The Rule of Order versus the Rule of Mai Pen Rai

When we talk about developed countries and what constitutes a liberal society, we often forget an implicit social structure that occurs in developed countries but is not fully developed in other countries. I’m referring to the rule of order, or the law order. This is a concept at the very foundations of classical liberalism. It basically ensures that functions within a society are bound to perform in a generally predictable fashion to some degree. Of course, this could never be one hundred percent guarantee. In Washington D.C., the capital of the most influential country on earth, the trains do not arrive on the second. But what happens usually is that you can reasonably assume that what you are promised resembles what you get. This ensures contracts, business, regulations, traffic, banking, and general social interaction. Often, in the west we take these very things for granted, and when things don’t work according to these rules, we become highly unsettled (to put it lightly).

                Thailand, like most developing nations, does not operate by some rule of law. It’s not as if there is just open anarchy in these developing countries however. Most countries, a few failed states excluded operate under some general system, even if that system is not codified or exact. For example many, northern African countries work upon a system of corruption. This is not an inherent flaw at all, but a flaw that is the legacy of colonialism and imperialism. As the colonizers left these nations, they insisted that if the nations were to be truly sovereign then they must set up institutions and bureaucracy resembling the western nations. Except the western nations developed those systems and institutions gradually. Without the skill or the time, nations were forced to develop make shift institution that didn’t have the capacity to service their populations needs. So if you are waiting in line to get you permit and everyone wants to give you the permit, but is unable to because the system is broken, then maybe you can give them an extra favor of some sort to bypass the system. Over the years the lesson is ingrained. If you want something done, you have to pay extra or wait with the chance that it may never arrive. It’s a logical system, but it’s not a very effective system when it comes to providing the common welfare, ensuring an environment for economic competition and innovation, or inviting westerners to stay.

                In Thailand, though corruption does seem to exist in large amounts here, the system that they operate on is largely relational. This is how much of the East works. A lot of this can be traced back to Hinduism or Confucianism. Familial piety is stressed in Confucianism, which means that the family is held in utmost regard and your duties to your family are clearly structured. The regime in a Confucian society often takes on paternalistic roles, and consequently the citizens owe to the government analogously to the son owing to the father. Traditional Hindu societies are more or less, fatalistic, multi-tiered, hierarchical systems. That is, your birth determines your social strata and how one social level interacts with another or with those like themselves is usually known. In most society the ability to escape you social strata was not an option, however as economic prosperity leveled the playing field between bourgeois and nobles in Europe, the same phenomenon is happening in Asia. Buddhism, which is by far the majority religious group in Thailand, is a more or less an offshoot of Hinduism. The culture reflects a strong connection of relational dealings over complete flat dealing.

                When I arrived in Thailand, I thought that I would be in Phichit, teaching fourth grade. This is what I was told and what the school in Phichit was told. This is not what happened. I was asked to sign some papers at lunch one day, and told that they were just extra papers to set up the current situation. In reality they were papers that sent me to teach in Chiyaphum. Now I don’t mind being in Chiyaphum. It’s a little less urban than I would ask for, but the people are nice, and the feeling I get at school is that I am honestly needed here. But the way this business went down is definitely not something that would be ok in the west. Picture you uprooted your life to move to Chicago, Illinois. It was a big transition, but you made it. Then when you arrived at the headquarters of your new job in the north, they told you the day before you left for Chicago, that you were being placed in Virginia instead. This is not ok by any western standard. But here, this is life. Contracts are strong suggestions. Deadlines are wishful thinking and time tables have about a four hour margin of era i.e.; it takes seven hours to get to Chiyaphum. It’s actually eleven.

                I worry a lot about my reaction to things here. I don’t want to make the mistake of being too western centric, or dismissive of what seems to me to be non-typical behavior. So I’ve thought a lot about saying whether or not the way things happen in Chiyaphum could be called negative. This is a big question for me that boil down to two Wittgenstein quotes: “If you could teach a lion to speak, you would not understand him” and “my goal in philosophy: to let the fly out of the fly bottle”. These quotes I think, explain the major problem in political philosophy in the contemporary, digital, and global age. How could we free something that we could not understand? Is it not presumptuous to even think that it needs freeing? I don’t know. All I know is that I’m definitely a westerner, and my classes begin and end on the hour until further notice.    

*I missed a deadline for posting Sunday. Lesson planning and then Re-lesson planning once you realize how high your expectations are, can be a real pain in the neck. 

On Media Sensationalism, Busting the Hunger Games Bubble, and Perspectives on Oppression

Everyone is talking about Thailand again. It’s a weird thing to get news from outside of the country before you hear about it inside the country. In my last few posts on the takeover by the military Junta I have tried to shed some perspective on the situation, while still maintaining the point that eventually military rule has to end, and the sooner the better. It actually seemed like things were calming down though. From what I’ve saw and heard and read, all the major protests were isolated to Bangkok, I’ve only had one person tell me that there were protests in Chaing Mai, but the military check points increase as you get close to Bangkok, and are almost a non-factor in the North. Added to this, there seem to have been no protests against the Junta, as large as those that occurred before the Junta took power. So what has brought the attention of the west back to Thailand’s, almost traditional at this point, coup? The Huuuuungeeeeer Games! Sorry but I couldn’t help it.

                Articles from Wired, The Global Post, and Amnesty International, have all followed the same trend. Describe a surreal situation in which a salute from a movie has been re-purposed in a mirrored situation. Or at least this is the headline and the first paragraph: a shallow and plastic comparison of the dystopian government from the hit novel turned movie franchise and the actual real life coup. It does make for a good story, too bad it seems to lack any real attempt to educate. The articles largely glide over the small scale of the protests until the third or so paragraph and even then, they are much more interested in the catchy hand signal than a critical look at the issue. I read an article the other day that remarked that Thailand’s coup was systematic of South East Asia’s regression from democracy. It’s not at all. That’s just a good tag line. Thailand is a unique situation. It isn't indicative of anything but Thailand's own particular story. The military says that they took control because the elected government had become incapable of actually governing. This is not an ideal situation, but considers this: people we’re dying in the streets of Bangkok, and there was a non-military organization that was pushing against the government and questioning the validity of the results and the government’s ability to rule. The military did not hand over power to this group. To stop the fighting they took the current leaders from power which silenced the “people’s coup”, that was opposing the government. And everything has been safer now.

Some may causally throw out that Ben Franklin line “those who would sacrifice security for freedom deserve neither”, but think about this. Most people in Chiyaphom don’t care. Most people in Lampong don’t care. Most people in Thailand don’t care. Now if we were talking about the Royal family that would be a different issue. But most people already know that no matter what government is allowed to exist when the military returns the reigns, nothing will change for them. Their lives will continue along, as good or as bad as it was before. So the protests, which mostly interest a higher social class than most of Thailand only brought them the fear that comes with deaths in the street. This is different from Egypt or Burma. In Burma, if you’re Muslim right now, your life could be in danger if you catch the attention of a high ranking monk. So many uncounted atrocities are happening in that country because of the harsh and repressive social order. In Egypt, an equally powerful, but less favorable military has sided with a regressive government that is in many ways worse than the Mubarak regime. But the junta in Thailand is not randomly attacking any one social group, or siding with anyone in particular unfairly. They have taken some unsettling measures, like calling people into camps and making them promise not to speak out against the military, but it isn’t random people. It’s former government officials and others who have enough sway to restart the violence. They are putting peace over freedom (classical liberal freedom), which doesn’t sound good to Americans in particular (I’m not crazy about it myself), but we don’t always get to dictate to another country what is ok and what isn’t. We also shouldn’t sensationalize a real issue in an actual country because its gives us a better news headline. Thailand isn’t one of your thirteen districts. Sorry. 

On a side note, the only time I saw the Three finger salute was when my orientation leader raised it to get us to be quiet so he could give us direction. We laughed. Hopefully no one thought he was making some grand statement.     
Edit: Just want to be clear, my issue is with the sensationalism of media coverage on Thailand, and not any particular group. I hope that doesn't get lost in the post.  

     

Fighting for Progress: Political Determination, Education and Social Service

My focus again shifts towards education as I start my first days of my job. That definitely has to be in italicization because I'm not really working the way most people who just got into the workforce are working. I live on a base with a bunch of other teachers and we attend different schools in a really rural area to teach English. What that entails depends on the level of the kids education, the focus of the school, and your own drive to produce results.
In my first day of school, my teaching guide, who sits in on my class, helps with translation and shows me around the school, told me that I had to go slowly because the students are not as smart as the students in private schools in the city or American students. I sort of brushed it off as their was something lost in translation-- not exposed is maybe what she meant. But when she said it the second day, it really got me thinking about the political and social determination of large groups of people who feel excluded from the full experience that some selection of the body of politic is normalized to. The excluded portion can tend to become fatalistic about their destinies. "It has always been liked this, because it must be like this". This sort of thing happens in every country, especially America. It's so hard to come up with a solution in America, since so many of the privileged refuse to acknowledge it's occurrence. But here in Thailand, I think the field may be more easily changed, though it will take genuine social service.
While it may be harder for someone to change their own luck in Thailand, it seems much more likely that small acts of service can impact greatly here. Thailand's economy owes a large portion of income to tourism, but more than their present, their future calls for them to have basic English skills. Thailand is one of the ASEAN nations that will move to using English as an official language soon. This economic and supra-political coalition of south east Asian nations will likely drastically change the pathways that Thai's take towards social progression. Here's the thing though, while other countries in this group were once colonized and therefore, under terrible and nonredeemable circumstances, have come to know English in large proportions, Thailand is the only south east Asian country never colonized. As a result English is rare here. Mostly only the upper classes and small portions of city population have a chance to learn English, and if you are somewhere really rural you will likely meet less than twenty natural English speaking persons in your life.
But what you have to understand is, that the kids here are smart. They want to learn more than any kids I've ever meet (which is cliche but none the less true). They want to be better, and they aren't thinking of a higher tax bracket (I'm not even sure that term applies in Thailand), they are thinking personal betterment. All they need is a chance. Yes it would be great if I could get some kids to read Jane Eyre and write essays (I can be Du Boisian about this), but helping them understand basic conversational skills is going to do so much to open doors for their future and in turn they can return to these villages to uplift others, and the need for western intervention will dwindle. This is the hope: A completely autonomous and self determinate society, with true freedom to determine, not merely a facade of freedom to choose between the little afforded them currently. True freedom entails the ability to choose a third option rather than the two that a hierarchical structure offers you. Progress is incremental. I want to see myself as a small part of that.              

Re-Focusing

Ok so things haven’t gone as planned because I haven’t been able to get internet every day. My connection should be more stable. I just moved from Lampong to Chiyaboon. Chiyaboon is in the middle of nowhere but I’m getting way better reception here.

I want to continue to be dedicated to writing this blog, but to do that I need more time to focus on finding things to write about. Also I just need some time to write lesson plans. So we are re-odering the posting schedule in order to continue the blog. The blog will now update 3 times a week: My Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday? This is Monday, Tuesday and Thursday in America. We will see how this turns out.

The drive from Lampong to Chiyapoon took 12 hours. I was able to see a lot of the country on my travel pretty much across it. I also ran into a lot more of the military. There are military check points in between all the major cities. Most just wave you on through, which seems to defeat the point of a check point, but Mai Pen Rai. A few stopped us and shone a flashlight into the van. One opened the door. It’s a bit nerve racking to have a military man open the door to your van, but they were all smiling. They might have just wanted to see the weird American students our driver said we’re in the back, going to chiyaboon of all places. I don’t really have any great insights to say about check points.

I think I might want to say something about the importance of infrastructure though. There are so many people in Thailand who live secluded lives away from the rest of the larger cities. We passed by so many people selling items on the street in what seemed to be the middle of nowhere and walking down dirt roads that seem to lead into a world lost to those of us who spend our entire lives in the city. I mean my father is from Bamberg, South Carolina, so I know dirt roads, but I’ve never seen anything like what I saw yesterday. The highways here are the only things that could offer them a change of life. I’m not saying that they need to change their lives, or that they should be ashamed of the way that they live. But as a country, there is a responsibility to give them that opportunity to do so. The upkeep of roads is only one example of the needed infrastructural investment in Thailand. I will do a longer post concerning internet, schools, and pluming a little later.

So remember new posting dates: Saturday, Tuesday, Thursday,        

Explanation and Short Recap

There was no post last night because there was no internet in my hotel last night. This sort of thing happens in Thailand. There is a Mai Pen Rai culture. Mai Pen Rai translates roughly to don't worry about it.So some times your lights will go out (even on the plans which was the most scary thing for someone who doesn't fly often), Mai Pen Rai. Sometimes your internet goes out Mai Pen Rai. Sometimes it happens at the same time as another weird event concerning the internet, Mai Pen Rai?

Yesterday when I got home the general of the Thai army was on all the TV stations. He was warning that there may be a restriction of social media sites such as Facebook. He said that there have been those on those sites trying to insight violence and chaos. I don't doubt that there have been call for protests on Facebook, though I don't think it's that big of a deal. Mass protests in Thailand against the military just doesn't seem likely. I was in a market when the national anthem started playing (it plays everywhere twice a day) and everyone just stopped in there tracks, stood up, and fell silent. It's the weirdest sight. The people who do this sort of thing seem unlikely to rebel.

The only worrisome thing is that the military seems to be taking these threats more seriously than I would. Also they haven't announced an election, though they have promised one. Whether or not this coup could be considered an OK thing to me would depend on the delivery of a legitimate and open election. I have no reason to believe that this won't happen, but the delay is less than settling. But most people here don't seem worried. Mai Pen Rai    
 

The promise of Education inherent in Democracy

*note tonight is going to be a quick post because of a hectic day, and a well-deserved social interaction session—will get back to Dostoevsky paragraphs tomorrow. There be typos.   

                I’m in Thailand primarily to teach English, and today I was able to visit a Thai school and sit in, observe, and even teach classes for the first time. There are three things to note here: 1. the importance of the English language versus distaste for cultural destruction. 2. The ASEAN focus. 3. Witnessing an election, that spoke volumes. The basic point I want to bring from all of these is that a democracy that functions in any way that could be effectively called democratic must ensure education for all participants (what that education consists of is debatable, but that it is necessary seems insurmountable). And secondly that the only sort of patriotism or general political ambition I can condone is one that sees progress as key to life, and identity as constantly in flux.

                I had a conversation with some other American English teachers, all who are of course, highly educated at top schools and bright in individualistic in liberal arts types of ways. Some comments struck me as familiar to I felt before and I do believe that their solution was also the solution I eventually came to. How can you say that all cultures are equally valid and all forms of expression, equally on fire with a sacred (secular) fire of life and go to a country to teach kids to be more western? This is a fair critic and one that I battled with immensely (I will revisit this in a longer post, but I want to get, it’s basically the most important political-philosophical question of the global era). Well when I walked into a classroom today a student bravely stood up and told me that she wanted to be a doctor. Later on in that same class she told me that she wanted to live in America. This is such a big deal. Sometimes we philosophers can get so away from people that we forget they aren’t just theoretical. There was a little girl and she had a dream—a ‘non-superficial’, super important dream, on fire with that sacred flame I alluded to earlier. The gift of English would allow her to accomplish that goal and I would dare deny here that because some people are worried or upset a status quo so old that no one remembers its point of origin will be disturbed? I will not. She will still be Thai, in fact she will be the one to define what that even means in her day.

                Thailand is part of the ASEAN community and if you didn’t know before you went into a classroom, you would after. Facts about ASEAN embroider the walls of every classroom. They see the success and flourishing of that community of south Asian countries as the key to their future development, and the official language to that is English. So here we have two points of geopolitics intertwining: the need to band together in like-minded groups to secure your shared prosperity and the need to be a member of a larger world that is going to engulf you whether you move towards it or not. The world is global and there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. We must learn what democracy means in this age.  

Lastly, I want to talk about an election I witnessed today that was momentous. It was the school election for the class presidents of every grade school class. I say this humorously, but I do think that there is immense value in the process. The elections were conducted on actual election boxes that are used in elections (like the ones we use in America and the ones that soon Thai’s will hopefully be returning to). The boxes were brought out and set up by the ROTC students, an extremely popular program here. And all the students got to vote. Now, this may be a superficial vote (I didn’t hear any of the candidate’s platforms), but it shows the children a glimpse of a future that they should be promised. This allows them to acclimate and prepare for the enormous burden that is participating in a liberal democracy. And as we learned on our last few posts, this may be one of the most important lessons that these kids could learn to ensure future triumph. Thanks for reading. I will do better tomorrow.                     

Ideal Worlds versus Real Worlds and Giving the Scary Guys the Benefit of the Doubt

OK so this may be a controversial post, but probably not for the reasons you’d expect. I want to talk about the recent arrest of the former cabinet minister of the Thai government, as he denounced the coup. It’s an interesting conversation, because we Americans believe in Democracy to such an extent, that it seems like any breach of that democracy must have been done by malicious forces. I can tell you that I can’t find one piece of evidence to support this. For those not familiar with what happened Tuesday, AFP reported “Bangkok (AFP) - Thai soldiers swooped to detain a fugitive former cabinet minister on Tuesday after he emerged from hiding to become the first member of the ousted government to publicly denounce a military coup.” The former official held a press conference in which he stated his opinions openly about the coup. He knew that he would be arrested, and he still firmly believed that it was the right thing to do.

Here’s the thing, maybe he’s not wrong, but I also don’t think that the military is wrong. At least in Lampiog, there doesn't seem to be a negative view on the military. Even university students here, a demographic notorious for political angst, seem to see the military in a less negative light than many in the western media has portrayed them. As I walked next to a train station/ pop up market yesterday I saw military men in full uniform carrying automatic weapons. This, of course, can be disheartening or generally scary for American tourists. The two young Thai university girls with me, they took the opportunity to take selfies. They asked if I wanted to try and get one with a solider. I declined, though when I tell this story later in life I’ll fudge that part. That’s a humorous slant on a very serious issue but it is a reaction indicative of a general feeling. Thailand is not a violent place. There are low crime rates, and the popular sport Maui Thai (A mix of kick boxing and other fighting styles native to Thailand) is general disliked by Thais because of their feelings towards aggression. Overwhelmingly, it is foreigners who really enjoy and support the sport. But, during the protests people were actually dying here. From everything that I have seen of Thailand that doesn’t make sense.

So the military stepped in and seized power, not granting it to one side over the other through political-gainsmanship, rather they stepped in and removed both sides of the conflict. Now perhaps this move doesn’t make sense to Americans. But let’s give this some serious and critical thought. Both sides of the conflict seemed completely entrenched in the idea that their side was the legitimate voice in Thailand. In my last post, I talked about the necessity for someone to be willing to lose for a democracy to properly operate. In a situation in which both sides showed less than superb leadership to end the conflict peacefully for the sake of saving lives, there was a force whose whole mission is to protect a nation, that stood there with enough power to act, and what they say, was a legitimate reason to—to ensure peace only. This reminds me particularly of the Egyptian army.

 The Thai military didn’t really seize power, so to speak. They always had power. During the revolts in Egypt some questioned the role of the military really without thinking about a possible motive. Militaries are often painted as power hungry factions within foreign countries but neither the Thai nor Egyptian army are power hungry. I’m not saying that they are benevolent, but rather that they already held the largest share of power within their respective countries. The Egyptian army corners basically most of the major economic markets within Egypt and is the most stable organization within that country by far. This is similar to Thailand. In Thailand the military has not had to face the political drawbacks of democracy (unhappy citizenry entitled to a voice). The royal family enjoys a large amount of popularity as I have noted but though everyone seems to love the king and his daughter, there are those who worry about who will take over if the aging king passes. (Let me be clear to any possible Thai readers, this is not a criticism. This is simply a restatement of some of the things I have heard from the Thai people.) The military however, does not have to operate in such a strong feedback loop. In both Thailand and Egypt, the military has had really one motive: ensure stability regardless of the leader because that is their job, and to their advantage.

Often we good liberals can paint a reactionary and negative picture of military forces without really thinking about it critically (note I include myself in those that make this mistake). In truth, militaries were devised to organize a citizenry against a physical threat that looms too large for individuals to combat or police forces to police. Perhaps, one could object that these have to be external threats, but I think only the most radical of thinkers would object to the military in America, attacking credible threats of domestic terrorism or mass violence committed by citizens. If twenty people died in an American protest tomorrow, we would be clamoring for the National Guard to swoop in and restore order. What I’m saying is that, in an ideal world. Democracy and the agency it affords individuals should be cherished and held in the highest of regards. However, in a world in which two opposing political parties start killing each other, someone has to consider the right of impartial parties to ensure their security and life. I’m not taking a side here. I love democracy, but I’m just saying, it’s also nice to know that I won’t be caught in the cross-hairs of an unreasonable political actor.                  

Lastly I want to make two notes. First, everyone was asked by the military to turn themselves in for questioning, and some who complied have even been already released. He was already wanted, not because of his denouncements, in which he said “from now on there will be more and more resistance”, which was a poor choice of phrasing. Secondly, the curfew, that was already lax in enforcement, was eased today from 12(midnight) to 4(in the morning). Thanks for reading.                             

Context and the Difference between Liberalism and Illiberalism

One of the problems with Western perception of the current political happenings in Thailand is a general lack of context. No one can reasonably blame the average citizen for not knowing much about the history of a country half way across the world, but if someone is reading this (you made it to the second post!) then  they are probably the type of person who chats with friends about this sort of thing, or considers themselves a scholar. That would mean that this would be a good place to add some well needed context to the conversation. Given the prevalence of Buddhism, one could easily and reasonably assume a strong influence of Indian culture onto Thailand, and this is very much accurate. The influence largely can be credited to the legendary Indian Emperor Ashoka, who plays a critical role in many southeastern mythic-historical accounts including the Mahavamsa, which is at the root of Sri Lankan Just War Buddhist doctrines. Really, Thailand starts to take shape as the place we know it to be in 1782 when Bangkok was established as the capital of Thailand by Rami 1 the Great. Though there is a rich history of the time between this and modern Thailand to be explored, I won’t burden you with the details or myself with doing more research tonight. What we have above will suffice.

 Jump ahead to the modern era and an interesting fact steps out. Thailand is the only southeastern country to never become colonized, which was partly due to the land concessions that the King made to European forces to secure the vast majority of Thai land. This ability to self-determine has led to some interesting outcomes. There is always infighting in a country the age of Thailand, but any bitterness that persists is nothing compared to the lasting effects of Imperialism on countries like those in Northern Africa, the Middle East and even its neighbors in Southern Asia. The preservation of religious autonomy has developed a rich cultural history and a country dripping with physical history and symbolism of grand and venerable importance. The political character of Thailand, for most of its history, was absolute monarchy. There had been slight murmurs of democracy and self-governance in Thailand, but in 1932, the unsuspected thing happened. I have heard two versions of this story. In the first version the King did what no one expected and voluntarily abdicated full power of the country in favor of a constitutional monarchy in which he would retain certain powers and give the rest to a democratically elected body. Another version of the story states that some citizens and military officers took the power in a bloodless revolution. I can’t confirm the validity of either story, yet in any case, we see a leader who was able to surrender power without the need for violence or warfare—this is going to be an important point when we start to talk about what is happening today. In all likely-hood the king did not have to relinquish any power at all. After all, he was seen as a ‘Dharmaraja’ which means that he is a ‘King who rules in accordance with Dharma’. Even to this day the king is honored in god like status by many loyalists and there were many very unhappy with the idea that their pseudo god-king would not be in absolute country. Today as I walked in a market in Lampong everyone eating got up out of their seats stared directly in front of them and paused silently. I realized that they were observing the King’s anthem. Everyone did it without coercion or hesitance—even children and the elderly. It is still illegal to criticize the king of Thailand, who wields more power in the government than occurs in British Constitutional Monarchy. The rules about criticism are taken seriously by the citizens who still like the king very much even today. Despite the power of influence and respect wielded by the monarchy, Thailand has not been without its political turmoil. It’s the constitutional aspect of the Constitutional Monarchy that has faced the majority of the issues. As I alluded to in the previous post, coups are nothing new to Thailand— since 1932 there have been about 30 or so coups.

Though again let’s put this into context. Fifty years ago there were only ten cars in the district of Lampong. Everyone used horse and carriage—today only used to shuttle the occasional romantic tourist who doesn’t (yet) know how bad horses smell. Seventy years may seem like a long time but it took America, under the government that persists today, almost 200 years to move from ‘Illiberal Democracy’ to what can be considered the liberal democracy it is today. ‘Illiberal Democracy’ is a term mostly credited to Fareed Zakaria and it refers to a democracy in which the regular orders of democratic life break down at some point— be it at ensuring equitable civil liberties, or holding free and fair elections, or just functioning in a genuine non-corrupt way. Despite the high scores Thailand makes on the Human Developmental Index (the best in South East Asia), Thailand still seems to suffer from the inability to function in the way that a democracy basically should—notably the ability to accept the outcomes of an election. Fareed Zakaria revisited the issues of illiberal democracies in his praise of Mexico’s leader’s ability to stand next to each other on a stage, after months of fierce ideological debate, and have the successor willingly and gladly hand over power to those who were elected in his stead. This represented a landmark in Mexico’s political history—for a country plagued by partisan rebukes of election results in every election cycle, this is a big deal. Zakaria referenced the American 2000 elections, which saw a down to the wire decision that was obviously controversial and debatable. He said that American democracy was actually put to the test that next morning and it succeeded with flying colors. The ability for Al Gore to accept what felt like an obviously contestable lose, proved America’s ability to respect the process and mechanics codified in our constitution and that ensure liberal society. Thailand, it seems, has not quite reached that point. This is not unreasonable. The country’s democratic aspects are still relatively young and it took the United States twice the time, to even be able to call themselves a fully liberal democracy. Here is where the coup comes to play. Is it a good idea for a military junta to take over the government in order to ensure stability and reset the democratic functions? Is that really what they’re doing? Were the elections even legitimate in the first place? These are all questions this blog will be exploring in detail in the upcoming weeks. Thank you for reading. Please stay tuned.                   

We begin with a Question

The last few years, have seen their fair share of political upheavals. What would the first half of this decade be without the Arab Spring? What is to become of Venezuela? How can we reach a critically equitable solution to the Ukrainian problem, which threatened to throw the entire world back thirty years? So when I heard about the problems in Thailand, like so many others, I thought I had some general idea about where this was going. I thought that this was the next Domino. As I prepared to take a job in that country for nine months, I did my research and learned that I might have been mistaken. And getting here today I now know that I don’t get it at all. Whatever Thailand is said to be in the media or over a water cooler, that isn’t what greeted me. I flew into a country under Martial Law, and didn't realize it until I was two minutes late for mandatory curfew, and lost in a dark and alleyway market.  It also seemed I wasn't the only one who forgot about it— it seems the crowds of native Thai’s, and the police did as well.

‘Life goes on as usual, this is nothing new’. This is the message that I got from everyone who had actually been in Thailand for an extended amount of time, or was living in the land during the coup. Of course, my employers could have been lying to get me to continue to accept moving half way across the world to a country with a destabilizing (turned non-active) government. But this was told to me by friends, by mentors, and by people who had taken the trip themselves and had nothing to lose by telling me the truth. Nevertheless, my nervousness persisted. But the truth is Thailand is not a powder keg. It’s not going to blow any second. It’s probably not going to blow at all. How can this be? We all saw the protests on TV, and we saw how passionate the parties were against each other. But as I saw myself in a crowd of people— people not running home as curfew loomed ever closer, I knew that something different was happening here. Folks in Thailand seem actually pretty relaxed— scratch that— insanely relaxed. How can this dichotomy persist? How can the Land of Smiles also be the Land of the Repeating Coup, averaging about one every six years? This is what this blog is going to be about. I want to look at Thailand in the light of Contemporary Political Thought, Ancient Buddhist philosophy, the on the ground experience of an amateur philosopher from the West in a country he doesn't understand. I hope to post daily here, but I don’t know how reliable my internet will be, and I don’t know my schedule. Likely most posts, like this one, will be hastily planned in the morning on a piece of tissue paper and cobbled together late at night, instead of sleeping. I hope we can all learn something.