The time has come to reframe the great questions before Thailand and upset the forces pressing for polarisation and confrontation.
Farang perspectives on individualism and hierarchy, resting as they do on emotional, psychological, intellectual and philosophical nihilism of post-modernism, offer little in the way of constructive visions for a common good for Thais.
Unreflective social traditionalism offers little in the way of a constructive vision for the 21st century.
Cooperating, balancing, blending, amalgamating, keeping the core and letting go of the periphery — classic traits of successful Thai modernisation, not to mention successful resistance to the Khmer, the Burmese, Colonialists and the Communists — should now be in vogue.
It is a time for a grand consultation and compromise, and not for demands and rigid self-seeking.
- Extracted from Stephen B. Young, “What is happening to the land of ‘mai pen rai’?”, The Nation, 23 January 2010. Previous New Mandala coverage of Young’s current stint in Thailand is available here.
“But I have a sense that in Yeat’s terms, the Thai centre is not holding, pressed between essentially farang values and judgements on one side, and very hierarchical old Thai social practices on the other. Therefore we see in Thailand recently a tendency where the best appear to “lack all conviction” and the worst are filled with “passionate intensity”.”
He sounded as if the wise professor is predicting, in a double-speak, the time now is ripe for the much needed revolution in Thailand.
Last few decades of successful industrialization and financial deregulation of Thai economy has brought forward the new ruling class of industrialists, predominantly the extremely wealthy Thai Chinese, onto the frontline.
Thaksin with the money and ambition is the figurehead and also the epitome of that class and he is not gonna disappear into a peaceful retirement like many other former dictators from old Thailand. Times are changing.
The industrialists are now clashing with the old ruling class, the monarchy and the military, and threatening the well-established status quo.
Democracy along with the individual freedom will eventually come along as the history of western democracies has proved from time to time through ages.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
It’s time Thais stand up for the spirit of Liberté, égalité, fraternité, envisioned by the Founding Fathers of the Thai Constitution of the 1932 Coup d’etat by Dr. Pridi Banomyong. Government of the people, by the people, for the people…
Where all citizens being equal before the law
Where civil and political liberty and rights of every citizen are protected
Where authority of government derives from the consent of people
Where all citizens having equal access to power
Where the contestation over power is allowed in free and fair elections.
Where the supreme power is vested in the simple people and exercised by them through a system of representation involving held free elections
With the absence of hereditary or class distinctions or privileges
With the neutrality of the armed forces
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
So for years it was the poor Isanese clashing with elites, now it’s industrialists, too?
If you ignore red shirts for a moment, there’s no sign of any serious conflict in a society, and the red shirts themselves are increasingly getting sidelined and struggling for attention.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Once again StanG’s brilliant and profound insight and understanding of the present situation in Thailand is on display for all to see and emulate.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Perhaps that is because it is increasingly obvious that the redshirts lie every bit as much as those they are fighting against.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
@StanG #3
Red shirts sidelined and struggling for attention? If you judge them by the size of turnouts at their rallies, that may appear to be true. It’s unlikely that they’ll ever be able to match last Songkran’s turnout again. We need to keep in mind, though, that the strategy of the red leaders at the time was simply to get as many red folks as possible to come to the rally in the hope that somehow their number would mean something. The leaders must have learned by now that numbers alone don’t really make a difference.
Yet, the fact that we’re even talking about the reds at all after the Songkran crushing is remarkable in itself. On the whole I think the reds as a movement are now bigger than ever. And the Khao Yai Tieng case alone is enough to disprove your point that they struggle for attention.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
StanG, no sign of conflict. WTF.
Two elected governments driven from power. Judicial decisions that convict cooking show hosts and persons that sign off on their wives financial dealings but leave airport and government house occupiers free……..
Please…………….
Do you believe your own Alice in Wonderland arguments?
Next you will be telling us about Thailand’s human rights record in 2009. A shining example of…………………. yada, yada, yada.
Who makes your rose coloured glasses?
But how many more elections will the oligarchs and bureaucrats steal from the voters? How many more PMs will be the results of back room deals with men wearing green, before the tipping point is reached?
And what will the result be?
No, I don’t expect you to answer, “Mai Phen Rai. Every thing fine. I good. You good. Everything good. Sanook. Sanook. Pass me some nam plaa.”
No conflict, then why does it take the mobilization of a small army of thugs, soldiers, and police for democrats to visit Issan and Chaing Mai or for Phua Thai MPs to visit the South?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
” Ragnarok ” … verrrry trrricky, Mr Young: just like the clever wordplay of HM’s sermons to his
little childrensubjectsQuality comment or not?
0 
0
The problem I have with Mr. Young is the same that I have with Mr. Abhisit, both produce good rhetoric yet neither seems to be able to actually have a oration that matches the actions of their principles.
Young criticizes Thaksin, perhaps rightly so, saying that , “His version of democratic justice… is a vision of democracy without ethics where money trumps all other values.”
Yet he does not offer a comparable criticism of the Democrat Party that replaced it though back room deals with the military, bribes to politicians, selective judicals actions, and armed violence against the public.
I agree with him when he says, “It is, really, a conflict within one elite; it is a struggle for control of public authority between two
factions.
But I disagree with his followup that ” each with its own set of values and rules by which to play the game of power. The different values are fundamentally incompatible, which is why the conflict in Thailand is so difficult to end.”
I maintain that both have similar sets of values. That each wants more power, more money, more privileges.
It is not about”baramee”, social justice.
The difference between the two competing groups is that one side recognizes that in a “Democracy” the voters count. To assure that they have the numbers, the must deliver policies that count to those voters. And ultimately those voters have the power to remove those that don’t deliver, offend the public morals, etc.
That TRT/PPP/PT included members that some viewed as provincial thugs, does not reduce the the validity of the voters opinions.
The real problem is that in this one elite there is pervasive corrupti0n.
Neither the Democrats nor the various incarnations of TRT can get individual players to be held accountable for various irregularities ,
–whether it be the death of police officers in pubs murdered by the sons of the influential, Diplomats murdered in broad daylight, Civil Rights Lawyers abducted and murdered by men with badges, migrants being left to die at sea, purchasing irregularities in all government departments, lack of forensic evidence, slowed enforcement of some judicial decisions, etc.
So the given in the view of the poor, is that all governments emanating from this one elite are corrupt.
So the problem, Mr. Young is not with the Democrats nor with TRT, it is with the fact that all governments in Thailand to date lack what you identify in Caux Round Table ethical Principles for Responsible Business and its Principles for Ethical Government
And although you found “… Taksin’s approach
wanting.
Your view “Public office is not for sale to the highest bidder.” is at this moment in Thai History wrong.
Sadly.
Futher you state:
“The CRT Principles for Business call upon business to avoid corruption and to support the rule
of law and constitutional checks and balances. It is not the office of responsible business to
contribute to corruption and autocracy.”
“The CRT Principles for Government do not support a shallow formalism of unfairly manipulated elections as legitimizing democratic government. Elections conducted without ethics do not
produce any democracy worth the name.”
“Nor do the CRT Principles for Government validate a government if it has no ethics or justice in the way it uses power once in office. The office of just government has to be won day in and day
out by the quality of governing. The right to hold office can be forfeited by abuse of its prerogatives. Government without ethics is not good government.”
http://gotoknow.org/file/vicharnpanich/Young2.pdf
So while you are to be commended for being able to see the flaws in Thaksin’s policies, you are really missing the plot when you fail to see that the Democrats, a party I once supported I might add, is itself a failure in ethics.
At least with elections, there is a certain degree of control of the elite and politics by the citizens, you seem to offer nothing better.
Your presence in Thai politics, Mr. Young is is merely that of a red herring. They are using your fawning to illustrate that they are “legitimate”.
It is time for an election, the sooner the better. It is time to return to the People’s Constitution of 1997.
And it is time to start holding members of the elite accountable for their transgressions.
Mr Young, your point that, “Aristotle made these points many centuries ago when he wrote that democracy like aristocracy
and monarchy can be corrupted by those who have few scruples into vile forms of abusive rule.”
The only problem is that you are failing miserably to see the that too many of the actors here have “few scruples” and there is far too much abusive rule.
Perhaps you can gain some credibility, by confronting your Friends int he Democrat Party to actually address some of the more substantive issues like the recent Human Watch Report which they characterized as being planted by Thaksin.
Or the denial of Secret Thai prisons as an attemp by Washington to bring discredit on Thailand.
ETC. ETC.
Until then you are merely a puppet– a stooge.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Tumbler, reds have been able to convince themselves through their own propaganda channels but they make no sense to the society at large.
Driving Surayud out of his hill top residence is peanuts. They can fill the schedule for decades ahead with this kind of agenda.
Street politics are not relevant anymore. They have no effect on the government or the parliament. Reds themselves have no clue how they can effect any of their ideas, and this lack of plan doesn’t bother them at all. They just don’t think that far ahead and so no one takes them seriously.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
“Until then you are merely a puppet– a stooge”
I often wonder whether such people are merely puppets/stooges/red herrings, or could they be co-conspirators?
Sometimes paid co-conspirators, but mostly just satisfied with the rewards of mixing with a select crowd of ‘important’ people (perhaps including some ‘help’ pushing their own agenda or projects through).
It just seems too unbelievable that anyone who really knows and studies Thailand could say that stuff (and believe it!)
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
StanG: Why not let the electorate decide whether the reds have any relevance?
If ‘no one takes them seriously’, why are the Democrat Party (and you?) so afaid of elections?
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Reds don’t want elections, it’s not a part of their agenda.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Reds don’t want elections, it’s not a part of their agenda
Which ‘reds’ have you been talking to?
First time I’ve heard that one, but perhaps its because they feel the country should return to the 1997 constitution first (quite a reasonable demand IMO, but I also think they should participate in trying to get the current coup installed constitution more reasonable – remember the army only got it passed in a referendum by telling people it could be amended later).
Maybe you mistook the reds you heard, and what they actually said is they don’t want elections stolen from them?
Now that would be quite understandable.
PS. I’m not sure why I’m still bothering to respond to you Stan/Trep – I must be a glutton for punishment & like banging my head against a brick wall:)
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Nganadeeleg, reds have no idea what they want themselves.
They sort of want the elections but they reject the constitution.
They sort of want the elections but they want to overthrow the government via street protests first, and then overthrow the constitution, and then bring back Thaksin.
After that they want “sort of” elections.
It’s hard to imagine more misguided and contradictory political group.
I guess it would be true to say that first and foremost they want a revolution to overthrow the regime of ammart, not elections per se.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
So what is it StanG? The reds want elections or they don’t. You said they don’t and now you say they do. You’re making this up. various reds have called for the house to be dissolved umpteen times. The reds actually accuse the government of not wanting an election. For example, in his famous Times interview last November mentioned this and Abhisit and Suthep have repeatedly rejected red calls for the house to be dissolved – see the reports in November and December last year (e.g. 20 Nov in Bkk Post). If you are going to make things up, at least be a bit more inventive.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Once again the brilliance and wonder of StanG’s exceptional understanding and wisdom in regard to Thailand’s present situation and future circumstances sets an impressive standard for others to follow.
I think is shameful that he is given so little respect in some of the comments.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
StanG, your statement, “Reds don’t want elections,” has validity since most elections that they have participated in have resulted in red cards for members and/or caused the dissolution of their party over relatively minor offenses by only a few members and causing the entire executive membership to be banned from politics for 5 years. While opposition parties (with the notable exception of Banharn’s Party) have escaped judicial punishment for similar offenses.
So until there is a level playing field, you are, as least this one time, correct.
I, however, favor elections because with each stolen election, the illegitimacy of their clique weakens.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Since reds don’t recognize the constitution any “want” of elections is a smokescreen. They would reject the results if they don’t go their way just like they refused to take const amendments to referendum last year.
John Brown is right here – they want to lay the level playing field first.
No one knows how they are going to achieve that, and they have no clue themselves.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
You mean the same reds who stood under the 2007 constitution and put together a coalition government? What nonsense you write.
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Just a note to readers – it’s becoming increasingly obvious that StanG is either a troll or a plant.
He is posting across a range of Thai english language blogs and makes continued outrageous and ridiculous points in an attempt to divert discussion.
So far he’s proved quite successful but I would caution that from this point his comments are roundly ignored.
DON’T FEED THE TROLL
Quality comment or not?
0 
0