Chomsky among signers of pro-Netiwit petition

[webfact]

Chomsky among signers of pro-Netiwit petition

By The Nation

 

 

BANGKOK: -- A petition has appeared online in support of eight Chulalongkorn University students whose “behaviour scores” were reduced for perceived misbehaviour at the school’s annual oath-taking ceremony for freshmen.

 

The petition asking that the disciplinary action be rescinded has been signed by world-renowned scholars Noam Chomsky, Johan Galtung, Perry Link, Henry Hardy and Lawrence Krauss.

 

It says the students’ actions were “congruent with human rights principles” and urges the university to “respect the demonstration of different opinions as well as alternative forms of expression”.

 

It denounces the punishment as constraining freedom of expression.

 

Five of the eight students were members of the school’s Student Council, including prominent activist Netiwit Chotiphatphaisal, who’d served as Student Council president. 

 

The reduction in their behaviour scores led to their dismissal from the council as being disqualified for membership.

 

The eight were sanctioned for failing to sit on the ground before statues of Kings Rama V and Rama VI during the ceremony, as is expected of students in a show of obeisance.

 

They instead remained standing and bowed to the monuments, prompting an irate lecturer to manhandle one of the students away from the scene.

 

University rector Bundhit Eua-Arporn later explained that a special area had been designated for students not wanting to sit on the ground to pay respect during the ceremony, but Netiwit and the other seven did not stay in the area as they’d promised to do. 

 

The school established a committee to consider the incident and it was decided the students should be sanctioned.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30325831

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-09-05

[Bob12345]

Quote

prompting an irate lecturer to manhandle one of the students away from the scene

Did the university already take action against this guy and the female helping him?

Or didn't they damage the reputation of the university?

[tryasimight]

Use a lot and its called research, use a little and its called plagiarism.

[yellowboat]

May not always agree with him, but Noam is a courageous man and worthy of admiration. 

[Jingthing]

I don't understand specifically what issues the dissenting students are dissenting about. 

But it sounds like this is touching greatly on third rail issues here. 

So ... no comment. 

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

No time for Chomsky as he denies the Cambodia genocide. 

 

That's a new issue to me. Chomsky has a brilliant mind but that doesn't mean he's always right (or wrong). It's off topic but if he did actually deny  the Cambodia genocide closer to the time it happened, surely he's revised his POV since then? If not, which I doubt, yes, that would be unforgivable.

[phkauf]

28 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

 

That's a new issue to me. Chomsky has a brilliant mind but that doesn't mean he's always right (or wrong). It's off topic but if he did actually deny  the Cambodia genocide closer to the time it happened, surely he's revised his POV since then? If not, which I doubt, yes, that would be unforgivable.

Chomsky was a supporter / apologist of Pol Pot and the murderous Khmer Rouge regime. He let his anti-Vietnam War mindset blind him to the atrocities happening in Cambodia. And it wasn't until the 1990's that he finally admitted he was wrong. 

While I fully support Netwit against the tools running Chula, Chomsky can and should burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. It was him and the other like minded individuals at the time that refused ton see the Khmer Rouge for what it was that led to the slaughter of millions and destruction of a great nation.

[Jingthing]

45 minutes ago, phkauf said:

Chomsky was a supporter / apologist of Pol Pot and the murderous Khmer Rouge regime. He let his anti-Vietnam War mindset blind him to the atrocities happening in Cambodia. And it wasn't until the 1990's that he finally admitted he was wrong. 

While I fully support Netwit against the tools running Chula, Chomsky can and should burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. It was him and the other like minded individuals at the time that refused ton see the Khmer Rouge for what it was that led to the slaughter of millions and destruction of a great nation.

I can understand your POV. But at least he has admitted his mistake. That's not quite the same thing as an active denier. 

[Bluespunk]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

University rector Bundhit Eua-Arporn later explained that a special area had been designated for students not wanting to sit on the ground to pay respect during the ceremony, but Netiwit and the other seven did not stay in the area as they’d promised to do. 

Ahh, I didn't see that little nugget of information in earlier reports. 

[Bluespunk]

52 minutes ago, phkauf said:

Chomsky was a supporter / apologist of Pol Pot and the murderous Khmer Rouge regime. He let his anti-Vietnam War mindset blind him to the atrocities happening in Cambodia. And it wasn't until the 1990's that he finally admitted he was wrong. 

While I fully support Netwit against the tools running Chula, Chomsky can and should burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. It was him and the other like minded individuals at the time that refused ton see the Khmer Rouge for what it was that led to the slaughter of millions and destruction of a great nation.

The UN also recognised the Khmer Rouge as the legitimate govt during the years of the Vietnamese backed govt. 

 

The current dictator of Cambodia was also a member. 

 

Along with other "exalted" citizens. 

[Bob12345]

Ahh, I didn't see that little nugget of information in earlier reports. 

Me neither and that makes me a bit suspicious.

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Me neither and that makes me a bit suspicious.

Suggests an agreement was in place and the students chose to ignore it. 

 

If it's true, then this whole incident takes on a different hue for me. 

 

If. 

 

Mind, the statutes/rules they were punished for infracting are still ridiculous. 

[Jingthing]

I still don't understand the student's real reasons for dissent. The article does not say. 

As westerner's we mostly support the right of citizens to dissent for ANY reason.

But last time I checked, this isn't the west. 

[phkauf]

22 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The UN also recognised the Khmer Rouge as the legitimate govt during the years of the Vietnamese backed govt. 

 

The current dictator of Cambodia was also a member. 

 

Along with other "exalted" citizens. 

Further proof of how utterly useless the UN is.

And the Hun Sen is another one who can burn in hell.

There is so much blame to go around for the tragedy in Cambodia and hardly anyone has really paid the price. It's a shame on the entire world for what happened, but those who I really have the most contempt for, are the ones who were blinded to what was happening because they believed in the "cause". "The ends justify the means" mentality is bad no matter which side of the political spectrum you reside.

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, phkauf said:

Further proof of how utterly useless the UN is.

And the Hun Sen is another one who can burn in hell.

There is so much blame to go around for the tragedy in Cambodia and hardly anyone has really paid the price. It's a shame on the entire world for what happened, but those who I really have the most contempt for, are the ones who were blinded to what was happening because they believed in the "cause". "The ends justify the means" mentality is bad no matter which side of the political spectrum you reside.

Not just the UN that supported the Khmer Rouge scum. 

 

They at least appear to have learned from it. 

 

Unlike some of the govts who pushed the UN into their wrongful stance. 

[plachon]

2 hours ago, phkauf said:

Chomsky was a supporter / apologist of Pol Pot and the murderous Khmer Rouge regime. He let his anti-Vietnam War mindset blind him to the atrocities happening in Cambodia. And it wasn't until the 1990's that he finally admitted he was wrong. 

While I fully support Netwit against the tools running Chula, Chomsky can and should burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. It was him and the other like minded individuals at the time that refused ton see the Khmer Rouge for what it was that led to the slaughter of millions and destruction of a great nation.

So I hope you include in your "burn in hell" hatred for Chomsky, all of the US govt of the 70s and 80s, especially Nixon and Kissinger who created the conditions for the Khmer Rouge to rise with their "bomb them back to the stone ages" policy, plus later administrations of the US and UK govts that saw the Khmer Rouge as the legitimate rulers of Cambodia, including financing them via covert means? Hell, Thatcher even financed the SAS to go train the Khmer Rouge in terrorist tactics in the late 80s, and Pol Pot and chief cadres were treated as VIPs in Thailand, well into the 90s. So, your "other like minded individuals" could even be extended to the UN, which allowed the Khmer Rouge to represent Cambodia in New York for years after they were kicked out by the Vietnamese forces. 

Somehow, I think you are allowing your selective reading of history and tendency to believe anti-leftist propaganda hook, line and sinker to get in the way of any rational thinking over Chomsky's views.

[Machiavelli]

24 minutes ago, plachon said:

So I hope you include in your "burn in hell" hatred for Chomsky, all of the US govt of the 70s and 80s, especially Nixon and Kissinger who created the conditions for the Khmer Rouge to rise with their "bomb them back to the stone ages" policy, plus later administrations of the US and UK govts that saw the Khmer Rouge as the legitimate rulers of Cambodia, including financing them via covert means? Hell, Thatcher even financed the SAS to go train the Khmer Rouge in terrorist tactics in the late 80s, and Pol Pot and chief cadres were treated as VIPs in Thailand, well into the 90s. So, your "other like minded individuals" could even be extended to the UN, which allowed the Khmer Rouge to represent Cambodia in New York for years after they were kicked out by the Vietnamese forces. 

Somehow, I think you are allowing your selective reading of history and tendency to believe anti-leftist propaganda hook, line and sinker to get in the way of any rational thinking over Chomsky's views.

I don't buy the Khmer Rouge/ Pol Pot propaganda. Its a one sided non stop drivel and you never get to hear from the accused. I have some seen how the American mainstream propaganda news machine works. They create stories and they grow legs! Remember Saddam and WMD's?  

[Emster23]

Hey fellas, can we get back to subject and forget about Noam? We should be talking about Lawrence Krauss, his brilliant work, books, lectures etc.... "A universe from nothing" or "physics of star trek"..... funnier than Noam.

Oh yeah, support the students. Any time love and worship is demanded, there will be some who refuse, including me

[chickenslegs]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

University rector Bundhit Eua-Arporn later explained that a special area had been designated for students not wanting to sit on the ground to pay respect during the ceremony, but Netiwit and the other seven did not stay in the area as they’d promised to do. 

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Ahh, I didn't see that little nugget of information in earlier reports. 

 

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Suggests an agreement was in place and the students chose to ignore it. 

 

If it's true, then this whole incident takes on a different hue for me. 

 

If. 

 

Mind, the statutes/rules they were punished for infracting are still ridiculous. 

Seems a bit disingenuous of the rector to say "a special area had been designated for students not wanting to sit on the ground to pay respect"

Wasn't the purpose of the demonstration to object to students being expected to prostrate themselves before the statues of former kings?

If I recall correctly, Netiwit pointed out the irony of asking students to prostrate before the statue of the very king (Rama V) who banned the practice.

[Bluespunk]

52 minutes ago, chickenslegs said:

 

Seems a bit disingenuous of the rector to say "a special area had been designated for students not wanting to sit on the ground to pay respect"

Wasn't the purpose of the demonstration to object to students being expected to prostrate themselves before the statues of former kings?

If I recall correctly, Netiwit pointed out the irony of asking students to prostrate before the statue of the very king (Rama V) who banned the practice.

Not defending the practice, just pointing out the hypocrisy of agreeing to an arrangement and then breaking it. 

 

Doesn't justify the ridiculous statutes or the university's actions.

 

However, I don't have any respect for or trust in someone who cannot keep their word. 

 

If there was any such agreement, that is. 

[Morakot]

4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I still don't understand the student's real reasons for dissent.

 

Background

In 1902, King Chulalongkorn founded the Royal Pages School. This later became Chulalongkorn University. For many, years students and staff have been commemorating the "founding event" in an elaborate ceremony, where participants prostrate themselves on the floor in front of a statue of this King.

 

King Chulalongkorn, known an the Rama V, attempted to reformed Siam and dispensed with many "feudal" customs including prostrating. He proclaimed that his subject should bow their heads in front of him.

 

Analysis

Students appear to have taken issue with the revisionist practice by the university administration. Administrators and lecturers ---in line with wider Thai society--- may not see the apparent contradiction in the current practice of prostrating to a Rama V statue. For them, these eight students' actions is an affront to their devotional belief.

 

Discussion

Chomsky and Co. highlight the lack of freedom of expression that they see as essential to academia. They are merely critical of the fact that dissenting voices are suppressed.

 

Chomsky and Co. appear not to take any side in the supposed historiographic argument. In fact they fail to highlight that this conflict is about the interpretation of history that shapes current practices. They further fail to highlight that this university's practice of giving "behaviours scores" could be construed as a form extrajudicial  punishment for those whose ideologies are dissenting.

 

Conclusions

The incident not only places academia in Thailand in a bad light, but also raises the question how tolerant Thai society currently is. Chomsky and Co.'s intervention might be honourable in terms of broadly standing up for freedom of expression, but falls short of mentioning substantive issues.

 

 

[pegman]

8 hours ago, phkauf said:

Chomsky was a supporter / apologist of Pol Pot and the murderous Khmer Rouge regime. He let his anti-Vietnam War mindset blind him to the atrocities happening in Cambodia. And it wasn't until the 1990's that he finally admitted he was wrong. 

While I fully support Netwit against the tools running Chula, Chomsky can and should burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. It was him and the other like minded individuals at the time that refused ton see the Khmer Rouge for what it was that led to the slaughter of millions and destruction of a great nation.

Lies. This is what Chomsky actually wrote in The Nation. Far from supporting the K.R. his position was to not believe everything the CIA were feeding the world.

 "We do not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst these sharply conflicting assessments; rather, we again want to emphasize some crucial points. What filters through to the American public is a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered."[15]

[pegman]

3 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

 

 

If there was any such agreement, that is. 

BINGO!

[pegman]

5 hours ago, Machiavelli said:

I don't buy the Khmer Rouge/ Pol Pot propaganda. Its a one sided non stop drivel and you never get to hear from the accused. I have some seen how the American mainstream propaganda news machine works. They create stories and they grow legs! Remember Saddam and WMD's?  

How many would not have died had the Yanks stayed the hell out of SE Asia? Now they have moved on to the ME with millions more suffering from their imperialism.

[pegman]

4 hours ago, Emster23 said:

Hey fellas, can we get back to subject and forget about Noam? We should be talking about Lawrence Krauss, his brilliant work, books, lectures etc.... "A universe from nothing" or "physics of star trek"..... funnier than Noam.

Oh yeah, support the students. Any time love and worship is demanded, there will be some who refuse, including me

Cheers, count me in too.

[pegman]

8 hours ago, phkauf said:

Chomsky was a supporter / apologist of Pol Pot and the murderous Khmer Rouge regime. He let his anti-Vietnam War mindset blind him to the atrocities happening in Cambodia. And it wasn't until the 1990's that he finally admitted he was wrong. 

While I fully support Netwit against the tools running Chula, Chomsky can and should burn in hell as far as I'm concerned. It was him and the other like minded individuals at the time that refused ton see the Khmer Rouge for what it was that led to the slaughter of millions and destruction of a great nation.

The American gov was allies with Pol Pot. What you write is a complete distortion of history.

"

Thai military commanders say their close, indeed friendly, ties to the Khmer Rouge had at least the tacit approval of the United States and other outside nations that sought the ouster of the Cambodian Government installed by Vietnam. Military Supplies

In the 1980's, the United States used the Thai Army to funnel military assistance to two non-Communist rebel groups that were allied with the Khmer Rouge. Washington also helped support more than 350,000 Cambodian refugees, some of them Khmer Rouge soldiers and their families, who crowded into Thai refugee camps."

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/19/world/pol-pot-thai-connection-special-report-big-threat-cambodia-thais-still-aid-khmer.html?pagewanted=all

[billzant]

http://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm

[The manic]

11 hours ago, car720 said:

Chomsky is a brilliant man.  I recently used a lot of his work in a Masters thesis on sociolinguistics.

He's a Marxist stooge

 

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, billzant said:

http://www.mekong.net/cambodia/chomsky.htm

Noam Chomsky is a brilliant idiot. Reading this article has confirmed everything that I have known about the man. He is an unapologetic leftist and a supporter of the failed experiment that was communism in Russia (and other countries). Failure to learn from history does not make one "brilliant" it means that you are either ignorant or stupid (maybe both). 

[pegman]

1 hour ago, The manic said:

He's a Marxist stooge

 

Nonsense!