In a current opinion-piece of the Nation Anek is cited: “To fight populism, we need more statesman-like politicians to create a paradigm shift. The rural sector has been pushed into a disadvantaged position for so long by policies biased towards the urban sector. It’s time the villagers got compensated, not by handouts but by what I call progressive welfarism, and became a part of the middle class.” – While someone has to explain to me what is the difference between “progressive welfarism” and populist policies, I think he has got it right that there should be a shift towards the rural population.
But the tenor of the article was quite strange: Because the rural voters are not happy with the current government, Thailan cannot return to democracy or to put it different: because these stupid country bumpkins still don’t know what is good for them (at the next election), we have to maintain military control (to keep them quiet).
Again the people at the Nation show that they don’t understand that dissent is essential for democracy and that you have only rare moments of national unity in mature democratic societies (maybe after 911 or after Pearl Harbour)
Practice keeps the mind turning, right? On the other hand, the mind also has an effect on practice.
Anyway, you might well be right re the sufficiency economy.
On this matter:
1) Amartya Sen will receive a Lifetime Achievement Award from UNESCAP, with Princess Sirindhorn giving a key note address, and PM Surayud being in attendance. Sen will speak about “welfare economics.” Since UNDP praised the king’s sufficiency economy, and having all the above people in one event, one wonders how sufficiency economy will figure in this context.
2) Suriyasai Katasila suggested that the coup government should implement the sufficiency economy so that they would have something to show for. These democracy advocates must really be confused these days. They advise a military-appointed government on how to win the hearts and minds of the people, instead of demanding that the sufficiency economy be allowed to be democratically discussed by the public, and then discoursively be decided upon.
(both Bangkok Post, 19 March)
3) From The Nation, same day:
During separate visits by Gen Sonthi Boonyaratgalin and Gen Surayud Chulanont to her province earlier this month, all villagers who were willing to participate received Bt80 along with their round-trip bus ride.
The villagers were also asked to bring crops to demonstrate their commitment to the sufficiency economy.
“We brought our corn, bananas and a variety of vegetables, but this was all grown under a community agricultural project initiated by Thaksin,” Sompit said with a chuckle.
“Even though the government preaches sufficiency economy all the time, we’ve never been told what it’s all about, much less received any support to practise it.”
During separate visits by Gen Sonthi Boonyaratgalin and Gen Surayud Chulanont to her province [Nakhon Rachasima] earlier this month, all villagers who were willing to participate received Bt80 along with their round-trip bus ride.
The villagers were also asked to bring crops to demonstrate their commitment to the sufficiency economy.
“We brought our corn, bananas and a variety of vegetables, but this was all grown under a community agricultural project initiated by Thaksin,” Sompit said with a chuckle.
“Even though the government preaches sufficiency economy all the time, we’ve never been told what it’s all about, much less received any support to practise it.”
The junta never claimed to have any evidence that Thaksin was behind the bombings. On the contrary, it acknowledged all along that the Bangkok bombs looked nearly identical to those used in the South.
The reason it blamed Thaksin was due to an “intelligence analysis” which showed that the Bangkok bombs were intentionally made to look as if they were created by the insurgents. However, the government rejected the theory that the southerners were behind the Bangkok bombings because southerners would get lost in Bangkok. The junta’s “intelligence” saw through the deception – “old power clique” was clearly trying to frame the insurgents. See here and here
When the government of Spain engaged in similar bullshit back in 2004, the resulting outrage brought down the Aznar government. In Thailand, I don’t know if anybody is going to even care, unless if there are further bombings. My guess is that the entire matter will be swept under the carpet, like the 2006 car bomb, the 2006 Prem house bomb, the 2001 airplane bomb, and the death of King Ananda.
Speaking of fakes, I use to know a Lahu family that operated a small shop in the older version of the Chiang Mai night market, bottom level in the back. Although they were indeed Lahu, most of their hilltribe wares and Burmese tapestries were all factory made in Burma and then smuggled into Thailand by these three wild and crazy Shan women who sure were fun to go out drinking with. The Lahu family eventually relocated their stall to Chatuchak in Bangkok to sell their fakes to fellow Bangkok fakers.
Speaking of fakes, recent headlines this week here in the US show that in the pet food market, a government recall was enforced that hinted that one company was manufacturing the same pet food for both the inexpensive low end market (Walmart brand) marketed towards the trailer park denizen as well as the high end market (pet store brands) aimed at the nouveau riche. It is all in the marketing.
And if the fish is on land, it will die. Sometimes, it will even die when in water (see the recent newspaper reports). But it might still be edible. Just the same as with theory, right?
You got it Srithanonchai. People have been eating dead fishes for ages, what difference will this ‘sufficiency’ make? The point is to keep the water running, which it will, but this won’t have anything to do with you, me, or well educated readers of this website. The river will flow as it usually does.
No matter what ancient Greeks (who weren’t so Greek) and some elusive German chaps with capital h told us about theory, I prefer to call it ”Mind at work’. Mind shapes the world but practice keeps it turning. Just sit back and enjoy the show. I’ll give this ‘sufficiency’ five years at maximum. It’ll fade away as soon as the next reign begins.
I respect an ethical stance that is not consequentialist in its argument. My question was designed in part to determine if that was in fact what you were arguing, as I suspected. I’m not sure I totally accept that general position, or its application in this context, but I appreciate your clarification.
Regarding academic ethics, it seems to me that you are perhaps idealizing them far too much. Much academic ethics centers on the moral responsibility of academic as researchers to their informants and / or research subjects and as instructors to their consumers (i.e. students). It seems to me that academic ethics, as a formalized set of expectations, is much less explicit and clear regarding the uses others makes of academic products and participation. EXCEPT in the case of a direct use by authorities or other figures to infringe upon or violate very basic human or civil rights. You might be able to make that argument here in some respects, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. Which leads me to believe that you are basically appealing to a scholar’s individual ethical stance rather than an any institutional ethical obligation.
I would also like to read the Thai language description you refer to. At the same time, isn’t it a fact that the conference was planned for Thailand before talk of honoring the King? Isn’t it part of a regular rotation of the conference between different global regions? While the Thai language version may argue that honoring the King is the primary reason for this conference, isn’t that simply opportunistic on the organizers part? Seems to me we are dealing with different explanations and justifications and goals being offered to different reading publics. Are the rules and practices of this Thai Studies Conference regarding choosing of topics, panels, papers and their reading going to be substantially different in execution than previous ones?
I’m also not convinced that the Thai system has a particular genius for using foreigners for local agendas without their realization. That seems to me quite common. And moreover, many foreigners are (partially at least) aware of such possibilities and make their decisions accordingly or even despite that realization. They simply may not care because other ends or goals are just as or more important – ranging from cv padding to career advancement to wanting to connect with old friends to obligations felt to those asking them to join a panel, etc. Political ethics is not the only or even the most dominant ethical set of considerations at hand in such decisions, nor must it logically be so. You have to argue for that priority, and appealing to academic ethics doesn’t to my mind win that argument so easily.
Contrary to Thailand, documents in National Archive and National Library start to decay and disappear. Most of handwriting ducuments druring Rama 1-3 start to pale and unable to read. The same as “Khon Maung Newspaper” in Chiang Mai University live in very dangerous condition etc.
However they live in better condition tha Alsorn Tham and Laos Buhan script.
Reply to Jon Fernquest, I interest in the same period (pre-modern mainland southeast asia)
We eariler noted how the Thai press — well mainly the Nation — strangely relies on foreign reports on sensitive matters relating to the monarchy. Here is the Nation doing it again:
PHNOM PENH – A Cambodian court has charged ousted royalist leader Prince Norodom Ranariddh with adultery over his affair with a classical dancer, a court official said Sunday.
Ranariddh — who is currently in Europe and was on Tuesday sentenced in absentia to 18 months in jail for fraud over a land deal — could face up to one year in prison if found guilty under Cambodia’s new monogamy laws.
The charge follows a complaint filed in December by his estranged wife, Princess Norodom Marie Ranariddh.
Sok Kalyan, deputy prosecutor at Phnom Penh Municipal Court, said the charge was issued in January, but was only made public on Friday, the first day of campaigning for upcoming local administrative elections.
“It is true that I charged Prince Norodom Ranariddh with adultery, and I think it is fair because the accused had a relationship with a new partner,” said Sok Kalyan.
He said the court would invite both Princess Marie and Ranariddh to court once the investigation was complete. No date for the hearing has yet been set.
The prince, 63, has publicly acknowledged his relationship with a classical dancer, with whom he has a three-year-old son.
Cambodia in September passed a monogamy law which punishes unfaithful spouses and bans polygamy and incest. Perpetrators face between a month and a year in prison, plus a fine of up to 205 dollars.
Ranariddh’s defence lawyer Liv Sovanna labelled the charge “a great injustice”, but admitted that he had little hope that they could win the case, accusing the courts of bias.
Ranariddh, who was sacked as leader of the Funcinpec party in October, was on Tuesday sentenced to 18 months in jail and ordered to pay 150,000 dollars to Funcinpec over the illegal sale of his former political party’s headquarters.
The charges against the prince are at the heart of a battle with his former political allies for royalist support ahead of local elections next month and national polls in 2008, which are likely to see royalist influence in the government plummet.
Ouk Socheat, the prince’s information adviser, said Ranariddh was currently in Belgium.
He did not say when Ranariddh would return to Cambodia, but told AFP that members of the prince’s newly-established Norodom Ranariddh Party would issue a petition requesting a royal pardon from King Norodom Sihamoni.
This is fascinating stuff, particularly since some of the people who played prominent roles in this war were recently or are still living in Northern Thailand. Dr. McDaniels of Chiang Rai who wrote a memoir of his experiences as a doctor during this era just recently passed away.
Walking through the history museum in downtown VIentienne raised more questions than it answered for me. Newspapers are a good source for social history, so maybe someone will write social history with them.
The question that naturally arises is how graduate students and historians can put these materials to use. The National Library also has the Coedes and Luce papers which makes it one of the best sources on Burmese epigraphy, my interest. Are there graduate students or professors doing work with these sources?
Reply to #31- shouldn’t the other question be asked: do we have any evidence that the monarchy makes use of international academic approval (eg. honorary doctorates, UNDP reports, etc) to legitimize its authority in Thailand, to the extent that the king can be acclaimed as a genius and his “theories” forced upon the population by the military regime without critical debate? You have to remember that this conference is being explcitly promoted as being held to honour the king. In the Thai version of the promotional blurb this is the primary reason for the workshop, academic reasons are secondary. This is the genius of the Thai system: to use foreigners for local agendas without their realization of being used.
The question is not one of whether a boycott would be “effective”, but one of academic ethics (if such a thing exists anymore): is it right to attend such a conference when one knows (or should know) that one is being used for a domestic political agenda? As I said above, foreign academics don’t have to live under royalist dictatorships. But one would hope that they have some concern for those who do.
“A boycott would thus by a clear statement of concern on the part of the international scholarly community; participation, on the other hand, would be a vote of confidence for the regime.”
“What percentage of foreign scholars would have to boycott to obtain an effect?”
You assume that the international scholarly community is some unified mass that has one mind on this subject.
What about China and India? Even among western scholars, you’d only get those who believe that boycotts can change things. The ineffectiveness of economic sanctions in Burma over the last 20 years has just caused Burma to rely more on China and SIngapore.
I don’t know what the breakdown of participants will be, but a large fraction will probably be Thai. At international conferences contacts and friendships between international colleagues are renewed. A boycott would be cutting off these contacts and friendships. Stopping the discussions about how people feel about current political events.
During periods of political tumult communication and international cross-border flows of ideas should be encouraged, not cut off.
As for sacred kingship read Dr. Sunait Chutintaranond’s Cornell PhD dissertation or look at the numerous articles published in the Journal of the Siam Society over the last 100 years.
“…welcome up to … Grade A copied merchandise store. We have clothes, bags, shoes, watches, golf clubs and many other items.”
Sounds like a description of Tachileik market across the border from Maesai. Thousands of Thai tourists flood across the border to buy things on weekends and holidays.
More significant than the copies is the wide variety of extremely cheap high quality clothing made in China. I always what the impact of it would be, if suddenly the gates of free trade were swung wide open. It seems that some protection to Thai manufacturers is a good thing. I cringe when I say this, because I was trained as an economist and economists believe in free trade.
Tosakan, I forgot to write (TM by Tosakan), probably because I pointed to your blog in that post and I thought (TM) would just mean that there is a trademark – but if we’ll ever meet I’ll buy you a sufficiency-beer 🙂
david w, the way academic politics usually plays out is that if there is a sufficiently large schism, one side just drops out and starts its own conference….
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Sore loser
In a current opinion-piece of the Nation Anek is cited: “To fight populism, we need more statesman-like politicians to create a paradigm shift. The rural sector has been pushed into a disadvantaged position for so long by policies biased towards the urban sector. It’s time the villagers got compensated, not by handouts but by what I call progressive welfarism, and became a part of the middle class.” – While someone has to explain to me what is the difference between “progressive welfarism” and populist policies, I think he has got it right that there should be a shift towards the rural population.
But the tenor of the article was quite strange: Because the rural voters are not happy with the current government, Thailan cannot return to democracy or to put it different: because these stupid country bumpkins still don’t know what is good for them (at the next election), we have to maintain military control (to keep them quiet).
Again the people at the Nation show that they don’t understand that dissent is essential for democracy and that you have only rare moments of national unity in mature democratic societies (maybe after 911 or after Pearl Harbour)
The practice of sufficiency economy
Practice keeps the mind turning, right? On the other hand, the mind also has an effect on practice.
Anyway, you might well be right re the sufficiency economy.
On this matter:
1) Amartya Sen will receive a Lifetime Achievement Award from UNESCAP, with Princess Sirindhorn giving a key note address, and PM Surayud being in attendance. Sen will speak about “welfare economics.” Since UNDP praised the king’s sufficiency economy, and having all the above people in one event, one wonders how sufficiency economy will figure in this context.
2) Suriyasai Katasila suggested that the coup government should implement the sufficiency economy so that they would have something to show for. These democracy advocates must really be confused these days. They advise a military-appointed government on how to win the hearts and minds of the people, instead of demanding that the sufficiency economy be allowed to be democratically discussed by the public, and then discoursively be decided upon.
(both Bangkok Post, 19 March)
3) From The Nation, same day:
During separate visits by Gen Sonthi Boonyaratgalin and Gen Surayud Chulanont to her province earlier this month, all villagers who were willing to participate received Bt80 along with their round-trip bus ride.
The villagers were also asked to bring crops to demonstrate their commitment to the sufficiency economy.
“We brought our corn, bananas and a variety of vegetables, but this was all grown under a community agricultural project initiated by Thaksin,” Sompit said with a chuckle.
“Even though the government preaches sufficiency economy all the time, we’ve never been told what it’s all about, much less received any support to practise it.”
The practice of sufficiency economy
From today’s Nation:
During separate visits by Gen Sonthi Boonyaratgalin and Gen Surayud Chulanont to her province [Nakhon Rachasima] earlier this month, all villagers who were willing to participate received Bt80 along with their round-trip bus ride.
The villagers were also asked to bring crops to demonstrate their commitment to the sufficiency economy.
“We brought our corn, bananas and a variety of vegetables, but this was all grown under a community agricultural project initiated by Thaksin,” Sompit said with a chuckle.
“Even though the government preaches sufficiency economy all the time, we’ve never been told what it’s all about, much less received any support to practise it.”
Southern insurgents now prime suspects
The junta never claimed to have any evidence that Thaksin was behind the bombings. On the contrary, it acknowledged all along that the Bangkok bombs looked nearly identical to those used in the South.
The reason it blamed Thaksin was due to an “intelligence analysis” which showed that the Bangkok bombs were intentionally made to look as if they were created by the insurgents. However, the government rejected the theory that the southerners were behind the Bangkok bombings because southerners would get lost in Bangkok. The junta’s “intelligence” saw through the deception – “old power clique” was clearly trying to frame the insurgents. See here and here
When the government of Spain engaged in similar bullshit back in 2004, the resulting outrage brought down the Aznar government. In Thailand, I don’t know if anybody is going to even care, unless if there are further bombings. My guess is that the entire matter will be swept under the carpet, like the 2006 car bomb, the 2006 Prem house bomb, the 2001 airplane bomb, and the death of King Ananda.
Fakin’ it for the Thai market in Yunnan
Speaking of fakes, I use to know a Lahu family that operated a small shop in the older version of the Chiang Mai night market, bottom level in the back. Although they were indeed Lahu, most of their hilltribe wares and Burmese tapestries were all factory made in Burma and then smuggled into Thailand by these three wild and crazy Shan women who sure were fun to go out drinking with. The Lahu family eventually relocated their stall to Chatuchak in Bangkok to sell their fakes to fellow Bangkok fakers.
Speaking of fakes, recent headlines this week here in the US show that in the pet food market, a government recall was enforced that hinted that one company was manufacturing the same pet food for both the inexpensive low end market (Walmart brand) marketed towards the trailer park denizen as well as the high end market (pet store brands) aimed at the nouveau riche. It is all in the marketing.
Blaming the undercurrents
[…] happened, I wonder, to the “evidence” that ”old political power clique” was behind the bombings? Was there every any evidence […]
The practice of sufficiency economy
And if the fish is on land, it will die. Sometimes, it will even die when in water (see the recent newspaper reports). But it might still be edible. Just the same as with theory, right?
You got it Srithanonchai. People have been eating dead fishes for ages, what difference will this ‘sufficiency’ make? The point is to keep the water running, which it will, but this won’t have anything to do with you, me, or well educated readers of this website. The river will flow as it usually does.
No matter what ancient Greeks (who weren’t so Greek) and some elusive German chaps with capital h told us about theory, I prefer to call it ”Mind at work’. Mind shapes the world but practice keeps it turning. Just sit back and enjoy the show. I’ll give this ‘sufficiency’ five years at maximum. It’ll fade away as soon as the next reign begins.
A Thai Studies boycott?
Republican,
I respect an ethical stance that is not consequentialist in its argument. My question was designed in part to determine if that was in fact what you were arguing, as I suspected. I’m not sure I totally accept that general position, or its application in this context, but I appreciate your clarification.
Regarding academic ethics, it seems to me that you are perhaps idealizing them far too much. Much academic ethics centers on the moral responsibility of academic as researchers to their informants and / or research subjects and as instructors to their consumers (i.e. students). It seems to me that academic ethics, as a formalized set of expectations, is much less explicit and clear regarding the uses others makes of academic products and participation. EXCEPT in the case of a direct use by authorities or other figures to infringe upon or violate very basic human or civil rights. You might be able to make that argument here in some respects, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk. Which leads me to believe that you are basically appealing to a scholar’s individual ethical stance rather than an any institutional ethical obligation.
I would also like to read the Thai language description you refer to. At the same time, isn’t it a fact that the conference was planned for Thailand before talk of honoring the King? Isn’t it part of a regular rotation of the conference between different global regions? While the Thai language version may argue that honoring the King is the primary reason for this conference, isn’t that simply opportunistic on the organizers part? Seems to me we are dealing with different explanations and justifications and goals being offered to different reading publics. Are the rules and practices of this Thai Studies Conference regarding choosing of topics, panels, papers and their reading going to be substantially different in execution than previous ones?
I’m also not convinced that the Thai system has a particular genius for using foreigners for local agendas without their realization. That seems to me quite common. And moreover, many foreigners are (partially at least) aware of such possibilities and make their decisions accordingly or even despite that realization. They simply may not care because other ends or goals are just as or more important – ranging from cv padding to career advancement to wanting to connect with old friends to obligations felt to those asking them to join a panel, etc. Political ethics is not the only or even the most dominant ethical set of considerations at hand in such decisions, nor must it logically be so. You have to argue for that priority, and appealing to academic ethics doesn’t to my mind win that argument so easily.
Isan in the north
Very interesting, I will check for another documents and ask some people in Chiang Rai
Xat Lao
Contrary to Thailand, documents in National Archive and National Library start to decay and disappear. Most of handwriting ducuments druring Rama 1-3 start to pale and unable to read. The same as “Khon Maung Newspaper” in Chiang Mai University live in very dangerous condition etc.
However they live in better condition tha Alsorn Tham and Laos Buhan script.
Reply to Jon Fernquest, I interest in the same period (pre-modern mainland southeast asia)
Isan in the north
Verdammte Doktorarbeit!
Oliver Jufer, royal graffiti and global news
We eariler noted how the Thai press — well mainly the Nation — strangely relies on foreign reports on sensitive matters relating to the monarchy. Here is the Nation doing it again:
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/worldhotnews/read.php?newsid=30029590
March 18
Cambodian prince charged with adultery
PHNOM PENH – A Cambodian court has charged ousted royalist leader Prince Norodom Ranariddh with adultery over his affair with a classical dancer, a court official said Sunday.
Ranariddh — who is currently in Europe and was on Tuesday sentenced in absentia to 18 months in jail for fraud over a land deal — could face up to one year in prison if found guilty under Cambodia’s new monogamy laws.
The charge follows a complaint filed in December by his estranged wife, Princess Norodom Marie Ranariddh.
Sok Kalyan, deputy prosecutor at Phnom Penh Municipal Court, said the charge was issued in January, but was only made public on Friday, the first day of campaigning for upcoming local administrative elections.
“It is true that I charged Prince Norodom Ranariddh with adultery, and I think it is fair because the accused had a relationship with a new partner,” said Sok Kalyan.
He said the court would invite both Princess Marie and Ranariddh to court once the investigation was complete. No date for the hearing has yet been set.
The prince, 63, has publicly acknowledged his relationship with a classical dancer, with whom he has a three-year-old son.
Cambodia in September passed a monogamy law which punishes unfaithful spouses and bans polygamy and incest. Perpetrators face between a month and a year in prison, plus a fine of up to 205 dollars.
Ranariddh’s defence lawyer Liv Sovanna labelled the charge “a great injustice”, but admitted that he had little hope that they could win the case, accusing the courts of bias.
Ranariddh, who was sacked as leader of the Funcinpec party in October, was on Tuesday sentenced to 18 months in jail and ordered to pay 150,000 dollars to Funcinpec over the illegal sale of his former political party’s headquarters.
The charges against the prince are at the heart of a battle with his former political allies for royalist support ahead of local elections next month and national polls in 2008, which are likely to see royalist influence in the government plummet.
Ouk Socheat, the prince’s information adviser, said Ranariddh was currently in Belgium.
He did not say when Ranariddh would return to Cambodia, but told AFP that members of the prince’s newly-established Norodom Ranariddh Party would issue a petition requesting a royal pardon from King Norodom Sihamoni.
Agence France-Presse
Isan in the north
I’d be up for that – once I finish my verdamnt thesis, of course.
Xat Lao
This is fascinating stuff, particularly since some of the people who played prominent roles in this war were recently or are still living in Northern Thailand. Dr. McDaniels of Chiang Rai who wrote a memoir of his experiences as a doctor during this era just recently passed away.
Walking through the history museum in downtown VIentienne raised more questions than it answered for me. Newspapers are a good source for social history, so maybe someone will write social history with them.
The question that naturally arises is how graduate students and historians can put these materials to use. The National Library also has the Coedes and Luce papers which makes it one of the best sources on Burmese epigraphy, my interest. Are there graduate students or professors doing work with these sources?
A Thai Studies boycott?
Republican: Can I download the Thai-language flyer somewhere? So far, I have only seen the English-language web site of the conference.
A Thai Studies boycott?
Reply to #31- shouldn’t the other question be asked: do we have any evidence that the monarchy makes use of international academic approval (eg. honorary doctorates, UNDP reports, etc) to legitimize its authority in Thailand, to the extent that the king can be acclaimed as a genius and his “theories” forced upon the population by the military regime without critical debate? You have to remember that this conference is being explcitly promoted as being held to honour the king. In the Thai version of the promotional blurb this is the primary reason for the workshop, academic reasons are secondary. This is the genius of the Thai system: to use foreigners for local agendas without their realization of being used.
The question is not one of whether a boycott would be “effective”, but one of academic ethics (if such a thing exists anymore): is it right to attend such a conference when one knows (or should know) that one is being used for a domestic political agenda? As I said above, foreign academics don’t have to live under royalist dictatorships. But one would hope that they have some concern for those who do.
A Thai Studies boycott?
“A boycott would thus by a clear statement of concern on the part of the international scholarly community; participation, on the other hand, would be a vote of confidence for the regime.”
“What percentage of foreign scholars would have to boycott to obtain an effect?”
You assume that the international scholarly community is some unified mass that has one mind on this subject.
What about China and India? Even among western scholars, you’d only get those who believe that boycotts can change things. The ineffectiveness of economic sanctions in Burma over the last 20 years has just caused Burma to rely more on China and SIngapore.
I don’t know what the breakdown of participants will be, but a large fraction will probably be Thai. At international conferences contacts and friendships between international colleagues are renewed. A boycott would be cutting off these contacts and friendships. Stopping the discussions about how people feel about current political events.
During periods of political tumult communication and international cross-border flows of ideas should be encouraged, not cut off.
As for sacred kingship read Dr. Sunait Chutintaranond’s Cornell PhD dissertation or look at the numerous articles published in the Journal of the Siam Society over the last 100 years.
Fakin’ it for the Thai market in Yunnan
“…welcome up to … Grade A copied merchandise store. We have clothes, bags, shoes, watches, golf clubs and many other items.”
Sounds like a description of Tachileik market across the border from Maesai. Thousands of Thai tourists flood across the border to buy things on weekends and holidays.
More significant than the copies is the wide variety of extremely cheap high quality clothing made in China. I always what the impact of it would be, if suddenly the gates of free trade were swung wide open. It seems that some protection to Thai manufacturers is a good thing. I cringe when I say this, because I was trained as an economist and economists believe in free trade.
The practice of sufficiency economy
Tosakan, I forgot to write (TM by Tosakan), probably because I pointed to your blog in that post and I thought (TM) would just mean that there is a trademark – but if we’ll ever meet I’ll buy you a sufficiency-beer 🙂
A Thai Studies boycott?
david w, the way academic politics usually plays out is that if there is a sufficiently large schism, one side just drops out and starts its own conference….