Talk About Double Standards

[Steve2UK]

[OPINION]

CHANG NOI

Talk about double standards

By Chang Noi

Published on February 8, 2010

THE TERM "double standards" sounds innocent enough. But in a society where inequalities are so steep and stark, a simple call for equitable enforcement of the law can become political dynamite.

The phrase was introduced into Thailand's modern political history in 2001. Then it was used in English, and it attracted immediate attention in part because the use of a non-Thai phrase was unusual and eye-catching.

The Thai version, song matrathan, started to become popular in 2008. Supporters of Thaksin used the phrase to highlight what they saw as glaring bias in the judicial system. According to them, Thaksin was being persecuted by legal process, while the yellow shirts seemed to be able to break any number of laws with total impunity. After the judicial overthrow of the Samak and Somchai governments in late 2008, the phrase became central to the publicity of the red-shirt movement. It no longer refers to the rather narrow area of judicial bias, but focuses criticism against the wider and deeper inequality in society. Recently at Khao Yao Thiang and at the Soi Dao Golf Club, speakers asked the crowd why certain kinds of people seem to get away with almost anything. The phrase has spun out of control.

In Thailand, there is a close connection between power and illegality, between social status and defiance of the law. Often, laws seem to exist precisely to allow certain people the very special privilege of being able to flout them. If you have a big enough car, you need not worry too much about traffic regulations. If you have the right background and position, you can carry as much excess luggage as you like. With good political connections, even if you are accused of corruption in an overseas country, nobody investigates, lays charges or takes steps to prevent you doing a bunk.

In any society, real power is having the ability to write these sorts of privileges into the law and constitution. In old Siam, the aristocracy once enjoyed many such immunities and privileges, but over the past century almost all of them have been swept away. Then, through a half-century of political dominance, the military high command established a new structure of legalised inequalities. Soldiers are protected from the normal operation of the judicial system. When generals openly flout the law, we are told they are immune to anything more serious than a reprimand. In case after case when massive land encroachment has come to light, the issue has faded once it emerged that senior officials were involved.

When the foundations of a society shift in a big way, these arrangements need to be adjusted to match the new social realities. Over the last half-century in Thailand, a new corporate elite and much expanded upper middle class have become wealthier and more powerful. Although every now and then these new forces have challenged the privileges and immunities of the old powers, generally they have taken the smoother route of buying their way into the system.

The key institution for this process has been Parliament or the political system as a whole. This has been the arena where new money meets with old power, and where the two parties sit down and make a deal. The Thai political system has been a failure in many ways, but in this respect it has functioned brilliantly. The systems of political recruitment have been fine-tuned to ensure that money is practically the sole qualifying factor. Although sometimes analysts try to detect political conflicts between "new money" and "old money", in reality money has no age. In current Thai politics, money is money. Many political leaders are ready to admit that money is now the "blood" that keeps Thai politics alive and kicking. The source of the money is of no interest, only the amount. Under Thaksin, several Cabinet posts were reserved for "party financiers", people who often appeared from out of nowhere with no track record. The system only came slightly unstuck when a particularly flagrant share ramper was given a Cabinet post. Recent vacancies in the Cabinet have incited fierce competition. Corporate interests that are prepared to pay their political dues have very rapidly acquired influence in the background.

But the political system as it currently operates only helps to adjust the realities of wealth and power within a very narrow range. The big story of the past generation has been the overall tripling of incomes, the accompanying rise in ambition and aspiration among the masses of the population, and growing calls for a more inclusive equity. It began with NGOs, the path-breaking campaigns of the Assembly of the Poor, and a demand for rights that applied equally to everyone. It changed Thaksin from being a businessman to a populist.

The growing political significance of the judiciary over the last few years has given this trend a new twist. While the judicial system may not in fact perform in the service of equity, the justification for the importance of the judiciary is that there really is a rule of law that applies to all. Leading judges repeat this idea in defending themselves against bias. The claim was written into the landmark judgement against Pojaman.

The idea of equity under the law is now very prominent in public debate, yet the political structure still in place is designed precisely to preserve privileges by the evasion or manipulation of the law. This creates a situation so fragile that new challenges can come from anywhere. The red shirts decide to pinpoint Khao Yai Thiang. The Thai Airways union raises the excess baggage scandal. Community NGOs trip up Map Ta Phut. Nothing seems sacred any more. Illustrious institutions. The power of a big surname and an exalted position. The importance of economic growth over the health and well-being of ordinary people.

"Double standards" is a rather clumsy expression. It doesn't have the poetic ring of "liberty, equality, fraternity" or "workers of the world unite." But it is the catchphrase of the moment.

-- The Nation February 8, 2010

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/02/08...on_30122023.php

[hhgz]

What is your point exactly? My opinion - you're trying to stir up negative feelings, and I'm not sure why.

[TheLaughingMan]

What is your point exactly? My opinion - you're trying to stir up negative feelings, and I'm not sure why.

Anyone who points out problems anywhere is "just trying to stir up negative feelings?" Did you really just say that? I'd think you were actually a Thai elite protecting his own interests if I wasn't already convinced your just a mentally deficient falang. This is a newspaper article, not the words of the op. Guess you would support completel cencorship of news agencies to keep them from "stirring up negative feelings" so the poor average citizen doesnt stop accepting their miserable lot in life.

[barrybankruad]

Goodness! The Nation actually published something like the truth at last.

[givenall]

What is your point exactly? My opinion - you're trying to stir up negative feelings, and I'm not sure why.

May be OP thinks we were born yesterday

[Steve2UK]

What is your point exactly? My opinion - you're trying to stir up negative feelings, and I'm not sure why.

Anyone who points out problems anywhere is "just trying to stir up negative feelings?" Did you really just say that? I'd think you were actually a Thai elite protecting his own interests if I wasn't already convinced your just a mentally deficient falang. This is a newspaper article, not the words of the op. Guess you would support completel cencorship of news agencies to keep them from "stirring up negative feelings" so the poor average citizen doesnt stop accepting their miserable lot in life.

I wouldn't be quite so harsh on hhgz - who is perhaps not aware that posting a newspaper article in the General section is the standard route by which an ordinary TVF member can submit it as an OP for News Clippings (by reporting it with a request to Admin to transfer it) - because only Admin are authorised to post them as OP's there. They may or may not transfer it - up to their discretion (as I write this, the OP is still in the General section).

That said, hhgz's comment does seem a little strange - almost as if we have slid into George Orwell's "1984"* where only positive news is posted unless it's part of the daily "Two Minutes Hate" against Emmanuel Goldstein**.

Speaking of Orwell, Chang Noi's article also brings to mind one of the slogans made famous by Orwell's "Animal Farm"***: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

I thoroughly recommend both books.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Goldstein

*** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm

[rixalex]

Supporters of Thaksin used the phrase to highlight what they saw as glaring bias in the judicial system.

I wonder if they are refering to Thaksin's assets concealment case?

[Pakboong]

I guess the takeover becomes complete once the only ethnic Thais left on the ballot are relegated to the lesser positions due to lack of qualification. Of course the lack of qualification is due to cronyism. And the cronyism is from the new money which has flowed into politics since the sweep job on the old Siam aristocracy.

Author comments

"In old Siam, the aristocracy once enjoyed many such immunities and privileges, but over the past century almost all of them have been swept away."

"in any society, real power is having the ability to write these sorts of privileges into the law and constitution."

I guess that to make sure a Mexican is elected simply make sure there are only Mexicans on the ballot. This may take a few generations if you are not in Mexico but it seems to have worked here.

I guess if ashes could roll over, the ashes of Plaek Pibulsonggram are doing just that.

For those of you that don't know of Plaek, he was the last Ethnic Thai Prime Minister to take a public stand against foreigners taking over Thailand. He specifically targeted the Chinese minority and likened them to the Jews in Germany prior to WW2. On 2 different occasions, he shut down Chinese schools and social organizations in Thailand. He attempted to return control of markets to the ethnic Thais. He died in exile.

[Loz]

Double standards enter the political lexicon in 2001???? When did Dual pricing start?

Seems like we are dealing with some slow learners here, chaps.

[Loz]

Pakboong,

You are one of the most well read posters. I have met on here. Makes me sorry I cheapened this thread with a frivolous jibe.

Keep up the good posts.

[JusMe]

For those of you that don't know of Plaek, he was the last Ethnic Thai Prime Minister to take a public stand against foreigners taking over Thailand. He specifically targeted the Chinese minority and likened them to the Jews in Germany prior to WW2. On 2 different occasions, he shut down Chinese schools and social organizations in Thailand. He attempted to return control of markets to the ethnic Thais. He died in exile.

Yes, he did that prior to WWII. How much was really ethnic dislike and how much was political pandering we can't be sure.

However, after the war, he did some work for the Chinese community. (Sorry, can't remember the details right now.)

Fascinating man, Phibunsongkhram. So often managed to work both ends against the middle to garner support for whichever way he leaned.

[Pakboong]

For those of you that don't know of Plaek, he was the last Ethnic Thai Prime Minister to take a public stand against foreigners taking over Thailand. He specifically targeted the Chinese minority and likened them to the Jews in Germany prior to WW2. On 2 different occasions, he shut down Chinese schools and social organizations in Thailand. He attempted to return control of markets to the ethnic Thais. He died in exile.

Yes, he did that prior to WWII. How much was really ethnic dislike and how much was political pandering we can't be sure.

However, after the war, he did some work for the Chinese community. (Sorry, can't remember the details right now.)

Fascinating man, Phibunsongkhram. So often managed to work both ends against the middle to garner support for whichever way he leaned.

His connection to the Chinese was more to those still in China than the Thai/Chinese living in Thailand. He even communicated with those who later became communists. The burr under his saddle was the largely capitalist Chinese minority in Thailand who sought control of Thai markets and Thai society.

[lungbing]

He also simplified the spelling of many Thai words and made more letters of the alphabet redundant. When he fell from power they reverted to the original, more complicated, spellings.

[MiG16]

just to elaborate on the comment about news being moved to the Thailand News clipping section

yes, members can post news article starting in General / or whichever other relevant sub-forum. however if you think it is current news that need to be moved to the News section, you can try to alert the existence to a MOD/ADMIN by hitting the report button on your post.

however, please make sure that it is 'news', current and usually the focus is still on Thailand news (with ofcourse some exceptions of major international incidents)

on that note, since this particular article is more an opinion piece rather than a news item , Im leaving it here

cheers

[jdinasia]

What is your point exactly? My opinion - you're trying to stir up negative feelings, and I'm not sure why.

Anyone who points out problems anywhere is "just trying to stir up negative feelings?" Did you really just say that? I'd think you were actually a Thai elite protecting his own interests if I wasn't already convinced your just a mentally deficient falang. This is a newspaper article, not the words of the op. Guess you would support completel cencorship of news agencies to keep them from "stirring up negative feelings" so the poor average citizen doesnt stop accepting their miserable lot in life.

Did you miss the point that Thaksin was included amongst 'the elite' or that it isn't about 'old money and new money' just money?

[TheLaughingMan]

What is your point exactly? My opinion - you're trying to stir up negative feelings, and I'm not sure why.

Anyone who points out problems anywhere is "just trying to stir up negative feelings?" Did you really just say that? I'd think you were actually a Thai elite protecting his own interests if I wasn't already convinced your just a mentally deficient falang. This is a newspaper article, not the words of the op. Guess you would support completel cencorship of news agencies to keep them from "stirring up negative feelings" so the poor average citizen doesnt stop accepting their miserable lot in life.

Did you miss the point that Thaksin was included amongst 'the elite' or that it isn't about 'old money and new money' just money?

Im too thick to understand why you quoted me to say that. Just to clarify I was criticising his opinion that information should be suppressed as it might "stir up trouble" which is one of the most dangerous lines of thought imaginable. Im not quite sure how I misrepresented myself to demonstrate an opinion on Thaksin either way.

[jdinasia]

TLM ... I think it was your injudicious use of the "Thai elite" phrase followed by the misspelling of farang