A crude response to the horrors in Paris

[BlindMagician]

I think the answer lies somewhere in the multiple studies into extreme conservatism that all seem to reach the same conclusions:

“There’s no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb…Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice.”

No one who's actually intelligent pays any attention at all to such obviously politically-biased 'studies', except to scoff at them.

You really think Montesquieu (if you've even heard of him, which I doubt) could be considered 'low-intelligence'? Or Edmund Burke? Or Robert Taft, Sr. or Jr.? Or Paul Johnson? Or Pat Buchanan?

People who disagree with you aren't automatically stupid. It's incredibly arrogant of you to claim otherwise.

People who are truly intelligent, understand actual history, and are self-aware know their own limitations. This description doesn't fit the modern Left; they don't understand actual history and they aren't self-aware.

Note that I did not say that they're stupid.

As a paleo-conservative with a measured IQ three standard deviations above the norm, my very existence refutes those studies. And when I was younger, I was indeed a Leftist myself, until I'd traveled a bit and learned how the world really works. I guess you might say that I evolved.

I just want to point out that a high measured IQ does not guarantee sensible political views nor a well balanced character. I am sure TVF readers can think of examples!

I make only this simple single point.

I make no comment on your political views nor your character.

[Thaidream]

The comments by the General were in line with diplomatic protocol. His other comments are nothing new but a reiteration of his point of view. However, other representatives within the government are completely out of line by commenting on affect of tourism and whether there is too much freedom in France. The General needs to reign in his staff and they need some attitude adjustment.

Many people continue to call for elections but it is not as easy as you may think. Without a working constitution and the organic laws that are needed an election is not possible. Then you have the problem of how the election is to take place. Are some politicians banned or is it open to everyone. The coup happened for a reason. You can debate that reason but the facts are that past elections and governments were failures. The coup stabilized Thailand and stopped massive disruptions and violence. You cannot simply go back to the prior status quo. It will not work and the military is in charge. The past political organizations and parties produced no new leadership and simply recycled poor leaders. Thailand really needs new, young leadership not burdened by money politics. If the General can pull that off- the coup will have been worth the price.

[BlindMagician]

What people don`t often realise is that Thailand is a world apart from Europe and European affairs.

That must be the reasofn WW2 didn't affect Thailand at all.

Modern world makes us all interconnected. You think this hasn't given some radical down south ideas?

Have a read:

https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=11531

Just for starters, and not proposed as 100% proof of anything, in terms of the detail relationships it summarises.

[jvs]

Adding to the torment of the prime minister's ill-worded message "to Paris", Panitan Wattanyagorn - a security adviser to Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan - blamed France's woes on "too much freedom". Excess liberty opens the doors to terrorists, Panitan said, so public freedoms are best curtailed by the authorities.

Too much freedom,i just think there may a bit of truth in there,too much freedom is usually taken by people who are taking advantage of it in the wrong way.Democracy gives way to people who can take advantage of the system,just look at what is happening in Europe this very moment.

The majority is quite often the silent mass who is slowly but surely taking advantage off.

[lostmebike]

'Thai leaders and Thai citizens need to broaden their view.'

Impossible! And we all know why.

[Solomon]

I think the answer lies somewhere in the multiple studies into extreme conservatism that all seem to reach the same conclusions:

“There’s no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb…Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice.”

No one who's actually intelligent pays any attention at all to such obviously politically-biased 'studies', except to scoff at them.

You really think Montesquieu (if you've even heard of him, which I doubt) could be considered 'low-intelligence'? Or Edmund Burke? Or Robert Taft, Sr. or Jr.? Or Paul Johnson? Or Pat Buchanan?

People who disagree with you aren't automatically stupid. It's incredibly arrogant of you to claim otherwise.

People who are truly intelligent, understand actual history, and are self-aware know their own limitations. This description doesn't fit the modern Left; they don't understand actual history and they aren't self-aware.

Note that I did not say that they're stupid.

As a paleo-conservative with a measured IQ three standard deviations above the norm, my very existence refutes those studies. And when I was younger, I was indeed a Leftist myself, until I'd traveled a bit and learned how the world really works. I guess you might say that I evolved.

I believe you have fallen into a common logical trap.

The point was that low intelligence people tend to gravitate toward extreme conservatism; not that all conservative thinkers are low intelligence.

By the way, your "very existence" doesn't refute studies of conservative tendencies.

Surely someone at "three standard deviations" can understand statistical variation.

Well played

[Calach]

Prayuth is so prone to blunder, he would have been a great character in a burlesque cartoon. Or in a Sacha Baron Cohen movie.

Edited November 17, 2015 by Calach

[wabothai]

what would we all do without The Nation?

[ravip]

Thais only know their history, and even then, only about 10% of it. They need to learn to shut up and learn from others. They are not good at introspection.

Welcome to Asia.

From where do the likes of you originate from, may I ask Sir?

[EyesWideOpen]

The writer has taken a bold and - in my view - an unprecedented step in condemning everything the junta stands for.

And especially so given Prayuth's continued calls to suppress the media, his ongoing failure to 'reform' and the ever present spectre of corruption.

People need to take a long hard look at what's happening in Thailand. Since the coup, lip service has been made to any substantive change, while the wealthy and influential continue to consolidate and grow their power.

An excellent article.

It was indeed an excellent article. Sad to think that in all likelihood the writer will be arrested

and taken away to a military base somewhere for " retraining"...... Thailand is headed down

a terrible path, where the only means for Prayut to hold onto power is to increasingly crack

down on any form of criticism.. Dark days ahead. And on a side note, Thai officials making

fools of themselves on the world stage is nothing new.... :-)

[dageurreotype]

The polls are carried out by private academic institutions, and sampling is anonymous.

Not saying they're 100% reliable, same anywhere in the world. But more reliable, I suspect, than one man's intuition.

Really? And if 'the polls' showed the junta to be hugely unpopular by the majority of the people (I don't know and neither does anyone else), you seriously believe such a result would be published? Any poll under the current circumstances should be taken with a big bag of salt

[gandalf12]

THe way things are going ti is going to be very expensive to come to Thailand. How much do you think it will cost to visit Thailand previously known as the planet Zarg located in the outer reaches of the Milky Way?

Edited November 17, 2015 by gandalf12

[Yann55]

A pretty remarkable article, and the fact that it appears in a major (albeit in English) Thai newspaper indicates that there still are people in this country who have their head on their shoulders rather than up their a... and who think with their own brain rather than hitch a ride on universal, lame and violent clichés.

Serial Thai bashers, war mongerers and hopeless racists who abound on this Forum would be well-advised to learn from this. Which of course they won't.

[Crash999]

In an article criticizing the "ill-worded message to Paris" it might be helpful to include the actual words so we can see how bad it actually is. The "too much freedom" quote appears to come from someone else.

[thelonius]

In an article criticizing the "ill-worded message to Paris" it might be helpful to include the actual words so we can see how bad it actually is. The "too much freedom" quote appears to come from someone else.

The "someone else" is Panithan Wattanayagorn, a Chula lecturer and advisor to the Junta government. As for prayuths utterances, why would you disbelieve that a man who stated that the use of Section 44 does not run counter to the achievement of democratic ideals, (do a search for "Prayuth urges that people not be brainwashed by illusory democracy") is not capable of such a crass reponse to the events in Paris?

[baboon]

The writer has taken a bold and - in my view - an unprecedented step in condemning everything the junta stands for.

And especially so given Prayuth's continued calls to suppress the media, his ongoing failure to 'reform' and the ever present spectre of corruption.

People need to take a long hard look at what's happening in Thailand. Since the coup, lip service has been made to any substantive change, while the wealthy and influential continue to consolidate and grow their power.

An excellent article.

You must be new here.

Go spend a few days reading up on what Thaksin did to suppress the media (etc)

So surely the logical response of the junta should be to allow the media to open up more in order to help prove what a far cry they are from the administration they decided to replace, otherwise it would look just like a hypocrite and his arguments had taken over from where the last lot left off?

[metisdead]

An off topic deflection post has been removed as well as the replies.

[SpoliaOpima]

The polls are carried out by private academic institutions, and sampling is anonymous.

Not saying they're 100% reliable, same anywhere in the world. But more reliable, I suspect, than one man's intuition.

Really? And if 'the polls' showed the junta to be hugely unpopular by the majority of the people (I don't know and neither does anyone else), you seriously believe such a result would be published? Any poll under the current circumstances should be taken with a big bag of salt

Yeah I think they would be published, just as The Nation published this op-ed piece. Newspapers in Thailand are self-censored and The Nation is no exception. Nothing goes to print that hasn't passed through the editors, who represent the owners. They know how to walk the line.

Both The Nation and the Bangkok Post have published opinion pieces strongly critical of the last three coup regimes, including this one.

I have friends on staff at The Nation. The editors know how far they can go. They won't risk having the newspaper closed down as the loss of ad revenue would quickly put them out of business.

I reckon it's the same with polls. However you could be right. Maybe if opinion polls showed a majority disapproval there would be repercussions. If so I doubt the universities would bother running polls.

YMMV.

[Opl]

What a relief !! I feared other episodes of France's history would be mentioned such as Revolution and Terror ....

[heybruce]

The writer has taken a bold and - in my view - an unprecedented step in condemning everything the junta stands for.

And especially so given Prayuth's continued calls to suppress the media, his ongoing failure to 'reform' and the ever present spectre of corruption.

People need to take a long hard look at what's happening in Thailand. Since the coup, lip service has been made to any substantive change, while the wealthy and influential continue to consolidate and grow their power.

An excellent article.

You must be new here.

Go spend a few days reading up on what Thaksin did to suppress the media and the outrageous corruption in his governments. Start with an easy one : the rice scheme. 500 billion 'lost' from a 600 billion budget - but there are plenty more.

Then try to understand that the Junta is here to stop the Thai government murdering it's own people on the streets with UDD terrorists while they pass amnesty bills for themselves and also try to make reforms so the next elected government can make the changes you are talking about instead of going back to the same old farce we had before. Why do you people think they should solve all the problems themselves ?. They are Army people for Christs sake.

Look around the rest of the world, the wealthy and influential are everywhere just the same. If you think you can change that, you are a communist.

In other words...."But, but, but.....Thaksin!"

Though I can't resist noting that you mention the mysterious reforms that have yet to be stated a year and a half after the coup, and seem to suggest that the army is incompetent to rule. On that we agree.

[heybruce]

I think the answer lies somewhere in the multiple studies into extreme conservatism that all seem to reach the same conclusions:

“There’s no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb…Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice.”

No one who's actually intelligent pays any attention at all to such obviously politically-biased 'studies', except to scoff at them.

You really think Montesquieu (if you've even heard of him, which I doubt) could be considered 'low-intelligence'? Or Edmund Burke? Or Robert Taft, Sr. or Jr.? Or Paul Johnson? Or Pat Buchanan?

People who disagree with you aren't automatically stupid. It's incredibly arrogant of you to claim otherwise.

People who are truly intelligent, understand actual history, and are self-aware know their own limitations. This description doesn't fit the modern Left; they don't understand actual history and they aren't self-aware.

Note that I did not say that they're stupid.

As a paleo-conservative with a measured IQ three standard deviations above the norm, my very existence refutes those studies. And when I was younger, I was indeed a Leftist myself, until I'd traveled a bit and learned how the world really works. I guess you might say that I evolved.

A person three standard deviations above the normal can certainly explain what kind of distribution he is referring to--many people assume all large distributions are Gaussian, but I'm aware of no proof that intelligence follows such a distribution. Though I assume it depends on what intelligence measures you employ.

While you're at it, could you define your terms? I know the classical definitions of 'liberal' and 'conservative', but there are many conflicting interpretations of the words in modern language. Regarding your use of 'paleoconservative', I found a few definitions, one of the kinder ones is"

"Paleocons are simply Constitutional conservatives who believe in small government, low spending, national sovereignty, and maximum personal freedom." http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=paleoconservative

I'm not sure how that relates to the OP. It certainly doesn't describe the constitution shredding, "do as you're told or else" junta.

[dageurreotype]

In an article criticizing the "ill-worded message to Paris" it might be helpful to include the actual words so we can see how bad it actually is. The "too much freedom" quote appears to come from someone else.

The "someone else" is Panithan Wattanayagorn, a Chula lecturer and advisor to the Junta government. As for prayuths utterances, why would you disbelieve that a man who stated that the use of Section 44 does not run counter to the achievement of democratic ideals, (do a search for "Prayuth urges that people not be brainwashed by illusory democracy") is not capable of such a crass reponse to the events in Paris?

thelonius asked for the actual words, not 'well why wouldn't you believe he said something to this effect'. Spot the difference? I too wondered why his speech wasn't included so we can make up our own minds as to just how bad it was, not what someone else told it it was. And yes, I believe it was very likely as stupid and insensitive as his other blatherings, but I want to read it myself. Jesus. When did newspapers think it okay to post articles saying 'oh, what ******* said in his/her speech was just plain awful' and leave it at that? What.did.he.actually.say? So I can have a laugh.

[BSJ]

It's Thailand destiny to remain a 3rd world country for as long as possible......they work hard at achieving that goal!

[thelonius]

In an article criticizing the "ill-worded message to Paris" it might be helpful to include the actual words so we can see how bad it actually is. The "too much freedom" quote appears to come from someone else.

The "someone else" is Panithan Wattanayagorn, a Chula lecturer and advisor to the Junta government. As for prayuths utterances, why would you disbelieve that a man who stated that the use of Section 44 does not run counter to the achievement of democratic ideals, (do a search for "Prayuth urges that people not be brainwashed by illusory democracy") is not capable of such a crass reponse to the events in Paris?

thelonius asked for the actual words, not 'well why wouldn't you believe he said something to this effect'. Spot the difference? I too wondered why his speech wasn't included so we can make up our own minds as to just how bad it was, not what someone else told it it was. And yes, I believe it was very likely as stupid and insensitive as his other blatherings, but I want to read it myself. Jesus. When did newspapers think it okay to post articles saying 'oh, what ******* said in his/her speech was just plain awful' and leave it at that? What.did.he.actually.say? So I can have a laugh.

Yes I am aware of the difference. This is an English language forum - if you want to read the original in Thai, read this and the following extracts on Wassanna Nanuam's (Bangkok Post reporter assigned to military reporting) twitter account;

https://twitter.com/WassanaNanuam/status/665384426671443968 etc

Edited November 18, 2015 by thelonius

[LuckyNo4]

the terrorist attacks in france were diabolic and I have no doubt they will continue not only in france but also in the rest of Europe ,isils intention is to subjugate Europe create a caliphate creating a new muslim world .

So was the attack on Beirut and the attack on the Russian airliner........and they (isis) can only achieve that with the continued supply of weapons and funding from the US and its allies. When the funding and weapon supply stops they will disappear back into the sand where they came form. A group never heard of 24 months ago, seriously how many members do they have? last count I read was less than 50,000 how is it possible for them to get by when a combined strikeforce of international countries is striking them with all manner of weapons. Iraq a country with a standing army was taken in weeks. There's more going on here than meets the eye and regime change of Assad's government is top of that list. But of course they wont tell you that straight up.

[Tywais]

Comment on moderation removed.