In a world where most academics only contribute to the debate, Ben Anderson was remarkable for changing our understanding of Indonesian political history in four distinct ways with four separate writings, all published in a little over a decade. His ‘Idea of power in Javanese culture’ (1972) crystallized the view that Indonesian politics functioned according to norms derived from traditional Javanese politics. His _Java in a time of Revolution_ (also 1972) shifted attention away from established elites to other sources of dynamism in Indonesian society. ‘Old state, new society’ (1983) argued for institutional continuity between the Dutch colonial state and the Republic of Indonesia (especially in relation to the domination of Indonesian societies). _Imagine communities_ (also 1983) changed our thinking about Indonesian nationalism. All his insights have been challenged, but he shaped the field dramatically, forcing all subsequent scholars to respond to his arguments, even if they did not accept them.
Sorry if I reply to myself but I would like to add other considerations.
My previous question – if the shifting from culture to ideology may be a general problem and not a peculiarity of Islam – was rhetorical. It’s a strong tendency for example now in Europe, where several populist and nationalist parties are growing and receiving more and more consensus in this period of crisis.
In my previous comment, by way of example, I mentioned the confessions of a Nazi philosopher who described this shifting in the German culture and also himself. But this is only an extreme case: following a cultural phenomenology (the one of Husserl, not Hegel), a culture that asserts strongly its identity can be a form of acknowledgement in relation to another culture, not a new phase that destroys its authenticity. This direction was extreme and destructive in the case of Nazism, in which the German tradition became in toto a political idol. But actually several gradations are possible from the idea of superiority until the simple acknowledgement, and they may be even condition of possibility for a dialogue among cultures. Also in the daily life, in the dialogue with the others, it’s very natural to assert our identity before eventually overcoming it in the dialogue.
These simple considerations only to rise a question, this time not a rhetorical one: even though the political Islam, in its worst forms, is following the same path of Nazism, is it not possible to see in this new spring of Islam different gradations, where the “third phase” is not overcoming and cancelling the previous phases and it’s still compatible with its original authentic faith?
Pearshaped,
Whilst what you say about the US may be correct, what was being discussed here was “Turning the tide on Thailand’s human trafficking” and the conclusions drawn by Rachael Rudolph Ph.D which I, the Thai media, the investigating Thai General totally disagree with. The only glimmer of hope is Andy Hall being bought in to “advise” Thai Union, so they don’t lose all their contracts with the EU.
It is not about the shrimp industry, it’s about the murder, beatings and trafficking of human beings across borders just so some Thai fishing companies make a profit, in this case Thai Union and one other.
Thailand only acts with humanity as a last resort when their companies are threatened by the EU and US, otherwise they would never clean-up their act and the atrocities would continue with the Thai junta caring not as long as they get the biggest slice of the pie.
You can only be disgusted if you live in Thailand and see it going on daily and even then it takes the indignant “Farang” to get anything changed and justice done, which is rare in Thailand.
Dear Ken Ward,
Indeed Benedict Anderson is a model for all academics in Southeast Asia. I would be very interested to get his paper on Sukarno. Do you have a copy or do you know how and where I could get one? I am actually working on Sihanouk’s regime.
If you have to 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?, then I feel sorry for you since even Buddhism has shown no immunity to that, innate or acquired, let alone the other Abrahamic faiths besides Islam from their inception.
besides that, EU refugee crises right now is here because NATO attempt to change regimes in many countries in the middle east by supporting terrorist groups over there. Now things get way out of NATO hands and they “must” show responsibility by taking in refugees.
ASIAN members do not intervene in another people internal conflict like EU and The USA love to do. NATO is the real cause of their own refugee crises.
Yourself and one or two other commenters here could more usefully gain a better understanding of the structural problems, rather than the symptoms you so rightly decry, with an appreciation of the economics of regional fisheries and of course, Adam Smith.
Myanmar possesses good fisheries and has one of the region’s better wildcaught shrimp fisheries. Because of the nature of the regime, hostile investment climate and sanctions, processing has been mostly done at sea and in Thailand. Labour goes to where the demand is, hence the trafficking.
Since 9/11 the US shrimp market has new supply from cheaper farmed Asian product. The US wildcaught industry uses labour and environmental non tariff barriers to protect it’s industry. Mynamar, [and Rakhine] has begun to develop cultured product and has a ways to go yet, but due to the historical issues and competition can’t grab some market share. They need to develop local onshore processing to absorb local labour.
The US Tuna fleet is one of the most rapacious in the Pacific and their West Coast lobby rejects UNCLOS 2, the US continues to refuse to sign. The US is an apex predator, the rest lower in pecking order. The TPP is designed to set the rules so the US continues to benefit. Fair enough, it’s their National Interest. As an ally, we want them to be strong. We shall see much more of the ‘Asian slavery’ meme when the TPP is signed off. ILO and USAID will be cashed up to enforce it and there’ll be plenty of funding for compliant NGOs. Myanmar may have to seek investment from China to fully exploit it’s marine potential and develop processing capacity. When demand for labour is local the trafficking will cease. New supply will only grow from Iran and India, so grabbing market share will not be easy.
Bernie: I think pear-shaped is just doing the unforgivable thing (on NM) of questioning the broadbrush finger-pointing and shouts of “Kill the Witch! Evil Evil Evil!” in regard to the modern slavery buzz now infecting the media.
The sudden efflorescence of concern and moral horror regarding the Thai fishery industry has got to make a sceptical nose quiver just a little, no?
That is not to question that slavery is real or labor exploitation is real or that murder in the service of either has ever happened.
It is, however, to point out that the the military coup and the massive growth of Thai Union just might have something to do with the sudden explosion of news coverage and subsequent international outrage over a long-standing reality in the Thai fishery industry.
As pear-shaped quite correctly points out, the US (as well as the EU) uses non-tariff barriers to privilege domestic industry when it suits, and there is little question that Thai Union is perceived as a threat at the moment.
Having taken over a massive European corporation in the last few years they have just been stopped by an anti-trust ruling from taking over an equally large American one.
Add that to the Obama administration’s apparent decision to object more strenuously than usual to the latest coup in Thailand and you have a reasonable conjecture as to why this old issue is suddenly so “newsy”.
Pearshaped,
Without going off on tangents, as you have been doing, without any documented facts on the deaths of Burmese (Rohingya) and Cambodian nationals on Thai trawlers and motherships, I would suggest you read the Bangkok Post article I posted earlier, where the company itself (Thai Union Group) admitted that some of its suppliers, as well as itself, were guilty, but they has since cleaned up their act and had sacked the subsiduaries and sub contractors involved.
I have previously seen the video on the Thai shrimping industry, which has nothing to do with murder, graves and trafficking, just exploitation of cheap labour through lack of education..
All this Otoh-Botoh about Najib et al is pointless. Zahid Hamidi will be PM within two years. This isn’t even debatable. He has no opposition within UMNO, having scared them all nearly to death, and the Opposition has no opposition. PKR chaps are too young and inexperienced, women can’t be PM, Chinese cannot be PM, PAS is deadly, but Hadi Awang, sadly, is popular up North. The only really “viable” opposition to Zahid, let alone UMNO, is Hadi, who would turn Malaysia into Pakistan. Malaysians are at fault for allowing their expedient material needs take front and centre, for 30 years. Thus, Malaysia is stuck in a never-ending cycle of corruption and chaos, hardly likely to be fixed by any potential candidate from ANY Party. The best possible choice, by far, is Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin, but Allah made her a her, so oh well, there goes Malaysia’s best chance. Malaysia is not the poorest nation on the planet, but it barely beats Zimbabwe, as being the proven dumbest.
Hmuu Zaw posted an election campaign video on Facebook highlighting the new permissiveness in the “free and open society” brought about by Thein Sein after 2010 before the President himself came up at the last minute in desperation with the Arab spring video apparently as a stark warning to the public. It obviously backfired.
Facebook may not be the generals’ battlefield of choice but they cannot but join battle where it’s all happening unless they are prepared to cede this new democratic hilltop the Burmese public have occupied waging an extremely effective psy-ops war.
The first to do so among their ranks was Hmuu Zaw, Director of the President’s Office, followed by Ye Htut the Information Minister popularly known as the Minister for Facebook.
Hopefully for the sake of the peoples of Burma their ‘exit strategy’ is adequately working for them with the Lady proving to have turned into an astute and consummate politician which is perhaps a lot easier to believe than Shere Khan turning vegetarian.
“In Myanmar’s case, the length and intensity of conflict mean that almost no family has been untouched. Healing these countless wounds will take time and an unprecedented patience.”
Nich
Great synopsis on the uncharted future.
May Daaw Aung San Suu Kyi be continually blessed with wisdom, unwavering tenacity with longevity.
Emjay, accusing me of “subverting Thai democracy” is bringing absurdity to a new peak. Taking pictures of street events and writing about them – what is basically all that i am doing – hardly has that level of influence.
I am sure you will not take the friendly advice i am giving you now, but i still have to voice it: trying to pull yourself up by constant attempts to put others down will not get you taken any serious, especially when your strategic deliberations, as i just read on another discussion, on the creation of a liberal democracy in Thailand extend themselves to the delusion of some non-existent “progressive colonels” teaming up with a “a democratic political grouping/party” to do a coup. This is a nonsensical notion which shows a complete lack of knowledge on Thai power structures.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with me, but then, instead of just attacking me by insulting me as a “UDD/PT toad” (which i quite clearly am not – and time and time again i have proven this by passages of my articles, such as not following UDD narrative in many instances, publishing a critical interview with Thaksin, etc), do come up with well funded counter arguments based on more fact than just your opinion, please.
For example – you accuse UDD leaders and PT MP’s of having let Red Shirts rot in prison. There have been some articles published by especially LM victims, accusing UDD leaders of having not supported them. While there may be some truth in this accusation, it also depends on which leaders. There has to be space for counter arguments again. I can only say that i have taken pictures of UDD leaders, especially Tida and Weng, having handed over substantial amounts of money to support released prisoners, and also on numerous funerals of killed Red Shirts to their relatives.
The UDD leadership is not a unified block, it comprises of many factions who have conflicts with each other and individual leaders are quite different in style and ideology. Some are indeed somewhat self serving, some are corrupt, and others are not and trying their best.
Therefore, your accusation of me being a “UDD toad” is quite wrong – some leaders i do respect, and others i do not. I can hardly be a “PT Toad” as my work rarely brings me into contact with the PT party – i am not particularly interested in taking pictures of parliamentary politics, and when PT was in government, i only went once or twice to parliament during the entire time when i had business there. The PT people i do know personally are only the ones who had a role in street politics, or whose job was to be in contact with the foreign media.
More or less the same counts for my relationship with the Democrat Party, though i have to say that presently the amount of well known people left in that quarter i have some personal respect for i can count on one finger, given what took place during the PDRC protests.
It may surprise you, but my life does not revolve around rubbing shoulders and wining and dining with important people. Quite the opposite.
[…] the financially troubled villagers that live in close proximity to the city are considered to be “middle-income peasants”. It should be noted, however, that many of these residents find themselves surrounded by such […]
If I am hard on Rose it is more to do with the “space” she takes up with her obsessive repetition of one (not-so) BIG idea than with anything else.
As David Byrne was wont to say (again and again) “Say something once, why say it again?”
If the point is to provide a counterpoint to the flood of propaganda flowing the other way in Thai society, then New Mandala is absolutely the wrong venue for it. Those who are overwhelmed by the productions of the apparat are not coming on here to have a read.
My problem with attempting to come to grips with what might be the best strategy for the opposition is that it is hard to say exactly who that opposition is, what exactly it is that they “oppose”, and most importantly what it is they want to build in its place.
In my opinion, people like Rose and many of the flag-waving promoters of republicanism on NM are simply not operating in a real political context. It’s all personal feelings and a kind of advertising slogan approach to the situation which adds nothing at all.
People who consistently defend and excuse the UDD/PT condominium are not actually promoting democratic reform so much as arguing for a replacement oligarchy that will tinker here and there with the system but will absolutely not move in the direction of liberal-democracy.
All the evidence points to this rather simple but extremely unpleasant reality. The first two TRT administrations demonstrated without a doubt that they were not about to allow the “checks and balances” built into the 97 constitution remain independent of the executive.
If TS had managed to somehow gain control of the RTA we might be living in a kind of democracy now, but not the kind that recognizes liberal limits to state power.
The argument that the most recent PT administration demonstrated that they had “learned their lesson” and were governing in a more liberalized manner is undermined by the rather obvious fact that they did not have sufficient power or control to do anything at all.
Having sunk the “independent bodies” as constitutional safeguards, the only checks and balances left standing in the Thai arena were a politicized judiciary and the military.
So when people point to Yingluck’s amazingly Gandhian approach to handling the quasi-fascist theatre of the PDRC, they actually have the RTA to thank for it, not any “liberal” growth in the heart of the “Thaksin thinks PT does” breast.
For the opposition to align with the military, of course, can mean at least two very different things:
To co-operate with the present power structure would obviously be an attempt to replace one oligarchy with another and put lipstick on the pig and call it democracy.
If on the other hand we had a group of progressive colonels, say, who out of concern for both the monarchy and the country could see that a constitutional monarchy with a genuinely democratic parliament offers an effective solution to many, not all, of the problems Thailand is facing, a coup by such a group in cooperation with a democratic political grouping/party might be just the thing.
The problem with that pipe dream is that there appears to be no liberal-democratic political party in Thailand.
And that, to my mind, is the greatest lack in the movement towards democracy here. I believe that there is a sufficient mass of people who would support a democratic system in Thailand but almost no one willing to get involved in the dirt of electoral politics to lead them.
Liberal academics, liberal lawyers, liberal journalists, liberal activists: all are prepared to rabbit on about the faults of the present system but none apparently are prepared to put their careers and security on the line to get involved in electoral politics and try to make their words mean something.
In my opinion, there is a vast gulf between opposing the junta and working for democracy, and one thing is absolutely not the same as the other.
One just requires slogans and the occasional protest. The other requires a lot of work and dedication.
I think you will find the royalists and their extended circles also put a great deal of emphasis on “manners” and find that one of the problems with the whole idea of democracy is having to deal with people they consider rude.
As is evident from time to time and place to place, using the notion of manners to shut down a particular way of speaking, even particular topics, is depressingly standard.
In this case, a rude sonofabitch royalist is being castigated apparently for a breach of manners when in actual fact it is nothing more or less than the usual “us” versus “them” bollocks that animates most Thai-related threads on NM.
*And Nick, thanks for the psychological analysis but I suggest you stick to your day job. Or maybe just do the teenie thing and say something like “haters gotta hate” and leave it at that.
My moral courage is fine by my lights and your obvious craven toadying to the UDD/PT side of things is not, in my opinion.
There have been a few times when I have yet again recognized that you are one of these “last word” people and just dropped a “debate” and let you do your little insult dance and repeat yet again one of the mantras that the UDD/PT apologists pull out again and again to justify their own role in subverting Thai democracy. So who is stalking who Nick? Just let it rest.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Ben Anderson: the one and only
In a world where most academics only contribute to the debate, Ben Anderson was remarkable for changing our understanding of Indonesian political history in four distinct ways with four separate writings, all published in a little over a decade. His ‘Idea of power in Javanese culture’ (1972) crystallized the view that Indonesian politics functioned according to norms derived from traditional Javanese politics. His _Java in a time of Revolution_ (also 1972) shifted attention away from established elites to other sources of dynamism in Indonesian society. ‘Old state, new society’ (1983) argued for institutional continuity between the Dutch colonial state and the Republic of Indonesia (especially in relation to the domination of Indonesian societies). _Imagine communities_ (also 1983) changed our thinking about Indonesian nationalism. All his insights have been challenged, but he shaped the field dramatically, forcing all subsequent scholars to respond to his arguments, even if they did not accept them.
What is “Islamism”?
Sorry if I reply to myself but I would like to add other considerations.
My previous question – if the shifting from culture to ideology may be a general problem and not a peculiarity of Islam – was rhetorical. It’s a strong tendency for example now in Europe, where several populist and nationalist parties are growing and receiving more and more consensus in this period of crisis.
In my previous comment, by way of example, I mentioned the confessions of a Nazi philosopher who described this shifting in the German culture and also himself. But this is only an extreme case: following a cultural phenomenology (the one of Husserl, not Hegel), a culture that asserts strongly its identity can be a form of acknowledgement in relation to another culture, not a new phase that destroys its authenticity. This direction was extreme and destructive in the case of Nazism, in which the German tradition became in toto a political idol. But actually several gradations are possible from the idea of superiority until the simple acknowledgement, and they may be even condition of possibility for a dialogue among cultures. Also in the daily life, in the dialogue with the others, it’s very natural to assert our identity before eventually overcoming it in the dialogue.
These simple considerations only to rise a question, this time not a rhetorical one: even though the political Islam, in its worst forms, is following the same path of Nazism, is it not possible to see in this new spring of Islam different gradations, where the “third phase” is not overcoming and cancelling the previous phases and it’s still compatible with its original authentic faith?
Malaysia reaps what UMNO sows
Poetic
Turning the tide on Thailand’s human trafficking
Pearshaped,
Whilst what you say about the US may be correct, what was being discussed here was “Turning the tide on Thailand’s human trafficking” and the conclusions drawn by Rachael Rudolph Ph.D which I, the Thai media, the investigating Thai General totally disagree with. The only glimmer of hope is Andy Hall being bought in to “advise” Thai Union, so they don’t lose all their contracts with the EU.
It is not about the shrimp industry, it’s about the murder, beatings and trafficking of human beings across borders just so some Thai fishing companies make a profit, in this case Thai Union and one other.
Thailand only acts with humanity as a last resort when their companies are threatened by the EU and US, otherwise they would never clean-up their act and the atrocities would continue with the Thai junta caring not as long as they get the biggest slice of the pie.
You can only be disgusted if you live in Thailand and see it going on daily and even then it takes the indignant “Farang” to get anything changed and justice done, which is rare in Thailand.
Ben Anderson: the one and only
Dear Ken Ward,
Indeed Benedict Anderson is a model for all academics in Southeast Asia. I would be very interested to get his paper on Sukarno. Do you have a copy or do you know how and where I could get one? I am actually working on Sihanouk’s regime.
What is “Islamism”?
If you have to 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?, then I feel sorry for you since even Buddhism has shown no immunity to that, innate or acquired, let alone the other Abrahamic faiths besides Islam from their inception.
Ben Anderson: the one and only
[…] Heryanto, Ben Anderson: the one and only, New Mandala, […]
ASEAN can learn from Europe’s refugee crisis
What can Asian learn for real? Building wall?
besides that, EU refugee crises right now is here because NATO attempt to change regimes in many countries in the middle east by supporting terrorist groups over there. Now things get way out of NATO hands and they “must” show responsibility by taking in refugees.
ASIAN members do not intervene in another people internal conflict like EU and The USA love to do. NATO is the real cause of their own refugee crises.
Turning the tide on Thailand’s human trafficking
Yourself and one or two other commenters here could more usefully gain a better understanding of the structural problems, rather than the symptoms you so rightly decry, with an appreciation of the economics of regional fisheries and of course, Adam Smith.
Myanmar possesses good fisheries and has one of the region’s better wildcaught shrimp fisheries. Because of the nature of the regime, hostile investment climate and sanctions, processing has been mostly done at sea and in Thailand. Labour goes to where the demand is, hence the trafficking.
Since 9/11 the US shrimp market has new supply from cheaper farmed Asian product. The US wildcaught industry uses labour and environmental non tariff barriers to protect it’s industry. Mynamar, [and Rakhine] has begun to develop cultured product and has a ways to go yet, but due to the historical issues and competition can’t grab some market share. They need to develop local onshore processing to absorb local labour.
The US Tuna fleet is one of the most rapacious in the Pacific and their West Coast lobby rejects UNCLOS 2, the US continues to refuse to sign. The US is an apex predator, the rest lower in pecking order. The TPP is designed to set the rules so the US continues to benefit. Fair enough, it’s their National Interest. As an ally, we want them to be strong. We shall see much more of the ‘Asian slavery’ meme when the TPP is signed off. ILO and USAID will be cashed up to enforce it and there’ll be plenty of funding for compliant NGOs. Myanmar may have to seek investment from China to fully exploit it’s marine potential and develop processing capacity. When demand for labour is local the trafficking will cease. New supply will only grow from Iran and India, so grabbing market share will not be easy.
Turning the tide on Thailand’s human trafficking
Bernie: I think pear-shaped is just doing the unforgivable thing (on NM) of questioning the broadbrush finger-pointing and shouts of “Kill the Witch! Evil Evil Evil!” in regard to the modern slavery buzz now infecting the media.
The sudden efflorescence of concern and moral horror regarding the Thai fishery industry has got to make a sceptical nose quiver just a little, no?
That is not to question that slavery is real or labor exploitation is real or that murder in the service of either has ever happened.
It is, however, to point out that the the military coup and the massive growth of Thai Union just might have something to do with the sudden explosion of news coverage and subsequent international outrage over a long-standing reality in the Thai fishery industry.
As pear-shaped quite correctly points out, the US (as well as the EU) uses non-tariff barriers to privilege domestic industry when it suits, and there is little question that Thai Union is perceived as a threat at the moment.
Having taken over a massive European corporation in the last few years they have just been stopped by an anti-trust ruling from taking over an equally large American one.
Add that to the Obama administration’s apparent decision to object more strenuously than usual to the latest coup in Thailand and you have a reasonable conjecture as to why this old issue is suddenly so “newsy”.
Turning the tide on Thailand’s human trafficking
Pearshaped,
Without going off on tangents, as you have been doing, without any documented facts on the deaths of Burmese (Rohingya) and Cambodian nationals on Thai trawlers and motherships, I would suggest you read the Bangkok Post article I posted earlier, where the company itself (Thai Union Group) admitted that some of its suppliers, as well as itself, were guilty, but they has since cleaned up their act and had sacked the subsiduaries and sub contractors involved.
I have previously seen the video on the Thai shrimping industry, which has nothing to do with murder, graves and trafficking, just exploitation of cheap labour through lack of education..
Malaysia reaps what UMNO sows
All this Otoh-Botoh about Najib et al is pointless. Zahid Hamidi will be PM within two years. This isn’t even debatable. He has no opposition within UMNO, having scared them all nearly to death, and the Opposition has no opposition. PKR chaps are too young and inexperienced, women can’t be PM, Chinese cannot be PM, PAS is deadly, but Hadi Awang, sadly, is popular up North. The only really “viable” opposition to Zahid, let alone UMNO, is Hadi, who would turn Malaysia into Pakistan. Malaysians are at fault for allowing their expedient material needs take front and centre, for 30 years. Thus, Malaysia is stuck in a never-ending cycle of corruption and chaos, hardly likely to be fixed by any potential candidate from ANY Party. The best possible choice, by far, is Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin, but Allah made her a her, so oh well, there goes Malaysia’s best chance. Malaysia is not the poorest nation on the planet, but it barely beats Zimbabwe, as being the proven dumbest.
Southeast Asian snapshots
Hmuu Zaw posted an election campaign video on Facebook highlighting the new permissiveness in the “free and open society” brought about by Thein Sein after 2010 before the President himself came up at the last minute in desperation with the Arab spring video apparently as a stark warning to the public. It obviously backfired.
The Tatmadaw in a democracy
Facebook may not be the generals’ battlefield of choice but they cannot but join battle where it’s all happening unless they are prepared to cede this new democratic hilltop the Burmese public have occupied waging an extremely effective psy-ops war.
The first to do so among their ranks was Hmuu Zaw, Director of the President’s Office, followed by Ye Htut the Information Minister popularly known as the Minister for Facebook.
Hopefully for the sake of the peoples of Burma their ‘exit strategy’ is adequately working for them with the Lady proving to have turned into an astute and consummate politician which is perhaps a lot easier to believe than Shere Khan turning vegetarian.
The Tatmadaw in a democracy
“In Myanmar’s case, the length and intensity of conflict mean that almost no family has been untouched. Healing these countless wounds will take time and an unprecedented patience.”
Nich
Great synopsis on the uncharted future.
May Daaw Aung San Suu Kyi be continually blessed with wisdom, unwavering tenacity with longevity.
Public lectures and protecting the King
Seems even US Ambassador Glyn Davies may now have committed LM !! : http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/790873/us-mum-but-rights-groups-decry-us-ambassador-lm-inquiry
Public lectures and protecting the King
Emjay, accusing me of “subverting Thai democracy” is bringing absurdity to a new peak. Taking pictures of street events and writing about them – what is basically all that i am doing – hardly has that level of influence.
I am sure you will not take the friendly advice i am giving you now, but i still have to voice it: trying to pull yourself up by constant attempts to put others down will not get you taken any serious, especially when your strategic deliberations, as i just read on another discussion, on the creation of a liberal democracy in Thailand extend themselves to the delusion of some non-existent “progressive colonels” teaming up with a “a democratic political grouping/party” to do a coup. This is a nonsensical notion which shows a complete lack of knowledge on Thai power structures.
It is perfectly fine to disagree with me, but then, instead of just attacking me by insulting me as a “UDD/PT toad” (which i quite clearly am not – and time and time again i have proven this by passages of my articles, such as not following UDD narrative in many instances, publishing a critical interview with Thaksin, etc), do come up with well funded counter arguments based on more fact than just your opinion, please.
For example – you accuse UDD leaders and PT MP’s of having let Red Shirts rot in prison. There have been some articles published by especially LM victims, accusing UDD leaders of having not supported them. While there may be some truth in this accusation, it also depends on which leaders. There has to be space for counter arguments again. I can only say that i have taken pictures of UDD leaders, especially Tida and Weng, having handed over substantial amounts of money to support released prisoners, and also on numerous funerals of killed Red Shirts to their relatives.
The UDD leadership is not a unified block, it comprises of many factions who have conflicts with each other and individual leaders are quite different in style and ideology. Some are indeed somewhat self serving, some are corrupt, and others are not and trying their best.
Therefore, your accusation of me being a “UDD toad” is quite wrong – some leaders i do respect, and others i do not. I can hardly be a “PT Toad” as my work rarely brings me into contact with the PT party – i am not particularly interested in taking pictures of parliamentary politics, and when PT was in government, i only went once or twice to parliament during the entire time when i had business there. The PT people i do know personally are only the ones who had a role in street politics, or whose job was to be in contact with the foreign media.
More or less the same counts for my relationship with the Democrat Party, though i have to say that presently the amount of well known people left in that quarter i have some personal respect for i can count on one finger, given what took place during the PDRC protests.
It may surprise you, but my life does not revolve around rubbing shoulders and wining and dining with important people. Quite the opposite.
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
[…] the financially troubled villagers that live in close proximity to the city are considered to be “middle-income peasants”. It should be noted, however, that many of these residents find themselves surrounded by such […]
The last king of Thailand?
If I am hard on Rose it is more to do with the “space” she takes up with her obsessive repetition of one (not-so) BIG idea than with anything else.
As David Byrne was wont to say (again and again) “Say something once, why say it again?”
If the point is to provide a counterpoint to the flood of propaganda flowing the other way in Thai society, then New Mandala is absolutely the wrong venue for it. Those who are overwhelmed by the productions of the apparat are not coming on here to have a read.
My problem with attempting to come to grips with what might be the best strategy for the opposition is that it is hard to say exactly who that opposition is, what exactly it is that they “oppose”, and most importantly what it is they want to build in its place.
In my opinion, people like Rose and many of the flag-waving promoters of republicanism on NM are simply not operating in a real political context. It’s all personal feelings and a kind of advertising slogan approach to the situation which adds nothing at all.
People who consistently defend and excuse the UDD/PT condominium are not actually promoting democratic reform so much as arguing for a replacement oligarchy that will tinker here and there with the system but will absolutely not move in the direction of liberal-democracy.
All the evidence points to this rather simple but extremely unpleasant reality. The first two TRT administrations demonstrated without a doubt that they were not about to allow the “checks and balances” built into the 97 constitution remain independent of the executive.
If TS had managed to somehow gain control of the RTA we might be living in a kind of democracy now, but not the kind that recognizes liberal limits to state power.
The argument that the most recent PT administration demonstrated that they had “learned their lesson” and were governing in a more liberalized manner is undermined by the rather obvious fact that they did not have sufficient power or control to do anything at all.
Having sunk the “independent bodies” as constitutional safeguards, the only checks and balances left standing in the Thai arena were a politicized judiciary and the military.
So when people point to Yingluck’s amazingly Gandhian approach to handling the quasi-fascist theatre of the PDRC, they actually have the RTA to thank for it, not any “liberal” growth in the heart of the “Thaksin thinks PT does” breast.
For the opposition to align with the military, of course, can mean at least two very different things:
To co-operate with the present power structure would obviously be an attempt to replace one oligarchy with another and put lipstick on the pig and call it democracy.
If on the other hand we had a group of progressive colonels, say, who out of concern for both the monarchy and the country could see that a constitutional monarchy with a genuinely democratic parliament offers an effective solution to many, not all, of the problems Thailand is facing, a coup by such a group in cooperation with a democratic political grouping/party might be just the thing.
The problem with that pipe dream is that there appears to be no liberal-democratic political party in Thailand.
And that, to my mind, is the greatest lack in the movement towards democracy here. I believe that there is a sufficient mass of people who would support a democratic system in Thailand but almost no one willing to get involved in the dirt of electoral politics to lead them.
Liberal academics, liberal lawyers, liberal journalists, liberal activists: all are prepared to rabbit on about the faults of the present system but none apparently are prepared to put their careers and security on the line to get involved in electoral politics and try to make their words mean something.
In my opinion, there is a vast gulf between opposing the junta and working for democracy, and one thing is absolutely not the same as the other.
One just requires slogans and the occasional protest. The other requires a lot of work and dedication.
Public lectures and protecting the King
I think you will find the royalists and their extended circles also put a great deal of emphasis on “manners” and find that one of the problems with the whole idea of democracy is having to deal with people they consider rude.
As is evident from time to time and place to place, using the notion of manners to shut down a particular way of speaking, even particular topics, is depressingly standard.
In this case, a rude sonofabitch royalist is being castigated apparently for a breach of manners when in actual fact it is nothing more or less than the usual “us” versus “them” bollocks that animates most Thai-related threads on NM.
*And Nick, thanks for the psychological analysis but I suggest you stick to your day job. Or maybe just do the teenie thing and say something like “haters gotta hate” and leave it at that.
My moral courage is fine by my lights and your obvious craven toadying to the UDD/PT side of things is not, in my opinion.
There have been a few times when I have yet again recognized that you are one of these “last word” people and just dropped a “debate” and let you do your little insult dance and repeat yet again one of the mantras that the UDD/PT apologists pull out again and again to justify their own role in subverting Thai democracy. So who is stalking who Nick? Just let it rest.