All strength to Atiya Achakulwisut of the Bangkok Post who, today, has joined Jakrapob in making a brave attack on Thailand’s traditional patronage system. Referring to PM Samak’s dismissive attitude to the youthful Abhisit, Atiya writes:
That somehow summarised how PM Samak’s logic works and that’s about all he cares – conformity to the phuyai-ruled and phuyai-knows-best norms. PM Samak has the kind of mindset and attitude that belongs in the past, in the older, more tradition-bound version of Thailand which no longer exists. Today, merit is becoming as important, or even more so, than seniority. You get by in your job not because you are old enough, but because you are proven to be good at it. PM Samak won’t get this. He will find the notion unbearably arrogant.
Once the Democrat-except-when-you-can’t-win-an-election-and-then-a-coup-is-OK Party translators get their hands on this it will be dynamite! And linguistic deconstructionists in the Thai academy will be smacking their lips in anticipation.
Let’s hope this brave voice is not silenced by a lèse majesté charge!
Did the Nepalese Maoists have to find political father-figures to do their work for them?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“PM Samak has the kind of mindset and attitude that belongs in the past, in the older, more tradition-bound version of Thailand which no longer exists.”
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), outside of Bangkok, out in the boonies, “phuyai-rule” and “phuyai-knows-best norms” are still alive and kicking.
One staple of the puu yai system is some senior administrator alpha male (or female) behind a large imposing and rather fear inducing desk where junior staff members come to pay obeisance and make requests for their own benefit in some way, the assumption always being that the senior is granting the junior some boon, just like a fairytale, because the senior administrator is behind this big desk he never actually sees what is happening, except at token inspection tours when everyone wai’s a slow meaningful greeting to him as he passes by, or at the annual dam hua ceremony when everyone genuflects him, or at his annual birthday party on the day before Christmas, the birth of Christ, attended by the whole university, except missionaries, the result is that he does not see the chaos going on beneath him… (just like the ants in the lawn in the opening of David Lynch’s BlueVelvet)
…there was a rather pathetic aging alcoholic in our university department, who slept in his older sister’s basement when he returned to Canada and was finally kicked out of her house because she caught him drinking down in the basement, while he was working at the uni his hill tribe girl friend rent-a-wife, angry with his personal finances, ripped up his mattress with a carving knife, stole the TV and 5,000 baht, the last straw was his ritual of drinking one bottle of Singha every evening at five smack in front of the entrance of the uni, at a table clearly visible from the road, the uni president saw him and was outraged (never mind that he probably saw him on the way to an evening tryst with his mistress or one of those group outings with the boys to the massage parlour…), the ironic thing, is that this quiet guy who never took an initiative on any project or helped in leadership positions in any way whatsoever, was rewarded more than any other teacher when it came to bonuses and salary increases , which just goes to show what is more important, quiet passive acceptance of seniority or actually doing and accomplishing anything, I don’t pretend I saw everything, but the patronage system at that uni, made it effectively a basket case, something I never want to witness again or be associated with, for as long as I live, amen,
o then there was the LA guy they hired who had been in a coma for three years after being hit by a bus, who sadly had problems connecting thoughts and words, who was hired by this 23 year old just out of college, made temporary personnel director, son of a colleague of the supervisor, a rich woman with a PhD from the US, the LA-hit-by-a-bus-guy used his settlement money to hang out with local bar girls (puu-ying kai borikaan, as polite people are wont to say) and all his students knew about this and would tease and taunt him continually, the young (actually not from Princeton) Princeton Volunteers volunteer there for a quick impressive-resume-building-stint, both pitied him because of his accident and brain damage, while at the same time being repelled by the fact that he taught 18-19 year olds [ Thai: dek] during the day and hung out at a bar called the Schoolroom where all the waitresses dressed in school outfits, at night, being only 23 with advanced skills in irony not yet fully developed, this only confused the poor girl…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
When we talk about Mak we talk about Feudal Patronage
“The Jakrapob Code” by Chulalongkorn’s Professor Anan shows clearly that Jakrapob was talking about Royal Patronage System
2 different subjects, as for the Bangkok Post, they are doing a good job, the Jakrapob however has no job now and might end up in shackles
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sorry, Simon but I can’t resist: You seriously don’t see the stupidity of your comment do you?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
My sympathy jonfernquest. We are aware that the Thai bureaucracy (where PMSamak is quite popular) – your experiences of public university system being part of it is quite often ruled by self-righteous Phu-yais. Maybe the trend is already there and one day (if not already in many areas), private institutions such as Rangsit U, Bangkok U, Assumption U (where merit holds sway over patronage) will rate higher than prestigious public unis such Chula, Thammasat, or Kaset once US-style education ratings are adopted (the education ministry has been dabbling with it over the past years and many old public institutions were not happy).
W hile – for the most part – I am against the privatization of education, I agree with independent ratings (adopted from private sectors). I think it is a way to move towards more meritocracy (even if my own alma mater didn’t perform well – although I had a great undergraduate education and have been, on the main, impressed and inspired by my former ajarns). Education must be of good quality and assessible to all socio-economic groups and private institutions often fail to provide that. While Thai public university’s quality will improve greatly will less patronage…
However, I am seeing things from the outside now jonfernquest and am certain that you see things much clearer than me. I appreciate your sticking to the task of educating Thai students.
I have not criticized the content of Jakrapob’s speech because for the most part, I agree with it (except when he linked it to the PMPrem and higher institutions – which is rather personal and unsurprisingly landed him in political hotwater). It is an important speech for Thai bureaucracy (as Thai private sector are light years ahead) but the wrong person delivered it in the wrong context. I think Ajarn Ji Ungpakorn would have been the right person (a big reform in the country’s most prestigious institution can lead to reforms of the whole system).
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Simon: Isn’t Abhisit a product of the patronage system?
For those who haven’t seen Jakrapob’s Code, here is a link at The Manager.
http://tinyurl.com/4xp76q
He makes some great assumptions and starts inserting “monarchy” where “patronage system” is.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Professor Anan does not make assumptions, he applies linguistics to help analyse Jakrapob’s intentions. The word substitution is simply an additional test to see how the word monarchy would fit based or root analysis combined with context analysis simplified by his mathematical formula that conclusively cracks “The Jakrapob Code”.
BP: Can you read Thai?
RV: I cun’t see your comment
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Simon: He makes a huge leap. He narrows the patronage system to only the monarchy. Jakrapob talked about how he gained from the patronage system as his father was an airline pilot. Why not insert airline pilots there and say patronage system=airline pilots?
Yes, I can read Thai
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I can hardly see how defending Aphisit (didn’t he attack Jakrapob?) from patronizing attacks by Samak is taking on the patronage system. “Brave” would be criticizing both of them.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sidh: “…your experiences of public university system being part of it is quite **often** ruled by self-righteous Phu-yais.”
Out in the provinces I think you have a Heart of Darkness effect. Total power over the rural farm folk, totally corrupting.
Andrew Walker: “Let’s hope this brave voice is not silenced by a lèse majesté charge!”
I think this statement is confused. Some puu yais might misuse the power and legitimacy they get from royal ceremonies and the institutions of monarchy, but that is the puu yai‘s problem, not acting in a way so as to honour their monarch. Like those taking bribes or cheating people.
Take the example of the recently deceased HRH Princess Galyani who taught French literature at Thammasat, was a great lover of classical music, and a patron and supporter of the Siam Society. Are people really emulating her wonderful example to do her honour? I see people who received prestige and status from her visits, but acting to motivate and interest people in the fine examples of French literature, classical music, and Thai literature/history that she loved and promoted?
The problem is not with the insitutions of kingship, it’s with the way that some people use them.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sidh,
I work in one of the public university in Thailand. I’m not against the rating system.
But the Ministry of Education rating system is very inaccurate in measuring academic competency. Please read carefully how they compute the rating, and you’ll know.
They put the business schools and music department in the social science section (they do rating at faculty/department level as well).
As they cannot find much data on academic competitiveness, the rating was based mostly on 3 indicators: teacher/student ratio, funding, and internationality.
They include the outliers, and the result jump with the outlier. For example, all social sciecne departments get roughly the same score, with a few exceptional good performers such as; 1) the Music Department at Mahiol (due to a very low teacher/student ratio); 2) some departments that just build a new site and received a huge amount of funding from fundraising.
All law faculties (including Chula and Thammasat) received a very low rating, as they normally have a large classroom size. Does this mean their education is worse than the music department?
One very interesting result is, the univeristy with a very high score on internationality is Ubonrachthani University, as they get a lot of students from Laos. Nothing against the Laos, but does this reflect a better quality of education?
And lastly, the rating system was based on the data that all the academic department compiled and computed to the Ministry of Education. The Ministry of Education does not collect any data, they just use a ready made data. From who? those who are rated.
Finally, I don’t think the private universities are on the list. They are not rated.
I’m not against the rating system. But I’m against a “stupid” rating system, which do more harm than good. The evil is in details. Please don’t take it at the face value.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The problem is not with the insitutions of kingship, it’s with the way that some people use them.
And that includes the very family bestowed with that position. Or are you saying they are perfect and superhuman? That is why we do need valid criticism and no more LM, in order to fix it at the institutional level.
Otherwise, what is your recommendation for the next course of action? Its pretty clear that the old guys at the top aren’t/haven’t been/will not be doing anything to stop these abusers.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I heard the show, Jonathan did no LM that night but Jakrapob if not guilty is definitely in the dark grey areas, his patraonage was clearly royal patronage and he made numerous linking references to various kings throughout Thai history.
You don’t need a degree in political science to understand that Jakrapob broke sacred taboos and challenged the system of democracy with a monarch – a no no in Thai society!
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Or are you saying they are perfect and superhuman?”
No, His Majesty the King’s birthday speech of, I believe, 2004 makes that perfectly clear by, I believe, inviting well-reasoned and logical critical thought about the institutions of monarchy, but three important factors probably precluded exactly that in Jakrapob’s FCCT speech: 1. he seems to have been under severe emotional strain after being recently released from jail after the rather violent protest he lead outside of Prem’s house, and 2. using the English language instead of Thai for such a sensitive subject, clearly meant that he did not have complete command of what he was saying, I can’t read the transcript without cringing and trying to figure out what exactly he is trying to say, the fact that there is so much disagreement about what he said might actually constitute proof of that, and 3. he seems all too willing to discourse at length on subjects like ancient Tai history, that he knows hardly anything about, probably a habit picked up from work in TV, which does not place high value on, for instance, citing one’s sources, considering absolutely essential in reasoned scholarly discourse.
Earlier this year there was debate in the Thai media by scholars such as Nidhi Eoseewong on reforming the LM law so that it more like European LM laws, but until then, however admittedly murky and subject to abuse that the law might be (like the case of the farang in Kon Khaen who was accused of LM as a form of harassment), LM is the law.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
jonfernquest: Can you cite examples of reasoned criticism of the king that has been made, publicised and debated? I can’t recall any. Seems to me that the king is reveling in being able to call for criticism knowing that there won’t be any. The paplace did say that they were going to correct Handley’s “errors” but in the end did nothing and went along with the banning.
For me, as someone who regularly reads and edits the work on non-English speakers, Jakrapob’s speech is clear. What disagreement do you refer to? As far as I can tell it is over Thai translation, not what he said in English. He may want to squirm a bit now, but it is clear that he was criticising Prem and the monarchy directly and bravely. He now pays the penalty.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Jon said: No, His Majesty the King’s birthday speech of, I believe, 2004 makes that perfectly clear by, I believe, inviting well-reasoned and logical critical thought about the institutions of monarchy.
So we agree there needs to be criticism. Has there been criticism? Or has it all been just talk, as usual? In fact, there was only ONE memorable talk inviting criticism, if I remember correctly. It is almost as if the signal to Parliamentarians and civil servants is “take it easy. No pressure. No rush at all”
Now let’s see the royalists appearing out of the woodwork saying that there is nothing to criticize. And yet the King is not superhuman, does not rely on propaganda to boost his image, nor LM law….
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Reg Varney said: He may want to squirm a bit now, but it is clear that he was criticising Prem and the monarchy directly and bravely
Reg could be called as a witness, but by which side will depend on whether Jakrapob decides to backtrack, or tries to put some reason behind his speech.
Most expect a backtrack, but maybe he could surprise and be a real Jack out of the box
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
nganadeeleg: I hope he puts reason behind his speech. Whatever Jakrapob says now, I maintain that his position, in English, was clear, and it is a position well worth defending. My own hope is that he will make a martyr of himself and make these points again if the case gets to court. However, the realities of Thai politics are that throwing oneself on the sword is an unlikely strategy. The consequences are too great for a lad from the elite. Like others before him, he might recant or do a little time (a la Veera) or both.
There are so few times when the monarchy’s hegemonic ideological position is challenged these days that this represents a rare opportunity for Thai republicans to be heard.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
As far as there having been any criticism of the monarchy, obviously it would be ridiculous to suggest there is free-flowing critical debate on the monarchy.
However, having attended the panel discussion at Thammasat University on Paul Handley’s book during the Thai Studies Conference earlier this year, the consensus was that most everything Handley had written has already been written in Thai by academics.
The uproar was because they were now being written in English by a farang journalist – meaning it would be spread far and wide.
So some space does appear to exist, although it is very narrow, for reasoned criticism of the monarchy.
On a side note, Mr. Walker, I find your “Democrat-except-when-you-can’t-win-an-election-and-then-a-coup-is-OK Party” frankly offensive in its untruthfulness.
Having listened to Abhisit and Korn speak several times at the FCCT and other venues, never once did they defend the coup.
The closest Abhisit came to defending the military was in highlighting the sheer hypocrisy of TRT members such as Jakrapob who were railing against the military’s involvement in politics, by pointing out that TRT used soldiers to buy votes during elections. As did the NAP before it. TRT was happy to have the military involved in politics when it served their purposes, but not when the military turned against it.
Abhisit’s position, clearly stated, was that he was opposed to the coup, but that taking to the streets to demonstrate and try and force the coup leaders to step down could lead to a violent incident that would serve as a pretext for the military to hang on to power longer than their self-imposed deadline for stepping aside.
He spoke out against the CNS’s and interim government’s repressive measures several times.
In the end, he was right, and they left. (Had they not, and he did not oppose them lingering on, then he would be fair game.)
It’s now up to the government and politicians to create a system where they won’t have a pretext to come back – something they seem miserably incapable of achieving.
It’s very romantic to say Abhisit should have been leading some May 92 style revolt.
But that would have led to bloodshed, and there are better ways to solve the country’s problems than that.
It’s very romantic
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I’m sure Abhisit himself does not support a coup. But he is one man who is barely in charge of his party, in my opinion.
But what are these “better ways” to solve the country’s problem? Come out and give a few interviews then ride the political wave into office?
The Democrats frankly did nothing against the coup except give a few interviews. Hard “better ways” and is de facto support for the coup.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Thanks Thorn for the insight into the Thai university rating system. In some ways my position is also contradictory – advocating for assessible public education yet also for private-style, independent ratings. Maybe one way around that is to include ‘assessibility’ to education for lower socio-economic groups as one measuring criteria – but that would also contradict meritocracy (the irony of proactivism). Many current global university ratings are also quite problematic – however, a good aspect is that it mainly favours research output and that could be a good thing for Thai university education.
Reg Varney, I read your response to my comments on another post mentioning something about ‘race’, tying Thai underlying Confucianism to Sino-Thai dominance in modern Thai cultural urban-based space, but had no time to respond. I couldn’t find those postings now (?). It is a hard one to address as I am in the fish-tank myself. I do have enough Chinese ancestry (with healthy doses of others too) to be classified as “Sino-Thai” – but that is how I see it, an academic classification. Personally I feel mainly “Thai” and not so much “Sino” – especially being exposed to the ‘real’ Chinese culture/attitude. Ofcourse they are similiarities which I simplistically classify as “Asian”, but the differences are also quite pronounced (as a proud Chinese-Malay friend also once stressed to me – the hyphenated identity quite important for him). Maybe it is just the 19th-20th Century Siamese “self-colonized” history. While neighboring countries are exposed to European divide and rule based on ethnicity, the Siamese elite (monarchy) went for the assimilation of the ethically diverse population to survive colonization (especially while also facing extraterritoriality). I am vague on all this and I am sure the many knowledgable ajarns here can provide a more researched answer.
From observation, race and religion is generally irrelevant in Thai politics and elections (money is, and Bangkok-based “Sino-Thai” just happened to have more of it) – but maybe things are now quite different in the four Southern-most provinces since PMThaksin’s ‘divide and rule’ policies that seem to see Thai Muslims as a group, like the branded “drug-traders”, that he can massacre for political gain. However, I think I am a minority amongst my countrymen that is deeply disturbed and hurt by those events.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
If you say Abhisit is barely in charge of his party, please show evidence that other party members actively supported the coup or took a different position than his.
Yes, nonviolent participatory politics is better than bloodshed. You have the freedom to disagree, but I don’t think many Thais would join you in baying for the blood of their countrymen.
Abhisit chose a wise path. In the limited space for political activity allowed he made his voice heard, and his opposition to the coup perfectly clear. And he did so at a time when the coup was still supported by the voters that make up his party’s base.
Patience and forbearance helped bring about a peaceful transition back to elected government. Any other path ran a far higher risk of prolonging rule by force and causing death. And for what? The generals have stepped back. An elected government is in place, like them or not.
Should he have been out there with the UDD? Should he have shared the stage with Jakrapob Penkair, Thailand’s own Robespierre wannabe?
I think not.
Abhisit has plenty of faults, along with several strengths. But to say he or his party supported the coup is false, a blatant lie – and one used to great effect by the PPP.
You ask what are the “better ways” than bloodshed? Well, let me ask you: are you really proposing bloodshed or courting bloodshed?
Why don’t you tell us what you believe the leader of the Democrat Party should have done under the circumstances of 2006-7.
I can’t see any meaning or sense in your final sentence, so I can’t reply to it. But if not dying on the ramparts to oppose the generals is “de facto support” for the coup, then nearly the entire country gave its de facto support to the coup.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Mr Horn:
Still, we didn’t see the Democrats standing strongly against the coup –before and when it took place, as they did in the 1990s. And the boycott! Rather than working hard to build their case with the voters over a longer period, the way it sometimes has to work in democracies, they took the lazy way out and let the palace do the dirty work.
Yeah, I know, easily and knowingly giving in to a coup is not the same as endorsing one. Even when you used to be vocal about the matter.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
A Democrat Party MP is participating in the protests with the PAD. What is Abhisit’s stance? At the moment the Party actually disagrees with the PAD stance.
Abhisit chose a cowardly stance and still calls himself a democrat. His actions on two instances, however, said otherwise. Why boycott an election? If you’re a Political party in parliament, why do you choose not to participate in said election?
When you are named the “Democrat” party, why is it that in the event of a coup, you do nothing except talk? “Patience” is code for “do nothing”, I assume?
I never claimed Abhisit supported the coup. Also, to equate that doing nothing is the only means of avoiding bloodshed ridiculous. Arguments like yours get dissected in high school debate classes.
My final sentence should read: “The Democrats frankly did nothing against the coup except give a few interviews. Hardly is it “better ways” and is de facto support for the coup.
Emphasis on the word “hardly”.
By the way, here is what Abhisit could have done:
1. Boycott the referendum or promoted a “no” vote. After all they boycotted an election under lesser circumstances
2. Campaign against the 2007 Constitution
3. Denounce all actions by the coup group as unconstitutional
4. Protest the appointment of an interim government
5. Protest the unlawful overthrow of an elected government, or at least that MP protesting with the PAD could
6. Demand a complete re-instatement of the legitimate government
Commendably Abhisit did denounce the year long transition period and constitution drafting. But all his talk is hardly enough. In fact, if all he will do is talk, then he should at least talk with more conviction for democracy. Now don’t get me wrong, Abhisit is a good candidate. But him and his party need a better name.
Anyhow, what are these “better ways” of yours?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Mr Horn: “However, having attended the panel discussion at Thammasat University on Paul Handley’s book during the Thai Studies Conference earlier this year, the consensus was that most everything Handley had written has already been written in Thai by academics. The uproar was because they were now being written in English by a farang journalist – meaning it would be spread far and wide. ”
I didn’t attend, but my understanding was that this view was seriously challenged after the event and maybe at it. This was Reynolds and Kobkua’s point and it seems off the mark. There was a thread on this site about this, so you could search that out. I remember that Reynolds cited a number of Thai works, but all were published after Handley’s book came out. I also recall that Handley responded.
On Abhisit: It seems to me that your comments are about the political statements of the Dems and their leadership. Their actions and inactions, however, betray them. Frankly, they seem to be waiting to gain the position they think they deserved to get in December and they seem very capable at stirring the coup pot with dirty tactics – lese majeste, calls to close websites (which were as much anti-Dem as anti-monarchy, etc.).
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
FYI: This is not quite related to this topic. My apology using the space here. I just want to draw NM readers’ attention to this (I believe) important info.
Sondhi Limthongkhun explains the origins of the PAD’s “Blue Kerchief”
please see here (in Thai) my post, together with links to tape recording of Sondhi’s speeches.
http://www.sameskybooks.org/board/index.php?showtopic=8782
or
http://www.prachatai.com/webboard/topic.php?id=690534
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Reg Varney: “…he was criticising … the monarchy directly and bravely. He now pays the penalty.”
Which is Lese Majeste, which is the law. QED
Most Thais would probably not agree with the “brave” part.
Reg Varney: “Can you cite examples of reasoned criticism of the king that has been made, publicised and debated?”
First of all, “well-reasoned and logical critical thought” does not mean direct “criticism.”
Critical thought begins in small significant steps such as describing events and institutions in objective terms rather than in the normal hagiographical mode, for instance in the Thai language study (MA dissertation) on the Royal Projects and the panels at the conference, and the papers on the Crown Property Bureau, or every article that criticises the crown property bureau for actually making money, or evicting tenants from locations under redevelopment, or Jit Phumisak, or any other work that argues for the socialist paradise that Pridi envisioned, that neighboring Burma actually arrived at (not).
The real test may be whether Jakrapob would ever have let loose that little rant in front of his own countrymen in his own language, or whether he was just showing off for a foreign audience, like the part about a government in exile?
Foreign news articles with a few exceptions are littered with highly partisan and trite simplifications for a highly biased audience back home. I’m thinking specifically of the BBC and Economist. Never do you get the sense of how complicated and tangled this conflict is. And part of my job is to read Thai political news in detail everyday, even though I write about economics and business. Also I’ve published a 7o page monograph on early Tai history at SOAS, and I nearly broke into laughter, when reading his TV announcer’s babble about hundreds of years of Tai history. That you or foreign journalists think that it is reasonable is quite irrelevant.
It’s a positive step that the law is now being enforced and people are being help accountable for their actions, for instance in the assets of the Ample Rich case, which is really at the heart of this current political struggle over constitutional amendment.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
jonfernquest: The law is the law QED. Bad laws and repressive laws are always challenged.
Your characterisation of what constitutes criticism is not what I imagined from the royal comment. If you include the bits and pieces you mention, this does not amount to direct criticism of the monarchy. (Maybe you could have mentioned Ji Ungpakorn and Thongchai).
You miss the point on J’s comments about Thai history. He is characterising the royal view of that history – no idea if he believes it himself. See Thongchai’s piece in the JCA special issue.
The slective enforcement of the law – as you yourself have blogged before – does not amount to a positive. This remains a critical problem for Thailand, especially when the courts are corrupt.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I looked back for Abhisit’s steadfastness in the face of the 2006 coup. This was in the Nation, 21 Sept 2006 (TNA, Agencies):
Thailand’s Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy on Thursday announced a ban on political parties meeting and barred the establishment of new parties.
Just under the wire of the ban, Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva slammed the coup. He demanded military leaders call elections in six months – not a year as they said – and accelerate political reforms if they are serious about a swift return to democratic rule. “We cannot and do not support any kind of extra-constitutional change, but it’s done,” said Mr Abhisit on Thursday, just before the ban on political party activities. The country has to move forward and the best way forward is for the coup leaders to quickly return power to the people and carry out reforms they promised,” he said. “They have to prove themselves. I urge them to lift all restrictions as soon as possible,” he said of the coup council.
…
“There is no need to write a brand new constitution,” said Mr Abhisit, whose Democrats are the country’s oldest party. He and academics from Thammasat University said the 1997 “People’s Charter” constitution was basically sound but Thaksin had exploited flaws in its checks and balances. “They could make changes to the 1997 constitution and if that’s the case, there is no reason to take a year,” Mr Abhisit said, adding: “Six months is a good time.”
This is a bit weak isn’t it? Not really a brave attack on the military leaders, is it? Sounds like he supported getting rid of Thaksin by undemocratic means but wanted to get back to a post-TRT period as fast as possible. Makes the “Democrat-except-when-you-can’t-win-an-election-and-then-a-coup-is-OK Party” seem plausible. Maybe there are other quotes where he is less wimpish (please post them if found).
His comments on the constitution make interesting reading now.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“TRT-election win = license-to-rob-Thailand-Party” VS “Democrat-except-when-you-can’t-win-an-election-and-then-a-coup-is-OK Party”… what a choice!!!
For an election in NM “TRT=Thai Republic Party” trounces “Democrat= Thai Royalist Party”. I suspect it was never the question of ‘democracy’, ‘rule of law’, ‘human rights’, ‘media freedom’, ‘corruption’…etc…etc… Ah, the poor Thais – what chances do they have when the Ivory Tower misplace their priorities and dwell on personal fetish???
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Huh, Sidh?
Its not a republic v. constitutional monarchy question. Its a question of do we really have a choice. Hardly has anybody been advocating rule of law, transparency, or human rights in Thailand’s public sphere. They talk about it, but no one actually does it. Sondhi, Saphrang, Surayud, and now, Jaruvan. Not on the scale of Thaksin, but what is the definition of rule of law again?
http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/12Jun2008_news09.php
BTW, Jon, I would not say those are positive steps towards the rule of law. Politically motivated enforcement of law is hardly rule of law. In fact, it sows more discord than upholds justice.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“You miss the point on J’s comments about Thai history. He is characterising the royal view of that history – no idea if he believes it himself. ”
I did not “miss the point” at all.
The fact that his inflammatory impromptu remarks have been interpreted in so many ways is clear evidence that he was not being careful in what he was saying, that seems to be a fundamental purpose behind LM laws.
Impromptu speeches during happy hour at the FCCT are not the proper vehicle to carry on this sort of discourse.
“Bad laws and repressive laws are always challenged.”
All laws are challenged. All laws evolve. This one will too. The underlying purpose of this law, however, is completely legitimate, to maintain the central position of the monarchy in the constitution of Thailand. Jakrapob made a big mistake challenging this, effectively adding it to the agenda of all the other conflicts that are currently going on.
“See Thongchai’s piece in the JCA special issue.”
Is this another publication only available to academics with access to special databases? McCargo’s network monarchy piece is missing from Chula’s library. I can guarantee most people who work at newspapers in Thailand, like myself, could not read this article even if they wanted to.
“The selective enforcement of the law – as you yourself have blogged before – does not amount to a positive. This remains a critical problem for Thailand, especially when the courts are corrupt.”
I agree with the selective enforcement part which is pretty clear from the following article which I could get ahold of since I have JSTOR access:
Kings in the Age of Nations: The Paradox of Lese-Majeste as Political Crime in ThailandAuthor(s): David StreckfussSource: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 37, No. 3, (Jul., 1995), pp. 445-475Published by: Cambridge University Press
I wouldn’t say that the courts were corrupt in the lese majeste case. The painstaking procedures and legal rules are detailed in Streckfuss’s paper.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
jonfernquest: The JCA special is available for free download at a number of sites. Google around and you will find it. If you didn’t miss the point, then your words confused me. I do not understand how you can demand historical clarity and accuracy from someone who is essentially characterising a position that is widely held (and still taught in Thailand).
As others have stated – and you can access AHRC site – the Thai courts and judicial system are corrupt.
I would have thought that a fair reading of the Streckfuss article was exactly that LM cases are not transparent or fair. The Veera M. case was clearly a beat-up.
That a law exists does not make it fair or reasonable and free of political and elite interference. So I reject your view that “The underlying purpose of this law, however, is completely legitimate, to maintain the central position of the monarchy in the constitution of Thailand.” This law is illegitimate because of both its intent and its implementation as a highly politicised limit of political freedom. I suspect that we can go no further on this discussion as you are happy with a law that restricts while I reject it.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Teth, in NM democracy, we have a choice and it is overwhelmingly for a republic over a constitutional monarchy (by my subjective tally, admittedly). We in NM also made the choice to NOT advocate the rule of law, transparency, or human rights because we have a Lese Majeste (and other royalist) fetish (someone can count the number of blogs and comments to confirm that).
For one, why are we picking on the poor, hapless Democrats with so little discussion of the all-powerful TRT-PPP political machine? I suspect it’s because they are perceived as a royalist party, in contrast to TRT-PPP who occasionally display anti-monarchist sentiments that many in NM can relate to (“they are one of US and not THEM”).
While the Democrats are clearly not angels, at least the have the decency not to be bought into some sort of ‘national government’ and served as opposition for the past eight years (could we have a democracy without an opposition?). In the context of other political parties clamoring to be part of government like hungry ghosts (preta) and Thai politics where being in opposition is equal to perpetual starvation (from the cookie jars), the Democrats have shown a lot of principle and integrity.
We have to remember that it is PMThaksin’s TRT that rendered the parliamentary process and almost all checks and balances against against the ruling party ineffectual. After selling ShinCorp to public outcry, PMThaksin promised to answer questions in parliament and reneged on that and instead chose to dissolve parliament (which I see as a Singaporean-style ‘bankrupt the opposition through elections’. I mentioned then that part of the reason the Democrats boycotted the elections is because they did not have money after almost six years in opposition. It was only before the 2007 elections when some big political contribution flowed their way and even then, they lost the bid against PMThaksin’s money to form government). If all formal mechanisms of checks and balances fail, politics of resistance naturally migrate to the streets.
We also have to remember that PMThaksin’s TRT is the first democratically elected Thai civilian government to sanction police ‘death squads’ against “drug dealers and addicts” and send the full might of the Thai military on poorly armed/unarmed Thai citizens in the South. Why are these cases not investigated and prosecuted? I suspect it is because many high ranking policemen and army officers will also be implicated. This is a very sad state of affairs for the Thai rule of law.
How do we even begin to reverse this? For a start make sure that PMThaksin’s cases, already investigated, gets to court and are transparently tried. When the most powerful person in the country is in the docks, there’s a much better chance that, one day, the others (politicians, bureaucrats, policemen, army officers, business tycoons – of any political color) will have their turn.
The fetish myth of NM Vs Networked monarchist will not push any of this forward (from the point of view of an un-networked monarchist ofcourse).
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Reg Varney: “I do not understand how you can demand historical clarity and accuracy from someone who is essentially characterising a position that is widely held (and still taught in Thailand).”
Yes, it paradoxical how Jakrapob gives a 5th grade Thai history lesson to highly paid and intelligent foreign journalists, during happy hour, and at the end of his little story of Thai history, at the end of the “patronage system,” who is standing there heroically in bold relief, the Hegelian culmination and perfection of all Thai history?
Jakrapob’s patron.
Then his conclusion:
J: “Thaksin did right or wrong it’s up to history to judge.”
Yes, read the article on Thai telecommunications in the recent Baker and Pasuk volume, that article accurately summarises how he used the political power of his premiership to pump money out of his telecommunications business.
J: “You can drag him to court or international court of justice, doesn’t matter.”
That will be difficult because he has lots of money, unlimited ability to harass judges with defamation suits and arrest warrants and a lot of friends in the police department which does not operate transparently by any means.
J: “What matters is what he has put and imprinted in Thailand.”
That would be division and political strife.
J: “It’s something that people never felt before.”
Probably a good thing. Rewards usually go with economic progress, as in South Korea under Park Chung Hee or China nowadays.
Dumping money on rural Thailand without reforming the corrupt system there is like putting a bandaid on a bleeding ulcer.
J: “He almost did not do anything for the Bangkok people because he felt that they didn’t need him that much.”
No, because divide and rule was an essential part of his tactics.
Sidh: “We have to remember that it is PMThaksin’s TRT that rendered the parliamentary process and almost all checks and balances against against the ruling party ineffectual.”
Yes.
Sidh: “We also have to remember that PMThaksin’s TRT is the first democratically elected Thai civilian government to sanction police ‘death squads’ against “drug dealers and addicts” and send the full might of the Thai military on poorly armed/unarmed Thai citizens in the South.”
Yes.
Sidh: “How do we even begin to reverse this? For a start make sure that PMThaksin’s cases, already investigated, gets to court and are transparently tried.”
Yes.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sure, Sidh.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
jf: “Yes, it paradoxical how Jakrapob gives a 5th grade Thai history lesson to highly paid and intelligent foreign journalists, during happy hour,…”: I say again – you miss the point. And, the FCCT events are not happy hours.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I don’t pretend to understand too much about the workings of contemporary Thai politics, but I’m very confused by this debate – all sides of it. It appears, on the face of it, that everyone is debating not what constitutes democracy (or whatever positive word you would like to use), but who should be in charge.
Rule of lords indeed. If that’s the extent of serious political debate in Thailand, it’s much worse than I’d imagined.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0