Bayu, jadi menurut penafsiran anda kalimat Prabowo (debat Capres 1): “Kerangka hukum apa yang akan dibangun untuk menjamin nilai Bhinneka Tunggal Ika? Kalau kita bicara itu sebetulnya piranti hukum yang ada di bangsa kita sudah cukup. UUD 1945 sebetulnya sudah sangat jelas, apalagi dalam versi yang asli, tanggal 18 Agustus 1945 dan kami juga saya kira sudah jelas dan tegas….ya kami yang mencalonkan orang minoritas menjadi wakil gubernurnya Sdr.Joko Widodo, Sdr.Ahok….” berarti Prabowo ingin kembali ke UUD 1945 yang asli?
I was curious about your observations that even the yellow fear the reactionary psyche of the military and civil service. Are you saying that they fear this “elusive power base” throwing its support behind a different group, as the yellows would have no recourse? There is a strong overlap between the three “institutions” and recently the first and second groups (military and civil service) have strongly aligned with the third so I wondered if you had another idea in mind. Also your question about “who is it”, there is reactionary tendency in each of us. That part that willingly gives in to the system in exchange for security, a sense of belonging, or a sense of exceptionalism. Its amazing that this conversation about what it is the proper way for the Thai political system to reform and evolve has been going on for so long. It speaks to the persistent strength of social and institutional tradition and the ways they been employed (hijacked) in order to protect privileges.
[…] disclosure: I’m Chinese-Indonesian). He still had lingering allegations of instigating the anti-Chinese riots of 1998. The move to nominate a christian Chinese-Indonesian for Jakarta elections in 2012 (Joko […]
I think the comment was to cast some doubt about balanced views. Apparently you can’t be affiliated with a democracy-building organization and then write about democracy? That’s stretching it, but people making such comments – including myself – are better fit when taking the time to meet people we criticize beforehand.
R.N. England’s comments probably the most worthy of bearing for criticism. But However, it is also a bit overly basic to state that the military and civil service are just being filled with reactionaries rather than perhaps emphasize that reactionary psyche is imbedded with all Thais via their “system” of inculcated Thainess, and that the reactionary mind is merely more astute when it puts on a uniform. This far-reaching powerbase is something even the most yellow of all fear…it is that elusive entity we wonder about, how its influence can be so powerful, but that never really shows its head. Why not, and who, really, is it? How can such a cabal last so long?
As this is already the second time someone refers to my work position, I wonder what the significance is? Does me being born and raised in Germany limit my horizon to Germany? Or what exactly is your point?
If it is nothing more than farang mai kaojai, please spare your breath.
To the authors:
This is a silly argument. What’s the difference? In 2006 the military stoked tensions — as they have for coups since the 1930s — and assumed a relatively soft hand after the coup would send Thaksin and supporters into the sunset. In 2014, they also stoked the tensions, and, understanding that 2006 was a flop, they cracked down harder. The one thing one could say in their favor was they learned the lesson of the 2006 flop.
As for the stock market, one could say it goes up after most coups end the violence. But it also goes up after elections, and has risen a lot after Yingluck’s election. So, in essence, that part of your argument is pure ridiculous and dishonest.
But your final point is even more dishonest. You say: “The next step is now to keep watch if the General will follow through with his promises, and restore true democratic governance that suits the Thais, whatever that may be.”
Well what appeared to suit the majority of Thais, on a Democratic basis, over the past decade were Thaksin and then his sister. For better or worse, that was the people’s choice.
So these two authors, as heartfelt as their article may be, are being absolutely dishonest on what they want, who they represent, and how they justify it. Everyone wants peace in the streets. But in a democracy, it is not the military who is supposed to decide every time. Especially one that contributes a lot to the violence.
My recent post posits a basic choice: does the electorate want a president who will govern with them, or a president who will govern over them?
A president who reforms the bureaucracy by teaching bureaucrats to be of service to the rakyat rather than to themselves and their bosses, and who ensures that legal processes are ‘clean and transparent’ would probably easily win a second term. This is the Jakarta scenario, and also to some extent in Surabaya, Bogor, Bandung and a few other places throughout the archipelago.
Unfortunately, too many folk still remain hidebound by Asal Bapak Senang (ABS) – ‘as long as father is happy, little progress has been made since reformasi to encourage creative thinking. The education system is little changed, with successive education ministers, and others, emphasising ‘character building’, which in Suharto’s time was referred to as ‘Asian values’. Prabowo’s talk of preserving ‘Indonesia culture’ is but more of the same homogenisation which, as your excellent book emphasises, cannot be achieved with such a vast array of different communities among the 245 million population.
Too much has happened in the last 14 years, particularly in the arts, to make me feel discouraged that entrenched elite may hang on for another five years. Moreover, if Prabowo were to attempt to abolish direct elections, my gut feeling is that there would be mass strikes and other forms of civil protest which would mirror the seismic events of May ’98..
[…] All of a sudden we had some cretin circulating a photo of Jokowi allegedly at Boris Yeltsin’s grave (note Christian cross BTW) with the question, “Have you finished studying communism in Russia and China, Jok?” http://www.newmandala.org/2014/07/03/campaign-spirit/ […]
I don’t think Marc Saxer misunderstands the Thai middle class. Actually, they quite closely resemble most of the German middle class 100 years ago: deeply monarchist, nationalist, hard-driven by snobbery, filling the military and civil service with reactionaries, and after the demise of the monarchy, bankrolling fascism. Only when it became clear to them what a catastrophic idea that was, did they eventually embrace democracy.
Jury’s still out for me on this. You make some convincing points, but Prabowo in his response also said “not that I am proposing to cut direct elections.” So he said both 1) it could be good to go back to having the legislature elect the chief executive, ie abolish direct elections, and 2) I am not proposing to abolish direct elections. I’m looking at his statements and his party platform and they still seems too vague and contradictory for me to conclude positively that he would certainly move to do away with direct presidential elections. Not that he might not harbor that secret desire in his heart – I believe Allan Nairn when he says Prabowo told him Indonesia needs a “benign authoritarian regime”, although that was more than a decade ago – but preferring something personally and intending to and having the means to act on it are not quite the same thing, no?
Still, a compelling argument, and this is worth watching – please keep writing on it.
Assuming he did want to cut direct elections, what would be the path there? Would it just be a matter of getting parliament to pass the law?
You are talking with someone, who always claim “Thailand this, Thailand that”. The Thai people etc…. BUT Vichai always forget that the majority of Thais are for PT, not the Democrats or yellow shirts or the Army..
Legitimacy thru the barrel of a gun is not Legit Nor representative of the majority desire. Until Vichai and his brethren get that into their heads, Thailand will never see true peace, never mind Democracy.
[…] As Prabowo Subianto’s messianic nationalism chomps through rival presidential candidate Joko Widodo’s once-unassailable lead in Indonesia’s opinion polls, New Mandala and other fora have flared with concern. Prabowo is a thug, they say (though a lot more politely); he will shut down democracy, he will take Indonesia back to the bad old days of autocracy-in-the-name-of-stability. […]
Expand please K. Suriyon, what a “middle class” is as a term ‘conventionally understood’ say in societies like modern Germany.
But you are right K. Suriyon by your ‘insinuations’ that the Thai middle are more likely very reverential of their King Bhumibhol. But how that came about would be subject of very wearying debate depending on one’s ‘mindless exaltations’ (and I tend to include pro-Thaksin exaltations as definitely in the mindless category).
But I thought my being middle-class has everything to do with my income/social standing and less to my political correctness. But the middle-class Germans perhaps are different, K. Suriyon?
If that is so, why doesn’t Prayuth simply have an ballot with two names on in: his, and Thaksin. Have an election. See who wins.
As I recall, the last election in Thailand was nullified after a group of people “lawfully?” disrupted it because it was known one party had no chance of winning.
Very considered and thoughtful piece by Mr. Saxer. Re: Suriyon’s curious comment above, it would seem clear as day why Saxer choose not to cross the Lese Majeste line and I wonder why Suriyon pretends not to be aware of Thailand’s draconian Lese Majeste and 112 laws and how they severely “criminalize” all forthright and open debate on the subject of Thailand’s political situation.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
Excellent analysis.
Demokrasi Indonesia Dalam Bahaya
Bayu, jadi menurut penafsiran anda kalimat Prabowo (debat Capres 1): “Kerangka hukum apa yang akan dibangun untuk menjamin nilai Bhinneka Tunggal Ika? Kalau kita bicara itu sebetulnya piranti hukum yang ada di bangsa kita sudah cukup. UUD 1945 sebetulnya sudah sangat jelas, apalagi dalam versi yang asli, tanggal 18 Agustus 1945 dan kami juga saya kira sudah jelas dan tegas….ya kami yang mencalonkan orang minoritas menjadi wakil gubernurnya Sdr.Joko Widodo, Sdr.Ahok….” berarti Prabowo ingin kembali ke UUD 1945 yang asli?
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
I was curious about your observations that even the yellow fear the reactionary psyche of the military and civil service. Are you saying that they fear this “elusive power base” throwing its support behind a different group, as the yellows would have no recourse? There is a strong overlap between the three “institutions” and recently the first and second groups (military and civil service) have strongly aligned with the third so I wondered if you had another idea in mind. Also your question about “who is it”, there is reactionary tendency in each of us. That part that willingly gives in to the system in exchange for security, a sense of belonging, or a sense of exceptionalism. Its amazing that this conversation about what it is the proper way for the Thai political system to reform and evolve has been going on for so long. It speaks to the persistent strength of social and institutional tradition and the ways they been employed (hijacked) in order to protect privileges.
Prabowo and his anti-Chinese past?
[…] disclosure: I’m Chinese-Indonesian). He still had lingering allegations of instigating the anti-Chinese riots of 1998. The move to nominate a christian Chinese-Indonesian for Jakarta elections in 2012 (Joko […]
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
I think the comment was to cast some doubt about balanced views. Apparently you can’t be affiliated with a democracy-building organization and then write about democracy? That’s stretching it, but people making such comments – including myself – are better fit when taking the time to meet people we criticize beforehand.
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
R.N. England’s comments probably the most worthy of bearing for criticism. But However, it is also a bit overly basic to state that the military and civil service are just being filled with reactionaries rather than perhaps emphasize that reactionary psyche is imbedded with all Thais via their “system” of inculcated Thainess, and that the reactionary mind is merely more astute when it puts on a uniform. This far-reaching powerbase is something even the most yellow of all fear…it is that elusive entity we wonder about, how its influence can be so powerful, but that never really shows its head. Why not, and who, really, is it? How can such a cabal last so long?
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
As this is already the second time someone refers to my work position, I wonder what the significance is? Does me being born and raised in Germany limit my horizon to Germany? Or what exactly is your point?
If it is nothing more than farang mai kaojai, please spare your breath.
Thailand’s coup: same same but different?
To the authors:
This is a silly argument. What’s the difference? In 2006 the military stoked tensions — as they have for coups since the 1930s — and assumed a relatively soft hand after the coup would send Thaksin and supporters into the sunset. In 2014, they also stoked the tensions, and, understanding that 2006 was a flop, they cracked down harder. The one thing one could say in their favor was they learned the lesson of the 2006 flop.
As for the stock market, one could say it goes up after most coups end the violence. But it also goes up after elections, and has risen a lot after Yingluck’s election. So, in essence, that part of your argument is pure ridiculous and dishonest.
But your final point is even more dishonest. You say: “The next step is now to keep watch if the General will follow through with his promises, and restore true democratic governance that suits the Thais, whatever that may be.”
Well what appeared to suit the majority of Thais, on a Democratic basis, over the past decade were Thaksin and then his sister. For better or worse, that was the people’s choice.
So these two authors, as heartfelt as their article may be, are being absolutely dishonest on what they want, who they represent, and how they justify it. Everyone wants peace in the streets. But in a democracy, it is not the military who is supposed to decide every time. Especially one that contributes a lot to the violence.
Indonesians are not idiots
My recent post posits a basic choice: does the electorate want a president who will govern with them, or a president who will govern over them?
A president who reforms the bureaucracy by teaching bureaucrats to be of service to the rakyat rather than to themselves and their bosses, and who ensures that legal processes are ‘clean and transparent’ would probably easily win a second term. This is the Jakarta scenario, and also to some extent in Surabaya, Bogor, Bandung and a few other places throughout the archipelago.
Unfortunately, too many folk still remain hidebound by Asal Bapak Senang (ABS) – ‘as long as father is happy, little progress has been made since reformasi to encourage creative thinking. The education system is little changed, with successive education ministers, and others, emphasising ‘character building’, which in Suharto’s time was referred to as ‘Asian values’. Prabowo’s talk of preserving ‘Indonesia culture’ is but more of the same homogenisation which, as your excellent book emphasises, cannot be achieved with such a vast array of different communities among the 245 million population.
Too much has happened in the last 14 years, particularly in the arts, to make me feel discouraged that entrenched elite may hang on for another five years. Moreover, if Prabowo were to attempt to abolish direct elections, my gut feeling is that there would be mass strikes and other forms of civil protest which would mirror the seismic events of May ’98..
Prabowo Subianto: pilihlah aku, tetapi sekali saja
[…] р╣Ар╕Щр╕╖р╣Йр╕нр╕лр╕▓р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕ар╕▓р╕Юр╕Ир╕▓р╕Б: http://www.newmandala.org/2014/07/01/prabowo-subianto-pilihlah-aku-tetapi-sekali-saja… […]
Campaign spirit
[…] All of a sudden we had some cretin circulating a photo of Jokowi allegedly at Boris Yeltsin’s grave (note Christian cross BTW) with the question, “Have you finished studying communism in Russia and China, Jok?” http://www.newmandala.org/2014/07/03/campaign-spirit/ […]
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
I don’t think Marc Saxer misunderstands the Thai middle class. Actually, they quite closely resemble most of the German middle class 100 years ago: deeply monarchist, nationalist, hard-driven by snobbery, filling the military and civil service with reactionaries, and after the demise of the monarchy, bankrolling fascism. Only when it became clear to them what a catastrophic idea that was, did they eventually embrace democracy.
Don’t be fooled – Prabowo (still) wants to get rid of direct presidential elections
Jury’s still out for me on this. You make some convincing points, but Prabowo in his response also said “not that I am proposing to cut direct elections.” So he said both 1) it could be good to go back to having the legislature elect the chief executive, ie abolish direct elections, and 2) I am not proposing to abolish direct elections. I’m looking at his statements and his party platform and they still seems too vague and contradictory for me to conclude positively that he would certainly move to do away with direct presidential elections. Not that he might not harbor that secret desire in his heart – I believe Allan Nairn when he says Prabowo told him Indonesia needs a “benign authoritarian regime”, although that was more than a decade ago – but preferring something personally and intending to and having the means to act on it are not quite the same thing, no?
Still, a compelling argument, and this is worth watching – please keep writing on it.
Assuming he did want to cut direct elections, what would be the path there? Would it just be a matter of getting parliament to pass the law?
Thailand’s coup: same same but different?
You are talking with someone, who always claim “Thailand this, Thailand that”. The Thai people etc…. BUT Vichai always forget that the majority of Thais are for PT, not the Democrats or yellow shirts or the Army..
Legitimacy thru the barrel of a gun is not Legit Nor representative of the majority desire. Until Vichai and his brethren get that into their heads, Thailand will never see true peace, never mind Democracy.
Seven questions for Thailand’s military
Here’s a summary for everyone thinking tl;dr:
– Thaksin is a bad man
– Prayuth is a good man
– during cold war the US supported coups, why not now?
Did I miss something?
(and of course America will work with the junta anyway, just not as publicly as before)
Return to autocracy in Indonesia?
[…] As Prabowo Subianto’s messianic nationalism chomps through rival presidential candidate Joko Widodo’s once-unassailable lead in Indonesia’s opinion polls, New Mandala and other fora have flared with concern. Prabowo is a thug, they say (though a lot more politely); he will shut down democracy, he will take Indonesia back to the bad old days of autocracy-in-the-name-of-stability. […]
Indonesians are not idiots
[…] posting from New Mandala, for whom this was originally written. Interesting comments over on the original […]
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
Expand please K. Suriyon, what a “middle class” is as a term ‘conventionally understood’ say in societies like modern Germany.
But you are right K. Suriyon by your ‘insinuations’ that the Thai middle are more likely very reverential of their King Bhumibhol. But how that came about would be subject of very wearying debate depending on one’s ‘mindless exaltations’ (and I tend to include pro-Thaksin exaltations as definitely in the mindless category).
But I thought my being middle-class has everything to do with my income/social standing and less to my political correctness. But the middle-class Germans perhaps are different, K. Suriyon?
Thailand’s coup: same same but different?
If that is so, why doesn’t Prayuth simply have an ballot with two names on in: his, and Thaksin. Have an election. See who wins.
As I recall, the last election in Thailand was nullified after a group of people “lawfully?” disrupted it because it was known one party had no chance of winning.
Siamese dreams in the time of the junta
Very considered and thoughtful piece by Mr. Saxer. Re: Suriyon’s curious comment above, it would seem clear as day why Saxer choose not to cross the Lese Majeste line and I wonder why Suriyon pretends not to be aware of Thailand’s draconian Lese Majeste and 112 laws and how they severely “criminalize” all forthright and open debate on the subject of Thailand’s political situation.