The King Never Smiles
In Thailand, criticism of the monarchy is the ultimate taboo. Bhumibol is revered as an almost literally divine figure, the father of the nation. Last month marked his sixtieth anniversary, and the entire country wore yellow (the royal colour) in his honour. Any comment intended or construed as anti-monarchy would result in social disgrace and possibly in violent reprisal. Furthermore, the law of lese majeste is always on hand to punish any criticism of the royal family. Natural devotion to the King, desire to maintain social harmony, and fear of lese majeste ensure that the King remains absolutely immune to criticism.
Handley's book is unique in that it does not blindly accept the conventional, uncritical public viewpoint: it challenges the accepted view of Bhumibol's reign. Handley portrays the King as a firm traditionalist who actively sought to reinstate the superiority of the monarchy after Thailand's democratic revolution, conspired with the military to maintain his position ("Sanctifying Royalty and Stonewalling Democracy", as Handley puts it), and calculatedly cultivated his public image.
Bhumibol's New Theory, emphasising the importance of a self-sufficiency economy, is rationally evaluated by Handley as a PR triumph though "at best pseudo-economics". Serious environmental objections to the King's multiple dam projects are presented. A palace PR campaign to engender "reverence and myth-making", fostering the King's semi-divine public image, is alleged.
By far the most substantial criticism in the book is reserved for Bhumibol's son, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, whom Handley describes as "roundly feared and reviled". Vajiralongkorn is portrayed as a violent, corrupt womaniser, unsuitable as an heir to the throne. These characteristics are hardly news, as rumours of his misbehaviour have circulated for decades. However, what is different is that the rumours now appear, collectively, in print, in Handley's biography. The problem, however, is that, although Handley is careful to identify rumours as speculation and gossip, he has no way of authenticating any of this speculation, therefore the most scandalous rumours remain unresolved.
To worship someone absolutely unquestioningly, as if they were divine, is not advisable in the long-term. Indeed, King Bhumibol himself, in his birthday speech last year, unexpectedly invited constructive criticism, and announced that the popular dictum 'the king can do no wrong' was itself wrong. Though The King Never Smiles is, of course, banned in Thailand, it is a necessary book, because no individual or institution should be immune from criticism.
The amazon.com ordering page for the book is now unblocked in Thailand, and my parcel was not intercepted by Thai customs. Also, the book is part of amazon.com's Online Reader system, so we can access its contents online. The publisher's website, which is still blocked in Thailand, features a series of extracts from the book, notably its preface and introduction.
Labels: censorship, new_books, Thailand
posted by Matthew Hunt at 19:41
84 Comments:
although we should be open minded to other opinions, I think only exception is the king of Thailand. He is the one that Thai people will give up everything..You and people from different countries will never understand how we feel..we love our king as some people adore Jesus. We believe that he's a very good person since we were born and it will be like that until the last min of our breath. They can critic whatever they want, even with other royalty, but not with the king name's Bhumibol.
p.s. I like your work though :)
Thank you, I appreciate your comments.
I would argue that there should be no exceptions, however. The king is certainly admirable, though no-one is perfect and no-one should be above criticism, I believe.
Incidentally, the book is not very negative about the king himself, though few Thai people will realise that because they are banned from reading it. Censorship creates intrigue, so it's often counter-productive.
You said: "King Bhumibol himself, in his birthday speech last year, unexpectedly invited constructive criticism, and announced that the popular dictum 'the king can do no wrong' was itself wrong (something selectively omitted from the biography, as it does not support Handley's thesis)."
But the king also implied that he never makes mistakes, saying that he cannot afford to make a mistake because the kingdom would collapse. This is tantamount tosaying he is never wrong. I don't know about the book, but it is the same thing as saying he doesn'tmake mistakes. And the law prevents anyone still from criticizing him. So perhaps handley was correct not to write about that speech.
I read the book and there are no sensational there except it is full of unproven gossips that virtually everyone in Thailand know about them for years.
I believe Farangs, no mattr how long they live in Thailand, will never fully understand the depth of love and respect we have for our beloved King. During his 60th years reign, we have gone through several turmoils and yet we survive and prosper. Thailand did not fall to the domnio effect- we manage to remain a free country despite the falls of our neighboring countries to communism during the 60's and 70's. We may look messy, we may stumble, in the eyes of farangs, but we manage to survive and prosper in our own way.
By writing an unauthorized biography about our beloved King with no proof to back up the gossips is unprofessional for someone who calls himself a journalist.
To 'anonymous' (11:14 am),
You make a good point, his birthday speech wasn't quite as humble as I made it appear in the entry.
To 'anonymous' (12:31 pm),
You say that the book is "full of unproven gossips that virtually everyone in Thailand know about them for years", and I totally agree. I made exactly the same observation in the entry.
You imply that it is the king who has single-handedly guided the country through the "turmoils" you mention. Handley suggests that this is something the king actually encourages. Was it really the king himself who helped Thailand "remain a free country" and stopped it from succumbing to Communism, for example?
You claim that foreigners can never understand the Thai love for the king. This is a little bit offensive, I think. I believe I do actually understand it, as I live in Thailand and work/live/socialise with Thai people all the time. I may believe that unconditional love/worship of authority figures is wrong, but that doesn't mean I don't understand it.
Mat,
The King may not be single-handedly guided our beloved country through the "turmoils" but he is one of the central figures. With his steady hands guiding us through with his Dhamma way of governing, we have avoided several bloodsheds. Morevoer, the Dhamma way he institutes over years helps unite our country and bringing people back together through much of our turmoils over the years.
Granted all leaders have"their ways" of governing and winning at all cost. Is it fair to portray our beloved King as a cold, calculated person and to write unproven truth about his family? I can accept this book as a good book only if the author's observations are based on proven truths, but his book has hidden motives. He's not writing this book as a professional journalist, but rather more like an Enquirer gossip columnist. It's ashame because contrary to what Farang may think, I can assure you majority of us, Thai, are not blindly love and worship our King as an authority figure, but we love and worship him because he has a proven track record of how to govern our country and as a result of his leadership, Thailand has become a prosper and a peaceful country to live for all.
Good one, Mat, and I've enjoyed going through your blog, which I just discovered via a Google search on The King Never Smiles. Welcome to the hornets nest, which I'm also in. I just wish people would first read the book, and then make comments. I'm almost finished and it's a good, fair, balanced look at the royal family, great deeds and problems alike. Too bad the Thai government is so insecure that they can't allow a book like this to be sold in Asia Books. But then Vinai is such a suck-ass that he would never really carry something like this.
Friskodude,
I had also seen your blog entry, again by a blog search of the book's title. As you say, this is a balanced, rational book, which people should take the time to read before passing judgement on.
Thanks for your comments.
Let me repeat..Don't judge the book before you read it. So all you guys need to do is to BORROW this book from someone and read it through. Don't ever buy it!
If we really adore our King, just be kind to the outsiders including Paul Handley, the publisher, Matthew all supposed to be the "intellectuals". They are from a country of freedom. Their ancestors fought for freedom for a century...This was probably because they thought they had the freedom to express their opinions as they liked. They did not think about whether or not their opinions were reasonable or appropriate or their criticism may hurt our hearts. (A cruely from a civilised person). They only recited that as if they were students, then they must cry/ do anything for freedom. So they used their freedom fully in their books, criticism.
Dale Carnegie once said "Criticism is like a humming bird and it always returns home!), so don't be upset and don't ever beg them to stop criticising our beloved king and the royal family.
All Thais know that Thailand has the ancient culture. We had freedom, our own language and alphabet which we had created for our own use. We had made our own laws and administration. The King uled us just like we were in his family, daddy and children... We had been GIVEN freedom to our people for more than 700 years ago. And at that time remember that there were no America, Australia, etc. yet. (Just point out the true, no offense to those countries!)
Our King once said "Thai people have been broadminded, ready to give opportunity to others and to listen to their opinions, because we usually use our intellect to think and find reasons before making decisions, rather than making decisions based on trial and error, or on emotions, without reason."
It was us who told foreigners about the King's good deeds, and his good stories may annoy someone so much that they criticised our King, royal family and his self sufficient economic theory. We all know how good the royal projects are, no need to force the outsiders to agree with us. They never understand even though they have been living in Thailand, socialising with Thai people, etc. They are not Thai anyway!
I would like to share the motto written by the great poet : Soontorn Phu...
An Ninta Ka Lay Muean Tay Nam:
Mai Chok chum muean ao meet ma kreed him:
Mae Ong Pra Patima young ra-kin:
Poo kon rue ja sin khon nin-ta.
Best
eye_am
Best
Well, I agree strongly with your first point: don't judge a book until you've read it. The banning of the book in Thailand is not a good thing.
You say that Thai civilisation is older than America and Australia - that's true if you mean 'white man' in US/Australia, although both of those countries had ancient indigenous populations (Indians and Aborigines, respectively) before they were 'discovered' by the white settlers.
However, this debate is certainly not about which country has the oldest culture! It is not even about whether the king's deeds are all good. Instead, it is simply about the freedom to publish rational, constructive criticism.
"Tolerance" is the only word we need to know.
Many wars occurred from intolerance for the feeling of...our nation is superior than others, my religion is better than others,etc.
Regarding the book, we should feel sympathy to someone who lived in Thailand, earned money from Thai people and wanna be famous but no access to any interesting sources from their own countries, so he turned to our beloved King and wrote about him with an intention to see our negative reaction. Of course, when we complain, they will complain us back and "cry for freedom to publish constructive" criticism".
A good example is a civilised nation as England...After the WW II was over and Japan lost. British people were kind enough not criticising the Japanese Emperor or cried for freedom to publish criticism about the beloved emperor. They understood what they should/ should not do as a civilised nation. It's nice, isn't it?
Mat,
No matter who you are,Farang, White, Brown, or Black, I think that you are not an openness man. You and I have different mind, culture, or believes. As a forienger, don't try to use your own standards, intellects, or other evidences, which you received according to somebody whom dislike the Thai Royalty, for judging King of Thai people. I think that,you still be a smart man in several ways but unnecessary to judge or condemn the other love one you cannot have never known him. In my idea,it needs not to prove that your written right or wrong, because in each our short life we cannot prove or acknowledge all of the truth. Don't waist your time to use your reasons argue against the other believes.Instead, what you should do, as a moral man,if you want to be, is to find out any way to protect many problems in your own community rather than interesting other destiny.
P.S Don't forget to ask your own intention, " Whether are you writing, according to your own impartiality or prejudice?...
To 'anonymous' (3:12 pm),
I respect and admire the king. However, I also think that no-one is perfect.
The government would not insist that we all read the book, or that we all agree with it. That would obviously be wrong. But it is equally wrong for them to insist that we cannot read it, or that we must disagree with it.
I bought the book for 2 reasons: because the government banned it and I wanted to decide for myself, and because I wanted to learn about the monarchy from an impartial source.
Please do not make judgements about me personally.
To 'anonymous' (2:48 pm),
I can't vouch for Handley's intentions personally, but I'd be very surprised if he wanted to provoke a negative Thai reaction, as you claim. His intention was more likely to provide the first balanced (i.e. non-hagiographic) account of the king's life.
Your example of the emperor of Japan is very interesting, but not for the reason you suggest. Emperor Hirohito was basically considered a war criminal, and there were many calls for him to face trial after World War II. He avoided criminal charges, though he was forced to renounce the traditional claim that the emperor of Japan was a divine figure descended from the Sun Goddess. (Note: our leaders are not divinities, and should not be revered as such.) So, Hirohito may have been a "beloved" leader, as you call him, though to the rest of the world he was "Asia's Hitler" (according to wikipedia.org).
A breath of fresh air! At last someone has written a balanced book on Thai royalty. More importantly Thais have to learn how others perceive them. Its a pity the majority have been royally brain washed. Please have perspective and objectivity, we can then grow.
A breath of fresh air for these comments, too! Thank you.
First time poster here,
Mat, in regard to your wish to learn about the monarchy from an "impartial source", you should know a little bit about Handley's background before believing that this book was the right source you want to learn from.
He basically wrote the book after his former work (Far Eastern Economic Reviews, a magazine based in Hong Kong) was banned in Thailand. It was banned because two of his close colleagues wrote an article that was considered a threat to the Thai national security. They were reportedly deported from Thailand. The article was about the relationship between the King and the Prime Minister. So basically he wrote this book out of spite after he lost his job there. It's tought to see how his intention to write the book would not be "impartial".
If you want to know more about this issue just Google search with keywords like Far Eastern Economic Reviews + Thailand. Then try searching the author's name together with those of the people deported. It's all there for you to read and learn for free.
Try thinking of a shoe salesman who's trying to sell you the only pair of shoes he has to offer that are neither fit nor comfortable to your feet (in fact, these shoes might actually hurt your feet) by telling you that he has had these shoes on for a while and they are very comfortable to his feet. Maybe you'll understand better why other posters here think "Farangs" will never understand Thai people.
Basically, you just can't keep applying western idelogy on their eastern ways of life and expect them to accept it unconditionally. If it fits, it fits, and that's great. If not, let's hope they can make use of some good things western thinking has to offer and let them find or come up with their own perfect pair of shoes.
To 'first time poster',
Thanks a lot for your considered comments.
I was aware that Handley used to be a Far Eastern Economic Review correspondent, and that there was a ban placed on their 10th January 2002 issue. (The two journalists were threatened with deportation, though the threat was never carried out.)
However, I doubt that Handley would write this biography out of spite, as you suggest.
As far as I know Handley stopped working for FEER in the early 1990s, maybe 1993 or 1994, and didn't work for them again. So he would not be affected by the magazine's problems in 2002. In fact no body was expelled then, the government just threatened them and then got them to apologize. So what 'anonymous' says is stoopid.
BTW I don't think the book is 'full of gossip'. To me it is full of history with a little bit of gossip which is actually much more than gossip.
Sign me Anonymous TOO
I would love to leave a comment, but dare not for fear of persecution by the authorities.
Fear not, you can leave any comment anonymously. Although I am from the UK, and living in Thailand, this blog is hosted in the US and Canada.
I am a Thai working abroad and I've read the book just last night and finished it over a night. It is quite entertaining. All those gossips when I was since a student came up like old memories.
It's also fun to read those Thai who posted their comments in the blog. Now people see that they are nowhere near scholar. We boasted the rate of literacy but we didn't rank the rate of mentality.
I plan to write to Paul to add more information I recently heard about such as the Siriwanwalee's mental problem that had been healed by sports, the shots of Ploypailin's fellatio technique when she was in US. The Julaporn's Prosaic addiction and who healed it. Wake up!
Do you remember an old Thai song in Pibulsongkram's time? "Tuen Thoed Chao Thai" (Wake up, Thai) It is all what Paul wrote at the beginning.
The next blogger who add on to this must have been the one who wears yellow shirt. Don't mind, fella compatriot. You win a stage of the Tour de France and it'd be more meaningful for you.
Luckily, I don’t do yellow shirt and do not enjoy gossiping as much as many people do. After reading the book, I have to confess that I do enjoy reading it, but I will never take the matter in the book seriously. At the beginning, the writer does show that he did quite a lot of research and making a lot of interesting comments. But when the story starts to unfold, it seems like he does enjoying himself with series of conspiracy theories (which is of course fun and more healthier to your brain than the family gossips that lots of people seems to be interested and brainlessly indulged!)
The only remark I have is the explanation of the book, according to Handley, he describe the book as “A Biography of Thailand's Bhumibol Adulyadej”. Which I see it as a kind of journalist tactic to capture the crowd. The further I read, the more I feel like he’s talking about the monarchy as a kind of ‘institutional’ and not entirely related to the king himself. Names after names of military figures or court counsellors were mentioned, but not the king. In which I see it as a little bit unfair to the man himself to be responsible to all the conspiracy acts that are listed in the book.
To be honest, the king and his family are also human, sharing the same agony in life as we all do. Consider tremendous things he has done for Thailand, (without using any rate of ‘scholar’ or ‘literacy’ as suggested in the previous comment) I think it is already enough you can ask from a man in one life time, don’t you think?
Wake up!
Xin
i'm also Thai people and love the king but i don't wear yellow shirt as i don't think it represent any of my respect toward the king....i think the problem is that Thai people always judge things by using their pure feeling and believing....sometime it works but most of the time personally i think it's not the right way of judging things. Budha teach us that " don't believe in what you have been told, don't believe in what people have been believing in....do it and prove it yourself". i feel sorry for people who don't have a chance to read the book. However combatting with people's believe is really hard.....nowaday i think fact is not that important anymore, what important is that what people want to believe in.
i don't know how true the informations in the book are but for you who haven't read i don't think you should judge the author as what you know and believe in since maybe not true either. Open up....read...think....then you should criticise.
Mat
It is great to see a discussion of the book and get other people's perspective. Something sorely missing in Thailand.
I thought the whole point of the book was that you cannot have a constitutional democracy if you have an institution that meddles in politics, yet is immune from criticism. The basis for democracy is that ALL people have equal protections under the law. I think whatever you think about some of the more unsubstantiated claims in the book, it is clear that from time to time the king has involved himself in the political process, though often indirectly through the privy council. As such, his actions should be open to critique. If the people wish to maintain the ban against comments on the king and the royal institution, the king should remain as a figurehead and refrain from interfering in the political process. On the other hand, if Thai people truly believe that the king is the last word on how the country should be run, Thailand should revert back to an absolute monarchy.
some points I would like to make. I have not yet read the book but skimmed through it today and understood why it would be banned in Thailand. I sort of have an idea what the book is about from reading the above comment as well.
I think both sides have a point but few questions raised while I was reading people's comments here.
What is the motive of writing this book? I mean, did Handly, as a journalist, wants to report or present perspective on a controversial issue. Of course, he must know that the Thais are not allowed to criticize royal family, but the Thais won’t do that against King Bhumiphol anyway. The thing is he knows how much the Thais revere their King. My guess is that he wants to criticize for he feels disturbed someone can be left to viewed perfect while he is not. Perhaps he would like to simply write something controversial and draw public attention. Maybe he simply tries to do his job, reporting the untold truth. Or whatever his motive may be. Is it necessary?
Whether or not he is perfect, is it really a point he needs to make? It’s probably like the book, “Da Vinci Code” by Dan Brown, where Jesus’ life was ‘stained’ in this fictional book. How do Christians like it? Of course, they don’t because it shakes their faith or it hurts to see their beloved figure offended. Although I enjoy reading “Da Vinci Code” and found it very interesting (up to the point it sounds too much like Hollywood script), perhaps it does hurt a lot of people’s feelings. Good thing that Brown’s book is presented as a fiction book.
This is not the case for “The King Never Smiles”, which is claimed to be non-fictional book with evidence and thesis plus unproven facts (I can’t really say it for I haven’t read). It was released a little bit before the King Bhumiphol’s 60th years of his accession to the Throne. Why is that? It should be obvious. Such particular time provokes interest, thus the books gain more sales.
back to the motive…bottom lime, simply put, if you can avoid hurting someone’s feeling, would you do it? Criticism is great when it is used for productive purpose, ie. Improve someone’s life, increase happiness, etc. Otherwise it’s just useless constructive criticism. What’s the point? Simply to present the ‘truth’ in exchange for hurting the whole country? Seems to me a little heartless and self-centric, for wanting to say things and make his name at any cost.
Perhaps the Thais are brainwashed and blindly love the King. So what? As long as that’s one of the reasons that unites the country. Any tactic doesn’t matter. Note that I’m not saying anything to comment whether the book presents the truth or not. I just try to say that I don’t get why someone could be cruel enough to hurt as many people feelings as Mr. Hardly does. It hurts for the wants to protect the King, I guess.
I appreciate your extensive comment. Like you, I can only speculate about Handley's motives: I would add one more possibility, though - maybe he wrote it because such a book had not been written before. Originality is another important motive.
Your analogy with The DaVinci Code is interesting, and many other Thai people have made similar links between the King and God. To me, this seems puzzling. The King is not God, he is human. As a human, he is fallible and imperfect, and there should be no shame in recognising this. A man with such power should not be exempt from criticism.
You say that the book offends all Thai people, and I agree that it would presumably offend most of them if they read it. This offence is only indirect, however. The book makes some criticisms of the King, so it is only offensive to Thais because they love their King.
Yes, the national love for the King is a force for unity, though I still maintain that unconditional devotion to a powerful person is potentially dangerous.
The recent coup has seen a certain insularity among some Thai people, who have claimed that Western commentators don't understand that, in Thailand, a coup is sometimes necessary. This echoes the comments posted here from Thai people, that Farangs don't understand the Thai love for the King.
It took almost 2 months after I order this book for amazon until it arrived, just about 3 weeks ago. Before that I’ve been eagerly awaiting for the book and have largely relied on all the blogs and other sources on the Internet (I found your blog through google search for this book) In truth, I’ve read more about modern Thai history and politics than I did than when I was in school (I am not in academia nor I studied politics or social science, for that matter)
As a Thai, I have always viewed the king in a very positive way: he is the father of the nation who work selflessly for the benefit of the nation especially for the rural poor. I never viewed him as a god though but yet not just an average human being too. It’s hard to explain.
The book (and all the materials I read while I was eagerly waiting for this book to arrive) gave me totally new perspective. In short, I think the book is very convincing. I can say it convinced me because I see the recent coup in a totally new perspective (that piece by Duncan McCargo especially is very insightful for me). And the analysis that Paul Handley made in an article published on asiasentinel.com just 2 weeks before the coup confirms to me his deep knowledge of the subject.
I'm a Thai and have just finished reading this book today. The book is informative and well written. To most Thais, the King appears like a semi-god who can do no wrong. I myself respect the King because he's helped Thailand to develop. However, I view him and his family as normal human-beings who sometimes make mistakes and can be criticized. Freedom of speeches belongs to democracy.
I'm a Falang, I havent read the book, but I've read the revolutionary King.
I can't think of many people who could have handled all the challenges of his position as well as King Bhumibol has.
He really is unique in this world.
He basically has sacrificed his life for his people and his country.He may have wealth, yet you never see him succumbing to it like Thaksin and son many other Thais do.
I believe in a free press yet I understand how much Thais seek to protect their beloved King form any form of hurt or insult, percieved or otherwise.Unfortunately Thais don't seem to appreciate that critism is only that, just opinions, nothing too dangerous.
Many thais gossip about the Crown Prince- despite the lese majeste laws...... a bit hypocritical.
Still Long live the King I say.
He is a great and wise King in the same ways that Rama 4 and Rama 5 were and the success he has had in keeping thais unified has been remarkable.
He brings out the best in Thais
Long live King Bhumibol!!!!
It really is a pity that people at your level who can read and write English dont develop your brain beyond the whitewash :old guard :propaganda.No one is perfectand I feel so ashamed of so amny educated Thai that express their naive views in matters politic.You cant blindfold yourself and bow to the person without observing the facts surrounding them,that is called obsession.Ialways wonder why such aprosperous country like Thailand can never develope into a successful democracy.now I know why.Ourmiddle classes are not able to think they just very happy to be led by the rope like the Water Buffalo.Ps,The expression"No one would understand this better than did""is childish and un reasonable.Would Thai ever understand the "World Politic".As well since it is not so Thai.I guess your brain will only allow some Hippocratic Thai only Belief
Editing for Best.
Dear Best, Your history knowledge seem to be very limited, let read some comment below**
If we really adore our King, just be kind to the outsiders including Paul Handley, the publisher, Matthew all supposed to be the "intellectuals". They are from a country of freedom. ** Isn’t that a good Thing? ** Their ancestors fought for freedom for a century...** aren’t we never fought with Burma Lao and Cambodia? **This was probably because they thought they had the freedom to express ** Which we don’t really have in this country ** their opinions as they liked. They did not think about whether or not their opinions were reasonable or appropriate or their criticism may hurt our hearts. ** Aren’t we a bit of immature? ** (A cruelly from a civilized person ** You agree the writer are civilize and we aren’t? **). They only recited that as if they were students, and then they must cry/ do anything for freedom. So they used their freedom fully in their books, criticism. ** The Coin always have two side!! **
Dale Carnegie once said "Criticism is like a humming bird and it always returns home!), so don't be upset and don't ever beg them to stop criticizing our beloved king and the royal family. ** You seem to come to term with it, Why don’t you show some phrase from a Thai Scholar, Aren’t you so westernize to use Farang Quote **
All Thais know that Thailand has the ancient culture. We had freedom, our own language ** which is base on Sanskrit’s and Phalli (India) and some borrow from Chinese word ** and alphabet which we had created for our own use. ** Don’t you know that we steal it from Cambodia as well ** we had made our own laws and administration. ** Which always give way to aristocrat to do what they like ** The King ruled us just like we were in his family, daddy and children... We had been GIVEN freedom to our people for more than 700 years ago. And at that time remember that there were no America, Australia, etc. yet. (Just point out the true, no offense to those countries!) ** And you seem to forget the fact that this country are branch out from England and Spanish and other so well develop European nation which has long history trace back for more than a 1000 years as well… Sorry!! Your SukhoThai was still in jelly state, and which instant system they carry from they home land (They getting so tried of Aristocrat) it create the instant success for the modern country and modern system, People and business emerge on its purely own ability and create a produce like Car, Plan and Computer to serve your great Thai people, What are you brag about over here!! **
Our King once said "Thai people have been broadminded, ready to give opportunity to others and to listen to their opinions, because we usually use our intellect to think and find reasons before making decisions, rather than making decisions based on trial and error, or on emotions, without reason."
** The writer neither show maturity (Open Mind) Nor intellect over here, if you did have this quality we will not have a kindergarten mimicking answer like above **
It was us who told foreigners about the King's good deeds, and his good stories may annoy someone so much that they criticised our King, royal family and his self sufficient economic theory. We all know how good the royal projects are, no need to force the outsiders to agree with us. ** Real Game will spark from the pebble, You have nothing to worry about little boy ** They never understand even though they have been living in Thailand, socializing with Thai people, etc. They are not Thai anyway! ** This is a bit rude, and xenophobic Judging by the writer intellectual I think he will have a problem learning something else none native, How can we assume you understand English because your are not totally English anway, Did really mean what your write? Same comment back to your little child list thinker **
I would like to share the motto written by the great poet : Soontorn Phu...
An Ninta Ka Lay Muean Tay Nam: (** Gossip Just like pouring the water **
Mai Chok chum muean ao meet ma kreed him: (** Not Damaging like scratching the nife to the rock **
Mae Ong Pra Patima young ra-kin: ** This harraing have no exception even to Lord Buddha **
Poo kon rue ja sin khon nin-ta. ** So what about a mortal people like us ** We will get some criticize at some point anyway…
** Best This poem teach you to calm when people criticizing you, and it totally oppose to your reaction **
Best
eye_am
Best
I find this blog very interesting.
To me it demonstrates the deeply rooted cultural differences between Confucian Asia and the Greek West.
According to the philosopher Karl Popper the Presocratics were probably the first ever to introduce criticism to a (the Western) culture.
Someone like Parmenides was arguably one of the first teachers to accept criticism from his students. With the introduction of criticism we were able "to let our ideas die instead ourselves"
This is related to falsification as the scientific criterion.
On the other hand, in Asian cultures "trying not to hurt other feelings" frequently takes precedence over determining truth.
Since we are not allowed to criticize the king, the topic moves into the realm of irrationality. We believe the king is X, and if you claim Y (even if it were falsifiable and therefore a scientific statement), you will suffer from social isolation, imprisonment, etc.
Now, this sounds like I was making the case for criticism over "feelings". However, respecting other others' feelings clearly has benefits. I'm only inclined to feel more comfortable with the criticism value, because I have grown up in the West.
Also, in very recent US history, criticism of certain institutions was also taboo, because it was considered "unpatriotic" (How rational is that??)
By the way, I have not read the book and I therefore I do not have any opinion as to the truth value of the author's claims.
I felt intrigued however.
I read about the book in the newsletter of Columbia University's Thai student club.
It was then, that it occured to me:
Never before had I ever heard anyone criticizing HM.
"All Thais know that Thailand has the ancient culture. We had freedom, our own language and alphabet which we had created for our own use. We had made our own laws and administration. The King uled us just like we were in his family, daddy and children... We had been GIVEN freedom to our people for more than 700 years ago".
I totally disagree. You dont have freedom to question the ruler class whether their policy is right or wrong. You dont have the real freedom when majority were under absolute monarchy and feudalism.
Matt,
I totally agree with anyone that said we should not judge the book by its cover and I'm sure the book "The King Never Smiles" will be quite interesting to read. However, I can tell you that I, for one, will not be buying the book. Not that I'm narrow-minded but I'm against people who think they are civilised and claimed that everything they say is credible and true just because they are from the "western world".
People who are foreign to Thailand, no matter how long they might have been living there, will NEVER, NEVER understand why the Thai people love H.M The King, and we don't expect you to. And who told you that the Thai people don't criticise the Royal family? Believe me people do criticise. But we don't criticise our King because he has nothing for us to criticise about. I mean, just because he doesn't receive any worldwide media coverage like some celebrities promoting peace in South Africa or helping people somewhere in the globe, that doesn't mean that he can't be praised for what he has done for the country. (check your record and do some research, his 60 years of work will leave you speechless)Our King is not perfect, he, himself, has said that he is not perfect. So, please, try to understand that just because we love our King, it doesn't mean that we are blinded, narrow-minded or are deprived of our rights...we simply love him with all our heart and think that he is a great man. Btw, if you really want to see our King's smile, all you have to do is look at our Queen. She is his smile.
To Anonymous Tuesday, 10 October, 2006
There's nothing Confucian about Thai culture, with the possible exception of certain not completely assimilated Sino-Thais. Chinese cultural influence has never been strong in South-East Asia, apart from Vietnam of course, centuries of trade notwithstanding.
Back to the book in question, I'm quite amused by the assertions of some Thai posters here that farangs will never understand why Thais love their King so much. I know a whole bunch of farangs who are literally plus royalistes que le roi and completely block their critical reasoning when they talk about the King. On the other hand, I know quite a few Thais who couldn't care less about Rama IX and his power-hungry courtiers, and are eager to discuss the monarchy critically. No one says that the King is a bad person, and the book is manifestly not an exercise in character assasination. It simply shows that royal interventions induce permanent instability into the political system that results in weak institutions and bad governance. And since future Rama X is clearly unstable and, to put it mildly, not too bright, there isn't much optimism about the future of the political system in Thailand.
One of the main points I took away from the book was the existence of the Thai royalty as a group with some degree of common interests, as a political and economic enity. It has given me a very different perspective on events. It is interesting to see that the Thai royalty appear to be up to their necks in the Shin deal...
http://rockybru.blogspot.com/2006/09/learn-from-indians.html
Author: Richard M.
Date: 9 Aug 2549 13:47
The Ministry of Commerce is currently investigating the Shin Corp acquisition by Temasek (http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/08/09/headlines/headlines_30010683.php). But the investigation will never amount to anything. Why?
Temasek bought Shin Corp using a shell company called Kularb Kaew. Kularb Kaew was majority owned by two Thais, Pong Sarasin and Suphadej Poonpipat. Temasek had to use Kularb Kaew to overcome restrictions that forbid foreigners from owning Thailand's national security assets, like television stations.
But under Article 36 of the Alien Business Act 2542, Kularb Kaew's Thai shareholders are liable to jail terms and penalties if it is proved that they act as nominees for a foreign investor. Which is obviously what happened.
So why wont Pong Sarasin and Suphadej Poonpipat ever be found to be guilty of wrongdoing? Because Pong Sarasin is the brother of Arsa Sarasin, and Arsa Sarasin is the King's Principal Private Secretary. The Ministry of Commerce doesn't dare touch Pong, because they don't want to shame his brother, but that means they also wont be able to touch Thaksin and kill this deal.
Bangkok Post - 20 October 2006
M.R. Tongnoi Tongyai, the private secretary to His Royal Highness Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn, has been recruited to take up a board position with Shin Corporation by major shareholder Temasek Holdings. M.R. Tongnoi on Wednesday resigned as a director and audit committee chairman of Total Access Communication, the second-largest mobile operator behind the Shin flagship Advanced Info Service. The Oxford graduate had been on the board of DTAC since 2000.
Sources said the appointment was part of a broader revamp by Temasek of Shin Corp, which has seen its public image battered since the Singaporean investment company took over the telecom conglomerate in January.
''[M.R. Tongnoi] will be joining the board of Shin very soon, and he has been promised the position of chairmanship in the near future,'' a source said.
Shin's current chairman, Pong Sarasin, had proved a ''disappointment'' for Temasek, given his silence over the past several months, even as the company had come under criminal investigation into alleged illegal shareholding structures, sources said.
M.R. Tongnoi Tongyai
Director
Work Experience : 2002-present Chairman of Audit Committees,
Total Access Communication PLC.
2000-present Director,Total Access Communication PLC.
2001-present Chief Executive Officer to His Royal Highness
Crown Prince of Thailand
1986-2000 His Majesty’s Deputy Principal Private Secretary
(c.10) for Foreign and Technical Affairs,
Office of His Majesty’s Principal Private Secretary.
I copied this translated "the king can do no wrong" speech from sa-ra-son-teh website.
In fact “the king can do no wrong” is a great insult to the king because, the king, why can’t he do no wrong…. do wrong? Because this shows that they consider the king not to be human. But the king can do wrong.
Furthermore, the amazon page of this book is not banned in Thailand. It may be one of the plans to promote this book.
The First time I read The Da Vinci code, I believed that it was absolutely true because I am not Christian. So,I do not understand what the Christian understand.
Do you think the world has any place with no criticism? Thai proverb say "the wall has ear and the doors has hole" and the Chinese proverb "after the Enperor has passed, the cityzen soon gossip about him"
In this case, people who work with the king can affirm his morality and kindness thoroughly.
I am sure that no one can hide his cruelty from eyes of 60 million people for 60 years.
The auther is a very unfortunate person that he has never seen the King's smile. If you want to see his smile, please look at his face when he was working for Thai people and you will see why Siamese love their King.
I am not influenced in English;so,I will apologize for any linguistic error.
I think Thai people would benifit from reading "The Emperor's New Suit", by Hans Christian Andersen
http://hca.gilead.org.il/emperor.html
Quote " I am sure that no one can hide his cruelty from eyes of 60 million people for 60 years".
I think you miss the point. I dont think the King is cruel, but he is no demigod either. To maintain the status of the Royal fmily, the King has been playing politic behind the scene for 60 years. So, in some aspect, what he has done is no difference from what politicians have been doing: do whatever it takes to gain popularity.
I've skimmed through some chapters. And I think it is very intriguing to learn about some aspects of the Royal Family that we, as Thai, might not have heard about. I find some word choices very biased and misleading though.
We have to admit that we have been taught to love some people in this country. You might agree if I choose the word "bombard" in this case. The idea has been planted in our brains since kindergarten. And education in Thailand did not seem to encourage us to think critically or voice our opinions, especially when we think differently. I think it'd be very healthy if we can argue with each other based on facts and reasons.
I've skimmed through some of these comments. One anonymous comment mentioned that what is mentioned in the book is not real. Well, maybe we'll never know what the truth is. The history of Thailand has long been a distorted construction of reality.
It is sad that some people are always above the law. It's even tragic to face the fact that the police or the law enforcement in Thailand are a big time joke. Sometimes, we enjoy fooling ourselves that things would be okay and we'll never have to deal with it.
I'd like to say how much I agree with 'anonymous' (3rd, 5th, 19th, and especially 6th and 20th October 2006).
However, 'anonymous' (4th October 2006), despite being a foreigner, seems to have been indoctrinated into the standard King-can-do-no-wrong mantra.
'Anonymous' (18th October 2006) - you say that Westerners "claimed that everything they say is credible", but actually we don't. It was necessary for a Westerner to write this book, because no-one in Thailand would dare. (And it couldn't be published in Thailand anyway.) It would be much better if a Thai national would write such a book, of course. You also say, as have so many others, that foreigners will "NEVER, NEVER understand" - this is xenophobic and offensive. You say that Thais criticise the royals but never the King himself - why not? When I say the King is imperfect, I simply mean that it's impossible for anyone to be perfect, be they a King or not.
[Sorry I didn't post the above comments earlier.]
'Anonymous' (4th January) - you make some excellent points that I totally agree with. Critical thinking is essential in a good education system. As you also say, the Thai police are a joke. They are corrupt and incompetent.
As an American abroad who makes frequent trips to Thailand, I've been struck, in recent months, by just how much the Kingdom is beginning to resemble North Korea. It's a critique that I mean quite seriously.
Items in point:
1) An aimed-for "self-sufficient" economy. (They call it "juche socialism" in NK, and we all know how disastrously it's worked out there.)
2) Military rule in Thailand lining up with NK's "army first" policy and glorification of martial strength.
3) Rigid censorship, with jail time for anyone daring to criticize the Dear . . . King/Leader.
4) Quasi-religious deification of said Dear King/Leader.
5) A bumptious, braggart, narcissistic nationalism which endlessly asserts that "You foreigners can never understand us . . . Thais/Koreans [because we're so special]."
6) In line with all the above, an increasingly evident disregard for the outside world, as evidenced most recently by Thailand's open theft of foreign drug patents.
To any Thais reading this, I would ask you to seriously consider it.
Though I'm just one person, and so not strong enough to move the world, I cannot be alone (among farangs) in saying that I find myself increasingly wary of Thailand, and looking more and more closely at other destinations in the region (Indonesia, notably) as a place to work, do business, spend my money, invest my time and emotion.
Thailand could become more like South Korea (an all-around success story of recent decades) by retiring its monarchy, banishing its military from politics, and beginning to open up to the outside world.
Instead, it seems bent on following the North Korean model, right down (almost) to the fine print.
Time is precious, and the moment is now, I firmly believe, for Thai people to awaken from their slumber and begin to address these things in an intelligent way.
Anonymous
Seoul, Korea
To 'anonymous' (16th May),
I broadly agree with points 1-5.
I think the 'self-sufficiency economy' is misguided (promoted by the King, though certainly not by his aggressive Crown Property Bureau). Military rule is disastrous in both theory and practice. Lese Majeste is outdated and should be scrapped. Leaders should not be deified. Some Thais also need to start looking outward a little more, and accept that the 'You foreigners can never understand us' position is unacceptable.
Look at today's news:
"King pressures court over Dissolution of Political Parties"
No that was not the headline but well might it have been, Similarly the last year "order" to the court to invalidate the one-party election and General Prem's earlier public early vote in the same election are the sort
of tricks our saviour might be expected to apply after reading Handley's book.
Do hope he plans a second edition or sequel.
With hindsight it seems a great pity the USA did not occupy Siam after it collaborated with the Japanese in WWII and impose a rather more successful "peace" constitution on Thailand.
Ricky
Ricky, the King is supposed to be above politics, so I agree with you that it's unfortunate that he still makes political speeches i.e. the speech a few days ago about the forthcoming Thai Rak Thai/Democrat dissolution verdict.
I don't think I could support US occupation or constitution-imposition, though!
This is an iteresting discussion with good points and asinine ones made by non-Thais and Thais alike.
Most recently anonymous in Seol asserted that Thailand is becoming more like N. Korea and then proceeded to discribe the status-quo in Thailand for the last several decades/centuries.
Thailand is becoming less like N. Korea if you look at the comparison historically. I wish you could have used a different example to show that Thailand has a growing disregard for the outside world. Thailand is far more a world citizen than it once was. Although, to someone who's experience in the Kingdom is limited to ocassional visits, it may seem that Thailand is thumbing its nose at intellectual property, Thailand has improved in this field tremendously (Of course it still has a very long way to go). I find it hard to feel sorry for greedy drug manufacturers that can't find a way to provide cheaper drugs for HIV/AIDS victims. And why on earth would you want Thailand to be South Korea???
I feel bad that a Thai brother or sister would tell me that I can't understand their love for His Majesty, no-matter how long I've live with you. Would you like it if I, as an American, said Thai people could never understand democracy because only a handful of Thais had ever fought for it?
There are those in Thai society that love the King for his willingness to intercede at critical times during his reign. What might have happened if the events of October 14 and Black May had been allowed to follow their natural courses?
On the other hand, there are those Thais that remember that His Majesty did not stop the massacre of students on October 6, and may never forgive that. Some feal that the Thai people have relied on the King to fix their political problems for so long that their is an underlying apathy toward politics in general.
What is quiet clear is that if the Thai people don't start to take responsibility for their own destinies (democracy), on the dreaded day the tenth reign begins, it may be too late.
It's ironic that the publisher of this book is Harvard University Press, the very institution that HRH Prince Mahidol was studying at when His Majesty was born.
This book is better than the Thai history text book. It just like a mirror to look at the real king of Thailand who pretends to be a living bhuddha. He has been using traditional and religious to brainwash the Thai people to believe in his monarchy. He always behind and support the military coup and bloodshed in Thailand. The whole things are about himself and his family to survive.
I am Thai living in USA. I have read the book. It's all about gossips we all Thai know very well. There are more rumours and gossips are not in the book. Nothing new.
The most important thing is the King has proved how he care for the Thai. No book or words can describe that. I am glad I was born in Thailand and have witnessed everything the King has done for the Thai.
If someone wants to write a book about the King again. You can go to THailand and ask questions from some Thai people. I would suspect it would end up the same as this book. Nothing new and it is not correct.
I would dare any foreigners who want to get a glimpse of how Thais respect and love the King. You should spend time at least a year in THailand having interactions with Thai people. There you will get a grimpse but you will not completely understand. This is the way it is.
I agree with the ban of this book in Thailand because this book contains only gossips all the Thai knows well. Why we should allow this book in Thailand to earn money from the Thai. ????? When this is all about rumours that one foreigner got some the Thai. I read the book without buying it though.
It is the same thing about "Anna and the King". Hollywood made the flim just to cash money around the world but it wasn't successful. I am so glad that the film was banned in Thailand. Otherwise, every Thai must have gone to see it and felt disappointed and hollywood only cashed money from the Thai. :)
I watched the movie in USA and I was so disappointed. So I found this book in a book store and read in the bookstore without paying a cent.
To 'anonymous' (30th June),
Do you realise how offensive your comments are? It is incredible that a Thai person living in America would say that foreigners will never understand how/why many Thai people love the king.
Yes, the book contains lots of old gossip. But writing yet another book from a Thai public perspective is emphatically not the answer. There have already been countless, worthless, hagiographic biographies of the king published in Thailand. We don't need any more!
And, for your information, I have been living in Thailand for almost 3 years, interacting with Thai people all the time. Not agreeing with something is not the same as not understanding it!
The 2nd 'anonymous' poster, you say that you're in favour of banning Anna & The King and this book, because "every Thai" who saw/read them would be disappointed. Please don't generalise - not "every" Thai would be disappointed, check out some of the comments from Thai people above and you'll see that people are individuals with individual opinions.
Hi Mat,
After reading (40% of) this book...I have to confess I felt like my heart was broken, could not sleep that night...
This book is very interesting, especially the title of the book. It's the first time that makes me think about this point seriously. Yes, the point which the writer brought up is very TRUE. Isn't it strange??? And the next questions are 'how?' and 'why?'
It might help if I tell you about my background. I am almost 50, living in Thailand for all of my life. In short, I know quite well about Thai history (at least, my degree said that!)
My dear Mat...this book truly opened my eyes. I’ve always been in doubt about the turmoil recently. But now, I can see things more clearly.
Some may say this book is nothing, but many scholars say this book is ‘something’.
Some may say this book is full of gossips, but you know, in Thai Thailand gossips are always true.
-Picasso said ‘imagination is real’-there must be some connections between these two things-imagination and real. Same way-gossip(imagination) and truth(real).
-What destroy creativity, Mat?
Picasso said ‘the good sense’ does destroy creativity. Thai people are always good people (with the good sense). They are not familiar with these kinds of books. Criticism has both good and bad points, but Thai people normally take only the bad points (which hurt them, instead of improving the bad points. I am Thai, I know this very well)
However, I am very happy that there is a tiny ‘space’ corner in this GREAT country that I can talk with you.
Yellow is not my favourite colour.
To 'anonymous' (6th August),
Thank you so much for your comments about your feelings as you read the book. I'm also grateful that there is a space in this great country that we can discuss this.
with all the ban on your tube and the book, I stumbling on this web side. I have no idea it is real or not.
Be the judge.
http://www.revu.nl/video_top6
Yes, it's real. I blogged about it here. Thanks so much for the link to the video - all I could find online previously was a single screen-grab.
This is an embarrassment as a Thai for a future Q and K specially the comment in Dutch that I do not understand but can not be good.
What wrong with this family?
It almost like watching HBO series "Rome".
the king is smiling
http://www.gotoasia.no/thailand_elements/Bhumibol_Adulyadej/Bhumibol-4.jpg
http://www.simply-thai.com/images/King%20Bhumibol-greet.gif
tell me if you want more pictures
you want thai people to accept opinion but do you accept theirs ?
no one knows thai king better than thai people
He is very young in the first picture (before he was King). And he's not actually smiling in the second picture!
Anyway, I think the book's title is rather unfair.
Frankly, Thai people know the Royal propaganda they are force-fed by schools and the media.
I think the King don't smile because, King Bhumipol Aduldej of Thailand is work hard for Thai people but heart's the King is smile. And Thai people know that. The King have nurtured in people hearts and chance our souls.The King have done all with all your might for us all. The King true love us. We true love the King . We bow our heads to the ground and place our hearts under the King feet. With the supremely respect and gratefulness to the King, in deed. We pray that the miraculous power of the Emerald Buddha bless the King.I want Long live the King, Long live the King, Long live the King. Happy Birthday,His Majesty the King.I love the King.
The crown of the head , a goad. minister.
Thanks Mat for your reply. This is quite an interesting mix of opinions. I am glad to see Thai people responding to such a sensitive topic in an objective way. I think the time has come to explore the Thai monarchy in a more open, honest way. I think it's safe to say His Majesty's legacy has been established, but what of that of his predecessor? Indeed, the time to explore the Thai monarchy has come.
Ooops, I meant successor.
Hello, Matt, I found your blog via google so this comment may seem a little bit out of place from the discussion that has been going on. But first, I must disclose that I am Thai, and I do not love the King (and there are many more like me than you think), and for obvious reasons will remain anonymous.
One of the things I've noticed is that a number of people have claimed the book is full of gossip. But it seems they fail to realize that this gossip, included perhaps to spice up an otherwise academic book (and clearly identified as gossip), does not change the thesis of the book. The King has been intervening in Thai politics for a long time, often on the side of military dictators. He also had a prominent role in the massacre of 6 October 1976 and has remained above investigation, criticism, or transparency. Not by virtue, but by censorship. This has left Thailand as a third-world country throughout much of his reign while Singapore, Malaysia, and now Vietnam, race ahead. So much for not being colonized.
Secondly, the propaganda surrounding the throne is absolutely false: he is not benevolent, he is not a genius, and he certainly does not look out for the interests of the nation first. His first interest is his throne and his dynasty. Compare him to Juan Carlos II of Spain if you will for an example of a monarch who is actually democratic.
For all those Thais who continue to say "foreigners can never understand the love for the King" or that "the Thai King is special", you are fools. The only reason foreigners may be unable to understand the love for the King is because he is shrouded in so much propaganda and mass-brainwashing. There is no racial or national characteristic that makes you special and capable of loving the King. There is no mystical nor biological specialness in your love for the King: North Koreans love Kim as you love your King. It is the result of having been brought up with inadequate critical thinking skills, censorship, and 24/7 message on television, newspapers, radio that "The King is Good! The King is Perfect! The King is a Genius! The King's Dedication to the Country is Perfect!"
This attitude of inadequate thinking skills is clearly seen in Thailand and can be attributed to the public school system and our 'culture'. Though nominally Buddhist, Thais will believe most things told to me with little or no evidence. This is why they wear amulets even though they claim to be Buddhist. This is why 90% of Thais who watched a documentary expounding conspiracy theories will believe it. This is why Thais will blame "Western influence" for ruining Thai culture without realizing that otherwise, they would still be under feudalism. That is why some Thais will talk about "sufficiency", but buy Maybachs and ride around like a King while millions are in poverty. This is merely the tip of the iceberg of Thai hypocrisy and delusion.
And, lastly, for those who continue to say the King Never Smiles is merely a collection of gossip, I do urge you to actually read the book. And Matt, that book is does not treat the King well, in fact, it exposes him for the fraud that he is and I'm glad I've read that book and researched the facts (Handley actually did research) for it totally exposed the lunacy of what I had previously believed.
Open your eyes, my fellow countrymen.
To 'anonymous' (9th January),
Thank you so much for your comment, which I strongly agree with.
I also believe that unelected figures should not interfere with politics (should not make political speeches, should not instruct politicians, and should not give blessing to coup-makers).
The UK Queen, for example, has a weekly private meeting with the Prime Minister, with no TV cameras, and he updates her on political developments. The meeting is for the PM to inform the Queen, not for the Queen to advise/instruct him. [I am not suggesting that a Western system is automatically better, I am only making a contrast with this one specific area.]
And thank you for emphasising the lack of critical thinking skills (due to rote learning at school) which leads people to passively accept the media propaganda about a perfect monarch.
Thank you especially for your comment about the insularity of some Thai people: "There is no mystical nor biological specialness in your love for the King". Loving such a powerful figure unconditionally does not make one better than other people - it leads to cultural blindness.
Regarding the book specifically, I am perhaps more critical than you about Handley's emphasis on gossip. Throughout the book, he rehashes old gossip stories (and, as you say, he clearly labels them as gossip, not fact), but he never offers any new evidence to support or refute all this gossip. So maybe it does spice up the book, but it also makes it less academic.
Thank you again for your comment.
Two days ago I had dinner with friends who had just arrived from Germany. They've been to Thailand many times and visit me often. During dinner they mentioned this book and I was intrigued. So the next I started googlin' and stumbled on your blog.
Looking forward to read it (although not sure on how to get it) despite all the negative comments, at least something different than the same old propaganda (which seems to become more & more extreme daily)...
Despite having a Thai family & living here for a long time I still believe in making up my own mind & comparing different view points which (unfortunately) seems to be unacceptable by more than a few of the anonymous commentators here...