Interesting article looking into Thai politics through the lens of Lakhaon. We see some similarities with Cambodian political tale in that some Cambodian people believe that at times when the country is in serious danger, there is a ‘nak mean bon’, a person possessing great merit and goodness, coming to rescue the nation. And after that the country will be prosperous and the people will live happily ever after.
Malaysian history is that of Indian and China. These Sultans were pirates and today they demand allegiance from all Malaysians. Whatever they can label themselves, the fact remains that the whole system in Malaysia was a creation of the British in an effort to pacify the Malay pirates and their followers. Be that it may, years passed the royalty in the face of being stripped of everything for being honest by the Mahathir government took the avenue to appease the PM of Malaysia then.
We have now a corrupted political party called UMNO, that is made up of Muslims ( Indian and others) who run the country-working side by side with the so called Sultans to create what is an institution that Malaysian should kow tow to. I was at a meeting in London recently where many modern and educated Malays met and demanded that the royalty be stripped of their titles, paid off and sent to exile in their respective villages. I was shocked and mesmerized as a Bumiputra Eurasian of Portuguese descent.
But I think that is the way to go-As the government collapses (Malaysian don’t want UMNO anymore), we, Bumiputras find ourselves wanting new leadership and changes in Malaysia –enough of this daulaut nonsense-they are no ALLAH, being mere mortal. We don’t want to be 2nd class Bumiputras-we all want to be Sultans in Malaysia. I can see this happening soon in Malaysia –nothing can defraud Malaysians nowadays-we are all smart.
The protests and deals that we learn from have shown that nobody in Thailand seems to take the state institutions(not the government!) serious. Obviously there is in Bangkok and in the south still a stronger interest in “dark influences” on the local and national level, then in more transparent democratic procedures. Let us only hope that the move into the past will not go beyond the 80’s.
Until the factionalized elite (both rural and urban, singular)ceases to interpretthe incentives and interests of the poor and financially-tenuous(both rural and urban)as either a threat to the ancient(moribund)status quo or as lucrative leverage to create a nouveau status quo (slightly more proactive, but hopelessly compromised right from the start), the hegemonic Thai system will continue to reel drunkenly and disastrously from one complete foul-up to the next.Added to which, I’m not at all sure that a grand theorist is really quite practical enough to fully understand a system in which the only apparent way of ever ejecting a criminally-irresponsible government is to engage in equally irresponsible criminal acts. And the great populist of Thai politics was never exactly going to be quite subtle or intelligent enough to execute a complete and clean break from the bad old good old days.
Many of observers see a profound illogic in the actions of Suthep and PDRC — save democracy by killing democracy, as one of the New Mandela posters aptly put it. This piece points out another piece of that illogic — the good man needed to rescue democracy is unnamed and unknowable, but he will arise.
Irene Stengs’ book on the Chulalongkorn Cult of the late 1990s, which is noted at another post (http://www.newmandala.org/2014/01/07/review-of-worshipping-great-moderniser-tlc-nmrev-lxvi/) on New Mandala, describes a logical framework in which this type of thinking is not illogical. (My apologies to others who may have made similar observations to whom I can’t give credit.)
This is how a pretty good sized group of profoundly Thai men and women of education and merit think, and it is a fully sanctioned way of thought. It is perhaps what the shorthand for ‘faith in the monarchy’ is actually all about, the efficacy of this sort of thought, the right to think this way, the Thainess of thinking this way, the exceptionality of the insights so given. Or so I think it is possible to read Stengs and to understand what is happening with PDRC.
Khun Merisa, thank you. I’m not sure whether politics is like a lakhorn or the lakhorn are like politics. But one doesn’t have to be prior, and the parallels are certainly identifiable, and until you took the time to point them out, the rest of us didn’t see it.
Yep, you’re wrong. There’s nothing in Mattes’ piece above that claims that moral considerations are irrelevant; rather, the emphasis is on a class-based analysis because taking the side of the oppressed is assumed to be a key element of political morality. That you clearly disagree with this assumption doesn’t mean that you are offering a “morality-based” riposte to an amoral position, but rather that your own ethical worldview does not see class-based oppression as a relevant moral issue.
There’s nothing special about your claims regarding the morality of your cause — every social movement in history has claimed to have morality on its side. This is especially true of some of the most destructive and oppressive movements in history. In the end, being clear-eyed about facts and principles is worth much more than moral posturing.
Indeed, mere moral posturing (e.g. “it is because we need to be moral; and sadly it seems archaic these days” — as if people were really so much more moral in the past!) is dangerous. A group of people who are misty-eyed about their own moral goodness and full of red-faced rage about their demonised opponents is capable of anything; in particular, it is capable of supporting just the kind of unprincipled and undemocratic politics that Suthep and his cronies have engaged in since the beginning of this crisis. And of course, such people are capable of developing the laughably one-sided and distorted understanding of recent history that you’ve demonstrated in your post.
I agree entirely. I have never been particularly attracted to Thaksin as a politician though I must admit to having a soft spot for Yingluck – it was just such a delight to see the faces of Abhisit, Chuan, Korn and others after she had so roundly defeated them! What has actually motivated me has been the reaction of the “Democrats” and their elite supporters ever since Thaksin’s comprehensive election win in 2005. They tried every single underhand, anti-democratic ruse, first to unseat him and then to try to obliterate him completely. It has been just such wonderful fun to see them put on the back foot time and time again. He has made fools of them all and it has been thoroughly deserved.
Chris Beal: Thank-you very much for your sensible comment. I do admit that I do not at present have the full picture since I am six thousand kilometers away, and can follow only bits and pieces from afar. Thanks to people like you, I undoubtedly will be kept well informed. By the way, have you heard anything new concerning so-called “reform”? For a maligned and ignorant “red-buffalo” government they have done rather well under the circumstances. They probably have some very smart educated people among their ranks, though not Eton/Oxford educated! They could also take heart from the fact that foreign opinion is mostly on their side.
George – I agree with much of your posts, and explanations – but don’t think they are the full picture (as much as us farang can figure out a limited “full picture”). Your ” The government cannot act against the protesters out of fear for an army intervention. And the police cannot act to uphold the law because they are hated by the same elite” is especially questionable, given that the Yingluck Government is now ACTUALLY arresting protest leaders, banning them from leaving the country, exposing their funding, and dismantling protest sites plus opening up Government offices – eg. Chaeng Wattana – for work again. Suthep, etc. may – indeed, probably – won’t suffer more than token punishment, given their friends in high places. But not all such friends support them. And they face at least one very, very formidable politician against them. Namely Chalerm Yoobamrung. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Sonthiyarn-arrested;-first-rally-leader-to-be-deta-30226553.html http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Chalerm-vows-non-stop-campaign-to-clear-sites-30226897.html
Suthep has once again chosen to block the Prime Minister’s access to Government House. This is insurrection, pure and simple. Whether he likes it or not, Yingluck holds her office by dint of the election of all the Thai people , Suthep and his cohorts included. That election was endorsed by her appointment by H.M. the King. If the judiciary and the military have any proper standing, this move must be legally rejected and that judgment enforced by whatever means is necessary, including the military. Otherwise we have proof positive that neither institution is standing on the side of the Thai state and supporting the country.
Neptunian: You have in a few words once again hit the nail spot on the head.The Rule of Law does not apply to the entrenched powerful and rich, only to the poor and disadvantaged.There are in Thailand different sets of rules for these two sections of the population, and the elite seem to have no social conscience whatsoever nor a desire for social justice.
Many accepted 2006 coup and verdict in convicting TK base on ethic and morality ground instead of law, so why would not they believe in Suthep’s bullshit love story.
Songkran: I greatly sympathize with your point of view. The explanation is quite simple. Suthep and the Democratic Party seem to be above the law since they have the blessing of the highest authority in the Kingdom. The government cannot act against the protesters out of fear for an army intervention. And the police cannot act to uphold the law because they are hated by the same elite who are calling the tune. And in a showdown the police do not have tanks like the army. Therefore they are powerless to act. Hope this serves as a satisfactory explanation.
He makes such an argument with no hint of irony that Singapore’s response shows that it is ultra sensitive and they feel forever entitled to their “tiny little red dot” self-righteous nationalism too. Why East and Southeast Asian diplomacy is still full of countries who are persistently insecure and who cannot think beyond their respective sensitive self-righteous nationalism is perhaps something to be explored?
Also, if 99.9% of Indonesians don’t even know the two fellows, combined with their alleged insensitivity, then it stands to reason that the most probable reason for Indonesia’s naming of the ships was an administrative matter-of-course which was overlooked, rather than any purposeful provocation at all?
There certainly are parallels, both being middle class movements with dictatorial implications, but these go only so far. Also, very interestingly, Suthep borrows from Communist imagery, as in establishing a People’s Council (=Soviet), but this certainly doesn’t make him a communist either.
Clearly, the protesters’ arguments are irrational, and their demands, if fulfilled, would lead to a disaster for Thailand. But that doesn’t mean that the protesters themselves are not rational people. Rather, I believe there are real issues they could argue on rational terms… if only they wanted to speak about them in the first place. What I’m talking about is not only the succession dispute, but also regionalism. That’s probably legal to speak about, but very, very unpatriotic. So we get what we get, violent protests all about fairy tales, insults, and a People’s Soviet.
An Indonesian friend (who works as a Catholic priest in Canberra) explained to me that the official explanation (as he interprets it) is that the two men died for the country, and therefore needs to be honoured.
But I wonder how many Indonesians today, actually think that Konfrantasi was a war that they should be proud off.
I’ll be especially interested in the views of Indonesian New Mandala readers.
By now, the whole outside world (outside of Thailand) has worked out that there are two sets of “law” in Thailand. One for the Democrats and one for everyone else.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Suthep’s romantic tale
Interesting article looking into Thai politics through the lens of Lakhaon. We see some similarities with Cambodian political tale in that some Cambodian people believe that at times when the country is in serious danger, there is a ‘nak mean bon’, a person possessing great merit and goodness, coming to rescue the nation. And after that the country will be prosperous and the people will live happily ever after.
Reinventing “derhaka” in modern Malaysia
Malaysian history is that of Indian and China. These Sultans were pirates and today they demand allegiance from all Malaysians. Whatever they can label themselves, the fact remains that the whole system in Malaysia was a creation of the British in an effort to pacify the Malay pirates and their followers. Be that it may, years passed the royalty in the face of being stripped of everything for being honest by the Mahathir government took the avenue to appease the PM of Malaysia then.
We have now a corrupted political party called UMNO, that is made up of Muslims ( Indian and others) who run the country-working side by side with the so called Sultans to create what is an institution that Malaysian should kow tow to. I was at a meeting in London recently where many modern and educated Malays met and demanded that the royalty be stripped of their titles, paid off and sent to exile in their respective villages. I was shocked and mesmerized as a Bumiputra Eurasian of Portuguese descent.
But I think that is the way to go-As the government collapses (Malaysian don’t want UMNO anymore), we, Bumiputras find ourselves wanting new leadership and changes in Malaysia –enough of this daulaut nonsense-they are no ALLAH, being mere mortal. We don’t want to be 2nd class Bumiputras-we all want to be Sultans in Malaysia. I can see this happening soon in Malaysia –nothing can defraud Malaysians nowadays-we are all smart.
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
The protests and deals that we learn from have shown that nobody in Thailand seems to take the state institutions(not the government!) serious. Obviously there is in Bangkok and in the south still a stronger interest in “dark influences” on the local and national level, then in more transparent democratic procedures. Let us only hope that the move into the past will not go beyond the 80’s.
A Gramscian take on Thai politics
Until the factionalized elite (both rural and urban, singular)ceases to interpretthe incentives and interests of the poor and financially-tenuous(both rural and urban)as either a threat to the ancient(moribund)status quo or as lucrative leverage to create a nouveau status quo (slightly more proactive, but hopelessly compromised right from the start), the hegemonic Thai system will continue to reel drunkenly and disastrously from one complete foul-up to the next.Added to which, I’m not at all sure that a grand theorist is really quite practical enough to fully understand a system in which the only apparent way of ever ejecting a criminally-irresponsible government is to engage in equally irresponsible criminal acts. And the great populist of Thai politics was never exactly going to be quite subtle or intelligent enough to execute a complete and clean break from the bad old good old days.
Suthep’s romantic tale
Many of observers see a profound illogic in the actions of Suthep and PDRC — save democracy by killing democracy, as one of the New Mandela posters aptly put it. This piece points out another piece of that illogic — the good man needed to rescue democracy is unnamed and unknowable, but he will arise.
Irene Stengs’ book on the Chulalongkorn Cult of the late 1990s, which is noted at another post (http://www.newmandala.org/2014/01/07/review-of-worshipping-great-moderniser-tlc-nmrev-lxvi/) on New Mandala, describes a logical framework in which this type of thinking is not illogical. (My apologies to others who may have made similar observations to whom I can’t give credit.)
This is how a pretty good sized group of profoundly Thai men and women of education and merit think, and it is a fully sanctioned way of thought. It is perhaps what the shorthand for ‘faith in the monarchy’ is actually all about, the efficacy of this sort of thought, the right to think this way, the Thainess of thinking this way, the exceptionality of the insights so given. Or so I think it is possible to read Stengs and to understand what is happening with PDRC.
What an interesting time this is.
Suthep’s romantic tale
Khun Merisa, thank you. I’m not sure whether politics is like a lakhorn or the lakhorn are like politics. But one doesn’t have to be prior, and the parallels are certainly identifiable, and until you took the time to point them out, the rest of us didn’t see it.
A Gramscian take on Thai politics
Yep, you’re wrong. There’s nothing in Mattes’ piece above that claims that moral considerations are irrelevant; rather, the emphasis is on a class-based analysis because taking the side of the oppressed is assumed to be a key element of political morality. That you clearly disagree with this assumption doesn’t mean that you are offering a “morality-based” riposte to an amoral position, but rather that your own ethical worldview does not see class-based oppression as a relevant moral issue.
There’s nothing special about your claims regarding the morality of your cause — every social movement in history has claimed to have morality on its side. This is especially true of some of the most destructive and oppressive movements in history. In the end, being clear-eyed about facts and principles is worth much more than moral posturing.
Indeed, mere moral posturing (e.g. “it is because we need to be moral; and sadly it seems archaic these days” — as if people were really so much more moral in the past!) is dangerous. A group of people who are misty-eyed about their own moral goodness and full of red-faced rage about their demonised opponents is capable of anything; in particular, it is capable of supporting just the kind of unprincipled and undemocratic politics that Suthep and his cronies have engaged in since the beginning of this crisis. And of course, such people are capable of developing the laughably one-sided and distorted understanding of recent history that you’ve demonstrated in your post.
A Gramscian take on Thai politics
I agree entirely. I have never been particularly attracted to Thaksin as a politician though I must admit to having a soft spot for Yingluck – it was just such a delight to see the faces of Abhisit, Chuan, Korn and others after she had so roundly defeated them! What has actually motivated me has been the reaction of the “Democrats” and their elite supporters ever since Thaksin’s comprehensive election win in 2005. They tried every single underhand, anti-democratic ruse, first to unseat him and then to try to obliterate him completely. It has been just such wonderful fun to see them put on the back foot time and time again. He has made fools of them all and it has been thoroughly deserved.
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
Chris Beal: Thank-you very much for your sensible comment. I do admit that I do not at present have the full picture since I am six thousand kilometers away, and can follow only bits and pieces from afar. Thanks to people like you, I undoubtedly will be kept well informed. By the way, have you heard anything new concerning so-called “reform”? For a maligned and ignorant “red-buffalo” government they have done rather well under the circumstances. They probably have some very smart educated people among their ranks, though not Eton/Oxford educated! They could also take heart from the fact that foreign opinion is mostly on their side.
A Gramscian take on Thai politics
Now just where are those sturdy structures that are being revealed?
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
George – I agree with much of your posts, and explanations – but don’t think they are the full picture (as much as us farang can figure out a limited “full picture”). Your ” The government cannot act against the protesters out of fear for an army intervention. And the police cannot act to uphold the law because they are hated by the same elite” is especially questionable, given that the Yingluck Government is now ACTUALLY arresting protest leaders, banning them from leaving the country, exposing their funding, and dismantling protest sites plus opening up Government offices – eg. Chaeng Wattana – for work again. Suthep, etc. may – indeed, probably – won’t suffer more than token punishment, given their friends in high places. But not all such friends support them. And they face at least one very, very formidable politician against them. Namely Chalerm Yoobamrung. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Sonthiyarn-arrested;-first-rally-leader-to-be-deta-30226553.html
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Chalerm-vows-non-stop-campaign-to-clear-sites-30226897.html
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
Suthep has once again chosen to block the Prime Minister’s access to Government House. This is insurrection, pure and simple. Whether he likes it or not, Yingluck holds her office by dint of the election of all the Thai people , Suthep and his cohorts included. That election was endorsed by her appointment by H.M. the King. If the judiciary and the military have any proper standing, this move must be legally rejected and that judgment enforced by whatever means is necessary, including the military. Otherwise we have proof positive that neither institution is standing on the side of the Thai state and supporting the country.
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
Neptunian: You have in a few words once again hit the nail spot on the head.The Rule of Law does not apply to the entrenched powerful and rich, only to the poor and disadvantaged.There are in Thailand different sets of rules for these two sections of the population, and the elite seem to have no social conscience whatsoever nor a desire for social justice.
Suthep’s romantic tale
Many accepted 2006 coup and verdict in convicting TK base on ethic and morality ground instead of law, so why would not they believe in Suthep’s bullshit love story.
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
Songkran: I greatly sympathize with your point of view. The explanation is quite simple. Suthep and the Democratic Party seem to be above the law since they have the blessing of the highest authority in the Kingdom. The government cannot act against the protesters out of fear for an army intervention. And the police cannot act to uphold the law because they are hated by the same elite who are calling the tune. And in a showdown the police do not have tanks like the army. Therefore they are powerless to act. Hope this serves as a satisfactory explanation.
Indonesia: Why you so like that wan?
Singapore’s recently retired permanent secretary at the ministry of foreign affairs has argued that the Indonesians are (a) insensitive, and (b) feel entitled to their self-righteous nationalism. http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/kri-usman-harun-issue-sensitivity-two-way-street
He makes such an argument with no hint of irony that Singapore’s response shows that it is ultra sensitive and they feel forever entitled to their “tiny little red dot” self-righteous nationalism too. Why East and Southeast Asian diplomacy is still full of countries who are persistently insecure and who cannot think beyond their respective sensitive self-righteous nationalism is perhaps something to be explored?
Also, if 99.9% of Indonesians don’t even know the two fellows, combined with their alleged insensitivity, then it stands to reason that the most probable reason for Indonesia’s naming of the ships was an administrative matter-of-course which was overlooked, rather than any purposeful provocation at all?
A Gramscian take on Thai politics
For people who keep claiming every Thai is against Thaksin, and still too chicken to go for an election….
See what’s wrong with the picture?
Suthep’s romantic tale
There certainly are parallels, both being middle class movements with dictatorial implications, but these go only so far. Also, very interestingly, Suthep borrows from Communist imagery, as in establishing a People’s Council (=Soviet), but this certainly doesn’t make him a communist either.
Clearly, the protesters’ arguments are irrational, and their demands, if fulfilled, would lead to a disaster for Thailand. But that doesn’t mean that the protesters themselves are not rational people. Rather, I believe there are real issues they could argue on rational terms… if only they wanted to speak about them in the first place. What I’m talking about is not only the succession dispute, but also regionalism. That’s probably legal to speak about, but very, very unpatriotic. So we get what we get, violent protests all about fairy tales, insults, and a People’s Soviet.
Indonesia: Why you so like that wan?
Thanks very much Peter for this explanation.
An Indonesian friend (who works as a Catholic priest in Canberra) explained to me that the official explanation (as he interprets it) is that the two men died for the country, and therefore needs to be honoured.
But I wonder how many Indonesians today, actually think that Konfrantasi was a war that they should be proud off.
I’ll be especially interested in the views of Indonesian New Mandala readers.
Thailand’s election: 2 February 2014
By now, the whole outside world (outside of Thailand) has worked out that there are two sets of “law” in Thailand. One for the Democrats and one for everyone else.