Is there any evidence that Sondhi spoke up about the extrajudicial killings of more than 2,000 people at the time, or even during the year, that they took place (early 2003). There was very little outrage in Thailand about this at the time, and it is somewhat hypocritical for it to be cited now to justify having a coup to oust Thaksin. Are there open demands that the junta investigate and prosecute these? What does Kraisak now expect?
The truth is my posters do not need ‘moderation’. It is your end of the posters . . . your malicious commentaries which need moderation – – – cloaked in pompous scholarly style which you believe would be enough to con your readers.
Pathetic to say the least that you all cannot find meaningful and more decent jobs elsewhere.
How suggestive all the lies here. It is all preposterous and you are all too educated to believe that you can carry on with this malicious website suggesting that Thailand’s HMK wants to keep the rurals enslaved by poverty!
Guys . . . you claim to have ph.d.’s here and there. How can you be such fools . . . or desperate to be reduced to such ‘menial’ duties by Thaksin Shinawatra.
I think you are paid hand of Thaksin Shinawatra to malign the Thai monarchy. Every poster in this website suggests malice in the intent and slant of NEW MANDALA.
I’d rather you come out clean and rename your website: Thaksin Laments or something to that effect.
Dr. Patric Jory, Dr. Andrew Walker and the little Ant,
All I asked you to do is to articulate how you all arrived at that ridiculous lie that Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy was designed to keep Thailand’s poor POOR. And you have not responded for more than week now.
And now you start rattling of little nonsense about acidity here and there at some changwats in Thailand that to be truthful I am totally unawares about.
If all the lies you print here are true, how is it that none of these were ever reported by Time Magazine, Newsweek, Far Eastern Economic Review or any of the thousand independent publications around the world?
From 1989 through to 1992 I was working in Northern Thailand in the province of Chiangrai and towards the end of 1992 was struck by an anomolous appearance of three Akha villages in a previously uninhabited area that occurred over a period of about two months or so. Talking to some of the people in the village myself and some Thai colleagues managed to ascertain that the villages (and villagers) had come from doi tung where they had had to flee as they were unable to support themselves and their families due to extortion by govt (royal project) officials and as the opium erradication through cash crop replacement scheme failed due to lack of roads and transport for their goods, less than a year later all three villages had been rounded up by police and expelled to Burma. In practice sethakhit phor pieng is, for those who are touched by the royal projects probably better translated as “sub-subsistence economy”, I’m not an economist (or Dr of anything for that matter) but according to my sums that would translate to “poverty economy”.
Dr. Jory, the concerns expressed in your article are well put and necessary, however, I would like to make a clarification on your point that because a member of the Thai royal family was present at the event, the speakers/audience were hindered in discussing the role of the monarchy in Thailand’s current political situation. The only member of Thai royalty present on Saturday’s discussion round was Hugo Levy (aka Hugo Chakrabongse)- a thai performer and song writer who is not part of the immediate royal family. From my understanding, his father is British and his mother, who is a quarter Thai and daughter of a Prince, holds the (minor) noble title Mom Rajawongse. Hugo is not recognised as part of the monarchy. More importantly, he is well respected in Thailand for his very impartial political and social views.
Although the topic of monarchy reform was discussed by both speakers (albeit at no great detail) I do not believe that this was because of Hugo’s presence.
Just wanted to add my two cents.
Regards,
Mr. Anon surely you are not so easily fooled by such a wild and ridiculous claim by the discredited Thaksinists? If indeed the villagers can raise themselves to be mini-capitalists, what should this go against Self-Sufficiency?
Quote from Anon
‘The palace wants to repeal these programs, because a prosperous rural class will realize that their development doesn’t come from the King, but from the power of their own votes.’
So you really think the King doesn’t want a prosperous rural class?
Many thanks Raja Phikhaat (how do you get by with that name?) for filling in the gaps. You have an excellent knowledge of the project. You forgot to mention the “Build a House for Our Father” project, which entails the construction of a new palace at Pak Panang right next to the dam project which the king will never visit – just like the other one at Phromkhiri, ha ha – which has costed hundreds of millions of baht. Can you believe it that now they dare to ask for donations to complete it?!). This is the bitterness the villagers have to swallow. Yes, “horror” is not too strong a word for the way they’ve been treated.
And these poor villagers have to endure the “Holy Foot of the Powerful Lord Over our Head” preaching to them about self-sufficiency, after his project has destroyed that very thing!
But I am not as confident as you that the “people of Nakhon” will see justice.
[…] On the afternoon of Saturday, 8 October 2006, New Mandala attended the School of Oriental and African Studies seminar titled “Thailand under CEO Thaksin”. Some controversy emerged regarding the format of this event. Regular New Mandala contributor, Dr Patrick Jory, had earlier voiced some concerns regarding its structure and speakers. The Nation carried a strange article before the seminar which helps to put it in context. […]
Vichai, many foot-lickers have claimed that one of Thaksin’s crimes was to go against the principles of Self-Sufficiency by turning poor people mini-capitalists, by giving them capital (the Village Fund) and pushing them to expand their markets (OTOP program). Yet, this misguided series of policies resulted in remarkable reductions in poverty among rural Thais.
The palace wants to repeal these programs, because a prosperous rural class will realize that their development doesn’t come from the King, but from the power of their own votes.
Patrick Jory, let me provide some context to the others for what the horror the King inflicted upon Pak Panang.
Pak Panang is an estuary, the largest in South Thailand. The Pak Panang river plays a channeling flood waters during the rainy season into the Gulf of Thailand. Similar to the Chao Phraya, Mekhong, and Yellow River deltas, the lands along the Pak Panang river were incredibly fertile. The estuary itself played an important role in the ecosystem, and the seas around it were rich in fish and sea-life. Pak Panag was the rice-bowl of the kingdoms of Nakhon Srithammarat for over 2,000 years.
Like all estuaries, Pak Panang is prone to flooding when water can’t reach the Gulf fast enough and passes through homes and agricultural land. The major event that got the King’s attention was the 1989 flood.
The King’s idea was to widen and dredge the estuary to increase the natural capacity of the river to carry floodwater. The problem was that during the dry season, the saltwater of the Gulf would creep upstream, ruining the land in the area. Significantly increased salinity levels have been measured all the way up to Cha-uat district, 100KM up the river!
The King’s solution to this was to build massive levees to prevent saltwater incursion. This really screwed up the ecosystem in the area, as Patrick noted.
Today, Pak Panang is a wasteland, with abandoned rice-mills along the riverbanks and the stench of rotting stagnant salty water from the river. The government talks of “rehabilitation” of Pak Panang and the people have been forced to take hand-outs – HAND OUTS! – from western aid agencies. Kings had ruled in Pak Panang since the ancestors of the Chakri were still illiterate farmers in China, and today that once proud people have to rely on handouts…
Patrick also mentioned how the King micromanaged the projects, helping to line the pockets of his “chlear’ers”. The entire project cost over $600 million – that’s US dollars, not Baht. PM Banharn’s construction companies made over $100 million on the project.
When the people of Nakhonsrithammarat demonstrated against the projects, he shut them up by linking the projects to the prestige of his thrown by declaring that he wanted the project finished by his 50-year Jubilee in 1996. Then he said “We don’t want to be confronted with protests. It is tiring and useless.”
The King salted the earth of Nakhon, but the people of Nakhon are proud and fierce and with long memories. The simpletons of Bangkok and Isaan might listen to his propaganda, but Nakhon people will not rest until they see justice.
Both very interesting and well detailed accounts (Patrick and Raja). Do either of you get the impression that the present monarch’s activities resemble more a fascination for the potential of environmental engineering and experimentation, with the Thai state as his work shop, than a well thought out or innovative execution of a project/ideas? I certainly do, and in my experience and contra to the received wisdom regarding the popularity of the king, know many a lower ranking govt official and local farmer who often bemoan this very point. Father of innovation I think is stretching it a bit as with out critique and feedback how can someone be innovative…the UN gave him an award for what outside of Thailand is called horticulture, if I remember correctly…are we to see “Emperor’s new clothes” become replaced in the English vernacular by “Kings innovation”, another Siamese contribution to the langauge, like “white elephant” before it?
All I want is Dr. Andrew Walker (he must be a doctor, to be abel to make wild conclusions like that), is to articulate how he arrived at his authoritative conclusion that Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy keeps the poor POOR! So litttle Ant, don’t draw me into some subjects I have no interest at all about.
Dr. Jory,
It seems to me you are not exactly pro-democratic and you want to badly criticize HM the king (of Thailand) for his idea on Sufficiency Economy theory (but claim that there is a lese majeste law protecting him, that is only true if you are in Thailand, here in this forum you are free to do that without fear of criticism from anyone, really).
It seems to me you are anti-dynasty and do not approve of a society where monarchy exist. You are not an economist so you don’t know the effect of the economy in any nation. You are an expert on human sociology from the like of your expert survey and theory on Southeast Asia, but still you have no idea about what coexist in Southeast Asia at all. You are an academic but I presumed that you have your own opinion which is not up to anyone to say that you are wrong. I know you are a visitng fellow in Singapore, but being a PhD doesn’t mean you know everything and with good judgement about a man whom you never knew, met or understood. You discriminate and yet hold your self-esteem so high that you don’t realize you came from a lower ground. A intelligent man like you should be able to separate facts from theory. Well, I hate to go on and on because it will take it forever to get to you to understand something so simple. You are entitle to your precious opinionbut ohters have theirs as well. That is if you think your opinion is superior than everyone else (because you have a PhD …).
Thanks Raja Phikhaat for the interesting post about the destruction of the Bajoh forest in Narathiwat by a royal project, no doubt one of many dismal failures of royal projects that can not be declared failures because of lese majeste. Could I draw your attention to another royal project that has ruined the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of villagers in Nakhon Si Thammarat province, the Pak Panang Basin Development Project. The Pak Panang basin region was once the rice bowl of southern Thailand, and rivalled the rice production of the Rangsit region. This royal project involved building a number of dams and irrigation systems which would divide the Pak Panang basin into a “salt water zone” and a “fresh water zone”. The king took the major role in conceiving and overseeing the project, with the military, the bureaucracy and crony contractors carrying out the implementation. The result has been an environmental catastrophe, destroying the unique “3 water” ecosystem of the region which has lead to the extinction of fish species, greatly increased soil salinity, the dying out of local vegetation including valuable economic species such as the nipa palm, water stagnation, increased flooding, and the resulting increased impoverishment of the region. Villagers had no say whatsoever in the implementation of the project. Disasters such as this one are only possible because once a project has the royal brand it is impossible to criticize. A perfect example of Thai-style democracy.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
SOAS and the coup
Hugo Chakrabongse! You’ve got to be kidding. He did not even make it as a singer nor an actor. Another badly researched seminar.
SOAS discussion on the Thai coup
Is there any evidence that Sondhi spoke up about the extrajudicial killings of more than 2,000 people at the time, or even during the year, that they took place (early 2003). There was very little outrage in Thailand about this at the time, and it is somewhat hypocritical for it to be cited now to justify having a coup to oust Thaksin. Are there open demands that the junta investigate and prosecute these? What does Kraisak now expect?
Sufficiency and the junta
The truth is my posters do not need ‘moderation’. It is your end of the posters . . . your malicious commentaries which need moderation – – – cloaked in pompous scholarly style which you believe would be enough to con your readers.
Pathetic to say the least that you all cannot find meaningful and more decent jobs elsewhere.
Sufficiency and the junta
How suggestive all the lies here. It is all preposterous and you are all too educated to believe that you can carry on with this malicious website suggesting that Thailand’s HMK wants to keep the rurals enslaved by poverty!
Guys . . . you claim to have ph.d.’s here and there. How can you be such fools . . . or desperate to be reduced to such ‘menial’ duties by Thaksin Shinawatra.
Find some other decent line of work guys.
SOAS and the coup
Dr. Patrick Jory,
I think you are paid hand of Thaksin Shinawatra to malign the Thai monarchy. Every poster in this website suggests malice in the intent and slant of NEW MANDALA.
I’d rather you come out clean and rename your website: Thaksin Laments or something to that effect.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Dr. Patric Jory, Dr. Andrew Walker and the little Ant,
All I asked you to do is to articulate how you all arrived at that ridiculous lie that Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy was designed to keep Thailand’s poor POOR. And you have not responded for more than week now.
And now you start rattling of little nonsense about acidity here and there at some changwats in Thailand that to be truthful I am totally unawares about.
If all the lies you print here are true, how is it that none of these were ever reported by Time Magazine, Newsweek, Far Eastern Economic Review or any of the thousand independent publications around the world?
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
From 1989 through to 1992 I was working in Northern Thailand in the province of Chiangrai and towards the end of 1992 was struck by an anomolous appearance of three Akha villages in a previously uninhabited area that occurred over a period of about two months or so. Talking to some of the people in the village myself and some Thai colleagues managed to ascertain that the villages (and villagers) had come from doi tung where they had had to flee as they were unable to support themselves and their families due to extortion by govt (royal project) officials and as the opium erradication through cash crop replacement scheme failed due to lack of roads and transport for their goods, less than a year later all three villages had been rounded up by police and expelled to Burma. In practice sethakhit phor pieng is, for those who are touched by the royal projects probably better translated as “sub-subsistence economy”, I’m not an economist (or Dr of anything for that matter) but according to my sums that would translate to “poverty economy”.
SOAS and the coup
Dr. Jory, the concerns expressed in your article are well put and necessary, however, I would like to make a clarification on your point that because a member of the Thai royal family was present at the event, the speakers/audience were hindered in discussing the role of the monarchy in Thailand’s current political situation. The only member of Thai royalty present on Saturday’s discussion round was Hugo Levy (aka Hugo Chakrabongse)- a thai performer and song writer who is not part of the immediate royal family. From my understanding, his father is British and his mother, who is a quarter Thai and daughter of a Prince, holds the (minor) noble title Mom Rajawongse. Hugo is not recognised as part of the monarchy. More importantly, he is well respected in Thailand for his very impartial political and social views.
Although the topic of monarchy reform was discussed by both speakers (albeit at no great detail) I do not believe that this was because of Hugo’s presence.
Just wanted to add my two cents.
Regards,
Sufficiency and the junta
Mr. Anon surely you are not so easily fooled by such a wild and ridiculous claim by the discredited Thaksinists? If indeed the villagers can raise themselves to be mini-capitalists, what should this go against Self-Sufficiency?
Your preposterous claim defies logic.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Patrick – presumably you have written to the palace raising your specific concerns regarding the “people of Nakhon”?
What was the response?
Sufficiency and the junta
Quote from Anon
‘The palace wants to repeal these programs, because a prosperous rural class will realize that their development doesn’t come from the King, but from the power of their own votes.’
So you really think the King doesn’t want a prosperous rural class?
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Many thanks Raja Phikhaat (how do you get by with that name?) for filling in the gaps. You have an excellent knowledge of the project. You forgot to mention the “Build a House for Our Father” project, which entails the construction of a new palace at Pak Panang right next to the dam project which the king will never visit – just like the other one at Phromkhiri, ha ha – which has costed hundreds of millions of baht. Can you believe it that now they dare to ask for donations to complete it?!). This is the bitterness the villagers have to swallow. Yes, “horror” is not too strong a word for the way they’ve been treated.
And these poor villagers have to endure the “Holy Foot of the Powerful Lord Over our Head” preaching to them about self-sufficiency, after his project has destroyed that very thing!
But I am not as confident as you that the “people of Nakhon” will see justice.
SOAS and the coup
[…] On the afternoon of Saturday, 8 October 2006, New Mandala attended the School of Oriental and African Studies seminar titled “Thailand under CEO Thaksin”. Some controversy emerged regarding the format of this event. Regular New Mandala contributor, Dr Patrick Jory, had earlier voiced some concerns regarding its structure and speakers. The Nation carried a strange article before the seminar which helps to put it in context. […]
Sufficiency and the junta
Vichai, many foot-lickers have claimed that one of Thaksin’s crimes was to go against the principles of Self-Sufficiency by turning poor people mini-capitalists, by giving them capital (the Village Fund) and pushing them to expand their markets (OTOP program). Yet, this misguided series of policies resulted in remarkable reductions in poverty among rural Thais.
The palace wants to repeal these programs, because a prosperous rural class will realize that their development doesn’t come from the King, but from the power of their own votes.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Patrick Jory, let me provide some context to the others for what the horror the King inflicted upon Pak Panang.
Pak Panang is an estuary, the largest in South Thailand. The Pak Panang river plays a channeling flood waters during the rainy season into the Gulf of Thailand. Similar to the Chao Phraya, Mekhong, and Yellow River deltas, the lands along the Pak Panang river were incredibly fertile. The estuary itself played an important role in the ecosystem, and the seas around it were rich in fish and sea-life. Pak Panag was the rice-bowl of the kingdoms of Nakhon Srithammarat for over 2,000 years.
Like all estuaries, Pak Panang is prone to flooding when water can’t reach the Gulf fast enough and passes through homes and agricultural land. The major event that got the King’s attention was the 1989 flood.
The King’s idea was to widen and dredge the estuary to increase the natural capacity of the river to carry floodwater. The problem was that during the dry season, the saltwater of the Gulf would creep upstream, ruining the land in the area. Significantly increased salinity levels have been measured all the way up to Cha-uat district, 100KM up the river!
The King’s solution to this was to build massive levees to prevent saltwater incursion. This really screwed up the ecosystem in the area, as Patrick noted.
Today, Pak Panang is a wasteland, with abandoned rice-mills along the riverbanks and the stench of rotting stagnant salty water from the river. The government talks of “rehabilitation” of Pak Panang and the people have been forced to take hand-outs – HAND OUTS! – from western aid agencies. Kings had ruled in Pak Panang since the ancestors of the Chakri were still illiterate farmers in China, and today that once proud people have to rely on handouts…
Patrick also mentioned how the King micromanaged the projects, helping to line the pockets of his “chlear’ers”. The entire project cost over $600 million – that’s US dollars, not Baht. PM Banharn’s construction companies made over $100 million on the project.
When the people of Nakhonsrithammarat demonstrated against the projects, he shut them up by linking the projects to the prestige of his thrown by declaring that he wanted the project finished by his 50-year Jubilee in 1996. Then he said “We don’t want to be confronted with protests. It is tiring and useless.”
The King salted the earth of Nakhon, but the people of Nakhon are proud and fierce and with long memories. The simpletons of Bangkok and Isaan might listen to his propaganda, but Nakhon people will not rest until they see justice.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
You can practice all your doctoral prattle in this forum . . I learned that new word yesterday: BLOVIATE.
The word applies to you all exactly.
Dr. Jory, Dr. Walker and the The Little Ant. Enjoy your conference dears.
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Both very interesting and well detailed accounts (Patrick and Raja). Do either of you get the impression that the present monarch’s activities resemble more a fascination for the potential of environmental engineering and experimentation, with the Thai state as his work shop, than a well thought out or innovative execution of a project/ideas? I certainly do, and in my experience and contra to the received wisdom regarding the popularity of the king, know many a lower ranking govt official and local farmer who often bemoan this very point. Father of innovation I think is stretching it a bit as with out critique and feedback how can someone be innovative…the UN gave him an award for what outside of Thailand is called horticulture, if I remember correctly…are we to see “Emperor’s new clothes” become replaced in the English vernacular by “Kings innovation”, another Siamese contribution to the langauge, like “white elephant” before it?
Sufficiency and the junta
What bullshit are you prattling about Ant?
All I want is Dr. Andrew Walker (he must be a doctor, to be abel to make wild conclusions like that), is to articulate how he arrived at his authoritative conclusion that Thailand’s Sufficiency Economy keeps the poor POOR! So litttle Ant, don’t draw me into some subjects I have no interest at all about.
Sufficiency and the junta
Dr. Jory,
It seems to me you are not exactly pro-democratic and you want to badly criticize HM the king (of Thailand) for his idea on Sufficiency Economy theory (but claim that there is a lese majeste law protecting him, that is only true if you are in Thailand, here in this forum you are free to do that without fear of criticism from anyone, really).
It seems to me you are anti-dynasty and do not approve of a society where monarchy exist. You are not an economist so you don’t know the effect of the economy in any nation. You are an expert on human sociology from the like of your expert survey and theory on Southeast Asia, but still you have no idea about what coexist in Southeast Asia at all. You are an academic but I presumed that you have your own opinion which is not up to anyone to say that you are wrong. I know you are a visitng fellow in Singapore, but being a PhD doesn’t mean you know everything and with good judgement about a man whom you never knew, met or understood. You discriminate and yet hold your self-esteem so high that you don’t realize you came from a lower ground. A intelligent man like you should be able to separate facts from theory. Well, I hate to go on and on because it will take it forever to get to you to understand something so simple. You are entitle to your precious opinionbut ohters have theirs as well. That is if you think your opinion is superior than everyone else (because you have a PhD …).
Exhibition: The King – “Father of Thai Innovation”
Thanks Raja Phikhaat for the interesting post about the destruction of the Bajoh forest in Narathiwat by a royal project, no doubt one of many dismal failures of royal projects that can not be declared failures because of lese majeste. Could I draw your attention to another royal project that has ruined the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of villagers in Nakhon Si Thammarat province, the Pak Panang Basin Development Project. The Pak Panang basin region was once the rice bowl of southern Thailand, and rivalled the rice production of the Rangsit region. This royal project involved building a number of dams and irrigation systems which would divide the Pak Panang basin into a “salt water zone” and a “fresh water zone”. The king took the major role in conceiving and overseeing the project, with the military, the bureaucracy and crony contractors carrying out the implementation. The result has been an environmental catastrophe, destroying the unique “3 water” ecosystem of the region which has lead to the extinction of fish species, greatly increased soil salinity, the dying out of local vegetation including valuable economic species such as the nipa palm, water stagnation, increased flooding, and the resulting increased impoverishment of the region. Villagers had no say whatsoever in the implementation of the project. Disasters such as this one are only possible because once a project has the royal brand it is impossible to criticize. A perfect example of Thai-style democracy.