…said:
“The King holds a very, very special place…only this King can get the people the things they deserve…The Thai King’s place is completely different from other Kings…[he] went down to the masses”.
In light of the robust debate that New Mandala is currently hosting, these small extracts from a convoluted Sondhi answer give some insight into the thinking of the most prominent anti-Thaksin campaigner. There is much fodder for debate in Sondhi’s words.
At a time when the King’s “very, very special place” is being increasingly questioned, the statements coming from the likes of Sondhi need to be examined closely. The hubris associated with the palace and its good works does, of course, require careful scrutiny.
Attention people of the world. Please say your word now. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/specials/thefall/compare.php
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I don’t quite understand why you are focussing on how the thais view their king. You could ask any thai about how they feel towards the monarch and you would probably get this same answer (i.e Sondhi’s) millions of times over. What is the point you are making?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
In his post on Political Education for the Elite, Andrew Walker has described Sondhi as ‘patronising’
I suspect Sondhi’s view of the King is more in line with the average Thai (urban or rural) than the view presented by Andrew, Nicholas, Patrick etc.
Who is patronising?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Thank you for your comments Mr. Vichai. I do enjoy debating with you over this issue because as you know, in your country it is forbidden to discuss the monarchy because of the lese majeste law, as well as the ideological control of the monarchy through the media, and through the education system which starts at kindergarten and continues until one graduates from university. This makes it dangerous to discuss such things. So it is not surprising that you are shocked and angry.
Your English is very good. I assume you have lived in Australia or overseas for some time. But you and a number of other people who have posted on this blog do not seem to have understood one aspect of “Western” culture (I actually believe it is universal), and that is freedom of expression. This is an Australian website, and an academic website. What that means is that it allows full freedom of expression, on absolutely any topic whatever (at least in Southeast Asian Studies).
Behind the platitudes, what does freedom of expression mean? It means the freedom to allow the full exercise of reason, this faculty that we have been gifted with to make sense of the world and through such understanding to improve the human condition. This is the work that academics are supposed to do, in the myriad fields of scholarly inquiry, including politics. From a number of your posts you seem very dismissive of academic work and academics generally. But you should understand that this is an academic website, and that means that the people on it will debate, criticize (sometimes strongly), every topic possible, including your king. But everything should be based on the principles of reason, and where it isn’t then all of us are open to and ought to welcome criticism.
As I keep saying, this is not possible in your country. And this is why so many people, not only in Thailand but outside it as well, misunderstand the true nature of politics in Thailand – for example, believing the CDR’s fairy tale that 19th September was a military coup, when in fact it was a royalist coup. The reason for this misunderstanding has nothing to do with “Thai culture” – which I don’t believe exists. It is actually very simple: we are not allowed to use our reason to discuss, debate, and criticize the single most important institution to Thailand’s political system: the monarchy. Or more precisely, the role of the monarchy in Thailand since the beginning of its political restoration in 1947.
The simple fact is that most Thai people do not understand their own monarchy because all debate about it is censored. It is an extremely worrying thing that the most important institution in the country is surrounded and protected by this collective unreason. And this unreason spills into so many aspects of Thai society like rotten water, poisoning the country. The education system is a good example, a bastion of authoritarianism, rote learning, and uniformity, which has resisted every effort to reform it. The bureaucracy is another, but I will save my criticism of that for another day. Religion (fossilization of the monkhood), rural development (royal projects, the self-sufficiency farce), even the business culture (preferences to businesses with a royal interest); none of them escapes the deadening hand of the monarchy.
One then has to ask, why is the monarchy so afraid of criticism?
If we could debate the monarchy there are many other things we could ask, including why the royal family requires people to crawl on the floor in their presence, a practice that was in fact abolished in 1873 by King Chulalongkorn because he considered it oppressive and inappropriate to civilized countries. In Chulalongkorn’s words, your king has resurrected an “oppressive” custom. For what? This degrading practice has nothing to do with “Thai culture”. It has everything to do with culturally reinforcing the power of the monarchy. Language is another. Why when addressing the king must one use the phrase, “under the speck of dust under the royal foot that is over my head”? As an analogy of a power relationship what does that signify? As they say, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I understand why many people will be shocked by what I say. But you should realize that there is nothing that I have said here that Aj Sulak has not said many times before – and much more strongly than me. As you would know, Aj Sulak is now fighting yet another lese majeste charge for the interview in Fa Diao Kan last year.
As I have said, your king should be criticized very strongly for his endorsement of the overthrow of a democratically elected government by the use of tanks and guns. And now the Cabinet that he has sworn in seems to be a group of elderly, royal favourites, apparently hand-chosen by Prem, the king’s “nominee”, you might say. I know many Thais who are very angry about what the king has done, and is doing. You can check out some of the websites yourself to see – although most of that anger is expressed in code. What it shows, at the very least, is that your king refuses to let the Thai people choose their own government. An election was due in October but your king agreed that it was better to use tanks and guns to prevent the Thai people from making their democratic choice. And he is only able to do this by hiding behind lese majeste. Hence the importance of websites like New Mandala.
Sondhi is absolutely wrong. The Thai king is no different from any other autocratic ruler. What is different is the system that has been set up to hide the full extent of the monarchy’s political, economic and cultural control.
In Thailand it is not possible (now) to say all this, as you know. But I truly hope that one day you too will have this freedom. Then you will truly be “Thai” / ไท.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Please note that not all ‘anti Thaksin’ people are ‘pro Sondhi’
As a general proposition I would be ‘anti coup’, but I am pleased that it has come and was bloodless.
The coup would not have been necessary if Thaksin had resigned like he initially indicated he might do.
I have no doubt that the King wants the best for Thailand and it’s people, and I fear how bad things would be if he was not there.
I also fear what will happen when the King passes on, and see this coup as perhaps his last chance to set the country on the right course before he is gone.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Dr. Jory,
your points are well put, however, I don’t believe you are totally correct
in your analysis on thai royalty. Thais “crawl around” senior members in society (senior in age and social position) in general- it is just more pronounced with the immediate royal family. And the language used to address the king is actually a fusion of cambodian and old thai. The words are completely different eg. the word for eating in normal thai is “gin” or rabprathan” but in court language it is “savoey”. Court dictates that you end a sentence not with “ka” or Krub” but “peka” and “phyakha”. It is just another mode of communication. I’m not sure that RamaV irradicated this- because I was educated in the palace school in the 1980′s and we were stil taught this form of etiquette. It is not a must that you address the king in this language- only if you have been educated is is really expected. When the king is “up country” people often just use normal words. What they are expected to do is not stand at the same level (hence the constantcrawling kneeling and sitting). Mind you at traditional thai schools students act in a similar way towards teachers- not as extreme of course but enough to make any westerner kringe.
I don’t see this behaviouras negative or overly important to merrit academic discussion though. I do understand how it is difficult to digest through western eyes.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Jory I have read your long poster and it leaves me at my exact opinion of you and this website the first time I wallked in. This NEW MANDALA was created at around June 2006 is that right? Just about the time that disgraced corrupt dangerous ex-Thai leader was facing mounting citizens’ anger against his illegitimate mandate and the time when he started casting aspersions at people of ‘baramee’ in Thailand. That was not coincidence . . . Thaksin Shinawatra already had in mind to begin a campaign to weaken the insitution of the Thai monarchy . . just as he did with Thailand’s constitutional checks & balances if he was to perpetuate his massively corrupt rule. Because to be able to assume absolute powers in Thailand, Thaksin had to eliminate the monarchy factor.
Hence my conclusion that this forum/website is driven by malice and not by any lofty scholastic or academic ideals that you would con readers to believe.
Many Thais I believe kneel before HMK out of true affection for our most beloved monarch. I would not presume to know how foreigners view how we Thais conduct ourselves before our HMK and I don’t care less. But if your dislike of our Thai monarch stem from our Thai ‘kneeling’ before our monarch, or,our reserve to criticize our monarch . . . a ‘culture’ you feel oppressive but many Thais willingly accept . . . I just don’t see how I can view any of your poster or argument was motivated by reason, and, not ‘western’ prejudice.
Thaksin deserved to be deposed . . in other forums we can argue at length on the why’s I believe so.
But for now I just want to reject your proposition or suggestion that we Thais should abide by any ”western’ standard of democracy. Jory, Thaksin has so manipulated your ‘western-standard democracy’ we Thais rejected it outright, by military coup, which was an extraordinary act, that we Thais extraordinarily approved.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
More coverage from the conference from a Singaporean blog… a quote:
“Beside the irony of the military delivering liberals from Thaksin’s new authoritarianism, we seem to have liberals arguing that rewriting constitutions and having elections should not be the focus of building a really-existing democracy.”
Quality comment or not?
0 
0