Bangkok Pundit
In that case Dr. Jory should conduct better research before making any kind of comment. Much of the logic in his article was based around the lese majeste rule inhibiting earnst discussion. I am trying to follow the academic insights in to thailand’s political situation on this page but am finding it hard to take many opinions seriously (Dr. Jory, Walker and NF) because they seem to lack certain basic understandings of thailand needed to make an informed academic opinion. I am not trying to discredit- just that I think they are on the right track but need to do more research about Thailand to balance their views.
First I sure that Andrew has a lot of expereine of Thai rural life.
What is so soapy for these discussions. when ‘something wrong’ happened in Thai politics like the Coup 19-09-2549, the old plot is immediately brought out and framed the ways peoples think, saying that the Thai rural folks are poor uneducated, they could be bought, while the middle class in BK in particular is seen as a kind of hero, rich of pol awareness and of course well educated, in addition, the Thai govt, whoever or which parties come to mechanise it those state takers and controllers would be painted by corruption, abuse of power for thier interest groups, and so on and on.
And in this case, the Coup leaders are a kind of ‘a white knight’ who borns to be a hero and solve the problem just in time. And the Thai folk, most of them solute him.
It is the story of the Power Elite, why one wold not think of this? And this is the Thai ways of operating De-Moc-Crasy.
Chris, I know the kind of vote buying “caravans” you are talking about but don’t think that is the limit to it. I think they constitue a public spectacle that is bordering on purely public relations almost compulsory for general good will for all involved. Like walking around to all the houses in sub-district elections, doing it doesn’t guarantee a vote but not doing it certainly is remembered in an unfavourable light. There are more strategic ways of buying votes and far more subtle or blended in with the social landscape. For example around songkhran, new year, funerals, marriages etc etc etc. you get politicians gifting strategically groups of local lads, influential people, inwhole arrays of social situations that generate a “bun khun” debt as well as being normative behaviour of “phu yai” who occuy or aspire to occupying office such as local, district etc politicians (often taxpayers money used). While banned for up to two months before elections (appearing at public situations like this, according to the new constitution) hua khanaen are sent in as proxies. They also get paid in some circumstances according to success etc.
The deliberations on who to vote for are very serious and inevitably include considerations of who gets what from who if such and such gets in and as the peole do not exist in isolated, egalitarian individualistic frameworks but more socially oriented and interlinked circumstances, consderations for the individual are rarely made independent of one’s social self in terms of sets of relations one has, as other’s proseprity is usually beneficial to self in such contexts so long as other is someone you are allied with and so on. So thereis a related and vested interest created through and with vote buying. The intimidation, killing and what not still goes on and under Thaksin the involvement of national level politicians and public servants in local politics was tangible.
The idea of dismissing vote buying off hand as ineffective in this context is too simplistic. While opportunism such as taking money from every party is likely the money being given in those circumstances is not expected to reap the rewards that more strategic, planned and negotiated vote buying does…a distinction needs to be made here where the anonymity of the ballot box should not be mistaken for the nature of relationships between people before during and after elections, it might seem appropriate, culturally familiar but it is not representative of what’s happening.
In terms of the gross stereotype of farmers voting for Thaksin because of a “politically unsophisticated respect for authority”, is the respect and fondness that so many older folk have for Sarit and the paralells they drew between him and Thaksin unsophisticated or common sense considering how these kinds of leaders are credited with bringing stability that many bemoan as having gone…is it inconceivable for “farmers” to vote for this as they want/perceive a need for it, that that appeal is actually not unsophisticated but very pragmatic. I would say that economics isn’t the be all and end all of rationality here or there.
Jory I have read your long poster and it leaves me at my exact opinion of you and this website the first time I wallked in. This NEW MANDALA was created at around June 2006 is that right? Just about the time that disgraced corrupt dangerous ex-Thai leader was facing mounting citizens’ anger against his illegitimate mandate and the time when he started casting aspersions at people of ‘baramee’ in Thailand. That was not coincidence . . . Thaksin Shinawatra already had in mind to begin a campaign to weaken the insitution of the Thai monarchy . . just as he did with Thailand’s constitutional checks & balances if he was to perpetuate his massively corrupt rule. Because to be able to assume absolute powers in Thailand, Thaksin had to eliminate the monarchy factor.
Hence my conclusion that this forum/website is driven by malice and not by any lofty scholastic or academic ideals that you would con readers to believe.
Many Thais I believe kneel before HMK out of true affection for our most beloved monarch. I would not presume to know how foreigners view how we Thais conduct ourselves before our HMK and I don’t care less. But if your dislike of our Thai monarch stem from our Thai ‘kneeling’ before our monarch, or,our reserve to criticize our monarch . . . a ‘culture’ you feel oppressive but many Thais willingly accept . . . I just don’t see how I can view any of your poster or argument was motivated by reason, and, not ‘western’ prejudice.
Thaksin deserved to be deposed . . in other forums we can argue at length on the why’s I believe so.
But for now I just want to reject your proposition or suggestion that we Thais should abide by any ”western’ standard of democracy. Jory, Thaksin has so manipulated your ‘western-standard democracy’ we Thais rejected it outright, by military coup, which was an extraordinary act, that we Thais extraordinarily approved.
Hopefully Andrew will recount his experiences with vote buying – it will be an interesting story. I have had some experience of vote buying in the northeast of Thailand that may be worthwhile contributing. I wasn’t present at the last elections but was there for the pervious election in held 2005. Yes vote buying happened big time and all parties contesting the seat had their hand in it. All I can say Andrew is that the villagers in my area would wish that it was a few hundred baht but in reality the sums handed across were more like 20 or 30 baht per family. I agree with you Ant in that in the area that I’m familiar with discussion about whom the best candidate to vote for can be quite vigorous at times, however, it is highly sophisticated and taken very seriously. Hua Kanaen (its not the term that is used in my area but its close enough) from all parties do come into the villages and do hand out small amounts of money. The villages accept the money – from all who offered it – gratefully with a smile and kind words. However, after the caravan had left for the next village there was general disappointment with the amount of money handed over. It was pointed out to me, on the number of occasions, that they would have received more money but it was believed (shock horror) that the Hua Kanaen had creamed off most of it for themselves.
In my experience the types of ‘sets of relations’ that I’m guessing that you are referring to in your post do exist – but only as a type of palimpsest. They are sometimes acknowledged, but to the rural folk that I know, the reality of everyday life tends to inscribe a more pragmatic representation of the world.
Dr. Jory,
your points are well put, however, I don’t believe you are totally correct
in your analysis on thai royalty. Thais “crawl around” senior members in society (senior in age and social position) in general- it is just more pronounced with the immediate royal family. And the language used to address the king is actually a fusion of cambodian and old thai. The words are completely different eg. the word for eating in normal thai is “gin” or rabprathan” but in court language it is “savoey”. Court dictates that you end a sentence not with “ka” or Krub” but “peka” and “phyakha”. It is just another mode of communication. I’m not sure that RamaV irradicated this- because I was educated in the palace school in the 1980’s and we were stil taught this form of etiquette. It is not a must that you address the king in this language- only if you have been educated is is really expected. When the king is “up country” people often just use normal words. What they are expected to do is not stand at the same level (hence the constantcrawling kneeling and sitting). Mind you at traditional thai schools students act in a similar way towards teachers- not as extreme of course but enough to make any westerner kringe.
I don’t see this behaviouras negative or overly important to merrit academic discussion though. I do understand how it is difficult to digest through western eyes.
At best it is a status quo philosophy that if you are poor stay poor if you are middle-class stay middle-class and if you are rich (like the King) stay rich…neofeudalism, perhaps?
What a waste of good mind but now so poisoned. Leave Thailand alone. Go back to Perth and condemn your own government. It does not have such a perfect government too, you know. Or do you think that there is nothing to criticized?
You spend many years in studying about Thailand and teach, too, so that you can condemn this nation, people and the royal family? I cannot respect someone like you who have the knowledge that could be valuable contribution to the world at large but chose instead to lash out so many negative words about a country that you came to be a teacher at a university … did many researches and surveys about the nation, and the people. Why then is that you dislike Thailand? Did you brainwash all your Thai students to hate their country too? You are really not very respectable as a scholarly individual and your name will not be remembered, you will go to your grave without grace because you have none. Only the people who agree with you in this forum will lay by your side in the ground with epitaph saying, \”We Are the Disgrace of Our Intellectual Profession\” You don\’t deserve the honor of being a great man of knowledge. Your past works now have become a big lie. Let everyone know that truth before you disgrace yourself even more.
You are probably a two-headed bird, you know that? While being so nice to your Thai friends and colleagues, behind their back you criticized them. Shame on you.
Please note that not all ‘anti Thaksin’ people are ‘pro Sondhi’
As a general proposition I would be ‘anti coup’, but I am pleased that it has come and was bloodless.
The coup would not have been necessary if Thaksin had resigned like he initially indicated he might do.
I have no doubt that the King wants the best for Thailand and it’s people, and I fear how bad things would be if he was not there.
I also fear what will happen when the King passes on, and see this coup as perhaps his last chance to set the country on the right course before he is gone.
Andrew, what is “your experience” with vote buying? I think that you overlook the point that while people can, theoretically, take money and vote for who rhey want, in practice people discuss who they vote, networks are very tight knit and even in the case of the new sub-district elections where people vote for Nay-yok OBT, the buyers of votes (hua Kanaen) are Kin, vote buyers know, can estimate and predict within a close enough range to expect certain outcomes and when these outcomes do not occur, punitive measures are taken against either the most likely recalcitrant, those that most assume to not have kept up their end of the bargain and sometimes random targets and the idea that this is a possiblity and these tactics are very effective in assuring levels of compliance. If your experience was ethnographically grounded you would also know that people are very careful who and how they take money from. The anonimity that you are ascribing to the polling box is a farcical idea as it can neither be separated from the sets of relations that the voting is taking place in, nor from the cosmological considerations that inform people’s choices, such as Nganadeeleg has pointed out. What you say here is certainly commonsensical to an Australian but when ascribed to the Thai population the question “who wouldn’t” is definitely the Thai people you are saying would act as you would. An idea born of a simplictic or distant understanding of local political processes in Thailand. Certainly a particular class version of events.
Confused,
my point was not that the king had done anything nor that the journalists were jailed, rather that the potential for such action is an immanent reality in Thailand and a likely outcome of any critical reporting on the king . The Journalists were held in police custody and were going to be expelled until the international press got behind them and stopped it. Point is, report about the king in a negative way and you aren’t going to get away with it, nor is the article likely to see the light of day for too long, this in response to Vichai’s question regarding the journalistic evidence of the discussion regarding the failure and consequences of the Kings “innovative” projects.
Vichai,
You are impossible to reason with. All of your arch nemisis list have responded to your sufficiency-economy proof question, in one form or another. No one is lying about it. Its what we think and are critiquing the concept based on the fact that we believe that it is keyed to the detriment of the poor. Further “proof” could be provided but apart from ubiquitous l’il ol me, I don’t think the others take you seriously enough to bother responding. I would say to you, what’s so hard to understand about a response to poverty or being poor of, ” learn to live within your means” as being a call for the perpetuation of poverty. It doesn’t rally the poor to aspire to more than what they have, to attempt to attain say a middle-class level of living, on the contray it tells them not to, ipso facto is keyed to keeping them poor. Do you understand?
Andrew, I agree a few would vote for whomever they want, but understand that most will vote for who they took the money from because they are worried about ‘bahb kram’
Hi Wasan, the paper is still a work in progress. Here is one quote from one of the key organisers of the festival (poi):
“The festival is a blessing…Our relatives from far away will come and join us to make merit. Anything not good has to be fixed. Places to stay and things to eat have to be prepared. This is how we welcome them. Relatives will be coming from other sub-districts, from other districts, from other villages. Everyone’s relatives have to come and join us because it is a really big occasion for making merit. It is a very famous festival.”
So, yes, networks are created and reinforced by the festival but I am not sure that these can be simply described as “networks of community.”
Hi Ngaandeeleg, thanks for your comments. On the issue of vote buying – do you really think that farmers’ votes can be bought for a few hundred baht? In my experience, as I have said before, farmers accept money from all parties (who wouldn’t) and then vote for whoever they want.
The Coup 19/9/2549, which is absurdly resurrected on the Thai soil in itself, is possibly indicated that Sondhi’s understandings of Thai democracy and politics in general has some problems.
The idea to say that ‘given the lack of political education among the rural voting masses.’, which is also cliamed and used by the so called Political Reform Committee (later is transformed to be Kor- Por- Kor and ‘ a national security commission,) is also poor and absolutelylack of knowledge of Thai politics in the countrysides in particular.
The resurrection of the Coup is perhaps needed another way to think or rethink of in trying to undertsand the Thai democracy. To me this is a story of the Power Elite. it is also represented a real picture of Thai social structure.
To A.Andrew
Can u explain a litle more on what u called ‘the festival succeeds and fails in the symbolic construction of community’?, it seems to me this is the focal point of this paper.
In short, can I get your paper to read further more.
p.s. in my views, one will not be able to fully and truly undestand the social meanings of the Poi without considering its mobility aspects. the networks of community, or a community network that operates through and upon the Poi. This is fundamental for ‘Tai community life’
Regards
Wasan, Chiang Mai
Thank you for your comments Mr. Vichai. I do enjoy debating with you over this issue because as you know, in your country it is forbidden to discuss the monarchy because of the lese majeste law, as well as the ideological control of the monarchy through the media, and through the education system which starts at kindergarten and continues until one graduates from university. This makes it dangerous to discuss such things. So it is not surprising that you are shocked and angry.
Your English is very good. I assume you have lived in Australia or overseas for some time. But you and a number of other people who have posted on this blog do not seem to have understood one aspect of “Western” culture (I actually believe it is universal), and that is freedom of expression. This is an Australian website, and an academic website. What that means is that it allows full freedom of expression, on absolutely any topic whatever (at least in Southeast Asian Studies).
Behind the platitudes, what does freedom of expression mean? It means the freedom to allow the full exercise of reason, this faculty that we have been gifted with to make sense of the world and through such understanding to improve the human condition. This is the work that academics are supposed to do, in the myriad fields of scholarly inquiry, including politics. From a number of your posts you seem very dismissive of academic work and academics generally. But you should understand that this is an academic website, and that means that the people on it will debate, criticize (sometimes strongly), every topic possible, including your king. But everything should be based on the principles of reason, and where it isn’t then all of us are open to and ought to welcome criticism.
As I keep saying, this is not possible in your country. And this is why so many people, not only in Thailand but outside it as well, misunderstand the true nature of politics in Thailand – for example, believing the CDR’s fairy tale that 19th September was a military coup, when in fact it was a royalist coup. The reason for this misunderstanding has nothing to do with “Thai culture” – which I don’t believe exists. It is actually very simple: we are not allowed to use our reason to discuss, debate, and criticize the single most important institution to Thailand’s political system: the monarchy. Or more precisely, the role of the monarchy in Thailand since the beginning of its political restoration in 1947.
The simple fact is that most Thai people do not understand their own monarchy because all debate about it is censored. It is an extremely worrying thing that the most important institution in the country is surrounded and protected by this collective unreason. And this unreason spills into so many aspects of Thai society like rotten water, poisoning the country. The education system is a good example, a bastion of authoritarianism, rote learning, and uniformity, which has resisted every effort to reform it. The bureaucracy is another, but I will save my criticism of that for another day. Religion (fossilization of the monkhood), rural development (royal projects, the self-sufficiency farce), even the business culture (preferences to businesses with a royal interest); none of them escapes the deadening hand of the monarchy.
One then has to ask, why is the monarchy so afraid of criticism?
If we could debate the monarchy there are many other things we could ask, including why the royal family requires people to crawl on the floor in their presence, a practice that was in fact abolished in 1873 by King Chulalongkorn because he considered it oppressive and inappropriate to civilized countries. In Chulalongkorn’s words, your king has resurrected an “oppressive” custom. For what? This degrading practice has nothing to do with “Thai culture”. It has everything to do with culturally reinforcing the power of the monarchy. Language is another. Why when addressing the king must one use the phrase, “under the speck of dust under the royal foot that is over my head”? As an analogy of a power relationship what does that signify? As they say, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I understand why many people will be shocked by what I say. But you should realize that there is nothing that I have said here that Aj Sulak has not said many times before – and much more strongly than me. As you would know, Aj Sulak is now fighting yet another lese majeste charge for the interview in Fa Diao Kan last year.
As I have said, your king should be criticized very strongly for his endorsement of the overthrow of a democratically elected government by the use of tanks and guns. And now the Cabinet that he has sworn in seems to be a group of elderly, royal favourites, apparently hand-chosen by Prem, the king’s “nominee”, you might say. I know many Thais who are very angry about what the king has done, and is doing. You can check out some of the websites yourself to see – although most of that anger is expressed in code. What it shows, at the very least, is that your king refuses to let the Thai people choose their own government. An election was due in October but your king agreed that it was better to use tanks and guns to prevent the Thai people from making their democratic choice. And he is only able to do this by hiding behind lese majeste. Hence the importance of websites like New Mandala.
Sondhi is absolutely wrong. The Thai king is no different from any other autocratic ruler. What is different is the system that has been set up to hide the full extent of the monarchy’s political, economic and cultural control.
In Thailand it is not possible (now) to say all this, as you know. But I truly hope that one day you too will have this freedom. Then you will truly be “Thai” / р╣Др╕Ч.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
SOAS and the coup
Bangkok Pundit
In that case Dr. Jory should conduct better research before making any kind of comment. Much of the logic in his article was based around the lese majeste rule inhibiting earnst discussion. I am trying to follow the academic insights in to thailand’s political situation on this page but am finding it hard to take many opinions seriously (Dr. Jory, Walker and NF) because they seem to lack certain basic understandings of thailand needed to make an informed academic opinion. I am not trying to discredit- just that I think they are on the right track but need to do more research about Thailand to balance their views.
What about some political education for the elite?
First I sure that Andrew has a lot of expereine of Thai rural life.
What is so soapy for these discussions. when ‘something wrong’ happened in Thai politics like the Coup 19-09-2549, the old plot is immediately brought out and framed the ways peoples think, saying that the Thai rural folks are poor uneducated, they could be bought, while the middle class in BK in particular is seen as a kind of hero, rich of pol awareness and of course well educated, in addition, the Thai govt, whoever or which parties come to mechanise it those state takers and controllers would be painted by corruption, abuse of power for thier interest groups, and so on and on.
And in this case, the Coup leaders are a kind of ‘a white knight’ who borns to be a hero and solve the problem just in time. And the Thai folk, most of them solute him.
It is the story of the Power Elite, why one wold not think of this? And this is the Thai ways of operating De-Moc-Crasy.
What about some political education for the elite?
Chris, I know the kind of vote buying “caravans” you are talking about but don’t think that is the limit to it. I think they constitue a public spectacle that is bordering on purely public relations almost compulsory for general good will for all involved. Like walking around to all the houses in sub-district elections, doing it doesn’t guarantee a vote but not doing it certainly is remembered in an unfavourable light. There are more strategic ways of buying votes and far more subtle or blended in with the social landscape. For example around songkhran, new year, funerals, marriages etc etc etc. you get politicians gifting strategically groups of local lads, influential people, inwhole arrays of social situations that generate a “bun khun” debt as well as being normative behaviour of “phu yai” who occuy or aspire to occupying office such as local, district etc politicians (often taxpayers money used). While banned for up to two months before elections (appearing at public situations like this, according to the new constitution) hua khanaen are sent in as proxies. They also get paid in some circumstances according to success etc.
The deliberations on who to vote for are very serious and inevitably include considerations of who gets what from who if such and such gets in and as the peole do not exist in isolated, egalitarian individualistic frameworks but more socially oriented and interlinked circumstances, consderations for the individual are rarely made independent of one’s social self in terms of sets of relations one has, as other’s proseprity is usually beneficial to self in such contexts so long as other is someone you are allied with and so on. So thereis a related and vested interest created through and with vote buying. The intimidation, killing and what not still goes on and under Thaksin the involvement of national level politicians and public servants in local politics was tangible.
The idea of dismissing vote buying off hand as ineffective in this context is too simplistic. While opportunism such as taking money from every party is likely the money being given in those circumstances is not expected to reap the rewards that more strategic, planned and negotiated vote buying does…a distinction needs to be made here where the anonymity of the ballot box should not be mistaken for the nature of relationships between people before during and after elections, it might seem appropriate, culturally familiar but it is not representative of what’s happening.
In terms of the gross stereotype of farmers voting for Thaksin because of a “politically unsophisticated respect for authority”, is the respect and fondness that so many older folk have for Sarit and the paralells they drew between him and Thaksin unsophisticated or common sense considering how these kinds of leaders are credited with bringing stability that many bemoan as having gone…is it inconceivable for “farmers” to vote for this as they want/perceive a need for it, that that appeal is actually not unsophisticated but very pragmatic. I would say that economics isn’t the be all and end all of rationality here or there.
Sondhi at the SOAS event…
Jory I have read your long poster and it leaves me at my exact opinion of you and this website the first time I wallked in. This NEW MANDALA was created at around June 2006 is that right? Just about the time that disgraced corrupt dangerous ex-Thai leader was facing mounting citizens’ anger against his illegitimate mandate and the time when he started casting aspersions at people of ‘baramee’ in Thailand. That was not coincidence . . . Thaksin Shinawatra already had in mind to begin a campaign to weaken the insitution of the Thai monarchy . . just as he did with Thailand’s constitutional checks & balances if he was to perpetuate his massively corrupt rule. Because to be able to assume absolute powers in Thailand, Thaksin had to eliminate the monarchy factor.
Hence my conclusion that this forum/website is driven by malice and not by any lofty scholastic or academic ideals that you would con readers to believe.
Many Thais I believe kneel before HMK out of true affection for our most beloved monarch. I would not presume to know how foreigners view how we Thais conduct ourselves before our HMK and I don’t care less. But if your dislike of our Thai monarch stem from our Thai ‘kneeling’ before our monarch, or,our reserve to criticize our monarch . . . a ‘culture’ you feel oppressive but many Thais willingly accept . . . I just don’t see how I can view any of your poster or argument was motivated by reason, and, not ‘western’ prejudice.
Thaksin deserved to be deposed . . in other forums we can argue at length on the why’s I believe so.
But for now I just want to reject your proposition or suggestion that we Thais should abide by any ”western’ standard of democracy. Jory, Thaksin has so manipulated your ‘western-standard democracy’ we Thais rejected it outright, by military coup, which was an extraordinary act, that we Thais extraordinarily approved.
What about some political education for the elite?
Hi Ant
Hopefully Andrew will recount his experiences with vote buying – it will be an interesting story. I have had some experience of vote buying in the northeast of Thailand that may be worthwhile contributing. I wasn’t present at the last elections but was there for the pervious election in held 2005. Yes vote buying happened big time and all parties contesting the seat had their hand in it. All I can say Andrew is that the villagers in my area would wish that it was a few hundred baht but in reality the sums handed across were more like 20 or 30 baht per family. I agree with you Ant in that in the area that I’m familiar with discussion about whom the best candidate to vote for can be quite vigorous at times, however, it is highly sophisticated and taken very seriously. Hua Kanaen (its not the term that is used in my area but its close enough) from all parties do come into the villages and do hand out small amounts of money. The villages accept the money – from all who offered it – gratefully with a smile and kind words. However, after the caravan had left for the next village there was general disappointment with the amount of money handed over. It was pointed out to me, on the number of occasions, that they would have received more money but it was believed (shock horror) that the Hua Kanaen had creamed off most of it for themselves.
In my experience the types of ‘sets of relations’ that I’m guessing that you are referring to in your post do exist – but only as a type of palimpsest. They are sometimes acknowledged, but to the rural folk that I know, the reality of everyday life tends to inscribe a more pragmatic representation of the world.
Sondhi at the SOAS event…
Dr. Jory,
your points are well put, however, I don’t believe you are totally correct
in your analysis on thai royalty. Thais “crawl around” senior members in society (senior in age and social position) in general- it is just more pronounced with the immediate royal family. And the language used to address the king is actually a fusion of cambodian and old thai. The words are completely different eg. the word for eating in normal thai is “gin” or rabprathan” but in court language it is “savoey”. Court dictates that you end a sentence not with “ka” or Krub” but “peka” and “phyakha”. It is just another mode of communication. I’m not sure that RamaV irradicated this- because I was educated in the palace school in the 1980’s and we were stil taught this form of etiquette. It is not a must that you address the king in this language- only if you have been educated is is really expected. When the king is “up country” people often just use normal words. What they are expected to do is not stand at the same level (hence the constantcrawling kneeling and sitting). Mind you at traditional thai schools students act in a similar way towards teachers- not as extreme of course but enough to make any westerner kringe.
I don’t see this behaviouras negative or overly important to merrit academic discussion though. I do understand how it is difficult to digest through western eyes.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
At best it is a status quo philosophy that if you are poor stay poor if you are middle-class stay middle-class and if you are rich (like the King) stay rich…neofeudalism, perhaps?
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
nganadeeleg made good short comments in several posts above, why doesn’t anyone listen?
SOAS discussion on the Thai coup
Whitewash Dr. Jory? Explain, please…
What a waste of good mind but now so poisoned. Leave Thailand alone. Go back to Perth and condemn your own government. It does not have such a perfect government too, you know. Or do you think that there is nothing to criticized?
You spend many years in studying about Thailand and teach, too, so that you can condemn this nation, people and the royal family? I cannot respect someone like you who have the knowledge that could be valuable contribution to the world at large but chose instead to lash out so many negative words about a country that you came to be a teacher at a university … did many researches and surveys about the nation, and the people. Why then is that you dislike Thailand? Did you brainwash all your Thai students to hate their country too? You are really not very respectable as a scholarly individual and your name will not be remembered, you will go to your grave without grace because you have none. Only the people who agree with you in this forum will lay by your side in the ground with epitaph saying, \”We Are the Disgrace of Our Intellectual Profession\” You don\’t deserve the honor of being a great man of knowledge. Your past works now have become a big lie. Let everyone know that truth before you disgrace yourself even more.
You are probably a two-headed bird, you know that? While being so nice to your Thai friends and colleagues, behind their back you criticized them. Shame on you.
Sondhi at the SOAS event…
Please note that not all ‘anti Thaksin’ people are ‘pro Sondhi’
As a general proposition I would be ‘anti coup’, but I am pleased that it has come and was bloodless.
The coup would not have been necessary if Thaksin had resigned like he initially indicated he might do.
I have no doubt that the King wants the best for Thailand and it’s people, and I fear how bad things would be if he was not there.
I also fear what will happen when the King passes on, and see this coup as perhaps his last chance to set the country on the right course before he is gone.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
My understanding of the Kings ‘sufficiency economy’ is that it does not only apply to the poor, but to all classes.
I still think it is more an ‘anti greed’ philosphy than an aim to keep poeple poor.
What about some political education for the elite?
Andrew, what is “your experience” with vote buying? I think that you overlook the point that while people can, theoretically, take money and vote for who rhey want, in practice people discuss who they vote, networks are very tight knit and even in the case of the new sub-district elections where people vote for Nay-yok OBT, the buyers of votes (hua Kanaen) are Kin, vote buyers know, can estimate and predict within a close enough range to expect certain outcomes and when these outcomes do not occur, punitive measures are taken against either the most likely recalcitrant, those that most assume to not have kept up their end of the bargain and sometimes random targets and the idea that this is a possiblity and these tactics are very effective in assuring levels of compliance. If your experience was ethnographically grounded you would also know that people are very careful who and how they take money from. The anonimity that you are ascribing to the polling box is a farcical idea as it can neither be separated from the sets of relations that the voting is taking place in, nor from the cosmological considerations that inform people’s choices, such as Nganadeeleg has pointed out. What you say here is certainly commonsensical to an Australian but when ascribed to the Thai population the question “who wouldn’t” is definitely the Thai people you are saying would act as you would. An idea born of a simplictic or distant understanding of local political processes in Thailand. Certainly a particular class version of events.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Confused,
my point was not that the king had done anything nor that the journalists were jailed, rather that the potential for such action is an immanent reality in Thailand and a likely outcome of any critical reporting on the king . The Journalists were held in police custody and were going to be expelled until the international press got behind them and stopped it. Point is, report about the king in a negative way and you aren’t going to get away with it, nor is the article likely to see the light of day for too long, this in response to Vichai’s question regarding the journalistic evidence of the discussion regarding the failure and consequences of the Kings “innovative” projects.
Vichai,
You are impossible to reason with. All of your arch nemisis list have responded to your sufficiency-economy proof question, in one form or another. No one is lying about it. Its what we think and are critiquing the concept based on the fact that we believe that it is keyed to the detriment of the poor. Further “proof” could be provided but apart from ubiquitous l’il ol me, I don’t think the others take you seriously enough to bother responding. I would say to you, what’s so hard to understand about a response to poverty or being poor of, ” learn to live within your means” as being a call for the perpetuation of poverty. It doesn’t rally the poor to aspire to more than what they have, to attempt to attain say a middle-class level of living, on the contray it tells them not to, ipso facto is keyed to keeping them poor. Do you understand?
What about some political education for the elite?
Andrew, I agree a few would vote for whomever they want, but understand that most will vote for who they took the money from because they are worried about ‘bahb kram’
Andrew Walker seminar in Oxford
Hi Wasan, the paper is still a work in progress. Here is one quote from one of the key organisers of the festival (poi):
“The festival is a blessing…Our relatives from far away will come and join us to make merit. Anything not good has to be fixed. Places to stay and things to eat have to be prepared. This is how we welcome them. Relatives will be coming from other sub-districts, from other districts, from other villages. Everyone’s relatives have to come and join us because it is a really big occasion for making merit. It is a very famous festival.”
So, yes, networks are created and reinforced by the festival but I am not sure that these can be simply described as “networks of community.”
SOAS discussion on the Thai coup
The whitewash continues – from today’s Matichon:
р╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕Бр╕п р╕Щр╕▒р╕Фр╕Чр╕╣р╕Хр╕Чр╕▒р╣Ир╕зр╣Вр╕ер╕Бр╣Бр╕Ир╕Зр╕кр╕Цр╕▓р╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╣Др╕Чр╕в р╕Юр╕гр╕╕р╣Ир╕Зр╕Щр╕╡р╣Й
р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣И 11 р╕Х.р╕Д. 2549
р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Щр╕╡р╣Й (11 р╕Х.р╕Д.) р╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕кр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Вр╣Ир╕▓р╕зр╕гр╕▓р╕вр╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╕Ир╕▓р╕Бр╕Чр╕│р╣Ар╕Щр╕╡р╕вр╕Ър╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Ър╕▓р╕е р╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Юр╕е.р╕н.р╕кр╕╕р╕гр╕вр╕╕р╕Чр╕Шр╣М р╕Ир╕╕р╕ер╕▓р╕Щр╕Щр╕Чр╣М р╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕Бр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕бр╕Щр╕Хр╕гр╕╡ р╕бр╕╡р╕Бр╕│р╕лр╕Щр╕Фр╕Ир╕░р╕Юр╕Ър╕Ыр╕░р╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╣Ар╕нр╕Бр╕нр╕▒р╕Др╕гр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Чр╕╣р╕Хр╕Ир╕▓р╕Бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╣Ж р╕Чр╕▒р╣Ир╕зр╣Вр╕ер╕Б р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Ир╕│р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╣Гр╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╣Др╕Чр╕в р╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣И 12 р╕Х.р╕Д.р╕Щр╕╡р╣Й р╣Ар╕зр╕ер╕▓ 09.30-16.15 р╕Щ. р╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕Хр╕╢р╕Бр╕кр╕▒р╕Щр╕Хр╕┤р╣Др╕бр╕Хр╕гр╕╡ р╕Чр╕│р╣Ар╕Щр╕╡р╕вр╕Ър╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Ър╕▓р╕е р╣Ар╕Юр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Кр╕╡р╣Йр╣Бр╕Ир╕Зр╕Цр╕╢р╕Зр╣Ар╕лр╕Хр╕╕р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕Ыр╕ер╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕Щр╣Бр╕Ыр╕ер╕Зр╕Чр╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╣Др╕Чр╕в р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Хр╕▒р╕зр╣Бр╕Чр╕Щр╕Ир╕▓р╕Бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╣Ж р╕Чр╕▒р╣Ир╕зр╣Вр╕ер╕Бр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕Чр╕гр╕▓р╕Ъ р╣Вр╕Фр╕вр╕Ир╕░р╣Бр╕Ър╣Ир╕Зр╕нр╕нр╕Бр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕ер╕╕р╣Ир╕б р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕ер╕│р╕Фр╕▒р╕Ъ р╣Ар╕гр╕┤р╣Ир╕бр╕Ир╕▓р╕Бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╕нр╕▓р╣Ар╕Лр╕╡р╕вр╕Щ 9 р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕и р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕ир╣Гр╕Щр╕Чр╕зр╕╡р╕Ыр╣Ар╕нр╣Ар╕Кр╕╡р╕в-р╣Бр╕нр╕Яр╕гр╕┤р╕Бр╕▓ 23 р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕и р╕Чр╕зр╕╡р╕Ыр╕нр╣Ар╕бр╕гр╕┤р╕Бр╕▓-р╣Бр╕Ыр╕Лр╕┤р╕Яр╕┤р╕Б 11 р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕и р╕Чр╕зр╕╡р╕Ыр╕вр╕╕р╣Вр╕гр╕Ыр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕кр╣Ар╕Лр╕╡р╕в 25 р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕и р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕нр╕Зр╕Др╣Мр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕и 19 р╕нр╕Зр╕Др╣Мр╕Бр╕г р╕Зр╕▓р╕Щр╕Фр╕▒р╕Зр╕Бр╕ер╣Ир╕▓р╕зр╕Бр╕гр╕░р╕Чр╕гр╕зр╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Хр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕и р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕кр╕│р╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╣Ар╕ер╕Вр╕▓р╕Шр╕┤р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕Бр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕бр╕Щр╕Хр╕гр╕╡р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╕Ир╕▒р╕Фр╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щ
What about some political education for the elite?
Hi Ngaandeeleg, thanks for your comments. On the issue of vote buying – do you really think that farmers’ votes can be bought for a few hundred baht? In my experience, as I have said before, farmers accept money from all parties (who wouldn’t) and then vote for whoever they want.
What about some political education for the elite?
The Coup 19/9/2549, which is absurdly resurrected on the Thai soil in itself, is possibly indicated that Sondhi’s understandings of Thai democracy and politics in general has some problems.
The idea to say that ‘given the lack of political education among the rural voting masses.’, which is also cliamed and used by the so called Political Reform Committee (later is transformed to be Kor- Por- Kor and ‘ a national security commission,) is also poor and absolutelylack of knowledge of Thai politics in the countrysides in particular.
The resurrection of the Coup is perhaps needed another way to think or rethink of in trying to undertsand the Thai democracy. To me this is a story of the Power Elite. it is also represented a real picture of Thai social structure.
Andrew Walker seminar in Oxford
To A.Andrew
Can u explain a litle more on what u called ‘the festival succeeds and fails in the symbolic construction of community’?, it seems to me this is the focal point of this paper.
In short, can I get your paper to read further more.
p.s. in my views, one will not be able to fully and truly undestand the social meanings of the Poi without considering its mobility aspects. the networks of community, or a community network that operates through and upon the Poi. This is fundamental for ‘Tai community life’
Regards
Wasan, Chiang Mai
Sondhi at the SOAS event…
Thank you for your comments Mr. Vichai. I do enjoy debating with you over this issue because as you know, in your country it is forbidden to discuss the monarchy because of the lese majeste law, as well as the ideological control of the monarchy through the media, and through the education system which starts at kindergarten and continues until one graduates from university. This makes it dangerous to discuss such things. So it is not surprising that you are shocked and angry.
Your English is very good. I assume you have lived in Australia or overseas for some time. But you and a number of other people who have posted on this blog do not seem to have understood one aspect of “Western” culture (I actually believe it is universal), and that is freedom of expression. This is an Australian website, and an academic website. What that means is that it allows full freedom of expression, on absolutely any topic whatever (at least in Southeast Asian Studies).
Behind the platitudes, what does freedom of expression mean? It means the freedom to allow the full exercise of reason, this faculty that we have been gifted with to make sense of the world and through such understanding to improve the human condition. This is the work that academics are supposed to do, in the myriad fields of scholarly inquiry, including politics. From a number of your posts you seem very dismissive of academic work and academics generally. But you should understand that this is an academic website, and that means that the people on it will debate, criticize (sometimes strongly), every topic possible, including your king. But everything should be based on the principles of reason, and where it isn’t then all of us are open to and ought to welcome criticism.
As I keep saying, this is not possible in your country. And this is why so many people, not only in Thailand but outside it as well, misunderstand the true nature of politics in Thailand – for example, believing the CDR’s fairy tale that 19th September was a military coup, when in fact it was a royalist coup. The reason for this misunderstanding has nothing to do with “Thai culture” – which I don’t believe exists. It is actually very simple: we are not allowed to use our reason to discuss, debate, and criticize the single most important institution to Thailand’s political system: the monarchy. Or more precisely, the role of the monarchy in Thailand since the beginning of its political restoration in 1947.
The simple fact is that most Thai people do not understand their own monarchy because all debate about it is censored. It is an extremely worrying thing that the most important institution in the country is surrounded and protected by this collective unreason. And this unreason spills into so many aspects of Thai society like rotten water, poisoning the country. The education system is a good example, a bastion of authoritarianism, rote learning, and uniformity, which has resisted every effort to reform it. The bureaucracy is another, but I will save my criticism of that for another day. Religion (fossilization of the monkhood), rural development (royal projects, the self-sufficiency farce), even the business culture (preferences to businesses with a royal interest); none of them escapes the deadening hand of the monarchy.
One then has to ask, why is the monarchy so afraid of criticism?
If we could debate the monarchy there are many other things we could ask, including why the royal family requires people to crawl on the floor in their presence, a practice that was in fact abolished in 1873 by King Chulalongkorn because he considered it oppressive and inappropriate to civilized countries. In Chulalongkorn’s words, your king has resurrected an “oppressive” custom. For what? This degrading practice has nothing to do with “Thai culture”. It has everything to do with culturally reinforcing the power of the monarchy. Language is another. Why when addressing the king must one use the phrase, “under the speck of dust under the royal foot that is over my head”? As an analogy of a power relationship what does that signify? As they say, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I understand why many people will be shocked by what I say. But you should realize that there is nothing that I have said here that Aj Sulak has not said many times before – and much more strongly than me. As you would know, Aj Sulak is now fighting yet another lese majeste charge for the interview in Fa Diao Kan last year.
As I have said, your king should be criticized very strongly for his endorsement of the overthrow of a democratically elected government by the use of tanks and guns. And now the Cabinet that he has sworn in seems to be a group of elderly, royal favourites, apparently hand-chosen by Prem, the king’s “nominee”, you might say. I know many Thais who are very angry about what the king has done, and is doing. You can check out some of the websites yourself to see – although most of that anger is expressed in code. What it shows, at the very least, is that your king refuses to let the Thai people choose their own government. An election was due in October but your king agreed that it was better to use tanks and guns to prevent the Thai people from making their democratic choice. And he is only able to do this by hiding behind lese majeste. Hence the importance of websites like New Mandala.
Sondhi is absolutely wrong. The Thai king is no different from any other autocratic ruler. What is different is the system that has been set up to hide the full extent of the monarchy’s political, economic and cultural control.
In Thailand it is not possible (now) to say all this, as you know. But I truly hope that one day you too will have this freedom. Then you will truly be “Thai” / р╣Др╕Ч.