New Mandala

46 responses so far ↓

• 1 nganadeeleg // Apr 25, 2008 at 10:20 am

  The publicity should be good and I generally support him taking a stand against the draconian lese majeste laws (particularly the ability of anyone to make the charge).

  No one is harmed by merely ‘thinking differently’ and that clearly should not be a crime, so I also support him on that point.

  However, it will be interesting how he reconciles his act of not standing with his claim that he did not want to insult the monarchy - that’s a bit hard to believe, unless he offers careful explanations.

• 2 Observer // Apr 25, 2008 at 1:08 pm

  Nonconformity is the greatest of the Thai sins. Thinking differently is not merely a crime, but a threat to society that needs to be addressed through a massive campaign by the Culture Ministry and others.

  Pull out the brick of conformity and the whole fortress could come with it. I don’t see this as a small or accidental historical relic. It is a conscious and carefully constructed building block of the machine.

• 3 Srithanonchai // Apr 25, 2008 at 3:06 pm

  How can remaining seated in a cinema mean that he wanted to insult the monarchy? The more obvious motive would be that he wanted to rebel against the state-imposed procedure. Anyway, even more interesting than Khun Chotisak’s action is the reaction by that fellow visitor to the cinema. That person had been so much soaked in nationalist and royalist propaganda that he was not only prepared to disrespect Khun Chotisak’s individual rights as a citizen. Rather, that person developed a very strong emotional outrage about his behavior, and this emotional reaction was based on the long years of preceding propaganda. Even worse, he could not balance his own political preferences and his emotional state with a consideration of the political rights of a fellow citizen, but rather even acted on his emotions by mobilizing state authorities so that they would suppress that fellow citizen’s right to dissent. This sort of political culture is quite widespread in Thailand.

• 4 sueksit nanhuay // Apr 25, 2008 at 3:38 pm

  Many, I am sure, intend neither insult nor disrespect to HMK. What they want is to put him in a proper perspective and not to go on insisting that he is an omnipotent divine being. Treat him as a fellow human being so that we can tolerate any human faults in him.

• 5 Srithanonchai // Apr 25, 2008 at 6:30 pm

  I wonder what will happen when the picture of the present king is replaced with that of his successor. Most Thais don’t have great problems paying respect to the present king by getting up from their seats before the movie starts. But a great many Thais will be hard-pressed to do the same for his successor. Will there be more demonstrated dissent? Or will the authorities show sufficiency reasoning and discontinue the practice after the unavoidable departure?

• 6 Observer // Apr 25, 2008 at 6:49 pm

  Srithanonchai,

  Several years ago, we had a farang consultant come to Thailand. He dropped a 100 baht note and stepped on it to stop it from blowing away, at which point one of the royalist dervishes gave him a tougue lashing that he very seriously feared would turn into much worse. And I am pretty sure he had no intention of insulting the king.

• 7 Dickie Simpkins // Apr 25, 2008 at 7:21 pm

  I agree with most here.

  There is no law saying you have to stand in the theater. It’s one of those conformity things we do. I think he will get away with framing it as an issue of non-conformity rather than an issue of being anti-monarchy, especially given the light of the international media picking up on the story. I don’t mind the practice as I’ve been doing it all my life, but many of my visiting friends find the practice odd.

  Like Ngadeleeng though, I am curious to know how he frames the issue.

• 8 nganadeeleg // Apr 25, 2008 at 8:02 pm

  Srithanonchai said:‘The more obvious motive would be that he wanted to rebel against the state-imposed procedure’

  Sueksit said: ‘What they want is to put him in a proper perspective and not to go on insisting that he is an omnipotent divine being. Treat him as a fellow human being so that we can tolerate any human faults in him’

  You both have given plausible, but differing, explanations of what his motive could have been - rather than us guessing what his real motives were, I would like to see him give more of an an explanation.

  So far all we know is that he was an anti coup activist, he chose to go against a generally accepted practice or custom, one idiot took his exception too far, lese majeste has been invoked, and his only explanation so far is that thinking differently is not a crime.

  I can understand the stand he has taken now that lese majeste has been (IMO foolishly) invoked , however it would be interesting to hear his reasons for not standing in the first place (even though it clearly should not be a crime, whatever the reasons)

  To me, the only real crime that looks to have taken place was the aggressive attack by Nawamin.

• 9 Dog Lover // Apr 25, 2008 at 9:27 pm

  I once sat down during the playing of “God Save the Queen” in an official event in 1972. No response from anyone. Don’t think I have been in an event where they have played that horrid song again.

  Observer : I have heard that story before. Is it an urban legend? The other side of the coin is that the people in the post office would vigorously bash the king’s head on stamps to postmark a letter….

  The king deserves to be disrespected. I take Chotisak’s action to be all of the things mentioned above and an act of recognizing that the king is unworthy of the treatment he is accorded (and so would anyone else be unworthy of the fawning adulation he gets).

• 10 jonfernquest // Apr 25, 2008 at 10:06 pm

  The punishment maybe should fit the crime. Kick him out and ban him from the theatre. Try him for high treason? That just looks silly and cheapens the law.

  It also provides a opportunity for people who have a lot of violent negative energy to hurt other people. The guy in the movie theatre was attacked, as I remember.

  How many times do you hear, I’m a warrior (Saprang), I will die for my King, I will fight to the death, etc, etc. Is there really a need to be violent and attack people and fight to the death nowadays? Even back in the 1976 Red Gaur redneck days? IMHO people who attack other people, like the guy in the movie theatre, do not do honour to His Majesty the King at all, they are rather an embarassment. I remember sitting by the side of the road peacefully reading my book many years ago, when a drunk out of uniform police officer saw fit to sit down and lecture me about Thailand. He kept repeating (rather metonymically): I am Thailand, I am Thailand, I am Thailand. He thought he was, but he wasn’t and isn’t.

• 11 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 25, 2008 at 10:21 pm

  It reminds me of seeing a couple - not Chootisak - not stand for the anthem about 18 months ago - I was directly behind them so I know they didn’t stand. I vaguely remember the girl saying something to the guy, but he just sat there. No one else said anything. For me the amusing part was, I tried to have a look at the guy and saw that he had the words POLICE written on the back of his jacket and those police-style black shiny shoes.

  Chootisak’s argument, like Sulak used in the 90s, will be that he didn’t intend to insult the monarchy. He can then ask the complaint, do they know view the monarchy in a lesser light because of his actions? No one could admit to this, least all of the royalist who complained, so there is no insult.

• 12 Dog Lover // Apr 26, 2008 at 12:52 am

  jonfernquest : “IMHO people who attack other people, like the guy in the movie theatre, do not do honour to His Majesty the King at all, they are rather an embarassment.”

  You buy into the ideological machinations of the palace too much. These nationalist-monarchists are essentially doing the bidding of the palace. They want these events; they encourage them. I know, the king said once that the laws cause him problems, but he really does need them and so does the palace.

  I’m cheering Nepal’s Maoists (for the moment). Get rid of the daft feudalists.

• 13 colonel jeru // Apr 26, 2008 at 1:03 am

  Lese majeste carries “force” now in Thailand only because of the deep reverence accorded by the Thais to its current King, HM King Bhumibhol.

  Fast forward a few years from now when Thailand will have a new King . . . . . and Teth’s “futility” will probably best describe Lese Majeste law.

  So just wait gentlemen . . . be patient. But in the meantime . . .NM regulars should be able to endure standing up in theaters during the Thai royal anthem.

• 14 Dog Lover // Apr 26, 2008 at 3:33 am

  Colonel: I think you are not likely to be correct. I wish it were so. I think - guess - that lase majeste will be more important in the next reign….

• 15 Teth // Apr 26, 2008 at 5:11 am

  Now, now, Colonel, my use of “futility” is the standard, correct use of the word. Shall I now expect an apology from you for misunderstanding the word now that you are using it in its correct sense?

• 16 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 26, 2008 at 1:03 pm

  Khun BP writes
  He can then ask the complaint, do they know view the monarchy in a lesser light because of his actions? No one could admit to this, least all of the royalist who complained, so there is no insult.

  This legel strategy (basically based on “consequence” as well as intention) was first employed by Thongbai Thongpao in the famous Praderm Damrongcharoen’s case of 1974-75 and is said (by Streckfus) to account for the succesful defense of the case. First of all, I’m not sure that the Praderm Damrongcharoen’s (or Sulak’s) case was successful in the defense because of legal reason or political reason. I suspect it’s the latter. Furthermore, in the Veera Musikkaphong’s case, the “consequence” didn’t seem to help him get off (in the appeal court). Other recent LM trial, eg. the case of a ‘crazy’ nun in Ayudthaya who (if I remember correctly) claimed to be relative of the Crown Prince was also convicted even though no negative consequence to public could be shown.

  I still think the outcome of most, if not all, LM cases depend largely on political reason rather legal one.

  btw. Thongbai has now come out to state firmly that not standing for Royal Anthem is less majesty and is punishable by jail terms.

• 17 Srithanonchai // Apr 26, 2008 at 7:01 pm

  Thongbai has really said that? Can you give the source, please?

  Btw, here is a somewhat frightening piece of rhetoric by Chamlong Srimueang produced at the PAD rally at Thammasat on April 25. He was quoted in Matichon (April 27) as having said, “Today’s politicians are extremely insolent. Whatever terrible things they can think of, they can do them every day. Now, they don’t only aim at destroying the chairperson of the Privy Council alone. Today, they aim at destroying the highest institution of the country. Therefore, we must be prepared to resist.”

  This is a strange deja vu re Chamlong in October 1976, only that he was at the Royal Plaza with the village scouts at that time, and not in Thammasat University. And those accused of destroying the monarchy were not the government politicians, but the students assembled in Thammasat.

• 18 Teth // Apr 26, 2008 at 9:46 pm

  Well, Srithanonchai, the students from 1976 have now matured to take the helms of government. How the tables have turned, and I wish them well.

• 19 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 26, 2008 at 11:31 pm

  here’s the link to the report of the No-Standing incident in Manager which quotes Thongbai as saying “This action is illegal under the Criminal Code and is a less majesty”:
  http://www.manager.co.th/Crime/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000048141

  นายทองใบ ทองเปาด์ อดีต ส.ว.มหาสารคาม ทนายความรางวัลแมกไซไซ กล่าวว่า กรณีดังกล่าวถือเป็นความผิดทางอาญา มีโทษจำคุกสูงถึง 7 ปี และถือว่าหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ ซึ่งการยืนทำความเคารพเพลงสรรเสริญพระบารมี และเพลงชาติ ทุกคนต้องกระทำด้วยความสุภาพ ยืนตัวตรง ห้ามแกว่งแขน หรือยืนยิ้ม ต้องยืนด้วยความสงบเรียบร้อย ซึ่งในอดีตเคยมีเหตุการณ์นิสิตจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัยต้องติดคุก 2 ปี เพราะไม่ลุกขึ้นยืนทำความเคารพเพลงสรรเสริญพระบารมี ขณะไปฟังการปราศรัยที่ท้องสนามหลวง โดยเฉพาะในโรงภาพยนตร์จะมีข้อความระบุไว้ชัดเจนอยู่แล้วว่า “โปรดยืนถวายความเคารพ”

  “แม้จะอยู่ ณ ที่แห่งใด เมื่อได้ยินเพลงสรรเสริญพระบารมี และเพลงชาติ ทุกคนต้องยืนตัวตรงนิ่งทำความเคารพ” นายทองใบ กล่าว

  ทนายความผู้นี้ ระบุด้วยว่า หากบุคคลใดเห็นหรือแจ้งความเอาผิดกับผู้ที่ไม่ลุกขึ้นยืน หรือยืนไม่สุภาพ และมีพยานเห็นชัดเจน เจ้าหน้าที่ตำรวจจะรับแจ้งความอยู่แล้ว ซึ่งที่ผ่านมา มีเหตุการณ์ลักษณะเช่นนี้เกิดขึ้น และนำเรื่องขึ้นสู่ศาลฎีกามาแล้ว

• 20 jonfernquest // Apr 26, 2008 at 11:59 pm

  I stand up at every movie I go to and I am deeply moved by the song they play, honest. And I am a big fan of Princess Sirindhorn.

  It wasn’t always that way. I used to think that what is essentially worshipping human beings was a little strange. No longer. My family has all the pictures on the family altar at home. Neighbors gave them to us.

  I do cringe at those ads a year or two ago with the rural tuk tuk driver explaining to the clueless blond Farang boy the deep meaning of His Majesty the King, which is just plain racist. Like because I’m a white Farang, I can’t understand and do it too? Because of my genes?

  I had an opportunist colleague from Australia who wanted to make it as a writer so he defamed the Crown Prince in his novel. Authorities silently took it off the shelves. Discrete approaches like this take the wind out of opportunist’s sails.

  I don’t understand why they want to blow this movie theatre thing into a big issue. Is the police or the courts (or both) that decide whether a lese majeste case goes to court?

• 21 Melly // Apr 27, 2008 at 12:31 am

  Srithanonchai said : Thongbai has really said that? Can you give the source, please?

  http://www.manager.co.th/Crime/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000048141

• 22 Mariner // Apr 27, 2008 at 1:42 am

  The truth is the Lese Majeste will persist in some form or other for quite a while; not because Thais love their king -although many claim to do so- but because the current law a. prevents some very uncomfortable issues being discussed in the public domain (which may have little if anything to do with the king), and b. is a valuable tool in the hands of powerful and influential people.

  Actually, some to think of it, the law does work pretty damn well. I still haven’t plucked up the courage to write about the mysterious death of Ananda Mahidol.

• 23 Dog Lover // Apr 27, 2008 at 6:12 am

  jonfernquest: hope you have your Thongdaeng t-shirt on and that you feel all warm and fuzzy being Thai and shout to the rooftops:

  I, servant of His Majesty,
  Extend my heart and body to his feet,
  To pay respect and give praise
  To the protector of the country,
  To the great Chakri Dynasty,
  To the leader of the Siamese people in might and splendor,
  The people, in peace and contentment
  From his tireless labor and guidance,
  Pray, that whatever he wills,
  Will come to pass for his glory

  Especially as you support censorship (including of so-called opportunists) and all other crimes perpetrated by all the Chakri dynasty that you worship.

• 24 Teth // Apr 27, 2008 at 6:27 am

  Jon, you’ve brought a tear into my eye. I accept you as a real Thai now. Thank you from the people of Thailand, Brother Jon.

• 25 Erewhon // Apr 27, 2008 at 1:51 pm

  Doglover is right. The national anthem was played before the start of performances in UK cinemas during the 1960s and into the early 1970s. Fewer and fewer people stood and it was quietly abandonned. But we never had the anthem played on tv/radio twice a day nor traffic stopping twice a day, nor the threat of 15 years prison if it was not done

  In reply to Observer, an old anarchist protest was to stick postage stamps on letters upside down. Wonder if that would ever catch on in Thailand…

• 26 Srithanonchai // Apr 27, 2008 at 2:35 pm

  Somsak and Melly: Thanks for the link and the pasting of the text. As I understand it, Thongbai tried to provide information on the current legal situation as he sees it. I wonder what his normative-political stance on this issue is.

  Teth: The situation is even more ironic, because this government is headed by Samak, who, in October 1976, was also out there at Thammasat University–outside with the right-wingers, not inside with the students, of course! And now he stands accused by Chamlong of helping those who want to destruct the monarchy, notwithstanding his family’s unwavering service to the monarchy over decades (and this as Chinese, not even Thai).

  Jon: Please, don’t go as far as putting yellow make-up in your face! Is the crown prince included in that family shrine?

• 27 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 28, 2008 at 12:04 pm

  Khun Srithanonchai writes:
  As I understand it, Thongbai tried to provide information on the current legal situation as he sees it. I wonder what his normative-political stance on this issue is.

  I’m not quite sure what K.Srithanonchai means here, but I’m afraid “Phi Bai” is doing more than “provid[ing] information”: I believe he’s expressing his negative judgement on the action of Mr.Chotisak and friend. Thongbai has been involved in politics for a very long time and has intimate knowledge and experience with the LM cases (perhaps more than anyone else). He should know (I think he knows) that by publicly lending his authority to the view that “Chotisak committed less majesty” he in fact helps the rightist royalist attack on Chotisak of the Manager and co.

  I write these lines with deep painful feeling. For, as you may know, Phi Bai was the lawyer who defended me and my friends against the LM charge in the 6 October trail (not to mention most other LM cases both before and after Oct6). But lately his public pronouncement on the LM issue has been highly regretable. Last year, at the high of the campaign to denounce Prem (which many groups joined, not only the pro-Thaksin), Thongbai has invoked the article in the Constituion “The person of the King is sacred and inviolable”, implying that the anti-Prem campaign was in violation of LM.

• 28 Srithanonchai // Apr 28, 2008 at 3:36 pm

  Khun Somsak: In order to end the speculation about what is on Thongbai’s mind, do you have a way to ask him whether he in fact has a “negative judgment” about Chotisak’s actions? I remember well that Thongbai welcomed the coup als strong medicine that was sometimes necessary. But has he also become a royalist, and does he want to help the “rightist royalists”? In this context, your final sentence is interesting. What has happaned to the political mind of Thongbai?

• 29 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 28, 2008 at 7:01 pm

  Ajarn Somsak: I agree that political reasons more than legal ones are relevant, but the legal argument provides a political reason to find the person “not guilty”. His outright challenging of the status quo though will be difficult for the elite to tolerate. However, by being so vocal he can establish himself as a cause celebre and well this might not be seemed as helpful as internationally exposes Thailand. Quietly dropping the case vs making him a public example seems the choice which the elite is faced with. Now, what will they choose.

• 30 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 28, 2008 at 7:05 pm

  Btw, here is a somewhat frightening piece of rhetoric by Chamlong Srimueang produced at the PAD rally at Thammasat on April 25. He was quoted in Matichon (April 27) as having said, “Today’s politicians are extremely insolent. Whatever terrible things they can think of, they can do them every day. Now, they don’t only aim at destroying the chairperson of the Privy Council alone. Today, they aim at destroying the highest institution of the country. Therefore, we must be prepared to resist.”

  Srithanonchai, I am not questioning the quote or your translation, but I just want to read the whole article. Do you have a link to the article or remember the title of the article? Searching on Privy Council in Thai brings up too many articles.

  The shades of 1976 are disturbing.

• 31 Srithanonchai // Apr 29, 2008 at 12:04 am

  Bangkok Pundit: I found the quote in the political summary news in issue 11005 of April 27, p. 13. Unfortunately, neither Matichon nor NewsCenter carry the entire bloc, but leave out the last five sections. So, here is the typed text:

  แก้รธน.”เพื่อตัวเอง”อีกปม อุ้ม”นายกฯ-รมต.” ไม่พ้นส.ส.ทั้งที่ปี40ให้หลุด
  Source – เว็บไซต์มติชน Saturday, Apr 26, 2008 09:22

  ‘สนธิ’ ลั่นศึกใหญ่ครั้งสุดท้ายถอยไม่ได้

  เวลา 21.40 น. พล.ต. จำลอง ศรีเมือง แกนนำพันธมิตร ขึ้นแถลงบนเวทีเป็นคนแรกว่า วิกฤดการเมืองแก้ในสภาไม่ได้ ต้องออกมาแก้นอกสภา น.ต. ประสงค์ สุ่นศิริ บอกว่า ทุกครั้งที่มีเรื่อง ทหารอยู่กับพันธมิตร ในการชุมนุมปี 2549 มีทหารชุมนุมกับพันธมิตรมาก แต่ไม่แต่งเครื่องแบบมา วันนี้ก็มามาก แม้แต่นายพลก็มา

  “นักการเมืองสมัยนี้มันเหิมเกริมเหลือเกิน คิดจะทำอะไรแย่ๆ มันก็ทำได้ทุกวัน เดี๋ยวนี้ไม่ได้จ้องจะทำลายประธานองคมนตรีแล้ว วันนี้มันจ้องทำลายสถาบันสูงสุดของแผ่นดินกันแล้ว ดังนั้นพี่น้องต้องพร้อมที่จะออกมาต่อต้าน เป็นอย่างไรก็เป็นกัน” พล.ต. จำลองกล่าว

  In fact, the last phrase, which I did not include in my rough treanslation, makes matters even worse, because it shows that the speaker does not care about what the consequences of any confrontations might be.

• 32 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 29, 2008 at 1:18 am

  Here’s the link to the full transcript (there’re also MP3 files) of the speeches at last Friday rally by the 5 PAD leaders. The part about the alledged movement to change the system of government (i.e. republicanism) is very disturbing indeed.
  http://www.manager.co.th/Home/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000048775

  See also the latest article by Chai-anan Samutthavanit.
  http://www.manager.co.th/Daily/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9510000049004
  Remember he’s the one who first suggested the use of “Article 7″. In this new article, Chai-anan in effect suggests that a new coup is probably necessary. He of course doesn’t say as much, but the implication is clear (I think in his mind too). For the so-called “Half-Democracy” (ประชาธิปไตยครึ่งใบ - sorry I couldn’t think of a good translation of the term) can only be implemented by overthrowing the current system of choosing government by elections.

• 33 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // Apr 29, 2008 at 1:34 am

  Note also that Chai-anan insists quite categorically that there’s a movement to install a republic :

  การโจมตี พล.อ.เปรม ติณสูลานนท์…..ปรากฏการณ์นี้ส่อแววของการเคลื่อนไหวของกลุ่มที่ต่อต้านสถาบันพระมหากษัตริย์ที่ไม่ใช่พวกมาร์กซิสต์แต่เป็นพวกรีปับลิกัน คือผู้ต้องการสถาปนาระบอบสาธารณรัฐ

  “The attack on General Prem Tinsulanont…this phenomena signals the movement of those who oppose the monarchy. They are not Marxist, but they want to establish a republic.”

• 34 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 29, 2008 at 6:05 am

  Srithanonchai: Thanks very much. The Manager article that Somsak posts has more, but it is only a partial transcript.

  What has become of Chai-anan? He is just a Sondhi L lackey these days.

• 35 Democratus // Apr 29, 2008 at 6:54 am

  Bangkok Pundit: What on earth do you mean? Chai-Anan has been Sondhi’s buddy and sidekick for years. He’s the brains in the operation. Sondhi provides the money and cunning. Remeber that they both went over to Thaksin initially. Chai-Anan is a bit of a whore when it comes to serving governments. But when Sondhi left, Chai-Anan was close behind. Chai-Anan has always been a royalist, so even if they weren’t buddies, they’d team up to face alleged republicanism.

• 36 Bangkok Pundit // Apr 29, 2008 at 3:09 pm

  Democratus: Well, I suppose I should expand on what I mean “these days”. I am talking about the last 10 or more years. Think back to some of his writings in the 70s and 80s on Thai politics which I think are excellent. I blogged on him just being a lackey a couple of years ago - see here. Chai-anan was defending Thaksin in 2005 and then well Sondhi L jumped ship and he followed his patron. I just find the whole thing quite sad.

• 37 nganadeeleg // Apr 29, 2008 at 7:09 pm

  Does anyone know if there really is, or isn’t, a movement to install a republic?

  Is (was) Republican a one man band?

  Personally, given the nature of Thai politics and the elected politicians we have seen so far, I would have thought that such a move would be premature.

• 38 Democratus // Apr 29, 2008 at 10:20 pm

  Chai-Anan has been a lackey of Sondhi L since the late 1980s. I admit that he wrote a couple of good pieces in the 1970s, but he’s written a lot of rubbish since then.

• 39 fall // Apr 29, 2008 at 10:22 pm

  This lese majeste case is ridiculous.
  As mention earlier, it became “tradition” to play the royal anthem in cinema, but better time and energy would be spend on questioning of whether it should be there in the first place.

  Say, if there is any mob at Sanamluang again. Then someone come up with loud speaker and play royal anthem 24/7. Would those who move got caught?

  IMO, this case show that the spirit of the law on “preserving respect” got lost and substitute by “tradition”. As in business term of “corporate culture”; we do it, but no one know why it was done.

  It would have made more sense if lese majeste were to be slap on those who counterfeit money, with the king image and all.

• 40 Teth // Apr 30, 2008 at 1:03 am

  Does anyone know if there really is, or isn’t, a movement to install a republic?

  Movement? Not that I’m aware of.

  Is (was) Republican a one man band?

  Probably, but there are plenty to share Republican views in Thailand. More people than you think, just like there are probably more independent thinkers in Thailand than you think.

  Personally, given the nature of Thai politics and the elected politicians we have seen so far, I would have thought that such a move would be premature.

  Let’s say Republicanism in Thailand has been around far longer than that. And for a reason too. Its only now seeing a sort of revival.

  I see you are still up to your old tricks of accrediting HMK inappropriately. Perhaps it would surprise you then that what is probably the strongest Republican ‘movement’ in Thai history was probably after 1976.

  If Thailand were to follow the path of Nepal, the worst case scenario is the replacement of one clique/cabal with another, so I don’t see how Republicanism is “premature” at all. Really, what is the new power going to do that the old one hasn’t? Or, what is the old power doing that the new won’t be able to do?

• 41 nganadeeleg // Apr 30, 2008 at 9:18 am

  Teth: I think the worst case would be much worse that the mere replacement scenario you outlined, and therefore cannot see any point in going through the inevitable violence getting there.

  Apart from differences in the respective monarchies, your comparison with Nepal is also a bit premature - wait another 60 years and get back to me.

  Like it or not, the old power has an established image throughout the world, and has a reputation to uphold - would a replacement new power have those constraints?

  A few of you continually hark back to the 1970’s as some sort of evidence of how bad the old power is, but you never seem concerned about putting things into proper context be referring to the mood of those times - remember it was only 1970 when the Kent State massacre occurred, and I’m sure you don’t need me to remind you of the other crimes being perpetrated in the Thai region at the time.

  Here’s some ‘relativist drivel’ for you to consider:
  Please tally up all the deaths which can be directly attributed by the old power, and then compare that with some of the goings on in other Asian countries, or African, or middle eastern countries.
  Or make a comparison with the Iraq death tallies pre & post Saddam.

  The Thaksin example makes me think your mere replacement scenario is a strong likelihood, and not just a worst case scenario.

  Of course I am not happy with ‘network monarchy’, but I do think it is now premature (or too late) to go the republican route.
  The situation may change after a few years under the next monarch.

  For there to be any improvement, IMO, there has to be attitudinal change at both the top and bottom (and middle) of the Thai political spectrum.

  If the top changes without the bottom, then your worst case will be reality, however if the bottom changes, then eventually the top will be forced to follow suit.

• 42 Teth // Apr 30, 2008 at 11:23 pm

  Nganadeeleg, I will counter your relativist drivel with this question, how much criticism and denunciation has occurred with regards to those events? On the other hand, has justice been had to those who were brutally (shall we compare the brutality of events as well?) slain in the 1970s? Furthermore, I would have liked to ask the rhetorical question “Do these occurrences and context excuse murder?” but you’ve already answered that network monarchy is despicable.

  As long as you don’t subscribe to the myth that the monarchy is an irreplaceable, supernatural force that has singlehandedly kept the country together and is the essence of Thailand, I will agree to disagree about the pro’s and con’s of a Republican reform, the outcome of which is far too uncertain for any of us to determine, let alone whip up mass hysteria (a la Sondhi L) based on such fears.

• 43 nganadeeleg // May 1, 2008 at 9:04 am

  Teth: I definitely do not subscribe to that myth.
  I just think things could have been much worse, although I also concede they could be much better.
  (for instance, fairness and transparency in the administration of the rule of law would be a good start).

• 44 Reg Varney // Jun 24, 2008 at 1:05 am

  I just read in the international press that another person - a woman - has been charged/accused of lese majeste for failing to stand in a cinema. The date on the report was 18 June. Anyone know any more about this? Was it in the Thai press/media?

• 45 Nicholas Farrelly // Jun 24, 2008 at 4:20 am

  Reg,

  If you have a google around for รัชพิณ จันทร์เจริญ (Rachapin Chancharoen) you will find a fair amount of Thai-language reporting (and blogging, etc) on her case. My understanding is that the story was broken, originally, by Khao Sod. Manager and others have also reported the story to one extent or another. They even have some pictures.

  From my reading it is unclear how far this prosecution will go. I get the impression, although I may be mistaken, that this is not another Chotisak…of course, I may be wrong about that.

  Best wishes to all,

  Nich

• 46 Reg Varney // Jun 24, 2008 at 1:36 pm

  Thanks Nich. In the meantime, I did find more information and appreciate the links.

Leave a Comment