For the information of interested New Mandala readers, today I received the following reply from the conference organisers:
“Dear Mr.Farrelly,
The conference is open to the public. Anybody who wishes to participate in the conference must register. The preliminary program and registration information will be available on website soon.
Yes, these are photos of anti-junta protests in Bangkok. But what the photos don’t show is the master-mind behind the protests, his “hired henchmen” who have caused millions of Baht worth of damage to the country. The TRT cronies have shown where their allegiance lie and it is not with the country, or the safety of the people.
[…] the road from Houayxai to Luangnamtha. (For some previous New Mandala commentary on this route see here and here.) In a recent contribution to Mekong Currents, Rosalia Sciortino provides a useful profile […]
I was reading (on a different webboard) rumors that he was sent abroad to Sweden because the King was in ill health – if the King died, and if the Crown Prince were abroad, Prem would be able to appoint Princess Sirindhorn without too much hassle.
As someone who studies cross-cultural pragmatics, I am fascinated by this particular thread of comments. Looking at who takes offense at what is extremely interesting considering the various linguistic and cultural backgrounds of the interlocutors.
I wonder how Republican’s tone (and people’s response to it) if he or she were writing in Thai? Would it come across just as aggressive as certain people feel it is when Republican writes in English, or would the pragmatics of Thai force Republican to use different rhetorical and pragmatic devices? Would there be a vast difference in how native Thai speakers interpret Republican’s tone as compared to non-native speakers?
Perhaps what we are seeing here is merely a case of cross-cultural pragmatic failure; that is, since we are all communicating in the medium of English (for the most part), certain pragmatic nuances are misinterpreted due to 1st language interference.
So many questions, so little time….and even less funding!
re Sawarin> From your original comment, it seemed as if you believed Thai academics only belonged to Marxist or royalist camps. If that were true, I used the Paine quote to comment that either of those ideologies are not to friendly to personal liberty.
Nevertheless, as a liberal of the Lockean, Georgist, and Austrian school traditions (i.e. a Libertarian), I can’t say that I’m too fond of “value pluralism.’ It seems to me that a system of governance that doesn’t protect the basic human rights of its subjects cannot claim a valid mandate to rule that is recognized by its people and the international community at large; as such, free nations are only required to respect the sovereignty of such a nation as suits the free nation’s self-interest.
However, I will admit value pluralism is valuable in that it makes us question just what those basic human rights are.
“1) There was a difference between A. standing behind democracy and the democratic process, and B. standing behind Thaksin-as-the-only-defense-of-democracy.”
The “difference” here is more apparent than real, more rhetorical than actual, and more slippery than many a slope I can think of.
Because when you consider that Thaksin and the TRT were the only democratically elected government in evidence at the time, “standing behind democracy and the democratic process” would have necessarily involved standing behind that government– not as “the-only-defense-of-democracy”, but rather as the only democratically elected government to defend against military-royalist anti-constitutional interference.
That, it appears to me, is a real “difference”. And one that genuine democrats could be expected to discern and act on, albeit holding their noses the whole time.
Republican, a fascist liberal is someone who insists upon the adoption of liberalism. Obviously it is an oxymoron. Why aren’t you out in the jungle leading your guerrilla forces on a siege of Bangkok to impose freedom on the masses? The CIA could sponsor you!
re: #37: Fair enough, except that Republican misrepresents Thongchai’s positions and tries to bluster instead of present a cogent argument.
I actually think it is not so hard to figure out whether Republican is being fair or not, by going and looking at what Thongchai has written. This has nothing to do with what is or isn’t “true in his own heart.”
(Tosakan said: In the final analysis. I donβt know if Republican is being fair to Thongchai or not, because only Thongchai knows what is true in his own heart about his personal political positions, but I think Republican has the right to call Thongchai out if he perceives that Thongchai was being a hypocrite concerning his pre and post-coup positions.)
All that said, it is still edifying to read everyone’s contributions, wherever they stand. except maybe that guy who pops up now and then to take a gratuitous shot at the site’s hosts.
Judging by the colors of Democracy Monument on the other one, I’d guess it’s just a misprint, a bad (or early) press run with the color register screwed up.
FYI, I belong to neither of those traditions. ‘Value pluralism’ is a familiar word amongst the liberals. And thanks for quoting my senior alumnus, though I don’t know what for….
By the way ‘he’ writes about HMK, I’m surprised to be informed that Republican is a Thai – I’d always pictured him as a Paul Handley type (not that I know what Handley actually looks like).
I find it amusing that a David W, a farang, is criticizing Republican, a Thai, over his style rather than his substance.
I think Republican is probably the most articulate writer on this blog. And we need more critics like him or her instead of the let’s hold hands and sing Kumbaya and not hurt anybody’s feelings academics who sold us out. I can’t think of any crime worse than to punish 65 million people for the alleged behavior of one individual. But I guess that Republican’s style is a far bigger offense than the academics who have sold us out in the defense of their feudal privileges and big shot status.
What the junta did was outrageous and inexcusable, and any academic worthy of the name should be ashamed of backing the coup.
But I guess coups don’t happen in David W’s country, where his political rights are still intact and he is free to do whatever he wants in whatever style he chooses, which is a privilege and a luxury Thais don’t have because of military dictators and their royalist allies. it must be nice to be in David W’s shoes, where he can criticize the style of people who have been under the feet of the Thai military for the last 75 years.
Even if Republican is perceived to be “annoying and insulting”, so what? Does that take away from the substance or analysis?
Personally, I find Republican’s style refreshing, especially with all the mealy mouthed bullshit out there. David W cares that Republican doesn’t speak in Orwellian Academic-Speak. Who gives a shit? I certainly don’t.
In the final analysis. I don’t know if Republican is being fair to Thongchai or not, because only Thongchai knows what is true in his own heart about his personal political positions, but I think Republican has the right to call Thongchai out if he perceives that Thongchai was being a hypocrite concerning his pre and post-coup positions.
While the timber trade out of Attapeu is booming, particularly in light of the new sealed road through to Vietnam, it will not last long. Many of the loggers have simply moved from the Boloven Plateau, which they successfully logged out. The Thai owned sawmill near Paksong recently closed down due to lack of logs, and our project was even unable to purchase local sawn timber for regular building construction. The local climate is now changing, and the streams are no longer the havens for spawing fish and insects so important for the local people (and for the wildlife, such as remains). Plantations of rubber, oil palm etc. are going up, on land confiscated from locals in massive land frauds effected by the political elite., worked largley with imported labour.
Anyway, who in Thailand cares for these debates? It is a very much isolated exchange of, shall I say, “arguments.” Most Thai people could not care less for the concerns of the “Octobrists.”
This debate really seems to be at a dead end, with Republican’s comment that “They love to pronounce from on high (the philosopher king) but when they are implicated in something unpleasant (eg. a coup) they refuse to accept any “responsibility.”
“implcated in the coup?” — You keep coming around to the same black and white paradigm.
My summary of the situation is this: The PAD folks, in defense of – well, that was never too clear, but let’s say democracy _-insisted it was neceassary to get rid of Thaksin at any cost. (A position not quite shared by all the old comrades, but surprsingly widespread despite some lip service against royal intervention by some.) A surpriisng example of this case was made by Perry Anderson, in a communication I’m sure not a few readers have seen.
Other folks now say they believe it was necessary _ and more clearly and cogently, for the sake of democarcy _ to defend Thaksin at all costs.
Thongchai, who made it publicly clear he stood in neither camp, got it in the neck from both sides.
I’d like to recall part of Republican’s initial comment:
“But now Thongchai plays the anti-royalist academic fighting for democracy, leading an βovert challenge to the repressive atmosphereβ. This is the game one sees so often in Thailand. The academic, displaying a fake earnest sense of moral self-righteousness, playing the role of the intellectual fighter for the just cause, but without any sense of responsibility or accountability.”
(“Fake earnest sense,” eh? Sweet. Is this a carefully documented analytical judgement?)
Anyway, you are truly ingenuous, if not downright dishonest, in at least two respects.
First of all, Thongchai is not “now” playing the anti-royalist academic, as you well know _ and basically admit in later comments _ and as anyone can look up. He has had the same position for years.
Second – and here your convoluted explanations to the contrary absolutely elude me – he has shown a “sense of responsibility or accountability” by attaching his name to his commentaries and positions. And though he lives and works abroad, he has spent plenty of time in Thailand in the past two years, lest you accuse him of grandtstanding from a safe haven.
In fact, this thread was about his efforts to get the subject of the monarchy on the Thai studies conference agenda. Should he get any cred for that? If not, why not?
I think I detect the whiff of an old and personal feud in this whole matter.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
Re: Numbers 4 and 13:
For the information of interested New Mandala readers, today I received the following reply from the conference organisers:
“Dear Mr.Farrelly,
The conference is open to the public. Anybody who wishes to participate in the conference must register. The preliminary program and registration information will be available on website soon.
Yours sincerely,
ICTS10 organizer”
Best wishes to all.
Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship protests, Bangkok
Yes, these are photos of anti-junta protests in Bangkok. But what the photos don’t show is the master-mind behind the protests, his “hired henchmen” who have caused millions of Baht worth of damage to the country. The TRT cronies have shown where their allegiance lie and it is not with the country, or the safety of the people.
A bridge for Chiang Khong
[…] the road from Houayxai to Luangnamtha. (For some previous New Mandala commentary on this route see here and here.) In a recent contribution to Mekong Currents, Rosalia Sciortino provides a useful profile […]
Thailand’s crown prince
I was reading (on a different webboard) rumors that he was sent abroad to Sweden because the King was in ill health – if the King died, and if the Crown Prince were abroad, Prem would be able to appoint Princess Sirindhorn without too much hassle.
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
As someone who studies cross-cultural pragmatics, I am fascinated by this particular thread of comments. Looking at who takes offense at what is extremely interesting considering the various linguistic and cultural backgrounds of the interlocutors.
I wonder how Republican’s tone (and people’s response to it) if he or she were writing in Thai? Would it come across just as aggressive as certain people feel it is when Republican writes in English, or would the pragmatics of Thai force Republican to use different rhetorical and pragmatic devices? Would there be a vast difference in how native Thai speakers interpret Republican’s tone as compared to non-native speakers?
Perhaps what we are seeing here is merely a case of cross-cultural pragmatic failure; that is, since we are all communicating in the medium of English (for the most part), certain pragmatic nuances are misinterpreted due to 1st language interference.
So many questions, so little time….and even less funding!
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
re Sawarin> From your original comment, it seemed as if you believed Thai academics only belonged to Marxist or royalist camps. If that were true, I used the Paine quote to comment that either of those ideologies are not to friendly to personal liberty.
Nevertheless, as a liberal of the Lockean, Georgist, and Austrian school traditions (i.e. a Libertarian), I can’t say that I’m too fond of “value pluralism.’ It seems to me that a system of governance that doesn’t protect the basic human rights of its subjects cannot claim a valid mandate to rule that is recognized by its people and the international community at large; as such, free nations are only required to respect the sovereignty of such a nation as suits the free nation’s self-interest.
However, I will admit value pluralism is valuable in that it makes us question just what those basic human rights are.
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
somon, khor thot, obviously mai wai poot pa sa tai mor som π
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
#31
“1) There was a difference between A. standing behind democracy and the democratic process, and B. standing behind Thaksin-as-the-only-defense-of-democracy.”
The “difference” here is more apparent than real, more rhetorical than actual, and more slippery than many a slope I can think of.
Because when you consider that Thaksin and the TRT were the only democratically elected government in evidence at the time, “standing behind democracy and the democratic process” would have necessarily involved standing behind that government– not as “the-only-defense-of-democracy”, but rather as the only democratically elected government to defend against military-royalist anti-constitutional interference.
That, it appears to me, is a real “difference”. And one that genuine democrats could be expected to discern and act on, albeit holding their noses the whole time.
Thailand’s crown prince
Methinks Thongchai would not be very pleased w. New Mandala gossiping about royalty…
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
ΡβΠ¬ΡβΠ±Ρβ£ΠΡβΠΡββ‘ΡβΠ²ΡβΠ©ΡβΠ°ΡββΡβΠΉΡββΡβΠ½ΡββΡβΠΡβΠΡβΠ΄ΡβΠΉΡβ£ΠΡβΠ±Ρβ£ΠΡβ£ΠΡβΠ€Ρβ£Π Ρβ£ΠΡβΠ₯Ρβ£ΠΡβΠ½Ρβ£ΠΡββΡβΠ© Grasshopper ΡβΠ½ΡβΠ€Ρβ£ΠΡβΠ±Ρβ£ΠΡβ£ΠΡβΠ€Ρβ£ΠΡβΠ₯Ρβ£ΠΡβΠ½ΡβΠΡβΠͺΡβΠ½ΡβΠΡβΠ·Ρβ£ΠΡββ ΡβΠ₯ΡβΠ΅ΡβΠΡβΠ€Ρββ‘
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
Republican a Thai? I wish I could be as articulate as that. I have never met a second language speaker that good. Maybe Thai mother.
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
Republican, a fascist liberal is someone who insists upon the adoption of liberalism. Obviously it is an oxymoron. Why aren’t you out in the jungle leading your guerrilla forces on a siege of Bangkok to impose freedom on the masses? The CIA could sponsor you!
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
re: #37: Fair enough, except that Republican misrepresents Thongchai’s positions and tries to bluster instead of present a cogent argument.
I actually think it is not so hard to figure out whether Republican is being fair or not, by going and looking at what Thongchai has written. This has nothing to do with what is or isn’t “true in his own heart.”
(Tosakan said: In the final analysis. I donβt know if Republican is being fair to Thongchai or not, because only Thongchai knows what is true in his own heart about his personal political positions, but I think Republican has the right to call Thongchai out if he perceives that Thongchai was being a hypocrite concerning his pre and post-coup positions.)
All that said, it is still edifying to read everyone’s contributions, wherever they stand. except maybe that guy who pops up now and then to take a gratuitous shot at the site’s hosts.
Pick a colour
Our family got the yellow one.
Judging by the colors of Democracy Monument on the other one, I’d guess it’s just a misprint, a bad (or early) press run with the color register screwed up.
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
#32
FYI, I belong to neither of those traditions. ‘Value pluralism’ is a familiar word amongst the liberals. And thanks for quoting my senior alumnus, though I don’t know what for….
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
a farang, is criticizing Republican, a Thai
By the way ‘he’ writes about HMK, I’m surprised to be informed that Republican is a Thai – I’d always pictured him as a Paul Handley type (not that I know what Handley actually looks like).
I’ll now have to adjust my mental picture of him to something like a Jakrapob.
http://manager.co.th/imageupload/images/550000009551313.JPEG
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
I find it amusing that a David W, a farang, is criticizing Republican, a Thai, over his style rather than his substance.
I think Republican is probably the most articulate writer on this blog. And we need more critics like him or her instead of the let’s hold hands and sing Kumbaya and not hurt anybody’s feelings academics who sold us out. I can’t think of any crime worse than to punish 65 million people for the alleged behavior of one individual. But I guess that Republican’s style is a far bigger offense than the academics who have sold us out in the defense of their feudal privileges and big shot status.
What the junta did was outrageous and inexcusable, and any academic worthy of the name should be ashamed of backing the coup.
But I guess coups don’t happen in David W’s country, where his political rights are still intact and he is free to do whatever he wants in whatever style he chooses, which is a privilege and a luxury Thais don’t have because of military dictators and their royalist allies. it must be nice to be in David W’s shoes, where he can criticize the style of people who have been under the feet of the Thai military for the last 75 years.
Even if Republican is perceived to be “annoying and insulting”, so what? Does that take away from the substance or analysis?
Personally, I find Republican’s style refreshing, especially with all the mealy mouthed bullshit out there. David W cares that Republican doesn’t speak in Orwellian Academic-Speak. Who gives a shit? I certainly don’t.
In the final analysis. I don’t know if Republican is being fair to Thongchai or not, because only Thongchai knows what is true in his own heart about his personal political positions, but I think Republican has the right to call Thongchai out if he perceives that Thongchai was being a hypocrite concerning his pre and post-coup positions.
If you go down to the woods today …
While the timber trade out of Attapeu is booming, particularly in light of the new sealed road through to Vietnam, it will not last long. Many of the loggers have simply moved from the Boloven Plateau, which they successfully logged out. The Thai owned sawmill near Paksong recently closed down due to lack of logs, and our project was even unable to purchase local sawn timber for regular building construction. The local climate is now changing, and the streams are no longer the havens for spawing fish and insects so important for the local people (and for the wildlife, such as remains). Plantations of rubber, oil palm etc. are going up, on land confiscated from locals in massive land frauds effected by the political elite., worked largley with imported labour.
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
Anyway, who in Thailand cares for these debates? It is a very much isolated exchange of, shall I say, “arguments.” Most Thai people could not care less for the concerns of the “Octobrists.”
Thongchai’s update on the Thai Studies conference
This debate really seems to be at a dead end, with Republican’s comment that “They love to pronounce from on high (the philosopher king) but when they are implicated in something unpleasant (eg. a coup) they refuse to accept any “responsibility.”
“implcated in the coup?” — You keep coming around to the same black and white paradigm.
My summary of the situation is this: The PAD folks, in defense of – well, that was never too clear, but let’s say democracy _-insisted it was neceassary to get rid of Thaksin at any cost. (A position not quite shared by all the old comrades, but surprsingly widespread despite some lip service against royal intervention by some.) A surpriisng example of this case was made by Perry Anderson, in a communication I’m sure not a few readers have seen.
Other folks now say they believe it was necessary _ and more clearly and cogently, for the sake of democarcy _ to defend Thaksin at all costs.
Thongchai, who made it publicly clear he stood in neither camp, got it in the neck from both sides.
I’d like to recall part of Republican’s initial comment:
“But now Thongchai plays the anti-royalist academic fighting for democracy, leading an βovert challenge to the repressive atmosphereβ. This is the game one sees so often in Thailand. The academic, displaying a fake earnest sense of moral self-righteousness, playing the role of the intellectual fighter for the just cause, but without any sense of responsibility or accountability.”
(“Fake earnest sense,” eh? Sweet. Is this a carefully documented analytical judgement?)
Anyway, you are truly ingenuous, if not downright dishonest, in at least two respects.
First of all, Thongchai is not “now” playing the anti-royalist academic, as you well know _ and basically admit in later comments _ and as anyone can look up. He has had the same position for years.
Second – and here your convoluted explanations to the contrary absolutely elude me – he has shown a “sense of responsibility or accountability” by attaching his name to his commentaries and positions. And though he lives and works abroad, he has spent plenty of time in Thailand in the past two years, lest you accuse him of grandtstanding from a safe haven.
In fact, this thread was about his efforts to get the subject of the monarchy on the Thai studies conference agenda. Should he get any cred for that? If not, why not?
I think I detect the whiff of an old and personal feud in this whole matter.
Let’s move on, shall we?.