Seem like the junta attempt to get a court order for YouTube like Turkey did, but with half the subtlety and none the sublime.
The problem with Thai culture is government does not know the different between government order and legal jurisdiction power. After so long status quo of government order as supreme command, the notion that someone could legally deny complying is non-standard situation. So they are fumbling with using legal court power like a child who learn to speak for the first time.
I believe your sense of humor and recent choice of topics Andrew Walker border on the tittilating these days.
Today’s Nation News article by Tulsathit Taptim may be more ethically and intellectually stimulating to New Mandala readers (nationmultimedia.com/2007/05/09/opinion/opinion_30033735.php).
Tulsathit asks this question: ” Do dying patients all deserve immediate access to affordable drugs, given that the world is now capable of producing them – anywhere, any time and in an instant? At a time when ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’ are supposed to be more indomitable than ever, and at a time when our world is richer and better equipped than ever, it’s just strange that this still has to be a question.”
Ah Vichai N. welcome back. I’ve missed your posts, they certainly lighten up my day. And I’m very glad that you have been researching republicanism; obviously I am beginning to have an effect on you. But it is a pity that in that passage on republicanism you copied from that website you didn’t include the quote from Thomas Paine, which fits perfectly with Thailand today:
All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny. A
heritable crown or an heritable throne … have no other
significant explanation than that mankind are heritable
property. To inherit a government, is to inherit the people
as if they were flocks or herds.
When a farmer’s daughter from Isaan does it, they consider it dirty and shameful. But when a Harvard-educated architect does it, it’s considered cute and artsy.
#58 Sorry, I had given the words “regime” and “politically passive” a wider meaning, overlooking that, for once, you really put down a straightforward sentence.
\”When looking at the history of republics we find that most republics are established for one of three reasons, either because a particular monarch or royal house (as in France (three times), Italy, Greece, China , Russia, Austria, and Germany) is considered obnoxious, or an ex-colony desires an indigenous head of state (eg the republics of the Commonwealth and formerly in the Commonwealth, such as Ireland, Pakistan and South Africa) or because a colony seeks independence ( eg the United \”States, Finland , Indonesia, Burma and Zaire). \” (www.geocities.com/Heartland/6897/republic.html)
Thailand was and is not a colony and the Thai King is revered by nearly all the Thais, with the exception of Thaksin and Republican.
So I guess you are right to call yourself \’silly\’ Republican! Unless of course the next monarch become \’obnoxious\’, the Thai people would be hard pressed to find some motivation to be a Republic.
Self-censorship is a dangerous game. They are justifying those in power and asserting the view that there is a kind of “right” and “wrong” information in the world. Freedom of expression is one of the elementary values necessary for a democratic society, coming first before the institutional democracy. An authoritarian society allowing everyone freedom of speech is an oxymoron. The opposite of it unfortunately still preveils pretty much in this world.
Repubican: I too fear the political activity of the people if the impact is corrupt politicians continuing to be elected.
The best way to nullify the military and end the cycle of coups is to elect better politicians, and turf out the corrupt politicians as soon as they show their true colours – until the electorate can do that, further coups are inevitable (with or without a king, but probably bloodier without)
Srithanonchai: I agree. No Shin sale = No coup.
Major miscalculation by Thaksin IMO, although he might still have avoided a coup if he had paid tax on the deal.
Cricket is a contribution of the two civilizations: one sees the joy of body as a way of paying respect to gods (in organization of nature), and another treats numbers (= score) to be the beauty of God’s mind. The English didn’t invent the game, nor did they come up with the rule of the game. People have been claiming too much of originality. Thought and idea do not come from nowhere. Since the Reformation, I can’t think of any Saxonian/Normanian inventions that have not stood on the shoulders of pre-modern giants of other civilizations, not even chicken tikka masala, circa 1930.
#54: huh? Silly old me thought that the reason the people were “politically passive” after September 19 was because they had tanks and guns pointing at them and their god-king was ordering them to obey the coup leader. Before September 19, the three elections that Thai Rak Thai won overwhelmingly and the 18 million membership of the party (not to mention their enthusiasm for local elections) should be ample enough evidence to show that the people are willing to be “politically active” when they are not intimidated by the military waving yellow flags. Hence my point that the king and his political allies (the military and bureaucracy and their academic and media ideologues) fear the political activity of the people and will do everything possible to limit it. This is precisely the objective of the new draft constitution, and the reason why it is almost certain that Thai Rak Thai will be dissolved when the decision on the electoral fraud case is handed down at the end of the month.
As for nganadeet, if you think the king’s influence over the political system is restricted to his one vote, then I’m afraid it’s back to Politics 100 for you. By the way, on the issue of corrupt politicians: do you think that the king’s strong support for the Surayudh regime which has stolen a trillion baht government budget at gun-point amounts to corruption? In this case the king would appear to be the most corrupt of them all: approving the theft of the taxpayers’ money and allowing it to be used by the military to enforce a dictatorship.
BTW: Marc Askew’s report has just been published by the East-West Center in Washington. No free PDF download yet.
Conspiracy, Politics, and a Disorderly Border: The Struggle to Comprehend Insurgency in Thailand’s Deep South Conspiracy, Politics, and a Disorderly Border: The Struggle to Comprehend Insurgency in Thailand’s Deep South
by Marc Askew
Policy Studies, No. 29 (Southeast Asia)
Binding: paper
Pages: xii, 100
Publisher: Singapore: ISEAS Publishing; Washington, D.C.: East-West Center Washington
Publish Date: 2007
Available From: Amazon.com and Institute for Southeast Asian Studies
ISBN: 978-981-230-464-3
Abstract
This study examines a number of themes underlying the struggle to identify the character and causes of the violence engulfing southern Thailand’s border provinces since 2004. It begins by outlining key representations of the southern problem in Thailand. Then, drawing on little-used Thai-language documentation, and on interviews and field study, this monograph focuses on three topics. First, it addresses the prominence of a number of conspiracy theories claiming that killings and bombings have been engineered, in whole or in part, by vested interest groups rather than by ideologically inspired separatists. Conspiratorial models are a dominant feature of explanations of conflict in Thailand. The study argues that the circulation of conspiracy speculation brings into relief the tangible reality of the labyrinthine and disorderly borderland, which is a major problem requiring attention that has long been deferred by Thailand’s governments. Second, the monograph focuses on some problematic arguments claiming that Thaksin Shinawatra’s dissolution of the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Center in 2002 paved the way for the current insurgency, and holds that the SBPAC and previous governments failed in the previous decade to detect an emerging new network-based militancy. Third, it discusses the political uses of the southern crisis by the opposition Democrat Party, which was able to preserve its electoral base in the south by demonizing Thaksin as the key cause of the turbulence. The study argues that representations of the southern crisis have been inherently political, and that the major reality needing attention is the complexity and vulnerability of a disorderly, contested, and neglected borderland.
But, yes, it would have been very interesting to see what would have happened, if Thaksin had not been so obsessed, and not sold Shin to Temasek — no coup!
I think a lot of people who mock your country find that Singapore is a wonderful place once you forget your morals and embrace free market economics! Don’t take it to heart, be above it.
“I’m not quite sure of the purpose of your quote from the State Dept. This is only relevant for “free societies” – not, as in the case of Thailand…..”
The king only has one vote, so he cannot take the blame for corrupt politicians being elected.
It would be much harder to stage a succesful coup against a popularly elected, non-corrupt government.
–So why does your king keep on legitimizing coups and the regimes they impose which force the people to be politically passive?–
A different interpunctuation would reverse the causal connection, i.e. because people are politically passive, coups and royal interventions are still possible. Besides, it was the politically active people who invited the coup and joined the resultant governmental bodies.
Also, I’m not quite sure of the purpose of your quote from the State Dept. This is only relevant for “free societies” – not, as in the case of Thailand, for countries where governments are installed or manipulated by the military and bureaucracy – as has been the case in Thailand for most of the last 60 years. “For democracy to succeed, citizens must be active, not passive… ” Yes, of course. So why does your king keep on legitimizing coups and the regimes they impose which force the people to be politically passive? Hence the argument: the king is the major obstacle to Thailand’s democratization. Not bitterness, simple logic.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
YouTube vs Thai dictatorship: The saga continues
Seem like the junta attempt to get a court order for YouTube like Turkey did, but with half the subtlety and none the sublime.
The problem with Thai culture is government does not know the different between government order and legal jurisdiction power. After so long status quo of government order as supreme command, the notion that someone could legally deny complying is non-standard situation. So they are fumbling with using legal court power like a child who learn to speak for the first time.
Middle class coyote
I believe your sense of humor and recent choice of topics Andrew Walker border on the tittilating these days.
Today’s Nation News article by Tulsathit Taptim may be more ethically and intellectually stimulating to New Mandala readers (nationmultimedia.com/2007/05/09/opinion/opinion_30033735.php).
Tulsathit asks this question: ” Do dying patients all deserve immediate access to affordable drugs, given that the world is now capable of producing them – anywhere, any time and in an instant? At a time when ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’ are supposed to be more indomitable than ever, and at a time when our world is richer and better equipped than ever, it’s just strange that this still has to be a question.”
Has the coup been good for democracy?
Ah Vichai N. welcome back. I’ve missed your posts, they certainly lighten up my day. And I’m very glad that you have been researching republicanism; obviously I am beginning to have an effect on you. But it is a pity that in that passage on republicanism you copied from that website you didn’t include the quote from Thomas Paine, which fits perfectly with Thailand today:
All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny. A
heritable crown or an heritable throne … have no other
significant explanation than that mankind are heritable
property. To inherit a government, is to inherit the people
as if they were flocks or herds.
How right Paine was.
Middle class coyote
I just love the hypocrisy of the Thai elite.
When a farmer’s daughter from Isaan does it, they consider it dirty and shameful. But when a Harvard-educated architect does it, it’s considered cute and artsy.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
#58 Sorry, I had given the words “regime” and “politically passive” a wider meaning, overlooking that, for once, you really put down a straightforward sentence.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
\”When looking at the history of republics we find that most republics are established for one of three reasons, either because a particular monarch or royal house (as in France (three times), Italy, Greece, China , Russia, Austria, and Germany) is considered obnoxious, or an ex-colony desires an indigenous head of state (eg the republics of the Commonwealth and formerly in the Commonwealth, such as Ireland, Pakistan and South Africa) or because a colony seeks independence ( eg the United \”States, Finland , Indonesia, Burma and Zaire). \” (www.geocities.com/Heartland/6897/republic.html)
Thailand was and is not a colony and the Thai King is revered by nearly all the Thais, with the exception of Thaksin and Republican.
So I guess you are right to call yourself \’silly\’ Republican! Unless of course the next monarch become \’obnoxious\’, the Thai people would be hard pressed to find some motivation to be a Republic.
Today is World Press Freedom day
Self-censorship is a dangerous game. They are justifying those in power and asserting the view that there is a kind of “right” and “wrong” information in the world. Freedom of expression is one of the elementary values necessary for a democratic society, coming first before the institutional democracy. An authoritarian society allowing everyone freedom of speech is an oxymoron. The opposite of it unfortunately still preveils pretty much in this world.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
Repubican: I too fear the political activity of the people if the impact is corrupt politicians continuing to be elected.
The best way to nullify the military and end the cycle of coups is to elect better politicians, and turf out the corrupt politicians as soon as they show their true colours – until the electorate can do that, further coups are inevitable (with or without a king, but probably bloodier without)
Srithanonchai: I agree. No Shin sale = No coup.
Major miscalculation by Thaksin IMO, although he might still have avoided a coup if he had paid tax on the deal.
Cambodia’s oil curse?
Here is another good article in the Guardian in the UK:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2026467,00.html
Cricket: “It’s a game for the mind”
Cricket is a contribution of the two civilizations: one sees the joy of body as a way of paying respect to gods (in organization of nature), and another treats numbers (= score) to be the beauty of God’s mind. The English didn’t invent the game, nor did they come up with the rule of the game. People have been claiming too much of originality. Thought and idea do not come from nowhere. Since the Reformation, I can’t think of any Saxonian/Normanian inventions that have not stood on the shoulders of pre-modern giants of other civilizations, not even chicken tikka masala, circa 1930.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
#54: huh? Silly old me thought that the reason the people were “politically passive” after September 19 was because they had tanks and guns pointing at them and their god-king was ordering them to obey the coup leader. Before September 19, the three elections that Thai Rak Thai won overwhelmingly and the 18 million membership of the party (not to mention their enthusiasm for local elections) should be ample enough evidence to show that the people are willing to be “politically active” when they are not intimidated by the military waving yellow flags. Hence my point that the king and his political allies (the military and bureaucracy and their academic and media ideologues) fear the political activity of the people and will do everything possible to limit it. This is precisely the objective of the new draft constitution, and the reason why it is almost certain that Thai Rak Thai will be dissolved when the decision on the electoral fraud case is handed down at the end of the month.
As for nganadeet, if you think the king’s influence over the political system is restricted to his one vote, then I’m afraid it’s back to Politics 100 for you. By the way, on the issue of corrupt politicians: do you think that the king’s strong support for the Surayudh regime which has stolen a trillion baht government budget at gun-point amounts to corruption? In this case the king would appear to be the most corrupt of them all: approving the theft of the taxpayers’ money and allowing it to be used by the military to enforce a dictatorship.
Seminar on Thailand’s southern crisis
Looking at the names of panellists I can guess the direction of their argument. I’ll be waiting to read a balanced report from New Mandala.
Seminar on Thailand’s southern crisis
BTW: Marc Askew’s report has just been published by the East-West Center in Washington. No free PDF download yet.
Conspiracy, Politics, and a Disorderly Border: The Struggle to Comprehend Insurgency in Thailand’s Deep South Conspiracy, Politics, and a Disorderly Border: The Struggle to Comprehend Insurgency in Thailand’s Deep South
by Marc Askew
Policy Studies, No. 29 (Southeast Asia)
Binding: paper
Pages: xii, 100
Publisher: Singapore: ISEAS Publishing; Washington, D.C.: East-West Center Washington
Publish Date: 2007
Available From: Amazon.com and Institute for Southeast Asian Studies
ISBN: 978-981-230-464-3
Abstract
This study examines a number of themes underlying the struggle to identify the character and causes of the violence engulfing southern Thailand’s border provinces since 2004. It begins by outlining key representations of the southern problem in Thailand. Then, drawing on little-used Thai-language documentation, and on interviews and field study, this monograph focuses on three topics. First, it addresses the prominence of a number of conspiracy theories claiming that killings and bombings have been engineered, in whole or in part, by vested interest groups rather than by ideologically inspired separatists. Conspiratorial models are a dominant feature of explanations of conflict in Thailand. The study argues that the circulation of conspiracy speculation brings into relief the tangible reality of the labyrinthine and disorderly borderland, which is a major problem requiring attention that has long been deferred by Thailand’s governments. Second, the monograph focuses on some problematic arguments claiming that Thaksin Shinawatra’s dissolution of the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Center in 2002 paved the way for the current insurgency, and holds that the SBPAC and previous governments failed in the previous decade to detect an emerging new network-based militancy. Third, it discusses the political uses of the southern crisis by the opposition Democrat Party, which was able to preserve its electoral base in the south by demonizing Thaksin as the key cause of the turbulence. The study argues that representations of the southern crisis have been inherently political, and that the major reality needing attention is the complexity and vulnerability of a disorderly, contested, and neglected borderland.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
Ever saw the king putting his ballot in the box?
But, yes, it would have been very interesting to see what would have happened, if Thaksin had not been so obsessed, and not sold Shin to Temasek — no coup!
Has the coup been good for democracy?
LKY,
I think a lot of people who mock your country find that Singapore is a wonderful place once you forget your morals and embrace free market economics! Don’t take it to heart, be above it.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
“I’m not quite sure of the purpose of your quote from the State Dept. This is only relevant for “free societies” – not, as in the case of Thailand…..”
The king only has one vote, so he cannot take the blame for corrupt politicians being elected.
It would be much harder to stage a succesful coup against a popularly elected, non-corrupt government.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
–So why does your king keep on legitimizing coups and the regimes they impose which force the people to be politically passive?–
A different interpunctuation would reverse the causal connection, i.e. because people are politically passive, coups and royal interventions are still possible. Besides, it was the politically active people who invited the coup and joined the resultant governmental bodies.
There is no straight logic here.
Has the coup been good for democracy?
What is wrong with being Singapore ? Why do you criticize and mock my country?
Has the coup been good for democracy?
In recent years i’ve found that views on Thai politics and policy seemed at the interesting crossroad…
when we need strong leadership and government we look for singaporean or malaysian style…
while we don’t want ‘nationalist policy’ like mahathir’s.
we call for the division of power and ‘strong political party’, like american style, but we don’t want independent parliament like american…
Has the coup been good for democracy?
Also, I’m not quite sure of the purpose of your quote from the State Dept. This is only relevant for “free societies” – not, as in the case of Thailand, for countries where governments are installed or manipulated by the military and bureaucracy – as has been the case in Thailand for most of the last 60 years. “For democracy to succeed, citizens must be active, not passive… ” Yes, of course. So why does your king keep on legitimizing coups and the regimes they impose which force the people to be politically passive? Hence the argument: the king is the major obstacle to Thailand’s democratization. Not bitterness, simple logic.