And, because it’s still relevant, here’s a comment that I made last month in response to another anonymous critic. It provides some further context for those who want to understand where I’m coming from:
“Thanks Wester,
Your comment reads, to me at least, as an example of the criticism that sometimes comes from those who don’t fully understand the variety of important contributions that have been made. By their very nature, many of these will be quiet, verging on secret.
We don’t know why people make the decisions they do. Some of us can write critical analysis under our own names, and will take the consequences of doing so. Some may (or may not) also have various practical outlets for their energies. Others will keep their powder dry. There are also those who will use pseudonyms to better prosecute the battle of ideas. From where I sit, they all deserve respect in what are troubling and sometimes dangerous circumstances.
Of course, there will be productive disagreement among such people of goodwill about our collective knowledge, and about the tactics required to better inform Thailand-related political discussions.
But I don’t see where anybody gains by heaping opprobrium on those who have been doing their best. We all have little notion of what scars some people may carry from the past decade’s political turbulence in Thailand.
To you and to others, I would gently advise more caution in judging the contributions that others have made. We can all learn from each other.
Appreciate the response. I don’t think there’s much disagreement between us on what’s important here.
Just a final few thoughts from me.
Plenty of people have good reasons for shielding their identity — professional, personal, whatever. New Mandala has a long tradition of supporting anonymous commentary. We take some risks to do so. In practice, that means those of us who run the site are constantly considering the ramifications of these issues.
I get why people don’t want to put their names to critical comments about lese majesty, the Thai monarchy, etc. They could be banned from Thailand. They could lose their job. They could go to gaol. Or worse.
For that reason, we have published important, anonymous, analyses on these topics, and others. The NM team ends up taking responsibility. We can carry that burden, because we think it’s important that somebody does.
But this doesn’t mean that anonymous criticisms are always worthy, or always deserving of my endorsement. We allow them — but I think those who make anonymous comments need to appreciate that this is a privilege. We do “encourage a rigorous intellectual debate where those with the most ‘status’ are held up to the most vigorous challenge”. And we have been doing this since 16 June 2006.
Most people, including yourself, tend to do the right thing. As the site continues to grow there will be less space for those who don’t, whether under their real names or not. Frankly, there are enough other places on the Internet for spite and aggression. Those who consistently have their comments binned will eventually get that message.
I like to think of NM as a rolling seminar, its participants and observers come from all over the world, and from all sorts of backgrounds. We can’t expect everyone to engage with the site in the same way. The goal, however, should be to have respect flow in all directions.
My general point is that on this site anonymity isn’t an excuse for bad behaviour.
As Khun Pavin is the only prominent coup critic who has some ‘international outreach’ on his regular columns in major international newspapers I’m a bit disappointed by his lack of commitment.
As he is a Thai (even if some junta members question this lacking other ‘arguments’) there is nothing wrong with using social media the same style like millions of his countrymen but I think Pavin’s often sarcastic postings there (almost exclusively adressing a Thai audience) are somehow inconsistent with his much tamer criticism of Prayuth and the monarchy written for the international audience.
Nevertheless, some of his flamboyant ideas are brilliant like the regular use of his pet dog ‘Moo Yong’ or my alltime favourite ‘Prayuth selling rubber sheets on Mars’
Clearly Bhumibol has been little more than a wax dummy kept alive by artificial means for a while now, but his legacy will have been awful for Thailand. Were he truly a good king, with interests of Thai people in mind, he would have abolished lese majeste long ago and made sure the network monarchy cannot rule unchecked. For now Thai generals still seem to be able to call in the favors owed from back during the Cold War but in the next few years Thailand is at the risk of severe economic downfall and international isolation.
Pavin is a runaway fugitive from Thailand, and like it or not the law hasn’t changed to suit him or any one person…yet! Every country has its own laws, rules and regulations and it has to be respected. Until any of this changes, Pavin has no choice but to hit the road. The problem with Thailand’s political impasse is the handful of academics, intellectual and money hungry individual who takes advantage of the mostly non-political minded Thais. Times change, powers change, people change…..check out the political pass of all Southeast Asian countries…we went to the dogs on day one when the “Master” colonizer’s moved in, since then western ideas and standards have been shove into our faces. Being Westernized was good! Pavin can debate with me any time, in English or Thai….sorry I don’t know Japanese! TIT (this is Thailand)
Japan, where I worked long ago, is not always good at diplomacy – eg. their mishandling of a visit by Thailand’s Crown Prince was disasterous, due to Japanese Foreign Ministry’s officials’ gross incompetence. But on Pavin, they seem to be using Japan’s immense soft power in the best possible way.
Given that all the factions here espouse something that probably puts them in the neo-liberal category (or perhaps just conscious that neo-Liberalism is a dead easy scam) there is probably less than a snowball’s chance in hell of achieving a working constitution or a democracy in this country before Bangkok sinks under the waves and the country sinks into anarchy as a result – especially since most Thai politicians’ idea of democracy is somewhat akin to a fashion trend that they heard about from their conservative business buddies abroad. Such an easy way to return the plebes to serfdom is surely the way they all see it – and we’ll (1%) all get filthy rich by effectively lowering real incomes and making up the difference with dodgy credit scams. What makes me even more sure about this is that the USA, the UK and others stopped making any pretense that they were running proper democracies decades ago, and their pathetic oppositions have more-or-less bought the neo-liberal package as a dirt-simple means to pay off the soaring debts of their exorbitant lifestyles. Essentially, politicians everywhere have given up trying to serve their ordinary public – since it interferes with their lucrative lobbying and early retirement into PLC board plans. But perhaps even scarier right here and now is that I somehow doubt that there is a single contributor to this board who hasn’t more or-less swallowed the neo-liberal free-market mythology – trickle-down day dreams and the full works. Some of these folks even actually manage to convince themselves that they are saving democracy, although I sense most are rather more hard-nosed cynical about it.
It might do NM some good to find out just where most of its pro pundits are really coming from – it would make it so much easier to figure where the real BS is coming from. Some hope of any honest answers though. My guess is that the true wets here wouldn’t be enough to moisten a Kalahari face flannel. So almost all of the heat generated here is probably hot-air.
“.. let’s see …”, or “let’s wait” is exactly what Gen. Prayuth wants. The Thais are ‘goose-stepping’ to the General’s marching (towards a Thai constitution) song.
The Democrat Party and all its members are asleep … the party leader Abhisit snoring the loudest of all. The Peau Thai Party, all the other political parties, appear content the ” … let’s see and let’s wait …”.
WAKE UP EVERY ONE. Wake up all politicians. Wake up all activists. Let’s all rouse our idling-MPs to make a lot of noise to be represented, actively participate in the Thai Constitution rewrite process.
Writing a country constitution is NOT military science. Writing a country constitution is political science folks!
Distinguished Thai’s like Anand Panyarachun keep peddling that the monarchy is above politics – part of the awakening also involves understanding that the ‘good people’ are not necessarily so.
I agree the recent phenomenon of “ta sawang” came from that public intervention by the Queen but it’s not like the monarchy haven’t been critiqued before, is it?
There have been significant anti-royal forces and ideas circulating in Thailand for decades and this notion that it is just a recent thing doesn’t just stand up to the evidence.
It also seems to erase the decades of struggle Thais have engaged in.
Which would then de-historicize ordinary Thais’ struggle for democracy even further and, by proxy, “naturalize” the power of the monarchy even more.
I think it’s fair to say that New Mandala have published several articles by anonymous authors on Thai politics and it’s also fair to point out that one of the most cited bloggers on Thai politics, Bangkok Pundit, who was never that controversial or “dangerous”, spent their entire blogging life completely anonymous and with little comment on that anonymity.
You may have seen Bangkok Pundit as lacking “good manners” but surely we should judge a comment or blog on its content and application of argument and evidence rather than on entirely subjective notions of “etiquette”?
I think Pavin has made some interesting statements over the years but he’s also come up with some less than intellectually rigorous stuff as well. Personally, I find much of his comment to be derivative and less than challenging. I find little in his oeuvre that is “new” or “original”.
As with much of the academic and intellectual debate on Thailand it does seems to end up with who has the most “fans” rather than who has the best arguments and evidence.
I hope New Mandala can seek to create and encourage a rigorous intellectual debate where those with the most “status” are held up to the most vigorous challenge – whether it’s from anonymous commentators or not – and that NM publishers don’t try to denigrate those who do offer a challenge by making highly dubious points about “good manners.”
Ideally all of the above suggestions are true in order to build a better Thailand. However, I just tried to be realistic of what the junta will ever permit. That is drafting a not-to-ugly (still ugly though) document that the whatever council will approve. Then, let’s see if the junta can still find an excuse to stay on for longer.
To my mind this is simply a well written account of a conversation. Pravin is not writing as a journalist, he’s telling us about a meeting he had with an eminent academic. The personal background at the start is important to understand why this took place and the selfie just confirms the meeting. With so many sceptics out there this seems a reasonable thing to do.
I am also interested that the Japanese government seems to be affording protection to Pavin. This suggests that their assessment of his case and concerns for his safety have been accepted. (There are governments who won’t offer asylum to people from certain countries because of the diplomatic implications)…..
This, at a time when Japan is Asylum, in whatever form is based on an assessment of the
The Thai nation building or rebuilding could only move forward if there is not only a functional constitution, but a Thai constitution accepted in substance and in form by the people of divergent interests – political, social, economic or ethnical.
That’s a tall order. But it seems totally insane and inane to exclude the ‘political parties’ in the active constitutional writing process. Huh?
The generals should step aside and let the ‘politicians and political scholars’ take command of the constitutional writing process. That’s the way it should be done!
Or a short-cut: resubmit the 1997 Thai constitution with one additional revision to reduce lese majeste penalties to a maximum of two years jail sentence. That should do it!
I read John Blaxland’s article with interest and as a former UN staff member who not only took part in the popular consultation and later witnessed the upheavals in East Timor, hopes he would not leave out the contribution made by the UNAMET, the UN mission in East Timor. Several books, memoirs and analysis, originating in Australia, dealing with post Independence East Timor has either failed or underplayed the role of the UN, especially its Missions in East Timor. I do admit, I was a mere foot soldier. I was there to register voters, manage the polling centres and later count the ballot…and then hold the Fort until Interfet arrived. I saw the first Interfet planes landing in Dili and also saw the then Indon Governor leaving Dili for the last time. It was troubled times and I saw firsthand the UN administration on the ground at times oddballs with Interfet leadership. But the balancing act was with the Indonesians. And that went well, not because of the presence of the Interfet but due to political horse dealing behind closed doors in Jakarta and New York, involving the US and the UN. So I really hope John Blaxland did manage to capture all this too. And thank you New Mandala for the interesting article.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
A conversation with Chomsky
And, because it’s still relevant, here’s a comment that I made last month in response to another anonymous critic. It provides some further context for those who want to understand where I’m coming from:
“Thanks Wester,
Your comment reads, to me at least, as an example of the criticism that sometimes comes from those who don’t fully understand the variety of important contributions that have been made. By their very nature, many of these will be quiet, verging on secret.
We don’t know why people make the decisions they do. Some of us can write critical analysis under our own names, and will take the consequences of doing so. Some may (or may not) also have various practical outlets for their energies. Others will keep their powder dry. There are also those who will use pseudonyms to better prosecute the battle of ideas. From where I sit, they all deserve respect in what are troubling and sometimes dangerous circumstances.
Of course, there will be productive disagreement among such people of goodwill about our collective knowledge, and about the tactics required to better inform Thailand-related political discussions.
But I don’t see where anybody gains by heaping opprobrium on those who have been doing their best. We all have little notion of what scars some people may carry from the past decade’s political turbulence in Thailand.
To you and to others, I would gently advise more caution in judging the contributions that others have made. We can all learn from each other.
Best wishes to all,
Nich”
Southeast Asian snapshots
How about a red and yellow (not orange) ribbon campaign against the One Belt One Road One Whip One Hegemon One Nan China SEA (Southeast Asia)?
A conversation with Chomsky
Thanks “Not aligned”,
Appreciate the response. I don’t think there’s much disagreement between us on what’s important here.
Just a final few thoughts from me.
Plenty of people have good reasons for shielding their identity — professional, personal, whatever. New Mandala has a long tradition of supporting anonymous commentary. We take some risks to do so. In practice, that means those of us who run the site are constantly considering the ramifications of these issues.
I get why people don’t want to put their names to critical comments about lese majesty, the Thai monarchy, etc. They could be banned from Thailand. They could lose their job. They could go to gaol. Or worse.
For that reason, we have published important, anonymous, analyses on these topics, and others. The NM team ends up taking responsibility. We can carry that burden, because we think it’s important that somebody does.
But this doesn’t mean that anonymous criticisms are always worthy, or always deserving of my endorsement. We allow them — but I think those who make anonymous comments need to appreciate that this is a privilege. We do “encourage a rigorous intellectual debate where those with the most ‘status’ are held up to the most vigorous challenge”. And we have been doing this since 16 June 2006.
Most people, including yourself, tend to do the right thing. As the site continues to grow there will be less space for those who don’t, whether under their real names or not. Frankly, there are enough other places on the Internet for spite and aggression. Those who consistently have their comments binned will eventually get that message.
I like to think of NM as a rolling seminar, its participants and observers come from all over the world, and from all sorts of backgrounds. We can’t expect everyone to engage with the site in the same way. The goal, however, should be to have respect flow in all directions.
My general point is that on this site anonymity isn’t an excuse for bad behaviour.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
A conversation with Chomsky
As Khun Pavin is the only prominent coup critic who has some ‘international outreach’ on his regular columns in major international newspapers I’m a bit disappointed by his lack of commitment.
As he is a Thai (even if some junta members question this lacking other ‘arguments’) there is nothing wrong with using social media the same style like millions of his countrymen but I think Pavin’s often sarcastic postings there (almost exclusively adressing a Thai audience) are somehow inconsistent with his much tamer criticism of Prayuth and the monarchy written for the international audience.
Nevertheless, some of his flamboyant ideas are brilliant like the regular use of his pet dog ‘Moo Yong’ or my alltime favourite ‘Prayuth selling rubber sheets on Mars’
Royal power in Thai politics
Is this your own thoughts or the result of decades of indoctrination? Cuz it sounds eerily like North Koreans praising Kim Il Sung/Jong.
As for what really happened to his brother, in all likelihood it was Bhumibol himself who done it. Read King Never Smiles.
Royal power in Thai politics
Clearly Bhumibol has been little more than a wax dummy kept alive by artificial means for a while now, but his legacy will have been awful for Thailand. Were he truly a good king, with interests of Thai people in mind, he would have abolished lese majeste long ago and made sure the network monarchy cannot rule unchecked. For now Thai generals still seem to be able to call in the favors owed from back during the Cold War but in the next few years Thailand is at the risk of severe economic downfall and international isolation.
A conversation with Chomsky
Pavin is a runaway fugitive from Thailand, and like it or not the law hasn’t changed to suit him or any one person…yet! Every country has its own laws, rules and regulations and it has to be respected. Until any of this changes, Pavin has no choice but to hit the road. The problem with Thailand’s political impasse is the handful of academics, intellectual and money hungry individual who takes advantage of the mostly non-political minded Thais. Times change, powers change, people change…..check out the political pass of all Southeast Asian countries…we went to the dogs on day one when the “Master” colonizer’s moved in, since then western ideas and standards have been shove into our faces. Being Westernized was good! Pavin can debate with me any time, in English or Thai….sorry I don’t know Japanese! TIT (this is Thailand)
A conversation with Chomsky
Japan, where I worked long ago, is not always good at diplomacy – eg. their mishandling of a visit by Thailand’s Crown Prince was disasterous, due to Japanese Foreign Ministry’s officials’ gross incompetence. But on Pavin, they seem to be using Japan’s immense soft power in the best possible way.
Thailand’s constitution conundrum
Given that all the factions here espouse something that probably puts them in the neo-liberal category (or perhaps just conscious that neo-Liberalism is a dead easy scam) there is probably less than a snowball’s chance in hell of achieving a working constitution or a democracy in this country before Bangkok sinks under the waves and the country sinks into anarchy as a result – especially since most Thai politicians’ idea of democracy is somewhat akin to a fashion trend that they heard about from their conservative business buddies abroad. Such an easy way to return the plebes to serfdom is surely the way they all see it – and we’ll (1%) all get filthy rich by effectively lowering real incomes and making up the difference with dodgy credit scams. What makes me even more sure about this is that the USA, the UK and others stopped making any pretense that they were running proper democracies decades ago, and their pathetic oppositions have more-or-less bought the neo-liberal package as a dirt-simple means to pay off the soaring debts of their exorbitant lifestyles. Essentially, politicians everywhere have given up trying to serve their ordinary public – since it interferes with their lucrative lobbying and early retirement into PLC board plans. But perhaps even scarier right here and now is that I somehow doubt that there is a single contributor to this board who hasn’t more or-less swallowed the neo-liberal free-market mythology – trickle-down day dreams and the full works. Some of these folks even actually manage to convince themselves that they are saving democracy, although I sense most are rather more hard-nosed cynical about it.
It might do NM some good to find out just where most of its pro pundits are really coming from – it would make it so much easier to figure where the real BS is coming from. Some hope of any honest answers though. My guess is that the true wets here wouldn’t be enough to moisten a Kalahari face flannel. So almost all of the heat generated here is probably hot-air.
Southeast Asian snapshots
Mandalay folk are said to be contemplating an orange ribbon campaign against the monks for not putting their own house in order.
Thailand’s constitution conundrum
“.. let’s see …”, or “let’s wait” is exactly what Gen. Prayuth wants. The Thais are ‘goose-stepping’ to the General’s marching (towards a Thai constitution) song.
The Democrat Party and all its members are asleep … the party leader Abhisit snoring the loudest of all. The Peau Thai Party, all the other political parties, appear content the ” … let’s see and let’s wait …”.
WAKE UP EVERY ONE. Wake up all politicians. Wake up all activists. Let’s all rouse our idling-MPs to make a lot of noise to be represented, actively participate in the Thai Constitution rewrite process.
Writing a country constitution is NOT military science. Writing a country constitution is political science folks!
A conversation with Chomsky
Distinguished Thai’s like Anand Panyarachun keep peddling that the monarchy is above politics – part of the awakening also involves understanding that the ‘good people’ are not necessarily so.
A conversation with Chomsky
I agree the recent phenomenon of “ta sawang” came from that public intervention by the Queen but it’s not like the monarchy haven’t been critiqued before, is it?
There have been significant anti-royal forces and ideas circulating in Thailand for decades and this notion that it is just a recent thing doesn’t just stand up to the evidence.
It also seems to erase the decades of struggle Thais have engaged in.
Which would then de-historicize ordinary Thais’ struggle for democracy even further and, by proxy, “naturalize” the power of the monarchy even more.
A conversation with Chomsky
Nicholas,
Thanks for your comment.
I think it’s fair to say that New Mandala have published several articles by anonymous authors on Thai politics and it’s also fair to point out that one of the most cited bloggers on Thai politics, Bangkok Pundit, who was never that controversial or “dangerous”, spent their entire blogging life completely anonymous and with little comment on that anonymity.
You may have seen Bangkok Pundit as lacking “good manners” but surely we should judge a comment or blog on its content and application of argument and evidence rather than on entirely subjective notions of “etiquette”?
I think Pavin has made some interesting statements over the years but he’s also come up with some less than intellectually rigorous stuff as well. Personally, I find much of his comment to be derivative and less than challenging. I find little in his oeuvre that is “new” or “original”.
As with much of the academic and intellectual debate on Thailand it does seems to end up with who has the most “fans” rather than who has the best arguments and evidence.
I hope New Mandala can seek to create and encourage a rigorous intellectual debate where those with the most “status” are held up to the most vigorous challenge – whether it’s from anonymous commentators or not – and that NM publishers don’t try to denigrate those who do offer a challenge by making highly dubious points about “good manners.”
Independence and interventions
Guess who was in the news toasting in the airplane after splitting the loots of Timorese people in the early 90’s?
Shameless!
Thailand’s constitution conundrum
Ideally all of the above suggestions are true in order to build a better Thailand. However, I just tried to be realistic of what the junta will ever permit. That is drafting a not-to-ugly (still ugly though) document that the whatever council will approve. Then, let’s see if the junta can still find an excuse to stay on for longer.
Independence and interventions
For which Timor is trying get back what is their own yet is totally impotent in a vultures’ world! Benign intervention!!!!! My foot!
A conversation with Chomsky
To my mind this is simply a well written account of a conversation. Pravin is not writing as a journalist, he’s telling us about a meeting he had with an eminent academic. The personal background at the start is important to understand why this took place and the selfie just confirms the meeting. With so many sceptics out there this seems a reasonable thing to do.
I am also interested that the Japanese government seems to be affording protection to Pavin. This suggests that their assessment of his case and concerns for his safety have been accepted. (There are governments who won’t offer asylum to people from certain countries because of the diplomatic implications)…..
This, at a time when Japan is Asylum, in whatever form is based on an assessment of the
Thailand’s constitution conundrum
The Thai nation building or rebuilding could only move forward if there is not only a functional constitution, but a Thai constitution accepted in substance and in form by the people of divergent interests – political, social, economic or ethnical.
That’s a tall order. But it seems totally insane and inane to exclude the ‘political parties’ in the active constitutional writing process. Huh?
The generals should step aside and let the ‘politicians and political scholars’ take command of the constitutional writing process. That’s the way it should be done!
Or a short-cut: resubmit the 1997 Thai constitution with one additional revision to reduce lese majeste penalties to a maximum of two years jail sentence. That should do it!
Independence and interventions
I read John Blaxland’s article with interest and as a former UN staff member who not only took part in the popular consultation and later witnessed the upheavals in East Timor, hopes he would not leave out the contribution made by the UNAMET, the UN mission in East Timor. Several books, memoirs and analysis, originating in Australia, dealing with post Independence East Timor has either failed or underplayed the role of the UN, especially its Missions in East Timor. I do admit, I was a mere foot soldier. I was there to register voters, manage the polling centres and later count the ballot…and then hold the Fort until Interfet arrived. I saw the first Interfet planes landing in Dili and also saw the then Indon Governor leaving Dili for the last time. It was troubled times and I saw firsthand the UN administration on the ground at times oddballs with Interfet leadership. But the balancing act was with the Indonesians. And that went well, not because of the presence of the Interfet but due to political horse dealing behind closed doors in Jakarta and New York, involving the US and the UN. So I really hope John Blaxland did manage to capture all this too. And thank you New Mandala for the interesting article.