Dear Matt, don’t you think we know enough of blogging to realize that there are factual errors out there? Do you really think that we take any blogger’s comments as gospel without digging a little deeper? By its very nature blogging is going to supply a heady mixture of fact and fiction. Everyone accepts that, got it?
And I’m not too sure that we would agree on what is a well-sourced fact.
If Google is to be believed, NK Kim starved its people of food, facts and fornography. But I could be wrong, Check with Tarrin who could have first-hand information on such matters.
I can’t help asking myself how closely Thailand’s newest dictator is having the NM site monitored. It is being monitored, surely.
Could any of us be the first Falangs invited to report to the Junta? Can they possibly find us? (I assume we all use fake email addresses of course). I don’t put it past this tin pot dictator to take a swipe sooner or later.
Being in a minority is a state which I entirely respect. But that is hardly the same as having an open mind. Surely the latter involves being able to listen to argument when it is contrary to one’s own view rather than dismiss those whose views are opposed as a “herd taking cheap shots”? For instance, when I say that your open-mindedness does not come across, I don’t believe I am taking a cheap shot at you but merely stating that, in my experience, you rarely engage in argument but are simply dismissive of views you find objectionable. The worst thing about that is that it tends to be boring.
Absolutely agree with this opinion: “Prabowo is designing a new mutant creature, transplanting the wild, romantic heart of Sukarno into the stiff, rotting corpse of Suhartoism.”
Jokowi stated that he will not reward his allied parties with ministries; yeah right, cause he is not the one who will defermine who will be the ministers–Megawati will.
On the contrary there is good evidence that “most of this fortune” has been acquired legitimately. I say this advisedly. When the judges confiscated some 46 billion baht, their calculation was based exclusively on the increase in value of shares in ShinCorp between the day Thaksin took office and the day he sold to Temasek. Actually this increase was broadly in line with the whole SET. Furthermore it had a perfectly rational explanation. ShinCorps core business was mobile phone subscriptions of which they had acquired about 68% of the market. Between 2001 and 2005 mobile phone subscriptions virtually quadrupled from 12 her hundred head of population to 46 phhp. The price Temasek paid would also have taken into account the prospects for subsequent growth with usage now standing at 120 phhp. In other words the whole basis for the judgment was a complete (and probably corrupt!) nonsense. It should also be noted that the only significant legislative move made by Thaksin’s TRT government relative to the industry actually reduced ShinCorp’s market share from 68% to 53%.
That the Shinawatras have deducted money that was intended to help the farmers is a complete red herring. What evidence has anyone produced? Even the NACC has not tried to charge Yingluck with that, but rather with failing to prevent corruption at the operational level. The problem with that is that in Thailand virtually any and every policy that passes through the bureaucracy is subject to graft. Some estimate it as high as 30%. That unfortunately is simply how the system has always worked but it has nothing whatever to do with what has been called “policy corruption” at ministerial level.
Where do you get your “information”? The Bangkok Post? The Nation? Vichai? Ghost of Jit? Or just the usual lazy, ignorant, prejudiced and half-witted Bangkok rumour mill?
Now is 2014. Prayuth (said to be so much better than Anupong) has set a coup d’Etat and will probably not give the power back to civilian soon. At the time of the coup, the prince has moved to the UK with a lot of bags and heavy security (to avoid being killed???). So seems your theory comes true.
Thai tulip. To be fair, we used to live peacefully under the monarchy,
Yes, I noticed a change after the 2006 coup and even more so after the PAD demos of 2008.
Some silly people got it into their heads that father didn’t love Thaksin and didn’t love the ones that voted for him. Of course this is nonsense, father loves all his children equally.
Even now he loves his red shirt children the same as all the rest, right?
Speaking from Bangkok, this debate actually still holds quite a lot of relevance. In fact, issues of academic association with military figures is quite interesting given several academics here being ‘summoned’. While Carey has some good points, it’s a shame that he does not address why he was not more direct from the start about his affiliations, and whether that is playing a role in avoiding a more clear denunciation of Prabowo or whether it is just to avoid getting involved in another country’s electoral process (or for some other reason).
Yes I agree with you. SOME think different as I didn’t say ALL are thinking like that but MOST are …
Opinions?! All the dead people, the official statement for the civil war in case of and the rude demonstrations back in 2007 by the red shirts?
Democracy in Thailand? I don’t agree with that. There was no democracy until now. At least not in one and the most important of the democracy definitions.
democracy: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting – buying votes is not FREE choosing
No doubts that some of the deadly attacks on protesters, in Trang or in Bang Na, were perpetrated by uncontrolled red groups. And it’s true that some red crowd applauded to these killings (as well as yellow shirts applauded to killing of policemen in Bkk). And no doubt that people like Thaksin or Chalerm will not hesitate to kill if this can serve their interest. But for all the other attacks, why the would the Thaksin clan do something that goes exactly opposite to its interests? Its goals being clearly to stay in power as long as possible to continue its business. And the mean being having peaceful elections as soon as possible. Every public trouble was going to be used by the opponents and the military to justify first the cancellation of elections, second, the coup. Then it’s much more logical to think that most the attacks were perpetrated by groups linked to the PDCR itself.
Professor Carey describes the late Professor Arndt as acting as a cheerleader for the Indonesian military. No doubt present-day ANU academics like Professor Aspinall, even if they were nowhere near the ANU then, bear full responsibility for Arndt’s transgression.
Just a little before Arndt became a cheerleader for the Indonesian military, in 1933 the Oxford Union voted by 275 votes to 153 that its members would not fight for ‘King and Country’. The privileged students of Oxford were thus indirectly acting as cheerleaders for Adolf Hitler, who had come to power one month earlier. Professor Carey bears as much responsibility for this shameful legacy as any current ANU academic assuredly bears for Arndt’s actions. But, if Carey doesn’t accept any responsibility for what happened at his university 71 years ago, why should Aspinall be blamed for what happened on his campus thirty years ago?
It’s true that the coup is an invitation to violence, and it’s also true that UDD-allied groups have been inviting/inciting violence as well. I live in Chiang Mai and have been listening to red shirt radio (92.5 FM) for the past few months. The violent rhetoric was increasing daily, encouraging specific acts against specific persons. Also many calls for violent revolution in case of a coup. This is a fact, not an opinion. Personally, I am not partisan to either side. I want to point out however that Thailand has long had a deep culture of political violence, well documented since the 1970s. Both sides in today’s conflict have played important roles in diminishing the rule of law and public order that would protect society from such extremism. And neither side while holding power made a priority of human rights. Whatever evolves from this coup, unless there is a serious effort to rein in this tendency, I fear the cycle will continue.
Some Thais will need to evaluate why democracy and decency failed in their society instead of pointing fingers at foreigners, outsiders, and other Thais who they believe are the sources of the problems in Thailand. Certainly, many Thais and some foreign expats blame Thaksin and Yingluck for the problems. However, The current problem extends far beyond the Thaksin’s era, and it is mind-blowing that most Thais refuse to acknowledge the actual problems. Thai society fails because some Thai people refuse to acknowledge the humanity of others. They are unable to accept differences of others in the ways they choose to express themselves. I do not agree with Rose’s activities but I would never go out of my way to actually harm her or throw feces at her residence as some Thais would have done to her. If she is merely “trying to get attention,” why pay attention to her? For a society to be healthy, it does need both satire and inspiration. Let me tell readers why I believe Thai people destroy themselves. Two years ago, I hosted a Thai exchanged-student. I observed his attitudes and they are what many observant foreigners would have had picked up from many of the well-to-do Thais:pride (false pride),self-absorbed, and seem to not recognizing other people’s contribution to the world. Asked if he knew Vietnam or Laos; his answer was he did know that they are his neighboring countries but was not sure of their locations. I did a search on the internet on Thai education. I realized that the civic and history curriculum has not changed since I left the country in the mid 1980’s. While the student was under my care, I asked him to take World History and American History to widen his world view. Based on what I had observed of my student’s attitudes and of Thai people’s conversation over the internet, I have predicted that if Thai people do not embrace humanity and compassion, things will get very ugly in Thailand. Five months later, that prediction came true. Thaksin nor Yingluck were never the source of the problem.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Sukarno’s two bodies
“When it comes to imitating Sukarno, Jokowi is as much an imposter as Prabowo. It could not be otherwise.”
AGREED!
Thailand’s information war
Dear Matt, don’t you think we know enough of blogging to realize that there are factual errors out there? Do you really think that we take any blogger’s comments as gospel without digging a little deeper? By its very nature blogging is going to supply a heady mixture of fact and fiction. Everyone accepts that, got it?
And I’m not too sure that we would agree on what is a well-sourced fact.
Thorns of the Thai rose
If Google is to be believed, NK Kim starved its people of food, facts and fornography. But I could be wrong, Check with Tarrin who could have first-hand information on such matters.
Thailand’s information war
I can’t help asking myself how closely Thailand’s newest dictator is having the NM site monitored. It is being monitored, surely.
Could any of us be the first Falangs invited to report to the Junta? Can they possibly find us? (I assume we all use fake email addresses of course). I don’t put it past this tin pot dictator to take a swipe sooner or later.
Thailand’s information war
Being in a minority is a state which I entirely respect. But that is hardly the same as having an open mind. Surely the latter involves being able to listen to argument when it is contrary to one’s own view rather than dismiss those whose views are opposed as a “herd taking cheap shots”? For instance, when I say that your open-mindedness does not come across, I don’t believe I am taking a cheap shot at you but merely stating that, in my experience, you rarely engage in argument but are simply dismissive of views you find objectionable. The worst thing about that is that it tends to be boring.
Sukarno’s two bodies
Absolutely agree with this opinion: “Prabowo is designing a new mutant creature, transplanting the wild, romantic heart of Sukarno into the stiff, rotting corpse of Suhartoism.”
Jokowi stated that he will not reward his allied parties with ministries; yeah right, cause he is not the one who will defermine who will be the ministers–Megawati will.
Soekarno-wanna-be is dead. Long live Golput.
Thailand, what next?
On the contrary there is good evidence that “most of this fortune” has been acquired legitimately. I say this advisedly. When the judges confiscated some 46 billion baht, their calculation was based exclusively on the increase in value of shares in ShinCorp between the day Thaksin took office and the day he sold to Temasek. Actually this increase was broadly in line with the whole SET. Furthermore it had a perfectly rational explanation. ShinCorps core business was mobile phone subscriptions of which they had acquired about 68% of the market. Between 2001 and 2005 mobile phone subscriptions virtually quadrupled from 12 her hundred head of population to 46 phhp. The price Temasek paid would also have taken into account the prospects for subsequent growth with usage now standing at 120 phhp. In other words the whole basis for the judgment was a complete (and probably corrupt!) nonsense. It should also be noted that the only significant legislative move made by Thaksin’s TRT government relative to the industry actually reduced ShinCorp’s market share from 68% to 53%.
That the Shinawatras have deducted money that was intended to help the farmers is a complete red herring. What evidence has anyone produced? Even the NACC has not tried to charge Yingluck with that, but rather with failing to prevent corruption at the operational level. The problem with that is that in Thailand virtually any and every policy that passes through the bureaucracy is subject to graft. Some estimate it as high as 30%. That unfortunately is simply how the system has always worked but it has nothing whatever to do with what has been called “policy corruption” at ministerial level.
Where do you get your “information”? The Bangkok Post? The Nation? Vichai? Ghost of Jit? Or just the usual lazy, ignorant, prejudiced and half-witted Bangkok rumour mill?
Wikileaks and Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn
Now is 2014. Prayuth (said to be so much better than Anupong) has set a coup d’Etat and will probably not give the power back to civilian soon. At the time of the coup, the prince has moved to the UK with a lot of bags and heavy security (to avoid being killed???). So seems your theory comes true.
Thorns of the Thai rose
Thai tulip. To be fair, we used to live peacefully under the monarchy,
Yes, I noticed a change after the 2006 coup and even more so after the PAD demos of 2008.
Some silly people got it into their heads that father didn’t love Thaksin and didn’t love the ones that voted for him. Of course this is nonsense, father loves all his children equally.
Even now he loves his red shirt children the same as all the rest, right?
A lesson for researchers
Speaking from Bangkok, this debate actually still holds quite a lot of relevance. In fact, issues of academic association with military figures is quite interesting given several academics here being ‘summoned’. While Carey has some good points, it’s a shame that he does not address why he was not more direct from the start about his affiliations, and whether that is playing a role in avoiding a more clear denunciation of Prabowo or whether it is just to avoid getting involved in another country’s electoral process (or for some other reason).
A lesson for researchers
The 1933 Oxford Union vote was 81, not 71, years ago.
Thailand’s juristocracy
Yes, but in those countries if someone is found guilty of corruption steps back by them own. And not like in Thailand where Mrs. PM didn’t.
Sukarno’s two bodies
Wonderful article, truly enjoyed reading it.
Thailand, what next?
Yes I agree with you. SOME think different as I didn’t say ALL are thinking like that but MOST are …
Opinions?! All the dead people, the official statement for the civil war in case of and the rude demonstrations back in 2007 by the red shirts?
Democracy in Thailand? I don’t agree with that. There was no democracy until now. At least not in one and the most important of the democracy definitions.
democracy: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting – buying votes is not FREE choosing
Thailand, what next?
All good points, but that is not what this coup is about!
Thailand, what next?
No doubts that some of the deadly attacks on protesters, in Trang or in Bang Na, were perpetrated by uncontrolled red groups. And it’s true that some red crowd applauded to these killings (as well as yellow shirts applauded to killing of policemen in Bkk). And no doubt that people like Thaksin or Chalerm will not hesitate to kill if this can serve their interest. But for all the other attacks, why the would the Thaksin clan do something that goes exactly opposite to its interests? Its goals being clearly to stay in power as long as possible to continue its business. And the mean being having peaceful elections as soon as possible. Every public trouble was going to be used by the opponents and the military to justify first the cancellation of elections, second, the coup. Then it’s much more logical to think that most the attacks were perpetrated by groups linked to the PDCR itself.
A lesson for researchers
Professor Carey describes the late Professor Arndt as acting as a cheerleader for the Indonesian military. No doubt present-day ANU academics like Professor Aspinall, even if they were nowhere near the ANU then, bear full responsibility for Arndt’s transgression.
Just a little before Arndt became a cheerleader for the Indonesian military, in 1933 the Oxford Union voted by 275 votes to 153 that its members would not fight for ‘King and Country’. The privileged students of Oxford were thus indirectly acting as cheerleaders for Adolf Hitler, who had come to power one month earlier. Professor Carey bears as much responsibility for this shameful legacy as any current ANU academic assuredly bears for Arndt’s actions. But, if Carey doesn’t accept any responsibility for what happened at his university 71 years ago, why should Aspinall be blamed for what happened on his campus thirty years ago?
Thailand’s invitation to violence
It’s true that the coup is an invitation to violence, and it’s also true that UDD-allied groups have been inviting/inciting violence as well. I live in Chiang Mai and have been listening to red shirt radio (92.5 FM) for the past few months. The violent rhetoric was increasing daily, encouraging specific acts against specific persons. Also many calls for violent revolution in case of a coup. This is a fact, not an opinion. Personally, I am not partisan to either side. I want to point out however that Thailand has long had a deep culture of political violence, well documented since the 1970s. Both sides in today’s conflict have played important roles in diminishing the rule of law and public order that would protect society from such extremism. And neither side while holding power made a priority of human rights. Whatever evolves from this coup, unless there is a serious effort to rein in this tendency, I fear the cycle will continue.
Thorns of the Thai rose
How does the Kim family in N. Korea success in all these years?
Thorns of the Thai rose
Some Thais will need to evaluate why democracy and decency failed in their society instead of pointing fingers at foreigners, outsiders, and other Thais who they believe are the sources of the problems in Thailand. Certainly, many Thais and some foreign expats blame Thaksin and Yingluck for the problems. However, The current problem extends far beyond the Thaksin’s era, and it is mind-blowing that most Thais refuse to acknowledge the actual problems. Thai society fails because some Thai people refuse to acknowledge the humanity of others. They are unable to accept differences of others in the ways they choose to express themselves. I do not agree with Rose’s activities but I would never go out of my way to actually harm her or throw feces at her residence as some Thais would have done to her. If she is merely “trying to get attention,” why pay attention to her? For a society to be healthy, it does need both satire and inspiration. Let me tell readers why I believe Thai people destroy themselves. Two years ago, I hosted a Thai exchanged-student. I observed his attitudes and they are what many observant foreigners would have had picked up from many of the well-to-do Thais:pride (false pride),self-absorbed, and seem to not recognizing other people’s contribution to the world. Asked if he knew Vietnam or Laos; his answer was he did know that they are his neighboring countries but was not sure of their locations. I did a search on the internet on Thai education. I realized that the civic and history curriculum has not changed since I left the country in the mid 1980’s. While the student was under my care, I asked him to take World History and American History to widen his world view. Based on what I had observed of my student’s attitudes and of Thai people’s conversation over the internet, I have predicted that if Thai people do not embrace humanity and compassion, things will get very ugly in Thailand. Five months later, that prediction came true. Thaksin nor Yingluck were never the source of the problem.