I don’t know anything for a fact. It’s all hearsay. Well, I imagine anyone who have first hand experience, or are players in this struggle are not going to be in the mood to tell you much of what’s going on on-line in real time. I can only encourage these people to keep a careful note of events, so that maybe decades from now, posterity can learn something about all this.
Here’s a riddle: In a game of chess, which piece is the most powerful?
Leaving aside Khun Thanong’s conflating worship of the monarchy with the Buddhist religion – perhaps a trifle insensitive in view of the situation in the south – and his utter lack of courage in failing to mention the succession issue, I’m wondering about his use of the word ‘pagan.’ I’m no scholar, but the only people I am aware of who use the word nowadays are hard-core fundamantalist Christians and comedians who make fun of hard-core fundamentalist Christians. Can someone enlighten readers if the word is in fact used in serious political discourse? Anywhere?
Bystander’s view is the one that sees the monarchy used by others. I’d like to have it explained how, on the one hand, the king can be great at everything he turns his hand to, but on the other, he is used by slimy un-named others? Doesn’t work for me.
That said, if the lese majeste laws were gone, then the monarchy would have to adapt. Of course, it probably would, but at least there might be some transparency and less sycophantic drivel about it.
Of course everybody; Thai, Farang, Chinois, etc. can study Thai politics. It is definitely not a special area reserved for a class of yellow/black robe chromosomes. What I meant is don’t bother to study from people who like to publish, publish, and publish. What do these people know? If you’re keen to know the history of Thai politics, study the ‘meaning’ of theory and go to the archive at Tha Wasukree. The best historian is within you. Why learns Thai history of politics from other people’s imagination? (No debate please Srithanonchai 🙂 )
Yeah, Lese majeste is a law under which many parasites make a living. The monarch himself is as much a victim as the lay citizen. Taking away this law, and the monarchy will likely adapt and survive and thrive in a good way, having been rid of these self-serving morally-bankrupt syncophants.
Thais would be a heck of a lot less obsessed with Lese Majeste if they did not have the current King as the role model for the monarchy. What if the monarchy was (or becomes) like court of Nepal’s King Gyanendra?
jonfernquest states: “But powerful people exploit the institution of kingship for their own selfish goals and they use it to make them invulnerable and instead of becoming humble, as one would expect if they really loved HMK, they become self-righteous and are not willing to consider any opinion other than their own because they “know” that they are “right” and are willing to “die” for HMK to do the “right” thing (e.g. Saprang is always expressing his “opinions” in these terms).” Very true. Everyone who has worked and lived in Thailand has come across this kind of thing.
However, this should not deflect attention from the fact that the palace want laws that protect them and censor and threaten others. For example, if the king didn’t like the lese majeste law he could ask that it be removed. The palace has used the law for political purposes and continues to find it very useful that there is no easy or legal public scrutiny of any of its business, personal and political activities.
it’s good to read Khun Andrew’s sensible comment on this “campaign”. I was thinking of writing something myself but was too busy with other things. I’d like to make just two brief points:
(1) “Siam” as it was used prior to 1938 ESPECIALLY during the time of the Absolute Monarchy was NOT an ethnically inclusive name as Charnvit suggests. In fact, like the name “Thai”, it refered MANINLY to an ethnic group (Rama VI, for instance, used “Siamese race” and “Thai race” interchangeably). Even during the brief period between the 1932 Revolution and the 1938 change of name to Thailand, “Siam” was taken as largely synonymous with “Thai”. There was no real “contrast” between the two as Charnvit implies.
(2) More importantly, SUPPOSE the junta’s Constitution Drafting Council agree with Charnvit and use Siam instead of Thailand, would Charnvit and all those who signed this petition support this Constitution, regardless of its provisions on other “smaller” issues (like the structure of the parliament, the role of the militarty, etc.)?
An anti-coup group cancelled their rally at Sanam Luang Friday for fear that its use of public addressing system would interfere with the Chakri Day ceremony at a nearby temple.
Wiphuthalaeng Pattanaphumthai said his Saturday People Group decided to cancel the planned rally Friday.
But it would hold a marathon rally with other anti-coup groups starting from Saturday to Wednesday, he said.
“such a fractal geometry. Structure the basic building blocks of the society and let that structure recur, percolating upwards.” > Wow — I am now just curious how such a structure, started perhaps somewhere in Chiang Rai, would look like on Silom or Sukhumvit, or along the way to the eastern seaboard.
Had the president of this “royally connected” university not also dreamt up something like a hotel project, and spent a lot of money on that, until the private sector was asked to join and promtly criticized that all this nonsense and spending had been done without any shred of planning and competence? Or is this a different university up north?
LKY afterword: Mercer Human Resource Consulting just published their quality of life survey of cities all over the world. Singapore ranks 34th. No sign of Bangkok, Jakarta, or Manila amongst the top 50…
I have the utmost respect for HMK and the institution of kingship. I even spend a lot of time researching the history of kingship in Southeast Asia.
But powerful people exploit the institution of kingship for their own selfish goals and they use it to make them invulnerable and instead of becoming humble, as one would expect if they really loved HMK, they become self-righteous and are not willing to consider any opinion other than their own because they “know” that they are “right” and are willing to “die” for HMK to do the “right” thing (e.g. Saprang is always expressing his “opinions” in these terms).
IMHO this is just an excuse for not being humble, democratic, and considering other peoples’ opinions. (like Abhisit) The censorship of the Matichon reporting on a child prostitution ring at the university I worked at was, I suppose, suppressed because the name of the university was associated with royalty.
There was also, reportedly, going to be an oath of loyalty soon. All of this buttressed the president’s autocratic power to control and micro-manage everything, to make promises and break them at will, with impunity. In my case, I was never paid a single baht for teaching 200+ students economics in two gigantic lecture classes without TAs! And then they led me down the garden path to prepare for more classes, that also turned out just to be a con-game and a lie. And meanwhile you can see the little van of deans and vice-presidents disembarking in front of the massage parlour downtown that they frequent. With perfect control of information, they are a law unto themselves, and I, a Farang, just a “guest” in “their” country, who should shut-up and behave himself.
Under such a system, teachers are no longer teachers (no real faculty senate, they can’t vote him out) they are just little pawn robots in the president’s grandious vision that he has dreamed up in honour of HMK, but the institution of kingship here becomes a tool for self-aggrandizement. As the Thais at the institution used to say, he (the president) can crush you with one finger, farangs are non-entities without health insurance or tenure, so they could not interfere with this system of oppression, all of which really contradicts the very definition of “university” and academic excellence. The flip-side of treating farangs who do have reverence for your culture like trash, is that you will eventually attract exactly that, trash to the teaching profession, alcoholics, paedophiles, etc, all the sorts that Thailand has problems with, I suppose there is a little “Som Nam Na” element here, I really wish it was not the case.
“I don’t think the military feels threatened. They have all the guns. This is just an opportunity to whip everyone into line…” Sure, but the people at large, like Thanong, have no guns (fortunately). But then, the military also isn’t that sure. Otherwise, why should they make trips to Chiang Mai to consult with their mo du?
I have no doubt that some, perhaps a majority of the drafters of the latest and greatest constitution (prior to the new, latest and greatest one now on the drawing board) were diligent tinkerers trying their best to create The Document that would put it all right. Put it all right that is and leave power in their hands. Stability.
For what it’s worth I think that is the problem. Once you get over keeping things in your own hands you can set about with a much simpler design principle in mind. HM the King’s sufficiency economy, so greatly scoffed at by all the enlightened Neoliberals here, embodies just such a fractal geometry. Structure the basic building blocks of the society and let that structure recur, percolating upwards.
This is not a recipe that requires magnificent ministries or generals with forty pounds of headlights stapled to their chests or that presents mega-opportunities for rake-off. And those are the main “rationalizations”, I fear, that are deemed essential by the political class.
Please don’t think I am critical of Thailand. I love it here. I still think it has a very good chance to proceed along the lines that HM the King and Ivan Illich, HM’s contemporary, have given us all a glimpse of.
It’s just that Neoliberal, god forbid Neoconservative, politics have been globalized. Have spread like bird flu. And spread chiefly amongst the chattering classes, who write the constitutions and seek “stability” at all costs.
Opportunism and sensationalism with the lese majeste was/is bound to happen, given the way they are currently dealing with the problem.
Exactly. I cannot help but think that it’s a military passion for control that makes such a fetish of the monarchy. In my view it has nothing to do with HM the King himself but with the military’s desire to have a refuge into which they may retreat where no discussion is allowed. The equivalent of a religion’s dogma. Their means of establishing such a refuge is to cast the beloved Bhumipol Adulyadej into the middle of it and then dare anyone to entire “HM the King’s” reserve. They can get away with it in the Thai media, they “own” most of Thai TV-land, can intimidate the print media, and jail you on the street, but they haven’t come to grips with the internet. Their only switch there is “on” or “off”. Right now it’s “off”.
Maybe, one can put this “siege mentality” and the King together with Thai animism? If you feel threatened, you try to collect as many influential deities of all sorts as you can in order to feel safe in your life.
I don’t think the military feels threatened. They have all the guns. This is just an opportunity to whip everyone into line…
and yet another pathetic op-ed from thanong:
…pathetic is right! The Nation has rolled over completely.
Tor downloads (“The Onion Router” – open source anonymizing software) have been blocked for a month, anyway.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
A royal petition
I don’t know anything for a fact. It’s all hearsay. Well, I imagine anyone who have first hand experience, or are players in this struggle are not going to be in the mood to tell you much of what’s going on on-line in real time. I can only encourage these people to keep a careful note of events, so that maybe decades from now, posterity can learn something about all this.
Here’s a riddle: In a game of chess, which piece is the most powerful?
Blocked tube
Leaving aside Khun Thanong’s conflating worship of the monarchy with the Buddhist religion – perhaps a trifle insensitive in view of the situation in the south – and his utter lack of courage in failing to mention the succession issue, I’m wondering about his use of the word ‘pagan.’ I’m no scholar, but the only people I am aware of who use the word nowadays are hard-core fundamantalist Christians and comedians who make fun of hard-core fundamentalist Christians. Can someone enlighten readers if the word is in fact used in serious political discourse? Anywhere?
Blocked tube
Bystander’s view is the one that sees the monarchy used by others. I’d like to have it explained how, on the one hand, the king can be great at everything he turns his hand to, but on the other, he is used by slimy un-named others? Doesn’t work for me.
That said, if the lese majeste laws were gone, then the monarchy would have to adapt. Of course, it probably would, but at least there might be some transparency and less sycophantic drivel about it.
A royal petition
John Francis Lee & Srithanonchai:
Of course everybody; Thai, Farang, Chinois, etc. can study Thai politics. It is definitely not a special area reserved for a class of yellow/black robe chromosomes. What I meant is don’t bother to study from people who like to publish, publish, and publish. What do these people know? If you’re keen to know the history of Thai politics, study the ‘meaning’ of theory and go to the archive at Tha Wasukree. The best historian is within you. Why learns Thai history of politics from other people’s imagination? (No debate please Srithanonchai 🙂 )
Blocked tube
Thailand is not alone. In fact, the Turks beat us in this game!
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/04/06/turkey.youtube.ap/index.html
Blocked tube
Yeah, Lese majeste is a law under which many parasites make a living. The monarch himself is as much a victim as the lay citizen. Taking away this law, and the monarchy will likely adapt and survive and thrive in a good way, having been rid of these self-serving morally-bankrupt syncophants.
Blocked tube
Thais would be a heck of a lot less obsessed with Lese Majeste if they did not have the current King as the role model for the monarchy. What if the monarchy was (or becomes) like court of Nepal’s King Gyanendra?
Thailand? Siam? Who cares?
much ado about nothing to my view point…
Blocked tube
jonfernquest states: “But powerful people exploit the institution of kingship for their own selfish goals and they use it to make them invulnerable and instead of becoming humble, as one would expect if they really loved HMK, they become self-righteous and are not willing to consider any opinion other than their own because they “know” that they are “right” and are willing to “die” for HMK to do the “right” thing (e.g. Saprang is always expressing his “opinions” in these terms).” Very true. Everyone who has worked and lived in Thailand has come across this kind of thing.
However, this should not deflect attention from the fact that the palace want laws that protect them and censor and threaten others. For example, if the king didn’t like the lese majeste law he could ask that it be removed. The palace has used the law for political purposes and continues to find it very useful that there is no easy or legal public scrutiny of any of its business, personal and political activities.
Thailand? Siam? Who cares?
it’s good to read Khun Andrew’s sensible comment on this “campaign”. I was thinking of writing something myself but was too busy with other things. I’d like to make just two brief points:
(1) “Siam” as it was used prior to 1938 ESPECIALLY during the time of the Absolute Monarchy was NOT an ethnically inclusive name as Charnvit suggests. In fact, like the name “Thai”, it refered MANINLY to an ethnic group (Rama VI, for instance, used “Siamese race” and “Thai race” interchangeably). Even during the brief period between the 1932 Revolution and the 1938 change of name to Thailand, “Siam” was taken as largely synonymous with “Thai”. There was no real “contrast” between the two as Charnvit implies.
(2) More importantly, SUPPOSE the junta’s Constitution Drafting Council agree with Charnvit and use Siam instead of Thailand, would Charnvit and all those who signed this petition support this Constitution, regardless of its provisions on other “smaller” issues (like the structure of the parliament, the role of the militarty, etc.)?
Thailand? Siam? Who cares?
Andrew ,see the October 2006 Tlc archive for mentions of the coup.
Patrick Jory certainly shoots straight from the hip.
A royal petition
Activists cancel rally Friday
An anti-coup group cancelled their rally at Sanam Luang Friday for fear that its use of public addressing system would interfere with the Chakri Day ceremony at a nearby temple.
Wiphuthalaeng Pattanaphumthai said his Saturday People Group decided to cancel the planned rally Friday.
But it would hold a marathon rally with other anti-coup groups starting from Saturday to Wednesday, he said.
The Nation April 6, 2007
A royal petition
“such a fractal geometry. Structure the basic building blocks of the society and let that structure recur, percolating upwards.” > Wow — I am now just curious how such a structure, started perhaps somewhere in Chiang Rai, would look like on Silom or Sukhumvit, or along the way to the eastern seaboard.
P.S.: I am neither a neoliberal nor a neocon.
Blocked tube
Had the president of this “royally connected” university not also dreamt up something like a hotel project, and spent a lot of money on that, until the private sector was asked to join and promtly criticized that all this nonsense and spending had been done without any shred of planning and competence? Or is this a different university up north?
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
LKY afterword: Mercer Human Resource Consulting just published their quality of life survey of cities all over the world. Singapore ranks 34th. No sign of Bangkok, Jakarta, or Manila amongst the top 50…
Blocked tube
I have the utmost respect for HMK and the institution of kingship. I even spend a lot of time researching the history of kingship in Southeast Asia.
But powerful people exploit the institution of kingship for their own selfish goals and they use it to make them invulnerable and instead of becoming humble, as one would expect if they really loved HMK, they become self-righteous and are not willing to consider any opinion other than their own because they “know” that they are “right” and are willing to “die” for HMK to do the “right” thing (e.g. Saprang is always expressing his “opinions” in these terms).
IMHO this is just an excuse for not being humble, democratic, and considering other peoples’ opinions. (like Abhisit) The censorship of the Matichon reporting on a child prostitution ring at the university I worked at was, I suppose, suppressed because the name of the university was associated with royalty.
There was also, reportedly, going to be an oath of loyalty soon. All of this buttressed the president’s autocratic power to control and micro-manage everything, to make promises and break them at will, with impunity. In my case, I was never paid a single baht for teaching 200+ students economics in two gigantic lecture classes without TAs! And then they led me down the garden path to prepare for more classes, that also turned out just to be a con-game and a lie. And meanwhile you can see the little van of deans and vice-presidents disembarking in front of the massage parlour downtown that they frequent. With perfect control of information, they are a law unto themselves, and I, a Farang, just a “guest” in “their” country, who should shut-up and behave himself.
Under such a system, teachers are no longer teachers (no real faculty senate, they can’t vote him out) they are just little pawn robots in the president’s grandious vision that he has dreamed up in honour of HMK, but the institution of kingship here becomes a tool for self-aggrandizement. As the Thais at the institution used to say, he (the president) can crush you with one finger, farangs are non-entities without health insurance or tenure, so they could not interfere with this system of oppression, all of which really contradicts the very definition of “university” and academic excellence. The flip-side of treating farangs who do have reverence for your culture like trash, is that you will eventually attract exactly that, trash to the teaching profession, alcoholics, paedophiles, etc, all the sorts that Thailand has problems with, I suppose there is a little “Som Nam Na” element here, I really wish it was not the case.
Blocked tube
“I don’t think the military feels threatened. They have all the guns. This is just an opportunity to whip everyone into line…” Sure, but the people at large, like Thanong, have no guns (fortunately). But then, the military also isn’t that sure. Otherwise, why should they make trips to Chiang Mai to consult with their mo du?
A royal petition
I have no doubt that some, perhaps a majority of the drafters of the latest and greatest constitution (prior to the new, latest and greatest one now on the drawing board) were diligent tinkerers trying their best to create The Document that would put it all right. Put it all right that is and leave power in their hands. Stability.
For what it’s worth I think that is the problem. Once you get over keeping things in your own hands you can set about with a much simpler design principle in mind. HM the King’s sufficiency economy, so greatly scoffed at by all the enlightened Neoliberals here, embodies just such a fractal geometry. Structure the basic building blocks of the society and let that structure recur, percolating upwards.
This is not a recipe that requires magnificent ministries or generals with forty pounds of headlights stapled to their chests or that presents mega-opportunities for rake-off. And those are the main “rationalizations”, I fear, that are deemed essential by the political class.
Please don’t think I am critical of Thailand. I love it here. I still think it has a very good chance to proceed along the lines that HM the King and Ivan Illich, HM’s contemporary, have given us all a glimpse of.
It’s just that Neoliberal, god forbid Neoconservative, politics have been globalized. Have spread like bird flu. And spread chiefly amongst the chattering classes, who write the constitutions and seek “stability” at all costs.
Blocked tube
Opportunism and sensationalism with the lese majeste was/is bound to happen, given the way they are currently dealing with the problem.
Exactly. I cannot help but think that it’s a military passion for control that makes such a fetish of the monarchy. In my view it has nothing to do with HM the King himself but with the military’s desire to have a refuge into which they may retreat where no discussion is allowed. The equivalent of a religion’s dogma. Their means of establishing such a refuge is to cast the beloved Bhumipol Adulyadej into the middle of it and then dare anyone to entire “HM the King’s” reserve. They can get away with it in the Thai media, they “own” most of Thai TV-land, can intimidate the print media, and jail you on the street, but they haven’t come to grips with the internet. Their only switch there is “on” or “off”. Right now it’s “off”.
Maybe, one can put this “siege mentality” and the King together with Thai animism? If you feel threatened, you try to collect as many influential deities of all sorts as you can in order to feel safe in your life.
I don’t think the military feels threatened. They have all the guns. This is just an opportunity to whip everyone into line…
and yet another pathetic op-ed from thanong:
…pathetic is right! The Nation has rolled over completely.
Tor downloads (“The Onion Router” – open source anonymizing software) have been blocked for a month, anyway.
Blocked tube
Re the link posted by David W – That youtuber has also posted another video which explains where he’s coming from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq_YsYxb_bU&NR=1
Whilst I do not agree with the monkey image, I do agree with his sentiments about lese majeste.