nganadeeleg said:
“Never fear Srithanonchai, Historicus & Teth:
PPP & Samak will be the savior, and lead the country into the light. (We are so lucky that there are no hypocrites on that side of the political battle)”
And Teth adds: “Thank you so very much for lumping me in with the rabid pro-Thaksin supporters.”
Can’t let this go by. Teth is wrong on this. I am not now and never have been a “rabid pro-Thaksin supporter.” This is just silly. I have regularly commented in ways that are anti-military and anti-coup. That does not, ipso facto, make me a Thaksin supporter.
nganadeeleg’s comment can’t be taken seriously. It is this either your with us or against us mentality better left to dummies like George Bush. If nganadeeleg looks back at an earlier exchange I had with our good Colonel, it would be clear what my views are on Samak. But nganadeeleg still can’t get out of the blindingly dumb view that there are just two sides in Thai politics. I would have thought that the the politicians are demonstrating this for nganadeeleg.
For a farang, the fact that you can type Thai is very flattering.
Nice reply as well. The post by the “Khon Thai” clearly shows the Thai mentality and the reason why we are a backwards state. So much for Buddhist and gentle Thailand hahahahah.
Srithanonchai: I didn’t carefully avoid mentioning Chris Baker’s name. It is just that I wasn’t particularly interested in attacking the person listed as the writer in the report, when I know that he was essentially editing the work of others. Like others, I have wondered why he got caught up in this report. But as most of us know, Dr. Baker has been editing numerous reports and articles for Thai authors into English for many years (including for the Siam Society). I was more interested in the institutional politics of the report – the military, its military-backed government, the monarchy and the UNDP.
Sidh S.: I am never really sure that I ever fully grasp your posts to NM. But that might reflect my own failings more than yours. In this case, I would observe that all developmental issues are political. I would also reject the notion that I am unfairly tying the coup, SE and the monarchy together. It seems to me that the monarchy and the military (and its government) are the ones that have made this linkage. Sure, others have paid lip service to SE, but this government has made it a pillar of current ideology. That may well continue under an elected government, but that doesn’t negate the use of SE as a plank of a political and economic ideology by this government.
I hate this book. Hate since the title is ABSOLUTELY AND ALWAYS UNTRUE. Paul Handley, you have no respect to our culture and our most beloved person. I WISH YOU IN CURSE FOREVER ASSHOLE
nganadeeleg said: Never fear Srithanonchai, Historicus & Teth:
PPP & Samak will be the savior, and lead the country into the light.
(We are so lucky that there are no hypocrites on that side of the political battle)
Thank you so very much for lumping me in with the rabid pro-Thaksin supporters.
Where did I ever say I supported Thaksin? In fact, that tirade of mine was directed against the entire establishment and the fight they are perpetuating, which means both sides, the generals and the cronies. If only there were something as revolutionary and drastic as another People’s Party. I would join it and campaign to eliminate “Nation/Religion/King” and replace it with “Liberty/Equality/Fraternity” in our collective mindsets. Minus the guillotines of course and maybe have Phra Thep as Prez.
Sidh, I actually think Thailand is violently conservative overall. Check out the rhetoric, the posturing, and the clashes (at Prem’s house) we have had recently. Sondhi has often been vitriolic in his statements and accusations against Thaksin, while we all know Thaksin and Samak have big mouths. But everyone professes their conservative royalism, the need to preserve the Thai language, culture, and bureaucracy, etc etc etc. In the West, political rhetoric is now limited to politically correct phrases, and vague, ambiguous “visions” but back in Thailand, it is still pretty much, “I love the King, I love the Thai language, I love the Sangha, I love Thai culture, all our social ills are farangs’ fault.” And nowadays, add populism to the mix. There needs to be a paradigm shift in education, in public life, academia, and especially the press. The press needs critical thinkers and brave souls unafraid of challenging the dogma….
6 October is a good example of rabid conservatism and I can clearly see that happening again because it is a Thai trait. Personally, for all the nonsense about Thais being gentle people, we love to lynch “suspects”, rabid tuk-tuk drivers love to harass tourists, same with porno sellers. Our “heroic” soldiers are caught saying, “Beware, you might die for ….” and every once in a while, some local politician gets murdered. Hell, some provinces are famous for their “mue puens”! The police love to kidnap and intimidate. And stretching it back even further, how did the Chakris come to power? By killing Taksin. And during the Ayutthaya period? Not only that, but cockfights, muay boran, fighting fish, etc etc etc. Not the hallmark of a peaceful, reasonable, and especially, not Buddhist society is it? Right from the top down.
As for liberals in this country, they are so far to the left and so deluded it often makes me squirm. I love the dissent and criticism found in magazines like Fah Diew Kan, but certain things are simply too radical. If there is to be a real force to counter these conservatives, it certainly will not be them. Honestly, who is going to vote for the recently formed “Artists’ Party”?
Great interview Nicholas. You could certainly start charging for these (although I hope you don’t!) It was interesting to read his perspective on consultancy because I have often thought that capitalist businessmen were quite bigoted about being capitalist businessmen.
Also, if Professor Taylor reads this, did one or two of those individuals that benefited from Premier Oil’s involvement in Burma include Cecil Salisbury?
“that Cambodians do not like to openly admit unpleasant realities, hence they prefer to bury them rather than discuss them in a straighforward manner.” >> Many have said the same about the Thais…
Along broadly similar lines, one can also say about the Filipinos, although admission is not an issue but national memory. Think about Marcos or the Marcoses and their recent incarnates – the Arroyos. Is this Asian?
“that Cambodians do not like to openly admit unpleasant realities, hence they prefer to bury them rather than discuss them in a straighforward manner.” >> Many have said the same about the Thais…
A good ‘political’ review of developmental issues. However this results in little space given to the actual HD issues. It is, in essence, a critical review of SE, the monarchy and the coup – probably unfairly tying them together (the Chakri Dynasty is a couple of centuries old; SE arose in 1997 during a democratically elected government; and the coup was last year). The danger is that the review could prove irrelevant if a democratically elected Thai government also take SE up (and it is likely to – at least paying lip service if anything, don’t forget that PMThaksin also did!).
I wonder myself why UNDP gives to much prominence to SE in its report (gathering from this review). Is it in hope that bigger developing countries like China and India, whose growth will have global impact on Climate Change, catch on SE – as it is initiated by a fellow developing country – as China and India seem to ignore ‘sustainability’, a concept with significant overlap with SE but initiated by the developed countries? Both SE and ‘Sustainable Development’ seemed problematic for many commentators because one has been initiated by a wealthy family for a poor country, while another by wealthy countries for a poor world! (I for one believe in the importance and relevance of both SE and SD and in the good intentions of their initiators).
Or is it merely a practical move on UNDP’s part – otherwise Thai bureaucrats wouldn’t take the report seriously?! (However, I doubt they take SE seriously in the first place!)
I have visited Thailand for the second time and asked many english speaking Thai’s why Siam was changed to Thailand. They do not really know, except it happened early 1900’s. After reading all of the above I still do not understand?? Please explain? I love the place and would like to know more about it. Thank You
Teth, I suppose that’s what makes the country so interesting – even intriguing (but that could be a partisan statement!). Thai society manifests the socio-cultural conservative Vs liberal like any other society – but in most cases it has not been too hateful or violent. Everyone seem to have their spaces which ebbs and flows. In fact, it is never really that neatly divided and often the same person may alternate between being a conservative to liberal on various issues from the monarchy, religion, politics, nationalism, gender, education, youth culture etc…etc…
For example, I for one may be branded as a ‘traditionalist’ in terms of Bangkok’s street culture. I love the vibrant mobile markets and vendors. I love their food in particular – for their great tastes and value for money. In the name of ‘development’ (‘cleanliness’, ‘orderliness’, ‘civilizedness’), they are being displaced by expanding traffic (and reduced footpath) and department stores (I find that franchised food has no soul).
In terms of urban architecture, from the above, I am against ‘modernization’ in the name of malls and high-end condominums unless they are responsive to the mentioned street culture (and the Thai street typology needs re-designing). With the case of the proposed new Thai style administrative court (?) building east of Sanam Luang to replace the old modernist (with traces of Art Deco) structure, I am torn inbetween. Aesthetically, I don’t like the old structure – but on learning of its link to the the People’s Party of AjarnPridi and FMPibul, I am beginning to have a change of heart. This may result in an ‘ugly compromise’ – but so be it!
I think our politics is merely a reflection of that. We’ll always end up way short of the ‘ideal’ with ‘ugly compromises’. There’s two very plausible ugly scenarios PPP+Chart Thai or Democrats+Chart Thai. What next?! Is the glass half-full or half-empty?
Land of snarls, I am not disputing the ‘conditions’ of Thai gaols – but of the long jail sentences (I recall some implication of “life”) for the crime of lese majeste. From my observation, more than anything else, it is an irresponsible political tool – selectively abused by those in power. Many of the rumours you have heard are far more vicious as you know – and really, I don’t think it is too difficult to track it to the source (at least at the time the rumour was released). My speculation (unsupported by research) is that it is an powerful elites’ game – and this suggests that there are mulitple factions whether allied or opposed (or inbetween) at play. The relative free-flow of all kinds of rumours/artifacts also suggest the populace are exposed to different points of view and made up their minds what to believe (and from my experience talking to my fellow countrymen, that is the case).
And I haven’t said you can’t comment – no one did – I only observed that your view is of a foriegner and I also found it patronizing (something you have accused carelus of). As a ‘critical royalist’ Thai, I can’t see statements such as the one I quoted below in any other way:
“… If Thai people are ever going to break out of the disgusting feudalism that is their lot, they need to understand how they are being deluded. Good onyer, Handley, say I.”
I recall I’ve read something along those lines in Anna Leonowen’s book. That was the 19th century – over a century later, Thais are still “digusting feudalists”?! Such unfair, unempathic assessment!
Let me be clear here, I don’t mind you writing/saying it – some of my Australian friends (not doing Thai studies though) share your views although they haven’t put it in such strong words. If I am not ‘Thai’ enough, maybe I can translate this into Thai and test it on your and my Thai friends who speaks little English to see what they think.
“This reviewer suggests that the UNDP do some serious institutional soul-searching to understand why it has been used in this way or has been complicit in promoting military-backed government.”
This review is not too bad.
I read the quote as a message to the author of the report, whose name KH carefully avoids to mention. After all, he is a fellow Thai Studies colleague.
First of all, thank you to Nicholas for your interview job. This interview is so valueable for an extent of knowing the background and Prof. David which reflects his interest in the Cambodian political history.
I earnestly believe that the royalist propaganda has begun to bring about its own ruin. Ironically through extra-sufficient air time and over emphasis as well as over zealous portrayal of the monarchy. We can only hope the machine will fall and those hiding behind the royalist/conservative cover broken up once and for all, so this nation can start moving forward.
“One obvious way to boost regional self-sufficiency is to move more food processing upstream to the provincial level. I could see local entrepreneurs who have the requisite technical skills in food science,…doing at a local level essentially what CP Foods does at a national level for export.”
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
“Royalist populism”
nganadeeleg said:
“Never fear Srithanonchai, Historicus & Teth:
PPP & Samak will be the savior, and lead the country into the light. (We are so lucky that there are no hypocrites on that side of the political battle)”
And Teth adds: “Thank you so very much for lumping me in with the rabid pro-Thaksin supporters.”
Can’t let this go by. Teth is wrong on this. I am not now and never have been a “rabid pro-Thaksin supporter.” This is just silly. I have regularly commented in ways that are anti-military and anti-coup. That does not, ipso facto, make me a Thaksin supporter.
nganadeeleg’s comment can’t be taken seriously. It is this either your with us or against us mentality better left to dummies like George Bush. If nganadeeleg looks back at an earlier exchange I had with our good Colonel, it would be clear what my views are on Samak. But nganadeeleg still can’t get out of the blindingly dumb view that there are just two sides in Thai politics. I would have thought that the the politicians are demonstrating this for nganadeeleg.
The King Never Smiles?
For a farang, the fact that you can type Thai is very flattering.
Nice reply as well. The post by the “Khon Thai” clearly shows the Thai mentality and the reason why we are a backwards state. So much for Buddhist and gentle Thailand hahahahah.
(р╕Бр╕╣р╕Бр╣Зр╕Др╕Щр╣Др╕Чр╕в р╣Бр╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕нр╕Бр╕Ир╕▓р╕Бр╕Бр╕░р╕ер╕▓р╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕з)
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
Srithanonchai: I didn’t carefully avoid mentioning Chris Baker’s name. It is just that I wasn’t particularly interested in attacking the person listed as the writer in the report, when I know that he was essentially editing the work of others. Like others, I have wondered why he got caught up in this report. But as most of us know, Dr. Baker has been editing numerous reports and articles for Thai authors into English for many years (including for the Siam Society). I was more interested in the institutional politics of the report – the military, its military-backed government, the monarchy and the UNDP.
Sidh S.: I am never really sure that I ever fully grasp your posts to NM. But that might reflect my own failings more than yours. In this case, I would observe that all developmental issues are political. I would also reject the notion that I am unfairly tying the coup, SE and the monarchy together. It seems to me that the monarchy and the military (and its government) are the ones that have made this linkage. Sure, others have paid lip service to SE, but this government has made it a pillar of current ideology. That may well continue under an elected government, but that doesn’t negate the use of SE as a plank of a political and economic ideology by this government.
The King Never Smiles?
р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕лр╕Щр╕▒р╕Зр╕кр╕╖р╕нр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Фр╕╡р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕кр╕╕р╕Фр╣Ар╕ер╣Ир╕бр╕лр╕Щр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕лр╕ер╕нр╕Бр╕ер╕зр╕Зр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╕Щр╕╡р╣Йр╕бр╕▓р╕Щр╕▓р╕Щ
р╕нр╕нр╕Бр╕Ир╕▓р╕Бр╕Бр╕░р╕ер╕▓р╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╣Бр╕ер╣Йр╕з khun kon thai
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
Nothing to add. Good job KH.
Sufficiency economy is the Thai equivalent to Marie Antoinette’s “let them eat cake”. It may very well have the same consequences.
I think Thailand is closer to a republic now than at any time since 1935.
The King Never Smiles?
I hate this book. Hate since the title is ABSOLUTELY AND ALWAYS UNTRUE. Paul Handley, you have no respect to our culture and our most beloved person. I WISH YOU IN CURSE FOREVER ASSHOLE
“Royalist populism”
nganadeeleg said:
Never fear Srithanonchai, Historicus & Teth:
PPP & Samak will be the savior, and lead the country into the light.
(We are so lucky that there are no hypocrites on that side of the political battle)
Thank you so very much for lumping me in with the rabid pro-Thaksin supporters.
Where did I ever say I supported Thaksin? In fact, that tirade of mine was directed against the entire establishment and the fight they are perpetuating, which means both sides, the generals and the cronies. If only there were something as revolutionary and drastic as another People’s Party. I would join it and campaign to eliminate “Nation/Religion/King” and replace it with “Liberty/Equality/Fraternity” in our collective mindsets. Minus the guillotines of course and maybe have Phra Thep as Prez.
Sidh, I actually think Thailand is violently conservative overall. Check out the rhetoric, the posturing, and the clashes (at Prem’s house) we have had recently. Sondhi has often been vitriolic in his statements and accusations against Thaksin, while we all know Thaksin and Samak have big mouths. But everyone professes their conservative royalism, the need to preserve the Thai language, culture, and bureaucracy, etc etc etc. In the West, political rhetoric is now limited to politically correct phrases, and vague, ambiguous “visions” but back in Thailand, it is still pretty much, “I love the King, I love the Thai language, I love the Sangha, I love Thai culture, all our social ills are farangs’ fault.” And nowadays, add populism to the mix. There needs to be a paradigm shift in education, in public life, academia, and especially the press. The press needs critical thinkers and brave souls unafraid of challenging the dogma….
6 October is a good example of rabid conservatism and I can clearly see that happening again because it is a Thai trait. Personally, for all the nonsense about Thais being gentle people, we love to lynch “suspects”, rabid tuk-tuk drivers love to harass tourists, same with porno sellers. Our “heroic” soldiers are caught saying, “Beware, you might die for ….” and every once in a while, some local politician gets murdered. Hell, some provinces are famous for their “mue puens”! The police love to kidnap and intimidate. And stretching it back even further, how did the Chakris come to power? By killing Taksin. And during the Ayutthaya period? Not only that, but cockfights, muay boran, fighting fish, etc etc etc. Not the hallmark of a peaceful, reasonable, and especially, not Buddhist society is it? Right from the top down.
As for liberals in this country, they are so far to the left and so deluded it often makes me squirm. I love the dissent and criticism found in magazines like Fah Diew Kan, but certain things are simply too radical. If there is to be a real force to counter these conservatives, it certainly will not be them. Honestly, who is going to vote for the recently formed “Artists’ Party”?
Interview with Professor Robert Taylor
… and by Cecil Salisbury I mean Viscount Cranborne (not the PM), the current Chancellor of the University of Hertfordshire.
Interview with Professor Robert Taylor
Great interview Nicholas. You could certainly start charging for these (although I hope you don’t!) It was interesting to read his perspective on consultancy because I have often thought that capitalist businessmen were quite bigoted about being capitalist businessmen.
Also, if Professor Taylor reads this, did one or two of those individuals that benefited from Premier Oil’s involvement in Burma include Cecil Salisbury?
Interview with Professor David Chandler
I don’t like to admit to unpleasant realities and I’m not from Asia? Am I an anomaly?
“I’m not going to save the world.”
You don’t know how hard that was to say!
Interview with Professor David Chandler
“that Cambodians do not like to openly admit unpleasant realities, hence they prefer to bury them rather than discuss them in a straighforward manner.” >> Many have said the same about the Thais…
Along broadly similar lines, one can also say about the Filipinos, although admission is not an issue but national memory. Think about Marcos or the Marcoses and their recent incarnates – the Arroyos. Is this Asian?
Interview with Professor David Chandler
“that Cambodians do not like to openly admit unpleasant realities, hence they prefer to bury them rather than discuss them in a straighforward manner.” >> Many have said the same about the Thais…
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
A good ‘political’ review of developmental issues. However this results in little space given to the actual HD issues. It is, in essence, a critical review of SE, the monarchy and the coup – probably unfairly tying them together (the Chakri Dynasty is a couple of centuries old; SE arose in 1997 during a democratically elected government; and the coup was last year). The danger is that the review could prove irrelevant if a democratically elected Thai government also take SE up (and it is likely to – at least paying lip service if anything, don’t forget that PMThaksin also did!).
I wonder myself why UNDP gives to much prominence to SE in its report (gathering from this review). Is it in hope that bigger developing countries like China and India, whose growth will have global impact on Climate Change, catch on SE – as it is initiated by a fellow developing country – as China and India seem to ignore ‘sustainability’, a concept with significant overlap with SE but initiated by the developed countries? Both SE and ‘Sustainable Development’ seemed problematic for many commentators because one has been initiated by a wealthy family for a poor country, while another by wealthy countries for a poor world! (I for one believe in the importance and relevance of both SE and SD and in the good intentions of their initiators).
Or is it merely a practical move on UNDP’s part – otherwise Thai bureaucrats wouldn’t take the report seriously?! (However, I doubt they take SE seriously in the first place!)
Siamese Northern Exposure
I have visited Thailand for the second time and asked many english speaking Thai’s why Siam was changed to Thailand. They do not really know, except it happened early 1900’s. After reading all of the above I still do not understand?? Please explain? I love the place and would like to know more about it. Thank You
“Royalist populism”
Teth, I suppose that’s what makes the country so interesting – even intriguing (but that could be a partisan statement!). Thai society manifests the socio-cultural conservative Vs liberal like any other society – but in most cases it has not been too hateful or violent. Everyone seem to have their spaces which ebbs and flows. In fact, it is never really that neatly divided and often the same person may alternate between being a conservative to liberal on various issues from the monarchy, religion, politics, nationalism, gender, education, youth culture etc…etc…
For example, I for one may be branded as a ‘traditionalist’ in terms of Bangkok’s street culture. I love the vibrant mobile markets and vendors. I love their food in particular – for their great tastes and value for money. In the name of ‘development’ (‘cleanliness’, ‘orderliness’, ‘civilizedness’), they are being displaced by expanding traffic (and reduced footpath) and department stores (I find that franchised food has no soul).
In terms of urban architecture, from the above, I am against ‘modernization’ in the name of malls and high-end condominums unless they are responsive to the mentioned street culture (and the Thai street typology needs re-designing). With the case of the proposed new Thai style administrative court (?) building east of Sanam Luang to replace the old modernist (with traces of Art Deco) structure, I am torn inbetween. Aesthetically, I don’t like the old structure – but on learning of its link to the the People’s Party of AjarnPridi and FMPibul, I am beginning to have a change of heart. This may result in an ‘ugly compromise’ – but so be it!
I think our politics is merely a reflection of that. We’ll always end up way short of the ‘ideal’ with ‘ugly compromises’. There’s two very plausible ugly scenarios PPP+Chart Thai or Democrats+Chart Thai. What next?! Is the glass half-full or half-empty?
Interview with Paul Handley
Land of snarls, I am not disputing the ‘conditions’ of Thai gaols – but of the long jail sentences (I recall some implication of “life”) for the crime of lese majeste. From my observation, more than anything else, it is an irresponsible political tool – selectively abused by those in power. Many of the rumours you have heard are far more vicious as you know – and really, I don’t think it is too difficult to track it to the source (at least at the time the rumour was released). My speculation (unsupported by research) is that it is an powerful elites’ game – and this suggests that there are mulitple factions whether allied or opposed (or inbetween) at play. The relative free-flow of all kinds of rumours/artifacts also suggest the populace are exposed to different points of view and made up their minds what to believe (and from my experience talking to my fellow countrymen, that is the case).
And I haven’t said you can’t comment – no one did – I only observed that your view is of a foriegner and I also found it patronizing (something you have accused carelus of). As a ‘critical royalist’ Thai, I can’t see statements such as the one I quoted below in any other way:
“… If Thai people are ever going to break out of the disgusting feudalism that is their lot, they need to understand how they are being deluded. Good onyer, Handley, say I.”
I recall I’ve read something along those lines in Anna Leonowen’s book. That was the 19th century – over a century later, Thais are still “digusting feudalists”?! Such unfair, unempathic assessment!
Let me be clear here, I don’t mind you writing/saying it – some of my Australian friends (not doing Thai studies though) share your views although they haven’t put it in such strong words. If I am not ‘Thai’ enough, maybe I can translate this into Thai and test it on your and my Thai friends who speaks little English to see what they think.
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
“This reviewer suggests that the UNDP do some serious institutional soul-searching to understand why it has been used in this way or has been complicit in promoting military-backed government.”
This review is not too bad.
I read the quote as a message to the author of the report, whose name KH carefully avoids to mention. After all, he is a fellow Thai Studies colleague.
Interview with Professor David Chandler
First of all, thank you to Nicholas for your interview job. This interview is so valueable for an extent of knowing the background and Prof. David which reflects his interest in the Cambodian political history.
Royalist propaganda and policy nonsense
I earnestly believe that the royalist propaganda has begun to bring about its own ruin. Ironically through extra-sufficient air time and over emphasis as well as over zealous portrayal of the monarchy. We can only hope the machine will fall and those hiding behind the royalist/conservative cover broken up once and for all, so this nation can start moving forward.
In-sufficient analysis
“One obvious way to boost regional self-sufficiency is to move more food processing upstream to the provincial level. I could see local entrepreneurs who have the requisite technical skills in food science,…doing at a local level essentially what CP Foods does at a national level for export.”
Wasn’t that what OTOP was about?