How can anyone–including revered ones and their hangers-on–presume to know the interests of others better than those others themselves? At the same time, how long can the claim endure that the interests of revered ones and their hangers-on never differ from the collectives interests of “the masses”?
Monism in a political sense just refers to what Hardy elaborated as ‘triumphalist nationalism’ where persons within the state are convinced that there is only one right way. A monist state would have a centralized source of power and would reject diversity. ( – and doesn’t necessarily have to be a ‘dictatorship.’)
Isaiah Berlin said of monism “One belief, more than any other, is responsible for the slaughter of individuals on the altars of the great historical ideals — justice or progress or the happiness of future generations, or the sacred mission or emancipation of a nation or race or class, or even liberty itself which demands the sacrifice of individuals for the freedom of society. This is the belief that somewhere, in the past or in the future, in divine revelation or in the mind of an individual thinker, in the pronouncements of history or science, or in the simple heart of an uncorrupted good man, there is a final solution. This ancient faith rests on the conviction that all the positive values in which men have believed must, in the end, be compatible, and perhaps even entail one another.” p.173 in Two Concepts of Liberty.. Karl Popper referred to this line of thought as ‘essentialism.’ Monist political philosophers can be said to be Plato, Hegel and Marx.
Therefore, when a state seeks (or already has in place) a system where there is one right way, or a final solution to (sufficient) economic, cultural, gendered — or perhaps, just perhaps (don’t want to give credit to Huntington, but because you have mentioned al-Qaeda) civilisational disagreements they are practicing a monist form of politics.
From this description, it can be said that SEA nations are all fairly well entrenched in monist political behaviour. So perhaps last night my thoughts were skewed because clearly these dominoes had already fallen long ago and are half sunk in the ground. Even when one domino looks like getting dug up and re aligned, it proves far to heavy for those trying and usually collapses on top of them.
I suppose it can be said that ‘isn’t it a monist belief that there is no final solution, but only relative situations where there is no right answer’?, and my response at the moment is: yes.
OK, I admit it – I’m an individualistic radical altruist, and never consider self interest in my voting considerations.
Perhaps that’s why I’m always on the losing side, which might also explain why I keep hoping there is a better system than what ‘democracy’ has evolved into) .
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with “voters with self-interest.” Democracy (and politics) is not about “purity.” Each voter may cast her/his vote based on self-interest, but each vote does not mean much in general election, so one voter could not have done much damage. Of course, a lot of voters–whom can be claimed to be enticed by certain “populism policies,” can make a difference. But if it is the mass’s own interest, what (or who) else can be fairer than this? Of course, one can go further by claiming that the mass don’t know their own interest, but if that can be the case for someone, then how can anyone proof that s/he (or his revered one) is able to know other people’s (the very diverse mass’) interest better than themselves.
Re: Grasshopper>
I have to admit that you lost me on “monism” in this context. I understand the term “monism” when applied to metaphysics and theology, but not in a political(?) sense. Could you please explain?
As for dominoes, while the game was invented by the Chinese, the Arabs seem to currently produce the champion players nowadays.
“After knocking over one domino after another, we will stand face to face with the key domino, the United States.” – Dr. Abu Hafiza, Psy-Ops officer for al-Qaeda, referring to the 2004 Madrid attacks, of which he was the mastermind.
She wore a G-Sting with topless and shoes, nothingelse!
She walked here and there in the party just like we walk in our close friend birthday party in that dress while the waiters was serving food and drink. The waiters wore Thai classical dress(Jongkaben and Rachpatan)
By the time she cut the birthday cake, she also carrying a small dog names FU FU.
This was how the Thailand’s Queen-to-be behaved.
She is a great actor, she behaves nicely and modestly when she visits people in remote areas.
Please help preying to have the Crown Princess to be the next.
The Crown Prince have nothing suitable for the Throne. I don’t want the next Thailand Queen who behaved this way.
If that was done to the favor of the Crown Prince, Is he still fit for the position he has long been waiting for?
Maybe an updated similarity could be seen in Bangkok being a new, new interest economy like Ho Chi Minh City (or even vice versa) – with a conservative administration arbritrating (perhaps) Privy Council corporate interests for maximal economic growth. But yes, a rather telling prophecy for the predicament at present. Although I suppose it might only be a catastrophe (given the reasonable current state of Vietnam comparitively) if we justify invasion on grounds of the plague of monism! (with a much better advertising campaign than the last plague predecessor: communism.. ie. banning reprints of monist penguin classics and promoting exceptionalised, individual engagement through pdf files which can never have nostalgic musty pages)
Its G R E E N now! As my newspaper salesman said this morning, “Soon, we will have to wear a certain color on every day of the week. At least, the civil servants will be forced to do so. No way of escape for them.”
I am not so sure about Abhisit. He was one of those who messed up the educational policy-making in the drafting of the National Education Act and the Decentralization Act back in 1998. Not sure whether he has learned anything from what resulted from the mess he was involved in.
I can’t look at the handbook referred to because the link is dead, but I think it may be part of the mandatory two week culture training course mandated as part of the 2003 Teachers Council and Educational Personnel Act.
I think the problems run much deeper than Republican suspects but perhaps in a different way. For instance, at the university I worked at:
1. No math department?
2. A software engineering professor who can’t program?
Part of the problem seems to be that everyone gets the same salary. You start at a university and you stay there for the rest of your life. There was no incentive for people to work or perform. One very smart former president of Naresuan was trying to change that with a teacher portfolio. But research? What research? There was no one expert enough to mentor research in linguistics. If someone wanted to make a difference, they couldn’t. The only hope is if the Democratic party wins, Abhisit has already pledged that the Democrats will maintain control of the Education Ministry in the cabinet. He will change things.
re: Sidh> The establishment of the ‘Ministry of Culture’ and the publishing of the Thai etiquette book is a reflection of perceived and real cultural loss as well as insecurity – a natural response to aggressive, irresistable, unstoppable globalization.
Indeed. It’s a shame that the “Thai” etiquette book has nothing to do with authentic Thai culture, but, rather, it is a relic of a past wave of globalization, about 150 years ago, when the Thai ‘hi-so’ saw it fit to ape the Victorian-era mores of the Western diplomats and missionaries.
Of course the PPP is Thaksin’s party. They have not really hid the fact, the only reason they don’t say it openly is because it would give the junta a reason to disband the party. But anyone with the slightest ability to read between the lines knows a vote for the PPP is a vote for Thaksin and his policies?
What does a vote for any of the other political parties mean? Anyone’s guess as far as I can see. We have the Democrats running as the anti-Thaksin party, so we know what (who) they are against, but what exactly are they for?
If Thaksin is such an evil bast—, why is the opposition so scared of allowing him to stand in a free and fair election? Why do the supporters of the dictatorship only support “democracy” when they get to choose who gets to run in the election? Same old tune, Thaksin is evil and anything, including dictatorships and overthrowing of elected governments through the use of the gun is better than having Thaksin around; the people in the opposition of the elected government remains completely blinded to the deterioration of the country by their hatred of a single man.
Hatred is an interesting emotion and watching its effects on the rationality of people is fascinating
Anyway, this drama is more interesting than any of the soaps on Thai TV and far funnier than any of the comedies. So I will stay tuned.
I like it when two white boys argue over who is right and who is wrong in their academic musings. Unlike Prof. Taylor, I can’t even go back to the land of my birth. Instead, I wander around the streets of Bangkok in drunken stupor, daydreaming of going home and ever whispering the words of James Campbell and Reginald Connelly to anyone that will lend an ear:
“Show me the way to go home
I’m tired and I want to go to bed
I had a little drink about an hour ago
And it got right to my head
Where ever I may roam
On land or sea or foam
You will always hear me singing this song
Show me the way to go home”
The junta does seem to have any problem denouncing Thaksin as a corrupt criminal. They just seem to have a lot of trouble producing any evidence at all.
Sidh S: you need to read more carefully. I referred to “English teachers”, not to “Thais with a better grasp of English” generally.
The problem with the English teachers / English language degree students is that they have been deliberately educated to have no social science knowledge or critical thinking skills. In other words they have no intellectual defense against royalist propaganda. And so they have been totally indoctrinated by the royalist ideology that has permeated the universities particularly after October 1976, when the royalists realized the danger that the universities posed to their domination of Thai politics and moved to totally control them. The result is that Thai universities are definitely NOT the place where anyone should look for sources of progressive political change, since the royalists have turned them into one of the most conservative institutions in the country. In fact, as we saw before and after September 19, Thai academics and most of their Western counterparts lined up with the movement fighting Thaksin and his democratically-elected government and welcomed its demise, even if not all of them were honest enough to display their feelings openly.
I had to laugh at your anecdote about the Thai diplomats. As we know, the Foreign Ministry and the Embassies are close to the heart of network monarchy since their very important job is to manage the monarchy’s image abroad. They are controlled for the most part by a small number of elite families with good royal connections. They seem to spend most of their time taking the royals for “thiao” at the Thai taxpayer’s expense and organizing royal ceremonies overseas. Their world view has NOTHING to do with their English language proficiency and everything to do with their elite position in Thai society and sense of feudal privilege. How the Embassies howled when Thaksin tried to reform them. But you portray them as representing Thailand!
Their problem – which sounds like it might be your problem as well – with life in the West is that its egalitarian ethos grates on their sense of aristocratic privilege. The problem has nothing to do with their being looked down upon, but rather that they are looked upon at the same level as everyone else – something they are certainly not used to in their own country, whose royalist bureaucracy forces its subjects to practice a feudal form of manners taught in textbooks like the Culture Ministry’s one that is the subject of this series of posts. Egalitarianism is like poison to feudal culture so it is not a surprise that your diplomat fellows should react in this way.
In fact, the monarchy and the royalists have everything to be grateful for to the West – a gullible media (who can’t see a royalist coup even when it pokes them in the eye), royalist academics who are willing to celebrate the King’s birthday at conferences (and actually pay for the privilege! One would think that out of his $40 billion the king could pay for his own propaganda), and long-standing international political support for the throne. Think about it: 60 years and just one critical biography of the king! If anything your diplomat fellows should be criticized for their lack of gratitude for the West’s support for their privileged status in Thai society. Shows a lack of breeding if you ask me.
Republican and jonfernquest, I don’t think it is surprising that Thais with a better grasp of English are the more ‘conservative’ elements once they find that what foriegners say or write is negative and/or critical of their culture, they are naturally ‘defensive’. I have heard seasoned Thai diplomats (with good understanding of foriegn languages) observe something along the line of “no matter what, richer societies will always look down on poorer societies”. Those who understand another language, particularly English, understands that fact with very greater clarity.
The establishment of the ‘Ministry of Culture’ and the publishing of the Thai etiquette book is a reflection of perceived and real cultural loss as well as insecurity – a natural response to aggressive, irresistable, unstoppable globalization. It is a losing battle and people who have had the chance to travel around the world and experience the youth cultures, there is an increased homogenization in both form and attitude. We’ve heard about ‘ugly Americans’ before, now we are hearing “ugly Australians” – I won’t be surprised if one day we’ll meet ‘ugly Thais’. But by then, it won’t be ugly anymore as the notion of etiquette would have also shifted as a whole new generation takes over.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
“Royalist populism”
Well, this is exactly the point, Dr Wirot.
How can anyone–including revered ones and their hangers-on–presume to know the interests of others better than those others themselves? At the same time, how long can the claim endure that the interests of revered ones and their hangers-on never differ from the collectives interests of “the masses”?
Your comments give voice to Thai democracy.
1968: Is Thailand going to be another Vietnam?
LSS,
Monism in a political sense just refers to what Hardy elaborated as ‘triumphalist nationalism’ where persons within the state are convinced that there is only one right way. A monist state would have a centralized source of power and would reject diversity. ( – and doesn’t necessarily have to be a ‘dictatorship.’)
Isaiah Berlin said of monism “One belief, more than any other, is responsible for the slaughter of individuals on the altars of the great historical ideals — justice or progress or the happiness of future generations, or the sacred mission or emancipation of a nation or race or class, or even liberty itself which demands the sacrifice of individuals for the freedom of society. This is the belief that somewhere, in the past or in the future, in divine revelation or in the mind of an individual thinker, in the pronouncements of history or science, or in the simple heart of an uncorrupted good man, there is a final solution. This ancient faith rests on the conviction that all the positive values in which men have believed must, in the end, be compatible, and perhaps even entail one another.” p.173 in Two Concepts of Liberty.. Karl Popper referred to this line of thought as ‘essentialism.’ Monist political philosophers can be said to be Plato, Hegel and Marx.
Therefore, when a state seeks (or already has in place) a system where there is one right way, or a final solution to (sufficient) economic, cultural, gendered — or perhaps, just perhaps (don’t want to give credit to Huntington, but because you have mentioned al-Qaeda) civilisational disagreements they are practicing a monist form of politics.
From this description, it can be said that SEA nations are all fairly well entrenched in monist political behaviour. So perhaps last night my thoughts were skewed because clearly these dominoes had already fallen long ago and are half sunk in the ground. Even when one domino looks like getting dug up and re aligned, it proves far to heavy for those trying and usually collapses on top of them.
I suppose it can be said that ‘isn’t it a monist belief that there is no final solution, but only relative situations where there is no right answer’?, and my response at the moment is: yes.
“Royalist populism”
OK, I admit it – I’m an individualistic radical altruist, and never consider self interest in my voting considerations.
Perhaps that’s why I’m always on the losing side, which might also explain why I keep hoping there is a better system than what ‘democracy’ has evolved into) .
“Royalist populism”
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with “voters with self-interest.” Democracy (and politics) is not about “purity.” Each voter may cast her/his vote based on self-interest, but each vote does not mean much in general election, so one voter could not have done much damage. Of course, a lot of voters–whom can be claimed to be enticed by certain “populism policies,” can make a difference. But if it is the mass’s own interest, what (or who) else can be fairer than this? Of course, one can go further by claiming that the mass don’t know their own interest, but if that can be the case for someone, then how can anyone proof that s/he (or his revered one) is able to know other people’s (the very diverse mass’) interest better than themselves.
1968: Is Thailand going to be another Vietnam?
Re: Grasshopper>
I have to admit that you lost me on “monism” in this context. I understand the term “monism” when applied to metaphysics and theology, but not in a political(?) sense. Could you please explain?
As for dominoes, while the game was invented by the Chinese, the Arabs seem to currently produce the champion players nowadays.
“After knocking over one domino after another, we will stand face to face with the key domino, the United States.” – Dr. Abu Hafiza, Psy-Ops officer for al-Qaeda, referring to the 2004 Madrid attacks, of which he was the mastermind.
Thailand’s crown prince
I had a look that VDO.
It’s unvelievable.
She wore a G-Sting with topless and shoes, nothingelse!
She walked here and there in the party just like we walk in our close friend birthday party in that dress while the waiters was serving food and drink. The waiters wore Thai classical dress(Jongkaben and Rachpatan)
By the time she cut the birthday cake, she also carrying a small dog names FU FU.
This was how the Thailand’s Queen-to-be behaved.
She is a great actor, she behaves nicely and modestly when she visits people in remote areas.
Please help preying to have the Crown Princess to be the next.
The Crown Prince have nothing suitable for the Throne. I don’t want the next Thailand Queen who behaved this way.
If that was done to the favor of the Crown Prince, Is he still fit for the position he has long been waiting for?
He dosen’t deserv at all!
1968: Is Thailand going to be another Vietnam?
Maybe an updated similarity could be seen in Bangkok being a new, new interest economy like Ho Chi Minh City (or even vice versa) – with a conservative administration arbritrating (perhaps) Privy Council corporate interests for maximal economic growth. But yes, a rather telling prophecy for the predicament at present. Although I suppose it might only be a catastrophe (given the reasonable current state of Vietnam comparitively) if we justify invasion on grounds of the plague of monism! (with a much better advertising campaign than the last plague predecessor: communism.. ie. banning reprints of monist penguin classics and promoting exceptionalised, individual engagement through pdf files which can never have nostalgic musty pages)
Anyone for a game of dominos?
Horror in pink
Its G R E E N now! As my newspaper salesman said this morning, “Soon, we will have to wear a certain color on every day of the week. At least, the civil servants will be forced to do so. No way of escape for them.”
THAISOC101: Behaving bureaucratically
I am not so sure about Abhisit. He was one of those who messed up the educational policy-making in the drafting of the National Education Act and the Decentralization Act back in 1998. Not sure whether he has learned anything from what resulted from the mess he was involved in.
THAISOC101: Behaving bureaucratically
I can’t look at the handbook referred to because the link is dead, but I think it may be part of the
mandatory two week culture training course mandated as part of the 2003 Teachers Council and Educational Personnel Act.
I think the problems run much deeper than Republican suspects but perhaps in a different way. For instance, at the university I worked at:
1. No math department?
2. A software engineering professor who can’t program?
Part of the problem seems to be that everyone gets the same salary. You start at a university and you stay there for the rest of your life. There was no incentive for people to work or perform. One very smart former president of Naresuan was trying to change that with a teacher portfolio. But research? What research? There was no one expert enough to mentor research in linguistics. If someone wanted to make a difference, they couldn’t. The only hope is if the Democratic party wins, Abhisit has already pledged that the Democrats will maintain control of the Education Ministry in the cabinet. He will change things.
THAISOC101: Behaving bureaucratically
re: Sidh>
The establishment of the ‘Ministry of Culture’ and the publishing of the Thai etiquette book is a reflection of perceived and real cultural loss as well as insecurity – a natural response to aggressive, irresistable, unstoppable globalization.
Indeed. It’s a shame that the “Thai” etiquette book has nothing to do with authentic Thai culture, but, rather, it is a relic of a past wave of globalization, about 150 years ago, when the Thai ‘hi-so’ saw it fit to ape the Victorian-era mores of the Western diplomats and missionaries.
PPP unmasked?
Of course the PPP is Thaksin’s party. They have not really hid the fact, the only reason they don’t say it openly is because it would give the junta a reason to disband the party. But anyone with the slightest ability to read between the lines knows a vote for the PPP is a vote for Thaksin and his policies?
What does a vote for any of the other political parties mean? Anyone’s guess as far as I can see. We have the Democrats running as the anti-Thaksin party, so we know what (who) they are against, but what exactly are they for?
If Thaksin is such an evil bast—, why is the opposition so scared of allowing him to stand in a free and fair election? Why do the supporters of the dictatorship only support “democracy” when they get to choose who gets to run in the election? Same old tune, Thaksin is evil and anything, including dictatorships and overthrowing of elected governments through the use of the gun is better than having Thaksin around; the people in the opposition of the elected government remains completely blinded to the deterioration of the country by their hatred of a single man.
Hatred is an interesting emotion and watching its effects on the rationality of people is fascinating
Anyway, this drama is more interesting than any of the soaps on Thai TV and far funnier than any of the comedies. So I will stay tuned.
Justin Wintle’s response to Robert Taylor
I like it when two white boys argue over who is right and who is wrong in their academic musings. Unlike Prof. Taylor, I can’t even go back to the land of my birth. Instead, I wander around the streets of Bangkok in drunken stupor, daydreaming of going home and ever whispering the words of James Campbell and Reginald Connelly to anyone that will lend an ear:
“Show me the way to go home
I’m tired and I want to go to bed
I had a little drink about an hour ago
And it got right to my head
Where ever I may roam
On land or sea or foam
You will always hear me singing this song
Show me the way to go home”
PPP unmasked?
Serf,
The junta does seem to have any problem denouncing Thaksin as a corrupt criminal. They just seem to have a lot of trouble producing any evidence at all.
Why do you think that is?
THAISOC101: Behaving bureaucratically
Sidh S: you need to read more carefully. I referred to “English teachers”, not to “Thais with a better grasp of English” generally.
The problem with the English teachers / English language degree students is that they have been deliberately educated to have no social science knowledge or critical thinking skills. In other words they have no intellectual defense against royalist propaganda. And so they have been totally indoctrinated by the royalist ideology that has permeated the universities particularly after October 1976, when the royalists realized the danger that the universities posed to their domination of Thai politics and moved to totally control them. The result is that Thai universities are definitely NOT the place where anyone should look for sources of progressive political change, since the royalists have turned them into one of the most conservative institutions in the country. In fact, as we saw before and after September 19, Thai academics and most of their Western counterparts lined up with the movement fighting Thaksin and his democratically-elected government and welcomed its demise, even if not all of them were honest enough to display their feelings openly.
I had to laugh at your anecdote about the Thai diplomats. As we know, the Foreign Ministry and the Embassies are close to the heart of network monarchy since their very important job is to manage the monarchy’s image abroad. They are controlled for the most part by a small number of elite families with good royal connections. They seem to spend most of their time taking the royals for “thiao” at the Thai taxpayer’s expense and organizing royal ceremonies overseas. Their world view has NOTHING to do with their English language proficiency and everything to do with their elite position in Thai society and sense of feudal privilege. How the Embassies howled when Thaksin tried to reform them. But you portray them as representing Thailand!
Their problem – which sounds like it might be your problem as well – with life in the West is that its egalitarian ethos grates on their sense of aristocratic privilege. The problem has nothing to do with their being looked down upon, but rather that they are looked upon at the same level as everyone else – something they are certainly not used to in their own country, whose royalist bureaucracy forces its subjects to practice a feudal form of manners taught in textbooks like the Culture Ministry’s one that is the subject of this series of posts. Egalitarianism is like poison to feudal culture so it is not a surprise that your diplomat fellows should react in this way.
In fact, the monarchy and the royalists have everything to be grateful for to the West – a gullible media (who can’t see a royalist coup even when it pokes them in the eye), royalist academics who are willing to celebrate the King’s birthday at conferences (and actually pay for the privilege! One would think that out of his $40 billion the king could pay for his own propaganda), and long-standing international political support for the throne. Think about it: 60 years and just one critical biography of the king! If anything your diplomat fellows should be criticized for their lack of gratitude for the West’s support for their privileged status in Thai society. Shows a lack of breeding if you ask me.
Horror in pink
Perhaps he IS the Pink Man!
Horror in pink
Is His Majesty perhaps making a similar statement?
http://enews.mcot.net/upfile/1194414007.jpg
THAISOC101: Behaving bureaucratically
Republican and jonfernquest, I don’t think it is surprising that Thais with a better grasp of English are the more ‘conservative’ elements once they find that what foriegners say or write is negative and/or critical of their culture, they are naturally ‘defensive’. I have heard seasoned Thai diplomats (with good understanding of foriegn languages) observe something along the line of “no matter what, richer societies will always look down on poorer societies”. Those who understand another language, particularly English, understands that fact with very greater clarity.
THAISOC101: Behaving bureaucratically
Talking about ‘etiquette’, I just notice an article in the opinion section of The Age:
“Loveable larrikin morphs into ugly Australian”
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/loveable-larrikin-morphs-into-ugly-australian/2007/11/12/1194766588114.html
The establishment of the ‘Ministry of Culture’ and the publishing of the Thai etiquette book is a reflection of perceived and real cultural loss as well as insecurity – a natural response to aggressive, irresistable, unstoppable globalization. It is a losing battle and people who have had the chance to travel around the world and experience the youth cultures, there is an increased homogenization in both form and attitude. We’ve heard about ‘ugly Americans’ before, now we are hearing “ugly Australians” – I won’t be surprised if one day we’ll meet ‘ugly Thais’. But by then, it won’t be ugly anymore as the notion of etiquette would have also shifted as a whole new generation takes over.
New Mandala goes …….
What! Pink’s out already – the world of sports is just catching on the pink bug:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/photo_galleries/7092569.stm