The king’s speech can do no wrong (2) | 9.01.06
This is the second half of “King’s speech can do no wrong”. Please read the first half first.
“Enough bio-diesel for the two of us”
As far as Mr. Gray and his colleagues are concerned, the speech pretty well ended there. Of course, in the world that is unfit to print, there’s still one full half of this 59-minute speech left.
His Majesty’s remark about television and electricity at the end of the last block quote segued into — what else? — a lengthy advocacy for his alternative fuel pet project. (For accuracy’s sake, the royal speech, along with the entire ceremony, did get televised on all of the five state-owned channels in the evening prime time, after all radio stations broadcast it live in the afternoon.) This part was actually quite straightforward, but I have been around enough anti-Thaksin maniacs (some of whom are my relatives) to know they respect the king far too much to take his word at face value. Here, for instance [1:02:30]:
ถ้าไม่ได้ทำเชื้อเพลิงทดแทน เราก็เดือดร้อน เราก็เป็นห่วง แต่เราไม่ต้องเป็นห่วง ถ้าคนอื่นเขาไม่ทำ เขาอาจจะไม่มีน้ำมันไบโอดีเซลใช้ แต่ว่าเรามี เราคือข้าพเจ้า ทำเอง คนอื่นอาจจะไม่มี เค้า… ไม่เป็นไร ต้องเห็นแก่ตัว คือ แต่ละคนถ้าเห็นแก่ตัว ก็รู้ว่าไม่เป็นไร เพราะแต่ละคนก็ต้องพยายามที่จะหาพลังงานทดแทนทั้งนั้น เราเชื่อว่าเวลาเราอายุ 118… 118 นายกฯ… นายกฯ ก็บอกว่าแก่แล้ว แต่เราไม่แก่ เพราะเราคิดทำพลังงานทดแทนอยู่เรื่อย
แต่นายกฯ บอกแก่ จะถึงอายุเท่าไหร่? 90 จะอายุ 94 หรือ 96 นายกฯ จะอายุ 96 อ้าว 94 ก็ไม่รู้ว่า 94 อาจจะแข็งแรงก็ได้ คงแข็งแรงครึกครื้น อาจจะมีความคิดที่จะสร้างโรงงานก๊าซโซฮอล์ และไบโอดีเซลสำเร็จแล้ว ก็นายกฯ ก็ไม่เดือดร้อน เอาไบโอดีเซลใส่เครื่องบินได้ เออ.. เครื่องบินน่ะ เขาใช้ไบโอดีเซลได้แล้วสมัยนี้ แต่ลำไม่ใช่โตๆ แต่เวลานั้นอาจจะสา… ใส่ลำโตๆ สำหรับนายกฯ ได้ อาจจะสามารถที่จะมี แต่ว่าเฉพาะนายกฯ คนอื่น… คนอื่นไม่สามารถที่จะมี ก็สองคนล่ะ พระเจ้าอยู่หัวกับนายกฯ มีเครื่องบินใช้ แล้วใช้ไบโอดีเซล
ท่านองคมนตรีสั่นทำไม? ท่านองคมนตรีสั่นหัวว่าไม่มี เวลานั้นท่านอายุเท่าไหร่? 130? ก็คงไม่อยู่แล้ว เราก็อยู่สองคน ส่งท้ายเราก็อยู่สองคน มีไบโอดีเซลใช้ แล้วจะไปไหน? จะไป… ไปเชียงใหม่เหรอ? ขึ้นเครื่องบินที่สนามบินสุวรรณภูมิ แล้วไป… ไปเชียงใหม่ ไปเชียงใหม่ ไปดู… ไปดูสวนสัตว์ (หัวเราะ) ก็สวนสัตว์ก็อยู่สบาย เพราะว่าเขาไม่ต้องใช้ไบโอดีเซล ก็เป็นอันว่าไม่ต้องกลัว เราไม่เดือดร้อน เพราะว่าอีก… อีกสี่สิบปี อีกสี่สิบปี มีไบโอดีเซลพอสำหรับเราใช้สองคน
Without replacement fuel, I would be troubled. I would be concerned. But I don’t have to be concerned. If other people don’t do it, they would not have bio-diesel fuel to use, but I do. “I” means me. [I] made it myself. Others may not have it, they… never mind. One must be selfish. [If] each one is selfish, then there’s nothing to worry about, because each one will be looking for replacement fuel, too. I believe when I am 118… 118 years old… the PM… the PM says that’s already old… but I am not old, because I am always trying to produce replacement energy.
But the PM says it’s old. How old will [you] be? Ninety-… 94 or 96 years old? …. The PM will be 96, wait, 94. Anyway, one may be healthy at 94. Must be healthy and exuberant. [He] may have had an idea to build a gasohol and bio-diesel factory successfully [by that time]. So the PM is not troubled. [He] can fill an airplane with bio-diesel. Oh, planes can fly on bio-diesel already these days, but not large ones. By that time, it might be possible to make [bio-diesel] for large planes for the PM. That may be possible. But only for the PM, others can’t have that. Well, two of us, anyway. The king and the PM, [we] have our planes, running on bio-diesel.
Why is Mr. Privy Councilor shaking…? Mr. Privy Councilor is shaking his head that he doesn’t have. How old will you be then? [Laughter] 130? Probably no longer there. So there will be the two of us left, with bio-diesel. And where do we go? To… to Chiangmai? [Laughter] Board the plane at the Suvarnabhumi Airport, and go to Chiangmai… to Chiangmai to visit… to visit the zoo. [Laughter] The zoo will have no problem, because they don’t have to use bio-diesel. And so there’s no need to be afraid. We are not troubled. Because in… in forty years… in forty years, there’ll be enough bio-diesel for the two of us.
Did you catch the king’s subtle jibe the Thaksin? In a country where naming one’s child after a royalty would be considered lèse majesté, the idea a perquisite that only “the king and the PM” share is absurd. Yet this imperious prime minister has not only been grabbing royal prerogatives as mentioned above, but also put his prestige before that of the king by buying a new plane for cabinet use before replacing the king’s old one. So the king put the impudent Thaksin in his place by raising him to his own unattainable heights. The choice of Chiangmai as destination was the last nail in the coffin. That’s where the Air Force’s C-130 chauffeured guests to the premier’s sister’s party.
Or so the Thaksin hater may enthuse. Add to your mental picture a posh setting (perhaps the Diplomat Bar) and a gullible, gaping farang clinging to every word of his suave local acquaintance. And you see how expat journalists and other self-styled Thailand hands have so much penetrating, intriguing, and electrifying misinformation.
The truth is more mundane (and the setting in which I’m writing this, much less swanky). As you can see in the preceding paragraph and rest of his speech about energy, the king’s constant theme is every man for himself. Those who invest in alternative fuel will have it; those who do not, will not. Of course, it doesn’t work that way in real life and he might not have meant that literally. But at least this made clear that by limiting the imaginary bio-diesel planes to his and the premier’s use, the king was talking about earned benefits, not entitlements.
I wouldn’t guess why the king spoke about the prime minister in such chummy terms, referring to the “two of us” five times altogether. But that tone is consistent throughout this part of the speech. The prime minister, previously quite tense, certainly appreciated it, if in a stunned sort of way.
Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra reacts to King Bhumibol’s “there will be two of us left”
As for the Chiangmai reference, it together drew laughter from the audience, including Mr. Thaksin. Khun Sondhi’s accusation of improper use of the C-130 transport plane by his sister was no doubt in many people’s minds, perhaps including that of the premier himself. But was it in the king’s mind? Again, nothing His Majesty said suggested that it was meant to be a deliberate taunt against Mr. Thaksin. Chiangmai is after all Thailand’s second largest province by area and its second most important culturally after Bangkok. This alone is enough to make Chiangmai the first domestic air destination that most Bangkokians think of among the handful available. It is also the premier’s native province and its the Chiangmai zoo, which the king mentioned, has since 2003 been home to Thailand’s only pair of giant pandas. Could His Majesty simply be thinking of pandas and not politics? I know that’s something I should do more of.
Naturally, the king’s pervasive congeniality toward Thaksin here negates all the talk of “reprimand”, “rebuke” and “take to task” in the international media (the local media is generally more restraint, though not without anti-Thaksin spin). The king thus has achieved a historic feat of crafting an environmentalist speech that is incompatible with the international media’s bias.
“To do sufficiency economy”
After the energy talk came the now ritualized paean to “sufficiency economy”. I strongly disagree with this whole concept, if one can call it that, but the king is indeed very fond of it…
There, I’ve just disagreed with the king. It wasn’t even that hard. It was, in fact, far easier and more respectful than squirming and spinning (“no, here’s what he actually meant…”) like some of his highly loyal subjects like to do. They didn’t make an exception here, where one would think no such tweaking would be necessary since all of the media are on board the sufficiency-economy bandwagon (whatever that means). One should never underestimate the press’s pathological duplicity, and its pressing need to make the Democrats look good.
So what the king said here [1:12:10]:
เนี่ยมามองทางนี้มั่ง บอกสภาฯ น่ะเป็นยังไง ก็สภาฯ ด้วยเหมือนกันน่ะ ถ้าอยากทำ สภาฯ เป็นอาจารย์ของนายกฯ ก็นายกฯ สอนครูหน่อย สอน… สอนอาจารย์ ว่าเศรษฐกิจพอเพียงทำยังไง สอนครูคนเดียวก็พอแล้ว เพราะว่าครูเขาก็ไปสอนคนอื่น ต่อไปนั่นน่ะฝ่ายค้าน… ฝ่ายค้านไม่ต้องสอน เขาพอเพียงอยู่แล้ว
ฝ่ายค้านเนี่ย หัวหน้าฝ่ายค้านเขาก็ ไม่ทราบเขาพอเพียงหรือเปล่า แต่อย่างน้อยอดีต… อดีตหัวหน้าพรรคเขาพอเพียง… พอเพียงอย่างมากๆ เขาทำอะไรที่ ทำให้ที่ประเทศชาติใช้เงินนิดเดียว ไม่พอ เขาถึงต้องออก (หัวเราะ) เลยไม่รู้ว่าฝ่ายค้านจะ… จะพอเพียงหรือไม่ แต่อย่างน้อยอดีตหัวหน้าพรรคเขาพอเพียงมาก จนกระทั่งต้องออกจากหัวหน้าพรรค
Let me turn this way, too, and ask the parliament. How is the parliament? The parliament, too, if it wants to do [sufficiency economy]. The parliament is the prime minister’s mentor, so the prime minister should teach his teacher… teach… teach his mentor how to do sufficiency economy. It’s enough to teach only the teacher, because the teacher can then teach others in turn. Next is the opposition. No need to teach the opposition, they are already sufficiency-minded. [Laughter]
The opposition, the opposition leader, he… [I] don’t know whether he is sufficiency-minded. But at least the former… former party leader is very sufficiency-minded. He did something that… that made the country spend only a little. Not enough, so he had to quit. [Laughter] So I don’t know whether the opposition is… is sufficiency-minded. But at least the former party leader is very sufficiency-minded, so much so that he had to quit the party leadership.
Becomes this in The Nation’s “summary”:
The prime minister himself might also educate the House on sufficiency economy and then the latter can subsequently teach other people.
There is no need to teach the Opposition about sufficiency economy since they seem to practise it well. The former Opposition leader has practised sufficiency so well that he has made the country spend little money and even quit the party’s helm. [Emphasis added.]
Thus the Nation turned a joke (Khun Abhisit himself laughed) into a serious commentary despite the king’s following statements to the contrary (two I-don’t-know’s). Naturally, the “summary” of that one remark turns out to be longer than the original text, but I guess a few extra words, plus an ethical breach, are a small price to pay for an apparent royal endorsement of the Democrats. The Bangkok Post obviously agreed, doing the same thing in its December 5 lead story.
“Not let you quarrel”
The king wrapped up his speech just before one-hour elapsed [1:26:16]:
ก็ขอขอบใจที่ท่านมา… มาให้พร แล้วก็…. ให้พรนี่ดี เพราะว่าถ้าไม่ให้พร มันก็ไม่รู้ว่าเราทำอะไร ไม่รู้ว่าเราทำอะไร ถ้า… ถ้า… มาให้พรเราก็มีกำลังใจที่จะทำงานต่างๆ
Thank you for coming… coming to wish me well. Well-wishing is good because without this well-wishing [in form of the premier’s speech], I wouldn’t know what [public projects] I’ve done. If… if… [you] come wish me well, then I’ll be encouraged to do all these works.
Remember what I said earlier about the king’s half-joking about praises? He did actually like to be praised and the premier’s speech this year must have struck the right chord, being acknowledged three times by the king. (Here’s the one time, in the middle of the speech, that I haven’t mentioned: “Everything that the PM has spoken just now is not a fiction, What the PM said about what the king said and did is correct, [as is] his admiring the king that the king sustains the country.”) Surely, there’s nothing wrong with praises or even liking to be praised. Unless your name is Thaksin Shinawatra, in which case any praise is sycophancy and any criticism is justified the virtue of being criticism.
The king then returned the well-wishing to his audience, and added some parting instructions:
แล้วก็ต้องให้พรกับทุกฝ่าย ฝ่ายรัฐบาลกับฝ่ายค้าน ก็ให้กำลังใจ ทำอะไรก็ทำ ทำได้ดี แต่วันนี้ไม่พูดว่าให้ทำอะไร เพราะว่า… ให้ทะเลาะกัน ไม่ ไม่เอา ไม่ให้ทะเลาะ ให้ทำอะไรที่ดูจะดี และคิดให้อย่า… อย่าเกิน อย่าเลยเถิด แต่ว่าถ้าแต่ละคนทำงานให้เหมาะสม บ้านเมืองจะไปได้ ถึงว่าจะต้องให้พรให้บ้านเมืองไปได้ ให้แต่ละคนไปได้ ไม่ใช่… ไม่ใช่… ให้…มีการหัวชนฝา จะทำอะไรๆ ก็ขอให้แต่ละคนมีความสำเร็จ… พอสมควร เศรษฐกิจ…พอเพียง คือทำให้พอเพียง ถ้าไม่พอเพียง มันไปไม่ได้ แต่ถ้าทำพอเพียงสามารถจะนำพาประเทศให้ดี… ไปได้ดี
ก็ขอให้ทุกคนประสบความสำเร็จในความสำ… สำเร็จพอเพียง และเพื่อให้บ้านเมืองบรรลุความสำเร็จที่แท้จริง ก็ไม่รู้ล่ะ คนที่รับพรก็รับไป คนที่ไม่รับพร ก็คิดในใจ ขอบใจที่ท่านทั้งหลายมาให้พร เรา… เรารับพรของท่าน
And I had to wish well on all sides. The government and the opposition, I encourage you. Do what you [have to/want to] do. Do it well. But today, I won’t say what to do. Because… [I] will not make you quarrel [with one another]. No… no… not let you quarrel. Do what you consider good and think not…. not… to be excessive, not extreme. But if each one works appropriately, the country will go well. So I have to wish for the country to go well, for each one to go well, without pigheadedness. In whatever you do, I wish each of you success… moderate success, sufficiency-minded economy. That is, to make it sufficient, if not sufficient, it won’t go well. But if [we] make it sufficient, then it can lead the country to be good, to go well.
So I wish everybody success in moderate success and for the country to achieve the true success. Well I don’t know. Those who accept the wishes, do so. Those who don’t accept the wishes, think about it in your head. Thank you all of you for coming to wish me well. I accept your wishes.
The ending is the vintage King Bhumibol. Whether he intended it or not (I think he did, though in an impulsive sort of way) it sounds like a sneer against those who didn’t accept his well-wishes properly by putting their hands together in a wai gesture. Now who could be so insolent? Believe or not, it isn’t the Prime Minister Thaksin, Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak, or their wives.
Khun Abhisit Vejjajiva, on the other hand, appeared to be sitting still as the camera briefly panned across the hall. Should he get the benefit of the doubt? Definitely, his name is not Thaksin.
And there you have it, the king’s speech as it is, and as you will not see anywhere else in English. Far from the mythical, semi-divine oration that breathless foreign observers crack it up to be, the king is a human being delivering a very human talk. He stutters, misspeaks, wavers, rambles, errs factually, contradicts himself, and confuses listeners — just like most people do. In that respect, it is no surprise that his speech is sometimes misunderstood and misreported. But then most people do not speak in the news as the ultimate voice of authority, the King Bhumibol does.
Or does he? As we have seen, the royal speech belongs not to him, but to those who interpreted them to the mass, especially if the mass happens not to speak Thai. No wonder, then, that these journalists always seem to be, to borrow Khun Sondhi’s unregistered trademark, “fighting for the king”. Having crowned themselves, they fight accordingly.
« Happy New Year | Main | The king’s speech can do no wrong »
- 1
- JW 10.01.06
Superb post, Tom!
- 2
- Naphat 12.01.06
Thanks for the post, Tom. To me, if the King was taking to task anything, it’s probably our culture of hyper-sensitivity towards any perceived violation of the monarchy, often times manifesting in lèse majesté suits or threats of them.
The king went on to make… an opening salvo against the foreigners who, he said, violated him and laughed at the jail sentence for lése majesté…
I think your summary here missed out the main point of why he brought up farangs at all. In paragraph 13, I think what the King is trying to say is that article 8 of the constitution (“The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated.”) is quite dysfunctional.
ถ้าไม่ให้วิจารณ์ก็หมายความว่า พระเจ้าอยู่หัวนี่ ก็ต้องวิจารณ์ ต้องละเมิด แล้วไม่ให้ละเมิด พระเจ้าอยู่หัวเสีย พระเจ้าอยู่หัวเป็นคนไม่ดี
The fact that we have laws to protect the King against criticism implies that he’s attracts so much of it and is not a good person. From the outside the Kingdom, this attitude seems a bit silly, they criticise the King anyways, and probably laugh at this as propaganda.
I speculate that the “mysterious digression” may be rebuking legal professionals (the King identified them as nodding earlier in another section of the speech) or our leaders for not checking this trend ‘the king can do no wrong’ mentality.
PS:
bq…. the king was backhandedly chiding the prime minister for his legendary intolerance (which, like most legends, is not true).I maybe able to give it to you that the “chiding” part is a bit overblown, but are you saying here that Thaksin’s intolerence is a myth?