Yes, John, it’s so hard to disagree with something that I might have written myself 18 months ago, but disagree I must.
The fact that Thaksin’s various parties and manifestations of the past decade and a half have stimulated some political movement is beyond doubt; what is not so clear is what the nature of its politics are.
There is a clear difference between relying on elections because they are the only road to political power and liberal democracy. Nothing any Thaksin administration has done has indicated a desire to “democratize” the Thai state.
You hold your nose long enough, and eventually your oxygen starved brain no longer functions well enough to take in the information the world continues to provide.
Or you become one of the mouth-breathers that dominate the talk about democracy in social media and often on here as well.
Scientific indeed, and very interesting. And explains part of the reason (and there are others) for the movements of Bengalis to Burma, and after long term settlement the Burmese government has to deal with them. Unfortunately, they have not had good governance in Burma for many decades therefore a forgotten (and persecuted) population.
It was a nice attempt Soe and very accurate and well-stated. I am afraid in will go in one ear and out the other, for the very adroit reasons that you state. The Left and the West need a paradigm for Islam, and they haven’t yet learned about all the havoc Hezbollah is creating in Brazil, but when they do, be certain they will defend it. We are saturated with paradigms from the Middle-East, Africa and Europe, so what’s left ? Asia. Well, one can’t picture zealous Western tenured faculty defending corruption and Islamic extremism in Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia (and southern Philippines and Thailand, where terrorism still takes place), so Myanmar is the perfect Leftist test-case of a contrived minority supposedly suffering at the hands of the majority. It worked when it was the “secular” Tatmadaw doing naughty things, but the NGOs got stuck, which is strange, because they are supposed to KNOW that Myanmar is mostly Buddhist and has been for eons. So, someone fished out U Wirathu, he made the cover of a magazine, who’s publisher had never heard of Myanmar before , and the Big Bad Buddhist was created, extended a bit to the Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, who’s war against the Tamils was still unjustified, despite seven assassination attempts (four successful) against the Sinhalese-dominated government by the LTTE. Back to Myanmar. U Nu tried his best to accommodate all Burmese, though he did pass a bill that Burma was a Buddhist nation, far more inert than the Malaysian Constitution which guarantees “special rights” for Malays. Myanmar does not guarantee special rights for ethnic Bamar, but you would not know that from the “Rohingya” enthusiasts. Some are just pissed-off that DASSK didn’t do their bidding. As if anyone should expect her to be the UN global human rights official of all eternity (thank god for her, she isn’t). Neither is she the Dalai Lamai, another point lost on those darlings of the Left that praised her last year, and (just read some of the insulting press pieces about her)
now treat her like trash. If you think I am exaggerating, have a look at Yahoo. On any given day, there are four or five major stories on how she is a “disappointment” or “has she sacrificed human rights” or “is she really a nationalist in cahoots with President Thein Sein”…frankly, who cares ?
That her former supporters have become repugnant detractors, having unrealistic and unfair expectations of her, proves enough (even aside from the bogus “Rohingya” Lord Jim tale) that the Left and sundry acolytes are hypocrites; know nothing about Myanmar, and instead of forming mutual flattery cliques, should instead attend a lecture by Professor David Steinberg (who happens to live two blocks from me, outside Washington, DC). The perversity of the Left knows no limits, as 2015 female Leftist academics will defend Islamic Female Genital Mutilation. ISIS is not to be judged, but Ayaan Hirsi Ali is to be shunned; and that she is pro-Israel is a double whammy. Maybe she is pro-Bamar; well, that will just do it for her. Kafka and Orwell (I repeat again) warned us of this Leftist malignancy, the one that claims: “All cultures are equal, but some cultures are more equal than others (as long as they are Islamic cultures). I am curious. Two months ago, there was a report that got some press (and I know this case with my eyes closed) about a schoolgirl who was savagely attacked in Malaysia (by nearly 40 men) and her life ripped out from under her. She was what she claimed to be: A schoolgirl; a Muslim schoolgirl. No mad rush of Western Press to Malaysia to protest; no lectures from Human Rights Watch (about THIS CASE) to Prime Minister Najib, and barely anything done about in Malaysia itself. Not one “Rohingya” girl has even remotely been treated like this, and yet you would think Matt Dillom had set up camp in Sittwe. Well, in fact, Matt Dillon did set up camp in Sittwe. What a guy ! And the girl in Malaysia ? Oh, she’s just gone madly insane and I wonder whether she is even better off living. No Reuters, Huffington Post, BBC, ABC, AP, Al-Jazeera, CNN and the rest, for her. She just doesn’t fit the Leftist need, so we are so sorry, go off and die (I mean die from insanity; it does happen).
You don’t need to do all this. But to understand Rakhine, you have to understand three very important factors.
(1) Your media: Since the 1990s, a common practice among Western journalists in Myanmar is that they rely all facts based on interviews without verification. And a common practice among Burmese refugees is to tell the most harrowing tale whenever asked by a Westerner. My old friend who is now in US, went to refugee camp in Thailand because he couldn’t find a job, told Westerners that his parents, wife and children were shot dead by military, sought refugee status and now live in Kentucky. A journalist even interviewed him in Thailand and his story was published in a London-based newspaper. Indeed, there were even story-writing services for Burmese refugees and asylum seekers.
Rohingya/Bengali are nothing new, but they are more organized in their stories after being lectured in mosques and madrasas. Even the UN and MSF have been fooled by this and made embarrassing declarations that “Rohingya were killed by Rakhine in Maungdaw”, where 95% are Muslims, only to be known later that entire story is a pure fabrication and the only man dead was a police sergeant killed by Muslims.
Furthermore, your journalists looking for “Rohingya” stories, easily walk through extremely poor villages of Rakhine, the poorest state in Myanmar. Many of Rakhine have no toilets, live in hats, drink muddy water, and are leaving their state in far larger numbers. They brave through gunfire in Thai border, pay brokers and work illegally in Thailand and Malaysia. NGO help? Don’t think about it.
(2) Your brain: Nothing is easier to entice sympathy from Westerners than “oppressor-and-the-oppressed” storyline. At a time the West is seeking to prove the Islamic Word that they are not against Muslims, “Rohingya” offers a perfect opportunity.
And your political correctness and human rights thinking confine you to a small set of ideas. Even though you read papers that the Muslims have five or six kids per woman, you find it difficult to condemn, and see this extremely high fertility as the root cause of Rakhine fears and hostility, as well as migrant outflow. After all you ask, aren’t they just exercising their “rights to reproduce”? This is a typical scenario Thomas Malthus might see at a first glance. Even when citizenship is given to all 1.3 million who cloaked under Rohingya identity, the hostility will be there because the root cause of Rakhine fear of Muslim takeover is still real and palpable.
(3) Others’ brains: There is a human trait called tribalism or group loyalty which triggers when your group is attacked. Because of it, Australians feel outpouring sympathy when Indonesia executed two Auzi men, even though they are drug traffickers who have ruined hundreds of lives. Exactly, Rakhine also feel it when Muslims have taken over northernmost townships of their state, and have three times more kids per woman, putting them on the blink of oblivion. With their history being rewritten and international community and NGOs all concentrate on “helping” Rohingya and shaming Rakhine, Buddhism, with its entire scripture devoted to peace, is the only factor stopping Rakhine from resorting to all-out violence.
But then, why do Rohingya refuse to integrate, learn Burmese language and stop very high birth rates? Indeed, Islam is a religion arose from nomadic steppes of Arabia and instils very strong sense of group loyalty. Apostates are to be executed. See it as a spectrum. Those on the left are pushed to middle, those on the right are pushed to far right by Islam. But when groups are in danger, Buddhism alone cannot push those on the right to middle, but, it does help to mitigate the situation.
Since democracy isn’t an either/or proposition I’d say that the Thaksin governments were slouching – extremely reluctantly – towards a more active and engaged citizenry, and achieved this more-or-less by accident as a by-product of other less worthy aims.
Peua Thai now have some sort of awareness that democracy – of whatever stunted sort – is the only claim to legitimacy they have, so at least have to pay it lip service.
I think, due to the Thaksin governments and the RTA/elite response to them there has been a growing political consciousness in increasing parts of the population who are more able and willing to question the status quo, and this provides a glimmer of hope of a move towards that active and engaged citizenry.
I think most of the liberals who support elections are well aware of Peua Thai and Thaksin’s unsavory ways, but hold their noses and throw their lot in with that camp because they (a) believe democracy is good way of improving society and (b) think that PT/Red Shirts/Thaksin is the most likely to get there, albeit in a very slow, frustrating, contradictory and hypocritical manner.
Intriguing commentary on the article both Emily and I wrote last week. Some very inaccurate assumptions about us, that I feel no need to clarify, and I respect and enjoyed the criticism. Perhaps we are wrong, however, I struggle to see why our view, opinion or assessment should be ignored by the likes of NM. Welcome debate, especially on this issue. There is certainly a lack of debate on issues surrounding academia and the pro-democracy camp.
Perhaps using words such as ‘democracy worship’ and ‘democracy cult’ are unhelpful and can be misinterpreted, but in the context of the article, it is clear what we are attempting to say. Perhaps not as well as we would have liked too.
Both of us oppose the coup, are disgusted by the junta and support the theory of Thailand becoming a democratic state. However I see significant parallels between the Thai elite and the establishment, and those who constantly advocate for democracy. I respect all the Thai academics mentioned in the above commentary, however I do stick to my assessment. Perhaps, just perhaps, democracy is over studied, over mentioned and given too much attention (it is in this context I use the problematic word ‘worship’).
There is a sense of ‘hopefulness’ yet a lack of reality in mainstream comments by the majority of Thai academics. Even today I look on numerous social media streams and see an attachment to democracy – democracy, that is it.
We decided to use religious terminology because, in our view, the arguably most ‘religious’ state on earth, creates a ‘religious’ environment with almost everything. Senior Thai academics are ‘worshipped’, literally at times. The monarchy is worshipped. The Buddhist establishment is worshipped. Status is worshipped. Hierarchy is worshipped. Thus in turn, in my view, democracy is worshipped. I have been to some events where mentioned academics speak, and they could literally say anything, and some individuals would follow. A basic definition of ‘cult’ is – ‘a person or thing that is fashionable and popular among a particular group or section of society’. A basic definition of ‘worship’ is – ‘show reverence and adoration for (a deity)’. Democracy has become a deity. But hey, what would I know.
‘a conservative, a right wing voter. And yes, I support the Rohingya!’
I knew it. There had to be one. The exception that proves the rule.
Ben, did you see any street cricket in Sittwe? This may be more important than you think. The Howard Ruddock duopoly just couldn’t believe Afghans playing cricket in detention weren’t Pakistanis. I’m a bit concerned that Rohingyas may be mistaken for Bangladeshis. Could you clarify the situation? Any chance of a Rohingya ODI team?
Anyway, Howard would never have turned a boat back without first checking for legspinners. I’m not sure about Abbott though. Do you know if Tones has asked IOM to scour the camps for Doosra bowlers? We badly need one if we’re to win the Ashes.
For what it’s worth, next time you’re in Sittwe you could suggest they photoshop some images of themselves bowling Gatting. Alternatively, letters to the Young Liberals Exec and/or Big Tobacco promising to campaign against plain packaging should see visas issued pronto.
Except during the SPDC era up until now there has always been vigorous and healthy exchanges of Myanmar brightest in Medicine, Science, Agriculture and in various fields under the sponsorship of various institutions, locally or Internationally.
Furthermore advisers/Educators were also sent to/invited by, to keep Myanmar up to date.
ROL can be readily bring up to date with such process. Since after Ne Win era “Law and Order” does take precedent to all other statues.
LAO however has always favor the Have rather the Have-not. That however is another matter due to neglect as well as Military rule.
Maybe the authors are correct PING PING! Just look at Charnvit’s FB page. All idealistic poetry. No solutions. We need to be out with the old and in with the new!
Thank you for a strong reminder that problem with residency for Kalar in Yakhine is just One problem need to be solved accordingly.
History has caught up with Myanmar or vice versa in many respects, therefore other contributing events as well as the other participants must chip in for any solution that endure.
Like every other quagmires require combinations of ROL, Economic with careful planning instead of one sided urgency that show only contempt for the rest making the real solutions to the problem not attainable.
Those who know Myanmar well sold suggest viable solution instead of being mired in defending being label with onerous name by those who might be well meaning but using different criteria other than on the ground.
If we even care to observe above surely enough NM will be again a forum for inspiration.
Once you call yourself a human rights defender, you have signed up for a particular set of narrow thinking. You are at risk of confirmation bias, looking only one side, and justifying all biases in the name of human rights. As in the case of massively counterproductive sanctions against the people to punish junta, you would probably cause hundreds of thousands of people to become jobless and justify everything by saying “we did it in good faith”.
This is a disease most Westerners have. If a biologist see a group of ants swimming out an overpopulated colony, he would immediately conclude that overpopulation is the root cause. But humans are not ants and have a long list of biases in judging their own species.
Nothing more. I just want to repeat a comment from a WHO official.
“My first experience in the area of West Burma began in 2003 when I went there for WHO to administer TB tests.
One of the first things that I noticed among the Roihinga–children everywhere. This in itself is a root cause of the conflict because it is quite impossible to provide jobs fast enough for such a population increase and young men get angry when they are poor and idle. Population pressure is in fact the real underlying source of the problem.”
Everything today seems to concentrate on what Myanmar should do. But what about what Rohingya should do? I have never heard of any reassurance from Rohingya that they won’t take over Rakhine state. I have never heard of any story that these people accept birth control and stop having 5 or 6 kids per woman, thereby limiting outflow and easing Rakhine fears. I keep hearing stories taught in madrasas that Rakhine was previously a Muslim kingdom. I keep hearing stories that their MPs claimed Rohingya should take back their “ancestral” land.
Excellent work from Boothee, and great to see his passion for photojournalism continues, even as his work broadens. He and others’ images are an important component of Myanmar’s difficult transition.
Oddly enough, given what I have said above, I do agree that the terms ‘cult’ and ‘worship’ are not particularly accurate and make for a somewhat clumsy reading experience.
I imagine the writers have chosen these terms to attempt to frame and emphasize the degree of unreality that has dominated most discussion of Thai politics since the most recent coup. Maybe one of them will return to the scene of the crime and try to justify the “religious” terminology they have chosen.
I would place the unreality more along the line of ideological purity and the art of Socialist Realism, but that is another topic.
What needs to be said again and again until someone in the media picks up on it is that the previous government was in no way, shape, or form a democratic government in the way that most people understand that term.
To suggest that it was is to expand the definition of democracy so far as to make it meaningless. Or to reduce it to a mere synonym for “electoralism”.
It is interesting, however, to ask, as David suggests, “why so many Thais prefer hierarchy to equality and individual interest to social solidarity”.
Before we ask that question though, we need to try to establish whether its assumption is correct. How many Thais really do prefer hierarchy?
If it is a significant number, we may be wise not to hold our breath until the establishment of a liberal form of democratic governance takes shape in Thailand.
The article does contain some useful if less than original insights, but its headline ideas – ‘democracy worship’ and ‘democracy cult’ – strike me as deeply unhelpful. Those who want to turn back the clock in Thailand will no doubt seize on those bits to argue for the status quo or at most a Thai-style democracy. Others may think that the extra-constitutional nature of the Thai state and the power of the military and royalist networks, deserve more attention than any shortcomings in how the opponents of totalitarian rule understand democracy. Rather than turning a critical eye on those who ‘worship democracy’ we might do better to ask why so many Thais prefer hierarchy to equality and individual interest to social solidarity.
This is an example of the kind of thing the article wants to talk about.
Essentially what R.N. is saying is: “Don’t talk about reality. It might put ammunition in the hands of the foe.”
Talk about being your own worst enemy.
In order to fight censorship and repression, practice self-censorship and shout “fascist royalist” whenever anyone points out an inconvenient reality.
If you dare to try to remind people what “democratic” government in Thailand looked like when it wasn’t teetering on the edge of a coup back during TS1, you are a royalist stooge.
Mention the state violence employed in the WoD and the protests smashed and activists disappeared and you are a royalist stooge.
Remind people of TS attempting to bring the RTA to heel, not by bringing it under civilian governmental control but by adopting it into his family, you are a royalist stooge.
Suggest that the media was threatened and silenced by the elected government of TS and you are a royalist stooge. Only the “elite” practices censorship and repression.
Point out that the “at least elections are a step in the right direction” argument is not borne out by anything in the real world and you are a royalist stooge.
And on and on.
New Mandala should be ashamed to host such drivel, not rely on it as proof of its popularity.
Then again, if you think about Iggy Pop and The Three, maybe being a Stooge isn’t such a bad thing.
PM Najib Razak is a hypocrite and so are the people mentioned below. The only difference is that George Bush jr and Tony Blair took their lieing one step further and went to war on lies.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Review of Myanmar: The Dynamics of an Evolving Polity
Speaking of gender issues, Yun Sun is a woman, Amrita!
Democracy worship in Thailand
Yes, John, it’s so hard to disagree with something that I might have written myself 18 months ago, but disagree I must.
The fact that Thaksin’s various parties and manifestations of the past decade and a half have stimulated some political movement is beyond doubt; what is not so clear is what the nature of its politics are.
There is a clear difference between relying on elections because they are the only road to political power and liberal democracy. Nothing any Thaksin administration has done has indicated a desire to “democratize” the Thai state.
You hold your nose long enough, and eventually your oxygen starved brain no longer functions well enough to take in the information the world continues to provide.
Or you become one of the mouth-breathers that dominate the talk about democracy in social media and often on here as well.
Indonesia and the Rohingya: de-legitimising democracy?
Scientific indeed, and very interesting. And explains part of the reason (and there are others) for the movements of Bengalis to Burma, and after long term settlement the Burmese government has to deal with them. Unfortunately, they have not had good governance in Burma for many decades therefore a forgotten (and persecuted) population.
Islam and the state in Myanmar
It was a nice attempt Soe and very accurate and well-stated. I am afraid in will go in one ear and out the other, for the very adroit reasons that you state. The Left and the West need a paradigm for Islam, and they haven’t yet learned about all the havoc Hezbollah is creating in Brazil, but when they do, be certain they will defend it. We are saturated with paradigms from the Middle-East, Africa and Europe, so what’s left ? Asia. Well, one can’t picture zealous Western tenured faculty defending corruption and Islamic extremism in Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia (and southern Philippines and Thailand, where terrorism still takes place), so Myanmar is the perfect Leftist test-case of a contrived minority supposedly suffering at the hands of the majority. It worked when it was the “secular” Tatmadaw doing naughty things, but the NGOs got stuck, which is strange, because they are supposed to KNOW that Myanmar is mostly Buddhist and has been for eons. So, someone fished out U Wirathu, he made the cover of a magazine, who’s publisher had never heard of Myanmar before , and the Big Bad Buddhist was created, extended a bit to the Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, who’s war against the Tamils was still unjustified, despite seven assassination attempts (four successful) against the Sinhalese-dominated government by the LTTE. Back to Myanmar. U Nu tried his best to accommodate all Burmese, though he did pass a bill that Burma was a Buddhist nation, far more inert than the Malaysian Constitution which guarantees “special rights” for Malays. Myanmar does not guarantee special rights for ethnic Bamar, but you would not know that from the “Rohingya” enthusiasts. Some are just pissed-off that DASSK didn’t do their bidding. As if anyone should expect her to be the UN global human rights official of all eternity (thank god for her, she isn’t). Neither is she the Dalai Lamai, another point lost on those darlings of the Left that praised her last year, and (just read some of the insulting press pieces about her)
now treat her like trash. If you think I am exaggerating, have a look at Yahoo. On any given day, there are four or five major stories on how she is a “disappointment” or “has she sacrificed human rights” or “is she really a nationalist in cahoots with President Thein Sein”…frankly, who cares ?
That her former supporters have become repugnant detractors, having unrealistic and unfair expectations of her, proves enough (even aside from the bogus “Rohingya” Lord Jim tale) that the Left and sundry acolytes are hypocrites; know nothing about Myanmar, and instead of forming mutual flattery cliques, should instead attend a lecture by Professor David Steinberg (who happens to live two blocks from me, outside Washington, DC). The perversity of the Left knows no limits, as 2015 female Leftist academics will defend Islamic Female Genital Mutilation. ISIS is not to be judged, but Ayaan Hirsi Ali is to be shunned; and that she is pro-Israel is a double whammy. Maybe she is pro-Bamar; well, that will just do it for her. Kafka and Orwell (I repeat again) warned us of this Leftist malignancy, the one that claims: “All cultures are equal, but some cultures are more equal than others (as long as they are Islamic cultures). I am curious. Two months ago, there was a report that got some press (and I know this case with my eyes closed) about a schoolgirl who was savagely attacked in Malaysia (by nearly 40 men) and her life ripped out from under her. She was what she claimed to be: A schoolgirl; a Muslim schoolgirl. No mad rush of Western Press to Malaysia to protest; no lectures from Human Rights Watch (about THIS CASE) to Prime Minister Najib, and barely anything done about in Malaysia itself. Not one “Rohingya” girl has even remotely been treated like this, and yet you would think Matt Dillom had set up camp in Sittwe. Well, in fact, Matt Dillon did set up camp in Sittwe. What a guy ! And the girl in Malaysia ? Oh, she’s just gone madly insane and I wonder whether she is even better off living. No Reuters, Huffington Post, BBC, ABC, AP, Al-Jazeera, CNN and the rest, for her. She just doesn’t fit the Leftist need, so we are so sorry, go off and die (I mean die from insanity; it does happen).
A happy end for Abhisit
My dear Ged, you don’t know much about Newin do you? Abhisit probably didn’t have to buy Newin. Someone else paid him. But the fix was in.
Islam and the state in Myanmar
You don’t need to do all this. But to understand Rakhine, you have to understand three very important factors.
(1) Your media: Since the 1990s, a common practice among Western journalists in Myanmar is that they rely all facts based on interviews without verification. And a common practice among Burmese refugees is to tell the most harrowing tale whenever asked by a Westerner. My old friend who is now in US, went to refugee camp in Thailand because he couldn’t find a job, told Westerners that his parents, wife and children were shot dead by military, sought refugee status and now live in Kentucky. A journalist even interviewed him in Thailand and his story was published in a London-based newspaper. Indeed, there were even story-writing services for Burmese refugees and asylum seekers.
Rohingya/Bengali are nothing new, but they are more organized in their stories after being lectured in mosques and madrasas. Even the UN and MSF have been fooled by this and made embarrassing declarations that “Rohingya were killed by Rakhine in Maungdaw”, where 95% are Muslims, only to be known later that entire story is a pure fabrication and the only man dead was a police sergeant killed by Muslims.
Furthermore, your journalists looking for “Rohingya” stories, easily walk through extremely poor villages of Rakhine, the poorest state in Myanmar. Many of Rakhine have no toilets, live in hats, drink muddy water, and are leaving their state in far larger numbers. They brave through gunfire in Thai border, pay brokers and work illegally in Thailand and Malaysia. NGO help? Don’t think about it.
(2) Your brain: Nothing is easier to entice sympathy from Westerners than “oppressor-and-the-oppressed” storyline. At a time the West is seeking to prove the Islamic Word that they are not against Muslims, “Rohingya” offers a perfect opportunity.
And your political correctness and human rights thinking confine you to a small set of ideas. Even though you read papers that the Muslims have five or six kids per woman, you find it difficult to condemn, and see this extremely high fertility as the root cause of Rakhine fears and hostility, as well as migrant outflow. After all you ask, aren’t they just exercising their “rights to reproduce”? This is a typical scenario Thomas Malthus might see at a first glance. Even when citizenship is given to all 1.3 million who cloaked under Rohingya identity, the hostility will be there because the root cause of Rakhine fear of Muslim takeover is still real and palpable.
(3) Others’ brains: There is a human trait called tribalism or group loyalty which triggers when your group is attacked. Because of it, Australians feel outpouring sympathy when Indonesia executed two Auzi men, even though they are drug traffickers who have ruined hundreds of lives. Exactly, Rakhine also feel it when Muslims have taken over northernmost townships of their state, and have three times more kids per woman, putting them on the blink of oblivion. With their history being rewritten and international community and NGOs all concentrate on “helping” Rohingya and shaming Rakhine, Buddhism, with its entire scripture devoted to peace, is the only factor stopping Rakhine from resorting to all-out violence.
But then, why do Rohingya refuse to integrate, learn Burmese language and stop very high birth rates? Indeed, Islam is a religion arose from nomadic steppes of Arabia and instils very strong sense of group loyalty. Apostates are to be executed. See it as a spectrum. Those on the left are pushed to middle, those on the right are pushed to far right by Islam. But when groups are in danger, Buddhism alone cannot push those on the right to middle, but, it does help to mitigate the situation.
Democracy worship in Thailand
Since democracy isn’t an either/or proposition I’d say that the Thaksin governments were slouching – extremely reluctantly – towards a more active and engaged citizenry, and achieved this more-or-less by accident as a by-product of other less worthy aims.
Peua Thai now have some sort of awareness that democracy – of whatever stunted sort – is the only claim to legitimacy they have, so at least have to pay it lip service.
I think, due to the Thaksin governments and the RTA/elite response to them there has been a growing political consciousness in increasing parts of the population who are more able and willing to question the status quo, and this provides a glimmer of hope of a move towards that active and engaged citizenry.
I think most of the liberals who support elections are well aware of Peua Thai and Thaksin’s unsavory ways, but hold their noses and throw their lot in with that camp because they (a) believe democracy is good way of improving society and (b) think that PT/Red Shirts/Thaksin is the most likely to get there, albeit in a very slow, frustrating, contradictory and hypocritical manner.
Democracy worship in Thailand
Intriguing commentary on the article both Emily and I wrote last week. Some very inaccurate assumptions about us, that I feel no need to clarify, and I respect and enjoyed the criticism. Perhaps we are wrong, however, I struggle to see why our view, opinion or assessment should be ignored by the likes of NM. Welcome debate, especially on this issue. There is certainly a lack of debate on issues surrounding academia and the pro-democracy camp.
Perhaps using words such as ‘democracy worship’ and ‘democracy cult’ are unhelpful and can be misinterpreted, but in the context of the article, it is clear what we are attempting to say. Perhaps not as well as we would have liked too.
Both of us oppose the coup, are disgusted by the junta and support the theory of Thailand becoming a democratic state. However I see significant parallels between the Thai elite and the establishment, and those who constantly advocate for democracy. I respect all the Thai academics mentioned in the above commentary, however I do stick to my assessment. Perhaps, just perhaps, democracy is over studied, over mentioned and given too much attention (it is in this context I use the problematic word ‘worship’).
There is a sense of ‘hopefulness’ yet a lack of reality in mainstream comments by the majority of Thai academics. Even today I look on numerous social media streams and see an attachment to democracy – democracy, that is it.
We decided to use religious terminology because, in our view, the arguably most ‘religious’ state on earth, creates a ‘religious’ environment with almost everything. Senior Thai academics are ‘worshipped’, literally at times. The monarchy is worshipped. The Buddhist establishment is worshipped. Status is worshipped. Hierarchy is worshipped. Thus in turn, in my view, democracy is worshipped. I have been to some events where mentioned academics speak, and they could literally say anything, and some individuals would follow. A basic definition of ‘cult’ is – ‘a person or thing that is fashionable and popular among a particular group or section of society’. A basic definition of ‘worship’ is – ‘show reverence and adoration for (a deity)’. Democracy has become a deity. But hey, what would I know.
Democracy worship in Thailand
The problem is that, within Thailand, it seems that debate is only allowed if one approves the coup and its makers’ actions.
PM Najib remarks on Rohingya
‘a conservative, a right wing voter. And yes, I support the Rohingya!’
I knew it. There had to be one. The exception that proves the rule.
Ben, did you see any street cricket in Sittwe? This may be more important than you think. The Howard Ruddock duopoly just couldn’t believe Afghans playing cricket in detention weren’t Pakistanis. I’m a bit concerned that Rohingyas may be mistaken for Bangladeshis. Could you clarify the situation? Any chance of a Rohingya ODI team?
Anyway, Howard would never have turned a boat back without first checking for legspinners. I’m not sure about Abbott though. Do you know if Tones has asked IOM to scour the camps for Doosra bowlers? We badly need one if we’re to win the Ashes.
For what it’s worth, next time you’re in Sittwe you could suggest they photoshop some images of themselves bowling Gatting. Alternatively, letters to the Young Liberals Exec and/or Big Tobacco promising to campaign against plain packaging should see visas issued pronto.
Making sense of the rule of law
Except during the SPDC era up until now there has always been vigorous and healthy exchanges of Myanmar brightest in Medicine, Science, Agriculture and in various fields under the sponsorship of various institutions, locally or Internationally.
Furthermore advisers/Educators were also sent to/invited by, to keep Myanmar up to date.
ROL can be readily bring up to date with such process. Since after Ne Win era “Law and Order” does take precedent to all other statues.
LAO however has always favor the Have rather the Have-not. That however is another matter due to neglect as well as Military rule.
Democracy worship in Thailand
Maybe the authors are correct PING PING! Just look at Charnvit’s FB page. All idealistic poetry. No solutions. We need to be out with the old and in with the new!
Glimpses of Myanmar
Thank you for a strong reminder that problem with residency for Kalar in Yakhine is just One problem need to be solved accordingly.
History has caught up with Myanmar or vice versa in many respects, therefore other contributing events as well as the other participants must chip in for any solution that endure.
Like every other quagmires require combinations of ROL, Economic with careful planning instead of one sided urgency that show only contempt for the rest making the real solutions to the problem not attainable.
Those who know Myanmar well sold suggest viable solution instead of being mired in defending being label with onerous name by those who might be well meaning but using different criteria other than on the ground.
If we even care to observe above surely enough NM will be again a forum for inspiration.
Rohingya crisis: nothing from nothing
Once you call yourself a human rights defender, you have signed up for a particular set of narrow thinking. You are at risk of confirmation bias, looking only one side, and justifying all biases in the name of human rights. As in the case of massively counterproductive sanctions against the people to punish junta, you would probably cause hundreds of thousands of people to become jobless and justify everything by saying “we did it in good faith”.
This is a disease most Westerners have. If a biologist see a group of ants swimming out an overpopulated colony, he would immediately conclude that overpopulation is the root cause. But humans are not ants and have a long list of biases in judging their own species.
Nothing more. I just want to repeat a comment from a WHO official.
“My first experience in the area of West Burma began in 2003 when I went there for WHO to administer TB tests.
One of the first things that I noticed among the Roihinga–children everywhere. This in itself is a root cause of the conflict because it is quite impossible to provide jobs fast enough for such a population increase and young men get angry when they are poor and idle. Population pressure is in fact the real underlying source of the problem.”
Everything today seems to concentrate on what Myanmar should do. But what about what Rohingya should do? I have never heard of any reassurance from Rohingya that they won’t take over Rakhine state. I have never heard of any story that these people accept birth control and stop having 5 or 6 kids per woman, thereby limiting outflow and easing Rakhine fears. I keep hearing stories taught in madrasas that Rakhine was previously a Muslim kingdom. I keep hearing stories that their MPs claimed Rohingya should take back their “ancestral” land.
Minorities and minority rights in Thailand
I’ll do this tomorrow when I am back near my hard drive. If I forget, please contact me at olivier.ev (at) free.fr
Glimpses of Myanmar
Excellent work from Boothee, and great to see his passion for photojournalism continues, even as his work broadens. He and others’ images are an important component of Myanmar’s difficult transition.
Democracy worship in Thailand
Oddly enough, given what I have said above, I do agree that the terms ‘cult’ and ‘worship’ are not particularly accurate and make for a somewhat clumsy reading experience.
I imagine the writers have chosen these terms to attempt to frame and emphasize the degree of unreality that has dominated most discussion of Thai politics since the most recent coup. Maybe one of them will return to the scene of the crime and try to justify the “religious” terminology they have chosen.
I would place the unreality more along the line of ideological purity and the art of Socialist Realism, but that is another topic.
What needs to be said again and again until someone in the media picks up on it is that the previous government was in no way, shape, or form a democratic government in the way that most people understand that term.
To suggest that it was is to expand the definition of democracy so far as to make it meaningless. Or to reduce it to a mere synonym for “electoralism”.
It is interesting, however, to ask, as David suggests, “why so many Thais prefer hierarchy to equality and individual interest to social solidarity”.
Before we ask that question though, we need to try to establish whether its assumption is correct. How many Thais really do prefer hierarchy?
If it is a significant number, we may be wise not to hold our breath until the establishment of a liberal form of democratic governance takes shape in Thailand.
Democracy worship in Thailand
The article does contain some useful if less than original insights, but its headline ideas – ‘democracy worship’ and ‘democracy cult’ – strike me as deeply unhelpful. Those who want to turn back the clock in Thailand will no doubt seize on those bits to argue for the status quo or at most a Thai-style democracy. Others may think that the extra-constitutional nature of the Thai state and the power of the military and royalist networks, deserve more attention than any shortcomings in how the opponents of totalitarian rule understand democracy. Rather than turning a critical eye on those who ‘worship democracy’ we might do better to ask why so many Thais prefer hierarchy to equality and individual interest to social solidarity.
Democracy worship in Thailand
This is an example of the kind of thing the article wants to talk about.
Essentially what R.N. is saying is: “Don’t talk about reality. It might put ammunition in the hands of the foe.”
Talk about being your own worst enemy.
In order to fight censorship and repression, practice self-censorship and shout “fascist royalist” whenever anyone points out an inconvenient reality.
If you dare to try to remind people what “democratic” government in Thailand looked like when it wasn’t teetering on the edge of a coup back during TS1, you are a royalist stooge.
Mention the state violence employed in the WoD and the protests smashed and activists disappeared and you are a royalist stooge.
Remind people of TS attempting to bring the RTA to heel, not by bringing it under civilian governmental control but by adopting it into his family, you are a royalist stooge.
Suggest that the media was threatened and silenced by the elected government of TS and you are a royalist stooge. Only the “elite” practices censorship and repression.
Point out that the “at least elections are a step in the right direction” argument is not borne out by anything in the real world and you are a royalist stooge.
And on and on.
New Mandala should be ashamed to host such drivel, not rely on it as proof of its popularity.
Then again, if you think about Iggy Pop and The Three, maybe being a Stooge isn’t such a bad thing.
PM Najib remarks on Rohingya
PM Najib Razak is a hypocrite and so are the people mentioned below. The only difference is that George Bush jr and Tony Blair took their lieing one step further and went to war on lies.