1) Thai studies is weak due to linguistic incompetence of the students
2) If you want to kick the system in the teeth and write the “truth” as many of you yearn to do…ever hear of the Freedom of Information Act in the USA…dig for CIA data…or is the “Land of the Free” and its thugs too scary for you paper pushers?
3) Got balls? Are you woman enough? Quit your whining, and word coinage ridden texts and collect data on the military junta.
4) The monarchy is manipulated by EVERYONE..wake up! Thais are mistakenly continuing to support it for stability due to this junta—error!—
5) real fighters are watching the fall 2007 election and any constitution…not bitching on a blog
I am apalled by the direction of “Thai Studies”
nothing but modern orientalism
In general I found it quite informative and productive to think with. I found McCargo’s introduction and conclusion measured but informative in framing issues. Not being a political scientist, I appreciated but wasn’t overwhelmed by McCargo and Ukrist’s chapters on the national / regional political dimensions of the violence. I must confess I found Satha-Anand’s essay a bit dissapointing in the limited reach and contextualization of his claims; guess I was just hoping for more voices of how different people viewed the monument rather than the more formalist analysis presented. Tan-Mullins’ piece was so brief and suggestive it couldn’t help but dissapoint any reader who wants to know more about how fear, gossip and confusion work in the context of the southern violence. I enjoyed the two essays by Jitpiromsi & Sobhonvasu and Suggunasil the most, probably because they provided challenging and new substantive material and analytic perspectives, yet were restrained in their claims.
After finishing the volume, I was struck about how little academic work exists on the structure and dynamics of local social and religious authority in the deep South. What does the general field of authoritative social and religious actors look like, what dynamics shape how these actors interact with each other and other more official voices of authority (like bureaucrats, politicians, the military and the palace), and even more importantly how exactly has this total local landscape of legitimacy been transformed under the pressure of the insurgency? I was also struck how despite at least two decades of global scholarship on political Islam and Islamism, there is next to no scholarship about how these cultural movement (and transnational Islamic devotional movements more generally) have played out, if at all, in Thai society and / or the South. Strange.
Would be interested in knowing about any work others know of that helps elucidate these issues. Also, for those who aren’t aware of it, there is a useful blog with weekly reflections on the news from the South (and a pdf file of English language reporting, plus numerous general links) at: pattanijg.typepad.com
I agree that people should listen to Thant Myint-U. It’s a shame that many seem so afraid now of standing up to the Burma lobby as epitomized by OSI and speaking their minds. Obviously many agree with OSI’s hardline stance, but many do not and their voices are entirely drowned out. Thant Myint-U was very brave in challenging the sanctions-based approach in an honest way and should be commended. I hope people others will speak out, refrain from ad hominem attacks, and realize that we desperately need to rethink outside strategies on Burma.
Jon Fernquest mentions in his comment a story about a nun who got charged with lese majeste. I don’t know this story, but I would like to know more about it. Anyone who knows this story?
Soros and Maureen Aung-Thwin and their activism funding pretty much drown everything else out with the volume of money they are pumping. They’ve set the agenda and nothing else matters. Thant Myint-U is a hero.
I haven’t been in Thailand around Songkran time last year but the years before. At least in Bangkok, it was more tame to my experience than the years before. Especially, there hadn’t been that much the discussion about spaghetti tops and how they are not in accordance with Thai moral values, as it had been two years ago (or even three – not sure about that.)
>With Sophon having set the pattern, Bangchak has a long >history of backing “progressive” (within the Thai milieu) >social and environmental causes.
Yes, he was a leading light of the old “progressive Buddhism/social responsibility” circle that last year made its devil’s pact with the reactionary forces of society when a cultural panic attack set in. Sophon, like many people, seemed to lose his bearings somewhere back there. In fairness, Bangchak did exercise more than average social responsibility (not very hard to do in Thailand!)
>Seems New Mandala can’t get sufficiently sated unless >Thaksin Shinawatra is restored to Thailand’s premiership.
>Once a while New Mandala attempt to digress on other >matters . . . but its slant is clearly pro-Thaksin.
What? Was this posted in the right place? The thread has nothing to do with Thaksin, It’s a pathetic fallacy to say that if you criticize people who criticize Thaksin, you are pro-Thaksin. Though that seems to be the fad in many circles in Thailand now.
There certainly seems to be a lot of hostility toward the Thai Studies conference in general. Or at least, the hostility towards academics seems pretty undifferentiated. What’s that all about? I can’t speak to the quality of the presentations, but the agenda of the last conference seems like it was compelling. See:
Also, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the genesis of Kevin Hewison’s work on the Thai monarchy in a paper about Monarchy and Democracy” presented at one of these conferences? (Or was it at an AAS meeting?) Was that not useful?
Administrative court: The introduction of institutional innovations often is a time-consuming process with many participants. Without some good research that would aim at reconstructing this process, one cannot really say with any certainty which organizations and groups of people had which relalative degree of influence at what point of time and on what particular element of that innovation.
This conversation about the King featuring Dr Craig Reynolds, Paul Handley and Thitinan Pongsudhirak has to be careful about lese majeste. Gives a history of the King’ role in politics
Tosakan, the link between Thailand’s administrative court and German politics is actually quite strong. The 1997 Constitution, which established the administrative court (as well as several other innovations), was a product of a limited number of academics. The most influential of them were Chai-Anan Samudavanija, Amorn Chantarasomboon, and Borwornsak Uwanno. All of these jurists and political scientists were funded by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation for much of the early and mid 1990’s.
The Christian Democrats did not tell the academics what to think. However, it did provide significant financial support to strengthen a very specific community of Thai thinkers. That support was critical in ensuring that that community would have an important role in drafting the constitution.
Yes, let’s see the connection between German political parties and the creation of the Thai Administrative Court. I did quite a bit of work with the court some time ago and got the impression the US and French support was much stronger.
JFL: There are many Thais who oppose the miliatry junta’s hiding behind the monarchy as they attempt to remake the country to their benefit. Are these Thais self-hating? You seem to be reading from Gen. Saprang talking points in claiming that criticism of specific efforts by the junta and their supporters are “anti-monarch” or “anti-Thai”
1) my point was about impact concerning your self-chosen term — “internal affairs.” What is the difference between a political party and a private company in this respect?
2) I did not say that they were “responsible”, merely that they had a “positive impact,” again referring to the term you chose.
3) What about the National Democratic Institute? Yet, this does not, as I mention, refer to political parties alone, but also to other NGOs, a bigger one being the Asia Foundation, others might include Amnesty International, etc. etc. Finally, we are not talking here about political parties per se, but about their educational foundations. Normally, they work through associated experts and Thai partners. Without the latter, they cannot do anything.
At least this conference might shed light on the practicalites of implementing a sufficiency economy instead of sychophantic rubbish being produced elsewhere. These people seem to have real environmental concerns
1. There is a distinction between political parties and government organizations.
And yes, political parties are different than the organizations you mentioned. Tourists, for example, don’t have symposiums on public policy and King Bumibol’s sufficiency theory.
2. I’d like to see the evidence that a German political party was responsible for creating Thailand’s administrative court.
3. I wonder which political parties of foreign countries, besides Germany, have an active role in formulating Thailand’s public policy.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Liberating Burma with $2 million a year?
Soros also funds Thailand projects, including Prachaitai Newspaper.
A Thai Studies boycott?
1) Thai studies is weak due to linguistic incompetence of the students
2) If you want to kick the system in the teeth and write the “truth” as many of you yearn to do…ever hear of the Freedom of Information Act in the USA…dig for CIA data…or is the “Land of the Free” and its thugs too scary for you paper pushers?
3) Got balls? Are you woman enough? Quit your whining, and word coinage ridden texts and collect data on the military junta.
4) The monarchy is manipulated by EVERYONE..wake up! Thais are mistakenly continuing to support it for stability due to this junta—error!—
5) real fighters are watching the fall 2007 election and any constitution…not bitching on a blog
I am apalled by the direction of “Thai Studies”
nothing but modern orientalism
Southern insight
In general I found it quite informative and productive to think with. I found McCargo’s introduction and conclusion measured but informative in framing issues. Not being a political scientist, I appreciated but wasn’t overwhelmed by McCargo and Ukrist’s chapters on the national / regional political dimensions of the violence. I must confess I found Satha-Anand’s essay a bit dissapointing in the limited reach and contextualization of his claims; guess I was just hoping for more voices of how different people viewed the monument rather than the more formalist analysis presented. Tan-Mullins’ piece was so brief and suggestive it couldn’t help but dissapoint any reader who wants to know more about how fear, gossip and confusion work in the context of the southern violence. I enjoyed the two essays by Jitpiromsi & Sobhonvasu and Suggunasil the most, probably because they provided challenging and new substantive material and analytic perspectives, yet were restrained in their claims.
After finishing the volume, I was struck about how little academic work exists on the structure and dynamics of local social and religious authority in the deep South. What does the general field of authoritative social and religious actors look like, what dynamics shape how these actors interact with each other and other more official voices of authority (like bureaucrats, politicians, the military and the palace), and even more importantly how exactly has this total local landscape of legitimacy been transformed under the pressure of the insurgency? I was also struck how despite at least two decades of global scholarship on political Islam and Islamism, there is next to no scholarship about how these cultural movement (and transnational Islamic devotional movements more generally) have played out, if at all, in Thai society and / or the South. Strange.
Would be interested in knowing about any work others know of that helps elucidate these issues. Also, for those who aren’t aware of it, there is a useful blog with weekly reflections on the news from the South (and a pdf file of English language reporting, plus numerous general links) at: pattanijg.typepad.com
Liberating Burma with $2 million a year?
I agree that people should listen to Thant Myint-U. It’s a shame that many seem so afraid now of standing up to the Burma lobby as epitomized by OSI and speaking their minds. Obviously many agree with OSI’s hardline stance, but many do not and their voices are entirely drowned out. Thant Myint-U was very brave in challenging the sanctions-based approach in an honest way and should be commended. I hope people others will speak out, refrain from ad hominem attacks, and realize that we desperately need to rethink outside strategies on Burma.
Pardon me, Jufer free
Jon Fernquest mentions in his comment a story about a nun who got charged with lese majeste. I don’t know this story, but I would like to know more about it. Anyone who knows this story?
Liberating Burma with $2 million a year?
I hope people listen to Thant Myint-U.
Soros and Maureen Aung-Thwin and their activism funding pretty much drown everything else out with the volume of money they are pumping. They’ve set the agenda and nothing else matters. Thant Myint-U is a hero.
“Is Songkran fun?”
I haven’t been in Thailand around Songkran time last year but the years before. At least in Bangkok, it was more tame to my experience than the years before. Especially, there hadn’t been that much the discussion about spaghetti tops and how they are not in accordance with Thai moral values, as it had been two years ago (or even three – not sure about that.)
Sufficiency network
[…] of foreign “meddling” in Southeast Asian affairs, Forbes has published an article on the funding that American […]
Sufficiency network
>With Sophon having set the pattern, Bangchak has a long >history of backing “progressive” (within the Thai milieu) >social and environmental causes.
Yes, he was a leading light of the old “progressive Buddhism/social responsibility” circle that last year made its devil’s pact with the reactionary forces of society when a cultural panic attack set in. Sophon, like many people, seemed to lose his bearings somewhere back there. In fairness, Bangchak did exercise more than average social responsibility (not very hard to do in Thailand!)
>Seems New Mandala can’t get sufficiently sated unless >Thaksin Shinawatra is restored to Thailand’s premiership.
>Once a while New Mandala attempt to digress on other >matters . . . but its slant is clearly pro-Thaksin.
What? Was this posted in the right place? The thread has nothing to do with Thaksin, It’s a pathetic fallacy to say that if you criticize people who criticize Thaksin, you are pro-Thaksin. Though that seems to be the fad in many circles in Thailand now.
More on the 2008 Thai Studies conference
There certainly seems to be a lot of hostility toward the Thai Studies conference in general. Or at least, the hostility towards academics seems pretty undifferentiated. What’s that all about? I can’t speak to the quality of the presentations, but the agenda of the last conference seems like it was compelling. See:
http://www.niu.edu/thaiconf/Program%20Booklet%20FINAL%203-25-05.htm
Also, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the genesis of Kevin Hewison’s work on the Thai monarchy in a paper about Monarchy and Democracy” presented at one of these conferences? (Or was it at an AAS meeting?) Was that not useful?
Sufficiency network
Administrative court: The introduction of institutional innovations often is a time-consuming process with many participants. Without some good research that would aim at reconstructing this process, one cannot really say with any certainty which organizations and groups of people had which relalative degree of influence at what point of time and on what particular element of that innovation.
Pardon me, Jufer free
This conversation about the King featuring Dr Craig Reynolds, Paul Handley and Thitinan Pongsudhirak has to be careful about lese majeste. Gives a history of the King’ role in politics
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/rearvision/
Sufficiency network
Tosakan, the link between Thailand’s administrative court and German politics is actually quite strong. The 1997 Constitution, which established the administrative court (as well as several other innovations), was a product of a limited number of academics. The most influential of them were Chai-Anan Samudavanija, Amorn Chantarasomboon, and Borwornsak Uwanno. All of these jurists and political scientists were funded by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation for much of the early and mid 1990’s.
The Christian Democrats did not tell the academics what to think. However, it did provide significant financial support to strengthen a very specific community of Thai thinkers. That support was critical in ensuring that that community would have an important role in drafting the constitution.
Sufficiency network
Yes, let’s see the connection between German political parties and the creation of the Thai Administrative Court. I did quite a bit of work with the court some time ago and got the impression the US and French support was much stronger.
JFL: There are many Thais who oppose the miliatry junta’s hiding behind the monarchy as they attempt to remake the country to their benefit. Are these Thais self-hating? You seem to be reading from Gen. Saprang talking points in claiming that criticism of specific efforts by the junta and their supporters are “anti-monarch” or “anti-Thai”
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
For a sampling of LKY’s persecution, check out the review of Francis Seow’s book, To Catch A Tartar, at http://mindbloggingstuff.blogspot.com/2004/07/lee-kuan-yew-that-very-few.html
Sufficiency network
Seems New Mandala can’t get sufficiently sated unless Thaksin Shinawatra is restored to Thailand’s premiership.
Once a while New Mandala attempt to digress on other matters . . . but its slant is clearly pro-Thaksin.
Sufficiency network
Tosakan:
1) my point was about impact concerning your self-chosen term — “internal affairs.” What is the difference between a political party and a private company in this respect?
2) I did not say that they were “responsible”, merely that they had a “positive impact,” again referring to the term you chose.
3) What about the National Democratic Institute? Yet, this does not, as I mention, refer to political parties alone, but also to other NGOs, a bigger one being the Asia Foundation, others might include Amnesty International, etc. etc. Finally, we are not talking here about political parties per se, but about their educational foundations. Normally, they work through associated experts and Thai partners. Without the latter, they cannot do anything.
Sufficiency network
With Sophon having set the pattern, Bangchak has a long history of backing “progressive” (within the Thai milieu) social and environmental causes.
Sufficiency network
At least this conference might shed light on the practicalites of implementing a sufficiency economy instead of sychophantic rubbish being produced elsewhere. These people seem to have real environmental concerns
Sufficiency network
Srithanochai-
1. There is a distinction between political parties and government organizations.
And yes, political parties are different than the organizations you mentioned. Tourists, for example, don’t have symposiums on public policy and King Bumibol’s sufficiency theory.
2. I’d like to see the evidence that a German political party was responsible for creating Thailand’s administrative court.
3. I wonder which political parties of foreign countries, besides Germany, have an active role in formulating Thailand’s public policy.