The first two of the following links were found on 2Bangkok.com and relate to the International Conference on Thai Studies currently being held at Thammasat University in Bangkok. The conference includes potentially controversial discussions on the role of the Thai monarchy in society and the presentation of a paper written by Paul Handley, the author of the banned royal biography 'The King Never Smiles'.

News article

Abstracts relating to the conference strand on the role of the monarchy

Review of The King Never Smiles

Rich

Here is a report on part of the conference...

Link

Intersting links

The wiki entry makes for a nice summary

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej

Is it the man or the institution which is revered and what happens if a heirarchical society has no effective head ?

The next decade will tell. Interesting times indead

Richard

Just caught up with this topic.

quote:

Is it the man or the institution which is revered

I think historically it was the institution by default, but in recent times 'the man' has kept up the momentum on his own merit. What happens in a future Thailand without his influence remains to be seen. Perhaps modern Thais, having revered the King - for most, the only one they have ever known - because, arguably, he deserved it, will have difficulty showing the same adulation to someone merely because they have to.

Interesting stuff and, as Richard says, even more interesting times ahead.

My wife reveres the present King to an absolute extent and almost supposes that all that is created in the way of progress for Thailand is due to him.

Regarding his son and heir to the throne she is differently blunt and says that most Thais would prefer his older sister to take the throne. I wonder if her view will change once this heir does become king . . .

Quote
-------------------------------------------------------
My wife reveres the present King to an absolute extent and almost supposes that all that is created in the way of progress for Thailand is due to him.

Regarding his son and heir to the throne she is differently blunt and says that most Thais would prefer his older sister to take the throne. I wonder if her view will change once this heir does become king . . .
Quote---------------------------------------------------

Exactly what my wife says, but my wife also reveres our Queen and the Royal Family anything about them has to be put on to DVD.

My wife too is adamant that the present Thai King is a 'god' whereas the next generation is not fit for office, except for as your wife says, if it was the second daughter who became monarch. Again my wife feels our Royal Family should be held in esteem and looks at British society with alarm and says many of our social ills come about due to a lack of respect for our Royalty, our families and elders and(past) way of life.
Some time ago there was a discussion on racism and immigration and some of us were astonished that our partners could show discrimmination against other immigrants but not so. Thais in UK are agast that we have 'surrendered' our customs and culture to placate and implicate foreigners into British society. As an aside did anyone else see the piece on Enoch Powel yesterday on television? My wife wants to see more on this man from Wolverhampton and his views.

Missed that, but I would be interested in seeing it - anyone know if it will get shown elsewhere?

quote:

Is it the man or the institution which is revered and what happens if a heirarchical society has no effective head ?

I am pretty sure it is the man, not the institution. For instance, the chakri dynasty seized control - the royal title does not have a long unbroken line.

Secondly, the present king has assidulously built up merit in the eyes of the Thai people by his charitable acts and his whole demeanour. Strangely, it does not matter if the money provided for his acts comes from big business - they gain merit by giving it to him, he gains merit by giving it to charity!

The book "The King Never Smiles" provides some exceellent insights. NB it is banned in Thailand to not suitable for holiday reading!

Ian

quote:

Originally posted by IanB:

quote:

Is it the man or the institution which is revered and what happens if a heirarchical society has no effective head ?

I am pretty sure it is the man, not the institution.

Perhaps, but I feel the Lèse Majesté laws also play a significant part.

I am inclined to agree that it is the man that is revered, not the institution, further I see, in the law of succession, the slight suggestion that the heir apparent may not be the eventual king but that the way is there for the very popular princess to be crowned Queen. What do others think?
quote:
Recent constitutions of Thailand have made the amendment of the Palace Law of Succession the sole prerogative of the reigning King. According to Gothom Arya, former Election Commissioner, this allows the reigning King, if he so chooses, to appoint his son or any of his daughters to the Throne.

quote:

Originally posted by Tobias:

quote:

Originally posted by IanB:

quote:

Is it the man or the institution which is revered and what happens if a heirarchical society has no effective head ?

I am pretty sure it is the man, not the institution.

Perhaps, but I feel the Lèse Majesté laws also play a significant part.

I think most Thais would never speak out against the king because of his high merit status, regardless of any lese majeste. Without lese majest maybe more educated Thais would speak out - but I don't think they would change the respect that is held for the king by most people.

You may well be right Ian, I don't know what the average Thai thinks about it. I know Jenny's view and that of some of her family and that view is certainly held not in fear of the law. That view is of a well respected King, the man himself on his own merit, by the way.

However, some dissenters may not offer an opinion for fear of the law so difficult to judge.

An inappropriate law in my view in a modern society. But when in Thailand one that I do of course observe.

quote:

Originally posted by Tobias:
An inappropriate law in my view in a modern society.

You are apparently not alone (translation).

See also EDITORIAL: A serious and sensitive issue–Bangkok Post and Testing Free Speech in Thailand.

Mook thinks the daughter should be the next queen, but I doubt this will happen.

Almost every Thai I know reveres the current king, but does not expect to feel the same way about his successor.

There are two really interesting issues in this thread.

(1) The issue of the Lèse Majesté law. It is easy to say it is inappropriate in a modern, democratic age, but it is probably only as inappropriate as the monarchy itself. If you've got one, it sort of makes sense to have both.

(2) The question of 'what happens if a hierarchical society has no effective head'. Japan is in that situation. The royal family is pretty irrelevant since the second world war, and other than Koizumi (the guy with the long hair), pretty much all prime ministers have been weak and short-lived. So although theoretically, you would think having no visible head might be an issue, Japan has prospered very nicely without one.

Oan, which of your premises do you think is correct?

I have always found both the UK monarchy and the Thai monarchy kind of interesting, and have a vague feeling that the world would be a less interesting place without them, as everything else is so 'transactional' - i.e. scrambling to be elected. However I also think that monarchies don't really make sense in this day and age.

But another problem is around globalization. The world has become such a small place that we feel that just because we can fly everywhere in a few hours, we can apply our way of thinking to every country. Societies evolve at different paces, across many different dimensions - values, structures etc. So - in short - I am more sure that the monarchy is out-of-date in the UK than Thailand.

Tobias - where do you stand - I sense you are a little anti-monarchy?

quote:

Originally posted by oan:
... Tobias - where do you stand - I sense you are a little anti-monarchy?

I don't have any problems with monarchies, it's the Lèse Majesté laws I find objectionable.

quote:

Mook thinks the daughter should be the next queen, but I doubt this will happen.

I may be wrong (!!!), but didn't the king change the law to allow female successiion? I think in the end it will be his choice before he pops his venerable clogs.

Ian

Yes he did IanB, as I wrote above on the 10th of March:

quote:

Recent constitutions of Thailand have made the amendment of the Palace Law of Succession the sole prerogative of the reigning King. According to Gothom Arya, former Election Commissioner, this allows the reigning King, if he so chooses, to appoint his son or any of his daughters to the Throne.

Ooops sorry!

One way would be for HM The King to appoint his daughter, Princess Sirindhorn (known as Phra Thep) as the next monarch, with the proviso that she appoints the Crown Prince's baby son as the King after her.

DavidJohn posted :-

quote:

my wife feels our Royal Family should be held in esteem

When my wife Nat first came here in 2001 she was extremely shocked by the irreverent references to the British Royal Family, on TV programmes such as "Have I Got News For You". She just could not accept that any Royal person could possibly be treated in this way.

As regards the Thai King, clearly he is mortal, and clearly his time on this earth is now a bit limited. I fear, irrespective of who succeeds him, there will be deep feelings of mourning in Thailand for the loss of such a loved King, when eventually he does pass.