“One suspects the more negative commentators on this site, particularly the anonymous trolls, are not in much danger from the junta.”
Not all anonymous posters are trolls and it would be a mistake to make that equation. Not an uncommon mistake, but a mistake non-the-less.
Anonymous posters probably are not in much danger from the junta, and that is precisely because they are anonymous and take care to conceal their identity. Failing to do so in a forum known to be surveilled by or which can reasonable be suspected to be surveilled by the government or representatives of the government (as NM definitely is) is folly, to think otherwise is naive, even though the IT capability of Thais is extremely moot.
Unconscious behaviours are generally obvious to the trained eye. Some folk find security in a hazardous world by using an alias, others by obfuscating their meaning in arcane or nearly impenetrable (without a key) language and symbolism. In my opinion, the former is generally the more appropriate – and, I would argue, reflects better upon the author where cleverness is sought to be implied rather than a necessary selectiveness of audience achieved; otherwise it’s a crude cryptography at best.
The problem with the 1982 Citizenship Law is not that it “denied citizenship to the Rohingya, thereby technically making them stateless”, but that it was not implemented in a timely and sensible manner.
Had the Law been promptly administered in accordance with the 1983 Citizenship Rules (available in Burmese only), all Arakan Muslims who had previously merited full citizenship, many holding valid NRCs, would have had no difficulty in exchanging their old IDs for new IDs under the entitlement provided by Article 6 of the Law. That would have covered almost two-thirds of the community. Another 80-90,000 applications for citizenship outstanding from the 1948 regulations would then have been granted “associate” citizenship, and by now their grandchildren would already have acquired full citizenship, even though they did not belong to one of the “national races”. That would have left maybe 200-250,000 in limbo because they were suspected of being illegal post-1948 migrants; but not 1.1 million, as today.
This is what the Law provided, but it didn’t happen. The government at the time denied Arakan Muslims their rights under the 1982 Law, insisting instead that in Arakan, alone of all States and Divisions, no new IDs should be issued to Muslims until entitlement and the authenticity of old IDs had been checked. This resulted in the delayed issue of so-called temporary ‘White Cards’ – and the rest is history.
My point is that it was not the Law which made them stateless, but the failure to apply the Law. That is why Arakan Muslims who were able to move to Yangon, or already lived there, had no problem in exchanging their old IDs for new IDs.
It could then be argued, and indeed should be argued, that it is not the Law, despite the blatant discrimination of some of its provisions, which is at fault, but the chicanery and obstructiveness of national and especially local officialdom, which needs to be challenged. This could open up new vistas for international protection. So one of the first questions to be asked is: are today’s Rohingya stateless de jure or only de facto – as Nick Cheesman has recently pointed out? And if our conclusion is only de facto, how should this influence the international response? In this context, the ideas discussed by the author, and especially the notion of reparations, are most relevant and apposite.
.
But if Manjit Bhatia were to provide more details about himself and/or his company, would it be fair to say that the Malaysian government could do things to him and his company based on what we know about the Malaysian government?
Oh dear, Michael Wilson, I was agreeing with you when you said: “The main point of the article, like all of the articles detailing the ins and outs of palace life, is to create the impression that the palace is where the power lies in Thailand. That is simply not the case.”
Agree. Though I think that the tipping point has now been passed. After proclaiming that the government is NOT broke, and maintaining the fatuous claim that submarines are any more use than a feather hat, the government is now discussing and proposing serious new taxes, like 100THB on a packet of fags and 1000THB on a soapie (that’ll really tick off the barstool brigade).
I think the process we both appear to believe will happen, is now inevitable. I for one will shed no fears if Thailand blows itself into small pieces, and I doubt the world would scarcely notice. Law and order has already broken down, and juxtaposing that with the corruption and incompetence of the police and armed forces makes for a certain amount of inevitability. IMHO.
“That is why it is so fantastic to attribute so much power to one man, never mind to the one institution that he operates within.”
Hmmm. Not sure you’re right about this. The amount of power wielded by any person is a function of how many people will do his bidding if push comes to shove – and of course how many of those have guns, ridiculous hats (especially the dopey ones that look like cycling helmets, they always make me snigger) – or big boots.
The absentee landlord, by this measure, probably does wield more power than any other person in Thailand.
Well, Ralph, if I’d ever suggested such a thing, I suppose your withering sarcasm wouldn’t be directed at a straw man.
But I never have.
There are a number of wealthy families in Thailand and a few of them I have no doubt wield considerable power, political and otherwise. I think this is a fairly uncontroversial belief.
There are any number of “power centers” in Thailand, as there are in any modern nation, democratic or otherwise. That is why it is so fantastic to attribute so much power to one man, never mind to the one institution that he operates within.
Christine Grey, in another of her articles on NM, says this:
“How is it that Thailand, such a tiny country, has produced so many billionaires who operate on a global scale, many of whom are designated as “self-made”?”
Just as Thailand is not facing a sudden descent into some imaginary hell determined by the character of one individual, Thailand is not “a tiny country”.
“If it were in Europe, Thailand would be that peninsula’s 3rd largest country, falling between France and Spain. It is the third largest country in SE Asia and the 14th largest country in all of Asia. It is the 51st largest country in the world.
By population, Thailand is the 21st largest country in the world. If it were in Europe, it would be that peninsula’s 3rd most populous country after Germany and France. It is 4th by population in SE Asia and 10th in all of Asia.
In terms of its economy, Thailand is the 28th largest in the world. It is the world’s 9th largest producer of motor vehicles, 2nd largest producer of HDD, 6th largest rice grower and 2nd largest producer of shrimp for the world market. It is the 10th most visited country in the world, with the 6th highest tourism receipts.”
Whenever the various magazines and websites that provide endless tidbits of information about the wealthy make lists of the countries with the most billionaires per capita or millionaires per capita, Thailand never makes it into the top 10 or even 20.
Singapore usually comes near the top of the list and even Malaysia has more by some measures.
So it would appear that the suggestion that there is some nefarious connection between Gray’s favorite whipping boy and unusual concentrations of wealth in tiny Thailand is just that- a suggestion. And it is one that rests on a falsehood and does not stand up to any sort of empirical test at all.
This constant promotion of Thailand as somehow being exceptional rather than characteristic of the region of the world it is located in is worthy of study in my opinion. It does seem to attract “haters” in a way that Vietnam and Singapore and Indonesia or Malaysia just don’t, regardless of human rights violations and limitations on freedom of speech etc being much the same in all of ASEAN.
In this article, we hear that Thailand’s new monarch “demanded two prerogatives exercised by Siamese despots of the past: the right to appoint the Supreme Patriarch of the Buddhist Sangha, and the right to determine the conditions of the regency.”
I would ask for some smidgeon of proof that the first “demand” came from the king.
It seems far more likely that the junta saw this as a convenient way out of the tangle that has bedeviled various Thai administration since the days of Thaksin and the first coup against him.
The constitutional history of this particular prerogative is an interesting one, but in no way indicates a return to the medieval or to “Siamese despots of the past”.
If we could get some indication of the source of this counter-intuitive claim without a long preamble on the psychological propensities of foreign men who live in Thailand it would be great. But if not, I’m sure no one will be surprised.
The UN organised election was in 1993. Thinking in a kind of very deep in political aspect, the dictatorship of Hun Sen exited since the period which is is installed by Vietnam and reinforce after his coup July 1997.
Without bullying, corruption, changing tunes every day, and enabling China’s interference, Hun Sen could not win a race against porky pig. Neptunian, on this one, you are way off.
Partially agree with this statement with a caveat.
I see nothing wrong with Hun Sen’s so called dictatorship as it has brought much needed relieve to the average Cambodians. The country was ravaged, no thanks to the USA and their collateral damage mentality. Dragging Cambodia into the “War Theatre” of the Vienam war. The very word Theatre used to describe WAR puts the chill in me.
Hun Sen’s party would win hands down in an election without the interference of Western NGOs and their unknown agendas.
The “main point” of the article, like all of the articles detailing the ins and outs of palace life, is to create the impression that the palace is where the power lies in Thailand.
That is simply not the case. No evidence is ever offered for this assumption/assertion, but the “arguments” (such as they are) simply assume the truth of it.
This is known as “begging the question”. Treat the assumption as if it needs to be proved or somehow validated and all this just goes away.
And as we see in Trump’s America, stating a falsehood as if it were true, and then running it through a rinse and repeat cycle, is just as effective as having an argument, but only when your audience is inclined to believe what you are claiming in the first place.
Take away the assumption and you have nothing left.
That would explain why rather than argue for the validity of the viewpoint, we get these royalist gossips saying such edifying things as “angry troll” and “sexist”. And at such length!
i believe being stateless is common thing happen in Brunei. instead of tired apply and sit for exam for Brunei nationality but yet no action just please give our proper passport being recongnized in entire world given us free travel visa just like Bruneian passport. Nor matter how difficult for us keep apply but no action just do something make respond.
Christine – I kinda get what you are saying about sexism, etc.! Or what Giles says re. class. But it seems to me the OVER-RIDING issue is now NOT EVEN ROYALISM : it is REGIONALISM. This country is going to blow itself apart – what is happening in Patani, is about to spread.
Andrew:
Thank you for your advice and your comments. I will strive to live up to your standards.
You were and remain the chief journalistic force in rooting out what’s going on behind the scenes in Thai politics. Please, do not stop.
The situation in Thailand just seems to get worse and worse. As we know, it burns out and embitters many people. The reason for the burnout is evident on this site and in the careers of Thai scholars and journalists, even more evident in the number of Article 112 detainees in Thai prisons, secret or otherwise.
While some of the comments are useful, messages (and subtexts) to me and others who post on this website are often You dare! — an enraged crown prince’s rumored message to the imprisoned Srirasmi. (Hmm. Dare what? Produce a flawed heir? Slap the mistress in the face at a European airport? Think that she was anything apart from him? Encourage her relatives to enjoy the ordinary perquisites of the royal in-laws [the family that provides the throne with a mother to the heir apparent], particularly police prerogatives? Yes, check out the activities of the Svasti and Sucharitakul relatives).
The Emperor IS clothed… well… sort of … He did go tandem sky diving in the middle of the night. Nooo! He did not! Prove it! She was naked. Nooo! They both were.
However, I disagree with your point about silence: The angry men brouhaha is precisely the point, as well as the sources and expressions of that discontent. It is hard not to descend into [s]ex-patriate hell. Very hard.
As I have suggested before, the worst expressions and insults on this site would seem to derive from life in a society that has normalized prostitution. As with the new king and his harem, what’s actually being transacted is flattery/entitlement/debasement of self and others. This, in turn, produces a kind of rage towards people who have actually accomplished something, particularly women.
One suspects the more negative commentators on this site, particularly the anonymous trolls, are not in much danger from the junta. There is an implied social contract for enjoying Oriental delights for which the country is famed, and for getting those special 10-year resident visas : not criticizing the monarchy, the military, and human rights violations.
While many NM discussants simply could not address the main point of the article, many people, including scholars, could, and thought it was spot on.
Thailand’s lucrative tourist and prostitution industry perfectly reflects the example set by the new king. Ironically, through opposite example — by pursuing a mostly asexual, saintly path that attempted to endow the monarchy, the nation and its ruling elite with high moral tone — his father normalized the trade by ignoring it, all the while enjoying profits that accrued to royal properties linked to the trade.
For those habituated to it, this atmosphere allows some farang men to behave towards women, or people in general, in a way that would make them outcasts in their own societies, certainly in polite society. Some seem to view this site as a format for expression of those entitlements. Note that Thai commentators, for the most part, do not engage in this type of response.
I’ve heard from many non-posters, including human rights activists and scholars, who not only understood the main point of the article, but thought it was both useful and thought-provoking.
One goal with this piece was to re-set political theory to include gossip (as a subset of free speech) and retaliation (in its various forms) as a critical social and political dynamic. Another is to normalize discussion of the monarchy in relation to politics, power, the economy, etc. (No, I did not say that the monarchy was the only or singularly most important institution in society, but that it needs consistently to be addressed.)
This piece took weeks to write and involved a cast of thousands (ok, perhaps the sustained efforts of at least a dozen people who, by necessity, must remain anonymous.)
As for less important matters:
Andrew, I am now developing a fierce interest in FiFi, the king’s new poodle. Did your sources confirm the name, or is that ironic or satirical on your part? Has there been a definitive check on FiFi’s sex? Can you confirm the identity of his or her groomer?
Also, what is your source on that Swiss clinic that the king supposedly visited. http://villa-medica.com/ This is hilarious.
Of course, no one can PROVE the king left Thailand to undergo stem cell treatment [whatever] for his [blank] ailments, although he does seem to have sailed off in a new $96 million Boeing jet gifted him by the RTAF. Given his lifestyle and preoccupations, the king may actually have no interest at all in rejuvenation or in state-of-the-art medical treatments available to his global peers — like the rock stars and business executives who attest to the miracles performed by such clinics.
Unless, of course, he views his latest rumored serving maid — of royal lineage and more “pure blood” than the bar girls, nurses and flight attendants who populate his harem — as a last chance to produce a viable male heir. That truly has alarmed Bangkok high society.
Nah. That’s just silly. Urged on by Goy or one of the serving maids charged with enhancing his virility and keeping excitement in his life, he’s probably experimenting with painting his toenails blue, with spangles, or some such thing. Resting up from all that unfair gossip, or planning to jail, torture and disappear anyone who displeases him.
Meanwhile, for the serious of mind or people who are into gossip big time, check out McCoy’s still seminal “The Politics of Heroin,” which is not identified with “Thai studies” per se. Next, integrate relevant information into mainstream scholarship on politics, history and economics [that’ll take about a decade]. Third, try and write women back into the equation, particularly in areas like banking and real estate. Finally, to figure out how this information disappears from the record, check out key concepts from feminist studies like erasure, trivialization, the powers of the weak, etc.
After which you, too, may need to visit that Swiss clinic.
“Giles comes from an elite family” – yes. But his British mother was a left- wing socialist. The fundamental problems with Gile’s views / “analysis” are that they are hard-core classic ’70’s UK Trotskyist, which place ALL emphasis on the Thai “working class” as vanguard. NOT ONLY is Thai Royalist “gossip” rejected as TOTALLY “irrelevant” – despite it being an indicator of important power plays – but so ALSO is the HIGHLY important question of REGIONAL identity. THIS is a MAJOR explosive issue – not only in relation to the vexed question of whether Thailand’s majority Isaarn remains part of “Thailand”. But also regarding ethnic minorities such as the Lahu. Eg. teen Lahu rights activist has just been murdered
by Prayut’s military.
There is new gossip … https://www.strategypage.com/qnd/thai/articles/20170316.aspx … which I relay courtesy of Political Prisoners in Thailand. Is it interesting that this new gossip calls on an Andrew MacGregor Marshall skill set for picking through? Rather than Christine’s? Note the way that Taksin figures in this story and how much greater the stakes seem to be that are being negotiated.
I have looked several times for hints that Google can find corroboration that Christine’s tandem skydive is an active rumor. I don’t find anything. But if the King is playing in both realms, the salacious and the high-stakes political, then the salacious gossip may well be something he is manipulating, and we are … not trolls, but bait swallowers. … And the gossip is still all that has been said of it.
Looking at the success of single party authoritarianism throughout east Asia – I’m tempted to ask : what’s wrong with it ? Why don’t Hun Sen and Rainsy form a single party of national unity, probably thereby VASTLY lifting Cambodian living standards further ? As has historically happened in – eg. China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Vietnam, etc., etc.
Andrew MacGregor Marshshall – this may not be Christine’s “best work” (indeed it is marred by lack of hard evidence). But judging by the hornets nest of commentary she has provoked – it’s a pretty good piece !
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
“One suspects the more negative commentators on this site, particularly the anonymous trolls, are not in much danger from the junta.”
Not all anonymous posters are trolls and it would be a mistake to make that equation. Not an uncommon mistake, but a mistake non-the-less.
Anonymous posters probably are not in much danger from the junta, and that is precisely because they are anonymous and take care to conceal their identity. Failing to do so in a forum known to be surveilled by or which can reasonable be suspected to be surveilled by the government or representatives of the government (as NM definitely is) is folly, to think otherwise is naive, even though the IT capability of Thais is extremely moot.
Unconscious behaviours are generally obvious to the trained eye. Some folk find security in a hazardous world by using an alias, others by obfuscating their meaning in arcane or nearly impenetrable (without a key) language and symbolism. In my opinion, the former is generally the more appropriate – and, I would argue, reflects better upon the author where cleverness is sought to be implied rather than a necessary selectiveness of audience achieved; otherwise it’s a crude cryptography at best.
Diplomatic protection for the stateless Rohingya
The problem with the 1982 Citizenship Law is not that it “denied citizenship to the Rohingya, thereby technically making them stateless”, but that it was not implemented in a timely and sensible manner.
Had the Law been promptly administered in accordance with the 1983 Citizenship Rules (available in Burmese only), all Arakan Muslims who had previously merited full citizenship, many holding valid NRCs, would have had no difficulty in exchanging their old IDs for new IDs under the entitlement provided by Article 6 of the Law. That would have covered almost two-thirds of the community. Another 80-90,000 applications for citizenship outstanding from the 1948 regulations would then have been granted “associate” citizenship, and by now their grandchildren would already have acquired full citizenship, even though they did not belong to one of the “national races”. That would have left maybe 200-250,000 in limbo because they were suspected of being illegal post-1948 migrants; but not 1.1 million, as today.
This is what the Law provided, but it didn’t happen. The government at the time denied Arakan Muslims their rights under the 1982 Law, insisting instead that in Arakan, alone of all States and Divisions, no new IDs should be issued to Muslims until entitlement and the authenticity of old IDs had been checked. This resulted in the delayed issue of so-called temporary ‘White Cards’ – and the rest is history.
My point is that it was not the Law which made them stateless, but the failure to apply the Law. That is why Arakan Muslims who were able to move to Yangon, or already lived there, had no problem in exchanging their old IDs for new IDs.
It could then be argued, and indeed should be argued, that it is not the Law, despite the blatant discrimination of some of its provisions, which is at fault, but the chicanery and obstructiveness of national and especially local officialdom, which needs to be challenged. This could open up new vistas for international protection. So one of the first questions to be asked is: are today’s Rohingya stateless de jure or only de facto – as Nick Cheesman has recently pointed out? And if our conclusion is only de facto, how should this influence the international response? In this context, the ideas discussed by the author, and especially the notion of reparations, are most relevant and apposite.
.
Playing Malaysia’s number game
Fair point John LK Tan.
But if Manjit Bhatia were to provide more details about himself and/or his company, would it be fair to say that the Malaysian government could do things to him and his company based on what we know about the Malaysian government?
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Oh dear, Michael Wilson, I was agreeing with you when you said: “The main point of the article, like all of the articles detailing the ins and outs of palace life, is to create the impression that the palace is where the power lies in Thailand. That is simply not the case.”
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Agree. Though I think that the tipping point has now been passed. After proclaiming that the government is NOT broke, and maintaining the fatuous claim that submarines are any more use than a feather hat, the government is now discussing and proposing serious new taxes, like 100THB on a packet of fags and 1000THB on a soapie (that’ll really tick off the barstool brigade).
I think the process we both appear to believe will happen, is now inevitable. I for one will shed no fears if Thailand blows itself into small pieces, and I doubt the world would scarcely notice. Law and order has already broken down, and juxtaposing that with the corruption and incompetence of the police and armed forces makes for a certain amount of inevitability. IMHO.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
@ Michael Wilson:
“That is why it is so fantastic to attribute so much power to one man, never mind to the one institution that he operates within.”
Hmmm. Not sure you’re right about this. The amount of power wielded by any person is a function of how many people will do his bidding if push comes to shove – and of course how many of those have guns, ridiculous hats (especially the dopey ones that look like cycling helmets, they always make me snigger) – or big boots.
The absentee landlord, by this measure, probably does wield more power than any other person in Thailand.
To Thailands, eternal shame.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Well, Ralph, if I’d ever suggested such a thing, I suppose your withering sarcasm wouldn’t be directed at a straw man.
But I never have.
There are a number of wealthy families in Thailand and a few of them I have no doubt wield considerable power, political and otherwise. I think this is a fairly uncontroversial belief.
There are any number of “power centers” in Thailand, as there are in any modern nation, democratic or otherwise. That is why it is so fantastic to attribute so much power to one man, never mind to the one institution that he operates within.
Christine Grey, in another of her articles on NM, says this:
“How is it that Thailand, such a tiny country, has produced so many billionaires who operate on a global scale, many of whom are designated as “self-made”?”
Just as Thailand is not facing a sudden descent into some imaginary hell determined by the character of one individual, Thailand is not “a tiny country”.
“If it were in Europe, Thailand would be that peninsula’s 3rd largest country, falling between France and Spain. It is the third largest country in SE Asia and the 14th largest country in all of Asia. It is the 51st largest country in the world.
By population, Thailand is the 21st largest country in the world. If it were in Europe, it would be that peninsula’s 3rd most populous country after Germany and France. It is 4th by population in SE Asia and 10th in all of Asia.
In terms of its economy, Thailand is the 28th largest in the world. It is the world’s 9th largest producer of motor vehicles, 2nd largest producer of HDD, 6th largest rice grower and 2nd largest producer of shrimp for the world market. It is the 10th most visited country in the world, with the 6th highest tourism receipts.”
Whenever the various magazines and websites that provide endless tidbits of information about the wealthy make lists of the countries with the most billionaires per capita or millionaires per capita, Thailand never makes it into the top 10 or even 20.
Singapore usually comes near the top of the list and even Malaysia has more by some measures.
So it would appear that the suggestion that there is some nefarious connection between Gray’s favorite whipping boy and unusual concentrations of wealth in tiny Thailand is just that- a suggestion. And it is one that rests on a falsehood and does not stand up to any sort of empirical test at all.
This constant promotion of Thailand as somehow being exceptional rather than characteristic of the region of the world it is located in is worthy of study in my opinion. It does seem to attract “haters” in a way that Vietnam and Singapore and Indonesia or Malaysia just don’t, regardless of human rights violations and limitations on freedom of speech etc being much the same in all of ASEAN.
In this article, we hear that Thailand’s new monarch “demanded two prerogatives exercised by Siamese despots of the past: the right to appoint the Supreme Patriarch of the Buddhist Sangha, and the right to determine the conditions of the regency.”
I would ask for some smidgeon of proof that the first “demand” came from the king.
It seems far more likely that the junta saw this as a convenient way out of the tangle that has bedeviled various Thai administration since the days of Thaksin and the first coup against him.
The constitutional history of this particular prerogative is an interesting one, but in no way indicates a return to the medieval or to “Siamese despots of the past”.
If we could get some indication of the source of this counter-intuitive claim without a long preamble on the psychological propensities of foreign men who live in Thailand it would be great. But if not, I’m sure no one will be surprised.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Michael Wilson is right. The wealthiest family and conglomerate in the country can’t possibly have any power.
Cambodia: towards single party dictatorship?
The UN organised election was in 1993. Thinking in a kind of very deep in political aspect, the dictatorship of Hun Sen exited since the period which is is installed by Vietnam and reinforce after his coup July 1997.
Cambodia: towards single party dictatorship?
Without bullying, corruption, changing tunes every day, and enabling China’s interference, Hun Sen could not win a race against porky pig. Neptunian, on this one, you are way off.
Cambodia: towards single party dictatorship?
Partially agree with this statement with a caveat.
I see nothing wrong with Hun Sen’s so called dictatorship as it has brought much needed relieve to the average Cambodians. The country was ravaged, no thanks to the USA and their collateral damage mentality. Dragging Cambodia into the “War Theatre” of the Vienam war. The very word Theatre used to describe WAR puts the chill in me.
Hun Sen’s party would win hands down in an election without the interference of Western NGOs and their unknown agendas.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
The “main point” of the article, like all of the articles detailing the ins and outs of palace life, is to create the impression that the palace is where the power lies in Thailand.
That is simply not the case. No evidence is ever offered for this assumption/assertion, but the “arguments” (such as they are) simply assume the truth of it.
This is known as “begging the question”. Treat the assumption as if it needs to be proved or somehow validated and all this just goes away.
And as we see in Trump’s America, stating a falsehood as if it were true, and then running it through a rinse and repeat cycle, is just as effective as having an argument, but only when your audience is inclined to believe what you are claiming in the first place.
Take away the assumption and you have nothing left.
That would explain why rather than argue for the validity of the viewpoint, we get these royalist gossips saying such edifying things as “angry troll” and “sexist”. And at such length!
Brunei’s stateless left in a state of confusion
i believe being stateless is common thing happen in Brunei. instead of tired apply and sit for exam for Brunei nationality but yet no action just please give our proper passport being recongnized in entire world given us free travel visa just like Bruneian passport. Nor matter how difficult for us keep apply but no action just do something make respond.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Christine – I kinda get what you are saying about sexism, etc.! Or what Giles says re. class. But it seems to me the OVER-RIDING issue is now NOT EVEN ROYALISM : it is REGIONALISM. This country is going to blow itself apart – what is happening in Patani, is about to spread.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Andrew:
Thank you for your advice and your comments. I will strive to live up to your standards.
You were and remain the chief journalistic force in rooting out what’s going on behind the scenes in Thai politics. Please, do not stop.
The situation in Thailand just seems to get worse and worse. As we know, it burns out and embitters many people. The reason for the burnout is evident on this site and in the careers of Thai scholars and journalists, even more evident in the number of Article 112 detainees in Thai prisons, secret or otherwise.
While some of the comments are useful, messages (and subtexts) to me and others who post on this website are often You dare! — an enraged crown prince’s rumored message to the imprisoned Srirasmi. (Hmm. Dare what? Produce a flawed heir? Slap the mistress in the face at a European airport? Think that she was anything apart from him? Encourage her relatives to enjoy the ordinary perquisites of the royal in-laws [the family that provides the throne with a mother to the heir apparent], particularly police prerogatives? Yes, check out the activities of the Svasti and Sucharitakul relatives).
The Emperor IS clothed… well… sort of … He did go tandem sky diving in the middle of the night. Nooo! He did not! Prove it! She was naked. Nooo! They both were.
However, I disagree with your point about silence: The angry men brouhaha is precisely the point, as well as the sources and expressions of that discontent. It is hard not to descend into [s]ex-patriate hell. Very hard.
As I have suggested before, the worst expressions and insults on this site would seem to derive from life in a society that has normalized prostitution. As with the new king and his harem, what’s actually being transacted is flattery/entitlement/debasement of self and others. This, in turn, produces a kind of rage towards people who have actually accomplished something, particularly women.
One suspects the more negative commentators on this site, particularly the anonymous trolls, are not in much danger from the junta. There is an implied social contract for enjoying Oriental delights for which the country is famed, and for getting those special 10-year resident visas : not criticizing the monarchy, the military, and human rights violations.
While many NM discussants simply could not address the main point of the article, many people, including scholars, could, and thought it was spot on.
Thailand’s lucrative tourist and prostitution industry perfectly reflects the example set by the new king. Ironically, through opposite example — by pursuing a mostly asexual, saintly path that attempted to endow the monarchy, the nation and its ruling elite with high moral tone — his father normalized the trade by ignoring it, all the while enjoying profits that accrued to royal properties linked to the trade.
For those habituated to it, this atmosphere allows some farang men to behave towards women, or people in general, in a way that would make them outcasts in their own societies, certainly in polite society. Some seem to view this site as a format for expression of those entitlements. Note that Thai commentators, for the most part, do not engage in this type of response.
I’ve heard from many non-posters, including human rights activists and scholars, who not only understood the main point of the article, but thought it was both useful and thought-provoking.
One goal with this piece was to re-set political theory to include gossip (as a subset of free speech) and retaliation (in its various forms) as a critical social and political dynamic. Another is to normalize discussion of the monarchy in relation to politics, power, the economy, etc. (No, I did not say that the monarchy was the only or singularly most important institution in society, but that it needs consistently to be addressed.)
This piece took weeks to write and involved a cast of thousands (ok, perhaps the sustained efforts of at least a dozen people who, by necessity, must remain anonymous.)
As for less important matters:
Andrew, I am now developing a fierce interest in FiFi, the king’s new poodle. Did your sources confirm the name, or is that ironic or satirical on your part? Has there been a definitive check on FiFi’s sex? Can you confirm the identity of his or her groomer?
Also, what is your source on that Swiss clinic that the king supposedly visited. http://villa-medica.com/ This is hilarious.
Of course, no one can PROVE the king left Thailand to undergo stem cell treatment [whatever] for his [blank] ailments, although he does seem to have sailed off in a new $96 million Boeing jet gifted him by the RTAF. Given his lifestyle and preoccupations, the king may actually have no interest at all in rejuvenation or in state-of-the-art medical treatments available to his global peers — like the rock stars and business executives who attest to the miracles performed by such clinics.
Unless, of course, he views his latest rumored serving maid — of royal lineage and more “pure blood” than the bar girls, nurses and flight attendants who populate his harem — as a last chance to produce a viable male heir. That truly has alarmed Bangkok high society.
Nah. That’s just silly. Urged on by Goy or one of the serving maids charged with enhancing his virility and keeping excitement in his life, he’s probably experimenting with painting his toenails blue, with spangles, or some such thing. Resting up from all that unfair gossip, or planning to jail, torture and disappear anyone who displeases him.
Meanwhile, for the serious of mind or people who are into gossip big time, check out McCoy’s still seminal “The Politics of Heroin,” which is not identified with “Thai studies” per se. Next, integrate relevant information into mainstream scholarship on politics, history and economics [that’ll take about a decade]. Third, try and write women back into the equation, particularly in areas like banking and real estate. Finally, to figure out how this information disappears from the record, check out key concepts from feminist studies like erasure, trivialization, the powers of the weak, etc.
After which you, too, may need to visit that Swiss clinic.
Out of order
This is classic Julie Bishop : huge grand-standing. Almost nothing to show for it.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
“Giles comes from an elite family” – yes. But his British mother was a left- wing socialist. The fundamental problems with Gile’s views / “analysis” are that they are hard-core classic ’70’s UK Trotskyist, which place ALL emphasis on the Thai “working class” as vanguard. NOT ONLY is Thai Royalist “gossip” rejected as TOTALLY “irrelevant” – despite it being an indicator of important power plays – but so ALSO is the HIGHLY important question of REGIONAL identity. THIS is a MAJOR explosive issue – not only in relation to the vexed question of whether Thailand’s majority Isaarn remains part of “Thailand”. But also regarding ethnic minorities such as the Lahu. Eg. teen Lahu rights activist has just been murdered
by Prayut’s military.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
There is new gossip … https://www.strategypage.com/qnd/thai/articles/20170316.aspx … which I relay courtesy of Political Prisoners in Thailand. Is it interesting that this new gossip calls on an Andrew MacGregor Marshall skill set for picking through? Rather than Christine’s? Note the way that Taksin figures in this story and how much greater the stakes seem to be that are being negotiated.
I have looked several times for hints that Google can find corroboration that Christine’s tandem skydive is an active rumor. I don’t find anything. But if the King is playing in both realms, the salacious and the high-stakes political, then the salacious gossip may well be something he is manipulating, and we are … not trolls, but bait swallowers. … And the gossip is still all that has been said of it.
(Sorry if that has all been said above.)
Cambodia: towards single party dictatorship?
Looking at the success of single party authoritarianism throughout east Asia – I’m tempted to ask : what’s wrong with it ? Why don’t Hun Sen and Rainsy form a single party of national unity, probably thereby VASTLY lifting Cambodian living standards further ? As has historically happened in – eg. China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Vietnam, etc., etc.
Risk, gossip and retribution in Thailand
Andrew MacGregor Marshshall – this may not be Christine’s “best work” (indeed it is marred by lack of hard evidence). But judging by the hornets nest of commentary she has provoked – it’s a pretty good piece !