A quote (written today) from a thread on this forum: "Thailand may never have actually been colonized, but the country is rife with colonial influences."

Thoughts.

From the point of view of nationalistic pride, I think the upper socio-economic circles of Thai society are well past any "cringe mentality" wrt the earlier-developed western countries.

From the point of view of pure economic development in the context of global competitiveness, I think they would have been much better off if they had been colonized, at least by the Brits.

I think it's quite possible that for example Burma will leapfrog Thailand's current level of development if they are successful in rejoining the international community.

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

Tell them your a yank you will get another version.

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

Tell them your a yank you will get another version.

That would be fibbing.

It's not a lie when I say that I am Canadian or English. I don't make a point of bringing up subject, it just tends to come up at some point after they have confirmed that I am a loog-krueng and we get to talking about the differences between Thailand and farangland. The vast majority of them have no idea about Canada's associations with the UK.

A quote (written today) from a thread on this forum: "Thailand may never have actually been colonized, but the country is rife with colonial influences."

Those influences, whatever they are, certainly haven't extended as far as foreign language skills.

Yes, colonized by Chinese. Better than nothing; otherwise, Thais would still be wandering around in the jungles staring at the moon.

Yes, colonized by Chinese.

Really?!

Yes, colonized by Chinese.

Really?!

Only if you're talking about hundreds of years ago and over a long period of time, long before the rise of the modern idea of "nationhood" in this part of the world.

More like "infiltrated and intermarried" than colonized.

Yes, colonized by Chinese.

Really?!

Only if you're talking about hundreds of years ago and over a long period of time, long before the rise of the modern idea of "nationhood" in this part of the world.

More like "infiltrated and intermarried" than colonized.

Yes, I agree.

I still don't really know what the guys from the other thread were talking about when they said Thailand is "rife with colonial influences".

Colonized influence I dont think so.. Thats..Would you like a taxi sir? here its TAXI and a refusal its (N----he)

Rama VI went to the Royal Military College at Sandhurst whence he was commissioned into the Durham Light Infantry. He then went to Oxford University.

Thats what I meant. I know there is alot of English input in the way the government and monarchy are structured.

I think he was the Crown Prince when he was with DLI, I will spare TV members by not mentioning the nick name of that particular Regiment.

Thailand's past and present monarchy have been responsible for actively introducing Western ideas. These things like the way the government is structured may seem like colonial influences but no-one visiting Thailand is in any doubt that it has never been colonized.

Lanna shows a bit of Burmese colonial influence..... other than that?

I'd say yes in certain social levels it is rife - like the lawn bowls at the Royal Bangkok Sports Club.

IN other levels, it's often an American influence - McDonalds/7/11 etc.

Thailand's past and present monarchy have been responsible for actively introducing Western ideas. These things like the way the government is structured may seem like colonial influences but no-one visiting Thailand is in any doubt that it has never been colonized.

True. Good observations.

I think that the guy/s on the other thread who said Thailand is "rife with colonial influences" either have things wrong of have perhaps misconstrued the meaning of the term "colonial influence".

Thailand has certainly acquired "stuff" from elsewhere. Such "stuff" might include guavas or the uniqueness of Yaowarat or a fondness for Pizza Hut.

But these are not colonial influences.

IN other levels, it's often an American influence - McDonalds/7/11 etc.

7/11 was bought out by a Japanese company in 1991.

Thailand's past and present monarchy have been responsible for actively introducing Western ideas. These things like the way the government is structured may seem like colonial influences but no-one visiting Thailand is in any doubt that it has never been colonized.

But I think that's exactly the point - Thailand was colonized by European ideas by way of their elite without the European powers having to actually bother taking over.

The incredibly damaging Victorian (Christian based) views on sexual morality is a perfect example, many remnants of which remain in the upper socio-economic and fundamentalist religious circles at least as a means to control and punish young women.

If they'd just kept their much healthier traditional ideas the society would be much less schizoid about the topic.

He seems to have come from the same school as Attaturk the founder of Modern Turkey. Attaturk banned hats while Phibun demanded them. Seriously I think there are many similarities between their views of what they wanted their country to be.

Yes both engaged in the deliberate destruction of their peoples' cultural heritage in favor of "superior" foreign ideas in order to drive forward their political-economically motivated agenda of modern nation building.

Bravo Kaewmala!

And shame on you americanexpatchiangmai whoever/wherever you are.

Bravo Kaewmala!

And shame on you americanexpatchiangmai whoever/wherever you are.

What he said, me too. Cheers

Bravo Kaewmala!

And shame on you americanexpatchiangmai whoever/wherever you are.

What he said, me too. Cheers

Hi, and thanks to chiangmaikelly for putting the link which brought the bloggery truth to my attention.

The discovery also led me to a plagiarism checker site: http://www.copyscape.com/ Quite a useful free service.

Sorry for my intrusion. I'll now leave you to your interesting discussion.

Have a great Sunday.

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

Generally, territories in South East Asia colonised by the British have developed much better post colonial with the exception of Mynmar (Burma)

While Singapore is at the forefront, neighbouring Malaysia (also ex-Brit colony) still lag far behind socially due to their Bumis (Malay) protectionism or patriotism policies.

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

Generally, territories in South East Asia colonised by the British have developed much better post colonial with the exception of Mynmar (Burma)

While Singapore is at the forefront, neighbouring Malaysia (also ex-Brit colony) still lag far behind socially due to their Bumis (Malay) protectionism or patriotism policies.

Ya, Brunei is a poster boy for modern industry, education and trade.

Nope, but I wish it was...

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

Generally, territories in South East Asia colonised by the British have developed much better post colonial with the exception of Mynmar (Burma)

While Singapore is at the forefront, neighbouring Malaysia (also ex-Brit colony) still lag far behind socially due to their Bumis (Malay) protectionism or patriotism policies.

Ya, Brunei is a poster boy for modern industry, education and trade.

In broad strokes, the best poster boys for British colonialism seem to be countries with a high content of cold-climate cultures.

Thailand's past and present monarchy have been responsible for actively introducing Western ideas. These things like the way the government is structured may seem like colonial influences but no-one visiting Thailand is in any doubt that it has never been colonized.

True. Good observations.

I think that the guy/s on the other thread who said Thailand is "rife with colonial influences" either have things wrong of have perhaps misconstrued the meaning of the term "colonial influence".

Thailand has certainly acquired "stuff" from elsewhere. Such "stuff" might include guavas or the uniqueness of Yaowarat or a fondness for Pizza Hut.

But these are not colonial influences.

Agree, those are foreign influences, not colonial.

The topic of hypothetical colonisation seems to be a particular favourite with Bangkok taxi drivers. The vast majority of them say they wish Thailand had been colonised by Britain, "then we'd be like Singapore!".

It's not just because I'm a loog-krueng Angrit either. Sometimes I say I'm half Canadian.

Generally, territories in South East Asia colonised by the British have developed much better post colonial with the exception of Mynmar (Burma)

While Singapore is at the forefront, neighbouring Malaysia (also ex-Brit colony) still lag far behind socially due to their Bumis (Malay) protectionism or patriotism policies.

Define 'lag far behind socially', please as it doesn't seem to make sense . . . and what is the patriotism policy?

The positive discrimination towards some Malays (they still have to be in the right party) in the most part certainly stops an outright ownership of the economy by the Chinese and Indians . . . one would have thought anything anti-Chinese would be welcomed by many TV posters, given their anti-Chinese rants.

Colonial influence?

Try Burma shaping Thailand on ever so many levels - colonialisation isn't only a western prerogative

Try Burma shaping Thailand on ever so many levels - colonialisation isn't only a western prerogative

Sure, as if China's "colonized" Tibet.

I think the word you're looking for is "conquered".

Try Burma shaping Thailand on ever so many levels - colonialisation isn't only a western prerogative

Sure, as if China's "colonized" Tibet.

I think the word you're looking for is "conquered".

What is the difference?