Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss 
Today we launch the final episode of the “ชาติ ศาสนา พระมหากษัตริย์: Nation, Religion, King” series.
It is is now available from YouTube and is also available as a podcast from here. This episode is titled “King”. Our panel of leading academic analysts — Dr Tyrell Haberkorn, Professor Charnvit Kasetsiri, Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun and Dr Patrick Jory — offer their views on the political role of Thailand’s royal family, on the country’s lese majeste law, and on the succession to the throne, among a range of other issues.
Thai language subtitles for this episode are also being produced and will be available soon.
[…] New Mandala and at YouTube there is a new 30-minute podcast available in NM’s series on Nation, Religion […]
0
0
This episode is much better. Hope it goes as viral as a 28 minute panel discussion can go. It would be good if Ajarn Charnvit Kasetsiri was interviewed for the Interview section. Seems like an interesting character.
0
0
I think Prf Charnvit get the history of Thailand national flag bits wrong. Originally the 3 colours on the flag were never intended to be Nation, Religion and Monarchy . Originally, before the 3 colours flag and after the white elephant flag, there is one more flag pattern which was used during 1916-1917. It was a red flag with 2 white strips. The middle portion was later change to blue with some speculation that blue was representing Saturday, the day Rama VI was born. Another speculation was that it was change so the colour of the flag is allign with those of the allie nations in WWI. The 3 motto was introduced in the 60s-70s in an effort to counter the surge of communisism. I’m really surprised that someone with professor caliber got something so basic wrong.
0
0
Excellent panel, excellent discussions, excellent podcast.
Bravo.
Dr Haberkorn’s line on the monarchy, that out of nation, religion, king, that the royalty “is (the) one that’s both the least questioned but also the most unquestionable because there are severe sanctions for doing so” was superbly succinct.
Jory statements on the vestiges of absolute monarchy remaining, where Thailand a ruler/subject instead of citizen/government, the reinforcement of the resacralised monarhcy via the exponential indoctrination of education and mass media is spot on. His Lese-majeste work is brilliant, so I was not surprised that he would hit the nail on the head with that one.
As we see, Lese-majeste is at the heart of this matter. 113, 114, 115 are obstacles to change and the advancement of Thailand.
On the absurdity of lese-majeste, I always think of Chotisak Onsoong, a 27 year old man. Chatisak went to the cinema to watch a film. Before a film in Thai cinemas there is always a 5 minute montage of the King and his various achievement as the royal anthem plays. Everyone must stand to show respect whilst this plays. Chatisak did not stand up. In an act that is chillingly Orwellian, a fellow cinema-goer Mr. Nawamin reported Chatisak to the cinema staff and the police. Chatisak could now face criminal prosecution under the lese-majeste laws, which can lead to (as the panel stated) a lengthy jail sentence.
Chatisak stated that by no means was he trying to insult the king and did nothing wrong. He cited freedom of expression and the right to choose if he stands up or sits down during the royal anthem/montage, freedoms and rights that are ‘assured’ by Articles 4 and 28 of the Constitution.
The sad, absurd punchline to this tale of lese majeste? The film was Transformers.
But I digress…
As regards to the relations between the military and the royalty discussed by the panel, (although not mentioned) McCargo’s concept of ‘Network Monarchy’ is too simplistic a take on something too opaque to comprehend. The military and the monarchy are enmeshed, yes. This relationship is a highly symbiotic one, but who really has the upper hand in the relationship? A difficult one indeed.
What a refreshing, intelligent and informed discussion. I was critical of the first, but this one was something else.
Thank you very much to everyone involved. You certainly kept the best until last.
0
0
Thank you for the interesting discussions and features, I have found New Mandala by chance and am an avid follower now.
One question: It seems that the podcast for episode three is not available yet. I’d like to know when it is going to be uploaded?
0
0
Thanks Ulf Mielke,
The podcast for episode 3 is now available here.
Best wishes,
Nich
0
0
Thai language subtitles for episode 3, “King”, are now available. Just click on the “CC” button if you are having trouble displaying them.
For those who are interested, Prachatai also has a short report drawing attention to the final episode.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
0
0
Tarrin, I heard that blue actually represents Friday, and purple is for Saturday.
0
0
Thanks Tarrin.
I thought the trinity is comprised of sufficient democracy, sufficient hypocrisy and sufficient economy.
But the three episodes tell me otherwise; score of the current government, southern violence and succession make up the Thai trinity.
BTW, in Thailand, the color representing Saturday is purple. Isn’t it Tarrin?
0
0
Khun Dundun’s comment in particular makes this one sound good. I’ll try and make my tired old ears give it a go in the next day or two.
0
0
Dr. Pavin Chachavalpongpun, starts at 20:20, runs to 21:12
I think it’s a tribute to the Royal Thai Army and their propaganda machine, simple minded as it is, that they have even Phd.s mouthing their assertions about “the issues”.
I think the referendum was on the Thai military… and only incidentally about the monarchy, insofar as the military were able to identify their coup, its continuation, and their massacre with the monarchy itself.
If the line between the Thai monarchy and the Royal Thai Army… with the army calling themselves simply the Thai Army, for a start… could be clearly drawn, if the Thai Army could be prevented from hiding behind the monarchy’s skirts, then we should see everyone’s attention drawn to the ones who routinely kidnap, torture, and murder the Thai people… and that wouldn’t be the Thai monarchy.
The July referendum was a referendum on the Thai Army… on their coup, their putsch, their massacre… and they and their unelected front people were swept from power by a torrent so strong that even cooking the electoral books in Bangkok could not hide it.
It is true that the PAD/Military/Democrat machinations have very much diminished the monarchy in everyone’s eyes. But everyone knows the real source of their pain as well.
0
0
Ulf Mielke – 6
Yes actually you are right, he was born on Saturday. Then the speculation about the flag being resemble to the allines’ one might be more accurate in this case.
0
0
I have posted before about the ideology underpinning the presentation of Thailand in language courses for foreigners. One absurd example concerns the change in the Thai flag. We were told that the new design was introduced to get over the problem of Thai people inadvertently hanging their flag upside down!
0
0
This podcast has presented in a highly commendable manner one of the most important issues/situations in contemporary Thailand, and yet many want to quibble about the meaning of a now defunct flag?
The meaning of the flag(s) are a valid, intriguing and telling part of the study of the development of the Thai nation – I do not doubt this. But I would just like to hear a few more voices address the major and much, much pressing issues discussed.
Thanks again for a truly worthwhile academic podcast.
0
0
Dundun 4
” This relationship is a highly symbiotic one”
According to my “Finding Nemo” DVD a relationship such as you describe would perhaps be better described as “commensual” rather than “symbiotic”. This difference is also an interesting subject for accademic discussion. (Is that how you spell it?)
To continue the analogy Dory the Blue Tang could represent historical-political consciousness.
For me Dr T is the Barracuda or Bruce the Shark. Haven’t made my mind up yet.
Would any care to cast Gill or the camp starfish?
Please note this thesis is a work in progress. I am in discussions with Harvard University Press and expect to publish in 2013.
Sharkbait – Boo Ha-Ha!
0
0
Dundun – 13
There were people who would be totally disagree with all of the opinion in the podcast, in exception of maybe of Prof. Chanvit. However, those view will not be so critical. Ususally, they will just come in and said something like “what do foreigners know about Thailand” sort of stance.
Back to the podcast, all of the guess seems to be looking into one direction except Charnvit in my opinion, who was talking about monarchy being a part of building a “modern nation” and being the “center” of the nation (if that’s what he means) then I can see a huge irony there. Thailand is far from being modern, our law is ambiguous and people still retort to using violence to settle things. The lese majeste law was so backward and it was threating the fabric of what is called a civilized nation.
One might ask, what have we been doing in the past 60 years under this currecnt monarch?
Furthermore, Prof Charnvit was talking as if people was “using manarchy” to their own benefit, but I can only see monarchy themselves as another player in the current political struggle. We can see how the member of the royal family involved with certain political group like the queen and the youngest princess who is clearly where their politocal ideology lies.
0
0
Billy,
No, symbiotic is the correct term. A commensual relationship is one in which one party benefits where the other is neutral and does not benefit. This is not the case here: the relationship between the monarchy and the Thai army is indeed symbiotic.
I cannot say I have had the pleasure of watching “Finding Nemo”, but it does indeed sound like an enchanting satire of contemporary Thai society and politics. I’ll watch it next time I’m bored and seven years old.
I misspelt ‘monarchy’, not academic. Yet call me crazy, but I would prefer and excuse a typo over an elaborately silly trivialization of statements made at a place I thought was for serious debate and discussion.
Billy, if you’re fishing for a reaction, you got one. Well done. I know it is quite a giddy thrill to troll web forums, but by doing so here you not only make a fool of yourself but belittle the topic at hand. The latter I believe is a grave error, the former merely an inconsequential annoyance.
Oh, and it’s spelt ‘shark bait’.
I look forward to your Harvard University Press publication.
Happy fishing.
0
0
Tarrin – 15
I never said that there aren’t those who would not agree with many of the opinions expressed in the podcast. I merely stated that in my opinion that I thought the podcast was a refreshing, intelligent and well informed discussion on a difficult and precarious topic.
I agree with your statement that the monarchy are political players. I think – after you examine the situation enough – that this is obvious. I also wonder about the political affiliations of the princess/prince/queen lie.
0
0
This last episode is indeed the best one, while the proceeding ones were more or less off the topic or at least off expectations. To use the national motto was maybe not the best idea – “State of the Kingdom Talks” might have been a title more appropriate to cover the content.
One thing that is striking is the lack of historical consciousness for the deviating nature of the current monarchical environment. There was a time when a journalist like K.S.R. Kulap could write and publish a satire accusing King Rama 5th of making serious mistakes while dealing with colonial powers, and he was sent to hospital for “mental treatment” for some days or weeks only. I assume such a lenient reaction was possible because King Chulalongkorn was indeed popular and could count on genuine affection of the Thai people.
How different is this from the experience of a young Head of State who, while leaving the ship from Europe on his return to Thailand is presented with a coup d’état by the military and a constitution that is effectively curbing the influence of the palace clique?!? Every bit of influence ces gens l├а have gained during the Sarit regime and afterwards is a booty assembled through competition with all other groups vying for power, influence and resources. It is this permanent state of fear to lose all this again (somewhat justified considering the (occasional) abolition of the monarchy in Laos and Cambodia) that probably makes this group so uncompromising and so responsive to forces that claim to defend its interests.
People accustomed to such conditions must perceive every approach onto their turf or their alleged prerogatives as a vital threat.
Even this last episode was rather lame in its outlook. Of course, for all those prosecuted under draconian laws right now, it is important that they be freed. Nevertheless, if the problem of societal ferment is to be tackled, then there ought to be a more positive vision for the future of the institution, beyond just negative acts of abrogation, reduction, restriction and disclosure. It might be more useful (and palatable) to formulate an objective, a target for a modern monarchy that fits in into the 26th century. I┬┤m sure there are enough academics around who are able to couch this into a pseudo-sukhothaian cloak…
0
0
Themis 18
I am inclined to agree with you. Should any of us have lived the experience of the early years of the current monarch in a politically fractious nation what actions would we have taken for self-protection?
It was a tightrope walk for a young and inexperienced man, “a stranger in a strange land”. I think given the restrictions of the role he did a good job in difficult circumstances and world history will have it’s judgement.
Unfortunately we are living in interesting times and the nation is suffering significant blowback from it’s fin de siecle power games with the persecution of both thought and speech.
Dundun 17
No apologies for the eccentric and cheeky input. Read the small print on the website, embrace your inner 7 year old as I do daily and troll down to the DVD store. It’s a great show, mate!
0
0
Dundun – 17
What I mean was dont’t expect too much from the people that backing the royalist.
Billy Budd – 19
Yes the man has done well indeed, from being merely a royal in exile he can get rid of most of his political enemy, rally all the franction within the palance and killed off the franction that got too powerful. Now even talking about him will face a jail term.
0
0
Tarrin#15
‘Back to the podcast, all of the guess seems to be looking into one direction except Charnvit in my opinion, who was talking about monarchy being a part of building a “modern nation” and being the “center” of the nation (if that’s what he means) then I can see a huge irony there. Thailand is far from being modern, our law is ambiguous and people still retort to using violence to settle things. The lese majeste law was so backward and it was threating the fabric of what is called a civilized nation.’
I totally agree with your point here as we can witness “the main pillar”
rebuilding the nation back to absolute monarchy- be it Privy Council, LM law, prostration, not to mention 24hour propaganda. If only the “pillar” could come to terms with people’s right- DEMOCRACY.
0
0
I’m going to stick my neck out here.
I think absolute monarchies are an outmoded institution and modern societies (where they are given a choice and a balanced education) prefer rule by committee with all the ensuing difficulties.
The monarch in question came to rule in turbulent times, unexpectedly and at the mercy of machievellian advisers and adversaries. The “Nation” has always been at the mercy of factionalism and tyrannies both great and petty. The king ascended the throne with powerful military enemies and his faction intrigued their way from survival to security to ascendence to what we see now. Given that all kings rule by divine right (that’s why they’re kings not mere mortals) the nation was lucky to have someone with evident concern for his nation and it’s people.
I believe that the current problems stem more from a perceived succession crisis than from the activities of a man in a past era. I do believe that for thai society to survive in the modern world the institution needs to modernise and modify it’s role; but this applies also to the arms of the state, political parties and big business too if an equitable state is to be arrived at. There lies the challenge. Right now it seems to be down to a choice between one controlling dynasty or another. -old-style- and that is really no choice at all, is it?
0
0
Now I see your angle, Billy.
Like Finding Nemo, the deification of any human being is a fantasy.
We are all mere mortals.
Succession is a real problem, but so has been some of the poor decisions/ramifications of a certain person at the apex of this whole place, a place where the vestiges of absolute monarchy have crept back in and now stand tall – see lese majeste.
Too much?
I thought Red Saurs/76/Wat grounds/Death Sqauds/”The nod” too much too.
0
0
@Billy Budd, “Given that all kings rule by divine right (that’s why they’re kings not mere mortals) the nation was lucky to have someone with evident concern for his nation and it’s people.”
I wonder where his “evident concern for his nation and its people” is when he signed the Royal assent to validate the law that sends people who criticise him to jail.
I fail to see his evident concern lies where his military came out and shot his people who protested for the very democracy that he and his army stole from them.
There are many more incidents where I wonder where his evident concern is, but I am too lazy to cite them all….
0
0
Thank you for a voice of reason, CT.
0
0
Wait a minute. Maybe we’re not thinking straight.
Maybe a billionaire who expects the abject poor to be content with their lot – via a combination of skewed Theravada Buddhism, re-sacralisation and unending indoctrination – could be just the ticket.
0
0
My favorite ep so far; I found it quite interesting. I wont/can’t comment on the content but having watched all 3 eps now, I just have a couple suggestions production-wise (being fully appreciative of the amount of time and effort that must have gone into making these vodcasts).
1) The audio needs to be normalized post-production or the mic placement rearranged – some of the panelists are rather hard to hear.
2) Lighting should be adjusted – Nich, you look quite sallow compared to your guests on this last ep especially.
Just some constructive criticism from someone who previously worked in audio/video.
Many thanks to all involved.
-R
0
0
Ricardo Duke,
You can’t/wont comment on the content, and instead give suggestions on the lighting?
I’m sure the people working on the vodcasts appreciate your practical, constructive criticism, but don’t you think that it may be quite possible that what the panel was talking about is more important than the poor lighting of the vodcast?
I find New Mandala to be a fountain of immense knowledge, debate and wisdom, and yet your comment leaves me cold.
You “can’t/wont” comment on the content after watching all three episodes, but you have lighting tips. Jeez… Well, seeing as the issues discussed in this third vodcast are possibly some of the most vital and fundamental issues facing Thai politics, society and the very make up of the Thai nation, I think that maybe your “can’t/wont” comment stance is a sort of cop-out, and your professional advice – which is indeed correct – is ludicrous in context.
First old flags and now the lighting? How many of us are left that actually want to discuss the issues raised by this very insightful, informed and forthright vodcast?
For those that don’t remember, it was about the king.
Discuss.
0
0
[…] Nation, Religion, King – Episode 3 […]
0
0
Denis Johnson,
Did you watch the vodcast yourself? If so, you should be able to figure out why I wont/cant comment on the content (which you so kindly reminded us is the King, thank you) and people are relegated to discussing flag design: We cant comment on the topic because of the harsh penalties involved in doing so, and there are around 67 million of us who dont have the luxury of being able to openly discuss an issue which affects us so directly, and thats not counting those with familial, occupational or other ties to the Kingdom. I cannot speak on behalf of other posters, but I value my family & friends, career & livelihood and freedom, so I refrain from commenting on the topic in a public forum. Is that a “cop-out”?
In case you missed the intent of my og post, it was to a) register appreciation to all those involved in making the vodcasts, particularly the ones with the courage to speak on such a taboo subject and open themselves up to the liabilities I mentioned; and b) give some constructive criticism of the vodcasts in the hopes that higher production quality might help bring more attention to the issue that affects so many of us.
Best regards, Ricardo
ps – I also found it amusing that you took the time to post your disapproval of us wont/cants while you, yourself didnt make any comment on the topic at hand.
pps – When attempting to be pithy, try to get your quotes right.
0
0
Ricardo:
There are ways to speak about this topic without lese majeste teleporting you immediately into the slammer. There are ways.
We need to – so delicately, yes – speak about this subject or all of us who live in this nation are in dire trouble.
I think your lighting tips were spot on, but the content’s the key.
Commending all those who speak out on such a taboo subject and those who worked to bring us this vodcast is praise much needed. Bravo. These sharp, well-informed academics need to be heard. But so does your voice. I understand the problems of doing so all too well, yet you must find a way or the tanks with the pink ribbons will roll again and again…
0
0
Dundun 31
My (Thai) wife has a set response when I start off on matters political after spending too much time reading New Mandala.
“Do you want to put food in your mouth – or a gun?”
I’d be interested to know if any readers know the ethnology or provenance of this ancient piece of hard earnt, practical folk wisdom.
0
0
Billy Budd:
Even though I do indeed consider you a mocking, boorish ex-pat posting glib, self-delusional gibberish on New Mandala in order to not rock the comfortable boat of existence I’m sure you enjoy in Thailand, I am sorry that I do not know “the ethnology or provenance of this ancient piece of hard earnt, practical folk wisdom”
As rhetorical as your wife’s (sidepoint: why was ‘Thai’ in brackets? To qualify your piercing insights?) question might have been, I think I have an answer of sorts.
You see, when I read your reactionary, kowtowing statements here, I wonder if maybe you might draw more sustenance from a Remington than a bowl of Som Tam.
No offence, mind you. Like you said, read the fine print, New Mandala is just one big laugh-in.
0
0
Dundun, 3
The (Thai) is in (brackets) because I had never heard the expression in (English ) before (and no other (English) speaking person I know has either.)
Other (Thai) friends I have smile at my question but politely, with a self effacing smile, tactfully change the subject. Funny that!
As I have a (Thai) family to support and do not want (ISOC) knocking on my door, so I try (like most thais), (and not always successfully) to choose my comments wisely and keep my anonymity.
I also try to find the good in the dramatis personae whilst granting the evil that exists. (Hence the nom de plume).
All the players are human and ironically all believe they are doing their duty as they see it. This is the human condition. (I’ve been reading a lot of Richard Dawkins lately)
As a longtime expat (or kowtowing sexpat – as it seems you’d like to categorise me) my posted reflections are the result of reading, discussion and attempts to understand and respect the culture that surrounds me.
Anyhow I will take no offence from your point scoring/idle abuse. I do try to walk a mile in another mans shoes to try to understand him.
Yours however are too small even for me.
I will continue to post contrary comments as long as the “moderators” permit and rant along with the vox populi on other days.
I endorse your right to bang your drum as you see fit and envy your moral superiority and clarity of perspective. I lost mine with advancing middle age.
(Note to moderator: apologies for the long-winded reply but I saw no nothing in post number 33 other than a personal attack. Please feel free to delete if this post adds nothing to the debate!)
0
0
Billy Budd:
This is my last post directed at you, because I myself have committed the cardinal sin of straying this thread away from the real issue at hand and of the Vodcast – the King.
I never denounced you as a “sexpat”. Kowtower, yes, but I never mentioned any “sexpat” activity. Keep your boorish cliches to yourself.
I have no moral superiority and my abuse is neither “idle” nor unfitting. “point scoring”? We – as in the rest of the people posting after such a sharp vodcast – were attempting to have a serious discussion on the King/monarchy and its place in contemporary Thailand. You seem to miss that. Refer to my previous posts
You say middle age clouded your perspective, on – let’s say – issues regarding the King. How old am I? Seven?
I wish I had never engaged in this discussion with you, because I have clouded an issue/thread that needs serious debate/discussion.
Oh, and don’t hide behind your Billy Budd. There is no need. Hell, don’t you know when you tow the party line you are rewarded?
Moderators, delete me at will.
0
0