Things can go terribly wrong even in places with many inherent advantages – think of Burma, Argentina and Sri Lanka. With the government’s withdrawal of an offer to hold new elections, the extension of curfew and state of emergency, the filing of terrorism charges against Mr. Thaksin and the insurrection’s spread, Thailand is entering uncharted territory. The state and its leadership are facing a full-blown crisis of legitimacy.
- Extracted from Daryl Copeland, “Dark shadow over the Thai smile”, The Globe and Mail, 28 May 2010.
31 responses so far ↓
1 chris beale // May 29, 2010 at 2:59 pm
The full-blown crisis of legimitacy is how Bangkok can keep its’ – Bangkoks’ – highly centralised construction of “Thailand” as a
unifying influence, now when so much of the country simply wants to break-away. Isaarn wants to break-away and join Laos,
Patani wants to break away and join a more Muslim Malaysia.
I don’t see any solution for these problems.
I think these emerging states will break free.
Quality comment or not?
15 
25
2 Nicholas Farrelly // May 29, 2010 at 3:06 pm
Hi Chris,
Surely the time is right for you to take me up on this offer?
As I suggested:
Look forward to your contribution.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Quality comment or not?
24 
0
3 David Brown // May 29, 2010 at 3:35 pm
seems to me secession would be an implosion of the feudalistic city state previously sustained by its agricultural and manufacturing slave population into itself
doubtful if such an introspective self-loving entity could survive very long
Quality comment or not?
13 
1
4 john francis lee // May 29, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Isaarn wants to break-away and join Laos, Patani wants to break away and join a more Muslim Malaysia.
I agree with Nicholas Farrelly. I don’t think either of these assertions is true. But you can believe anything you want, no problem here.
The state and its leadership are facing a full-blown crisis of legitimacy.
Yeah. The “leadership” is illegitimate and has been since 19 September 2006. Even when an elected government was nominally in power during that time it had no power. There will be no legitimate government in Thailand ’til one is elected. The sooner the better.
Development flourishes in circumstances where something approaching individual and collective potential can be achieved without excessive obstacles or constraints.
Security – at least, the variety that emphasizes the centrality of the person rather than the state or some other referent – has become the flip side of development. It can exist only in the absence of want and fear, which is to say that basic needs are being met without perceived threats to well-being.
Development, then, has largely become the basis for security, especially in the global South.
Sounds like Milton Freedman on Chile to me. Some fancy footwork is expended dancing around “neo-liberal economic prescriptions”, but individual freedom through globalist economic exploitation seems to remain the oxymoronic prescription here.
As regards the equation of “phrai” and “serfs”… does that really go?
I had thought that phrai was more nearly freeman, and that serf’s equivalent was the unvarnished Thai slave in the “good old days”. But I am incompetent to judge such points myself.
Quality comment or not?
14 
0
5 Willem Steyn // May 29, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Sad to say, I must agree with most of this article. Thailand’s efforts at democratisation, even the much lauded 1997 constitution, have been a total failure. It is basically rule by “Jhao Pao” outside of Bangkok.
If the local godfather doesn’t like your politics; it’s curtains for you.
Rarely mentioned in any of the current discourse about Thailand is the role of the “third pillar” of the nation; Buddhism. Even the monkhood is no longer respected by thinking Thais and from a reading of the vernacular press this is not surprising. In the eyes of many, the wats seem to have become centres of skulduggery, buggery and thuggery. All together a very sad state of affairs.
Quality comment or not?
20 
1
6 The Alamo // May 29, 2010 at 6:56 pm
The ideological limits of Thainess are now compacting and regressing. It is now firmly based on exclusion – who is deemed not Thai – rather than on a pluralistic, consensual and inclusive approch.
Arguably, then, what constitutes Thainess is getting smaller and smaller. In the present situation this will only continue until what is “Thailand” is just a few wealthy and powerful enclaves in Bangkok and the south protected by an increasingly vicious army.
The ONLY hope this approach has is backing from the West and even that would be short term rather than a strategic solution. Western publics can show remarkable forebearance when allowing their governments to support oppressive regimes (Iraq in 1980s being the best example) but ultimately Western support tends to rebound.
Even devolution of power to Isaan etc via elected governors and the like is not within the logic of the present approach and nor will it ever be.
The simple truth of Thailand is that the elites loathe democracy and the establishment is so out of touch that any kind of workable longterm solution is just unimaginable.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
51 
0
7 Mangoboy // May 29, 2010 at 8:56 pm
Excellent idea Nich (comment #2) It would be fascinating to see some academic flesh put on to this hypothesis that Isaan wishes to secede.
Quality comment or not?
5 
0
8 JohnH // May 29, 2010 at 10:08 pm
The Alamo: 6
”The simple truth of Thailand is that the elites loathe democracy and the establishment is so out of touch that any kind of workable longterm solution is just unimaginable.”
Yes, I often wonder whether the apparent embrace of democracy in Thailand, and other countries for that matter, and certaintly more so in recent decades, has simply been a matter of pragmatic expediency. Mere wall paper, a facade.
It certainly helps a country’s credentials when they want to attract both foreign private investment and social or infrastructure development funds.
It does seem that there is no real will to establish a fully working, inclusive and representative democracy in Thailand, and, sadly, never has been.
Quality comment or not?
29 
1
9 john francis lee // May 29, 2010 at 10:37 pm
…any kind of workable longterm solution is just unimaginable.
But why do you say that? First you argue convincingly that the elite is subtracting itself out of existence but then conclude, somehow, that change is impossible.
When the elite are small enough to drown in the bathtub… drown ‘em.
Politically, of course.
Quality comment or not?
9 
1
10 The Frog // May 29, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Chris Beale, if anything wouldn’t Laotians would be more disposed to becoming part of Isan? I think if you look at migratory routes, you wouldnt see many from Thailand heading for the mountains.
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
11 MadabouTIT // May 29, 2010 at 11:38 pm
@ Alamo ..the unimaginable inevitably becomes the manageable after you mindfully entertain just 6 impossible things before breakfast, every day
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
12 Johpa Deumlaokeng // May 30, 2010 at 1:00 am
I continue to be a bit bemused by the number of observers who feel that one of the primary issues in Thailand underlying the current troubles is a sense of increased economic disparity:
Still, those higher levels of connectivity have raised awareness of the Bangkok-centric and chronically imbalanced allocation of wealth and access.
Having just spent the past several weeks living in rural northern Thailand, in an unrepentant district of Thaksin support, I heard lots of complaints, but economic disparity is not one of the complaints. Just like their lower economic class brethren here in the US, the rural people still admire wealth and dream of attaining the lifestyles of the rich and famous. Economic disparity is not what bothered the people I was sharing bottles of Mae Khong with around the local village watering holes. What pissed them off was that they were told that Thailand was a democracy, they voted for the candidate that was willing to throw them some bones and who used the media to create an image that appealed to a rural voter, and then that elected man, Thaksin, was unceremoniously tossed out by the old guard. Their elected official to whom they invested their political desires was kicked out and that is what really upsets them.
I hear nothing about economic disparity from my Thai pals, only from western observers or western influenced Thais. I hear no rumblings regarding class as the local “Red” supporters include not only lower class Thais but also middle class Thais of many persuasions. (Not that there are no issues of class within Thai politics, but they are hopelessly intertwined with ethnicity in defining who is a Thai.) And having had a ringside seat in the rural north for the past 30 years, if anything income disparity has decreased with the rise of a lower middle class segment of the rural population that existed only scantily when I first arrived in Thailand back in 1981.
As an outside observer, outside of academia as well, without an ideological axe to grind, I do find it odd that the rural folks up north and over in Isaan would back someone like Thaksin who clearly does not represent the interests of the rural population. My own consternation regarding the rural support of Thaksin echoes the thoughts of American journalist Thomas Frank in his book “What’s the Matter with Kansas” which ponders a similar conundrum as to why poor rural people in the US back the political party, the Republican Party, that is least concerned about representing their interests. But Thaksin, like George Bush, created an image that appealed to this segment of the electorate and won the vote. Abhisit, who if anything is perceived as being a bit effete, and despite implementing some decent “populist” programs similar to those of Thaksin, has not been able to craft the same sort of popular image to win the hearts and minds of Thaksin’s supporters.
So they are mad, and pissed off, and don’t really care about economic equality, they just want their vote back and they don’t want to here from the likes of “Yellow Shirt” leader Sondhi that their vote should count for less than an urban Bangkok vote.
Quality comment or not?
30 
1
13 Daniel Wolf // May 30, 2010 at 1:08 am
-Chris
I’m thinking along the same lines as The Frog.
Do you have any evidence to support your statement that people in Issan want to join Laos? This conjecture seems rather far-fetched to me.
Quality comment or not?
3 
1
14 stop the massacre // May 30, 2010 at 5:32 am
I don’t think Isan at this time wants to join Laos, neither is it in Laotian interests for Isan to join Laos.
But what is notable is that after more than two hundred years, the people in the Northeast have retained a cultural identity that is Lao not Siamese/Central Thai. The recent Cannes winner Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives highlights the Lao identity of Isan. The dialogue and narration of the movie is in the Lao language–and yes it must really irk Bangkok that of all Thai movies ever made, the one in Lao should win the Palme d’Or.
Assimilation into Central Thai/Siamese culture is not going to happen anytime soon. And as long as culturally that region is distinct, those in Bangkok will always consider it as n0t-really-Thai and as such subtle and not-so-subtle measures will continue to keep that region out of the spheres of power.
The Lao whether in Isan or Laos do recognize a common Thai/Tai identity and are not opposed to it as long as the relationship is on an equal footing. Thailand does not have to fall apart, but it may fall apart if it imposes an apartheid regime and upholds minority rule.
Under a properly-designed system of government, with checks and balances and power spread out and distributed thinly, Bangkok has nothing to fear from a government dominated by Northeasterners. Even if they will never be Siamese, they are happy to be Thai.
Quality comment or not?
21 
0
15 The Alamo // May 30, 2010 at 6:06 am
John Francis Lee – apologies, i meant that any longterm solution is unimaginable to the elite because they just can’t seem to grasp what is going on.
I’m not saying it can’t come from other sources – just not the elite.
They’ve had 78years of trying to establish democracy in Thailand and have completely failed.
Quality comment or not?
8 
0
16 sniper // May 30, 2010 at 12:35 pm
@Johpa Deumlaokeng (12):
I found your comment interesting but unconvincing, and in my experience, although the primary fact behind the uprising was the illegal ousting of their elected representative, one needs to bear in mind they elected him precisely because he was prepared to address the economic disparity which just about everyone in Isaan and the North of Thailand knows about and resent like hell.
This is embedded in your own post when you note “What pissed them off was that they were told that Thailand was a democracy, they voted for the candidate that was willing to throw them some bones and who used the media to create an image that appealed to a rural voter, and then that elected man, Thaksin, was unceremoniously tossed out by the old guard. ”
Which is true of course, however the issues of how Thaksin was ousted (repeatedly, either in person or in proxy), and the reason he was so enthusiastically voted in in the first place are inextricably linked and cannot be usefully isolated.
Quality comment or not?
13 
1
17 JohnH // May 30, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Yesterday’s press conference with PM Abhisit is being broadcast on Channel 11 in English at this moment. There is also a Thai translation.
After Abhisit’s opening summary and comments, ambassadors are now questioning him about the various aspects of the recent crisis.
Abhisit and the government are certainly going to great lengths to establish their transparency and legitimacy over the events in question.
I do think that for this debate to continue here, we must see the transcript or video – if there is one – before NM loses any claim to
legitimacy for this particular thread, and suffers yet another crisis of confidence from its readers.
Quality comment or not?
2 
6
18 Daryl Copeland: Dark shadow over the Thai smile – jimdelaney.net // May 30, 2010 at 2:19 pm
[...] The idea of Muang Thai, “the land of the free,” has for years been expressed in its most extreme form as the freedom to exploit nature, environment, women, children. Yet conventional wisdom had it that a shared sense of identity would keep the social fabric from fraying beyond repair. This, too, has become a highly questionable proposition, particularly with ailing KingBhumibol Adulyadej apparently unable to intervene. It appears that Buddhism, the monarchy and the country’s long history as an independent regional player with a distinct language and culture are no longer enough to contain Thailand’s underlying fissures. ?Via New Mandala [...]
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
19 Nuomi // May 30, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Thailand’s ‘legitimacy’ as a ‘democracy’ has always been questionable from the ground. The illusion of ‘democracy’ has been carefully cultivated so as to place the country as acceptable to receive foreign aid. The illusion was furthered strengthened during the cold war, with hundreds and millions of USD harvested by the elite and a portion poured into a very successful and royal propaganda campaign during the war against communism. For that money, though more recently more known as foreign development aid, the status quo has to maintain its ‘democracy’ status, even as it ruthlessly cling on to power. Hence the dismissive: that the country folk are ‘too stupid’ attitude. Foreign aid money are simple too easy and too much to give up easily. What the status quo want is authoritarian rule with a monarchic front. Such a potential state is not necessarily dictatorial or tyrannic – not with a good leader. But the status quo wanted to believe that they would be egalitarian – which they could never be, because the Bangkok status quo is usually and simply not the cream of the crop Thailand has to offer, and they certainly do not know how to manage a country economically much less effectively. I would say, Thailand did well in-spite of the leadership it has, rather than because of the leadership it has. All the status quo know is how to skim off 30% of any mega government projects – just like the army taking a 30% cut of all army gear purchases.
The cracks that is now appearing in the middle class Bangkok, is in part a result of this discrepancy – that inherent want and desire to be authoritarian, yet must pretend to be democracy by western definition so that they can continue to get access to foreign aid for cheap money for mega projects so they can continue to loot the country’s coffers in that semi-legit way. The result is the current illogical narrative that is being played in Bangkok right now: every thing the status quo is doing is ‘educated’, ‘legal’, and ‘democratic’. Whereas everything the non-status quo and un-accepted status quo did is ‘stupid’, ‘uneducated’, ‘illegal’ and ‘terrorism’. Seriously, Taksin and Ahbisit are the same in sheer political ambitiousness – one bought his votes with his decades of hard work bribing his way to wealth and effectively using that wealth, while the other played the I am weak can’t do anything clean guy card so you can use me and wait for the likes of the army and status quo to put him on the PM chair. The difference is: the former one can see what one get, the latter one vote for an Oxford Grad but actually gets a list of fighting de-facto powers that can only be ‘verified’ via heresy and conjectures.
As a matter of fact, the narrative that Thailand is the biggest democracy in SEA has been playing for decades, as is the myth of the King’s tireless efforts to improve the lot of the improvished – both legends grow more frayed and less convincing over the years. In 1992 (and before) at least Thailand has the comfort of General Suchinda, leader by a coup, firing into the protesters to hide behind and emerge a little battered but with the ‘democracy-illusion’ fairly intact. Now in 2010, it was a CIVILIAN government (Abhisit did not do Thai military service just like all other rich Thais sons, he is also born in England and graduated from Oxford, and is really as civilian as can be) that ordered snipers (I do not know why but this sniper thing upset me more than the idea of the army using machine guns – perhaps it is the calculativeness of it, that sheer slowness and torture of wondering when the next sniper bullet will come, and who will be targeted etc) to take down civilians.
This time, Thailand can no longer hide behind the illegal coup and army firing at protesters story; the ‘democracy-illusion’ has taken a big battering, even as the status quo desperately tries to find comfort in the Terrorism Narrative so crudely borrowed from the US post-911. Taksin at once took on a bigger than life evil guy who could remote-control the destruction of Thailand (Bangkok) from afar, but yet powerless to come home and had to travel the world on a set of passports of some literally unknown countries – one of the many paradoxes the status quo had no problem believing in.
The fractures can no longer be covered with cheap paste and hence the deep divide down middle class urban Bangkokians. Those who agreed with status quo narrative are fine and would never understand those who felt queasy with the illogicalness of the current narrative. The simple reason is that because they agree with the establishment, they need not fear what they think and say being overheard or recorded that may one day come back to hurt them. Those on the other side understood that fear, and hence kept quiet for self-defence. Those who wants to believe, believe that the Reds have hundreds of M79 grenade launchers and Taksin paid millions to people to bomb various parts of Bangkok. Those who are more honest or less naive will tell you if they trust you, that lives are cheap in Thailand. You really don’t need to spend millions of hire someone to fire a grenade launcher in Bangkok, tens of thousands will do, and hitmen? Coupa of grand baht each…
My father told me as a child about Thailand:
You cannot help Thailand if you are Thai – Life is cheap and no one will care if you disappear. That was why we migrated.
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
38 
2
20 Tim // May 30, 2010 at 7:34 pm
Today Abhisit seemed to say that a November election was unviable – of course he blamed this delay on the UDD for not participating in the roadmap. This seems directly to contradict his words in early May where he said that he would go ahead with the roadmap, irrespective of the UDD’s participation. The Bangkok Post records that assertion here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/176901/pm-vows-to-go-ahead-with-roadmap. Further legitimacy and credibility problems for Khun Abhisit.
Quality comment or not?
14 
1
21 JohnH // May 30, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Nuomi – 19
(thanks for your previous clarification on the IMF / Japan question I posted elsewhere.)
You have made some excellent points with your above post.
Let’s face it, Thailand’s elite, whether monarchy, amart, military etc. etc. have been screwing Thailand and her people for years because they can.
And that ain’t going to change anytime soon.
Nuoma, re. your comment that Bangkokians are divided 50/50 over this situtation.
I think there is another dimension to this. Those people who just don’t care.
The other day, a small business owner in Silom was complaining on TV that Abhisit hadn’t done enough to compensate the money lost due to recent events.
A youngish guy bitterly complaining that a free 50k plus 1 mill. baht interest free loan wasn’t enough. No comments on the lives lost, the reasons why, the bigger picture. He just didn’t care.
No, just money and self. Odious and loathsome individual.
When you strip away the politics, the ideologies, the rhetoric and invenctive, is there anything left at the centre other than than money and self here?
If the answer is no, and I think it is, then is Thailand a morally hollow society?
Quality comment or not?
12 
1
22 BKK lawyer // May 30, 2010 at 9:31 pm
Tim @ 20: House dissolution and a Nov. 14 election were always separate from the five points of the “roadmap”. The Bangkok Post article you cite is not specific on that, but it’s apparent from the article that by proceeding with the roadmap Abhisit was not including the Nov. 14 election. Look at any description of the five points in the roadmap and they do not include an election.
Quality comment or not?
4 
3
23 Tim // May 30, 2010 at 11:14 pm
BKKlawyer – as I understood it, Abhisit said that the November elections would go ahead if the roadmap with its 5 general conditions was not interrupted. Abhisit thus (ostensibly) viewed the November election date as dependent on the roadmap and not separate from it. Now if the actions of the UDD were meant to be irrelevant to the roadmap, why has the November date been affected?
Anyhow, this is all largely sophistic debate. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the (lack of) success of the 5 general conditions was always going to be used as a get-out clause for holding elections in November.
Quality comment or not?
11 
0
24 Nuomi // May 31, 2010 at 2:18 am
JohnH:
No, Bangkok middle class is not 50/50 divided. I shall just use my family for comparison: My mother is anti-yellow, my father is pro-yellow, my brother is pro-Red, my grandmother is pro-Taksin, my 2 uncles are pro-Taksin and pro-yellow respectively and my grandaunt prefers to watch soap opera and pretends nothing affects her.
I suppose I would rate myself anti-PAD.
For one who spend much of the Taksin years trying to convince her grandmother Taksin is a politician and is just as corrupt as all previous Thai PMs, I am now in a rather embarrassing situation actually defending some of Taksin’s policies and some of the ridiculous accusations thrown at him.
The point is, the Red-Yellow divide is more layered and nuanced than Red vsYellow. There is a growing proportion of people who are being dragged into this tug of war (will elaborate later), and do not comfortably site with either camp. Some are Red leaning, others Yellow leaning. And of course there will be ostriches who prefer to keep their heads in the sands.
The PAD, by claiming that if one sides Taksin, one do not love the King, started the snowball rolling. It looked a good strategy: leveraging the King’s popularity vs Taksin to unseat Taksin. In reality, this situation is not mutually exclusive. One can like Taksin and still love the King. But PAD framed the situation into an either or: “If you vote Taksin, then you do not love the King” Most people, not understanding the abstractness of the situation was ‘talked’ into taking sides. At first, most ‘Reds’ simply vote for Taksin (or pro-Taksin), or vote against Ahbisit while still ‘loving’ the King. The Royalists unfortunately took that line to heart and too hard. And then came that wear yellow on Monday to show your devotion to the King. Pro-King citizens started hanging yellow flags on their gates. This physical manifestation of ‘love’ resulted in the flawed ability to identify those who ‘do not love the King’ when it could be just a simple case of ‘I do not care’. Those who hang yellow flags outside their gates started to questioningly eye those who do not if they love the King. The result? Some were embarrassed or coerced into hanging yellow flags, some were agitated into wearing red, some were disciplined enough to stay neutral, and some are just blissfully ignorant. The above written process is what happened to the middle class families on the Soi I used to live on in Bangkok. It used to be flag-free. Then it used to have some yellow, later a mix of yellow and red. Now according to my ex-neighbor, it is mainly yellow or nothing.
I find the entire situation distressful and sad. I feel that, if there is to be any flags hanging, that flag should be red, blue, and white.
Quality comment or not?
19 
1
25 Simon // May 31, 2010 at 8:29 pm
The proposition that the NE wants to break away with Laos is pure fantasy. Communism is still a dirty word in Thailand. Life here is better here than over the border, and everyone knows it.
Wanting a change of government is not the same as wanting a separate state, comrade!
Tim: Early elections were not part of the roadmap. They were offered with conditions – acceptance of the roadmap and an end to the protest *and* related disturbances.
The PM made it clear that there would be no early elections unless a ‘normal’ degree of law and order had been restored – accepting the roadmap was not enough, the violence had to stop too.
Quality comment or not?
2 
6
26 chris beale // May 31, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Nuomi # 24 – how about simply flying the old flag of Siam, with its’ royal white elephant on a red background, in honour of the great King Chulalongkorn who tried to keep the Thai and Lao peoples united, instead of them being driven apart as is happening now ?
Quality comment or not?
4 
1
27 JohnH // Jun 1, 2010 at 12:37 am
Nuomi – 24
Only a few of the many Thai people I meet are happy to express their views on politics. I can perfectly understand this. In many cultures, as we know, discussing politics is normally considered a taboo subject, unless with close friends and family.
However, while not not openly expressing whether they support X or Y, many people have expressed their sadness and upset over recent events.
(Recently, on NM, I slated a ABAC poll on the number of people who felt ‘sad’. I opined that outrage, anger etc. were more appropriate feelings to gauge.) It seems I was wrong, although there may be a comparative meaning and use of language point to this too.
Some, not many, have also told me they are disgusted by the media focus on the destroyed businesses and not on the loss of life.
Now, when it comes to the king, I only ever hear the usual, but, I have to say, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. With the queen and prince, it’s different; open disdain, dislike and even hostility are the normal responses,
I’m not sure what all of this means, but I do think that while many people are not concerned simply because they don’t care, there are also many people who cannot and will not express what they really think.
For example, I have never seen any mass public outcry over corruption, yet everyone I meet has been touched by it in some way, and they all agree it is wrong.
Is this silence a symptom of self interest, apathy or fear?
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
28 Charles Edward Frith // Jun 1, 2010 at 2:56 am
JohnH
I see moral hollowness everywhere, and sometimes it looks like me but I’m not 100 percent sure.
Great comment though. I like your style.
Quality comment or not?
4 
0
29 Nuomi // Jun 6, 2010 at 12:18 am
Chris Beale:
Red white and Blue is the color of the Thai national flag – should not a democracy fly the Thai national flag for unity?
It will be a sad day indeed if one can no longer stand tall and proud behind one’s national flag.
On your comment on Chulalongkorn: I believe only King Mongkut is deserving of the title ‘The Great” and with regard to King Chulalongkorn, well, one should really read some of those letters being exchanged between the various Thai princes and their friends in Europe during Chulalongkorn’s reign about that king before praising King Chulalongkorn. My take on Thai history is a little unorthodox and the questions I asked in class put left my grade just hovering above a pass. Still, amongst all my classmates, I was the only one to track down some of those letters. I love Thai history, and am saddened that most of the ruins of Ayuttaya is actually Chakri art and not Ayuttaya art. I do hope one day I can return to this study in Thailand without fear of prejudice.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
30 chris beale // Jun 6, 2010 at 10:40 am
Nuomi – whatever colour flag Thais, Siamese, Lao want is their business, not mine :
I simply think they should be given the choice – not have it rammed down their throats by the “Thai” military.
And your comments on Kings Mongkut and Chulalongkorn – yes :
under the ridiculous current “Thai” LM laws, you should be careful !
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
31 David Brown // Jun 6, 2010 at 12:17 pm
firstly, JohnH, the youngish selfish guy…
suspect there are a lot of Thais of his age group and relative affluence that are like him, I think more in Bangkok than outside
but there seem to be a lot of Thais that are more broadminded and concerned for the country and each other, and many more now as the redshirt message has spread and the old memories from 1970s-1990s have been revived and joined by the more generally understood 2010
so dont despair and let them move to democratic elections because if elections are seen to yield governments that are not puppets then people even like our selfish will, for valid selfish reasons, suddenly take an interest and vote for what they want
its worth saying, democracy doesnt expect or need smart or selfish or statesmen to vote, its aimed at finding what the majority want whatever their reasons and yielding a parliament and government that will work toward goals that will please the voting population next time around
secondly, my version of the elites/amart using democracy as a shield and attractor of lovely free foreign aid…
the elites/amart, now joined as full members by the military generals, use the parliament and MPs as their “S&E” (stories and excuses) department to provide them cover for whatever they feel like doing
if the S&E department performs to their satisfaction, then OK, otherwise replace them
Quality comment or not?
0 
0
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.