ChiangMaiFun

ChiangMaiFun seems like a lot of the people on New Mandala, so way up in their academic ivory towers with their political history books that they are unable to see what's really been going on here and now. They see the red shirt movement as an ideological fight of poor versus elites for democracy. The reality however is that it's a fight for power between elites, and the poor have been used as pawns by one particular side.

Absolutely.

The neo-Stalinists and their bogus cultural paradigm shift blah have as their rationale the position that support for Thaksin represents a stages theory towards fundamental political change. Of course the same nonsense was prattled by the CP fellow travellers of years ago to justify all sorts of nonsense. Thaksin doesn't mind that these people are in his pocket. Some masters degrees are so much paper.

'neo-Stalinists' hahaha that gave me an early morning chuckle

ChiangMaiFun, do you wish to see Thailand lead by Pheu Thai instead of a Democrat coalition, and why?

That, actually, is a very thoughful question... in many ways I don't care - I just want change for the better and real democracy where people get the government they voted for not some stiched up deal after the government they HAD chosen is dissolved. I'm much more interested in the longer term.

edit: spl

What about a government that is stitched up after an election compared to a government that is stitched up after a party is banned after it is caught cheating?

I'm sure no one really voted for a 5 different parties to form government. So no one got the government that they voted for.

and what about the current government that was CAUGHT on tape and got off on a 'technicality'? think on that - 'oh dear we seem to have put in the document too late'

ChiangMaiFun, do you wish to see Thailand lead by Pheu Thai instead of a Democrat coalition, and why?

That, actually, is a very thoughful question... in many ways I don't care - I just want change for the better and real democracy where people get the government they voted for not some stiched up deal after the government they HAD chosen is dissolved. I'm much more interested in the longer term.

edit: spl

<snip>

I hold to my more expansive premise - cultural change is happening and no one will look back and care about the personalities involved - whoever they are and whatever colour their shirts are

Cultural change might be happening, but does it really have anything to do with the red shirts?

In one sense... no... they are a reflection of parts of that change - in some ways a violent part regretfully... and so the clash between two opposing forces in the longer term will be seen in a more rational context

Quick question. The change from the Industrial Revolution was better working conditions. What are the changes we expect to see from this cultural shift?

(Difficult one I know!)

Not difficult... same... raised living standards, less deferential voting and maybe some other things we can't discuss - in time

But my issue with the Red Shirts is that they are experiencing this change from the Abhisit government already, and this is without any prompting from the Red Shirts themselves. So why exactly did they rally? It's this question that makes the UDD all about Thaksin and the Red Shirts simply not correct, for the same reasons as I listed in post #30 above; they have been fed lies by the UDD. That they were lies is no speculation either - cold, hard, documented fact, even if the truth did take a couple of changes in government to be permitted to be revealed. You could make the same argument for Abhisit, of course, and I fully expect some Red Leaders to say the DSI report is a lie when they find out that some people were killed by the UDD side.

And remember, I make a huge differentiation between the Red Shirts and the UDD. I don't think anyone is against cultural change as Jatuporn would have you believe - it's called social evolution and is needed as a vehicle to advance the human race. But I do hope that you realise this is simply UDD propaganda that you have fallen for, as all this is happening anyway (and, as you have correctly pointed been happening for decades). If it happens to someone as educated as you (I bet you're regretting that little dig earlier by now!), how can the poor uneducated Khon Kaen farmers possibly see through it?

What you have stated above are the exact same demands for change as the PAD, by the way...

I don't care who's saying it - I care about who's DOING it - and no one is in my view

I hold to my more expansive premise - cultural change is happening and no one will look back and care about the personalities involved - whoever they are and whatever colour their shirts are

many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like -

I think you are mistaken in thinking that sympathising with the plight of the poor equates to being "red". It does not. All of the Thais i live and work with sympathise with the poor, but wouldn't have anything to do with the reds, or for that matter, with the yellows, as they see those movements for what i believe they are: charades that use propaganda and lies to forward their own selfish agendas.

As far as the despising bit is concerned, the same Thais that i spoke of above, are far too contented in themselves, despite being neither rich nor wealthy, to waste time arbitrarily hating people because of what car they drive or how much money they appear to have. To quote a cliché, happiness comes from inside.

Happiness, my friend, comes from inside when you have food inside too - no food = no happiness

It is no poor thing to defend those that do not have the education nor ability to defend themselves - you wear your friends 'wonderful life of happiness from inside' as a badge of purity! it is not - remember Maslow's Triangle? if not go look it up

Lastly the reds are a 'reflection' of the changes that are happening - once again - you fall into the trap - the trap of limited thinking.

Quick question. The change from the Industrial Revolution was better working conditions. What are the changes we expect to see from this cultural shift?

(Difficult one I know!)

Not difficult... same... raised living standards, less deferential voting and maybe some other things we can't discuss - in time

This is the point - I am looking at the wider angle of historical cultrural shift where Thaksin's name (and the others) will be of no importance but the SHIFT will be - the change will be. This has been evident down history - yes the Labour Movement is a good example - you remember any of the hotheads who demanded revolution back then? I don't - but the change HAPPENED - thanks for 'getting it'.

Some great posts in this thread, from all sides.

CMF, despite my lowly education, i have no trouble grasping the concept of cultural shifts and accept the possibility of the red shirts ultimately playing a positive role a long way down the road, much as i hate what it is that drives the movement. What i can't grasp is this:

I'm not a Thaksin supporter either - and nor are most reds...

I, like some others here, have experienced first-hand red shirt rallies. Your claim is i believe totally false and says much more about your own wishes than it does the truth.

You make it sound like I am trying to partonise people and that really is not the case - but some of the posts have been very much 'better dead than red' with no thought nor analysis and so the rebuff from me has been 'but you don 't understand' - this may come across as patronising in print but in fact was not my intention I wanted to recognise that if you don't know something then you don't know it (this is not aimed at you BTW). anyway...

...the point is this (to address your last point) that many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like - I, like you, do NOT support violence nor any of the claptrap that much of the reds came out with down in Krung Thep but this is a narrow viewpoint - let's widen our gaze (whch you seem to have done) to the context of history.

For me the reds are a catalyst for change - they are a 'symbol' of a deeper and more meaningful 'change' and I believe we will look back at Thailand in 20 years and think - hmmmm all that shouting and angst was a verbalisation of birth pangs for change and we will hardly remember the red leaders names nor care.

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

This is the point - I am looking at the wider angle of historical cultrural shift where Thaksin's name (and the others) will be of no importance but the SHIFT will be - the change will be. This has been evident down history - yes the Labour Movement is a good example - you remember any of the hotheads who demanded revolution back then? I don't - but the change HAPPENED - thanks for 'getting it'.

Far from wishing to cast you in the role of puny doghearted hugger-mugger, I do feel it worth pointing out that I wasn't trying to compare the relative motivations of Taksin and the UK trades unions, but merely trying to suggest that they both were/are vehicles for change, be they good, bad or ugly. They will both eventually be forgotten, but the change that resulted (or may result) from their historical presence could be felt long into the future. Did the plight of the rural poor ever have such high profile as it does today? And who can remember governments of more than 15 years ago trumpeting populist policies aimed at improving their life? This is what I believe CMF was getting at.

yes it is exactly what I was trying to get across (poorly) - thanks you did a better job :jap:

A very poor attempt to explain cultural shift:

bit like smoking... there has been a cultural shift away from smoking over many decades or like sex discrimination that's another cultural shift - so is the vote for women etc. these shifts took many decades to come through - the personalities are largely irrelevant all we remember to day is that once... there were slaves... once the majority smoked.... once women did not have votes... and the change in Thai culture will also take many decades and is not all centered around one man - who ever he may be. It's around changing 'attitudes' and they ARE changing - this is a cultural shift. The poor are saying (as the other poster rightly said) why should I work for 200 baht a day? that's nothing to do with Thaksin or the reds - but they are catalysts for change albeit not always good ones I grant you.

In the end anaylsis, when we look back, change will have happened and Thaksin will be footnote to the larger issues. Slag me off if you wish but I think I understand the process and don't get caught up in all the 'noise' as many posters on here do. You wanaa concentrate on the small picture go ahead!

Thaksin maybe, in many ways, a focus and catalyst for the wider feelings of frustration - this is inappropraite in many and most ways - but many feel things were better (for them) back then.

Now there is a much wider feeling of dis-enfranchisment that has nothing to do with Thaksin - yes if his money disappeared it would be harder for them to continue and yes he has a large influence but to say that the whole frustration and cultural shift is to do with him is, frankly, born of lack of understanding of the larger picture.

I think many of us - including whybother - get this. That still doesn't answer his question though. We understand that the Red Shirts are pissed off with the elite. But the Red Shirts fail to recognise that Thaksin is the absolute paradigm of what they hate.

The pro-Thaksin Red Shirts (which, as whybother correctly pointed out, is the vast majority of them - as witnessed by anyone who has been to a UDD rally, past or present) DO feel like Thaksin helped them. They think that...

1) Thaksin totally cleared the national debt and any national debt the country has now is because of governments subsequent to Thaksin's;

2) The use of yaba dropped significantly since Thaksin's War on Drugs;

3) The 2,500 or so that died in said War on Drugs were mostly dealers and junkies.

4) They got richer when Thaksin was around and poorer since he left;

5) The military threw Thaksin out because he was trying to move the control of power from the military to the civilian government.

6) Thaksin introduced the 30 Baht healthcare scheme.

7) Thaksin was not an autocrat or a dictator.

I only know this because I, first hand, not some reporter with a politically-swayed translator or whatever, have talked to Red Shirts in their own language and dialect, about what they really want. Such discussion was not welcomed in March-May but is acceptable to them these days.

All of the above, of course, is simply NOT TRUE! And they heard it from the Red Shirt media networks, including those which were operating during Thaksin's time - the same ones who oversaw his electoral intimidation crews (see Kwanchai Praiphana). For me it is no sign of undue censorship, lack of democracy or whatever, that these media outlets were shut down, as they were unrepentantly lieing to the public about what never happened. What actually happened is:

1) Thaksin raised the national debt significantly.

2) The price if yaba rose significantly (result of less supply), but its use was more widespread than previously (higher demand as the campaign increased the reach of yaba - it was made more of a 'designer drug' - the rise in demand was larger than the fall in supply).

3) At last count and with the investigation still ongoing, approximately 1,400 people killed extrajudicially in Thaksin's War on Drugs were definitely not involved in narcotics.

4) They had more disposable cash for many months, but were left with long-term debt that they could absolutely not afford to pay back for approximately two generations. However, the world economy was booming in Thaksin's time and is not nowadays.

5) The military threw Thaksin out because he was trying to centralise the control of power to himself, undermining democratic principles and challenging the authority of the country's higher instutions.

6) Thaksin put into implementation former-PM Chuan's 30 Baht healthcare scheme, which was not introduced by Chuan as it was not ready. Its premature materialisation made it a failure and it was replaced by a free scheme because it was too expensive to collect the 30 Baht fee.

7) Thaksin is very much an autocrat and Thailand was making very clear steps to become a dictatorship under Thaksin.

This is not my point - and as you clearly demonstrate few people CAN grasp the wide cultural sweep that is happening nor understand that many of the 'personalities' are just pawns in the sweep of history - this is not condesending nor patronising it's a fact but, you may not like this sorry, it does take a degree of education and understanding to 'get it' if you don't understand the science of cultural and sociological 'shift' you won't understand what I am very poorly trying to convey.

I am not interested in attending a rally be it red, yellow or pink! it is irrelevant to the cultural shifts happening not just over the last 9 years you mention but over the next 50 years - Thailand will be unrecognizable but I doubt you understand anything I am saying so I shall not bother pursuing it further - people don't know what they don't know and you are one of them.

I'm not a Thaksin supporter either - and nor are most reds... you have it wrong this post really gets it right.

Give it a rest mate. Have you actually been to a red rally?

I was in Chiang Mai area over the New Year. In one of the Internet cafes the owner was watching his red TV. The speaker on the stage was the Communist leader bloke who was mentioning Thaksin's name every few minutes, much to the satisfaction of the audience, stating that proof that Thaksin doesn't want to hurt the country can be found by the way he fled the country (dodging the ensuing court action had absolutely nothing to do with it, of course).

Repeating this silly "it's not about Thaksin" mantra to us for the fourth year running while singing a completely different song to the red shirt supporters just isn't going to convince us this time around. Remove Thaksin and the red shirt movement will diminish significantly.

You have misunderstood the dynamics of history and the concept of cultural shift - I can't teach you about it in five minutes it took me years of study at masters level to even have a small grasp of it. Suffice to say that looking at the 'now' and at 'personalities' is like looking at a candle and expecting to see the sun.

All this condescending nonsense aside (even more so given its a developing situation I've been observing for the past 9 years), could you please answer the first question of whether you have actually been to a red rally or not? And if so, just how many images of Thaksin did you see and how many times did you hear his name mentioned?

such ignorance - it's pitiful

excellent and intelligent post - spot on!

Absolutely agree.

Maybe you can explain this for me then?

"a lot of Thai people are justifiably pissed off that there is so much wealth in the country going to criminal networks of capitalists, the military/police, and others who control the nation."

And these people don't think Thaksin is included in this?

Thaksin maybe, in many ways, a focus and catalyst for the wider feelings of frustration - this is inappropraite in many and most ways - but many feel things were better (for them) back then.

Now there is a much wider feeling of dis-enfranchisment that has nothing to do with Thaksin - yes if his money disappeared it would be harder for them to continue and yes he has a large influence but to say that the whole frustration and cultural shift is to do with him is, frankly, born of lack of understanding of the larger picture.

I'm not a Thaksin supporter either - and nor are most reds... you have it wrong this post really gets it right.

Give it a rest mate. Have you actually been to a red rally?

I was in Chiang Mai area over the New Year. In one of the Internet cafes the owner was watching his red TV. The speaker on the stage was the Communist leader bloke who was mentioning Thaksin's name every few minutes, much to the satisfaction of the audience, stating that proof that Thaksin doesn't want to hurt the country can be found by the way he fled the country (dodging the ensuing court action had absolutely nothing to do with it, of course).

Repeating this silly "it's not about Thaksin" mantra to us for the fourth year running while singing a completely different song to the red shirt supporters just isn't going to convince us this time around. Remove Thaksin and the red shirt movement will diminish significantly.

You have misunderstood the dynamics of history and the concept of cultural shift - I can't teach you about it in five minutes it took me years of study at masters level to even have a small grasp of it. Suffice to say that looking at the 'now' and at 'personalities' is like looking at a candle and expecting to see the sun.

They have a right to do what they want to do within the law.

Anyone who has looked at the events last year and thinks it is all over is delusion IMHO.

Despite populist posturings by Abhisit a lot of Thai people are justifiably pissed off that there is so much wealth in the country going to criminal networks of capitalists, the military/police, and others who control the nation.

They want their share and who can blame them?

The genie is out of the bottle and so many Thais now realise that they have been hoodwinked for centuries.

I am not a Thaksin supporter but you don't have to have much imagination to realise why so many of the poor liked him. And, yes, I know he is/was an arch-manipulator.

You only have to look at the dozens of stories every year highlighting corruption from the very top of Thai society right down through to the bottom to realise how widespread corruption is.

Check out the Wikileaks stuff on what some of Thailand's neighbours think of the corruption factor.

The military control everything in Thailand. They overule governments,parliamentary process, independent legal process, democratic elections, the national budget, foreign policy and a lot more.

I applaud the poor of Thailand standing up to this emporer's new clothes farce which so paralises everything in their society.

Good on them for having a go against a system so manifestly rotten from top to bottom - right through the government, the judicary, the military in particiular, the police (organised like a Mafia gang), the education system and other institutuions which can't really be discussed here.

If I was working on a building site for less than 200 baht a day while living in a hut I'd want to have a go at the system which justifies this too.

excellent and intelligent post - spot on!

Absolutely agree.

Stand up and take a bow, especially for the "I am not a Thaksin supporter but..." bit.

I'm not a Thaksin supporter either - and nor are most reds... you have it wrong this post really gets it right.

It's a cultural paradigm shift that is happening - it's not about personalities its about the larger view - it will take decades and will happen

They have a right to do what they want to do within the law.

Anyone who has looked at the events last year and thinks it is all over is delusion IMHO.

Despite populist posturings by Abhisit a lot of Thai people are justifiably pissed off that there is so much wealth in the country going to criminal networks of capitalists, the military/police, and others who control the nation.

They want their share and who can blame them?

The genie is out of the bottle and so many Thais now realise that they have been hoodwinked for centuries.

I am not a Thaksin supporter but you don't have to have much imagination to realise why so many of the poor liked him. And, yes, I know he is/was an arch-manipulator.

You only have to look at the dozens of stories every year highlighting corruption from the very top of Thai society right down through to the bottom to realise how widespread corruption is.

Check out the Wikileaks stuff on what some of Thailand's neighbours think of the corruption factor.

The military control everything in Thailand. They overule governments,parliamentary process, independent legal process, democratic elections, the national budget, foreign policy and a lot more.

I applaud the poor of Thailand standing up to this emporer's new clothes farce which so paralises everything in their society.

Good on them for having a go against a system so manifestly rotten from top to bottom - right through the government, the judicary, the military in particiular, the police (organised like a Mafia gang), the education system and other institutuions which can't really be discussed here.

If I was working on a building site for less than 200 baht a day while living in a hut I'd want to have a go at the system which justifies this too.

excellent and intelligent post - spot on!

Good for them - just watched one of the 'new' leaders of the red shirts on BBC World - credible, intelligent and against violence - hope they have learned and can now move forward to build a strong unity for a new government - as she said 'the vast majority of red shirst are against violence'

Am I the only one on this site that doesn't have to resort to bar girls or online dating?

Online dating just casts a wider net - its not an exclusivity

well I admit, for one, that i do go online but not exclusively and I have met lot's of lovely girls and built some good friendships too

I see a glimmer of hope for the young lady who caused the accident. She has a mother who has a lot of courage and a fair amount of compassion.

Come on, I personally think it's all an act. She's just trying to save the family name and 30,000B compensation what a joke. I really do hope this underage teen driver gets what should be coming to her but I highly doubt she'll get in any trouble. Imagine if that was one of you Sons or Daughters who died in such a way and some lady was offering 30,000B compensation. I would through it back in her face.

Hit the nail well and truly on the head

exactly

Am I the only one on this site that doesn't have to resort to bar girls or online dating?

no me too - only sometimes you can find accesible grils everywhere - the mall, shops - you name it they are there

you can look through Thai Love Links and see that there really isnt a sample bias

If you think the women who sign up for Thai Love Links are representative of all women in Thailand, then there is no point in trying to reason with you.

I never said they are represent "all women in thailand" - I said it isnt a sample bias

Its always extremes with you

Sample bias means using an unrepresentative sample as representative of a larger population. The women who sign up for Thai Love Links are unlikely to be representative of all Thai women, therefore using them as representative of all Thai women is sample bias.

However I will concede that women who sign up for Thai Love Links are probably representative of Thai women who have some grasp of English and are eager, if not desperate, to find a financially secure man who will take care of them. I simply maintain that these women do not represent all Thai women.

For the record, I do know single Thai women who have achieved financial security on their own, or are in the process of doing so, who do not wish to be dependent on a man. They range from early twenties to early forties, are pleasant, interesting, intelligent, and range from moderately to very attractive. Not all Thai women are scheming to get into a western man's wallet.

with respect you may know 'some' - I also know 'some' who think all men are bastards - but they are not the 'norm'.

As has been stated Thai girls (well actually Asian girls) view sex differently than in farangland - it's an 'exchange' for them - sometimes for dinner, sometimes for 'helping', sometimes for love - but it is always 'practical' and they just don't see it the same way. Anyway this is fascinating but we are veering off topic? be a very interesting thread in it's own right and I may start a new one so we can discuss it more? cheers

"I think the issue is that you can easily here and cannot in Farrangland"

I think the issue is that you cannot. That is what makes you a sexpat. Coming here to prey on less fortunate, because you don't know how to meet women the real way.

I think that PJclark is right. A person still can have a high sex drive and still have only one partner.

Those that keep tally of their partners is a sign of sexual addiction.

Having multiple partners doesn't make you more of a man it just puts you at risk for STD's.

don't start judging too quickly - I did well in farangland too! I have never kept a tally of sexual partners I think you are referring to another poster? nothing wrong with consensual sex - sounds like you are on a high horse!

I don't have a very high sex drive. But unless you actively resist, it's kind of inevitable in Thailand.

You don't have to use 100s of different partners though!

variety is the spice of life - I think the issue is that you can easily here and cannot in 'farangland'