Comments

Professor Kessler, thank you for the clarifications, for entering in the arena of the comments and for using a straighter, non-academic language.

Even if I still have some doubts about the robust finalism behind the historical process here described, even if I don’t agree with the idea that we are all heirs “knowingly or not” of the clash of civilizations that started with the crusades (but my doubts may depend on my lack of knowledge or misunderstandings), I find the conclusion extremely relevant, especially in the prospective of a cultural philosophy.

The subject is indeed extremely serious and concerns the possibility of a shifting of Islam in the arm of ideology, the possibility of making an idol of Islam itself, a kind of paradox since its founding moment was just the removal of any idols.

To contribute to the discussion, I would like to mention an article written by the philosopher Alfred Baeumler (“Der Hochmut, van Kultur zu reden”) just after the 2nd world war, where he tried to explain how was it possible for the German culture to become barbaric, to shift from culture to ideology and politics (actually also how it was possible that he joined Nazism despite his humanistic education). The analysis, in my opinion, is not very dissimilar from the phenomenology of conscience described by prof. Kessler. The only change is the switch of the term “faith” with the term “life”: the inhuman ideology of the Nazism started when the German culture was separated from the continuously changing human life and became “posses” of the German people, an idol to be celebrated in the parades, something that could be showed proudly. A separation that realized a shift from the flow of an alive culture to a reified and inhuman culture.

A part from the simplicity of my resume’ and without entering in the history of the Nazism, I think a question may arise out from this analogy: is the tendency of a political use of Islam which is happening in some contexts today only a peculiarity of Islam? Can it be found in other cultures?

Ben Anderson’s great intellectual legacy , like those of Scott and Geertz, was to demonstrate that Southeast Asia was not just “une aire culturelle” (to use the French expression) where Western theory and concepts would be applied, but one which would generate itself theorization and conceptualization. In a sense Ben Anderson rose to the implicit challenge of Said’s ‘Orientalism’ by demonstrating the poverty of the Euro (Western)-centric world view. Yet, rather than engaging in a polemical exercise, Anderson quietly, and with intellectual sophistication, showed the honest and respectful salience of taking the ‘other’, south of China, seriously in order to understand the world in which we live.

Thank you John. Ramachandra’s piece is priceless, as was the subject of his commentary. This is sublime:

Another time, when I wrote to him that I was down with “a minor ailment, laryngitis, aka too much bullshitting syndrome”, Ben answered: “I suddenly thought that if Vishnu were around he might punish bullshitters all over the world with chronic laryngitis. No doubt that the internet and the cellphone have vastly increased the numbers of nonstop bullshitters. Early in the internet days, when visiting Dartmouth for a lecture, I asked some of the youngsters why they liked the internet, especially ‘chatting’ so much, abandoning local bars, student canteens and so on. Answer: You can’t be interrupted! If you go to bars and canteens, people are interrupting all the time. Narcissism on a global scale.”

Yes, comparisons to Hobsbawm, Gilbert, Toynbee, Windstedt, Geertz, Mochtar Lubis, Syed Alatas, even Rabindranath Tagore and Satyajit Ray, are all valid.

My stalker Emjay – very amusing little rant. Is it envy that makes you so bitter towards me, and interpret something into me that i am clearly not?
What is not substantive by presenting facts? I can only repeat – it is a fact that the government had no power in the question of release of imprisoned Red Shirts. It is a fact that in several judicial cases i have followed, both Red Shirt leaders and PT big wigs have tried to get the accused Red Shirts released on bail, such as the Saichon Paebua/Pinit Channarong Central World arson case. What else can i say? I cannot invent what you would wish to hear when facts clearly speak against your little opinions. An intelligent person should let facts guide ones opinion, and not the other way around.

As to me being a propagandist for the UDD or the PT – boring, boring, boring. I can only refer you to the many occasions where i have quite clearly stated facts that speak against the UDD narrative, such as that i have always and quite clearly pointed out that there were and are armed militants under the Red Shirts (as there are in the many incarnations of the Yellow Shirts), for which i have been attacked, also here on New Mandala. A propagandist would hardly do that. It appears that you operate under the principle of ‘let the truth not get in the way of a good story’. I don’t.

Well, there are some native English (and naturally German, and whatever else nationality) speakers whose command of their own language exhausts itself in grunts. That though does not mean that certain idioms are idioms and have a known history, even if they don’t know that. Writers however should be aware of that before creating an issue out of nothing to serve their own agenda of hatred. Didn’t work then, won’t work now.

As to anonymity, it is in your particular case, as in some other of the trolls here, a question of manners, of which you have shown over time very little. Neither have you contributed much else than negativity. It is of course much easier to stalk and to be insulting when one does not reveal one’s true identity. In this case it is indeed a question of courage – of moral courage. You obviously do lack in that department.

So, can we please not make this yet again about *me*, as this isn’t about me, but about ultra-royalist hecklers at Yale who are representative of some very concerning developments in Thailand. Please go and stalk somebody else.

An excellent piece and very appropriate for the occasion. For another kind of tribute to Ben Anderson, see Ramachandra Guha’s piece in the Indian Telegraph:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1151215/jsp/opinion/story_58409.jsp#.Vm-IlGR97Zs

Interesting point. I didn’t know that was the case back then.

Did the military even bother rolling out APCs to commandeer communications this time or were they so sure of the agreement all-round from stakeholders that they saw no need?

Last post by Nostitz makes clear that monarchy and the Royalist establishment are the worst enemies of Thai democracy. Only the abolition of the feudal monarchy will provide a credible chance for democracy, justice and equality in Thailand

As always, Nick: a little name-calling, a bit of hollow posturing, and a cowardly scamper away from dealing with anything substantive.

When the judiciary and the military are corrupt and universally acknowledged to be acting both unconstitutionally and anti-democratically, who but a democratically elected government blessed with a powerful mandate from the sovereign people of Thailand is supposed to address the problem of illegal detention and unconstitutional laws?

The whole issue of how “celebrity liberals” and propagandists for UDD like yourself take up so much oxygen in the media that there is no chance for more substantive issues to get an airing I’ll forgive you for not quite understanding;
unlike the “pig iron” thing (that no native speaker of English ever thinks of when using that idiom), it takes more than a quick Google to even begin to get a handle on.

And just quickly, to give you something to focus on when the above topics prove too difficult to dismiss with a waving of hands: exactly how do I gain “safety” by not using my real name on NM? Are you going to come and beat me up? Do you imagine the junta can’t trace anything I post back to the frail flesh that squats behind the keyboard? Do tell.

Because it does just seem so “manly” every time you call someone out for anonymity.

And of course, my own personal little stalker Emjay appears again. You just can’t help yourself, you have to go off on a completely tangential snide 😉

Your accusation is rather polemic, and naturally, and again – it is factually wrong. What on earth could Yingluck have done to get the Red Shirts out of jail? She was the head of the executive, and the Red Shirts were convicted by the judiciary, over which the government, and especially the PT government, had no power or influence over. The much attacked amnesty bill – which, for the record, i am and was very critical of as i believe that judicial process has to come before amnesty – would have been the only way to get Red Shirts out of jail.

On many occasions high ranked members of both the government and the UDD have repeatedly (!!!) asked and guaranteed for bail for imprisoned Red Shirts but those requests were most of the time rejected by the courts.

Of course nothing could have been done about LM victims, but that, as we know, is beyond the powers of any elected government.

Heckler, you seem to be another one of those brave souls who love to snipe from the safety of anonymity.
First of all, regarding the “sweating like a pig” comment that at the time had some people up in arms. I really wonder where your command of the English language comes from. This is a well known and used idiom in the English language, and actually not derives from ‘pig’ the animal, but from ‘pig iron’ and the smelting process.
This issue was at the time used by certain quarters, who for years have been spreading vicious rumors about me trying to discredit me, and trying to get me kicked out of the FCCT, which did not work, naturally. But thank you for letting that slip, at least i now know which quarter you are from, maybe even who you are. 😉

And again, personalizing this issue as regards to Pavin is a bit of a simplistic approach. But it seems that lateral thinking is not exactly your strength.