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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

“…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.

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.

On the right-hand side of DOPA’s home page, there are a number of pictures symbolizing links. Click the one that says หนังสือสั่งการ.