Chang Noi has a seriously good analysis/reflection in today’s The Nation. It describes what drives the new international appetite for meaty coverage of Thai political issues. As Chang Noi points out, “[t]he knowledge industry, both inside and outside the country, will continue trying to fill in the missing parts of the puzzle because there is such a large audience that has so much at stake and a desire to understand what is really going on”.
The full article is available here. Readers looking to digest more nuggets of wisdom from the Little Elephant will find the entire menu worth a browse. And I hear there is a book out too! Its online blurb even lifts the “thinly veiled pseudonym” that shields what must be Southeast Asia’s most productive academic partnership.
Interesting article, thanks for the link. If I understand correctly, Chang Noi is saying that those phu-yai who are uncomfortable with the foreign press talking about the royal institution need to get over it, because it is going to continue. It’s going to continue because so many people outside Thailand now have an interest in what happens here.
I found the link to the menu absolutely great! I hadn’t had a chance to read most of his articles before. He makes clear some of the background of the legal system and the way the judiciary works.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I’ve never been a fan of Chang Noi, and I honestly don’t understand how many people are, including many people here who I expect should have known better.
Here’s one small example why:
in the article “Monarchy, democracy, and the politics of polarisation”
http://www.geocities.com/changnoi2/polarise.htm Chang Noi writes:
In August 2001, he blurted out “I love people, I want to work for them,” and launched his career as a populist hero. He now loves democracy and wants to work for it.
(See the rest of the articel too and – notice this – the article is title “Monarchy…”)
I seriously ask Chang Noi : Would you ever write with the same critical, sarcastic posture you write here about Thaksin in the case of speeches by certain “YOU KNOW WHO”? If not, why not?
If the answer is it’s too dangerous or something of the sort, should you, everytime you write something with such ‘high-moral’ stand as this one, tell readers that your ‘democratic moral highground’ is exclusively applies to politicians.
If I raise such question, say 5 or 6 years ago, people could easily say it’s irrelevant. But, again I seriously ask : given what happened during the past few years, isn’t such question highly relevant?
Frankly, I’m sick of academics like Chnag Noi who show so much ‘courage’ against politicians.
Notice too that the central idea of the article is for Chang Noi to claim to be “against both sides” (song mai aw). Such a self-promotional claim!
In historical perspective, PAD is nothing, a ‘small actor’ in the current conflicts. How about a sarcastic, critical take on speeches by ‘certain person’?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I want to ask Somsak to explain his response to the article he links to a little more. I be just dumb, but I am not sure that I understand the criticisms he makes about this particular article.
If he is simply saying that Chang Noi should attack the monarchy, the no need for more explanation. There are many in Thailand who do not directly attack the monarchy. But if there is something more, let us know.
I don’t see the sarcasm Somsak refers to. Rather I see something similar to Jakkrapob’s famous comment that Thaksin sleepwalked into a historical position that was not necessarily of his own choosing.
I think such a view warrants serious consideration. It is always claimed by anti-Thaksin academics that there is a need to acknowledge Thaksin’s failures when in office and how this disqualifies him as a democrat in any sense of the word. However, there can be little doubt that Thaksin has become a symbol of lost democracy for many people. Again, I think CN points this out, and we need to take that point seriously.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Let’s get it straight,the local journalists(in fact all Thais) are under the oppressed lesse majeste law. They are forced to discuss behind closed doors. That’s the reason why I pay less attention to the local medias. What kind of wisdom can you expect from an oppressed society.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
With all due respect to Somsak and another poster here named “Republican” who has disappeared for a while now.
They both like to criticize when pomp and purity against opinion makers, editorials, and academics who do a good job of criticizing society. These acts of criticism, some with good reason, most without, are an attempt to ‘take the higher ground’ with their purity or ‘score points’ to increase their pompous and righteous selves.
I point to the fact that ‘Chang Noi’ runs an article on the ‘Nation’, a strictly anti-Thaksin paper wherein he makes constant criticisms of “all types” or authorianism, whether the authroianism is elected (a la Hitler) or an ‘invisible hand’. The ‘invisible hand’ referred is not in the Adam Smith terminology, but in the Kwam Pen Thai terminology.
In direct reference Acharn Somsak asks why Chang Noi does not criticize these background actors in the same breadth and width that he criticizes elected politicos. A quick reply in this sense will be because Chang Noi is not able to get the information he needs to make stinging criticisms as actions of such people are unavailable for public viewing. As such, he can only make cryptic references that showcase his disappointment or position against these highly invisible influences. Such criticism by Acharn Somsak is quite bizarre knowing as Somsak knows the realities of Thailand quite well.
I made the same criticism of Republican a few years ago regarding his position against Dr. Thongchai’s interview in the nation wherein the argument was made that the existence of an LM law hurts the people it is meant to protect more than it helps them as the law can be abused. Recent flurry of ridiculous LM charges somewhat prove him right, but that too led to a bizarre and counter-productive criticism of fellow academics.
You don’t typically find revolutionaries writing articles in newspapers. There are exceptions, but typically editorials and opinion makers are given such status because of their entrenchment in the current system that has elevated their positions to such status. Acharn Somsak and Republican are well aware of this, yet make nonsensical criticisms given their respective positions. As such, I challenge Acharn Somsak to ‘publish’ his articles and points of views to places beyond web sites. Perhaps lead a rally in Sanam Luang full-with whatever clothing color he prefers, as there is already red and yellow, and the reds too ‘hold reverence’ for the monarchy as convicted felon Thaksin Shinawatra put on his speech in the National Stadium last month, perhaps he can pick green or blue?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0