jayboy

I feel that Newin is an opportunist,

I wonder how you possibly could have got that impression.

Not "foaming with rage" or any of the other personal ad hominems you used to describe me jayboy. In fact that post wasn't about Thaksin it was about policies that were populist that were trash from the beginning. The post was evidence that, contrary to your claim that the Dems took up all of Thaksin's populist policies, they in fact threw many in the bin where they belonged.

Not angry Not emotive Not given to ad hominem attacks when confronted by facts that don't fit my personal agenda

The bulk of the policy was copied and expanded.

Exactly --- I refuse. Mentioning the name of a book without discussing it is strictly a bibliography exercise.

But you were the one that gave the reason for not naming the book as your unwillingness to discuss it (mudslinging) !!!!

I know why you have refused so no need to invent reasons.

My manageable length post -- before altered by Jayboy. In the post I stated that playing jayboy's bibliography game serves no purpose (anyone can google) and is off topic.

Jayboy ---I have stated I have no intention on playing your bibliography game --- Your continued harassment on this subject is both off topic and boring to myself (and I would suggest, others)

Fair enough:boredom can't be forgiven.

I wasn't playing a bibliography game, simply asking you to name one book on Thai politics that's influenced you.

You have refused to do this as have your fellow rightists.

I found myself about to offer you the chance to come by and peruse my library and mention some books by author, then realized it would be giving in to your off-topic, ad hominem attacks.

As predicted.He just can't mention even one book, even after I have undertaken not to "follow up" in any way.

As asked before please do not modify my posts The rest is still off-topic and a continuation of ad hominem attacks

Forum rules on shortening posts to manageable levels have been carefully explained to you already.

If you can't name a book that's influenced you just say so and that's an end of it.

Meaningless and vague complaints about "ad hominem attacks" are very lame.If you have a specific problem I will do my best to address it.

Can throw the billions that Thaksin threw at the 1,000,000 cows and the 1,000,000 rubber tree programs in the trash bin as well.

Disagree - all these projects had some positive outcome, however minimal (rather academic, I know). There is a call for these policies and, in a true democracy, these calls have to be looked at.

The question is whether the public benefits are greater than the public cost. Even the war on drugs had some positive effect (possibly up to 1,100 drug dealers removed from the market). It's the implementation that's the difference-maker. And the implementation of the war on drugs, the loans for farmers scheme, the free cows, the rubber trees were all not really well done, to make an understatement.

These were examples of populist programs that the Dems did not use (hence the "lock stock and barrel argument is a fallacy" The Dems tossed these programs in the trash bin (where they belonged)

The general policy was maintained and expanded.Of course quite sensibly some components which didn't make much sense were set aside.The angry and emotive way this is described "tossed into the trash bin where they belonged" betrays the rightist agenda of deep dislike of the Thaksin strategy the Democrat led government is copying.It's not really controversial in the outside world: it's simply politics.Yet because Thaksin was the instigator there will always be a section that writhes and foams with rage.

I found myself about to offer you the chance to come by and peruse my library and mention some books by author, then realized it would be giving in to your off-topic, ad hominem attacks.

As predicted.He just can't mention even one book, even after I have undertaken not to "follow up" in any way.

Neither avoided "the main issue" ("That fact doesn't affect many that would have preferred to see fresh elections") nor is that in fact the main issue of this thread or of my counter-argument to a silly statement.

You started in on other people about reading before you singled me out for your new tangential tirades. I choose not to play that game. What purpose is there to list a bibliography to someone that always resorts to ad hominem attacks and that doesn't have a bearing on the discussions? I would think that direct refutation of cited references (which I have done repeatedly) would suffice

Your suggesting I found something "alarming" is simply crap. You have no idea what I find "alarming" but I can tell you honestly that nothing you have ever directed at me has been alarming at all.

More bluster and evasion, though reading the tea leaves it seems you now concede there is a problem with the way this government came to power.Not the line you took in the past.

Yes I have asked a few of the right wing hardliners whether there is any book which has informed their understanding of Thailand.I asked because (with the exception of Bucholz, who has some selective background well though is weak at analysing it) there seemed to be profound ignorance of recent history, let alone interpreting it.All including you have refused so I draw my own conclusions.I said you were alarmed because you provided as an excuse an unwillingness to get into mudslinging.I promised to note the book concerned and shut up.Still, nothing....

Jayboy with more personal attacks as fits his agenda.

Strange that he admitted "possibly" then goes on to suggest that the poster (me) had "never read around the subject" which is not true in the least but when you can't address the discussion point with anything other than "possibly" it only leaves ad hominem attacks. When the red spokesperson states that the government was legitimately elected in Thailand it IS silly to suggest otherwise. That fact doesn't affect that many people would have preferred to see fresh elections

If you have read around the subject, why do you consistently refuse to name even one book you have found illuminating? I even promised not to enter into a discussion about your choice, a prospect you found alarming.

I note you avoid dealing with the main issue of the way the current government was guided to power

I bet you have a white stick or you are a bad comedian.Would you like to define freedom to me. Is it the right to have your vote ignored by a military junta governerment by proxy. I think it is you that needs to get a life

Calling the government (duly elected as even the red shirt English language spokesman Sean B. stated publicly) a junta government by proxy is just plain silly.

Possibly but even Khun Korn, Finance Minister, in his recent interview with Andrew Spooner recognised that the way government had come to power wasn't particularly satisfactory.

Since you openly show contempt for knowledge of history, politics and context it's not surprising that perfectly reasonable assertions sound "silly".There is a good case to be made that the current Democrat led government represents elite interests and was guided to power in a shabby and ant-democratic way.If you ever read around this subject you might be able to mount a sensible counter argument (there is one I agree).As it is you just sound...well, silly.

And recovered from as equally well as the country did.

Point being, the North and Northeast did the same before and during Thaksin.

Actually that's not the point.One can have a rational discussion about how well the North and North East did under Thaksin's policies.The position is complicated by the fact the current government has not only adopted lock stock and barrel but also expanded those "populist policies."

The point is I think rather that under Thaksin the rural majority was "politicised" and given dignity , made to feel their views were important.This clearly struck a chord after decades of disrespect or "haut en bas" patronising.Again one can have a discussion about Thaksin's motives but whatever one believes he changed Thailand forever.

"report on the death of a Japanese cameraman during last year's riots showed a discrepancy between a written conclusion and the autopsy report. No one is questioning the integrity and professional dedication of DSI officials"

I do question their integrity, the whole article is about how they are politically manipulated, from the first day till today.

For me it looks like they are a "political police", to deal with the opposition and with the discontent brewing in the masses of society

Its obvious that you do not know any DSI officers, from my own experience they are hard working, non corruptible agents , doing a very hard job. If only all Thai policeman had their morals, society would be much richer...

No doubt there were East Germans who praised the Stasi as hard working non corruptible agents doing a hard job.

History swept them away.

It isn't a class-war since it isn't a division along class-lines. More regional than anything else.

Denying that *is* burying ones head in the sand.

Thank you for this thoughtful analysis.It's the same in the UK where the Conservative vote is concentrated in the South while the Labour vote is strongest in the Midlands and North.Purely regional differences and no suggestion there is a class or wealth angle involved.

You're right, it is a class war. Between two classes of elite with the poor and common people thrown in as cannon fodder. Poor sods shafted as usual

There may be elements of a class war but this is changing quite fast.Frankly I see the possibility of the River Tiber foaming with much blood ...but this isn't inevitable.I have been very impressed with an interview Korn recently gave to Andrew Spooner.If the Dems can take their lead from people of this calibre there's a good chance for reform and reconciliation.

It isn't a class-war since it isn't a division along class-lines. More regional than anything else.

Denying that *is* burying ones head in the sand.

Thank you for this thoughtful analysis.It's the same in the UK where the Conservative vote is concentrated in the South while the Labour vote is strongest in the Midlands and North.Purely regional differences and no suggestion there is a class or wealth angle involved.

Hmmmm I have never labeled anyone that disagrees with me as red just for disagreeing with me nor did I ever say that someone that disagrees with me (and the BoD of AOT) about who closed the airport is red. Some are and some aren't. I have labeled reds as red. I don't tend to label people as many other things either.

My use of machiavellian works in context and with common usage and understanding. The use of schoolboy etc is just another attempt to attack the poster because to not attack another poster would be almost unheard of.

Your other personal remarks will be left alone .... as I would not want to get involved in any more the mudslinging that would surely follow.

Glad to have your clarification.Still best not to label people as Reds who question extreme right wing views.

Give me one example of a recent book on Thai politics you have found useful.If you do,I solemnly promise I will not respond in any way and furthermore will never mention the subject again.

Again personal comments ..... sad.

Yes the AOT official on the ground did shut the airport. That has nothing to do with the fact that the reds on the board bring it up everytime the reds are criticized.

Machiavellian - from The Prince --- "The ends justifies the means" which could include the intentional baiting of the government or army to use violence resulting in the loss of their own members to force social change. I don't understand why that needed to be explained.

Personal comments NOT responded to.

So let me get this straight.You blame the AOT not PAD for closing down the airport and persist in describing anyone who disagrees a "Red."

I don't understand why it's too "personal" to name at least one book on recent Thai history/politics you have found illuminating.A cynic might begin to think you haven't read anything at all.

You repeat a schoolboy cliche on Machiavelli, end justifying the means, which actually is a distortion of his philosphy but even the example you give doesn't really work out.I would give you a potted briefing on Machiavelli but that would be off topic.

If I had a nickel for every time a red on the board has interjected in a thread about the reds machiavellian exploits with "What about the PAD and the Airport?" I'd be almost as rich as Thaksin!

Aren't you the fellow that claimed it wasn't the PAD that closed down the airport but a panicky AOT official?

Is it really necessary to describe anyone on the forum as "Red" simply because a different viewpoint is expressed?

Do you know what Machiavellian means because your use of it doesn't make much sense? I suggest you ponder hard before coming back to me on this one since I studied Machiavelli at graduate level.

How's that reading list (or even one useful book on recent Thai politics) expected from you getting along? Don't worry , I know that you will never produce one.

Also, I know many Thai people who are capable of having red and yellow friends and taking both perspectives into account without flying into a rage. In fact I wonder if the majority of people aren't like that? Much of the fury towards red shirts and towards govt from reds and others (because there were also ordinary non-red folk that felt sorry for the red shirts to some degree but wouldn't call themselves red), has died down and the election won't be won or lost on red/yellow issues.

I hope you are right.I think there has been some movement in that direction but there are still plenty of Thais (on both sides) with whom it is impossible to have a rational discussion.I love your comment about "flying into a rage": I have seen this so often (not just in relation to politics) or at least signs that only a modicum of dignity awareness prevented it.Where on earth did the the Thais get the idea that it was the foreigners who were hot hearted, as opposed to their cool hearted selves?

To clarify my 40% figure was of course a guess at the percentage that are broadly sympathetic to the Red movement, though as you suggest many would not be at all passionate let alone dream of attending rallies.It's just a guess though, and on reflection I would revise it down to 30%.

I would disagree, local meetings up here in the NE are drawing substantial crowds...and they are not being paid. The BKK rallys are a publicity thing but the real discussions are taking place in their villages and towns but you will not read about that in your newspaper. As farangs we dont get to know what the thais are thinking and doing and only when pressing a friend he leaked out how many meetings are actually taking place across this region. Even my wife is reluctant to discuss anything red with her husband.

For want of a better phrase the 'movement' is alive and well and stronger than before and that is not about violence, its about the desire to change. Minority reds.. lost for words

My wife has relatives in Hat Yai, Nakhon Sri Thammarat, Kanchanburi, Bangkok, Nonthaburi, Sukhothai, Langpang and Chiang Mai. Some of the northerners voted for TRT, but none of them vote for PT or attend Red rallies. However, since they're not from Issan I guess that they are not "true Thais".

Some of you Red Shirt cheerleaders need to visit the other 3/4s of Thailand occasionally. The Redshirts are NOT a majority.

Your reference to "true Thais" is rather misleading since the expression was originally used to exclude Southern Muslims and Lao people from the North East.It was also a way of differentiating Thais from Chinese immigrants and their descendants.

My own view is that "what my wife told me" comments are sometimes interesting but purely anecdotal.When we combine "what my wife told me" comments with a complete ignorance of recent political and historical background, I have to admit one's eyes glaze over.

Why anyone who differs from the received wisdom should be called " a Red shirt cheerleader " is puzzling.

I agree the Redshirts are not a majority but it's difficult to put a percentage on its support.I would say about 40% but who knows.It's become a very broad church now with much greater middle class support.

the Redshirt strongholds in the North and North East have a population of 22.3 million and 11.6 million respectively, almost exactly 50% of the total Thai population.Of course not everybody by any manner of speaking is A red supporter in these regions.What these numbers do mean however ...well, I don't need to spell it out yet again

We'll know how afraid the reds are of elections by seeing how violent they are this Songkran. If they act up again it will be because they NEED to get an election postponed.

Sean Boonpracong, the old UDD spokesman, put it to Pongthep & Suranand that many red shirts are losing confidence in the parliamentary system and might not bother voting all together.

I don't really get the argument the reds are afraid of elections.In fact it doesn't make any sense.The elite has shown that it is not prepared to tolerate the choice of the Thai people unless it coincides with their own interests.Hence the criminal coup,the rigged constitution supplanting the excellent 1997 version, the "direction" given to the courts, heavy handed military and government propaganda, fatuous "philosophies" propagated to keep the majority in their place, support for the fascist PAD and its plan to disenfranchise the majority etc etc.Those who read history will know this already.In short it is the elite that's afraid of elections hence the record of trying to manipulate the outcome.

As it happens all the signs are that the Dems and PTP will be level pegging and one assumes the former will be able to stitch up a deal in time honoured fashion with Newin and the smaller parties.Dems also benefit from weak PTP leadership and the impressive Abhisit/Korn pairing.Above all, and noting Hammered's perceptive comment elsewhere on food prices, the economy is in good shape.I feel therefore the Dems will do better than last time and the PTP worse.Thus I dont see that the elite really has to do much at all this time since all the signs are the status quo will remain.

Incidentally, purely subjective of course but so are all opinions on this forum, I don't feel there is much resentment among most Thais at red "outrages".Those who feel angry are those who detested the Thaksinite/PPP/Red factions anyway.

Even if I'm right the outcome will result in a government very similar to the current one, none of the underlying problems will have been solved.So what's new?

Fantastic report, Inquisitive.I'm sure many are very grateful to you for this.I was particularly impressed that you stressed the kindness and politeness of the interviewing panel - so typical of Thailand but not often commented on in the context of Immigration officials.Good luck with your application.

A GREAT line from the PM (whether you believe him or not!) ..... He needs to repeat it often and loudly, followed by highlighting the accomplishments of the Dems in real reform for the poor.

I would like to ask people to decide if they want a political party that tries to tackle their problems or a party that causes conflict and turns away from their problems or even makes them worse

Repeating often and loudly is some peoples idea of persuasion, not mine nor I think Abhisit's.It's a question of education really.

All political parties want to win elections and policies are adapted accordingly.The Democrats have "walked away with the Whigs' clothing" (an allusion for us Russell Group types) and are implementing the PPP populist measures although on a greater scale and cost.I don't blame them:it's what politicians do to win in any country.

Silly rhetoric is also a part of all political campaigns.Why should any political party that wants to do well turn away from peoples problems or want to make them worse?

Thanks for the advice, but I'll stick to what I've always done which is posting by following the forum rules and guidelines.

If the rules change, then I would be all to happy to change with them.

I am hoping that you were not entirely straight faced when you made these comments!

Some guys here do not act solely and exclusively as a people blinded by Mark's appearance or attractiveness.

Some guys here are acting and reasoning in the comments very brave, very courageously, defending current Government as if something in their lives depends on the survival of the PM in power.

As servants. So sad and self humiliating acting.

We could see in establishing of this government (and before the end of the Democrat's campaign) a very few foreigners.

It is very likely that some of them having job to posting here on TV, to give about their employer(dems) such biased and unrealistic comments but they do very poorly job here and should not be paid for such sloppy work as performed here.

So, if all these posters you are saying that are paid to post are still here after elections, will you give up on your accusations?

It always makes me laugh to read about these "paid to post" accusations.As though any Thai politician cares one way or another what we say.Beware of the time when being member of the forum starts to swallow up too much of one's life - it can have a shattering effect on one's judgement.

Thanks for the advice, but I'll stick to what I've always done which is posting by following the forum rules and guidelines.

If the rules change, then I would be all to happy to change with them.

You will be pleased/shocked/flabbergasted (please delete which words don't apply) to hear that I think your interpretation is completely correct.

My only comment is that if not quoting a whole post and someone makes a persuasive case that the deleted part has some relevance, one should be prepared to acknowledge that (though obviously in deleting part of the post one has does one's best to ensure that the quoted part doesn't become distorted)

You might explain forum policy to one of your ideological mates who never fails to complain when I cut his posts down when quoting.