Playing happy families is easier said than done even in the case of a blood family.
Realities aren’t immune to being overturned as the military itself had done to gain a stranglehold on Burmese society. You have the guns you make the rules. You can blow hot and cold, and only you matter. So better behave or else.
The constitution as it stands is patently inimical to democracy. The real mettle of the Lady will show in the way she overthrows the military yoke, and all means are fair here in this instance.
I had talked to some of today’s top military personnel nearly twenty years ago while at their junior ranks. They were upset of their top echelon and dreamt to change since then. Therefore I’m optimistic of the present transformation of our political arena. No more wolf and a lamb story I suppose.
No matter what the outside perspective may view from their own aspect.
Only the wearer knows where the shoe is pinched. But I could say it is early to predict.
‘’Chin Peng proved clear and persuasive at the 1955 Baling talks in Kedah, but insisted that he could only bring his men out of the jungle to lay down their arms if they were allowed to enter the political process as a legal party. Under British advice the Tunku would not agree to this, or indeed to any significant concession to the communists once they surrendered.’’
The above statement strongly suggested the British’s (imposing?) advice to Tunku is a mockery to Westminster Democratic system which principally entails none-violent ‘’political process’’ which was what Chin Peng had insisted.
He and his men had fought alongside against the Japanese invasion and resisted its occupations of Malaya when the British had surrendered. Despite this and his unwavering patriotic attachment to his mother land, he was not given a chance to take part in the democratic system adopted.
He was prejudiced for his belief in communism for justice and equality for the people.
What if he had believed in democracy for the same values?
I think Chin Peng had been treated unfairly .
He was truly a patriotic son of Malaya.
His legacy belongs here. He should be recognized as a citizen of Malaysia that he was undeservingly denied.
New Mandala has been vey unfair and biased towards Jokowi. He has been severely criticised, almost from day one of his Presidency. Give him a break. It is still early days. He’x been President not much more than a year.
Agree with you totally. The Malaysian authorities do not allow his ashes to be interred in Malaysia simply reveals how terrified they are of this man even when he is dead, and how unstable and lack of confidence the regime is. History is a distillation of Rumor. Respect him or not, no character assassination nor the manipulation and distortion of facts can deny Chin Peng’s place in the history of Malaya.
I agree every concern of Professor Andrew on this matter. In fact, I was worrying about the coming g power transfer since I woke up this morning. I’ve written a M.A Thesis in 2010 and as my topic is National Reconciliation and to bridge the two sides, I read a lot of papers and a few books on similar transitions. Professor Andrew reminds me of O’Donnell and Schmitter’s Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. I think our, Myanmar, situation is similar in many ways with Chilean transition. I hope the leadership of NLD could balance between its desire and reality.
The 3 questions that you finally raised are a very nice homework for your institution !
Indonesia has nothing to do with Herrn Prof. Dr.Michael Buehler !
Thank you for your kindness to publish my comment.
Dr. M. Sugandi-Ratulangi
We don’t have to like or respect Chin Peng for his political views. But we can honor his memory for his courage in fighting Japanese and English occupiers of Malaya. It’s a disgrace that Malaysian authorities won’t allow his ashes to be interred there.
Thanks Andrew. You are right that vote buying can carry a range of (social) meanings when it is presented to the recipients. When I was in the field and interviewed hundreds of candidates, they often mentioned economic terms in dealing with this activity, something like electoral investment, electoral market price etc. I think my supervisor Ed Aspinall also found similar response when interviewing candidates about this. But as discussed in the article, candidates tend to use language of gift giving when they interacted with voters. That’s why the terms include charity, keepsake (tanda mata), or souvenirs (buah tangan) are frequently used when dealing with the electorate. In Indonesian trait of balas budi or norm of reciprocity (something like utang na loob in the Philippines context) is evident.
This is fascinating, and very important, research. It provides very valuable insights into the functioning of “warts and all” democracy. And it is very nicely counter-intuitive. As I have in relation to Thailand, I would encourage some caution about using the term “vote buying.” Using “money or goods or benefits or patronage resources” to gain votes may, in some quite specific situations amount to “buying” but more often, I suspect, it is gift giving. I think its a potentially productive analytical distinction in terms of the social relations and moral economy of money politics. Thanks very much for a great post!
Take East Timor off the genocide list. That was Communist/fellow traveller agitprop for the struggle. The individuals who fabricated it are now busily, and very profitably, trying to mainstream it as history. Their reputations, and incomes, rely on it.
Latest Commo mythmaking was the ABC’s Domm- Gusmao meeting thingo.
In 1990 there were less than 150 armed Falintil left. Gusmao was not a guerilla – he was a political commissar with bodyguards. One of them, who went on to become a commander in the Cruzeiro, told us at the time that Gusmao trembled so violently when shooting began that it took two, sometimes three men to hold him down and stop him running away. In 1990 he wasn’t fighting, younger heads were critical and agitating against him. Pro integration sentiment in Ainaro and Manufahi was strong and he found it progressively harder to hide. The result of the Domm interview was Operation Jambu Merah, using local paramilitary. Gusmao was forced further into Kablaki, and to Holorua where he hid with former Fretilin accomplice to the Same massacre, A.Cortereal. Jambu Merah encroaching, he fled to Dili and hid with Alianca. The Manatuto pro Integ elite knew of his movements and planned to allow him to get so soft in town that he’d never want to go bush again. When the time was right, they’d organise his surrender. They didn’t tell TNI. Meanwhile, Gusmao was having schoolgirls procured for him. When his attention wandered to the household, he was dobbed in to Simbolon. His host family was torn apart. The Manatuto pro Integ elite was shattered. It had been too early. So near, so far.
The Domm interview was not a turning point. It was a result of Jakarta’s decision to open the Province. That was the real turning point from which subsequent events flowed.
Another note on the ABC piece. The former member of Falintil mentioned, Dadulas, was Reinado’s pointman in Atambua. Shortly after the UN arrived, Loromonu and Lorosae Falintil began fighting in Aileu where they were billeted, and a Civil War threatened. 40 senior Loromonu deserted. Some, like Loro Diaz, fled to Weluli in South Belu. He took with him an Uzi, confiscated by TNI. These 40 men went on to play a major role in subsequent events on the border culminating in the 2006 Coup. The ABC was used for propaganda then too. Too easy.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Thailand’s rocky road to democracy
” … or the potentially worse consequences of overlooking the playboy prince in favour of his more well-regarded sister .. .”
Really Paul Sanderson? Educate us Paul Sanderson why ‘worse’ when the prevailing Thai consensus seem to suggest just the opposite.
Jokowi fails his first test
he always fails hoho
The realities of power in Myanmar
Playing happy families is easier said than done even in the case of a blood family.
Realities aren’t immune to being overturned as the military itself had done to gain a stranglehold on Burmese society. You have the guns you make the rules. You can blow hot and cold, and only you matter. So better behave or else.
The constitution as it stands is patently inimical to democracy. The real mettle of the Lady will show in the way she overthrows the military yoke, and all means are fair here in this instance.
May the force be with her.
The realities of power in Myanmar
I had talked to some of today’s top military personnel nearly twenty years ago while at their junior ranks. They were upset of their top echelon and dreamt to change since then. Therefore I’m optimistic of the present transformation of our political arena. No more wolf and a lamb story I suppose.
No matter what the outside perspective may view from their own aspect.
Only the wearer knows where the shoe is pinched. But I could say it is early to predict.
Chin Peng, an obituary
‘’Chin Peng proved clear and persuasive at the 1955 Baling talks in Kedah, but insisted that he could only bring his men out of the jungle to lay down their arms if they were allowed to enter the political process as a legal party. Under British advice the Tunku would not agree to this, or indeed to any significant concession to the communists once they surrendered.’’
The above statement strongly suggested the British’s (imposing?) advice to Tunku is a mockery to Westminster Democratic system which principally entails none-violent ‘’political process’’ which was what Chin Peng had insisted.
He and his men had fought alongside against the Japanese invasion and resisted its occupations of Malaya when the British had surrendered. Despite this and his unwavering patriotic attachment to his mother land, he was not given a chance to take part in the democratic system adopted.
He was prejudiced for his belief in communism for justice and equality for the people.
What if he had believed in democracy for the same values?
I think Chin Peng had been treated unfairly .
He was truly a patriotic son of Malaya.
His legacy belongs here. He should be recognized as a citizen of Malaysia that he was undeservingly denied.
Statement of support for Michael Buehler
New Mandala has been vey unfair and biased towards Jokowi. He has been severely criticised, almost from day one of his Presidency. Give him a break. It is still early days. He’x been President not much more than a year.
Chin Peng, an obituary
Agree with you totally. The Malaysian authorities do not allow his ashes to be interred in Malaysia simply reveals how terrified they are of this man even when he is dead, and how unstable and lack of confidence the regime is. History is a distillation of Rumor. Respect him or not, no character assassination nor the manipulation and distortion of facts can deny Chin Peng’s place in the history of Malaya.
The realities of power in Myanmar
I agree every concern of Professor Andrew on this matter. In fact, I was worrying about the coming g power transfer since I woke up this morning. I’ve written a M.A Thesis in 2010 and as my topic is National Reconciliation and to bridge the two sides, I read a lot of papers and a few books on similar transitions. Professor Andrew reminds me of O’Donnell and Schmitter’s Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. I think our, Myanmar, situation is similar in many ways with Chilean transition. I hope the leadership of NLD could balance between its desire and reality.
Lobbyist questions still unanswered
The 3 questions that you finally raised are a very nice homework for your institution !
Indonesia has nothing to do with Herrn Prof. Dr.Michael Buehler !
Thank you for your kindness to publish my comment.
Dr. M. Sugandi-Ratulangi
NLD needs to lift the standard
[…] NLD needs to lift the standard (asiapacific.anu.edu.au) […]
Solving Malaysia’s economic crisis
[…] : Elsa Favreau Photo : CEphoto, Uwe Aranas Source (New Mandala) : Solving Economic Crisis […]
NLD needs to lift the standard
[…] NLD needs to lift the standard […]
Chin Peng, an obituary
We don’t have to like or respect Chin Peng for his political views. But we can honor his memory for his courage in fighting Japanese and English occupiers of Malaya. It’s a disgrace that Malaysian authorities won’t allow his ashes to be interred there.
Building Myanmar’s aid transparency
[…] : Thomas Courtial Source (Olivia Cable/New Mandala) : Building Myanmar’s aid transparency […]
The medium of people power
[…] : Louise de Nève Source (Ross Tapsell/New Mandala) : The medium of people power Photo : Malaysiakini […]
Statement of support for Michael Buehler
I am happy to add my name to the list of scholars supporting Dr Buehler.
Money politics and the prisoner’s dilemma
Thanks Andrew. You are right that vote buying can carry a range of (social) meanings when it is presented to the recipients. When I was in the field and interviewed hundreds of candidates, they often mentioned economic terms in dealing with this activity, something like electoral investment, electoral market price etc. I think my supervisor Ed Aspinall also found similar response when interviewing candidates about this. But as discussed in the article, candidates tend to use language of gift giving when they interacted with voters. That’s why the terms include charity, keepsake (tanda mata), or souvenirs (buah tangan) are frequently used when dealing with the electorate. In Indonesian trait of balas budi or norm of reciprocity (something like utang na loob in the Philippines context) is evident.
Money politics and the prisoner’s dilemma
This is fascinating, and very important, research. It provides very valuable insights into the functioning of “warts and all” democracy. And it is very nicely counter-intuitive. As I have in relation to Thailand, I would encourage some caution about using the term “vote buying.” Using “money or goods or benefits or patronage resources” to gain votes may, in some quite specific situations amount to “buying” but more often, I suspect, it is gift giving. I think its a potentially productive analytical distinction in terms of the social relations and moral economy of money politics. Thanks very much for a great post!
Statement of support for Michael Buehler
From what I gather, many Malaysian academics took part in the Bersih 4 rally calling for the resignation of Malaysia’s PM.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-29/thousands-rally-to-pile-pressure-on-malaysian-prime-minister/6735200
Private: Genocide and the vote
Take East Timor off the genocide list. That was Communist/fellow traveller agitprop for the struggle. The individuals who fabricated it are now busily, and very profitably, trying to mainstream it as history. Their reputations, and incomes, rely on it.
Latest Commo mythmaking was the ABC’s Domm- Gusmao meeting thingo.
In 1990 there were less than 150 armed Falintil left. Gusmao was not a guerilla – he was a political commissar with bodyguards. One of them, who went on to become a commander in the Cruzeiro, told us at the time that Gusmao trembled so violently when shooting began that it took two, sometimes three men to hold him down and stop him running away. In 1990 he wasn’t fighting, younger heads were critical and agitating against him. Pro integration sentiment in Ainaro and Manufahi was strong and he found it progressively harder to hide. The result of the Domm interview was Operation Jambu Merah, using local paramilitary. Gusmao was forced further into Kablaki, and to Holorua where he hid with former Fretilin accomplice to the Same massacre, A.Cortereal. Jambu Merah encroaching, he fled to Dili and hid with Alianca. The Manatuto pro Integ elite knew of his movements and planned to allow him to get so soft in town that he’d never want to go bush again. When the time was right, they’d organise his surrender. They didn’t tell TNI. Meanwhile, Gusmao was having schoolgirls procured for him. When his attention wandered to the household, he was dobbed in to Simbolon. His host family was torn apart. The Manatuto pro Integ elite was shattered. It had been too early. So near, so far.
The Domm interview was not a turning point. It was a result of Jakarta’s decision to open the Province. That was the real turning point from which subsequent events flowed.
Another note on the ABC piece. The former member of Falintil mentioned, Dadulas, was Reinado’s pointman in Atambua. Shortly after the UN arrived, Loromonu and Lorosae Falintil began fighting in Aileu where they were billeted, and a Civil War threatened. 40 senior Loromonu deserted. Some, like Loro Diaz, fled to Weluli in South Belu. He took with him an Uzi, confiscated by TNI. These 40 men went on to play a major role in subsequent events on the border culminating in the 2006 Coup. The ABC was used for propaganda then too. Too easy.