[…] Back in September, I speculated on this point: In the context of their many other “tough love” measures, it would make sense if the military regime was to now clamp down on foreign retailers, including Tesco. Bigger, better and more extravagant shopping ”experiences” may even, in some (soldierly) eyes, symbolise the excesses and waste of the Thaksin era. […]
[…] Back in early September – well before the coup and subsequent events began reshaping Thai politics – I wrote two short posts on growing opposition to the expansion agenda of Tesco and other foreign-owned “supercentres”. Tesco is an easy and obvious target for commercial (and, to some extent, popular) resentment: for anybody who is aggrieved by a whole raft of disparate economic and social changes. The hardline anti-Tesco forces are, to the best of my knowledge, marshaled by other retail interests who can’t stomach the success of the Lotuses and Carrefours of the world. […]
I agree, Taxi Driver, it is a real mess – but I wonder: when was Thaksin going to be voted out?
It seems to me that Thaksin himself should take much of the blame, along with those who continued to vote for him.
I think you are being a little harsh on those of us who supported the coup (after the event), and hoped it would prove to be a circuit-breaker.
Coup or no coup, this sort of mess was inevitable unless Thaksin changed his ways.
I know democracy defenders like to play down Plato’s theory on the basis that he was talking about a different form of democracy 2300 years ago, but was he wrong?
So it all come down to this:
“Do you want to give voting power to rural people?”
What Thaksin did, aside from corruption scandal, was showing a new way to play politic in Thailand: populist policy. Now, we have two way to play, the old way and the new populist way. The populist way get the rural’s vote easier and cheaper in democratic election.
Instead of adapting to new playing style, old politician and military just try to revert Thailand back to the good old one days. Now, they seem to get it into their head that once the rural people tasted hope, it might be too sweet to let go. So, they try to make up dual-power senate to serve as elitist powerhouse. Kind of remind me of the Marie Antoinette social revolution.
By the way, Where is David. I doubt monopolize rice would really promote rice market(but flood control is sure thing). More like put a burden/corruption on government. Korea tried it, did not worked.
The overthrow of democracy by coup was a major setback for the country. Maybe many are now beginning to see why.
The penny may be dropping among those who cheered the coup that they may be the ones who were “ngoh” afterall, instead of the “ai baan norg” farmers & taxi drivers. So now, instead of being able to vote out an unwanted leader through the ballot box in relative safety, the Millions in Yellow may have to go thru another “Black May”, and a few more lives lost, before power will be stripped away from the those who gained it through their control the strongest instrument of organised violence in the country.
The best chance for unity is through representative politics via the ballot box (+ equality under law), not men with guns & tanks (and small explosive devices!). Unrepresentative politics will always lead to pressure valves popping, and in Thailand, when valves pop, people often die.
What Bo Mya said dispels the myth among many Burmans (like myself, unfortunately) that ethnic rebel groups do not aim to remain in the Union of Burma, but are trying to secede and create their own countries.
What an odd statement. Despite calls for unity amongst the Karen, I have never seen any serious movement by Karens towards separation from a Burmese Union. Bo Mya never undertook any serious offensive action against the Burmese. And the Burmese Karen that I know, including some of the leaders in the overseas population, have never expressed any thoughts of total independence and have always worked closely with both ethnic Burmese and with other Burmese minority groups, with the goal being a united democratic Burma.
I am not alone in this impression. Falla, in his book True Love and Bartholomew comes to a similar conclusion.
I agree with Patiwat that things are getting strange, curiouser and curiosier as Alice would say, relative to the bombings. On first glance it is classic Bangkok based political action with grenades in the garbage cans. But the police are having problems connecting the dots to any one faction, not usually a weakness in the well connected world of the Thai police. And I ask myself, what purpose would the bombings make for the southern separatists if no claims of responsibility are made? So I am left to ponder upon which faction of the old boys network figures to benefit most by the bombings; and no clear winner comes to my mind as all factions come out about equal.
Muppet Puppet said ‘I don’t know where do you stand but, from my point of view, 5 years of Thaksin government’s corruption didn’t match of what the junta is doing in 4 months.’
Would you care to enlighten us with a list of corruption under the junta over the last 4 months?
Thaksin’s misdeeds are well documented, but the only real criticisms of Surayud I can find are:
– he is too soft
– he may be renting some restricted land
– he implied some things about the recent bombings without any apparent evidence to back up those claims (I will concede that loose lips may be one thing he has in common with Thaksin)
I am sure the usual lower levels of corruption have continued over the last 4 months, and it seems to me that, if anything, Surayud has been been distracted from the reform process by the continual sniping from Thaksin supporters/puppets, academia & media.
Eh…a coup installed government is generally called a puppet government hence the puppet PM. Why are you having a fuss with the term? The guy is working with/for those generals, not for the people.
I don’t know where do you stand but, from my point of view, 5 years of Thaksin government’s corruption didn’t match of what the junta is doing in 4 months.
Yet the “intelligence analysis” shows that the Southern insurgents have never hit Bangkok and presumably don’t have the capabilities to hit Bangkok. Thus the junta exonerate the insurgents and blame it all on Thaksin, who is closely imitating the insurgents. It’s a somewhat bizarre analysis.
[…] Kind of a random title, I know, but I saw an interesting article at New Mandala bringing up this exact question, and it reminded me of some ideas I’d thought about before, mainly in China, but I’ll be considering its application to Thailand a bit in this article. […]
coup coup coup…tons of sms’s flying around tonight (thursday) from farangs, from embassy security folks, from just about everyone…keep your ears tuned in.
The middle class is not big enough to influence the system on its own. It needs the academics as their political representatives. The difficulty for many Thai academics, however, especially the political scientists among them, is that, as Western-educated intellectuals living in a non-Western country they must pay lip service to “democracy”. They must “walk the walk”. They must look like Western-educated intellectuals, and therefore they must appear and sound as though they are democrats. But the problem is, as we have graphically witnessed over this last year, they are uncomfortable with the things that democracy brings with it: elected “immoral” politicians (in their eyes), capitalism, globalization, and especially the challenge to their position as moral authorities that elections bring. So they must play a double-game: on the one hand they use their overseas educational qualifications as collateral for positions in universities and other elite institutions, while on the other many of them are willing to subvert representative democracy by devaluing democratic elections and accepting positions in government bodies appointed by a military junta.
When one thinks about it, if anything, a genuine “Thai-Style Democracy”, that laughable concept that a number of eminent academics have been praising, would have to be a normal liberal democracy based on free and fair elections, since the academics, NGOs and even kharatchakan are always telling us that true “Thai values” are to be found in Thailand’s village communities where most of the electorate lives. Democratic elections are the conduit through which these values would flow through, influence and shape the Thai polity. But the “Thai-Style Democracy” of the academics and their middle class supporters is something very different; in fact, it is simply a disguise for “Ratchakan Democracy”, which, if anything, is far more “Western” than Thai, given that it is manipulated by Western-educated intellectuals. And it is not difficult to understand why a “Ratchakan Democracy” suits academics the best: because it is the system that best preserves their elite social position as moral authorities.
Of course, a Ratchakan Democracy is an oxymoron. One system serves the raja, while the other serves the people. Herein lies the crux of Thailand’s current political crisis.
“The educated middle class is elitist. Many of its members do not want democracy…”
Take for instance the killing lists that were cooked up during the drug wars. This was a very popular vote-getting policy par-excellence, a simple and appealing solution to many….who didn’t want to think very hard or bother themselves with ethical niceties like, for instance, that I find in the Buddhist scriptures which I read and the middle class is more likely to read and think about….what about the people who got stuck on the kill list because they were someone’s enemy…or they “looked” like or “seemed” real guilty, the false positives of the justice system…
What sometimes gets lost in the mass marketing exercise that elections are, is the traditional institutions and pillars of society, that glue the middle class together, like educators (lower level elites), the universities and the military (higher level elites), the King, the highest level elite whose words and deeds truly reflect ethical principles at the highest level and who represents the continuity and continued existence of the Thai state itself over hundreds of years. I think this is deeper and more important for most Thais than any abstract notion of “democracy” from the west, and so it should be. IMHO a political system will eventually evolve that best fits their needs.
Comparisons are really needed though. Thailand has got to where it is without being occupied by foreign troops or by being a brutal police state like South Korea was for many years. Life is better here than in any of the neighboring states.
IMHO the more complete documentation and making transparent of political institutions and their history that you see many on this blog doing and that Pasuk-Baker have done in their books is a major step towards a lasting constitution, the operation of which everyone can understand and respect.
As I’ve said before: I can understand voting for Thaksin the first time, but not the second and third times.
Personally, I would try to find a minor party to vote for if I did not like the major parties, and if no such minor party exists I just write an appropriate message on my ballot paper.
(Yes – I know it’s democracy that gives me that freedom)
Polo: I just thought conservation forest was higher protected than forest reserve, based on Andrews first post (and I also thought the name conservation implied a higher conservation value)
Thanks for the extra information, Andrew – I’m all for some land reform, but who would run it?
Can Politicians or Bureaucrats be trusted to act fairly, without somehow seeking a gain for themselves or their associates?
Er no, he is not. You obviously did not hear about Nakharin’s recent academic suicide, writing the monarchy out of the 6 October massacre in his recent book on the monarchy and political development. Far from offending them I would think the Palace would like to send him a bouquet of flowers. Or, they already have?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
A Paragon of Uncertainty
[…] Back in September, I speculated on this point: In the context of their many other “tough love” measures, it would make sense if the military regime was to now clamp down on foreign retailers, including Tesco. Bigger, better and more extravagant shopping ”experiences” may even, in some (soldierly) eyes, symbolise the excesses and waste of the Thaksin era. […]
New Thinking, New Shopping
[…] Back in early September – well before the coup and subsequent events began reshaping Thai politics – I wrote two short posts on growing opposition to the expansion agenda of Tesco and other foreign-owned “supercentres”. Tesco is an easy and obvious target for commercial (and, to some extent, popular) resentment: for anybody who is aggrieved by a whole raft of disparate economic and social changes. The hardline anti-Tesco forces are, to the best of my knowledge, marshaled by other retail interests who can’t stomach the success of the Lotuses and Carrefours of the world. […]
Tightening the grip
I agree, Taxi Driver, it is a real mess – but I wonder: when was Thaksin going to be voted out?
It seems to me that Thaksin himself should take much of the blame, along with those who continued to vote for him.
I think you are being a little harsh on those of us who supported the coup (after the event), and hoped it would prove to be a circuit-breaker.
Coup or no coup, this sort of mess was inevitable unless Thaksin changed his ways.
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
I know democracy defenders like to play down Plato’s theory on the basis that he was talking about a different form of democracy 2300 years ago, but was he wrong?
Tightening the grip
Don’t worry… we can still rely on the King (for now).
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
So it all come down to this:
“Do you want to give voting power to rural people?”
What Thaksin did, aside from corruption scandal, was showing a new way to play politic in Thailand: populist policy. Now, we have two way to play, the old way and the new populist way. The populist way get the rural’s vote easier and cheaper in democratic election.
Instead of adapting to new playing style, old politician and military just try to revert Thailand back to the good old one days. Now, they seem to get it into their head that once the rural people tasted hope, it might be too sweet to let go. So, they try to make up dual-power senate to serve as elitist powerhouse. Kind of remind me of the Marie Antoinette social revolution.
By the way, Where is David. I doubt monopolize rice would really promote rice market(but flood control is sure thing). More like put a burden/corruption on government. Korea tried it, did not worked.
Tightening the grip
The overthrow of democracy by coup was a major setback for the country. Maybe many are now beginning to see why.
The penny may be dropping among those who cheered the coup that they may be the ones who were “ngoh” afterall, instead of the “ai baan norg” farmers & taxi drivers. So now, instead of being able to vote out an unwanted leader through the ballot box in relative safety, the Millions in Yellow may have to go thru another “Black May”, and a few more lives lost, before power will be stripped away from the those who gained it through their control the strongest instrument of organised violence in the country.
The best chance for unity is through representative politics via the ballot box (+ equality under law), not men with guns & tanks (and small explosive devices!). Unrepresentative politics will always lead to pressure valves popping, and in Thailand, when valves pop, people often die.
Phil Thornton on General Bo Mya
Aung Kyaw wrote:
What Bo Mya said dispels the myth among many Burmans (like myself, unfortunately) that ethnic rebel groups do not aim to remain in the Union of Burma, but are trying to secede and create their own countries.
What an odd statement. Despite calls for unity amongst the Karen, I have never seen any serious movement by Karens towards separation from a Burmese Union. Bo Mya never undertook any serious offensive action against the Burmese. And the Burmese Karen that I know, including some of the leaders in the overseas population, have never expressed any thoughts of total independence and have always worked closely with both ethnic Burmese and with other Burmese minority groups, with the goal being a united democratic Burma.
I am not alone in this impression. Falla, in his book True Love and Bartholomew comes to a similar conclusion.
Backdown on the bombings
I agree with Patiwat that things are getting strange, curiouser and curiosier as Alice would say, relative to the bombings. On first glance it is classic Bangkok based political action with grenades in the garbage cans. But the police are having problems connecting the dots to any one faction, not usually a weakness in the well connected world of the Thai police. And I ask myself, what purpose would the bombings make for the southern separatists if no claims of responsibility are made? So I am left to ponder upon which faction of the old boys network figures to benefit most by the bombings; and no clear winner comes to my mind as all factions come out about equal.
Backdown on the bombings
Muppet Puppet said ‘I don’t know where do you stand but, from my point of view, 5 years of Thaksin government’s corruption didn’t match of what the junta is doing in 4 months.’
Would you care to enlighten us with a list of corruption under the junta over the last 4 months?
Thaksin’s misdeeds are well documented, but the only real criticisms of Surayud I can find are:
– he is too soft
– he may be renting some restricted land
– he implied some things about the recent bombings without any apparent evidence to back up those claims (I will concede that loose lips may be one thing he has in common with Thaksin)
I am sure the usual lower levels of corruption have continued over the last 4 months, and it seems to me that, if anything, Surayud has been been distracted from the reform process by the continual sniping from Thaksin supporters/puppets, academia & media.
Backdown on the bombings
Eh…a coup installed government is generally called a puppet government hence the puppet PM. Why are you having a fuss with the term? The guy is working with/for those generals, not for the people.
I don’t know where do you stand but, from my point of view, 5 years of Thaksin government’s corruption didn’t match of what the junta is doing in 4 months.
Backdown on the bombings
This is getting strange. The junta is admitting that forensic evidence shows that the bomb designs and assembly look very similar to those used in the Southern insurgency.
Yet the “intelligence analysis” shows that the Southern insurgents have never hit Bangkok and presumably don’t have the capabilities to hit Bangkok. Thus the junta exonerate the insurgents and blame it all on Thaksin, who is closely imitating the insurgents. It’s a somewhat bizarre analysis.
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
[…] Kind of a random title, I know, but I saw an interesting article at New Mandala bringing up this exact question, and it reminded me of some ideas I’d thought about before, mainly in China, but I’ll be considering its application to Thailand a bit in this article. […]
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
coup coup coup…tons of sms’s flying around tonight (thursday) from farangs, from embassy security folks, from just about everyone…keep your ears tuned in.
Another opportunity for Okas
Somsak Jiamtheerasakul has something to say about Nakarin’s latest book here:
http://www.sameskybooks.org/webboard/show.php?Category=sameskybooks&No=539
and here
http://www.sameskybooks.org/webboard/show.php?Category=sameskybooks&No=547
This might explain why Nakarin is now hand picked by the CNS.
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
The middle class is not big enough to influence the system on its own. It needs the academics as their political representatives. The difficulty for many Thai academics, however, especially the political scientists among them, is that, as Western-educated intellectuals living in a non-Western country they must pay lip service to “democracy”. They must “walk the walk”. They must look like Western-educated intellectuals, and therefore they must appear and sound as though they are democrats. But the problem is, as we have graphically witnessed over this last year, they are uncomfortable with the things that democracy brings with it: elected “immoral” politicians (in their eyes), capitalism, globalization, and especially the challenge to their position as moral authorities that elections bring. So they must play a double-game: on the one hand they use their overseas educational qualifications as collateral for positions in universities and other elite institutions, while on the other many of them are willing to subvert representative democracy by devaluing democratic elections and accepting positions in government bodies appointed by a military junta.
When one thinks about it, if anything, a genuine “Thai-Style Democracy”, that laughable concept that a number of eminent academics have been praising, would have to be a normal liberal democracy based on free and fair elections, since the academics, NGOs and even kharatchakan are always telling us that true “Thai values” are to be found in Thailand’s village communities where most of the electorate lives. Democratic elections are the conduit through which these values would flow through, influence and shape the Thai polity. But the “Thai-Style Democracy” of the academics and their middle class supporters is something very different; in fact, it is simply a disguise for “Ratchakan Democracy”, which, if anything, is far more “Western” than Thai, given that it is manipulated by Western-educated intellectuals. And it is not difficult to understand why a “Ratchakan Democracy” suits academics the best: because it is the system that best preserves their elite social position as moral authorities.
Of course, a Ratchakan Democracy is an oxymoron. One system serves the raja, while the other serves the people. Herein lies the crux of Thailand’s current political crisis.
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
“The educated middle class is elitist. Many of its members do not want democracy…”
Take for instance the killing lists that were cooked up during the drug wars. This was a very popular vote-getting policy par-excellence, a simple and appealing solution to many….who didn’t want to think very hard or bother themselves with ethical niceties like, for instance, that I find in the Buddhist scriptures which I read and the middle class is more likely to read and think about….what about the people who got stuck on the kill list because they were someone’s enemy…or they “looked” like or “seemed” real guilty, the false positives of the justice system…
What sometimes gets lost in the mass marketing exercise that elections are, is the traditional institutions and pillars of society, that glue the middle class together, like educators (lower level elites), the universities and the military (higher level elites), the King, the highest level elite whose words and deeds truly reflect ethical principles at the highest level and who represents the continuity and continued existence of the Thai state itself over hundreds of years. I think this is deeper and more important for most Thais than any abstract notion of “democracy” from the west, and so it should be. IMHO a political system will eventually evolve that best fits their needs.
Comparisons are really needed though. Thailand has got to where it is without being occupied by foreign troops or by being a brutal police state like South Korea was for many years. Life is better here than in any of the neighboring states.
IMHO the more complete documentation and making transparent of political institutions and their history that you see many on this blog doing and that Pasuk-Baker have done in their books is a major step towards a lasting constitution, the operation of which everyone can understand and respect.
“The educated middle class vs democracy”
As I’ve said before: I can understand voting for Thaksin the first time, but not the second and third times.
Personally, I would try to find a minor party to vote for if I did not like the major parties, and if no such minor party exists I just write an appropriate message on my ballot paper.
(Yes – I know it’s democracy that gives me that freedom)
Surayud’s conservation zone
Polo: I just thought conservation forest was higher protected than forest reserve, based on Andrews first post (and I also thought the name conservation implied a higher conservation value)
Thanks for the extra information, Andrew – I’m all for some land reform, but who would run it?
Can Politicians or Bureaucrats be trusted to act fairly, without somehow seeking a gain for themselves or their associates?
Another opportunity for Okas
Er no, he is not. You obviously did not hear about Nakharin’s recent academic suicide, writing the monarchy out of the 6 October massacre in his recent book on the monarchy and political development. Far from offending them I would think the Palace would like to send him a bouquet of flowers. Or, they already have?