When the Shit Hits the Fan?

I have been asked about posibilities that the Thai military would "launch a coup" against PM Abhisit many times for the past few months, especially these past few weeks after one of PAD's leader, Veera Somkwamkid, was captured and held by the Cambodian authority.

People who have asked me may think that I am supposed to have some "leaks" from my dad, a retired militarry officer. The truth is that, what is spreading in our society is just words from the world of mouths. "He says that a BIG name in the military will conduct a coup VERY SOON." "Naah, he won't do that. No one wants to live the rest of their lives in hell like the last guy who did the coup. What was his name again???" That kind of conversation.

Until this very evening that the Thai and Cambodian armies fired at each other and that caused the worst falre-up over decades. The clashes killed at least six people and damaged properties on both sides. Both the Thai and Cambodian armies claimed that they didn't start firing, and that the firing went off from the other sides first. Of course, when two people are saying different things about the same issue, it means that one of them is lying.

The matter of discussion here is not about "who" is lying, but rather about "why" they have to lie. To answer this question, we may look at sequences that came after this scence. First, the Cambodian vowed to take the issue to UN Security Council.

Second, the Thai Defence Minister, Prawit Wongsuwan assured the public that he and his ministry along with the Thai military are negotiating about this matter and everything will be fine.

Third, the Army Cheif, Prayut Chun-o-cha revealed that the firing was over and some Thai soilders were injured.

Fourth, PM Abhisit told the press that the Thai armies fired shots of warning and responsed to Cambodian's shots when the warning shots were ignored, but failed to confirm if some Thai soilders were captured.

From these 4 scenarios above, I believe that there are 3 main groups of elites: Cambodian government; the Thai military and; the Democratic Party. What we should discuss here is not "which one among these 3 groups will benefit most from this clash?" but "who among these 3 will lose benefit the most?"

In my perspective, the Cambodian government would be able to nail Thailand about the on-going territory disagreement by using this very fresh firing event--with little help form the United Nations. So, the Cambodian will benefit most.

Apart from that, the Thai military would be able to use this "security and dignity of Thailand"--related to this territory disagreement and the role of the military in defending the country (from who?)--as a good enough excuse to launch a coup... Finally! Therefore, the military gets their share as well!

However, the goat in this story is the Democratic Party. From what I heard in the news, the PM sounded a bit indifferent about this firing event. As a citizen of Thailand and a student of Politics, I would propose that the PM show more concerns and care about the Thai military, especially for those soilders who we don't know if they were captured by the Cambodian authorities. The PM doesn't have to really care about the Thai military, but, as the politial leader of the country, he should at least be aware that his British cold and heartless personality is not always the best card to play.

One of the Western's sayings I like is "When the shit hits the fan." It means "messy and exciting consequence brought about by previously secret stiuation becoming public."

What I would to comnclude here is that the most appropriate question to ask is "whose face is in front of the fan?" In this case, I would stay away from the fan if I were PM Abhisit.

Source: http://www.phrases.org.uk./meanings/407950.html

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/02/05/national/Border-clashes-kill-six-3014805.html

Picture was retrieved from: http://www.thaisweden.com/2010/12/wikileaks-2006.html

[Book] Politics: an Introduction--Chapter 1 (Abisit, Thaksin, or the system?)

Now we are at the first chapter of the book, and it is also the first chapter for this very first part: People and Politics. The name of the chapter is "Is Politics Really About People." What a good question, to begin with!



We are all individuals in the sense that we are a single human-being and the word "individual" suggests "originality and uniqueness" in each of us. However, what the authors try to point here is that there have been arguments if individuals are generic or made through the socialization process. Now you may not know what socialization is at this moment, but--no worries--we will cover this issue in the chapter 2--Political Socialization.

Anyway, the meaning of the word "individual" varies and is sensitive to time and space. [Guys you will hear this "sensitive to time and space and, or context specific" a lot. So, please bare with that because, all in all, it is the property of politics which makes this field of study interesting (and confusing sometimes).] For instance, in Western philosophy, individuals are placed as centrality and primacy of politics. No woder, that discussions about human rights and individual rights first started there. On the other hand, individuals are seen as subjects in Eastern states. More importantly, the definitions of individual also varies throughout time. in ancient Greek, which believed to be the birthplace of democracy, women, children, and slaves were seen as men's/head of the family's properties.

Therefore, if we take the "individual level of analysis," ancient Greek shouldn't have been called democratic state.

In this chapter, the authors provide us 3 questions of analysis. First, we need to look at relationship between the individual (agent/subject) and wider processes and institutions (structures). For example, to analyze how open the Thai political system is, we may look at the petition for law amending process.

Second, we need to at concepts and status of individuals in a certain country. And, third, we need to assess the extent to which the individual gains the capacity for effective political action. Can we perform a demonstration in front of the government house if we are upset about our education system? Will our voices be heard and will our opinoin be significant enough that the officials will take into account? Those are all important questions to ask.

Now we get to the point to decide if we want to study politics by seeing it as parts or whole. There are 3 main things that we should be concerned. first, Mutually Exclusivity tells us that we could make mistakes by saying that we can make inference about other things when we study one thing, or we could face individualistic fallacy and ecological or systematic fallacy. We (think we) know one thing doesn't mean that we know other things.

Second, Redcutionists tell us that one study doesn't apply to all (No one size fits all) and we can't say that it is individual who create events. Some Thais blame Thaksin for almost all events occuring in Thailand: corruption, illieration, poverty, oil price, Prah Vihear temple and problems along Thai-cambodia border, traffic congestion, flood, draught, etc. There is something wrong with this logic.

Third, structurationists, like Anthony Giddens, would tell us that "structures are socially constructed." Which means that "actors make/reproduce structures but they are infromed or constrained and their lives are given context by them." Makes sense?

From what we already know from reading this blog, there are 2 main things here to be looked at: Individual and Structure. When we look at each, we call it "the form of analysis." There are also 2 main forms of analysis: Form of individual analysis (or methodological individualism--such as behavioralism) and form of functional analysis (such as functionalism and marxism). We will see if we agree with that later!

The last concept in this chapter is the "modern individual." Modernity, as pointed in the Enlightenment's era, suggests that individual is the smallest form of political actors--indivisible. And Renaissance thought gives soveriegn and autonomous as properties of individuals. There is something we should carefully examine in modern individual concepts, however. That is, it also performs systematic exclusion of people by using stereotypes.

Apart from that, utilitarianism sees human asutility maximizer or economic man, thinking that humans are rational creatures and social life is nothing more than a market place. Nonetheless, Mancur Olson felt that there could be an issue of "free riders" if ones who benefit from goods and services don't put their efforts into organizations. The French and American revolutions could express the capacity of individuals to well act as a group, though the sense of the two revolution is different and affects individuals of the two countries' political behaviors even in the present. That is, the Americans would participate in social and/or political organizations than the Frnch would, but the French would gather and perform strike much quicker especially when they feel skeptical towards their government--which is almost all the time...

Goran Therborn explains individual rights as citizenship to claim and act and to be under the protection of the state, while Alexis de Toqueville sees American patriotism as collective act, and Jean Francoise Lyotard says that individuals and collectivism is not the matter of discussion anymore, rather Postmodern... It depends on what you believe, I guess.

There are "3 As" to look at the issue of individual and the capacity for meaningful actions. Are individuals "ALLOWED" to express dislike or disagreement to the authorities and to express themselves? Is the political process "ACCESSIBLE" to ordinary individuals, like you and me? Is the resource the individuals need in communication and expression of their political rights (such as the Internet, the genreal elections, etc) "AVAILABLE" in the certain country?

Those are all the important questions we should find the answers. Next time we will talk about the chapter 2: Political Socialization!

[Book] Politics: an Introduction--Introduction

Okay kids. I knew I promised you guys that I would write clipnotes for you on this blog. You have kept reminding me several times and I just kept forgetting. Baaaaaad bad professor, I am.


Here, since I am keeping my words, is the clipnote for the introduction of our required book.





Let's get back to the introduction of this book. First of all, I have to remid you (and myself) that I have chosen this book for our class because the book discusses why politics should be studied and it encourages students to think about "daily politics" by pointing observable experience of political world (that ordinary people like you and me would be able to experience) in the book's content so that the readers could see themselves as active actors in political world. (This is kinda "Yes, we can!" ideology).





The first thing the introduction tells us is that "politics is important." Why? Actually, the book doesn't really explain why politics important but, at least, it tries to explain that politics is not a very easy thing to define.





We may take a look at "what" constitutes politics first. In a country with representative democacy like Thailand, we may think of general election when thinking of the word politics, or we may just simply think of what the Prime Misnister and the Members of Parliament do at the govenment house. Is politics only about voting in general elections or what happens at the government house? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!





Politics is almost about everything in our lives--our peers; our languages; our clothes etc. Therefore, that also means that politics can occur everywhere as well. That was the answer of "where" politics takes places.

To study politics, you need to know that there are 2 main approaches in acquiring political knowledge: 1. Normative appoarch, which is what ougth to be or what should be in the IDEAL world (Thailand is a land of smile and peace.. bla bla bla) and 2. Empirical approach, which is what actually happens in the REAL world (There were many violent demonstrations in the past years).

Also, the unit of analysis is another important thing that you need to make up your mind when studying politics. What is your subject of inquiry? What do you want to make sense out of? The smallest unit of analysis is the individual level of analysis--to analyze an individual--or it can be an analysis of functions and structures (such as governmental regimes, political ideologies, countries, etc).

Apart from that, as we already studied in the class that after the Second World War, there has been an attempt to make politics science. And here we go "political science". But can we really take politics as science? If we can, we may need to bare in mind that, first, there is no clear cut between fact and value and between what is right and what is wrong. For instance, we cannot put the former PM Thaksin Shinawatara and this current PM Abisit Vejjajiva (I hope that he is still the current PM when this blog is launched) on a scale and say who is a better PM without bringing our judgements into the discussion.

Second, even if we use statistical methods to collect and analyze data, we are only able to explain the data or trends over time, but we are not able to explain political phenomena by placing causal relationship on the set of data. For example, we know that most people in the South of Thailand vote for the Democratic Party but we don't know why they vote for the party and we cannot say that every single person from the South has to vote for the particular party. If they have to, that would be very sad and very undemocratic.

Finally, we have to be aware of "the language of politics." The language of politics is pretty much what we use to express ourselves. Now remember that when we speak, we do not only express our ideas but we also tell people who we are. That is the matter of "identity." I think the French would best present the case. That is, the French is known for being proud of their beautiful language and most French would reuse to speak other languages even if they know how to.

The language of politics, like politics itself, is sensitive to context--time and space. Which means that what we use to express certain idea in the past may not express the same idea today. To give an example, the word "homely" is used to describe a warm person in the UK and oriental coutries, but it means boring in the US. So, you better don't try complementing your American girlfriend that she is very homely... (You have been warned!).

Last thing about the language of politics is the radicals, such as feminists. Wait, I don't mean that to be feminists is to be radical, but I admit that there are some feminists who ae practicing the ideology a bit too radical. In other words, I have been friend with feminists who believe that the word human kind, which means the race of human, is rooted from "MAN" so we should change it to "womankind" in order to protect women from suppression; and that the word "history" is combined from "his" and "story"!!! So, in their perspective, history is nothing bigger than great tales of men. So, they ask why we can't change it to "herstory"???

Alright, I believe that to change the whole system of languange--so that women can have a better life--is way too and too irrational, and also very sad. It is not about the language kids. It is about the system.

That is for the introduction. Keep checking in for updates on the following chapters!

Nite,
Surada

[Book & Exam] TU-GET

Hey,





I am sorry for having been disappear for a while. I have been extremely busy. Anyway, I know that wasn't a good excuse.





Okay... I went to take the TU-GET exam on December 26th at Thammasat University's Rangsit campus and I just knew my score nights ago.



The thing is that I will have to submit the TU-GET score to the doctoral program in business at Thammasat Business Schoool because they require either 100 points for iBT-TOEFL/ 7 points for IELTS, or 600 point for TU-GET. I have my above 100 points for iBT-TOEFL but the score expired in the passed August. So, I have to find a way to meet the requirement of the school.

I was thinking for a while and coming up that I should take the TU-GET because it is much cheaper than TOEFL and IELTS. The test fee is 500 baht, while both TOEFL and IELTS cost around 5,000 baht. 10 times cheaper...

I registered for the December round of the test and I also found many interesting information at this site http://www.tu.ac.th/org/litu/Banner/06/thai/tuget1.html. After that, I went pay the test fee at a branch of Kasikorn bank nearby my house. Usually, it may take around 5 to 10 days that you will see on the website if TU-GET administration gets your money or not, and you will be able to see your test room, seat number, and your test ID.

To prepare for the test, I baught the book TU-GET updated edition which is written by TGRE Institute Publications from Thammasat University' bookstore. It costs me 330 baht. Unfortunately, I just found on its website days ago that they offer cheaper price if you buy from the TGRE itself. D-m- it!

Here comes the book review! The book has 3 parts: Explaining the TU-GET test; TU-GET review which consists of Structure review, Vocabulary review, and Reading comprehension review; and 8 sets of the TU-GET test with answers and brief explanation.

Personally, I life the first 2 parts of the book. It is because they provide me what the test is and what it is looking for. Therefore, I spent days studying the first 2 parts religiously before getting myself into the third part. However, I took a diacnostic test even before studying the first 2 parts so that I knew what my strenghts and weaknesses are.

After taking the diacnostic test, i realized that my grammar sucks and my reading comprehension is even worse. I got around 60 questions correct out of 100 with almost less than 15 questions correct from the reading comprehension part. That was a big "wake up call" to me.

Given that I have a full-time job and a couple of part-time job, I barely have time for preparing for the test and I finally get myself soild four days to study just right before the exam.

On these 4 days, I reviewed the first 2 chapter, especially the reading comprehension part and I worked on a couple of the mock tests on the very last day before the exam. Still, I didn't score as well as I wanted to.

On the test day, I got to the Thammasat's Rangsit campus an hour early to make sure that I have everything I need, but I forgot to bring my test room number and my seat number with me. No worries, I told myself and walking to the test administration room to get the numbers. It went very well. I got the number and going to take the test very very soon.

The time came and I took the test quietly for 3 hours with my lucky 2B pencils that I used almost 7 years ago in my undergraduate entrance exam when I was a desperate high school student trying to get myself into the best university in Thailand.

I found that the actual TU-GET test I took is waaaaaaay easier than the mock TU-GET and the review parts' questions of the test preparation book I baught. I really thought that I got almost every question right, but, yeah, there were some questions that were extremely freaking hard.

I finished it and walked away and almost completely forgot about it since I saw in the website that it would take about 10 days until the score will pop up on my computer screen and given that it was the New Year hollidays, I was expecting that I would know my score around the 10th of January.

On the 2nd of January's night, I was wokring on my desktop and getting a strange feeling about TU-GET so I checked on the website again, thinking that my score would not be available yet. I checked it and it was so fast that I didn't close my eyes in time.

I was super scared when I saw that "THE SCORE WAS THERE!!!"

But it was too late. I saw it.

After days of studying, I have no regret. I got 220 out of 250 in the Structure part; 210 out of 250 in the Vocabulary part; and 420 out of 500 in the Reading comprehension part. Hence I got 850 points in total, meaning I got 58 questions right out of 100 questions since the test has 100 questions and each of them worth 10 points.

It was a very darn good score for a preson who prepared for the test for just 4 days... hehehe

Okay, I suggest that, if you are taking the test, you read this book--borrow it or buy it (doens't matter). It is a good test prep material since it is freaking harder than the actual test. Plus, the review part is a knock-out! I do hope that this article is helpful for those thnking about taking TU-GET or CU-TEP tests.

This is it for now.

Love you all,
Surada

[Book] GMAT for Dummies (5th edition)--Chapter 1

Hello,

There is another book that I want to introduce to you guys, GMAT for Dummies--the 5th edition!

I have started reading it a month ago since I will have to take the GMAT test very soon. The reason why I have to take the test will be presented later. So you still have to put up with me and my blogging... Hehehe.

I baught this book from a well-known retailed bookstore in Bangkok, Kinokuniya's Siam Paragon branch.

At first, I went to Asia Book's Siam Paragon branch, seeing on the store's website that it offers a lower price for this book. However, a store employee told me that they didn't carry it anymore--but somehow their website said they did... How great...

So, I walked to Kinokuniya and got the book with a reasonable price, 617 baht, but I have a member card so the discount price is a bit cheaper.

I just finished the first part of the book--Putting the GMAT into Perspective--which is consisted of 2 chapters--Chapter 1: Getting the Lowdown on the GMAT; and Chapter 2: Maximizing Your Score on the GMAT, and I found the book very user-friendly.

That is, the authors--Scott and Lisa Hatch--don't use big words to explain the ideas of the test. Their writings is very simple and there are tips and jokes (some of the jokes are lame--I have to admit) to make sure that we don't just simply get lost in the book like we usually do when reading this kind of prep-test materials.

In chapter 1, the authors point why the GMAT is important and give us knowledge on GMAT, such as how the Graduate Management Admission Council scores the GMAT. (Please note that the organization who is in charge of GMAT is not ETS--the Educational Testing Service--who is responsible for the TOEFL, TOEIC, GRE, SAT and etc).

They also show us that there are 3 parts in GMAT test, which are verbal, quantitative, and analytical writing parts.

For the writing part, our essays will be scored based on the overall quality of our ideasand our abilities to organize, develop, express, and support the ideas.

There are 41 questions in he verbal part which is comprised of reading comprehension, sentence correction (spot and correct writing errors), and critrical reasoning (analyze arguments and see how to strengthen and/or weaken those).

Last, there are 37 questions in the quantitative part, having statistics and probability, arithmetic, algebra, geometry and data interpretation, standard problem-solving questions, as its core content.

That's the main concepts you should get out of the chapter one! I will get back to you guys later in this week. Honestly, I recommend this book for those who are not good at math in general, like me. That is because I have read many test-prep materials and I found them very "dry" and tormenting. This book is very much easier to read and make sense out of. I hope you will find it useful as I do. I mean, come on, this is the freaking 5th edition of the book!!!!!! The authors mus have done smething right...., right???

Okay. I will leave you guys for now. Gotta go bak to my reading.

See you,

Surada

[Book] Politics: an Introduction--First sight?

Folks,

I am now working on a class that I will need to brush up my knowledge on a very fundamental class of my field, Principles of Political Science.

Just thinking about the similar class I took when I was an undergraduate at the faculty of political science at Chulalongkorn university, I can still feel a freakingly bad taste in my mouth... It was a very very first compulsory class that we all, the freshmen of the faculty, had to take--whether we like it or not.

The class was split into 2 big sections and we had to study with 2 different professors. (If you graduated from this faculty before 2010, you will know why I chose the word "different" in this article... lol) We were required to read a book that is written in Thai (by one of the professors) for the first section and we had a kind-of course reader for the second section, which is written in English--but interpreted in Thai when the prof was teaching. I was very curious if the prof was spontaneously translating it just at the moment he was teaching us, or he had a written scripts hidden under his lecture table... I had not tried to prove what he was doing anyway. Rather, I decided to translate the whole d*m* reader and give it to all my classmates, plus one hard copy and one electronic copy to my professor, which I didn't go after and find what he did with those.

I didn't get a very impressive grade out of that class, mostly because I didn't understand most of the first section of the class. I found that--and I still believe so today--Thai academics have found a very confusing way to translate, and/or write textbooks/class materials. I am not sure whether it is because they want to sound smart, or they simply think that their students will be able to approach the "true knowledge" of the subjects, not just a "model" or "make-believe stuffs."

To be a student in Thailand, you need to bare with that.

Therefore, I can really say, as a lecturer, that I have no idea what I should do if I have to teach this fundamental class! Since it is a basis of the field, I might end up making my students' lives very miserable if my teaching sucks...

Consequently, I spent a whole day to find a very student-friendly book for my class at the Chulalongkorn University's central library, and, lucky enough, I found this book--Politics: an Introduction, written by Barrie Axford and his collegues at Oxford Brookes university. I was very happy then I remembered that both my professors who taught me this class graduated from England...

Uh..oh.. "Should I get a class material written by a Brit then?" I talked to myself.

Anyway, I decided to open the book and read it and, more importantly, I found it very interesting and very user-friendly as well. I will tell you more about this book next time.

Thank you for reading,

Surada

Me

Hi folks,

My name is Surada Chundasuta and this is my personal blog where I will share my thoughts, or reviews on current and contemparary issues.

Before I get to that, I think I should tell you more about myself.

I am a lecturer in Politics at a university in Bangkok, the heart of Thailand--AKA Land of Smile, which I don't know who put it as that first. I am also working for my family business and a co-founder of a bakery business, in which I will give you a link to that later.

I decieded to blog not just because I think it will be a good excercise for my brain and my English skill, but it also helps me to broadcast my written work and some ideas that I might not come up during classes. So, This is for a greater good to me, my collegues, and my readers--esp my students.

Since this is the very first post of this blog, I won't give you a headache with my work just yet. Stop by next time and see what I will lead you to.

Thanks,
Surada