Nothing much to add to that common view. Thaksin murdered Thai Democracy, the junta merely buried the corpse. The referendum that followed may indeed be flawed, but surely no more flawed than the massive vote buying that characterized Thaksin’s democracy.
Oh please Jeru, Thaksin did not murder democracy in Thailand. If anything he showed that if you throw the rural poor a few crumbs that they will vote for you without the need to “buy votes” directly. Buying votes directly was the method of the previous political parties. Perhaps you don’t remember when bank branches in the provinces would run out of smaller denomination baht bills the day before a national election.
And Sparta, Thaksin did not rob the country any blinder than his predecessors. His fatal flaw was that he took his “populist” referendum to heart and as you note, it inflated his ego, and then he forgot to share the spoils sufficiently with his equally corrupt and tyrannical peers. As the elected Prime Minister, Thaksin was allowed to take the biggest piece of the pie (kin muang) but he forgot to share, was slapped on the wrist, and asked to leave the room. The new constitution is written to prevent a future charismatic leader, perhaps one with good intentions, from taking the pie out of the room altogether. Rest assured that the ruling elite is far more concerned about a Thai version of Hugo Chavez than another Thaksin, thus the newest anti-democratic constitution.
Might all you NM\’s perception of ANU as a \’highly ranked\’ univeristy be because of its pro-Thaksin leanings?
I told I never heard of ANU until I bumped into this ANU website so fixated in the defense of Thaksin\’s corrupt and extrajudicially licensed to kill democracy.
Perceptions perceptions perceptions – – that is what we all argue about, don\’t we?
My perception remains the same. Thaksin murdered Thai democracy, along with thousands of other innocent victims of Thaksin\’s extrajudicial rampage, rule of law violated. Thaksin was definitely murderously destructive provoking the recent military coup.
Was General Sonthi\’s intervention more destructive? Not by my perception and ultimately history will be the judge . . . just as history had judged Philippines General Ramos coup (against the destructive Ferdinand Marcos) positive for the rebirth of Philippine democracy.
If it will be one-sided junta-sponsored propaganda hit and run (or a luxury junket as a payoff for loyalty), then why not do what they do in the US, have an alternative teach-in to counter the propaganda?
If you think that the AHRC statement means that “the junta merely buried the corpse” then you need to work on your skills of interpretation. If one has carefully read the numerous statements from them over the past months you would know that they perceive the junta to have been a much more destructive, active and malign influence on democracy in Thailand than simply burying something that is already dead.
Personally to me Andrew Walker and Bangkok Pundit are much ado about nothing.
Wow! Fame has been achieved. Jeruchai/[insert one of a few other names] thinks I much ado nothing.
Look at international rankings on university, particularly for the Asia-Pacific region, and I think you will find ANU ranks quite highly. Why do you think they are coming to ANU in the first place? I can tell you it is not for the shopping or the warm weather because if it was they would go to Sydney.
I was interested to read Hewison’s qualified support for the boycott of the 10th International Conference on Thai Studies (ICTS), organized, as we know, primarily (according to the organizer’s own publicity) to honour the King of Thailand.
After everything that has happened since September 19 2006 – from the King’s continual political interventions, his support for the military dictatorship and the extension of the military’s powers, his destruction of Thai Rak Thai, his censorship of the media, the utter moral bankruptcy of the way he has got his military to enforce his idiotic sufficiency economy theory on a largely impoverished population when he sits on top of a $40 billion fortune (according to Hewison), the non-stop propaganda in his name, to the passing of this undemocratic Constitution against all the normal standards of free and fair democratic process – I ask again, why on earth should international Thai Studies scholars want to honour the King of Thailand?
By all means travel to Thailand, meet your colleagues, present papers, debate and exchange views, conduct your research, etc., even better, do it during the timing of the conference, perhaps at an alternative venue, but just DO NOT honour the King of Thailand by attending the International Conference on Thai Studies at Thammasat in January. A well-publicized boycott by the world’s leading scholars in Thai Studies, directly specifically at the King, could be the monarchy’s worst public relations disaster since October 6 1976 and a fillip for the pro-democracy forces in Thailand. It will also be seen as a well-deserved punishment for the Rector of Thammasat University’s blatant support for the dictatorship.
I say again, Thai scholars are not at liberty to take such actions, but international scholars are. Think carefully about what has happened since September 19 2006 before making the decision to attend the 10th International Conference on Thai Studies.
I am wondering why jeru spends so much time making his comments if “Andrew Walker and Bangkok Pundit are much ado about nothing.” Jeru must have time to burn. if it is deemed necessary to respond to “nothing”.
Jeru might want to explain why Thai taxpayers are made to pay for an event that is bringing junta-selected speakers to a place that has no significance. Surely a waste of money and perhaps even malfeasance!
With all due respect to your opinion, I don’t think that you are very biased towards this government. I am no CNS lover nor am the Thaksin’s deciple but I am going to tell you as it is from a Thai perspective.
Think about this “historical facts” and you will have a better understanding of what is happening based upon what has happened:
1. Thaksin is by no means representative of your Western democracy one man one vote but rather a pure dictator that got an ego much bigger than his shoes. He bought his way in unbashfully and robbed the country blind with his nepotistic policy. A tyrant with bundles of money is no different from a tyrant with guns!
2. When you are on the government side with media on your hand, you use it. Period. During the Thaksin’s 5 years of rule, news blackout and immediate transfer of reporters were the daily norm and you can search how many people lost their jobs and livelihood putting Thaksin on the negative side.
3. This referendum is completely useless because more than 90% of the average Thai people did not read nor understand the complexity of its contents. 19 million books was published and distributed and they are gathering dust. Just be real, referendum on 309 articles…. you need to be a constitution lawyer to make any sound judgement of its content but it is just trying legitimize the coup and say SEE more than 50% of the public voted in favor. This is also another bs.
4. People vote yes not because they support this government but they want to go forward with their lives while the people who voted no does not fully support Thaksin either. Only the campaign managers who got the financial support from the Thaksin’s cronies dictated most of the no votes. Bring any of the no voters and ask them simple questions of what they know about this constitution and the answer will be the “100 yards stare” blank face.
On the other hand, I am very sick and tired the noble cause of your human rights especially in the Southern part of Thailand! Where are you when they are killing innocent people day in and day out incessantly. You can blame the government, the agency or any one in power because you know darn well that they won’t shoot you!!!!! Try preach human rights to the blood thirsty southern bandits and see where it will lead you????? It will be the same as the South Korean trying to preach Christianity to the radical Muslim in Afghansitan. Correct me if I’m wrong.!!!!!
The statement by you as I copied part of it is just another example of trying to understand Thai politics from a complete outsider looking in and sad to say most of it is not at all close to reality in Thailand.
Predictably, the military junta in Thailand has coerced, threatened, bought and cajoled part of the electorate into passing its 309-article constitution on August 19. From results to date, just over 14 million people out of the country’s 45 million eligible voters crossed the box in favour of the charter. As only 25 million bothered to turn up at the poll booths, despite the saturating propaganda campaign in the weeks beforehand, this number was sufficient to carry the draft.
“While the former government did much to damage this positive atmosphere, it took the army to destroy it completely.”
Nothing much to add to that common view. Thaksin murdered Thai Democracy, the junta merely buried the corpse. The referendum that followed may indeed be flawed, but surely no more flawed than the massive vote buying that characterized Thaksin’s democracy.
Where is Thai democracy moving from here? Who knows where Thai democracy is right at this moment . . .
I am amused that the grass at ANU, according to one Grasshopper, would be so specially nourishing that Thai generals would be forbidden to tread. If ANU grass is the only one Grasshopper has eaten then perhaps to that Grasshopper ANU is indeed the center of the universe.
Preposterous! Even more preposterous that a Grasshopper would consult, but not bite at, a university Atlas.
Personally to me Andrew Walker and Bangkok Pundit are much ado about nothing.
Thank God for New Mandala! With the Bangkok Post (in particular) and the Nation simply too gutless to engage in objective political reporting I look to this website for authoritative news. It would be nice to contribute to the ongoing discussions but quite honestly I can’t risk deportation -for the moment, anyway.
Jeruchai, I’m sorry to report that you are indeed mistaken. The ANU is actually the center of the universe. If you care to consult your world university atlas, you shall see on page 42 the ANU is located between the “You are here!” sign and the royal palace in Bangkok.
Also, you use the word ‘preposterous’. Without having attended the ANU you risk being pretentious in using such a word unnecessarily. I have only recently been granted permission to use the word “unnecessarily” and I feel quite proud that I have come this far.
Knowing such events are officially listed as part of the CNS propaganda operation, from what we have know has been leaked, an academic setting is hardly the appropriate place. It is not that the embassy which concerns me as I have been to events sponsored by the US embassy and it is an academic who is not always a pro-US speaker. I would be interested in Andrew’s report to see if they are all one-sided.
But I don’t think the ANU is as irrelevant as people are suggesting. The reasons why Surayud’s “war room” has despatched this mission are not completely clear, but they clearly are seeking international platforms that give some semblance of academic respectability. And these events are reported in the Thai press and do play some small part in signalling a degree of credibility for defenders of the coup on the international academic stage.
If they didn’t think it was relevant or could somehow influence the views of some, why would they come? Is it solely a holiday junket for the faithful?
A clear statement by the NTSC that it was not willing to host this event could send a small signal that our view of freedom of speech does not extend to accepting, as a basis for a “discussion on the current political situation,”
I disagree slightly. If they (a) allow an alternative speaker or subsequent forum, and (b) the moderator clearly indicates that the speakers are part of the CNS information campaign then I don’t have a problem with the NTSC hosting it. This is normal disclosure and in an academic setting is vital. People can make up their own minds as to the biases or the various speakers.
First of all Grasshopper & Andrew Walker, ANU is not the center of the universe . . . so be grateful for every little attention drawn to a small town school like ANU. You are all being very preposterous.
Yes Andrew I see your point but I tend to agree with nganadeeleg. I don’t see a problem with the event being hosted at ANU because (I hope) it will be obvious to all in attendance that the views expressed are solely that of the Junta.
I’m sure question time will be fun, especially considering they won’t have Les Majeste to shield them!
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
“A long road back”
Nothing much to add to that common view. Thaksin murdered Thai Democracy, the junta merely buried the corpse. The referendum that followed may indeed be flawed, but surely no more flawed than the massive vote buying that characterized Thaksin’s democracy.
Oh please Jeru, Thaksin did not murder democracy in Thailand. If anything he showed that if you throw the rural poor a few crumbs that they will vote for you without the need to “buy votes” directly. Buying votes directly was the method of the previous political parties. Perhaps you don’t remember when bank branches in the provinces would run out of smaller denomination baht bills the day before a national election.
And Sparta, Thaksin did not rob the country any blinder than his predecessors. His fatal flaw was that he took his “populist” referendum to heart and as you note, it inflated his ego, and then he forgot to share the spoils sufficiently with his equally corrupt and tyrannical peers. As the elected Prime Minister, Thaksin was allowed to take the biggest piece of the pie (kin muang) but he forgot to share, was slapped on the wrist, and asked to leave the room. The new constitution is written to prevent a future charismatic leader, perhaps one with good intentions, from taking the pie out of the room altogether. Rest assured that the ruling elite is far more concerned about a Thai version of Hugo Chavez than another Thaksin, thus the newest anti-democratic constitution.
Brief note from Chachoengsao
Yes, you would.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
Might all you NM\’s perception of ANU as a \’highly ranked\’ univeristy be because of its pro-Thaksin leanings?
I told I never heard of ANU until I bumped into this ANU website so fixated in the defense of Thaksin\’s corrupt and extrajudicially licensed to kill democracy.
Seriously people schools are for kids!
“A long road back”
Perceptions perceptions perceptions – – that is what we all argue about, don\’t we?
My perception remains the same. Thaksin murdered Thai democracy, along with thousands of other innocent victims of Thaksin\’s extrajudicial rampage, rule of law violated. Thaksin was definitely murderously destructive provoking the recent military coup.
Was General Sonthi\’s intervention more destructive? Not by my perception and ultimately history will be the judge . . . just as history had judged Philippines General Ramos coup (against the destructive Ferdinand Marcos) positive for the rebirth of Philippine democracy.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
If it will be one-sided junta-sponsored propaganda hit and run (or a luxury junket as a payoff for loyalty), then why not do what they do in the US, have an alternative teach-in to counter the propaganda?
“A long road back”
Jeru,
If you think that the AHRC statement means that “the junta merely buried the corpse” then you need to work on your skills of interpretation. If one has carefully read the numerous statements from them over the past months you would know that they perceive the junta to have been a much more destructive, active and malign influence on democracy in Thailand than simply burying something that is already dead.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
Personally to me Andrew Walker and Bangkok Pundit are much ado about nothing.
Wow! Fame has been achieved. Jeruchai/[insert one of a few other names] thinks I much ado nothing.
Look at international rankings on university, particularly for the Asia-Pacific region, and I think you will find ANU ranks quite highly. Why do you think they are coming to ANU in the first place? I can tell you it is not for the shopping or the warm weather because if it was they would go to Sydney.
Interview with Professor Kevin Hewison – Part Two
I was interested to read Hewison’s qualified support for the boycott of the 10th International Conference on Thai Studies (ICTS), organized, as we know, primarily (according to the organizer’s own publicity) to honour the King of Thailand.
After everything that has happened since September 19 2006 – from the King’s continual political interventions, his support for the military dictatorship and the extension of the military’s powers, his destruction of Thai Rak Thai, his censorship of the media, the utter moral bankruptcy of the way he has got his military to enforce his idiotic sufficiency economy theory on a largely impoverished population when he sits on top of a $40 billion fortune (according to Hewison), the non-stop propaganda in his name, to the passing of this undemocratic Constitution against all the normal standards of free and fair democratic process – I ask again, why on earth should international Thai Studies scholars want to honour the King of Thailand?
By all means travel to Thailand, meet your colleagues, present papers, debate and exchange views, conduct your research, etc., even better, do it during the timing of the conference, perhaps at an alternative venue, but just DO NOT honour the King of Thailand by attending the International Conference on Thai Studies at Thammasat in January. A well-publicized boycott by the world’s leading scholars in Thai Studies, directly specifically at the King, could be the monarchy’s worst public relations disaster since October 6 1976 and a fillip for the pro-democracy forces in Thailand. It will also be seen as a well-deserved punishment for the Rector of Thammasat University’s blatant support for the dictatorship.
I say again, Thai scholars are not at liberty to take such actions, but international scholars are. Think carefully about what has happened since September 19 2006 before making the decision to attend the 10th International Conference on Thai Studies.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
I am wondering why jeru spends so much time making his comments if “Andrew Walker and Bangkok Pundit are much ado about nothing.” Jeru must have time to burn. if it is deemed necessary to respond to “nothing”.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
Jeru might want to explain why Thai taxpayers are made to pay for an event that is bringing junta-selected speakers to a place that has no significance. Surely a waste of money and perhaps even malfeasance!
“A long road back”
Dear Andrew,
With all due respect to your opinion, I don’t think that you are very biased towards this government. I am no CNS lover nor am the Thaksin’s deciple but I am going to tell you as it is from a Thai perspective.
Think about this “historical facts” and you will have a better understanding of what is happening based upon what has happened:
1. Thaksin is by no means representative of your Western democracy one man one vote but rather a pure dictator that got an ego much bigger than his shoes. He bought his way in unbashfully and robbed the country blind with his nepotistic policy. A tyrant with bundles of money is no different from a tyrant with guns!
2. When you are on the government side with media on your hand, you use it. Period. During the Thaksin’s 5 years of rule, news blackout and immediate transfer of reporters were the daily norm and you can search how many people lost their jobs and livelihood putting Thaksin on the negative side.
3. This referendum is completely useless because more than 90% of the average Thai people did not read nor understand the complexity of its contents. 19 million books was published and distributed and they are gathering dust. Just be real, referendum on 309 articles…. you need to be a constitution lawyer to make any sound judgement of its content but it is just trying legitimize the coup and say SEE more than 50% of the public voted in favor. This is also another bs.
4. People vote yes not because they support this government but they want to go forward with their lives while the people who voted no does not fully support Thaksin either. Only the campaign managers who got the financial support from the Thaksin’s cronies dictated most of the no votes. Bring any of the no voters and ask them simple questions of what they know about this constitution and the answer will be the “100 yards stare” blank face.
On the other hand, I am very sick and tired the noble cause of your human rights especially in the Southern part of Thailand! Where are you when they are killing innocent people day in and day out incessantly. You can blame the government, the agency or any one in power because you know darn well that they won’t shoot you!!!!! Try preach human rights to the blood thirsty southern bandits and see where it will lead you????? It will be the same as the South Korean trying to preach Christianity to the radical Muslim in Afghansitan. Correct me if I’m wrong.!!!!!
The statement by you as I copied part of it is just another example of trying to understand Thai politics from a complete outsider looking in and sad to say most of it is not at all close to reality in Thailand.
Predictably, the military junta in Thailand has coerced, threatened, bought and cajoled part of the electorate into passing its 309-article constitution on August 19. From results to date, just over 14 million people out of the country’s 45 million eligible voters crossed the box in favour of the charter. As only 25 million bothered to turn up at the poll booths, despite the saturating propaganda campaign in the weeks beforehand, this number was sufficient to carry the draft.
“A long road back”
“While the former government did much to damage this positive atmosphere, it took the army to destroy it completely.”
Nothing much to add to that common view. Thaksin murdered Thai Democracy, the junta merely buried the corpse. The referendum that followed may indeed be flawed, but surely no more flawed than the massive vote buying that characterized Thaksin’s democracy.
Where is Thai democracy moving from here? Who knows where Thai democracy is right at this moment . . .
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
I am amused that the grass at ANU, according to one Grasshopper, would be so specially nourishing that Thai generals would be forbidden to tread. If ANU grass is the only one Grasshopper has eaten then perhaps to that Grasshopper ANU is indeed the center of the universe.
Preposterous! Even more preposterous that a Grasshopper would consult, but not bite at, a university Atlas.
Personally to me Andrew Walker and Bangkok Pundit are much ado about nothing.
The constitutional count
Thank God for New Mandala! With the Bangkok Post (in particular) and the Nation simply too gutless to engage in objective political reporting I look to this website for authoritative news. It would be nice to contribute to the ongoing discussions but quite honestly I can’t risk deportation -for the moment, anyway.
HB
Brief note from Chachoengsao
Would I express a bias if I said that many areas of Isarn are more “backward” than Bangkok?
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
I have inserted a couple of brief updates in this post.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
Jeruchai, I’m sorry to report that you are indeed mistaken. The ANU is actually the center of the universe. If you care to consult your world university atlas, you shall see on page 42 the ANU is located between the “You are here!” sign and the royal palace in Bangkok.
Also, you use the word ‘preposterous’. Without having attended the ANU you risk being pretentious in using such a word unnecessarily. I have only recently been granted permission to use the word “unnecessarily” and I feel quite proud that I have come this far.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
Knowing such events are officially listed as part of the CNS propaganda operation, from what we have know has been leaked, an academic setting is hardly the appropriate place. It is not that the embassy which concerns me as I have been to events sponsored by the US embassy and it is an academic who is not always a pro-US speaker. I would be interested in Andrew’s report to see if they are all one-sided.
But I don’t think the ANU is as irrelevant as people are suggesting. The reasons why Surayud’s “war room” has despatched this mission are not completely clear, but they clearly are seeking international platforms that give some semblance of academic respectability. And these events are reported in the Thai press and do play some small part in signalling a degree of credibility for defenders of the coup on the international academic stage.
If they didn’t think it was relevant or could somehow influence the views of some, why would they come? Is it solely a holiday junket for the faithful?
A clear statement by the NTSC that it was not willing to host this event could send a small signal that our view of freedom of speech does not extend to accepting, as a basis for a “discussion on the current political situation,”
I disagree slightly. If they (a) allow an alternative speaker or subsequent forum, and (b) the moderator clearly indicates that the speakers are part of the CNS information campaign then I don’t have a problem with the NTSC hosting it. This is normal disclosure and in an academic setting is vital. People can make up their own minds as to the biases or the various speakers.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
First of all Grasshopper & Andrew Walker, ANU is not the center of the universe . . . so be grateful for every little attention drawn to a small town school like ANU. You are all being very preposterous.
Surayud’s “war room” comes to Canberra
Yes Andrew I see your point but I tend to agree with nganadeeleg. I don’t see a problem with the event being hosted at ANU because (I hope) it will be obvious to all in attendance that the views expressed are solely that of the Junta.
I’m sure question time will be fun, especially considering they won’t have Les Majeste to shield them!