Double Standard In Thailand

[Heng]

The current side is a minority, just made up of better people. I don't identify with either group... I know you want to play dodgeball and all, but my comment was just an observation and I'm not on either team. I can poke fun at the other side as well... it's just not as funny. There is no set measure, it's an intangible (which is the main reason why it can never be copied by the others... no matter how hard they try).

It calls itself whatever it wants to call itself. And the cycle is perfectly natural, and is hardly unique in historical terms. All that happens is that the system topples over and over time, the same components of society end up near the top... just with different names/symbols/and logos.

Heng I kind of agree with this. What really makes my stomach turn is the way the elites can't admit they have no truck with Democracy(unless their man gets voted in). Why doesn't Abhisit be frank and say that his party is better and thus it doesn't mater what the majority want and that Thailand shouldn't have a voter based democracy. Jeez he even went on TV in a foreign interview with Dan Rather and said if there was a new election the Democrats would win.

Well, I think plenty of elites do admit to that (that they don't believe rural/poor votes should count as much). He can't be frank about because if you come out and say you don't want a democracy, all of the other "pretend democracies" in the world won't want to hold hands with you in trade. It works much better when the parties take turns in power... which is why we're at this junction, they weren't taking turns.

[Time Traveller]

How is this current situation different from anytime in Thailand's history? It's not - nothing changes in thailand. The people without power or money want a better situation for improvement in their lives. And the people with the power don't want to give it up. Just let them fight it out, enjoy the viewing and align yourself with the winner - That's the secret to success

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

The sad part is that, for the most part, out of Thai that i talked to (during Songkrang) largely have no idea why they support 1 team or the other.

Example here's a conversation i had with my mother in-law who is a teacher at a public school.

Mother in-law - " I support the yellow team"

Me - "Why?"

MIL - "Rayong supports Yellow, and I don't like Thaksin"

Me - "Even though yellow team wants to scrap the 1-man-1-vote system? So regular people such as yourself will only have a 30% say in the government?"

MIL - "I've never heard of that, i'm sure you must have misunderstood".

Me - Look up PAD profile on ABS news website listing their core philosophy of 70% elite, 30% people government, and show MIL.

MIL - Silent/irritated look...."I support Yellow"

It's just so ironic to me that you would support a political movement designed to take away your political power...simply because you don't like one person.

I might work at the same school as your mother-in-law. Rayong supports PAD because the city's residents are relatively affluent, well-educated, and support investment and economic development in industries. I really don't think the voting dilution is something that PAD would try to or could implement.

I think Abhisit should be given time to get the economy back on track, eliminate the corrupt TRT remnants, then turn the government over to democratic elections. Most of the people in Rayong support democracy, they just feel Thaksin was corrupt, and that he spread throughout the political system like a virus.

[dbrenn]

I really don't think the voting dilution is something that PAD would try to or could implement.

And how can you be so sure of that?

In a country of 63 million people, most of whom are rural peasants with red leanings and certainly do not belong to the elite / military / bureaucrat class that supports the PAD and which Abhisit represents, how else would the PAD retain power? The PAD clique is sponsoring force in the short term, and has said repeatedly that vote dilution of the 'uneducated' is one of its political aims. What makes you so confident that it is not going to pursue this policy once it consolidates its power base some more? I suppose you also trust that, once democracy is replaced by the PAD system, the PAD will make all the right decisions, because there might be no going back after that. The military minority in Myanmar have made all the right decisions for the benefit of the majority too, haven't they? As the old saying goes 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely'.

I think Abhisit should be given time to get the economy back on track, eliminate the corrupt TRT remnants, then turn the government over to democratic elections. Most of the people in Rayong support democracy, they just feel Thaksin was corrupt, and that he spread throughout the political system like a virus.

Oh no, not again. Someone else who is deluded by the Bangkok Post / Nation and similar silly propaganda into believing that corruption in Thai politics is a TRT peculiarity. How long have you been in Thailand? Corruption is EVERYWHERE in Thai politics, but only one side gets prosecuted for it. Many of the 'corrupt TRT remnants' that you long to be rid of are now in Abhisit's own government.

How can Abhisit not appear as an autocratic hypocrite? He was installed by mob rule and is keeping power by miltary repression, rather than any democratic mandate. And his party is called 'the Democrats'. His yellow lot were very vocal about censorship by the Thaksin government, and now they are blocking Internet access and closing down all the local radio stations ... what kind of a democracy do you call that?

Edited April 17, 2009 by dbrenn

[dbrenn]

Very confident isn't he? Then why not call for a new election?

That says it all. What we get from Abhisit are various claims about how he is now so popular that an election is unnecessary, contradicted with refusals to back up his claims by going to the people and asking them for a democratic mandate, something that would bury Thaksin once and for all.

Abhisit is very crafty - his clean cut Etonian / Oxford credentials endear him to the elite, and to some extent the international community, but not to your average grindingly poor Thai, which is all that will really matter in the long run, now that Thaksin has opened the Pandora's box of giving the masses a taste of real political representation.

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

I really don't think the voting dilution is something that PAD would try to or could implement.

And how can you be so sure of that?

In a country of 63 million people, most of whom are rural peasants with red leanings and certainly do not belong to the elite / military / bureaucrat class that supports the PAD and which Abhisit represents, how else would the PAD retain power? The PAD clique is sponsoring force in the short term, and has said repeatedly that vote dilution of the 'uneducated' is one of its political aims. What makes you so confident that it is not going to pursue this policy once it consolidates its power base some more? I suppose you also trust that, once democracy is replaced by the PAD system, the PAD will make all the right decisions, because there might be no going back after that. The military minority in Myanmar have made all the right decisions for the benefit of the majority too, haven't they? As the old saying goes 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely'.

I think Abhisit should be given time to get the economy back on track, eliminate the corrupt TRT remnants, then turn the government over to democratic elections. Most of the people in Rayong support democracy, they just feel Thaksin was corrupt, and that he spread throughout the political system like a virus.

Oh no, not again. Someone else who is deluded by the Bangkok Post / Nation and similar silly propaganda into believing that corruption in Thai politics is a TRT peculiarity. How long have you been in Thailand? Corruption is EVERYWHERE in Thai politics, but only one side gets prosecuted for it. Many of the 'corrupt TRT remnants' that you long to be rid of are now in Abhisit's own government.

How can Abhisit not appear as an autocratic hypocrite? He was installed by mob rule and is keeping power by miltary repression, rather than any democratic mandate. And his party is called 'the Democrats'. His yellow lot were very vocal about censorship by the Thaksin government, and now they are blocking Internet access and closing down all the local radio stations ... what kind of a democracy do you call that?

I am not pretending to know what the PAD might do, if they had a chance or what yellow shirts, in general, think. I was trying to enlighten the poster about the political leanings of the residents of Rayong.

[dbrenn]

I am not pretending to know what the PAD might do, if they had a chance or what yellow shirts, in general, think. I was trying to enlighten the poster about the political leanings of the residents of Rayong.

Sorry, but you indicated personal opinion in saying:

"I really don't think the voting dilution is something that PAD would try to or could implement."

and you also said:

"I think Abhisit should be given time to get the economy back on track, eliminate the corrupt TRT remnants, then turn the government over to democratic elections"

And now you are saying that you are "not pretending to know what the PAD might do, if they had a chance or what yellow shirts, in general," In other words, that the comments that you made are no longer your personal opinion.

I don't need to explain further what makes you sound a tad inconsistent.

[dave111223]

I really don't think the voting dilution is something that PAD would try to or could implement.

This is the same thing she thought, but as you can see from several reliable sources, this is in fact one of their core philosophies.

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/world/11/26/08/...e-thailands-pad

Sondhi and the PAD advocate the scrapping of the one-man-one-vote system in Thailand and say only 30 per cent of parliament's members should be directly elected by the people.

The remaining 70 per cent should be chosen from various occupations and professions and be appointed, they say.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Al...e_for_Democracy

According to this source:

"Representative democracy is not suitable for Thailand," noted Sondhi Limthongkul, claiming that electoral systems have repeatedly elected allegedly corrupt populist governments.[46] To correct this problem, the PAD has proposed what it called "New Politics." Although most of its leaders supported, and in some cases, helped draft the post-coup 2007 Constitution, the PAD has proposed constitutional amendments that would make 70% of Parliament would be selected, based on professional groups, with elections accounting for only 30%.[32][33] On 21 September, the PAD changed its formula to 100% elections, but with 50% of Parliament voted for by geographic area and another 50% voted for by occupational representatives

So i guess with PAD we get a 50% democracy, "yay"

Which i guess only serves to further my point of people supporting a "team" without even bothering to learn about what that team actually wants or stands for.

Read the team name, like the color and see what your neighbor supports and i guess that is enough "research"?

[dbrenn]

So i guess with PAD we get a 50% democracy, "yay"

Which i guess only serves to further my point of people supporting a "team" without even bothering to learn about what that team actually wants or stands for.

Read the team name, like the color and see what your neighbor supports and i guess that is enough "research"?

That's a reflection of human nature, and is just as true in my country of origin - the UK. The vast majority of people the world over are simple folk, who follow leaders based on reasons that often have more to do with pop-culture than politics. In the US, for example, running up to the election, people were being interviewed about their views on Sarah Palin. Many of the responses included comments along the lines of "She's a real good looking woman" as an important deciding factor.

That said, we cannot tar everyone in a sector of society with the same brush, and that's exactly what the PAD is trying to do by labelling all the rural folk 'uneducated', and implying that the PAD alone, rather than the majority of Thai citizens, knows what's best for Thailand. I think that the PAD made a huge miscalculation - the rural poor may be simple people leading simple lives, but they are proving to be mowhere near as stupid as the PAD assumed.

The result is a backlash of bitter resentment at the thought of having newfound rights curtailed by the old guard in Bangkok that the PAD represents.

Edited April 17, 2009 by dbrenn

[quiksilva]

Just was wondering, is the present PM married (to a woman) ???

Yes.

[dominique355]

There seem to persist some misconceptions about what is a democracy and many people claim Abhisit's government is illegal or at least illegitimate

That's simply not true.

Reduced to the essence, a democracy is a form of organisation where the people (demos) has the power (cratein), not a king or a tyran. There is a direct democracy and an indirect democracy. When people elect representatives who form a parliament, that's a indirect and parliamentary democracy. The representatives in the parliament then elect the executive or Prime Minister. The Prime Minister obviously needs a majority of the votes.

Representatives, as an essence of a democracy, are not bound to instructions, they are only bound to the constitution and their conscious. A representative may change his opinion and his vote. That is not only totally legal, that is the essence of a democracy.

So when some members of the Thai parliament changed their opinion about who should be the PM, they did this in a totally legal way. This happens in many parliamentary democracies all over the world. Political parties or some of their members shift alliances and change opinion.

The Courts have found the two previous government to be illegal. Or more precisely, Samak broke a law and Somchai's party was found guilty of electoral fraud. If there was an illegal government under the 2007 Constitution, then it was the government of Samak and Somchai.

Now, how the 2007 Constitution came to be, that's a totally different question. But at least the 2007 Constitution has been approved by a majority of voters.

Of course, Abhisit had to make alliances and deals. Some of them are highly questionable. The the example of the Minister of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). She is a nurse with no qualification for this job at all. She got the job, because her husband, who actually runs the ICT, has been banned from politics for electoral fraud. I think it's a shame that Abhisit choose her, and she shows every day how incompetent she is.

Also his choice of the Foreign Minister is to be frowned upon.

But to go on and say, he is a puppet, that's going too far. The way he mastered the Songkran Songkram (I couldn't resist ), is ingenious and shows that he is in charge and in control, not the army and not the police.

[dbrenn]

There seem to persist some misconceptions about what is a democracy and many people claim Abhisit's government is illegal or at least illegitimate

That's simply not true.

Reduced to the essence, a democracy is a form of organisation where the people (demos) has the power (cratein), not a king or a tyran. There is a direct democracy and an indirect democracy. When people elect representatives who form a parliament, that's a indirect and parliamentary democracy. The representatives in the parliament then elect the executive or Prime Minister. The Prime Minister obviously needs a majority of the votes.

Representatives, as an essence of a democracy, are not bound to instructions, they are only bound to the constitution and their conscious. A representative may change his opinion and his vote. That is not only totally legal, that is the essence of a democracy.

So when some members of the Thai parliament changed their opinion about who should be the PM, they did this in a totally legal way. This happens in many parliamentary democracies all over the world. Political parties or some of their members shift alliances and change opinion.

The Courts have found the two previous government to be illegal. Or more precisely, Samak broke a law and Somchai's party was found guilty of electoral fraud. If there was an illegal government under the 2007 Constitution, then it was the government of Samak and Somchai.

Now, how the 2007 Constitution came to be, that's a totally different question. But at least the 2007 Constitution has been approved by a majority of voters.

Of course, Abhisit had to make alliances and deals. Some of them are highly questionable. The the example of the Minister of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). She is a nurse with no qualification for this job at all. She got the job, because her husband, who actually runs the ICT, has been banned from politics for electoral fraud. I think it's a shame that Abhisit choose her, and she shows every day how incompetent she is.

Also his choice of the Foreign Minister is to be frowned upon.

But to go on and say, he is a puppet, that's going too far. The way he mastered the Songkran Songkram (I couldn't resist ), is ingenious and shows that he is in charge and in control, not the army and not the police.

What you say about the literal meaning of the word democracy is of course true, but you don't address the double standard that gave parliament no option other than to reform along political lines that were being artificially dictated by a mob, the army, and the judiciary.

In a normal government, various legitimate processes can take place that can shift the balance of power, such as byelections, alliances, internal voting an so on, which can of course lead to the replacement of the PM and other representatives, and change policy. This is not what happened in Thailand - far from it. The point that I was making in my original post, the one that you are ignoring in your response, is that most, if not all, Thai politicians are blatantly corrupt, but only one side gets prosecuted for it in a deliberate move to change the government, and the prosecutions abrupty stop when that change was completed to the satisfaction of the PAD minority.

The military coup, disbanding the TRT, then expelling fom office one after the other PM who was affiliated with the TRT via mob rule or judicial pretext, left those remaining in parliament no choice other than to join whatever was left, and so Abhisit was installed as the largest remnant who was acceptable to the PAD and others in the old guard establishment.

Without all this interference, the government that the people had originally elected would most likely still be in power today.

[Ulysses G.]

In a normal government, various legitimate processes can take place that can shift the balance of power, such as byelections, alliances, internal voting an so on, which can of course lead to the replacement of the PM and other representatives, and change policy. This is not what happened in Thailand - far from it. The point that I was making in my original post, the one that you are ignoring in your response, is that most, if not all, Thai politicians are blatantly corrupt, but only one side gets prosecuted for it in a deliberate move to change the government, and the prosecutions abrupty stop when that change was completed to the satisfaction of the PAD minority.

The military coup, disbanding the TRT, then expelling fom office one after the other PM who was affiliated with the TRT via mob rule or judicial pretext, left those remaining in parliament no choice other than to join whatever was left, and so Abhisit was installed as the largest remnant who was acceptable to the PAD and others in the old guard establishment.

Without all this interference, the government that the people had originally elected would most likely still be in power today.

Excellent reasoning!

[plachon]

Can I just say how much I appreciate DBrenn's post.. I completely agree.. It's almost ironic that while it's all so obvious, so many 'Falungs' don't seem to get it.. They disliked Thaksin from the minute the social order campaign started, never mind what he did for the economy or for the rural poor.

Well guess what, sooner or later the rural poor won't just be 'serfs' anymore and the whole fairy tale bar disneyland is coming to an end.

Nonsense, I disliked Thaksin from the moment he claimed he would solve Bangkok's traffic jams within 6 months as Deputy PM in 96/97 and plainly failed. No apology, no remorse, no shame (as with the War on Drugs fiasco). Clearly, the guy was too busy ripping off the country and getting his baht converted into US$ in preparation for the float of the baht in July 97 to worry about such things as responsibility or culpability.

It's a pity that few Thai ever saw the writing on the wall when they voted in the richest man in Thailand as PM in 2001, or they could have saved themselves so much subsequent hearthache and trouble.

[ballbreaker]

The Yellows close down Thailand's international airport, causing mayhem and damage on an unprecedented scale to Thailand's tourist industry and reputation. None are arrested and charged, let alone convicted.

Stop shouting this crap. PAD leaders have been charged and you would know that unless you don't bother reading the newspaper.

[dbrenn]

The Yellows close down Thailand's international airport, causing mayhem and damage on an unprecedented scale to Thailand's tourist industry and reputation. None are arrested and charged, let alone convicted.

Stop shouting this crap. PAD leaders have been charged and you would know that unless you don't bother reading the newspaper.

There's no need to be rude in what has so far been a polite discussion. The tone of your post suggest mob rule, and with a name like 'ballbreaker', what more can we expect?

And, which newspaper are you reading? The Bangkok Post, or the Nation? They should dye their pages yellow . Please tell us which newspapers you read. What, please tell us, have the PAD leaders been charged with, and which ones are currently in custody? Names, dates, and charges please.

It's a great shame, because both the Bangkok Post and the Nation used to be balanced and for the most part interesting and informative. I think that they probably sold their souls a while back - they are a shadow of their former selves and these days contain mainly bellicose, yellow oriented rhetoric, bad grammar (in the case of the Nation), and overtly sensationalist style. A bit like the tabloid press in the UK, more's the pity. Reading them these days makes me want to weep.

Edited April 17, 2009 by dbrenn

[ballbreaker]

There's no need to be rude in what has so far been a polite discussion. The tone of your post suggest mob rule, and with a name like 'ballbreaker', what more can we expect?

And, which newspaper are you reading? The Bangkok Post, or the Nation? They should dye their pages yellow . Please tell us which newspapers you read. What, please tell us, have the PAD leaders been charged with, and which ones are currently in custody? Names, dates, and charges please.

It's a great shame, because both the Bangkok Post and the Nation used to be balanced and for the most part interesting and informative. I think that they probably sold their souls a while back - they are a shadow of their former selves and these days contain mainly bellicose, yellow oriented rhetoric, bad grammar (in the case of the Nation), and overtly sensationalist style. A bit like the tabloid press in the UK, more's the pity. Reading them these days makes me want to weep.

Why should I do research for you since you have already formed your opinion on this matter. But if you really want to know the details check out Bangkok Post for March 30th. On second thought why bother because you won't believe what it says.

As to mob rule if you haven't noticed that's what seems to be going on right now. I think both sides have major faults and the winner will be...the military when they seize power in the guise of maintaining order.

As a farang I have picked no side in this conflict and wish only to say the people will always have the government they deserve.

Edited April 18, 2009 by ballbreaker

[scorecard]

What I'm tired of is the ongoing statements that the TRT, TTT (thaksin, Samak, Somchai) governments were democratically elected.

They were not democatically elected, they came to power through massise rampant vote buying. And there's lots of evidence.

[Heng]

I'm tired of hearing how the elites rule the country as if that's a bad thing. As Jon Stewart said... "Doesn't elite mean GOOD?"

[TonySoprano]

I'm tired of hearing how the elites rule the country as if that's a bad thing. As Jon Stewart said... "Doesn't elite mean GOOD?"

i think its a good thing, but a bad thing when the elites appear too paranoid of everyone else behind them and trade growth for their own security. i look at the bill gate elite types as being more praise worthy. they rule and destroy but keep moving forward taking all of us with them. other elites seem to kinda just face backwards and hit anyone who gets to close with a baseball bat.

[ozzydom]

And I am tired of dbrenn continually running down all and sundry who dare to have an opposing view, maybe he will kindly give us the makeup of his preferred Government of Thailand including his preferred leadership.

Anybody can be negative,try being positive and put a bit of meat on the bones of your argument.

[Robby nz]

Spot on BB and it should be remembered that the PAD leaders were not charged by the previous govt, the one the reds want back, but by the a Abasith Gvt almost as soon as it came to power. They are now on bail awaiting a court appearance.

Because the red leaders are remanded in custody probably reflects the level of violance used by their supporters.

Abasith was badly let down by the police in Pattaya, he put his trust in them and they failed to do their duty. Remains to be seen what will happen about that.

He put an emergancy order in place when the reds were getting out of control in BKK and ordered in the army,who did a great job under his command

Remember the 2 J's shot through and are still on the loose and I believe making statements about being back as soon as the emergency order is revoked, more trouble.

There is no need for an election now, it would only leave the country leaderless for another few months in a time of global trouble. let the present legal Govt get on with the job and we will see when the next election time comes round who will win. Possibly the now opposition will be able to form a govt next time if they offer the elected MP's a few more million to join them, How many million did they offer last time? Then Taxin can be perdoned and come back and claim his? tax free billions and be given a job, in charge of course, President for life would probably suite him.

The real people of BKK, the working people ,showed who they supported when they came out of their homes after the reds had been chased away.

Those of you who think the people of essan live in broken down houses and are all stupid and uneducated have probably never been there, I have and know the people there are on the whole not stupid peasants. They know their business (how many of you know how to make aliving farming?) Some have been screwed by the system and are in debt but so are a lot of people in the world.

[dbrenn]

And I am tired of dbrenn continually running down all and sundry who dare to have an opposing view, maybe he will kindly give us the makeup of his preferred Government of Thailand including his preferred leadership.

Anybody can be negative,try being positive and put a bit of meat on the bones of your argument.

You are completely missing the point, so I suggest that you go back and read my previous posts in this thread. The makeup of my preferred government is as relevant as my single vote. It's only what the majority wants that matters. I think that's a very positive concept that will ultimately result in a better life for a lot of people in Thailand.

If presenting an opposing opinion is your definition of 'running down all and sundry', then that's your problem.

[dbrenn]

I'm tired of hearing how the elites rule the country as if that's a bad thing. As Jon Stewart said... "Doesn't elite mean GOOD?"

Elite being a good thing really depends on what makes one elite in the first place Heng. In Thailand, the elite by and large were born elite, and generally couldn't care less about the lot of their less well off countrymen. Now if you are in the minority that calls itself the elite, that's fine, but you can't then claim that Thailand is a democracy when the rest of the country elects a govenrment that opposes you, and you hae to throw it out to stay in power. If you are happy with that and trust the elite simply because they are elite, then that's up to you.

What we really have in Thailand is minority that calls itself the elite, and is seeking to prolong its rule indefinitely by claiming that the rest of their countrymen are unfit through what they perceive as a lack of education. We are left with a military junta that resembles those in South America. Granted, Thailand has a monarch, and a very good one at that, but after his reign is over the future looks much less clear without a democratic system in place. I think that this transition is what people have in mind at the moment.

[dbrenn]

it should be remembered that the PAD leaders were not charged by the previous govt, the one the reds want back, but by the a Abasith Gvt almost as soon as it came to power. They are now on bail awaiting a court appearance.

Because the red leaders are remanded in custody probably reflects the level of violance used by their supporters.

Are they really? Which of the PAD leaders are awaiting a court appearance for the chaos that they caused by closing down the international airport? Are they in custody? Talking about levels of violence, we should bear in mind that both sides used violence - the PAD were fighting and shooting in the streets too, and laid siege to the airport. Both sides behaved disgracefully, but only one side is held to account.

The real people of BKK, the working people ,showed who they supported when they came out of their homes after the reds had been chased away.

There is no need for an election now ...

Ah right, so the 'real people in Bangkok, the working people' are those that represent the country as a whole because they resisted the reds. This underscores exactly the problem that Thailand faces. The Bangkok people are traditionally Democrat Party leaning, and are one of the main groups courted by the PAD as falling into its category of 'educated' Thais who automatically deserve more of the vote. The capital city is at odds with the country, which is a recipe for disaster.

At least an election would give Abhisit a cast iron reason for staying in power and calling Thaksin's clique a thing of the past with the authority of the whole country, not just Bangkok, behind him. If he is so confident that he has a mandate, why doesn't he put it to the test instead of making excuses?

Those of you who think the people of essan live in broken down houses and are all stupid and uneducated have probably never been there, I have and know the people there are on the whole not stupid peasants. They know their business (how many of you know how to make aliving farming?) Some have been screwed by the system and are in debt but so are a lot of people in the world.

That's right, and is one of the reasons the country folk resent being labelled as 'uneducated' by the PAD. Unless the elite in Bangkok gives these folk more recognition and allows their democratically chosen representatives to govern unfettered, the problem will continue to get worse.

Edited April 19, 2009 by dbrenn

[dbrenn]

What I'm tired of is the ongoing statements that the TRT, TTT (thaksin, Samak, Somchai) governments were democratically elected.

They were not democatically elected, they came to power through massise rampant vote buying. And there's lots of evidence.

Vote buying is a practice that is as old as Thai politics. They all do it.

[dbrenn]

Why should I do research for you since you have already formed your opinion on this matter. But if you really want to know the details check out Bangkok Post for March 30th. On second thought why bother because you won't believe what it says.

As to mob rule if you haven't noticed that's what seems to be going on right now. I think both sides have major faults and the winner will be...the military when they seize power in the guise of maintaining order.

As a farang I have picked no side in this conflict and wish only to say the people will always have the government they deserve.

I wouldn't trust the Bangkok Post or the Nation as sources of unbiased information. The Nation, for example, started its pro PAD campaign just after advertisers in the Thaksin clique pulled the plug on lucrative advertising contracts. And yet, the Nation takes the high ground against Thaksin's 'money politics'. They are all as bad as each other, so why bother reading the propaganda?

You are spot on when you say that both sides have major faults. I never denied that. My point is about the double standard, that Abhisit is an unelected opportunist, and that the problem has not gone away simply because the current cycle of violence has abated.

[dbrenn]

Abhisit and his party snatched power promising reconciliation and national unity after all the pandemonium the PAD had caused by shutting down the airport. Instead of reconciliation, we have seen a violent uprising, followed by a military suppresion of one (but not the other) side, followed by taking off the air local radio stations that support one (but not the other) side. His supporters walk free while his opponents are rounded up and silenced. One of the premises that got him into power was the claim that Thaksin's lot were censoring free speech, and now he is censoring the media. That's the worrying thing about Abhisit - for all his clean cut niceness, he is really no more than an opportunist who owes his position to his military masters. He was installed rather than elected, he applies a double standard, then tells us that he is doing so in the name of reconciliation and democracy.

Elections are the only way that Abhisit can gain any credibility, and begin the reconciliation that he claims to represent.

[gonzobrains]

You're the only guy that actually makes any sense on these forums.

I've observed this double-standard just as much as you have. I see so many people flame each other about red and yellow on these forums, yet fail to see the reality that you have cleverly pointed out.

[Heng]

I'm tired of hearing how the elites rule the country as if that's a bad thing. As Jon Stewart said... "Doesn't elite mean GOOD?"

Elite being a good thing really depends on what makes one elite in the first place Heng. In Thailand, the elite by and large were born elite, and generally couldn't care less about the lot of their less well off countrymen. Now if you are in the minority that calls itself the elite, that's fine, but you can't then claim that Thailand is a democracy when the rest of the country elects a govenrment that opposes you, and you hae to throw it out to stay in power. If you are happy with that and trust the elite simply because they are elite, then that's up to you.

What we really have in Thailand is minority that calls itself the elite, and is seeking to prolong its rule indefinitely by claiming that the rest of their countrymen are unfit through what they perceive as a lack of education. We are left with a military junta that resembles those in South America. Granted, Thailand has a monarch, and a very good one at that, but after his reign is over the future looks much less clear without a democratic system in place. I think that this transition is what people have in mind at the moment.

At some time in the past, even the typically elite family line was made up of commoners. The difference over generations is that the elite (or upper middle class, middle class, or lower middle class guy with his minimart and two rundown unpainted for decades shophouses) worked to get ahead. They made the right decisions, made the right friends, bought the right property, selected the right products to sell, etc. etc. as per the nature of business and economics anywhere.

From the "have not" point of view, the result is that after years and years, the playing field is decidedly uneven and unfair. The fact that it's fairly difficult if not impossible to overcome a generations+ lead is also unfair. After awhile, people translate unfair to = "wrong." IMO, that's not right, as it discounts the accomplishments of those who put in the time and effort to build up their family lines.