Andrew Walker’s writeup mentioned:
sucked into the earth (suup phaen din).
This should have been:
sucked into the earth (phaen din suub), which means the earth sucks (the person). The phrase ‘phaen din suub’ is well documented in Thai and has its root from Buddhism which is well explained by the author.

There were cases documenting the occurance during the time Buddha still walked on earth, that certain villains who committed great sins against Buddha were punished by being physically sucked into the earth which opened up. In Buddhism, a sin committed against a person carries unequal weights. A sin against a villain is lesser, as compared to that against a virtuous person. A sin against Buddha, who is the supreme virtuous person is so great. Tewatat attempted to assassinate Buddha, causing bleeding in Buddha. That great sin and others which he practised against the Buddha, caused Tewatat to be punished by the Law of Karma to be sucked into the earth, and upon death, his soul has been cast in hell for a long, long time (even now, and far into the future). Incidentally Buddha didn’t cause the death or the suction of the earth.

There was also a woman who took bribes from some jealous local religious leaders to discredit Buddha. She wore an apparatus to fake a pregnancy and accused Buddha in a big gathering that Buddha was the cause. That false accusation against Buddha too was a great sin. Some angels couldn’t bear the great accusation, caused the apparatus to fall off, exposing her lie. She too was punished by the Law of Karma and was sucked into the earth.

Nowadays we don’t hear of cases where a person is sucked into the earth for a great sin. Obviously we don’t have another Buddha walking the earth and don’t have sins of such a magnitude.

There is no usuage for “suup phaen din”, which means suck the land.

The phrase “nug phaen din” (หนักแผ่นดิน) is commonly used in Thai. Nug is simply weight, or heavy, as each person has a weight. But in “nug phaen din”, “nug” it is meant as “deadweight”. It implies a person is no good, and is a deadweight upon the land. Upon death, the land would be higher, not having to support such a deadweight. It is used as an insult.

The translation into English as “scum of the earth” is proper also. Just different usage in two different cultures for similar insults.

Lleij Samuel Schwartz’s translation for:
“ได้อาศัยโพธิ์ทองแผ่นดินของราชันย์ แต่ใจมันยังเฝ้าคิดทำลาย
Living off the golden Bodhi tree and the land of the King ..”
“โพธิ์ทอง” is golden bodhi leave in this usuage. Bodhi leave is a large leave from bodhi tree. Bodhi tree is the tree under which Buddha attained enlightenment. Bodhi leaves from that specific bodhi tree still receives special reverance in most Buddhist countries, including Thailand. Some buddhists reported miracles from either that tree or its leave.
Bodhi leaves in this usuage is meant as (shade or) protection (by the King). This usuage is a carryover from the country of old, where a subject of the country was under the protection of the King for his security. Referring to the large bodhi leaf signifies the big protection as provided by the King.
ได้อาศัยโพธิ์ทองแผ่นดินของราชันย์ means “getting protection from the King and his land.”

On “คนใดหลงชมชาติอื่น ชาติเดียวกันเขายืนข่มเหง
Any person who is lost admiring other nations, while their own nation they allow to be oppressed”. It may be translated as:
Any person who is ignorantly admiring other nations, while oppressing his own nation (or his own people).
I think “oppressing his own people or his own nation” refers to communist rules which is known for oppressing its own people, or its own land.

“ได้สินทรัพย์เจือจานก็ประหารไทยกันเอง ทีชาติอื่นเกรงดังญาติของมัน
Seizing assets so that they may kill their fellow Thais, but respecting other nations like their own relatives… ”
“ได้สินทรัพย์เจือจาน” instead of “Seizing assets”, should mean (the villain, or the communists who received financial support from external Communist countries then) receiving monetary or financial contribution…

“คนใดขายตนขายชาติ ได้โอกาสชี้ทางให้ศัตรู
Any person who sells themself and their nation, creating an opportunity to point the way for the enemy”.
“ได้โอกาสชี้ทางให้ศัตรู” probably means point the way for the enemy, as opportunity arises.

“เกื้อหนุนอคติ เชื่อลัทธิอันธพาล แพร่นำมันมาบ้านเมืองเรา
Supporting bias and immorality, they come to spread their filth in our villages.” Maybe translated as:
Supporting bias and thug cult, spread them in our country.
“บ้านเมือง” are from two words. บ้าน means homes (or houses),
เมือง means city. In this usuage, it infers all the house and all the cities, to mean the country.

Cheers

B-b-but the Thai people already have developed everything on their own!

their own law –> where in the world can people running for elections pledge to overturn the law (ie Samak) or create their own laws (ie coup). This is a Thai-style phenomena.

their own medicine –> I never knew that ‘ya mong’ was a cure all cream. Lets not forget the aab ob nuad method to cure stress…

their own science –> who needs r&d or government spending on science when you got jatukam ramathep?

their own technology –> TUK TUK, AMULETS produciton in aeroplanes.

you said:
”
easily be solved by the “Third World” countries: They could stop importing everything they need from the “First World” and start developing their very own law, medicine, science, and technology, i.e. as fundamentally different from what the West has to offer.
”

Could never have guessed you were a strong proponent of the principles of Sufficiency Economy! Good for you!

Guess even you’re endowed with the strong belief of ‘kwam pen thai’ as much as the anti-Thaksinites you like to criticize for being pro-militaristic, etc.

I think the Thairath article attached by fall is quite powerful, highlighting the middle-class hypocrisy. However, this distrust and despise of the rural poor isn’t merely a Bangkok-Thai middle-class phenomenon, but is global and Western middle-class voters are as guilty, gullible and patronizing when it comes to perceptions of the poor and ‘Third World’ countries (always two-steps removed from ‘First World’).

But Thairath is probably oversimplifying in saying that it is also extreme selfishness that the Bangkok middle-class come out to “topple the government” – when in fact they wanted to force Thaksin’s resignation which is a democratic right. It is also oversimplifying in saying that the middle-class see “military dictatorship as better than civilian dictatorship” going so far to say that Thailand increasingly resembles Myanmar – a statement that is sensationally irresponsible and needs a lot of qualification. If the CNS did not promise a timetable and pathway back to democracy, the Thai middle-class will not accept and most likely come out in force to protest.

The point on different aspirations and desires between the middle-class and rural poor is well known and valid. The rural poor wants economic development and improvements in their lifestyles and the government that can deliver, while the middle-class wants less corruption and more effective and transparent use of their taxes (the majority of government revenues – and they know that). The politicians know that very well and exploit it for their electoral gain…