Call To Re-name Country Siam

[george]

Call to re-name country Siam

BANGKOK: -- A proposal that the Kingdom's name be changed back to Siam yesterday won support from the chairman of the National Human Rights Commission.

Prof Saneh Chamarik said that with problems threatening Thai-land's unity, including renewed violence in the deep South, it was time to reconsider the issue.

He said he supported the proposal by political activist Surachai Dantrakul that Siam once again be used as the country's name as it reflected the country's diversity better than the name Thailand.

Speaking at a panel discussion on "Stateless People" at Thammasat University, Saneh said that for him the name Thailand was a symbol of centralised power.

Siam was the country's official name until May 1949. The name Thailand was first used under an ultra-patriotic government in 1939. The old name was re-adopted during World War II, but it was changed back to Thailand after Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram returned to power.

Saneh also called for systematic action to solve the problem of stateless people. The law on nationality should be amended to "better focus on people's security rather than the country's security", he said.

--The Nation 2004-06-28

[Richard W]

Isn't Siam really just Central Thailand?

[Phil Conners]

Is this what those professors are paid all that money for? Thinking up idiotic proposals like that? What on earth is a name going to change?Burma/Myanmar parallels?

[Pepe']

I allways liked Siam better. It sounds very exotic. I don't believe it will change anything though?

[RedHong]

S. Sivarak rejects (or used to anyway) the use of the name Thailand on the grounds that it excludes those citizens who are not ethnic Thais, specifically many in the South. He feels that the name Siam is inclusive of all citizens whatever their ethnic background. I'll try and find some of his work on the subject and post a reference.

Again I can't remember the specifics offhand, but I think the change in name to Thailand was initially very brief and wasactually reversed (back to Siam) before being reinstated. I believe the Thai parliament has debated this issue several times since.

[snoophound]

Call to re-name country Siam

BANGKOK: -- A proposal that the Kingdom's name be changed back to Siam yesterday won support from the chairman of the National Human Rights Commission.

Prof Saneh Chamarik said that with problems threatening Thai-land's unity, including renewed violence in the deep South, it was time to reconsider the issue.

He said he supported the proposal by political activist Surachai Dantrakul that Siam once again be used as the country's name as it reflected the country's diversity better than the name Thailand.

Speaking at a panel discussion on "Stateless People" at Thammasat University, Saneh said that for him the name Thailand was a symbol of centralised power.

Siam was the country's official name until May 1949. The name Thailand was first used under an ultra-patriotic government in 1939. The old name was re-adopted during World War II, but it was changed back to Thailand after Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsongkram returned to power.

Saneh also called for systematic action to solve the problem of stateless people. The law on nationality should be amended to "better focus on people's security rather than the country's security", he said.

--The Nation 2004-06-28

Perhaps they should cede the south back to Malaysia.

After all it was British interference that gave it to them.

[ovenman]

Prof Saneh Chamarik said that with problems threatening Thai-land's unity, including renewed violence in the deep South, it was time to reconsider the issue.

No doubt such a change in name will immediately solve all of the problems in the South.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

I allways liked Siam better. It sounds very exotic. I don't believe it will change anything though?

I am with you all the way here Pepe. But a name change is certainly not going to have the slightest impact on the difficulties in the south. Also, look at Myanmar, the vast majority in the world still refer to the country as Burma.

[chanchao]

> Also, look at Myanmar, the vast majority in the world still refer to

> the country as Burma.

Yes, because 'Burma' in this case is the more exotic, familiar sounding name. "Siam" as a name is already known by many people in the world.

Cheers,

Chanchao

[Tornado]

I would support the change back to Siam, as one poster wrote, it is more exotic and is also steeped in history.

I originally thought that after world war 2, the USA had something to do with the change? Thailand means "free land"?

I am pretty sure this has come up quite a lot in the last few years.

[john b good]

I allways liked Siam better.  It sounds very exotic.  I don't believe it will change anything though?

I am with you all the way here Pepe. But a name change is certainly not going to have the slightest impact on the difficulties in the south. Also, look at Myanmar, the vast majority in the world still refer to the country as Burma.

Re: Burma even the Thai government still calls it Burma and the capital as Rangoon.

Likewise many (not saying the majority) still refer to Saigon and not Ho Chi Min City.

And then most still refer to Bombay not Mumbai.

A change from Thailand to Siam won't make an iota of difference as whatever it is called it won't change the fact that all around the world it will still be seen as the most corrupt country in the world.

Along with a few other descriptions as well that is.

[penzman]

Coincidence, my wife and I decided on a company name last week and prefered SIAM over Thailand.

[Yohan]

To change the name of a country costs a lot of money... you have to print new passports and ID cards, rename government related organisations, paint the airplanes of Thai Airways to Siam Airlines, have to issue new bills and coins...and so on...and so on....

I think, this money should better be used for something more useful for the Thai (excuse me, sorry) for the Siamese people....Out of financial consideration alone, my vote is NO.

[plachon]

To change the name of a country costs a lot of money... you have to print new passports and ID cards, rename government related organisations, paint the airplanes of Thai Airways to Siam Airlines, have to issue new bills and coins...and so on...and so on....

I think, this money should better be used for something more useful for the Thai (excuse me, sorry) for the Siamese people....Out of financial consideration alone, my vote is NO.

You've just neatly identified the grounds on which a name change would be approved. Just think who would get all the contracts for such an expensive palaver.

[fatter than harry]

I'm quite sure this is a move by Hasbro / Parker Brothers to reinstate the name Siam in time for the release of their nostalsia edition of risk. If I could draw your attention to their sales blurb:

"For over 40 years the game of Risk has been the ultimate military strategy and global domination game.

Now this Nostalgia edition brings back the original in all its vintage glory – with real wooden armies, the classic map from the 1959 version, a vow to bring pressure on the Thai government to change the name of Thailand back to Siam, a Risk game history and rules with the original gameplay."

[dr_Pat_Pong]

There'll be a Thaksin Printers Pte Limited in formation as we chat. Owned by the maid and the driver, but luckily, having the Government contracts.

[Jeff Jarvis]

I like the name Siam.

It would be better to change the name of Bangkok to somthing different.

Bangkok has a worldwide reputation for smut.

With the new social order campaign and all attempts tro clean up the city it would be good to get the KOK out. Agreed?

[fatter than harry]

Agreed, however as we are seeking purification in the extreme, there should also be no Bang in Bang.

Therefore I recommend that Bangkok should now be called fullstop

[ovenman]

With the new social order campaign and all attempts tro clean up the city it would be good to get the KOK out.  Agreed?

Hmmm... If we get the KOK out should we keep the BANG in?

[edd]

YES, YES, lets change Bangkoks name back to its old name.

Now all together

KRUNGTAPE-MAHAR-NACORN-AMORN-RATANA-GO,SIN-MAHIN-TA,LAR-MA,HA-DIT,LUK-NUP-PUP-TA,RAT-RACHTHANI-BU,RERUM-OUDUMNA,WE WAY-MAHAR-AS,TAN-A,MON-WIT,MAN-NA,SATAN-SA,TIT.

Sorry for the spelling.

Dont forget when you arrive at the airport and the tax-e-me-ter driver askes you "where you go mister" you can tell him with pride

Edd.

[mango head]

Perhaps THE BARD said it best, " Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet? "

[Flummoxed]

hhhhhh

[kenk3z]

It would be rather unfortunate though, if your wife has twins in Siam.

You'd have to explain that your new children are Siamese Twins.

Sorry.

kenk3z

[Richard W]

YES, YES, lets change Bangkoks name back to its old name.

Now all together

KRUNGTAPE-MAHAR-NACORN-AMORN-RATANA-GO,SIN-MAHIN-TA,LAR-MA,HA-DIT,LUK-NUP-PUP-TA,RAT-RACHTHANI-BU,RERUM-OUDUMNA,WE WAY-MAHAR-AS,TAN-A,MON-WIT,MAN-NA,SATAN-SA,TIT.

Or just promote the new name - Krungthep! I think the older name's something like Bang Makok, which is no improvement on Bangkok.

[Richard W]

Perhaps they should cede the south back to Malaysia.

After all it was British interference that gave it to them.

I thought it was British interference that took Malaya off Siam!

[The Gentleman Scamp]

I like the name Siam.

It would be better to change the name of Bangkok to somthing different.

Bangkok has a worldwide reputation for smut.

With the new social order campaign and all attempts tro clean up the city it would be good to get the KOK out. Agreed?

I like the name Bangkok as it is - it's only associated with smut to those crashing bores back home who have never travelled further than their local Sainsbury's.

I've always associated Bangkok with excitement and something different.

I couldn't give a rat's arse if they change Thailand to Siam.

[Richard W]

Re: Burma even the Thai government still calls it Burma and the capital as Rangoon.

The choice between Burma and Myanmar is probably hard to express in Thai, and the difference between Rangoon and Yangon is impossible to express in Burmese! See Myanmar, bama, oh heck, simply Burma.

[stroll]

How does Bangc.u.n.t sound?

[p1p]

Siam, the old name, would be a good choice to rename the country. Do not know if the TRT powers- that-be would like it though.

The official name of Bangkok is Krungthep and the Thai authorities have spent several years requesting international mapping authorities to use this name.

[DogNo1]

In consideration of the countless numbers cats that have been stateless for quite a while, I think the country's name should revert to Siam so that once more they will have a place to call home. Of course, according to the cats: "we are Siamese if you please; we are Siamese if you don't please!"