Of course there are many who would say that Thaksin is the cause of the "reds" and without him they would not be fighting.

But if for the purposes of this discussion, we give the "reds" the benefit of the doubt that they really are fighting on behalf of the under-represented rural masses, and they really do care about restoring this country to a full and fair democracy, do you think that doing so under the "Thaksin banner" does anything to further their cause?

It's my feeling that actually the "reds" make a lot of valid points; for example the way that certain figures outside of politics interfere and have too much influence - but the argument of the "reds" is completely undermined by their support of a corrupt man who during his tenure did nothing to further democracy in this country and who cynically and cruelly used the less-advantaged to further his own ambitions.

If the "reds" detached themselves from Thaksin's own personal fight to evade justice, i feel they would have infinitely more credibility - and if not support them, i might certainly sympathise with them.

What do you think?

I thought Thaksin is the red's cause, take him out of the equation and the reds have no figurehead.

<edit : I don't really give a toss but of the choices "stronger" is my perception.>

I don't think the majority of the protesting reds give a dam_n about the rural poor, they've been paid to join the current set of demos so they wear red.

Ultimately both sets of antagnists are being manipulated by various vested interest parties.

Hinders

Without Thaksins' money there would be no reds.

Wonder how much money it takes to keep crowds like that going.

Not thinking about any color (red/yellow), just how much money that must be poured in over time.

Most revealing thing so far is that none of the outspoken red supporters on this forum have any comment to make... i wonder why?

Most revealing thing so far is that none of the outspoken red supporters on this forum have any comment to make... i wonder why?

This is normal, they don't give a hood for the red shirts, they are only devoted to Thaksin.

The red shirts are only a tool to bring Thaksin back.

the red shirts for me don't symbolize Thaksin, they are more like the grassroots pro-democracy movement that wants a goverment that is free of military and so called "elite" inteference, and essentially that respects their voting rights.

I don't think it matters who is the leader, as long as they properly represent/emathise with the disappointments and hopes of the people and work to bring this issue to resolution. The current goverment is completely unacceptable to me and to many other people, due to the way it was formed and the sad direction it has taken. Abhisit is good at talking his way out of things but it can only take it so far.

Now, Thaksin is the obvious leader, he is a natural leader and the people identify with the injustices done to him.

As long as his supporters believe he is leading for the principle of justice and not his own self interest, I believe he will help the reds cause, in terms of uniting and focusing them. Some other charismatic leaders to help the reds would be good too.

Most revealing thing so far is that none of the outspoken red supporters on this forum have any comment to make... i wonder why?

Maybe they are bored sick of repeating over and over again that they don't "love" Thaksin, but do feel that he should not have been removed from office illegally!

Maybe they are bored sick of repeating over and over again that they don't "love" Thaksin, but do feel that he should not have been removed from office illegally!

And just to continue that thought... they support his campaign to evade justice for the crimes he has commited and justify this on the basis that other Thai politicians have also evaded justice in the past... correct?

I definitely support some of the Red's causes, the ones that relate to bringing a feudal political system to an end, and I also think Thaksin was one of the best PM's ever. But at this point in time I think he makes the Red's point weaker.

I started this poll 365 days ago and it's funny to think that the issue remains exactly unchanged.

Stronger:

More media attention, and financial backup.

He got things off the ground for them without a doubt, but now he is what is pulling them down and stopping them from going forward IMO.

Taksin IS the red shirts cause. With him in a box and no money to bribe and manipulate them any longer, the throngs of ignorant peasants would dissipate and go back to being decent rural Thai people for the most part.

Without Thaksins' money there would be no reds.

Ditto. Without him there would be no 'Reds'. You can't take him out of the equation.

If the Red Shirts was a real grassroots movement, and not astro turfed, he would be an huge obstacle since he is part of the pinnacle in how corruption and self-serving politicians have been perverting the laws and the office to better serve themselves.

But since the agenda of democracy is only a cover for the agenda to bring back Thaksin to power and feed all the pigs from his stable from the governments coffers he is the strength of it since without his finance there would be no campaign.

I thought Thaksin is the red's cause, take him out of the equation and the reds have no figurehead.

<edit : I don't really give a toss but of the choices "stronger" is my perception.>

If the red shirts were not paid by Tarksin, would they stop protesting??

If the red shirts were not paid by Tarksin, would they stop protesting??

Vast majority, yes.

I think it helps - always good to have a popular leader in your camp.

I think it helps - always good to have a popular leader in your camp.

Depends what standards you have. If being a convicted criminal on the run doesn't rule a person out from leading your camp, your camp obviously isn't worth very much.

The reds movement as it exists is down to Thaksin, but it has revealed divides that were always there without a voice. It's a good thing that these voices are being heard and a pity that it had to be in association with a man who has polarised the country to an extent that their efforts are probably wasted.

Depends what standards you have. If being a convicted criminal on the run doesn't rule a person out from leading your camp, your camp obviously isn't worth very much.

Criminal to some, hero to others. Last time I checked....heaps of criminals running the present regime, so that really doesnt say much about that camp either.

Criminal to some, hero to others.

Criminality isn't something open to opinion. You either are a criminal or you are not. Your hero is.

Last time I checked....heaps of criminals running the present regime, so that really doesnt say much about that camp either.

Whether or not this is true, i fail to see how it makes your support of a criminal any better.

^my hero? Get a grip mate - I think you lost the plot.

As for criminal - well apparently most of the world disagree(s) or they would have handed him over by now.

I voted weaker, because I think that he morally compromises the Red cause. However, without his funding, the Redshirt movement would be a weak shadow of what it is now.

"my hero? Get a grip mate - I think you lost the plot."

I could only be bothered to go back as far as a couple of weeks:

^Perhaps Khun T is a hero, not a criminal?

^When you are a billionaire and a good lad, rules are bent.

champion of the people, wrongly convicted by political enemies, and free to travel the world.

actually thailand loves khun T

This is just a minute soupcon of the nonsense you've been treating us to since your hero rose to fame and then fell spectacularly into the abyss he now resides.

Thank you rixalex for going back for his Taksin loving comments. Good job, how hypocritical was that?