I believe Suthep is less important than he is made out to be. He is simply the arrow head of just one prong of the attack. If McCargo’s “network monarchy” theory holds water – and I believe it does – the “PDRC” is simply part of a concerted plan than has been in the making probably ever since July 2011. The key
role has been reserved for the activist judiciary, supported by the “independent” agencies, all of which were greatly strengthened by the 2007 constitution. While the role of the military is critical, it has never been intended that it should be in the front line of attack. They learnt their lesson from the abject failure of the last coup. Rather its role has been to act as a brooding menace in the background to keep the government and its supporters in check, a bit like a strategically placed queen on a chess board. The rules of the game were established by the 2007 constitution and they are obviously heavily loaded against the present government. Nonetheless the latter – and Thaksin! – has recently played quite a good defensive game, that is to say ever since the aborted amnesty bill. That I suspect was a trap into which Thaksin was lured on the mistaken understanding that the monarchists were prepared to cut a deal with him. The result is that the monarchists’ campaign is taking much longer than was planned; it is also costing much more and there are signs that its support base has started to fray. So the denouement is still uncertain and the government’s position, while it has been seriously weakened, is not yet entirely hopeless.
Innuendo it is not. Thaksin’s corruption shenanigans had been well documented; by no less than one his right-hand man: Snoh Thientong. Surely Sceptic would not be sceptical of the all the dirty-gritty revelations by old man Snoh himself?
Thaksin also publicaly glorified corruption … mentoring his followers that ‘it is A-O.K. to be corrupt’.
And corruption will undo Thaksin’s sister Yingluck as well. Problem with the Shinawatras is that they only believe in ‘the vote’. ‘The vote’ it seems, is their license to engorge themselves and their cronies with the rewards of mega-corruption of the elected.
Do dukuns select candidates to whom they give their blessings? If they do not select on basis other than material benefits, I would doubt if voters would believe in dukuns’ sacredness.
Yeah, maybe the Dukun (Bomoh) can move to Malaysia and sue the Government (UMNO) for
100 million RM, then they can wear fine silk suits and ties, unless Garuda has an accident, then they have to return home, and then we will see how strong the Indonesian Dukun are in aviation investigations. And, if they are not, they can blame Jokowi and collect billions in rupiah.
That is just innuendo, isn’t it? What evidence do you have to back up your claims? We all know that corruption is rife in Thailand, though if the indices of TPI and the World Bank are to be believed it is only at par for the whole S.E.Asian region and is comparable to other countries with similar levels of per capita GDP and similar Gini coeffients. Despite the claims of his enemies, the corruption indices actually improved markedly year on year under Thaksin’s TRT government only to collapse after the army took over. But the fact remains that corruption has been a problem under all governments and all regimes, both democratic and military. and since long before Thaksin. The point is that its core is embedded less in the political class than in the entrenched bureaucracy and also the military. Consider the authoritarian regimes of Phibun, Sarit, the “Three Tyrants” which were all heavily corrupted. Even the government of the now beatified Prem struggled with the problem which appears to have been no better then than it is today.
More simplistic argumentation from RNE: I’ve lived and worked here in Thailand for half my life, and while the restrictions mentioned are obvious, they are far from being absolute – as RNE would perhaps understand if he wasn’t so busy being a ‘jack of all trades’ S.E. Asia commentator.
Oh good. Let’s replace a a “generalization” with anecdotal nonsense. I know a girl from a poor village too. She’s a waitress. I know a guy, too. He’s a laborer. My two anecdotal cases are obvious facts too. About what, I don’t know, but they apparently prove something. Oh yes, and they don’t whine or post inanities at NM, but work hard. They have never been to Pennsylvania.
It appears that my 10th grade writing is not clear enough. Let me rearticulate and expand my thoughts. I hope that New Mandala’s moderator will post my comment this time.
Peter, I do enjoy this online debate with you. Perhaps, I did not make it clear in my question regarding how a woman from a poor village gets to attend the U. of Pennsylvania. Your answer was, in short, “her intellect and hard work.” No one argue that; yes, it takes desire and intelligence to want to do anything. The point of my argument is accessibility and opportunity. Maybe, I should have phrased my question this way: “How did a woman get to leave her poor village?” Again, Peter, in Thailand, and especially in rural poor areas, a poor person or an ordinary citizen just does not simply get up, leave, and magically get accepted to higher level institutions in the United States. Yes, I know a few (though not personally) who got there through their effort, but that is just an insignificantly tiny number of people (I means the one from the village whose ancestors are farmers).
Let me entertain three possibilities how the woman gets where she is:
1. Her family is extremely wealthy- a scenario which is highly unlikely. Rich Thais don’t live in the village. Why should they when they could afford the finer things in life.
2. She was adopted at a very young age by foreigners (a blessing and luck).
3. She married a decent American man (luck and an opportunity).
My guess about the woman’s life path would be the last two, which exemplifies that someone else is willing to give her the opportunity. You brought in King Bhumipol’s health. My take on this issue is that the King has lived a full life. If Peter Cohen wants to be so concerned with the King, so be it.
I have never said that all Thais lack the opportunity and accessibility. Clearly, Thailand has a ruling class whose accessibility and opportunity are abundant. During the last 15 years, Thailand’s poverty rate fell to about 13 percent-credited to the government policy. However, this trend has begun to lose its strength since the gap between the rich and the poor is one of the highest in the world.
Do you read and write Thai? I do, and what I have seen and heard so far does not fare well for Thailand. The majority of Thais now are seeing the current events as injustice. Daily information about the ruling class coupled with info from wikileaks enable Thais to connect the dots. Many are now seeing the conflict as a class struggle.
Lastly, I have never said anything about Akanat’s many degrees. It matters most what Akanat has done for Humanity (not just for his friends and cronies). I have used your tread to start a conversation on injustice which I believe is a root cause of Thailand’s current problems. To end it nicely, I hope that you have a good day. Keep that Dopamine flowing.
The Brotherhood in Egypt has already shown us the “Faux Democratic” principle of “1 person 1 vote’.
So has the Pre War Germany Nazi/Social Democratic Party.
The former leader is presently undemocratically detained and the lather, well documented in History,
Both came to power using the principles of democracy yet applying the quintessential principles of freedom from poverty. Establishing and giving freely to all Education, Medical Care and Economic Advancement.
The race is on for Education that tied to true Economic Advancement i.e. out of poverty. Otherwise it will only take one cycle of voting to realize the night mare of an Asian Islamic State.
The more opportunities there are, the more the people in power will steal. The opportunities are greater for those that crush free speech and refuse to submit to elections.
unfortunately Thailands ‘democracy’ is completely skewed by the total lack of any kind of freedom of speech – even the King has criticised the lese majeste laws in the past and while they exist in their present form political action is conducted in a foggy maze wherein none of the participants really knows why they are performing their tasks or what the goals of their leaders are. Mr macgregor marshalls argument that there is a large and very active royal network acting on Thai politics may or may not be a significant factor but while it can’t be publicly discussed or even acknowledged by the protagonists in anything other than subtle allusions, the political process will continue to be a sophisticated game of russian roulette. The Thai people, meanwhile, deserve better.
Because she worked hard, saved her money, and didn’t whine, like so many commenting here.
Her accessibility was afforded by her intelligence, honesty and work ethic. I agree Thailand in increasingly divisive, and spending inordinate amount of text space on one stepson of Suthep, is neither particularly helpful, and neither is it going to reduce divisiveness in Thailand, but might increase divisiveness on New Mandala and at ANU, which might be the point in the first instance. Debating Akanat Promphan’s degrees, legitimate or not, is academic gesticulation. Why don’t we then debate all the other prominent Thais, Malaysians, Indonesians, and others who may also have forged or made-up degrees ? Will that help Thailand’s poor (or Indonesia’s poor or Cambodia’s poor or Burma’s poor, etc.) by such academic gesticulations, which will have no impact on the very nations and individuals being discussed ? Lying is not restricted to one class of people, or one particular culture or ethnic group. If a poor person lies, is it alright, because they are poor, and as ‘good
proletariats’, they are to be forgiven ?
Spare me, please. Over and out.
So, how does the Thai woman from a poor village get to attend the U. of Pennsylvania? Would this be an issue of accessibility as I was arguing for? From my observation thus far, the events happening in Thailand now are increasingly divisive. You are right that “many poorer Thais in the Northeast, have been afforded such opportunities, where they ostensibly had none before.” Perhaps the experience of not having wealth, opportunity, and education is the root cause of the problems in Thailand today.
It is not highly unlikely in Thailand, and your comments themselves, only add to the boring and endless discussion. Let me tell you about a Thai girl, from a poor village, who went to the University of Pennsylvania, and graduated Magna Cum Laude. Your generalizations about Thailand are inaccurate, and to suggest that all Thais lack access and are opportunity, is not true.
Spare me your rhetoric, as I know plenty of Thais who fully participate in Thai society, and if you believe Thaksin supporters, supposedly many poorer Thais in the Northeast, have been afforded such opportunities, where they ostensibly had none before. So, apparently it is not “highly unlikely”.
No, Dr. Cohen, it’s not about “bored minds.” It is rather about “injustice.” It is about accessibility and opportunity. Far too long, ordinary Thai citizens are prohibited from participating fully in political and especially, economical decisions, while small groups of people have benefited exceedingly. Let me tell you about a boy in my village with exceptional ability in Mathematics. He would end up in the Buddhist monastery to receive education beyond the sixth-grade compulsory requirements because his parents couldn’t afford the school tuition. It may be true that in the Western world: “If you are good at what you do,…you are recognized as such.” In Thailand, Dr. Cohen, it is highly unlikely.
It is an elected kleptocracy …this Yingluck government making lots of noises about espousing democracy but fails and failed at meeting the very basics of what democracy was all about: transparency and honest governing for the people of Thailand; and not for Thaksin and his family and his cronies.
Some of comments above tend to confirm my impression that Akanat’s greatest mistake in their eyes was to have attended Oxford University at all, even if most don’t descend to ludicrous agitprop cliches, viz
“Many others – including the many millions in the UK who view Oxbridge as little more than a bastion of the British establishment, re-entrenching privilege”
The reality is Akanat has impeccable educational credentials, and has no motive or need to embellish them.The bungled CV certainly deserves some teasing mockery but that’s all.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Network monarchy’s twilight
I believe Suthep is less important than he is made out to be. He is simply the arrow head of just one prong of the attack. If McCargo’s “network monarchy” theory holds water – and I believe it does – the “PDRC” is simply part of a concerted plan than has been in the making probably ever since July 2011. The key
role has been reserved for the activist judiciary, supported by the “independent” agencies, all of which were greatly strengthened by the 2007 constitution. While the role of the military is critical, it has never been intended that it should be in the front line of attack. They learnt their lesson from the abject failure of the last coup. Rather its role has been to act as a brooding menace in the background to keep the government and its supporters in check, a bit like a strategically placed queen on a chess board. The rules of the game were established by the 2007 constitution and they are obviously heavily loaded against the present government. Nonetheless the latter – and Thaksin! – has recently played quite a good defensive game, that is to say ever since the aborted amnesty bill. That I suspect was a trap into which Thaksin was lured on the mistaken understanding that the monarchists were prepared to cut a deal with him. The result is that the monarchists’ campaign is taking much longer than was planned; it is also costing much more and there are signs that its support base has started to fray. So the denouement is still uncertain and the government’s position, while it has been seriously weakened, is not yet entirely hopeless.
Network monarchy’s twilight
Meanwhile the uncompromising Suthep continues to split the country in two. He’s the best thing the emerging Lanna-Isarn separatist movement has going for it : http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Bid-to-meet-Suthep-to-find-way-out-30230103.html
Network monarchy’s twilight
Innuendo it is not. Thaksin’s corruption shenanigans had been well documented; by no less than one his right-hand man: Snoh Thientong. Surely Sceptic would not be sceptical of the all the dirty-gritty revelations by old man Snoh himself?
Thaksin also publicaly glorified corruption … mentoring his followers that ‘it is A-O.K. to be corrupt’.
And corruption will undo Thaksin’s sister Yingluck as well. Problem with the Shinawatras is that they only believe in ‘the vote’. ‘The vote’ it seems, is their license to engorge themselves and their cronies with the rewards of mega-corruption of the elected.
Network monarchy’s twilight
Sceptic’s overall point is valuable, but he may be letting the Thai political class off a bit too easily.
Paranormal politics
Do dukuns select candidates to whom they give their blessings? If they do not select on basis other than material benefits, I would doubt if voters would believe in dukuns’ sacredness.
Paranormal politics
Yeah, maybe the Dukun (Bomoh) can move to Malaysia and sue the Government (UMNO) for
100 million RM, then they can wear fine silk suits and ties, unless Garuda has an accident, then they have to return home, and then we will see how strong the Indonesian Dukun are in aviation investigations. And, if they are not, they can blame Jokowi and collect billions in rupiah.
Network monarchy’s twilight
That is just innuendo, isn’t it? What evidence do you have to back up your claims? We all know that corruption is rife in Thailand, though if the indices of TPI and the World Bank are to be believed it is only at par for the whole S.E.Asian region and is comparable to other countries with similar levels of per capita GDP and similar Gini coeffients. Despite the claims of his enemies, the corruption indices actually improved markedly year on year under Thaksin’s TRT government only to collapse after the army took over. But the fact remains that corruption has been a problem under all governments and all regimes, both democratic and military. and since long before Thaksin. The point is that its core is embedded less in the political class than in the entrenched bureaucracy and also the military. Consider the authoritarian regimes of Phibun, Sarit, the “Three Tyrants” which were all heavily corrupted. Even the government of the now beatified Prem struggled with the problem which appears to have been no better then than it is today.
Network monarchy’s twilight
More simplistic argumentation from RNE: I’ve lived and worked here in Thailand for half my life, and while the restrictions mentioned are obvious, they are far from being absolute – as RNE would perhaps understand if he wasn’t so busy being a ‘jack of all trades’ S.E. Asia commentator.
Network monarchy’s twilight
Nothing more than a cheap shot disguised as a clever allusion.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
Oh good. Let’s replace a a “generalization” with anecdotal nonsense. I know a girl from a poor village too. She’s a waitress. I know a guy, too. He’s a laborer. My two anecdotal cases are obvious facts too. About what, I don’t know, but they apparently prove something. Oh yes, and they don’t whine or post inanities at NM, but work hard. They have never been to Pennsylvania.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
It appears that my 10th grade writing is not clear enough. Let me rearticulate and expand my thoughts. I hope that New Mandala’s moderator will post my comment this time.
Peter, I do enjoy this online debate with you. Perhaps, I did not make it clear in my question regarding how a woman from a poor village gets to attend the U. of Pennsylvania. Your answer was, in short, “her intellect and hard work.” No one argue that; yes, it takes desire and intelligence to want to do anything. The point of my argument is accessibility and opportunity. Maybe, I should have phrased my question this way: “How did a woman get to leave her poor village?” Again, Peter, in Thailand, and especially in rural poor areas, a poor person or an ordinary citizen just does not simply get up, leave, and magically get accepted to higher level institutions in the United States. Yes, I know a few (though not personally) who got there through their effort, but that is just an insignificantly tiny number of people (I means the one from the village whose ancestors are farmers).
Let me entertain three possibilities how the woman gets where she is:
1. Her family is extremely wealthy- a scenario which is highly unlikely. Rich Thais don’t live in the village. Why should they when they could afford the finer things in life.
2. She was adopted at a very young age by foreigners (a blessing and luck).
3. She married a decent American man (luck and an opportunity).
My guess about the woman’s life path would be the last two, which exemplifies that someone else is willing to give her the opportunity. You brought in King Bhumipol’s health. My take on this issue is that the King has lived a full life. If Peter Cohen wants to be so concerned with the King, so be it.
I have never said that all Thais lack the opportunity and accessibility. Clearly, Thailand has a ruling class whose accessibility and opportunity are abundant. During the last 15 years, Thailand’s poverty rate fell to about 13 percent-credited to the government policy. However, this trend has begun to lose its strength since the gap between the rich and the poor is one of the highest in the world.
Do you read and write Thai? I do, and what I have seen and heard so far does not fare well for Thailand. The majority of Thais now are seeing the current events as injustice. Daily information about the ruling class coupled with info from wikileaks enable Thais to connect the dots. Many are now seeing the conflict as a class struggle.
Lastly, I have never said anything about Akanat’s many degrees. It matters most what Akanat has done for Humanity (not just for his friends and cronies). I have used your tread to start a conversation on injustice which I believe is a root cause of Thailand’s current problems. To end it nicely, I hope that you have a good day. Keep that Dopamine flowing.
Democracy, a ‘pathway to hell’
The Brotherhood in Egypt has already shown us the “Faux Democratic” principle of “1 person 1 vote’.
So has the Pre War Germany Nazi/Social Democratic Party.
The former leader is presently undemocratically detained and the lather, well documented in History,
Both came to power using the principles of democracy yet applying the quintessential principles of freedom from poverty. Establishing and giving freely to all Education, Medical Care and Economic Advancement.
The race is on for Education that tied to true Economic Advancement i.e. out of poverty. Otherwise it will only take one cycle of voting to realize the night mare of an Asian Islamic State.
Network monarchy’s twilight
The more opportunities there are, the more the people in power will steal. The opportunities are greater for those that crush free speech and refuse to submit to elections.
Network monarchy’s twilight
unfortunately Thailands ‘democracy’ is completely skewed by the total lack of any kind of freedom of speech – even the King has criticised the lese majeste laws in the past and while they exist in their present form political action is conducted in a foggy maze wherein none of the participants really knows why they are performing their tasks or what the goals of their leaders are. Mr macgregor marshalls argument that there is a large and very active royal network acting on Thai politics may or may not be a significant factor but while it can’t be publicly discussed or even acknowledged by the protagonists in anything other than subtle allusions, the political process will continue to be a sophisticated game of russian roulette. The Thai people, meanwhile, deserve better.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
Because she worked hard, saved her money, and didn’t whine, like so many commenting here.
Her accessibility was afforded by her intelligence, honesty and work ethic. I agree Thailand in increasingly divisive, and spending inordinate amount of text space on one stepson of Suthep, is neither particularly helpful, and neither is it going to reduce divisiveness in Thailand, but might increase divisiveness on New Mandala and at ANU, which might be the point in the first instance. Debating Akanat Promphan’s degrees, legitimate or not, is academic gesticulation. Why don’t we then debate all the other prominent Thais, Malaysians, Indonesians, and others who may also have forged or made-up degrees ? Will that help Thailand’s poor (or Indonesia’s poor or Cambodia’s poor or Burma’s poor, etc.) by such academic gesticulations, which will have no impact on the very nations and individuals being discussed ? Lying is not restricted to one class of people, or one particular culture or ethnic group. If a poor person lies, is it alright, because they are poor, and as ‘good
proletariats’, they are to be forgiven ?
Spare me, please. Over and out.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
So, how does the Thai woman from a poor village get to attend the U. of Pennsylvania? Would this be an issue of accessibility as I was arguing for? From my observation thus far, the events happening in Thailand now are increasingly divisive. You are right that “many poorer Thais in the Northeast, have been afforded such opportunities, where they ostensibly had none before.” Perhaps the experience of not having wealth, opportunity, and education is the root cause of the problems in Thailand today.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
It is not highly unlikely in Thailand, and your comments themselves, only add to the boring and endless discussion. Let me tell you about a Thai girl, from a poor village, who went to the University of Pennsylvania, and graduated Magna Cum Laude. Your generalizations about Thailand are inaccurate, and to suggest that all Thais lack access and are opportunity, is not true.
Spare me your rhetoric, as I know plenty of Thais who fully participate in Thai society, and if you believe Thaksin supporters, supposedly many poorer Thais in the Northeast, have been afforded such opportunities, where they ostensibly had none before. So, apparently it is not “highly unlikely”.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
No, Dr. Cohen, it’s not about “bored minds.” It is rather about “injustice.” It is about accessibility and opportunity. Far too long, ordinary Thai citizens are prohibited from participating fully in political and especially, economical decisions, while small groups of people have benefited exceedingly. Let me tell you about a boy in my village with exceptional ability in Mathematics. He would end up in the Buddhist monastery to receive education beyond the sixth-grade compulsory requirements because his parents couldn’t afford the school tuition. It may be true that in the Western world: “If you are good at what you do,…you are recognized as such.” In Thailand, Dr. Cohen, it is highly unlikely.
Network monarchy’s twilight
It is an elected kleptocracy …this Yingluck government making lots of noises about espousing democracy but fails and failed at meeting the very basics of what democracy was all about: transparency and honest governing for the people of Thailand; and not for Thaksin and his family and his cronies.
Akanat “six degrees” Promphan
Some of comments above tend to confirm my impression that Akanat’s greatest mistake in their eyes was to have attended Oxford University at all, even if most don’t descend to ludicrous agitprop cliches, viz
“Many others – including the many millions in the UK who view Oxbridge as little more than a bastion of the British establishment, re-entrenching privilege”
The reality is Akanat has impeccable educational credentials, and has no motive or need to embellish them.The bungled CV certainly deserves some teasing mockery but that’s all.