Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

This is a fascinating topic.

Indeed. How this situation at the airport resolves itself will be very telling on what cycle Thailand is in. If it resolves peacefully, you're likely to be correct. If not...

Your point about a crisis war not needing to be fought on home soil is very true. Anyone living in Canada during the 1850's was obviously affected by the US Civil War, yet there was zero conflict in Canada at that time. Between the war of 1812 and WWI, it could be said that there was nothing that could be considered a crisis war in Canada. I suppose as our cultures intertwined though, Canada had fully begun to emulate American social behaviour by the late 19th Century. So yes, Cambodia's civil war could be interpreted as Thailand's also. But as I mentioned, I saw little evidence of this while in Thai museums. And the degradation of traditional Buddhist values I noticed, screams of an unravelling. We will see... And very soon it appears.

On Burma (I refuse to call it Myanmar) - Yes, the mass protests of '88 seem to be an Awakening era event. The one thing I am finding interesting about Burma, though, is it's relatively short life expectancy. I don't know if you've addressed this as a relevant contributor to saeclum length before, but it is something that I have struggled with while exploring generational cycles of other countries. The theory holds that a saeclum (Strauss and Howe's name, stretching back millenia) is one life cycle. They seem to last anywhere between 60-90 years. The last crisis era you identify for Burma was it's independence from Britain, which occurred in 1948, shortly after the assassination of Aung San. The crisis climaxed in 1958 as civil war against the Karreni people raged - and continues (http://www.lorenzodegregorio.com/) The average lifespan in Burma is 60, according to the CIA world factbook. I don't know if that means anything.

I guess what I have a hard time accepting is that China and Tibet will be almost certainly escalating their conflict - yet the Burmese and Thai Buddhists will simply watch as Tibet is slaughtered? I see that it is far more likely that they simply 'skip' the last 10 years of their unravelling and join with Tibet to fight against the Han Chinese.

StilesBC wrote: > So yes, Cambodia's civil war could be interpreted as Thailand's
> also. But as I mentioned, I saw little evidence of this while in
> Thai museums. And the degradation of traditional Buddhist values I
> noticed, screams of an unravelling.

There's a great deal of shame in the aftermath of genocidal acts --
in fact, it's exactly this shame that unites survivors of a crisis
war -- both winners and losers -- in their determination that nothing
like that should ever happen again. This shame causes people in the
inter-crisis period to "forget" about their own roles in the
genocide.

The Cambodian genocide was one of the half dozen worst genocides of
the 20th century. If the Thai people supported the perpetrators
(Khmer Rouge), then they may feel that they were perpetrators as
well. Even without that, they may feel that they should have done
something to stop it. Either way, it's not something that they can
be proud of, and not a subject that would be proudly on display in
their museums.

Awakening and Unravelling periods tend to blend together, and the
differences in attitude and behavior are differences in degree,
rather than substance. It's now been 30 years, and the new Prophet
generation has had a good, solid 10-15 years to rebel against their
Buddhist parents, so the visible Unraveling effects may already be
relevant.

StilesBC wrote: > I guess what I have a hard time accepting is that China and Tibet
> will be almost certainly escalating their conflict - yet the
> Burmese and Thai Buddhists will simply watch as Tibet is
> slaughtered? I see that it is far more likely that they simply
> 'skip' the last 10 years of their unravelling and join with Tibet
> to fight against the Han Chinese.

This is a very interesting statement. I don't recall how the Thai
government handled China's crackdown on Tibetans last spring, but I
do recall that the Burmese were very harsh with pro-Tibetan
demonstrators.

A lot would depend on how the scenario unfolded. The Chinese would
not simply start exterminating Tibetans with no prior warning. It
would be a crisis that starts small and grows, and China would use
the time to lay the appropriate political groundwork with the Burmese
and Thai governments.

Sincerely,

John

Violence escalates in Thai capital:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... ional/home

In Saturday night's clash at Suvarnabhumi, 150 riot police fled their checkpoint after they were attacked by People's Alliance for Democracy militants armed with iron rods, slingshots and hurling firecrackers.

The onslaught lasted 15 seconds but left the five-lane highway, the main access route to the $4-billion airport, littered with broken glass and discarded police helmets and truncheons.

Earlier, about 2,000 People's Alliance for Democracy members forced riot police to abandon another checkpoint near the airport. There was no violence, but one police officer was detained by the group's “security guards“, the Nation newspaper reported on its website.

People's Alliance for Democracy supporters have vowed to “fight to the death,” and youths armed with iron stakes manned barricades, scanning the horizon with binoculars for signs of police or pro-government gangs.

“If they come, we'll not open the door. If they shoot us, we'll shoot them back. We'll die if that makes the country better,” People's Alliance for Democracy leader Sondhi Limthongul told supporters, the most explicit admission yet by the movement that they are armed

As would be expected, it is the youth that is at the centre of most of the violence here. Just as I found it more interesting to learn of the age of the Mumbai terrorists (all in the early 20's) rather than their origin, it is interesting to hear the willingness to become martyrs from young Thais.

Globe and Mail wrote: > “If they come, we'll not open the door. If they shoot us, we'll
> shoot them back. We'll die if that makes the country better,”
> People's Alliance for Democracy leader Sondhi Limthongul told
> supporters, the most explicit admission yet by the movement that
> they are armed

Oh, puhleeze, these are kids saying provocative things to the press,
and the press eating it up. These kids will say anything to impress
the press and their girlfriends, and the press will publish the most
provocative statements as if anyone believed them. These kids are
going through the most erotic time of their lives.

There'll certainly be some violence, but there was plenty of violence
in America during the 1960s.

In August, 1963, Martin Luther King led a march on Washington in
which over 200,000 people participated. Later, President Kennedy was
assassinated, and so was King. There were numerous huge
demonstrations and violent riots throughout the country. There were
"long, hot summers," led by the Black Panthers, and there were
bombings and declarations of war against the government, led by the
Weather Underground. There was a huge violent battle at the
Democratic convention in 1968, and college kids were shot by state
troopers at Kent State in 1971. President Lyndon Johnson was driven
from office, and President Richard Nixon was forced to resign.

Contrast what's going on today in Bangkok to the violence that
occurred in Tibet last spring. Or contrast it to what's going on in
Nigeria, with hundreds of bodies piled up on the streets.

Nothing like that is going on in Bangkok. You have kids frolicking
with one another, and the police are "reluctant" to do more than ask
nicely for the protestors to stop.

Sincerely,

John

That was a great post on Thailand, John. It certainly appears that you have the balance of proof on your side. Seeing as there was no escalation of the airport occupation, I really don't see how this could ever really escalate beyond what you describe.

But I still struggle with how Thailand's buddhists will react to increasing bloodshed in Tibet (which is something we know for certain will escalate). I suppose just because they are in an awakening, does not mean they cannot participate in someone else's generational crisis war (ex. US in Vietnam). And that participation could be quite significant - as in WWI significant. But it would likely not occur on Thai soil, and wouldn't be genocidal from a Thai perspective.

I have a friend who once talked to science fiction writer Somtow Suchakatril (sp?) - who once scorned a Westerner for being afraid when trucks rolled down the street. "He doesn't know our rules for coups," the writer observed. Apparently it's somewhat of a sport where he comes from, in his view. Nothing I saw in this one has changed my mind.

StilesBC wrote: > But I still struggle with how Thailand's buddhists will react to
> increasing bloodshed in Tibet (which is something we know for
> certain will escalate). I suppose just because they are in an
> awakening, does not mean they cannot participate in someone else's
> generational crisis war (ex. US in Vietnam). And that
> participation could be quite significant - as in WWI significant.
> But it would likely not occur on Thai soil, and wouldn't be
> genocidal from a Thai perspective.

You raise a very important question, and one that I now understand as
more significant than I understood the first time you raised it.

I'm beginning to see the Cambodian genocide as "the dog that didn't
bark" for Thailand. That is, you've pointed out that there is
nothing in Thailand's museums that reference it, and nothing that
I've read from Thailand even acknowledges that it happened. This huge
monster genocide occurred right next door to Thailand, and they act
like nothing happened. This is what's really focusing my mind. My
conclusion is that they're burying their history.

Thus, how the Thai people react to anything like a Tibetan genocide
would be highly influenced by how they feel about the Cambodian
genocide. For example, if they feel shame for "not doing anything to
stop the Cambodian genocide," then they'll be highly motivated to do
something about a Tibetan genocide.

However, there's also a (Han) Chinese side to the Tibetan situation.
Last spring, Beijing claimed that it was the Tibetans who were
attacking the Han, and there apparently is some evidence to support
that claim. If Beijing is successful in claiming that any Tibet
conflict is the fault of the Tibetans, then the Thai people would be
far less motivated to act.

The question I have for you is about these two groups, the "rural"
people and the "élite" people in Thailand. I've been trying to find
out whether there are any other differences between them. Do they
speak different dialects? Do they look different? Do they worship
different variations of Buddhism?

And one thing that I'd really love to know: Is there any difference
between them in how they reacted to the Cambodian genocide?

Any information you have would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

John

The question I have for you is about these two groups, the "rural"
people and the "élite" people in Thailand. I've been trying to find
out whether there are any other differences between them. Do they
speak different dialects? Do they look different? Do they worship
different variations of Buddhism?

As far as I know, rural and urban Thais are all of the same ancestry. The only split I am aware of is a political one. I noticed differences between the political beliefs between Thais in Chiang Mai (Thailand's second city in the north) and Bangkok and the southern islands. But that is only anecdotal. I was just a backpacker - and although I like to think I strayed from the tourist herd, I never really got off the beaten track.

I did notice that rural Thais had a darker complexion, but that is likely due to time in the sun. To the extent that a darker skin colour was equated with status, I'm not sure. Like many asians countries, the 'billboard girls' were very light in complexion.

I can't be of much help on this, sorry. But I would imagine that the urban/rural split is a relatively new one - as urbanization is relatively new for Thailand. If you wanted an answer on whether urban Thais or rural Thais reacted differently to the Cambodian genocide, you'd likely have to go there yourself or find someone that is going and willing to get their shoes dirty.

I would imagine that there's some pretty good deals right now...

The BBC broadcast an interesting Thailand analysis segment today.

Analysis segments are available online for a week. Here are the
relevent URLs:

> Deep divisions remain in Thai society after street protests and
> turbulence of the past few weeks, which included seizure of key
> airports by protestors.

> In today's Analysis Adrian Brown examines the causes of the
> political divisions in Thailand.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/progr ... ysis.shtml
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/chec ... 3399&ls=p2

It should be available for the rest of this week.

John