In a recent essay questioning Prime Minister Abhisit’s claim that things have “returned to normal” in Thailand following the suppression of the April red shirt rising, Kevin Hewison (Asia Sentinel, 4 June 2009) refers briefly to state-promoted signboards that have flooded Thailand’s landscape. Here I’d like to build on that important observation more closely.
Since late April this year a new sign has sprouted on roadsides and intersections throughout the country. It features a montage of photographs of the king from various periods of his reign, with a larger portrait at the top left backed by the Thai national flag. These pictures are set on a dark blue background and feature a two line injunction:
PROTECT THE INSTITUTION (ie. Monarchy): CALM-PEACE-SOLIDARITY
On the bottom right is the emblem of the Ministry of the Interior, and on the left the name of the tambon organization or municipality in whose boundaries the sign has been erected. In some areas the Ministry of Interior emblem is not shown (but more on that later).
The Ministry of Interior Billboard (click on the image for a larger version)
The question arises: why is an injunction to “protect” the monarchy required in a county where devotion to the king is so universal? Note that the widely-denigrated red shirts made a point of solemnly standing to sing the national anthem at their rallies in April and declare devotion to the king.
There are at least two answers to this question: first, the sign symbolically demonizes the red shirts and other opponents of the government by signalling that any turbulence (ie. khwam mai sangop) – which is by definition a violation of the virtue of “calm” (sangop) – is a disloyal act.
Second, it refects the agenda of the Bhumjai Thai party (formed last January and controlled by the “Friends of Newin” faction) to build its legitimacy with the anti-Thaksin Democrat-led government, which it helped to form after deserting the Pheua Thai Party. The Minister of the Interior is Chawarat Charnwirakul, former PPP minister, “Friends of Newin” faction members, and leader of the Bhumjai Thai Party. Control of the powerful Interior Ministry gives the Bhumjai Thai Party considerable clout, and it has exercised it to the full.
It is hardly a coincidence that the slogan on the new billboards is the same as the one printed on the tee-shirts of the so-called “blue-shirts” who opposed red shirt anti-government demonstrators in Pattaya during April, and who shot two red-shirt supporters, killing one, on 11 April. Blue tee-shirts emblazoned with the slogan were produced and distributed by Ministry of Interior officials to local people in Pattaya and were also worn by some police from the northeastern provinces, who were mobilized by the Deputy Interior Minister Boonjong Wongtrairat (also of Bhumjai Thai and the “Friends of Newin” faction) from his political heartland to confront red-shirt demonstrators at Pattaya. When queried by journalists about the distribution of these shirts, Boonjong stressed that blue was the colour of the monarchy, and denied that the shirts were used to advertise his party, whose colour is also blue.
The deliberate blurring of the boundaries between the Bhumjai Thai Party and the state are clear in the operations of the Ministry of the Interior. It was recently shown in the “seminar” staged at the edge of a constituency of the northeastern province of Sakhon Nakhon last week, during the campaign for the critical by-election where Bhumjai Thai and Pheua Thai were competing. Chawarat used his power as minister during his campaign visit to the province to summon the governor of Sakhon Nakhon to attend, ostensibly to listen to discussion about “government policy.”
Clearly nothing has changed in the political uses of the Interior Ministry – it was harnessed by the Democrats when they held the portfolio in the late 1990s, and by Thaksin’s Thai Rak Thai government. Now it is being used by the Bhumjai Thai party to undermine is political opponents. This suits the Democrat Party, since it shares a common enemy in the red shirts, but it also shows how much leeway the Bhumjai Thai party is being granted, clearly because the Democrats depend on this party and its de facto taskmaster Newin Chidchop, for the survival of their increasingly shaky coalition government.
Thanks to a friend who is nayok (mayor) of a municipal tambon, I recently obtained a copy of the orders sent by the Ministry of Interior to erect these billboards. The details are rather interesting. Stamped as “most urgent” the letter of instruction was sent to all province governors, and from thence transmitted to all local government bodies in each province. Of particular note is the fact that the order from the Minister of the Interior to erect the billboards is dated 7 April. This is the same day that Newin Chidchop made his tearful speech to journalists, where he appealed to his former boss to stop “damaging the monarchy,” and professed his devotion to the king. Is the convergence of these two dates a coincidence? I think not. Both the Ministry of Interior order and Newin’s choreographed announcement were a clear reaction to the red shirt anti-government demonstration in Bangkok, which began 12 days earlier, on 26 March.
The order begins by outlining that it follows an important “policy” laid down by Chawarat as Minister of Interior for all bodies under the control of the Ministry of Interior to follow. In the weighty language of the centralized state, highlighting the indivisibility of the country and its bureaucracy, the letter goes on to point out that: “It is the principal duty of the Ministry of the Interior to protect the institution of the monarchy that is at centre of the collective soul of the Thai people throughout the country and venerated in numerous ways.” Following this imperative duty the Ministry of Interior has determined a “motto,” namely: “Protect the Institution – Calm -Peace-Solidarity.” It continues:
This is a campaign for all working units, organizations and the population generally to be conscious of the motto and to participate and follow the direction of this policy. In order to make this tangible [the Ministry of Interior] requests that provinces arrange for the cooperation of all local government organizations everywhere in their areas.
There follows specification of the size of the “public relations sign,” to be printed by each local government body according to the template provided on a CD disk supplied with the letter. The size of billboards is specified to be no smaller than 7 x 10 metres, and local government organizations are instructed to erect them in prominent locations throughout their areas by 30 April at the latest. Each local government body was required to pay for these billboards from their own budgets.
The Ministry of Interior orders (click on the image for a larger version)
Most municipalities and tambon organizations seem to have erected their signs fairly soon after 20 April. But some were not particularly happy about it, not the least because the expenses amounted to over 10,000 baht. My friend the mayor (from a southern Thai Buddhist-majority province) objected to the sign, both because of the expense involved and because he viewed it disapprovingly as politically motivated. Though a southerner (frequently stereotyped as Democrat supporters) he is in fact a former Thai Rak Thai supporter, and was highly critical of the government suppression of the red-shirt movement in early April. Like all local government executives, however, he cannot refuse the order of the Ministry. What he did do, however, was restrict the number of billboards to one only, and he instructed the printers to omit the logo of the Ministry from the poster – “why should I advertise for the Ministry when we are paying for the billboard” he explained. This was a strange form of resistance, but it was all he could do under the circumstances.
Popular reactions to this conspicuous billboard in the red-shirt strongholds of the northeast have been negative. As a red shirt from Udon Thani (a middle-ranking district-level public servant) pointed out to me: “Most people are unhappy with this billboard. The king and the monarchy are deep in the peoples’ hearts already – they know that the Ministry of the Interior is controlled by Bhumjai Thai Party and that they are playing politics by invoking the royal institution.”
Given this reaction, it appears that this Ministry of Interior “campaign” has succeeded only in demonstrating the formal power of the Ministry to command province, district and sub-district government bodies. Of course, that coercive power is significant, and exposes the fiction of decentralization in Thailand. But the policy does not seem to have stimulated the desired response in the key areas where it was targeted. On 21 June the Bhumjai Thai party, armed with all the bureaucratic resources at its command, failed miserably in its effort to wrest control of the Sakhon Nakhon constituency from the Pheua Tai Party and its red-shirt supporters.
Thanks to Marc for this added and detailed information regarding the signs. When I saw them, back in late May, the signs were most noticeable in areas rather closer to Bangkok. I didn’t see any in the little corner of Korat where I visited. But they seem to be popping up like mushrooms now.
It seems to me that there might be another related explanation for these signs. That is that the people who protect the palace really do fear the consequences flowing from the increasing criticisms that have been aired of the monarchy and the palace’s political role as expressed in the blogosphere and in speeches from the red-shirt platform and so on. It can’t have gone unnoticed that these criticisms have had some purchase amongst groups considered loyal in the past. Just maybe the palace minders have been seriously spooked and are falling back on past strategies in order to demand loyalty.
Of course, this is a related explanation, and by no means diminishes the political points Marc discusses.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Certainly it is good business for billboard makers. It is also a proof that those crooks in the government really waste the people’s money.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
There are two huge billboards which are prominently displayed in the Victory Monument area where I pass almost daily. One urges “peace, unity, and devotion to the Father” while the other stresses Bhumi jai Thai party’s determination to solve traffic congestion by introducing NGV buses and offering cheap rates to commuters. I was even given leaflets showing more details about the NGV buses.
To what extent Bangkokians, especially commuters, will take this party’s carrots remains to be seen but a recent survey on Abhisit govt’s performance is very disappointing. Moreover, this party’s defeat in Sakorn Nakorn by-election shows that Isan people still remember who the traitors are and decide to punish them severely. People are getting smarter and they don’t trust what the govt-controlled media are reporting daily and prefer to find their own sources of information.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The fact is all these billboards which can be seen all over the country are being paid by the tax payers. While most Thais are poor and cannot even afford to pay for their food and a proper education, all these propaganda appear to be going on for the last 60 years. If all of these expenses are being recorded, I am sure we can build another country with these waste. All these propaganda should exceed 10% of the Thai GDP. I am sure the Thais can do a lot more with a 10% GDP being made for just one family alone.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Two brief remarks.
First, could “samakkhi” not better be translated as “unity”? This is the same semantic field that Suchit Bunbongarn touched upon in the title of his talk at the ANU — “Building unity” (versus pluralism and tolerance). In a wider sense, the campaign is located in the ideological context of creating unity within the boundaries demarkated by the trinity of “Nation, Religion, and Monarchy.”
Second, regarding the statement of “red shirts made a point of solemnly standing to sing the national anthem at their rallies in April and declare devotion to the king,” I wonder whether the second part of the sentence is accurate. While I was standing with the UDD protestors while the national anthem was played on the public address system on Rajadamnoen Avenue, I’d rather say that their protest area was sort of “monarchy free.”
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Given these signs were ordered by the ultra-transparent Interior Ministry, I would like to know how much each sign actually cost to make, who made them, and how much revenue was received from each municipality.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I was naively thinking that all those billboards and other signs all over the country showing “we love the king” messages are erected by the local authorities due to their honest feelings towards the royalty. Well, seems like I have to correct my misconception to the reality at least partially…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Thanks AjarnMarc for the sharp analysis.
The Talented Mr.Newin, a founding father of the Reds and early orchestrator, now wants to ‘out-loyal’ the Yellows. A “dual-track” strategy with ‘out-populist’ PMThaksin?! (The Democrats, a mere hapless stepping stone!)
A big slap in the face perhaps – but Mr.Newin is a very fast learner and seem to have what PMThaksin fatally lacked, patience. I will never count him out as a potential future Thai Prime Minister (whether I like it or NOT)…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Based on the argument presented, the title should read “Signs of the Bhumjaithai Party” rather than “Signs of the Thai State.”
What is the real red shirt issue anyway?
Isn’t it regional economic inequality?
How much time and attention do all the learned academic commentators actually devote to the real issue? Not much.
If there were more vibrant provincial economies, rural people would not feel compelled to migrate to Bangkok on a seasonal basis. They would get treated better working as permanent employees at companies that actually pay taxes which would give local provincial governments their own sources of revenue, instead of relying on and assuming that it is their natural right that the center should subsidize the periphery by large amounts. More babies, more votes, more subsidies?
The notion that somehow by just redistributing money from the urban center to the periphery or by shifting governance to the provinces all the problems would disappear is just ridiculous.The provinces are where government officials put their hand in the til and avoid detection. The provinces are where the wishes of the rich and powerful are an unchallenged law.
The signboards make the legitimate point that unity and an end to protests is needed now. If the political conflicts continue on for many more years Thailand as a whole, including those from rural areas stand to lose economically.
Sure Thailand needs more than one pole of prosperity besides Bangkok. Investment rather than street protests or politically motivated handouts are the way to get there.
The signboard obviously targets specific recent events:
1. Recent interview comments by Thaksin
2. The FCCT speech of Jakrapob
3. Recent attacks on Prem the closest advisor to the King
The net effect to get people to shun the red-shirts until they change their ways and focus on the regional economic issues that really count.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Thanks for this revealing, insightful post. Looking forward to more like it.
Do you have any thoughts on whether the order to build signs actually originated with the Interior Ministry/BJT Party? Is it possible that the politicians involved were acting on an order from elsewhere, and have you seen any evidence of this?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Some responses from the author to comments
Sritanonchai: I take your point, though “Samakkhi” can better be translated as “fellowship” or “togetherness.” Regardless of this nicety, the point of the alliterative triad of “S” words is to emphasize that political division is subordinate to fundamental solidarities of national unity and wellbeing, and that turbulence is illegitimate. My point stands: that this part of the slogan essentially de-legitimizes dissent. As for expressions of loyalty to the monarchy at the red-shirt rallies, using the example of the national anthem – well, perhaps you weren’t present at the Victory Monument rally. There, rally speakers also explicitly emphasized loyalty to the monarchy. I do not believe my observations are inaccurate, though other expressions need to be taken into account, such as the quote that I use later in the piece. Numerous other expressions of loyalty to the king were made to me personally by red shirt rally attenders.
Leosia: regarding cost of signs – I’ve already given the basic figure of 10,000 baht for the 7X10 metre sign, exclusive of mounting costs. Some signs are much larger than this, as I’ve recently observed south of Hat Yai, Songkhla. As a minimum, just multiply 12,000 Baht by the total number of local government bodies in Thailand and you’ll get a minimum ball-park figure of the total outlay.
Kevin Hewison: Yes, this clearly reflects the increase in choreographed paranoia in its broader context. My aim in this piece was essentially to link the sign to the Bhumjai Thai Party’s control of the MoI and their own agenda. The original posting featured the subtitle: “The Politics of a Recent Billboard.” To confirm your wider point, the blue billboards are briefly mentioned in an essay “New Royalist Fears” appearing in the website Thai Political Prisoners http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/new-royalist-fears/
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Marc Askew”
Thanks a lot for the article and the images. They are very interesting and helpful. The government’s concentration of “unity” is somehow a sign for increasing helplessness towards a Thai society that is changing towards a pluralism. I fear that such drives towards loyalty and identification with the monarchy by the political parties of the government carries the danger of even further alienating the Red Shirts. If one side of the conflicts somewhat exclusively occupies loyalty to the institution, what does it imply then to their opponents?
The Red Shirts are rather free of royal symbolism compared to the extensive use under the PAD. The majority of ordinary Red Shirts are without doubt loyal to the King, though not militantly. The speeches on the stage usually do stress the point of Constitutional Monarchy as opposed to the PAD view of demanding an increased role of the monarchy in politics and society. Within the legal limits – they are two rather opposing philosophies.
As to the Blue Shirts – i am afraid that the issue goes much further than Newin and Bhum Jai Thai/MoI. Suthep has in an interview with the Nation already admitted that he himself was very much involved in the decision making process to use the Blue Shirts, which also corresponds to my previous information. My information is that also navy personal from Satthahip were part of the Blue Shirts, and i definitely know that PAD guards were there as well under the Blue Shirts as i have known them from last year during the Government House occupation.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
The more you are told to love someone, the more you dislike him/her…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Oh! and I should add that
Conversely, the more you are told to hate someone, the more you love him/her…
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
there are 2 obvservations, which are rather certain clear facts:
1) that the popular color symbolising the faithfulness (loyalty) has steadily changed, comparing the 2006-2008 and now;
and also somehow
2) BJT is quite associated with this new color.
(that’s why on may forums it is being widely discussed that actually BJT is practically directly endorsed by someone who is also associated with that color
)
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
In fact, I don’t need to add to Nick’s observation concerning UDD members’ position towards the monarchy. However, the Bangkok Post of today (June 24) carried an article on the new pro-UDD “D-Magazine.” It contained a pertinent quote by the editor of this new journal:
“Mr Wat said his group was not against either the Sangha or the monarchy. ‘We only want to have freedom in criticising those who weaken the democratic institutions,’ he said. ‘As long as the monarchy and Sangha are constitutional, they are respected.’”
Imagine this statement made by a PAD member? Speaking of different conceptions of the monarchy and/or this particular king (devotion, worshipping, revering, love, loyalty, constitutional approval, critical distance) …
One addition to the post itself:
The project Marc Askew describes seems to be located at the ministerial level. However, its Department of Provincial Administration (DOPA) has a project with a similar orientation, poetically called “Stringing/weaving together the hearts of 63 million Thais to protect the foundational institutions of the nation” (roi jai thai 63 lan jai pokpong sathaban lak khong chat). It is laid down in an instruction to the provincial governors (“most urgent” letter thi motho 0310.3/wo 6807, dated April 27, 2009; it can be downloaded from the web site http://www.dopa.go.th).
The letter says that presently there are divisions in society, and it lacks unity. Sometimes, this had a negative impact on the nations’ important institutions, and this severely impacts on national stability. The people lack love and unity. They are divided into different camps. Therefore, there needs to be a campaign to make the people realize the resultant problems and join in protecting especially the institution of the monarchy, which is the center of tranquility, peace, and love and unity amongst the nation’s people.
The project has three strategies:
1) Promote activities to enhance the king’s prestige.
2) Enhance the effects of royal projects.
3) Cultivate the building of consciousness about loyalty.
All this is designed to serve the strengthening of the institutions of Nation, Religion, and Monarchy.
The accompanying project description gives the duration of the project as April 2009 to September 2011. The budget is to be taken from the provinces and districts, and requested from local authorities.
According to the Key Performance Indicator (KPI) sheets, there should be at least 86 activities during 2009. This is supposed to be increased to 100 and 120 in 2010, and 2011, respectively. Each activity should be advertised at least three times.
Projects could include those that promote a democratic way of life, support culture and customs, encourage sports and recreation, and protect national resources and the environment, etc.
In how far such projects serve the stated strategies, and how 86, 100, or 120 activities all over the country and per year can reach the great majority of all 63 million Thais remains the secret of the authors of this instruction. Also, note that there is no special budget for these activities. This means that money has to be taken away from existing expenditure plans. Add to this the usual problems of implementation (just imagine how enthusiastic the provincial governors and chief district officers will be about having another such nonsensical project to organize, and how willing clueless subordinates will follow their orders), and the entire project is reduced to not much more than words and bureaucracy. If this is all the ministry of the interior can do to instill “Nation, Religion, and Monarchy” amongst the Thai people, then it clearly is not much.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
To Nicka and Srithanonchai – thanks for the additional information/observations about blue shirt organization and Department of Provincial Administration (DOPA) project. The blue billboards are obviously only one part of a major blue iceberg – how far it goes up is a subject for speculation (or triangulation). However, regardless of the interminable projects of these powerful and pervasive state agencies , red-shirt symathizers in local government have their own ways of resisting the symbolic onslaught, whether one sympathises with their cause or not.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
interesting piece by Kh. Pluem on AS today :
Is Iran More Democratic Than Thailand?
it appears his conclusion is that Iran is actually more Democratic than Thailand. there are many curios questions he raised in it.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Srithanonchai: It is a packed website at DOPA. Do you have a more detailed link to the document? Would love to read it in detail.
jonfernquest raises a notion that I would never have thought of. That the signs and campaign are really about getting “people to shun the red-shirts until they change their ways and focus on the regional economic issues that really count.” Who would have thought?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I can think of two things that come with this billboard making: sycophancy and self-interest. In the days when Prem was prime minister, a billboard extolling his virtues was put up wherever he went, usually at the instigation of some high official of the Ministry of Interior who expected to gain the prime minister’s favor. Very often, too, a politician who wishes to garner popularity has billboard makers put up signs on roadsides describing his good deeds. Some MPs in Songkhla do this quite a lot. You can only visit Songkhla to get material evidence. And of course, Songkhla is one place where Prem’s virtues are recorded on a lot of roadside billboards. One billboard maker gleefully told me confidentially that he had to pay some 5-10-per cent kickback to local political bosses, but that it was worth it—it was a lucrative business indeed and unlikely to fade out.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Ralph:
On the right-hand side of DOPA’s home page, there are a number of pictures symbolizing links. Click the one that says หนังสือสั่งการ.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
I would like to share an article relating to the issue discussed here about the signs of Phumipon. I think the mainstream is going in the opposite direction against the signs of Phumipon and it is growing in every regions including Bangkok. Its main message is; the highest power of the country belongs to its people.
Here’s the article from Prachatai Webboard.
วันหนึ่งวันนี้…ว่าด้วยการฟื้นคืนความหมายของ “การปฏิวัติ 2475”
Tue, 2009-06-23 01:42
ณัฐกร วิทิตานนท์
นัยของ 24 มิ.ย. 2475 ณ เวลานี้คืออะไร? หากตอบแบบกำปั้นทุบดินก็คงหมายถึง ความเป็นประชาธิปไตยโดยสมบูรณ์ ขณะที่อีกนัยหนึ่งก็ถือเป็น “จุดเปลี่ยน” (Turning Point) สำคัญที่สุดสำหรับประเทศนี้ ซึ่งเขา ‘กล้า’ ที่จะยืนยันหลักที่ว่า อำนาจสูงสุดของประเทศนั้นเป็นของราษฎรทั้งหลาย เป็นครั้งแรก เพื่อให้เราฝ่าข้ามไปให้ถึงในโลกแห่งความเป็นจริง แม้นประชาธิปไตยในแบบที่คณะราษฎรปรารถนาให้เกิดขึ้นนั้นจะไม่เคยมีอยู่จริง ในสังคมไทยมาก่อนเลยก็ตามที
Translation:
Once Today… in relation to reviving the meaning of “the 1932 Coup d’etat”
What is the implicit meaning of the date, 24th June 1932 at this present time? If answering in bare truth, it implies becoming democracy with its complete form. It can be considered as the most important “turning point ” of this country, of which, they (the 1932 Coup d’etat) “dare” to confirm, for the first time, the principle that the highest power of the country belongs to its people. Eventhough their wishes of the 1932 Coup d’etat has never been as yet bear fruit in reality, the 1932 Coup d’etat had struggled to bring us people to cross and come to a reality that the highest power of the country belongs to its people.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Correction to Susie Wong’s #26 translation, last sentence:
“…เพื่อให้เราฝ่าข้ามไปให้ถึงในโลกแห่งความเป็นจริง แม้นประชาธิปไตยในแบบที่คณะราษฎรปรารถนาให้เกิดขึ้นนั้นจะไม่เคยมีอยู่จริง ในสังคมไทยมาก่อนเลยก็ตามที”
should translate as:
“…so that we can cross to in the real world even if the form of democracy that the People’s Party desired has never existed in Thai society prior.”
Susie, I find your translation in the first part accurate testament to your good handling of Thai. I know you have a very personal agenda against the Thai monarchy, however, please have some respect for KhunNatakorn Wititanon’s original writing in Thai.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Sidh S, I suggest you read the whole article in Prachatai News and also write to the author of the article and ask him. Your misleading intention is clear when you avoid the words “ฝ่าข้ามไป” and “ให้ถึง”.
At issue here is your intention to discredit the 1932 Coup d’etate Group’s visions and objectives, and to play a psychological game of doubt against me because I write about Phumipon. Don’t try your cheap shot with me, would you? Stick to the issue instead of personal attacks, because I have no intention to play your games.
Your agenda in promoting Newin Chidchob in comment #8 is pathetic, don’t you get that Puea Thai Party won by a landslide. No one in the country trusts Newin Chidchob. Stabbing others in the back is simply unacceptable in any society. Newin’s political future is finished.
As for Phumipon’s Thai State, the country is saying this:
สิทธิมนุษยชน = มึงก็คน กูก็คน…ประชาชนไม่ใช่ฝูงแกะ
Sat, 2009-06-27 00:52
กรณ์อุมา พงษ์น้อย
From Prachatai News
Translation:
Human Rights = You are a human being, I am a human being…
People are not a herd of sheep.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Calm down, Susie#24. Any one well versed in Thai will know that your translation in the last part in #22 is inaccurate. I am merely pointing that out and ask you to be more consistent, as your handling of Thai is obviously very good. No need to get over-emotional there and make a mountain out of a mole hill.
For the record, for me, AjarnPridi and King Prajadhibok both deserves equal credit for the Siam/Thailand’s first step towards democracy and the 24th of June is a celebration of both their legacies. One is impossible without the other. You can, of course, accuse me of leaving out FMPibul – as at the end of the day it was a coup d’etat that was not possible without military teeth provided by FMPibul. Yes, Thai Democracy – as the paragraph you attached suggests – is a bastard child of imported democratic ideals that does not exist in Siamese/Thai political culture prior AND a military coup. Democracy as a mass movement came much later and has, since 1973 at least, been negotiating power away from the traditional groups. Yes, whatever sensationalists that compare Thai Democracy to Myanmar’s or N.Korea’s say, Thailand has, in her specific way, never been more democratic. The future post-PMThaksin, post-Newin, post-military influence actually looks alright…
About The Talented Mr.Newin, I am certain that your English is also good enough to know my real thoughts towards his ways and methods. I see him as PMThaksin’s #1 student with attributes that Thaksin does not have that makes him a potentially (more) dangerous figure. Remember that he served time in military prison right after the 2006 coup – and here he is now establishing allies in the military as his political base. Remember that he maintained his loyalty to PMThaksin until PMSamak’s “Gang of Four” was literally dismantled by the courts last year and he lost favor with Thaksin who has since only trust his family to manage party affairs.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
With the help of Susie Wong and Sidh S, maybe the following translation.
What is the real meaning of 24 July 1932 in the present moment? Simply put, it would be democracy in its most complete form. In another sense, [the date] has been regarded as the most important turning point for the country in which [the coup leaders] had the courage to affirm for the first time the principle that the supreme power in the land belonged to all the people. This brought it into the real world for us, even though democracy in the form that the People’s Party wanted to create had never really existed previously in Thai society.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
When I first put this Thai article and its translation in, I wasn’t paying much attention to the fact that I had touched upon the crux of the matter of the Thai politics from 1932 to the current situation.
Because I had mentioned in my earlier comments somewhere in NM that in order to understand Thai political events, the focus must be put on Phumipon Adunyadet not the Military or the Politicians, so I assumed that every one knows that the real usual suspect is Phumipon. For example, when I glanced through the earlier comments in this article, at the time, I recognized that they were trying to discredit Marc Askew’s translation, not because of his translation but because he posted the matter relates to Phumipon. Here I am in the same boat as Marc Askew but heavier because I translated the root cause of the problem; Phumipon and his connection of Thai politics to international politics, in academic term, it is called the two-level game. In other words, Phumipon in connection to the external power (not the U.S. , the U.K., or China) but Japan. So my translation of what it seems a simple matter becomes a serious issue.
At issue are two main points:
1. Understanding Thai politics of present day, scholars have to go back to the origin of the 1932 Coup d’etat because its divergence stems from the conflict of the Allied and the Axis. For example, in order to understand why the article “Eat Thainess” that NM posted, occurred on 24th June 2009, and why Phumipon against foreigners’ rice, one needs to trace back to the 1932 Coup d’etat and the death of his brother Rama 8. The country was celebrating the 24th June 1932, the first constitution that put the Monarchy under the Constitution. But Phumipon wanted the country to celebrate himself not the significant of the 24th June 1932, so the “eat thainess” occurred to arouse nationalistic against Westerners and on the date 24th June 2009.
2. The death of Phumipon’s brother, Rama 8, of which only Phumipon knows how his brother died, no one else in the world knows, was not accident. The death was indeed directly related to the Allied versus the Axis. Prachatipok (Rama 7) went to Japan to sign the pact with Japan, (the trip also available on YouTube) which led to the 1932 Coup d’etat. Without military force, the “turning point” would not have happened. Rama 8 was close to Pridi (the Allied) while Phumipon was with Phibunsongkram (the Axis), this led to the death of Rama 8.
Because of the above reasons, my translation of this subject becomes issue of contention, and also Chandra Aditya is trying to dilute the meaning of the article, or the importance of the 24th June 1932.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“For the record, for me, AjarnPridi and King Prajadhibok both deserves equal credit for the Siam/Thailand’s first step towards democracy and the 24th of June is a celebration of both their legacies.”
I know this is the wrong place, but how about opening a thread on this? I think Sidh is quite wrong, but don’t want to debate it here.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Thanks Ralph #28 for picking this up. I’ll look forward to your comments. Please do keep in mind that the ‘Thai’ worldview is actually more conciliatory than many people think and I’ve heard many times the wish of the dead and dying that asking forgiveness (“ahosi” right?) from those they intentionally or unintentionally caused pain. I have family and friends who are Deep Yellow and Deep Red, and if we don’t talk politics, nothing as really changed and I love and respect them all the same… Of course, we can also debate that there’s no such thing as a “Thai worldview”, I am also interested to engage in that.
Re-reading my own comments, I’d like to add that Thai Democracy is not only a “bastard child” of elitist ideals imposed and a military coup d’etat, it is also a child from a broken home as all her main founders passed away in exile (AjarnPridi, King Prajadhibok and FMPibul). An orphaned child, Thai Democracy has had many, many foster and adoptive parents through the years, some love and nurture her, some dislike her and many exploit her. Sounds like a plot of a Siamese/Thai period drama of a ChaoKhun’s household of many wives with Thai Democracy being a bullied, favorite daughter of the ChaoKhun and a minor wife, both whom passed out from the picture too soon. She has phuyais that provide stability and warmth, others scheme her downfall, while others who mean well but had done her more harm than good. Today she must have grown up to be quite attractive as there are many young suitors (both Thai and foreigners) claiming to be her hero, claiming that only they can ‘save’ her… And the story goes on and on… (an eternal optimist, the version I have in mind is not too bad – just recently distracted by a possible nuclear-power Myanmar Junta can easily re-militarize Thai society to a frenzied extreme).
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
There is a smaller yellow sign with the same photos of the King and, I think the same logos. Often next to the pink Bhumjai Thai signs. Sorry I cant be of more help..
Quality comment or not?
0 
0