Octaviousbp

BAF, is Gramsci popular in Italian universities?

Does the political spectrum in the traditional "left/right" sense exist in Thailand? It seems politicians, and their ever dynamic platforms, are kind of all over the place. I think it's tricky to label them liberals/democrats/etc...

zzap,

Lots of problems assessing it, but that hasn't stopped people from trying!

The King of Bhutan came up with the Happiness Index, alluded to here

Critique of it here

It's a teleological question in that the word still is used. As in, a nation progresses through the categories of development. For me, calling one word PC over another is kind of pointless. All of the words have connotations that come with them, be they a hierarchical order (1st, 2nd, 3rd), or developing vs developed, north vs. south, etc, etc. For me, it doesn't really matter. I think what I am more concerned with is the fact that the nation as a whole is the category of study, rather then those whom are excluded from the benefits of the globalized world order. Some people in Thailand, as many throughout the thread have pointed out, are extremely "developed". They have access to markets, they are skilled in valuable ways to the global work force, and they are involved in decision making processes. These people, as well as those who are excluded from globalizations benefits, transcend state boundaries. So why is the nation-state still the unit of analysis used for comparison?

Obviously the nation is still extremely important, but would the semantics of "development" not benefit from a shift of focus to people, rather than the geographical containers they are grouped into?

Just enjoying the debate...

I think whether or not one views Thailand as "Third World" is a question of ontology. To my understanding, 1st, 2nd and 3rd World were categories of nation-states created out of Cold War neo-realist theory. The first two massively generalized countries into the "Free World" and "The Soviets" while the Third World was Non-Aligned.

Since the Cold War is technically long over, the terminology wouldn't seem to apply anymore. However it is still quite prevelent. I think it has to do with the fact that many people still think in these terms. The need to categorize complex variables into over-simplified homogonizations.

I had mentioned earlier about notions of history as well. The question "is Thailand still 3rd World?" is one of teleology. It assumes that development is a linnear progression, with a fixed goal at the end... usually one established by "Western" standards. Once again, whether or not you buy in to this depends on your ontological starting point.

Finally, the question regarding the age of Thailand as a Kingdom, I have to agree with BAF. As a Kingdom, Thailand has only been around since Sukothai. People are quick to lump all of the people living within the physical boundaries of Thailand as "Thai". But to my knowledge, aren't the people living in Issarn actually of Lao ethnicity? I also thought that when the boundary of the nation-state was drawn for Thailand, everyone living West of the Mekong was "Thai" and to the East "Lao". There are many ethnicities that live in Thailand, and to say their's is a history of over 2500 years is true, however by no means is it a unitary one.

There is a good book regarding the notion of "Thainess" that someone from this forum actually recommended (Thanks!) called "Siam Mapped" by Thongchai Winichakul. It gives a lot of food-for-thought for conceptualizing Thailand as a nation.

Just my 2 cents...

PS - Despite the digressions, an interesting topic!

I thought this was an interesting definition of "Real Development". It involves:

"...indigenous people determining their own future, confident, not intimidated, but free people determining what they want to do and doing it for themselves, exerscising agency, actively moving forward to create better lives and improve their well-being according to their won priorities and criteria as tehy have done for millennia" - Susan Maiava.

It's an interesting definition of the post-development persuasion, but sort of problematic as well. It runs the risk of essentializing indigenous people and their culture into a cohesive, static, homogenous entity that is void of tensions and antagonisms.

It does however avoid the Hegelian notion of history, and the perception of development as being the journey to a fixed (Western) ending point.

I hope this makes sense... it's kind of academic language, but the points are valuable none-the-less

I am not tarring all with the same brush and can only speak from my own experiences but I for one am rooting for Thailand and hope that the farang gets a damned good hiding.

This is what I was confused about... the contrast between "I'm not tarring all with the same brush..." and "I for one am rooting for Thailand and hope that the farang gets a damned good hiding". Is UMA cheering against skin colour or poseurness, I guess would be a more succinct way of stating it. The secondary portion of my inquiry was to whether or not she checked to see if they were poseurs first, and if so... how?

I would also hope she realizes, as many have already pointed out, that for one, the Thai's are pretty good at holding their own in "Thai Boxing" and secondly, there are plenty of serious athletes who want to compete in the most competitive venue in the world. Dead horse, I know... I just don't like prejudices in general... and if OP is not being prejudice, my bad.

I'm a little confused UMA... are you saying that if there is a Thai fighting a farang and you have no previous knowledge of either fighter, you cheer for the Thai? Or do you inquire with the farang before the fight whether he is a poseur or not? Or are you just assuming he is? Just curious...

Another request, if I may. I'm also quite curious about Burma, and specifically the similarities/differences between the two (Thailand and Burma) historically (pre-colonial times for Burma). Books, articles, anything that discusses/contrasts shared culture, religion, people, etc. would be great. The history of SEA is so rich, rather enthralling really!

I just finished "The Gods Drink Whiskey" by Stephen Asma, and while at some points I found it extremely frustrating, I also found it a fairly good read. It takes place mostly in Cambodia, however Thailand, and Vietnam also creap into it.

I also enjoyed Pongpaichit and Baker's "History of Thailand".

Anyone have any "academic" suggestions? I like to pretend sometimes...

The Buddhai Sawan may be "officially" closed... I'm not sure of its current status. Pedro Villalobos is a great teacher and teaches out of Chiang Mai.

Pedro Villalobos

Thanks kindly for the urls. It's a start! Any other suggestions always welcome.

Hello all, I tried posting this in the Chiang Mai section with not much luck. So I'll give it a try here. I'm looking for any general information about NGOs in and around Chiang Mai. I'm finishing up my graduate work, and am looking for a job back in Chiang Mai. If anyone who is working in the field ("development") has any advice, it would also be appreciate. Thanks!

Greets. I'm looking for any general information about NGOs in and around Chiang Mai. I'm finishing up my graduate work, and am looking for a job back in Chiang Mai. If anyone who is working in the field ("development") has any advice, it would also be appreciate. Thanks!

This is a long shot, but...

I'm currently living in Korea (I'm Canadian), and I would like to spend 6 months in Thailand, training in Muay Thai.  Since I would be technically studying/training at a gym, would it be possible to obtain an ED type visa?  Or am I doomed to have to leave the country every month?

Thanks

D