I find it rather peculiar that Sophie Lemière string “authoritarian state” and “semi-democratic” in almost the same sentence to describe Malaysia’s political “system”. Clearly the two are oxymorons, and they have been so since 1969 if not earlier, perhaps 1963-65. I don’t buy that Malaysia is semi-democratic when the practices and the structures of power, including state-driven racism and even racism amongst Malaysians of different ethnic groups, remain as prevalent today as they were in the past. In fact each ethnic-based political party, whether ruling or in opposition, despite their claims of ethnically diverse membership, are dominated by single ethnic majority (UMNO = Malays; DAP = Chinese and so on).
Which brings the issue of “change” in Malaysia. Change needs to be defined or re-defined or even re-conceptualised. To suggest that “change” in the Malaysian political context is “constant” is silly without defining it and indeed even its context. There isn’t just one kind of change and there isn’t only one kind of context in existence or co-existence in Malaysia. never has been. Never will. I take the diametrically opposite view, despite the advent of political activism and the internet and the so-called embolding of the opposition parties. Take PAS as an example: it too has changed in one sense but hasn’t in another sense. It has been emboldened in one sense but not in another sense.
This is the problem with the scholarship on Malaysia. Its “specialists” keep suggesting change but their analyses clearly show nothing fundamentally has change in Malaysia. This is the problem with the “culturalists” and the “institutionalists” among scholars who specialise on Malaysia.
Time to re-think and re-canvas Malaysia from staid (old/cliched) academic dictums. It’s fine to take an issues-based approach but what about the theory or theories underpinning the approaches? Have we all become crude positivists/empiricists?
Some of our trading products and transactions were with the Muslim region of Mindanao.
It was thought back then that the ” Troubles” were caused by economic and political inequality and the fact the locals were followers of Islam was coincidental.
Mr Simons has written an excellent submission that runs parallel to my earlier beliefs and findings.
Thanks for your comment, of course this is a common debate to have around the ECCC. I don’t think the legitimacy is based on number of defendants, if members of the government hadn’t said a word and these cases were dismissed it might be a different matter.
From my observations most Cambodians became jaded about the process many years ago, and the textbook is an important by product of the ECCC but not something it is directly respnsible for.
Ultimately I think an assessment of the worth of the tribunal lies with individual Cambodians and there will be different perspectives, but my underlying concern is that the ECCC only cements executive control of the judiciary in Cambodia, demonstrated so clearly this week with the decision to disband the CNRP.
[…] speech to soldiers at a military base, a prominent Burmese monk implied that it is permissible to kill non-Buddhists like the Rohingya because they are less than human. This is shocking, and a directly contradicts […]
Surely issues such as whether the PAD wanted / designed / supported military intervention in 2006, can be resolved by scrutiny of primary sources – eg. Bangkok Post, The Nation, and Thai language publications of that time ?
Your analytical scenarios are more unlikely given that Cambodia’s ruling party is strongly unified and the military is also cohesive. This makes the putsch far more unlikely given the today situation. Under international sanctions, especially from the ban of imports of footwear and garments to the United States and Europe, the factory workers will not resort to any assemblies given that the labor unions have almost now become CPP-alliances, plus the absence of coordination mechanisms from unions or opposition-related organizations. Thanks
This question always pops up in my mind!! I am Lao student who is studying in Japan. I love reading since I was 6 years old, at 6-15 I love reading Thai novels, I’ve Thai novels and others books more than 50books. My parent understand and support me to read. When I entered to University, most of the book I read is just a medical books till I graduated and got a scholarship and studied in Japan, I noticed most Japanese spent their free times (on the train, coffee shop etc) by reading a book. So I thought to myself that I used to be like that, so I’ve decided to read a book and I found many bookshops in Tokyo, that’s awesome and not too expensive to buy, instead of heading to our mobile phone, reading book is a good choice that we can learn others things and get some knowledge just not in our professional theory books!
I got a lot of book, especially English novels and some history books!!
When I was back to Laos and give a book for my friend as a present, she looked at me weirdo lolz, I said please read this and you will understand some day that I’ve gave the best present for you!
In my future, I would love to share my books with others, and wanna give an opportunity to lao kids to change their habit to read and to love reading.
One of bookworms in Vientiane.
[…] Based on what I have been witnessing on the ground, the situation is much more complex. To try and explain it does not mean excusing the atrocities the army has undoubtedly committed, or ignoring the plight of the hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children trapped between Rohingya militants and the army. […]
Agree or disagree with the author’s thesis, I don’t understand why it is necessary to undertake personal attacks. Blogs are, by definition, opinion and can include but do not require academic citations. I enjoy the cut and thrust of opposing arguments, which is why I read New Mandala, but the gratuitous personalisation of the comments renders them cheap and tedious.
I read the article about language shaming and I have just recently experienced it. I am a Mixed chinese-malay who speaks English and wear a scarf. I was trying to update my passport in the Immigration Department of Malaysia. There had been a miscommunication and I got into an arguement with a female Malay Officer who told me to learn to speak in Malay because I was talking in English among other things. I also suggested that the forms should have English when I learned that all forms were in Malay. I went to the Head office on the fifth floor to complain about the unprofessional behavior of the officer and at first they wanted to do a background check on me if I had a PR status or which foreign embassy I was from. It seems there is a concern because there are many illegal immigrants with fake ICs and passports that they wanted to authenticate if I was Malaysian. English is an universal language worldwide and a recognized second language in Malaysia. Where does it say in a Government building to speak only in Malay? If someone speaks in English and chooses to communicate in it while holding a Malaysian passport, is it fair to suspect that person is an illegal?! When does speaking a universal language that even that officer understands become wrong and a form of segregation? I am proud of my English and I have to right to communicate in it if I want to. There is no law in Malaysia that says I can’t speak in English! What gives that Officer the right to be rude and unprofessional to someone who already paid for their passport renewal? I hope sharing my experiences will help raise some awareness.
Dear Paul, yes, we have to change the way we think about Buddhism and non-violence, but not only in the light of what the Sayadaw says, but generally: the very same phase from the Mahavamsa was used in Sri Lanka during the civil war to justify killing Tamils. And I was told by a colleague that to save the religion, violence is alright. But four points:
This colleague also said that in order to save the doctrine, Ananda and others accepted their bad karma.
Second, the Mahavamsa is, against common perceptions, not a religious text in the sense of a prescribed doctrinal text.
Third, the canon itself has another view of the warrior and killing (I would have to look up the the sutra): even a warrior who fights in a good cause and regrets all he did the moment he dies, will have to go through the effects of his karma regardless.
And finally, the episode in the Mahavamsa is a reworking of a similar one told about Asoka who, after conquering Kalinga, regretted what he did and was advised by the monks to convert to Buddhism (minus the argument about the slaying of the non-humans!)
So, to revert to this example to justify killing for religious purposes is even more problematic than you indicate. Moreover, apparently, Myanma reworkings of the Mahavamsa considerably qualify this episode because it sat badly with the ideas of non-violence of the doctrine. I assume that like U Wirathu, the Sayadaw has been influenced by Sinhalese interpretations of the Mahavamsa recently.
Of course, Sondhi B is the General, Sondhi Boonyaratkalin, not the corrupt businessman Sondhi Limtongkol. Sorry.
Look, I’m just reacting in frustration to the too-common narrative that the UDD/redshirts are champions of democracy and that you can’t oppose them and Thaksin without being a fascist. I apologize to everyone for my overreaction.
Michael,
Re, Sondhi & Sondhi (did you mean Sondhi L, rather than B?), yes, but you forget that the “A” in PAD stood for “alliance”. A great many of the people on the ground were protesting Thaksin’s profoundly autocratic rule. Indeed, the movement started after Thaksin forced Sondhi L’s televison program, which was critical of him, off the air. Sondhi L continued the program off air in various open air venues, attracting large crowds. Those gatherings became larger and larger, finally turning into sustained protests attracting many who had no use for Sondhi L. himself, but who opposed Thaksin’s many human rights abuses. As Kevin himself noted, the PAD initially included many NGOs that would have been considered progressive.
It may be worth recalling as a side note, that the 2006 coup occurred in the midst of a constitutional crisis–constitutionally there was no government since over 90 days had passed since parliament had been dissolved with no new government being formed. Thaksin was ruling by edict. That wasn’t Thaksin’s doing, it was a series of flaws in the 1997 constitution.
Joel was the chair,dept of anthropology & sociology when I was doing my PhD in the department in the late 80s. He was a committed and engaged critical anthropologist who contributed articles in various books and journals dealing with the subject, based on his research in SEA and the disciplinary history. Though my supervisor was Dr. Rashmi Desai, Joel provided informal mentoring to me when I needed help. He nurtured a generation of anthropologists from the region and provided intellectual leadership. His loss will be felt among the anthropology community very much. He is sadly missed.
As someone who is often critical of how posts on NM either oversimplify or overtly skew discussion of Thai politics, I was surprised at Steve’s response to Hewison’s relatively balanced and nuanced article.
In the interest of just a tad more nuance, I think that Steve’s suggestion that the “original PAD” was not yet an anti-democratic movement whose goals included a military coup is naive.
PAD was officially formed on February 9, 2006, exactly five days after Sondhi’s “Farewell Show” at Lumpini.
When the apparently reborn enthusiasm of the 50K-plus audience had convinced a few soon-to-be PADites of the viability of a renewed push to oust Thaksin, emissaries from Lumpini were sent to the Royal Household Bureau and to Prem’s house.
Shockingly, the RHB was open at 9pm to receive Sondhi’s men, and at both places they were welcomed warmly.
Sondhi B went personally to meet Gen. Sonthi and asks “Are you going to stand by the people?”
Sonthi replies “I will stand by the people because I am a soldier of the people.”
So the usual congeries of palace and royalist power centers join with the RTA to give a media mogul the go-ahead to operate as the street wing of the coming “alteration”.
PAD was an anti-democratic proto-fascist mob from the day of its birth.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Book Preview: Illusions of Democracy in Malaysia
I find it rather peculiar that Sophie Lemière string “authoritarian state” and “semi-democratic” in almost the same sentence to describe Malaysia’s political “system”. Clearly the two are oxymorons, and they have been so since 1969 if not earlier, perhaps 1963-65. I don’t buy that Malaysia is semi-democratic when the practices and the structures of power, including state-driven racism and even racism amongst Malaysians of different ethnic groups, remain as prevalent today as they were in the past. In fact each ethnic-based political party, whether ruling or in opposition, despite their claims of ethnically diverse membership, are dominated by single ethnic majority (UMNO = Malays; DAP = Chinese and so on).
Which brings the issue of “change” in Malaysia. Change needs to be defined or re-defined or even re-conceptualised. To suggest that “change” in the Malaysian political context is “constant” is silly without defining it and indeed even its context. There isn’t just one kind of change and there isn’t only one kind of context in existence or co-existence in Malaysia. never has been. Never will. I take the diametrically opposite view, despite the advent of political activism and the internet and the so-called embolding of the opposition parties. Take PAS as an example: it too has changed in one sense but hasn’t in another sense. It has been emboldened in one sense but not in another sense.
This is the problem with the scholarship on Malaysia. Its “specialists” keep suggesting change but their analyses clearly show nothing fundamentally has change in Malaysia. This is the problem with the “culturalists” and the “institutionalists” among scholars who specialise on Malaysia.
Time to re-think and re-canvas Malaysia from staid (old/cliched) academic dictums. It’s fine to take an issues-based approach but what about the theory or theories underpinning the approaches? Have we all become crude positivists/empiricists?
Steer clear of Duterte’s wars
I was in Philippines 1985/ 1996.
Some of our trading products and transactions were with the Muslim region of Mindanao.
It was thought back then that the ” Troubles” were caused by economic and political inequality and the fact the locals were followers of Islam was coincidental.
Mr Simons has written an excellent submission that runs parallel to my earlier beliefs and findings.
Trials and tribulations in Cambodia
Thanks for your comment, of course this is a common debate to have around the ECCC. I don’t think the legitimacy is based on number of defendants, if members of the government hadn’t said a word and these cases were dismissed it might be a different matter.
From my observations most Cambodians became jaded about the process many years ago, and the textbook is an important by product of the ECCC but not something it is directly respnsible for.
Ultimately I think an assessment of the worth of the tribunal lies with individual Cambodians and there will be different perspectives, but my underlying concern is that the ECCC only cements executive control of the judiciary in Cambodia, demonstrated so clearly this week with the decision to disband the CNRP.
Sitagu Sayadaw and justifiable evils in Buddhism
[…] speech to soldiers at a military base, a prominent Burmese monk implied that it is permissible to kill non-Buddhists like the Rohingya because they are less than human. This is shocking, and a directly contradicts […]
Rethinking Southeast Asian civil society
Surely issues such as whether the PAD wanted / designed / supported military intervention in 2006, can be resolved by scrutiny of primary sources – eg. Bangkok Post, The Nation, and Thai language publications of that time ?
Nguyen Phu Trong: The Elitist
[…] New Mandala […]
Ghost ships: why are World War II naval wrecks vanishing in Indonesia?
[…] Further reading Ghost ships: why are World War II naval wrecks vanishing in Indonesia? […]
Hun Sen’s gamble
Your analytical scenarios are more unlikely given that Cambodia’s ruling party is strongly unified and the military is also cohesive. This makes the putsch far more unlikely given the today situation. Under international sanctions, especially from the ban of imports of footwear and garments to the United States and Europe, the factory workers will not resort to any assemblies given that the labor unions have almost now become CPP-alliances, plus the absence of coordination mechanisms from unions or opposition-related organizations. Thanks
Khon Lao don’t like reading?
This question always pops up in my mind!! I am Lao student who is studying in Japan. I love reading since I was 6 years old, at 6-15 I love reading Thai novels, I’ve Thai novels and others books more than 50books. My parent understand and support me to read. When I entered to University, most of the book I read is just a medical books till I graduated and got a scholarship and studied in Japan, I noticed most Japanese spent their free times (on the train, coffee shop etc) by reading a book. So I thought to myself that I used to be like that, so I’ve decided to read a book and I found many bookshops in Tokyo, that’s awesome and not too expensive to buy, instead of heading to our mobile phone, reading book is a good choice that we can learn others things and get some knowledge just not in our professional theory books!
I got a lot of book, especially English novels and some history books!!
When I was back to Laos and give a book for my friend as a present, she looked at me weirdo lolz, I said please read this and you will understand some day that I’ve gave the best present for you!
In my future, I would love to share my books with others, and wanna give an opportunity to lao kids to change their habit to read and to love reading.
One of bookworms in Vientiane.
On the latest Rohingya crisis
[…] Based on what I have been witnessing on the ground, the situation is much more complex. To try and explain it does not mean excusing the atrocities the army has undoubtedly committed, or ignoring the plight of the hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children trapped between Rohingya militants and the army. […]
Sex, love and vote-buying
Agree or disagree with the author’s thesis, I don’t understand why it is necessary to undertake personal attacks. Blogs are, by definition, opinion and can include but do not require academic citations. I enjoy the cut and thrust of opposing arguments, which is why I read New Mandala, but the gratuitous personalisation of the comments renders them cheap and tedious.
Mount Agung’s 18th-Century Eruption
[…] Perspectives On the Past – Mount Agung's 18th-Century Eruption […]
Language shaming in Malaysia
I read the article about language shaming and I have just recently experienced it. I am a Mixed chinese-malay who speaks English and wear a scarf. I was trying to update my passport in the Immigration Department of Malaysia. There had been a miscommunication and I got into an arguement with a female Malay Officer who told me to learn to speak in Malay because I was talking in English among other things. I also suggested that the forms should have English when I learned that all forms were in Malay. I went to the Head office on the fifth floor to complain about the unprofessional behavior of the officer and at first they wanted to do a background check on me if I had a PR status or which foreign embassy I was from. It seems there is a concern because there are many illegal immigrants with fake ICs and passports that they wanted to authenticate if I was Malaysian. English is an universal language worldwide and a recognized second language in Malaysia. Where does it say in a Government building to speak only in Malay? If someone speaks in English and chooses to communicate in it while holding a Malaysian passport, is it fair to suspect that person is an illegal?! When does speaking a universal language that even that officer understands become wrong and a form of segregation? I am proud of my English and I have to right to communicate in it if I want to. There is no law in Malaysia that says I can’t speak in English! What gives that Officer the right to be rude and unprofessional to someone who already paid for their passport renewal? I hope sharing my experiences will help raise some awareness.
Sitagu Sayadaw and justifiable evils in Buddhism
Dear Paul, yes, we have to change the way we think about Buddhism and non-violence, but not only in the light of what the Sayadaw says, but generally: the very same phase from the Mahavamsa was used in Sri Lanka during the civil war to justify killing Tamils. And I was told by a colleague that to save the religion, violence is alright. But four points:
This colleague also said that in order to save the doctrine, Ananda and others accepted their bad karma.
Second, the Mahavamsa is, against common perceptions, not a religious text in the sense of a prescribed doctrinal text.
Third, the canon itself has another view of the warrior and killing (I would have to look up the the sutra): even a warrior who fights in a good cause and regrets all he did the moment he dies, will have to go through the effects of his karma regardless.
And finally, the episode in the Mahavamsa is a reworking of a similar one told about Asoka who, after conquering Kalinga, regretted what he did and was advised by the monks to convert to Buddhism (minus the argument about the slaying of the non-humans!)
So, to revert to this example to justify killing for religious purposes is even more problematic than you indicate. Moreover, apparently, Myanma reworkings of the Mahavamsa considerably qualify this episode because it sat badly with the ideas of non-violence of the doctrine. I assume that like U Wirathu, the Sayadaw has been influenced by Sinhalese interpretations of the Mahavamsa recently.
Rethinking Southeast Asian civil society
Of course, Sondhi B is the General, Sondhi Boonyaratkalin, not the corrupt businessman Sondhi Limtongkol. Sorry.
Look, I’m just reacting in frustration to the too-common narrative that the UDD/redshirts are champions of democracy and that you can’t oppose them and Thaksin without being a fascist. I apologize to everyone for my overreaction.
Rethinking Southeast Asian civil society
Michael,
Re, Sondhi & Sondhi (did you mean Sondhi L, rather than B?), yes, but you forget that the “A” in PAD stood for “alliance”. A great many of the people on the ground were protesting Thaksin’s profoundly autocratic rule. Indeed, the movement started after Thaksin forced Sondhi L’s televison program, which was critical of him, off the air. Sondhi L continued the program off air in various open air venues, attracting large crowds. Those gatherings became larger and larger, finally turning into sustained protests attracting many who had no use for Sondhi L. himself, but who opposed Thaksin’s many human rights abuses. As Kevin himself noted, the PAD initially included many NGOs that would have been considered progressive.
It may be worth recalling as a side note, that the 2006 coup occurred in the midst of a constitutional crisis–constitutionally there was no government since over 90 days had passed since parliament had been dissolved with no new government being formed. Thaksin was ruling by edict. That wasn’t Thaksin’s doing, it was a series of flaws in the 1997 constitution.
Nguyen Phu Trong: The Elitist
[…] http://www.newmandala.org/nguyen-phu-trong-elitist/ […]
Sitagu Sayadaw and justifiable evils in Buddhism
What does killing mean in Buddhist doctrine? Here’s an argument that appears to say it means discarding a person as unteachable.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mzeTnSf4J1gC&pg=PA153&lpg=PA153&dq=Thai+buddhist+defends+killing+communists#v=onepage&q=Thai%20buddhist%20defends%20killing%20communists&f=false
Remembering Professor Joel S. Kahn
Joel was the chair,dept of anthropology & sociology when I was doing my PhD in the department in the late 80s. He was a committed and engaged critical anthropologist who contributed articles in various books and journals dealing with the subject, based on his research in SEA and the disciplinary history. Though my supervisor was Dr. Rashmi Desai, Joel provided informal mentoring to me when I needed help. He nurtured a generation of anthropologists from the region and provided intellectual leadership. His loss will be felt among the anthropology community very much. He is sadly missed.
Rethinking Southeast Asian civil society
As someone who is often critical of how posts on NM either oversimplify or overtly skew discussion of Thai politics, I was surprised at Steve’s response to Hewison’s relatively balanced and nuanced article.
In the interest of just a tad more nuance, I think that Steve’s suggestion that the “original PAD” was not yet an anti-democratic movement whose goals included a military coup is naive.
PAD was officially formed on February 9, 2006, exactly five days after Sondhi’s “Farewell Show” at Lumpini.
When the apparently reborn enthusiasm of the 50K-plus audience had convinced a few soon-to-be PADites of the viability of a renewed push to oust Thaksin, emissaries from Lumpini were sent to the Royal Household Bureau and to Prem’s house.
Shockingly, the RHB was open at 9pm to receive Sondhi’s men, and at both places they were welcomed warmly.
Sondhi B went personally to meet Gen. Sonthi and asks “Are you going to stand by the people?”
Sonthi replies “I will stand by the people because I am a soldier of the people.”
So the usual congeries of palace and royalist power centers join with the RTA to give a media mogul the go-ahead to operate as the street wing of the coming “alteration”.
PAD was an anti-democratic proto-fascist mob from the day of its birth.