Yesterday's article on the Asia Sentinel site is worth reading; it's not by the person who wrote That Book - http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?o ... &Itemid=31
Yesterday's article on the Asia Sentinel site is worth reading; it's not by the person who wrote That Book - http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?o ... &Itemid=31
Interesting piece surveying the rather different views of the place of HMK in relation to other elements in Thailand, from a very courageous (or crazy) man. His banned book 'A Coup for the Rich' can be download as free PDF here (bottom of page).
http://www.pcpthai.org/autopagev3/show_ ... auto_id=37
Interesting mainly for it being allowed into publication and for his being retained at Chulalongkorn in spite of his radical views. He is the "token Trotskyist" on the outer fringes of Thai politics who is probably allowed to make his outspoken views public more because the "powers that be" know that he will not be taken seriously and so does not pose any sort of threat, than because of any sort of tolerance on their part. He also does not attack individuals directly, only "institutions" on political grounds - very different to Paul Handley.
I found the various links far more interesting than the article itself, which actually said very little - typical of most political lecturers.
An avowed Trotskyist, he is a member of the Thai Socialist Group Workers Democracy, part of the International Socialist Tendency which in turn was based around the British Socialist Workers Party (he has joint Thai / British nationality).
Like most of his political persuasion he has never actually been a "worker", which is probably why the demonstrations he has attempted to stage a number of times have never been supported by more than a few middle class / upper middle class students.
I don't see Handley's book "attacking" anyone. He just states the facts and circumstances without a lot of value judgments. I know the Palace PR machine takes it as an "attack" but it's not. The PR people just don't want you or the Thai population to know certain facts.Originally Posted by Gone Fishing
E Dok Tong
"He also does not attack individuals directly, only "institutions" on political grounds..."
As one would, of course, expect from one who works from a Marxist perspective...
Like all Marxist historians, the author bases his analysis on the theory that the course of any country's history is shaped by an inevitable progression of conflicts between its various economic classes. As such, the role of individuals (and even of A Certain Person) is, in the grand scheme of themes, minimal as they cannot swim against the tide of historical inevitability for long and certainly cannot divert it.
Of course, while Marxist historians provide the analysis, Marxist revolutionaries - of whom there's no evidence here to indicate that the author is one - attempt to accelerate the process of historical development (which, they believe, will end inevitably with the Dictatorship of the Proletariat) by agitating and stirring up the class consciousness of the masses.
"The fruits of peace and tranquility... are the greatest goods... while those of its opposite, strife, are unbearable evils. Hence we ought to wish for peace, to seek it if we do not already have it, to conserve it once it is attained, and to repel with all our strength the strife which is opposed to it. To this end individual[s]... and in even greater degree groups and communities are obliged to help one another... from the bond or law of human society." [Marsilio dei Mainardini (c.1275-1342), Defensor Pacis]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote