I echo the first 2 comments above; over the years Thaivisa has sort of devolved into this Politically Correct mushiness to pander to the appropriate power centers – both in Thailand and “The West”.
It should be pretty obvious to everyone that well-connected elites in Thailand use lèse majesté laws as a battering ram to beat down the legitimate wishes and aspirations of the vast majority of Thais and the politicians they elected.
I think the BP story is basically right. Akbar Khan is a member of FCCT, and often attends sessions. He likes to video-record, and post bits on the net. He gave a recording and a transcript of the Jakrapob evening to his friend Watanasak. He did the same on Jonathan Head. He was present in the police station when the BBC went down to answer the first charge.
I think there is no real doubt that this was the mechanism whereby these incidents came to the attention of the police. The unknown is who/what else was involved apart from these two. There was a long delay between Khan handing over his tape, and the LM charge against Jakrapob appearing. During that delay, Jakrapob metamorphosed from very minor figure to minister. What intervened to prompt the charge?
Reg Varney said: He may want to squirm a bit now, but it is clear that he was criticising Prem and the monarchy directly and bravely
Reg could be called as a witness, but by which side will depend on whether Jakrapob decides to backtrack, or tries to put some reason behind his speech.
Most expect a backtrack, but maybe he could surprise and be a real Jack out of the box
Thanks for posting this, it is a splash (complete with yellow fever). The family state of wise father need not be dragged into contentions over the monarchy. I think the problem is much more pervasive. There is lots of stuff in Heather Montgomery’s Modern Babylon that deals with the idea of children, in Thailand and elsewhere. The book mentions a speech on National Children’s Day by then PM Chuan Leekpai. He “claimed that childhood was the most perfect state to be in because it was the only time in a person’s life when they were really free. No mention was made of the powerlessness of childhood, of the weak and vulnerable state that until now many people had viewed it to be. Indeed, his speech can be seen as celebrating that impotence and implying that freedom can only come with powerlessness which has obvious parallels to the role of the citizen” (2001:63). Sufficiency may be a condition akin to childhood in that sense. And all good things come from above.
Ah so first a Jailed rebel that attacked General Prem’s home was invited to talk about “patronage” at the FCCT and then a “conspiracy” is revealed, an ousted PM is mentioned as being involved and then everyone says no no it was some Afghan shepherd boy (pretending to be British) and as usual he cried wolf and there was no wolf
I guess everybody forgot to to tell the protesters to go home now that it was only the shepherd boy.
You bloggers crack me up so bad with your pseudo journalism
Indeed, it’s a constant : they are totally terrified to be… banned. It’s simple as that.
ThaiVisa is a -very- good business. So their policy is clear : nothing, nothing at all related to monarchy, the royal family etc. Risk zero. And too bad if basic ideas about free speech are a little bit forgotten…
Anyway, we can leave them to their mediocrity… we have now other sites, forums and blogs to talk.
As for this story, about the “team”. it’s indeed amazing.
I ask on my blog : is there a link between “british national”, “reporter”, and the case against the BBC ?
As for the rest, it’s a perfect drama. The cop looks a like poor child (we have the picture !), with his big brother, the british guy. I mean it’s so…. sweet !
The whole story might be totally fabricated by Bangkok Post. Anyway. It’s a good reason to give more publicity to this ridiculous story and the lese-majeste against the BBC and the “robot-cop”.
So I say : come on ! Bring on the details ! The more we talk about it, the more the world will understand the very low level of the the thai politics… It’s perfect.
In my experience, Thaivisa is hyper-sensitive to anything about HMK. Given that their site is presumably a rather lucrative business, they’re just covering their ass.
Jon said: No, His Majesty the King’s birthday speech of, I believe, 2004 makes that perfectly clear by, I believe, inviting well-reasoned and logical critical thought about the institutions of monarchy.
So we agree there needs to be criticism. Has there been criticism? Or has it all been just talk, as usual? In fact, there was only ONE memorable talk inviting criticism, if I remember correctly. It is almost as if the signal to Parliamentarians and civil servants is “take it easy. No pressure. No rush at all”
Now let’s see the royalists appearing out of the woodwork saying that there is nothing to criticize. And yet the King is not superhuman, does not rely on propaganda to boost his image, nor LM law….
jonfernquest: Can you cite examples of reasoned criticism of the king that has been made, publicised and debated? I can’t recall any. Seems to me that the king is reveling in being able to call for criticism knowing that there won’t be any. The paplace did say that they were going to correct Handley’s “errors” but in the end did nothing and went along with the banning.
For me, as someone who regularly reads and edits the work on non-English speakers, Jakrapob’s speech is clear. What disagreement do you refer to? As far as I can tell it is over Thai translation, not what he said in English. He may want to squirm a bit now, but it is clear that he was criticising Prem and the monarchy directly and bravely. He now pays the penalty.
“Or are you saying they are perfect and superhuman?”
No, His Majesty the King’s birthday speech of, I believe, 2004 makes that perfectly clear by, I believe, inviting well-reasoned and logical critical thought about the institutions of monarchy, but three important factors probably precluded exactly that in Jakrapob’s FCCT speech: 1. he seems to have been under severe emotional strain after being recently released from jail after the rather violent protest he lead outside of Prem’s house, and 2. using the English language instead of Thai for such a sensitive subject, clearly meant that he did not have complete command of what he was saying, I can’t read the transcript without cringing and trying to figure out what exactly he is trying to say, the fact that there is so much disagreement about what he said might actually constitute proof of that, and 3. he seems all too willing to discourse at length on subjects like ancient Tai history, that he knows hardly anything about, probably a habit picked up from work in TV, which does not place high value on, for instance, citing one’s sources, considering absolutely essential in reasoned scholarly discourse.
Earlier this year there was debate in the Thai media by scholars such as Nidhi Eoseewong on reforming the LM law so that it more like European LM laws, but until then, however admittedly murky and subject to abuse that the law might be (like the case of the farang in Kon Khaen who was accused of LM as a form of harassment), LM is the law.
Great conversation! And, not wanting to get it off track, as a point of clarification the “Kachin” Stephen refers to are usually called Singpho. And, yes, they are mostly Theravada Buddhists and they have, as I understand it, mostly been quite recently converted (i.e. in the past 150 years or so). The stories I have heard focus on Burmese and Shan (and maybe “Kachin”) monks from across the border who walked to the Singpho areas. I was up in those areas of Arunachal Pradesh and Assam earlier in the year and a fewof theseNew Mandala posts may be of interest to anyone wanting to learn more.
It seems to me the Kachins are a pretty good example of “heathen” beliefs incorporated in to a culturally-based Christianity. Christian Kachins from Burma and Buddhist Kachins (Singhpo) from Assam both participate in the Manau, an animist ceremony that pre-dates conversion to either Christianity or Buddhism.
I’d also point out that the Karen re-working of history might not just marginalize the non-Christian elements, but also the missionaries. I’m not saying that is the intent, but it is a possible interpretation. Can the missionaries trace their ancestory back to the Tower of Babel?
“I’d also suggest that if you really want to read between the lines, you should also look in to the activities of indigenous Christian communities.”
I do find it quite amazing how in some cases indigenous Christian communities have internalized facets 0f western missionary culture that don’t seem to be part of Christianity as such. Visibly, for example, in the male Chin ‘national dress’ being black slacks, a long sleeve button up white shirt, belt and a tie. But this covers a lot more than clothing and seems to include the rejection of ‘heathen’ practices and beliefs that could, with a bit of reworking, have possibly been incorporated into a culturally-tied Christianity had western missionaries not been so eager to expunge them.
Or, more problematic, the adoption of questionable historical and demographic claims that marginalize non-Christian members. Like the old claim that the Karen descend from Mesopotamia when “their forebears left Babylon when the town of Babel collapsed“. Reworking history in this way places Christianity (or at least middle-eastern-derived monotheism) as a more culturally legitimate religion than Buddhism or the various natural religions of the Karen despite the fact that the latter preceded Christianity amongst the Karen (barring the alternative theory that Christianity amongst the Karen came from Nestorian Christians in western China). Along these lines are Ashley South’s article “Karen Nationalist Communities: the ‘Problem’ of Diversity and Paul Keenan’s article “Faith at a Crossroads”.
Relatedly, an ethnic Karen missionary with whom I spoke recently told me that most Karen were Christian (they’re not; I think the figures are something like 25-35% Christian). He also told me that many Buddhist Karen, including most members of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army were in fact “really Christian in their hearts” and only professed Buddhism to get ahead given the SPDC’s pro-Buddhist bias or prior Burman domination over the Karen in pre-colonial Burma. Now, I recognize that the SPDC’s or monarchical Burma’s Buddhist favoritism may have influenced some individuals in their choice of religious adherence, but to suggest that this is the only reason for Buddhist faith amongst the Karen (or other ethnic nationalities of Burma) seems to me to be quite insulting to most non-Christian Karen who have strong beliefs in non-Christian religions; whether traditional natural religions, Buddhism or Islam (the latter being a small but important segment of the Karen).
The problem of Kachin claims to be a solely Christian ethnic group are challenged by the existence of Buddhist ethnic Kachin in north-eastern India (I forgot what the local name is, maybe simply called Jingpaw). This is discussed in Mandy Sadan’s article on the Kachin in Exploring ethnic diversity in Burma.
I think Leif’s point on how different societies have used Christianity to both resist larger national agendas and to create transnational connections certainly is important. The converts certainaly were not passive “Rice Christians”.
One other aspect to consider is the larger context in which these conversions took/take place. In mainland SE Asia they take place in a larger, dominant Buddhist context, which is a different dynamic than what happened in North America and Australia. Certainly in North America at least, Christianity was used by some tribal groups to resist national agendas, but in a much more constrained situation.
This is good stuff, and it is nice to get a breeze from beyond high-society Bangkok intrigues. Both remarks point to ways of thinking past some ideological certainties about missionaries and missionary encounters. There is good reason to come back to Southeast Asia as a problem, and to rethink its many starting points and intersections. Western missionaries came to the Yao in Nan, Phrae, and thereabouts in the early 1900s. They brought a sciopticon and showed Jesus-photos (I needed help to find out what the projector was like). They spoke some Chinese and had Chinese-lang Bibles, and some of the Yao were really keen on hiring them to teach their kids Chinese. There was an interesting back and forth between the missionaries, the Yao leader, and some of the villagers, that went on for years. This is recorded in Laos News, a missionary publication from that time that was aimed at supporters in the USA. Only in the 1950s did Yao start to convert to Christianity, and that played into local factionalisms that are still alive. Missionaries also went over to Laos during the war, made a few converts, and much more in the refugee camps by the mid 70s. They made songs in Mien, and worked on a romanized script. Both the script and Christianity are key to some Mien community building in Thailand and the US (former refugees from Laos), and it turns into something local and creative (and divisions between those using the Thai script and the romanized script for the good word in the Mien language). It also generates the desire to convert Mien “left behind”, in Laos, Vietnam, and southern China, which is an unexpected form of transnational connections. Missionary records and photos are interesting, missionaries can be as blind to the context of their actions as the rest of us. While I agree with the remark about how missionaries can play (unwittingly, sometimes) to the priorities of nation-building, they also contribute (sometimes) to an ethnic defense against it, and in the process they conjure up new possibilities for ethnicizing social life. While there have long been ethnic identities, how people become ethnic at any point in time is also worth some examination. But on this touchy topic, my favorite story is of a Buddhist missionary (Thammajarik) monk in northern Thailand (another nation building project) who came to a Mien village and was hoping for alms (food in particular). Some Mien guy came out of his house. After a while they came to some basis for communication, and the Mien man proceeded to offer money for the monk’s begging bowl, it would be useful in the kitchen. This story is in Kamala Tiyavanich’s Forest Recollections. This nearly transgressive moment (monks can’t handle money, without his bowl the monk cannot connect to ordinary society) is very funny, though KT is not trading in humor in this book or The Buddha in the Jungle, which is also worth checking out.
I think it is also important to note the missionaries had an important secular role as well. I remember a Kachin friend telling me how shocked he was to learn that the missionaries, at the request of the British colonial officials, included Burmese in the instruction at mission schools. He told me he was mad at the missionaries since they had been involved in “Burmanizing” the Kachins.
I’d also suggest that if you really want to read between the lines, you should also look in to the activities of indigenous Christian communities. The first offical Baptist missionaries to the Karens in Thailand arrived in the 1950s, but the first Karen Baptist church was founded in the 1880s around Chiang Rai, I believe. One of the first acts of the missionaries to Thai Karens was to attend a 50th anniversary of a Karen church around Mae Sarieng.
In fact the Thai public school in that town was originally a private school started by Karen Christians (but open to all Thai, Karen, and Burmese in the area) which taught Karen, Burmese and Thai. The initial Thai instructor was a Karen who only spoke Northern Thai, so they replaced him with someone who spoke the Central Thai dialect. The Japanese took the school over during WWII and gave it to the government.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss 
New Mandala in the press
Whatever transpires, the Thai people stand to lose in more than one way.
The lèse majesté plot thickens
I echo the first 2 comments above; over the years Thaivisa has sort of devolved into this Politically Correct mushiness to pander to the appropriate power centers – both in Thailand and “The West”.
It should be pretty obvious to everyone that well-connected elites in Thailand use lèse majesté laws as a battering ram to beat down the legitimate wishes and aspirations of the vast majority of Thais and the politicians they elected.
The lèse majesté plot thickens
I think the BP story is basically right. Akbar Khan is a member of FCCT, and often attends sessions. He likes to video-record, and post bits on the net. He gave a recording and a transcript of the Jakrapob evening to his friend Watanasak. He did the same on Jonathan Head. He was present in the police station when the BBC went down to answer the first charge.
I think there is no real doubt that this was the mechanism whereby these incidents came to the attention of the police. The unknown is who/what else was involved apart from these two. There was a long delay between Khan handing over his tape, and the LM charge against Jakrapob appearing. During that delay, Jakrapob metamorphosed from very minor figure to minister. What intervened to prompt the charge?
Bangkok Post’s brave attack on the patronage system!
Reg Varney said: He may want to squirm a bit now, but it is clear that he was criticising Prem and the monarchy directly and bravely
Reg could be called as a witness, but by which side will depend on whether Jakrapob decides to backtrack, or tries to put some reason behind his speech.
Most expect a backtrack, but maybe he could surprise and be a real Jack out of the box
A fairy story
Thanks for posting this, it is a splash (complete with yellow fever). The family state of wise father need not be dragged into contentions over the monarchy. I think the problem is much more pervasive. There is lots of stuff in Heather Montgomery’s Modern Babylon that deals with the idea of children, in Thailand and elsewhere. The book mentions a speech on National Children’s Day by then PM Chuan Leekpai. He “claimed that childhood was the most perfect state to be in because it was the only time in a person’s life when they were really free. No mention was made of the powerlessness of childhood, of the weak and vulnerable state that until now many people had viewed it to be. Indeed, his speech can be seen as celebrating that impotence and implying that freedom can only come with powerlessness which has obvious parallels to the role of the citizen” (2001:63). Sufficiency may be a condition akin to childhood in that sense. And all good things come from above.
The lèse majesté plot thickens
Ah so first a Jailed rebel that attacked General Prem’s home was invited to talk about “patronage” at the FCCT and then a “conspiracy” is revealed, an ousted PM is mentioned as being involved and then everyone says no no it was some Afghan shepherd boy (pretending to be British) and as usual he cried wolf and there was no wolf
I guess everybody forgot to to tell the protesters to go home now that it was only the shepherd boy.
You bloggers crack me up so bad with your pseudo journalism
The lèse majesté plot thickens
Indeed, it’s a constant : they are totally terrified to be… banned. It’s simple as that.
ThaiVisa is a -very- good business. So their policy is clear : nothing, nothing at all related to monarchy, the royal family etc. Risk zero. And too bad if basic ideas about free speech are a little bit forgotten…
Anyway, we can leave them to their mediocrity… we have now other sites, forums and blogs to talk.
As for this story, about the “team”. it’s indeed amazing.
I ask on my blog : is there a link between “british national”, “reporter”, and the case against the BBC ?
As for the rest, it’s a perfect drama. The cop looks a like poor child (we have the picture !), with his big brother, the british guy. I mean it’s so…. sweet !
The whole story might be totally fabricated by Bangkok Post. Anyway. It’s a good reason to give more publicity to this ridiculous story and the lese-majeste against the BBC and the “robot-cop”.
So I say : come on ! Bring on the details ! The more we talk about it, the more the world will understand the very low level of the the thai politics… It’s perfect.
Eventually, ridicule does kill.
The lèse majesté plot thickens
In my experience, Thaivisa is hyper-sensitive to anything about HMK. Given that their site is presumably a rather lucrative business, they’re just covering their ass.
Bangkok Post’s brave attack on the patronage system!
Jon said: No, His Majesty the King’s birthday speech of, I believe, 2004 makes that perfectly clear by, I believe, inviting well-reasoned and logical critical thought about the institutions of monarchy.
So we agree there needs to be criticism. Has there been criticism? Or has it all been just talk, as usual? In fact, there was only ONE memorable talk inviting criticism, if I remember correctly. It is almost as if the signal to Parliamentarians and civil servants is “take it easy. No pressure. No rush at all”
Now let’s see the royalists appearing out of the woodwork saying that there is nothing to criticize. And yet the King is not superhuman, does not rely on propaganda to boost his image, nor LM law….
Lèse majesté charges in Chiang Mai
[…] this does happen from time-to-time it isn’t an everyday event. So…why were they so […]
Lèse majesté and the BBC
[…] this does happen from time-to-time it isn’t an everyday event. So…why were they so […]
Bangkok Post’s brave attack on the patronage system!
jonfernquest: Can you cite examples of reasoned criticism of the king that has been made, publicised and debated? I can’t recall any. Seems to me that the king is reveling in being able to call for criticism knowing that there won’t be any. The paplace did say that they were going to correct Handley’s “errors” but in the end did nothing and went along with the banning.
For me, as someone who regularly reads and edits the work on non-English speakers, Jakrapob’s speech is clear. What disagreement do you refer to? As far as I can tell it is over Thai translation, not what he said in English. He may want to squirm a bit now, but it is clear that he was criticising Prem and the monarchy directly and bravely. He now pays the penalty.
Bangkok Post’s brave attack on the patronage system!
“Or are you saying they are perfect and superhuman?”
No, His Majesty the King’s birthday speech of, I believe, 2004 makes that perfectly clear by, I believe, inviting well-reasoned and logical critical thought about the institutions of monarchy, but three important factors probably precluded exactly that in Jakrapob’s FCCT speech: 1. he seems to have been under severe emotional strain after being recently released from jail after the rather violent protest he lead outside of Prem’s house, and 2. using the English language instead of Thai for such a sensitive subject, clearly meant that he did not have complete command of what he was saying, I can’t read the transcript without cringing and trying to figure out what exactly he is trying to say, the fact that there is so much disagreement about what he said might actually constitute proof of that, and 3. he seems all too willing to discourse at length on subjects like ancient Tai history, that he knows hardly anything about, probably a habit picked up from work in TV, which does not place high value on, for instance, citing one’s sources, considering absolutely essential in reasoned scholarly discourse.
Earlier this year there was debate in the Thai media by scholars such as Nidhi Eoseewong on reforming the LM law so that it more like European LM laws, but until then, however admittedly murky and subject to abuse that the law might be (like the case of the farang in Kon Khaen who was accused of LM as a form of harassment), LM is the law.
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
Thanks Aiontay, Leif and Stephen,
Great conversation! And, not wanting to get it off track, as a point of clarification the “Kachin” Stephen refers to are usually called Singpho. And, yes, they are mostly Theravada Buddhists and they have, as I understand it, mostly been quite recently converted (i.e. in the past 150 years or so). The stories I have heard focus on Burmese and Shan (and maybe “Kachin”) monks from across the border who walked to the Singpho areas. I was up in those areas of Arunachal Pradesh and Assam earlier in the year and a few of these New Mandala posts may be of interest to anyone wanting to learn more.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
It seems to me the Kachins are a pretty good example of “heathen” beliefs incorporated in to a culturally-based Christianity. Christian Kachins from Burma and Buddhist Kachins (Singhpo) from Assam both participate in the Manau, an animist ceremony that pre-dates conversion to either Christianity or Buddhism.
I’d also point out that the Karen re-working of history might not just marginalize the non-Christian elements, but also the missionaries. I’m not saying that is the intent, but it is a possible interpretation. Can the missionaries trace their ancestory back to the Tower of Babel?
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
“I’d also suggest that if you really want to read between the lines, you should also look in to the activities of indigenous Christian communities.”
I do find it quite amazing how in some cases indigenous Christian communities have internalized facets 0f western missionary culture that don’t seem to be part of Christianity as such. Visibly, for example, in the male Chin ‘national dress’ being black slacks, a long sleeve button up white shirt, belt and a tie. But this covers a lot more than clothing and seems to include the rejection of ‘heathen’ practices and beliefs that could, with a bit of reworking, have possibly been incorporated into a culturally-tied Christianity had western missionaries not been so eager to expunge them.
Or, more problematic, the adoption of questionable historical and demographic claims that marginalize non-Christian members. Like the old claim that the Karen descend from Mesopotamia when “their forebears left Babylon when the town of Babel collapsed“. Reworking history in this way places Christianity (or at least middle-eastern-derived monotheism) as a more culturally legitimate religion than Buddhism or the various natural religions of the Karen despite the fact that the latter preceded Christianity amongst the Karen (barring the alternative theory that Christianity amongst the Karen came from Nestorian Christians in western China). Along these lines are Ashley South’s article “Karen Nationalist Communities: the ‘Problem’ of Diversity and Paul Keenan’s article “Faith at a Crossroads”.
Relatedly, an ethnic Karen missionary with whom I spoke recently told me that most Karen were Christian (they’re not; I think the figures are something like 25-35% Christian). He also told me that many Buddhist Karen, including most members of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army were in fact “really Christian in their hearts” and only professed Buddhism to get ahead given the SPDC’s pro-Buddhist bias or prior Burman domination over the Karen in pre-colonial Burma. Now, I recognize that the SPDC’s or monarchical Burma’s Buddhist favoritism may have influenced some individuals in their choice of religious adherence, but to suggest that this is the only reason for Buddhist faith amongst the Karen (or other ethnic nationalities of Burma) seems to me to be quite insulting to most non-Christian Karen who have strong beliefs in non-Christian religions; whether traditional natural religions, Buddhism or Islam (the latter being a small but important segment of the Karen).
The problem of Kachin claims to be a solely Christian ethnic group are challenged by the existence of Buddhist ethnic Kachin in north-eastern India (I forgot what the local name is, maybe simply called Jingpaw). This is discussed in Mandy Sadan’s article on the Kachin in Exploring ethnic diversity in Burma.
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
I think Leif’s point on how different societies have used Christianity to both resist larger national agendas and to create transnational connections certainly is important. The converts certainaly were not passive “Rice Christians”.
One other aspect to consider is the larger context in which these conversions took/take place. In mainland SE Asia they take place in a larger, dominant Buddhist context, which is a different dynamic than what happened in North America and Australia. Certainly in North America at least, Christianity was used by some tribal groups to resist national agendas, but in a much more constrained situation.
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
This is good stuff, and it is nice to get a breeze from beyond high-society Bangkok intrigues. Both remarks point to ways of thinking past some ideological certainties about missionaries and missionary encounters. There is good reason to come back to Southeast Asia as a problem, and to rethink its many starting points and intersections. Western missionaries came to the Yao in Nan, Phrae, and thereabouts in the early 1900s. They brought a sciopticon and showed Jesus-photos (I needed help to find out what the projector was like). They spoke some Chinese and had Chinese-lang Bibles, and some of the Yao were really keen on hiring them to teach their kids Chinese. There was an interesting back and forth between the missionaries, the Yao leader, and some of the villagers, that went on for years. This is recorded in Laos News, a missionary publication from that time that was aimed at supporters in the USA. Only in the 1950s did Yao start to convert to Christianity, and that played into local factionalisms that are still alive. Missionaries also went over to Laos during the war, made a few converts, and much more in the refugee camps by the mid 70s. They made songs in Mien, and worked on a romanized script. Both the script and Christianity are key to some Mien community building in Thailand and the US (former refugees from Laos), and it turns into something local and creative (and divisions between those using the Thai script and the romanized script for the good word in the Mien language). It also generates the desire to convert Mien “left behind”, in Laos, Vietnam, and southern China, which is an unexpected form of transnational connections. Missionary records and photos are interesting, missionaries can be as blind to the context of their actions as the rest of us. While I agree with the remark about how missionaries can play (unwittingly, sometimes) to the priorities of nation-building, they also contribute (sometimes) to an ethnic defense against it, and in the process they conjure up new possibilities for ethnicizing social life. While there have long been ethnic identities, how people become ethnic at any point in time is also worth some examination. But on this touchy topic, my favorite story is of a Buddhist missionary (Thammajarik) monk in northern Thailand (another nation building project) who came to a Mien village and was hoping for alms (food in particular). Some Mien guy came out of his house. After a while they came to some basis for communication, and the Mien man proceeded to offer money for the monk’s begging bowl, it would be useful in the kitchen. This story is in Kamala Tiyavanich’s Forest Recollections. This nearly transgressive moment (monks can’t handle money, without his bowl the monk cannot connect to ordinary society) is very funny, though KT is not trading in humor in this book or The Buddha in the Jungle, which is also worth checking out.
Mission to Burma, and to the Lahu, and the rest…
I think it is also important to note the missionaries had an important secular role as well. I remember a Kachin friend telling me how shocked he was to learn that the missionaries, at the request of the British colonial officials, included Burmese in the instruction at mission schools. He told me he was mad at the missionaries since they had been involved in “Burmanizing” the Kachins.
I’d also suggest that if you really want to read between the lines, you should also look in to the activities of indigenous Christian communities. The first offical Baptist missionaries to the Karens in Thailand arrived in the 1950s, but the first Karen Baptist church was founded in the 1880s around Chiang Rai, I believe. One of the first acts of the missionaries to Thai Karens was to attend a 50th anniversary of a Karen church around Mae Sarieng.
In fact the Thai public school in that town was originally a private school started by Karen Christians (but open to all Thai, Karen, and Burmese in the area) which taught Karen, Burmese and Thai. The initial Thai instructor was a Karen who only spoke Northern Thai, so they replaced him with someone who spoke the Central Thai dialect. The Japanese took the school over during WWII and gave it to the government.
From the archives: Gordon Young
[…] we received an interesting comment prompted by an old New Mandala post about the Young family and their lives among the Lahu of […]