I'm confused by the heading of this article.

Who are these Red Shirts?

Certainly an odd way of describing political movements.

I understand some of them support the previous prime Minister, but what is their political context?

A local told me that one side of this political problem wants to abolish elections and simply appoint legislators, while the other side wants to have elections.

The side that doesn't want elections....why? Is it because they cannot win them or are they merely anti-democratic?

Where do these "Red Shirts" fit in, other than the association by some of them with the previous Prime Minister? Are they the ones wanting elections or do they want to appoint legislators without elections?

I'm confused by the heading of this article.

Who are these Red Shirts?

Certainly an odd way of describing political movements.

I understand some of them support the previous prime Minister, but what is their political context?

A local told me that one side of this political problem wants to abolish elections and simply appoint legislators, while the other side wants to have elections.

The side that doesn't want elections....why? Is it because they cannot win them or are they merely anti-democratic?

Where do these "Red Shirts" fit in, other than the association by some of them with the previous Prime Minister? Are they the ones wanting elections or do they want to appoint legislators without elections?

Red shirts want elections, as long as they win. They also want Thaksin back so that everything can go back to what it was before the 2006 coup.

Yellows don't trust elections in Thailand and want a mixed elected/appointed system. The last thing they want is the return of Thaksin and his brand of money politics/non-accountability.

Yellows are nationalists. Reds are populists.

Yellows are essentially non-violent though there were incidents involving their guards. The red core are unashamedly violent, though most redshirt followers are normal, peaceful people.

Reds believe the yellows are the tools of the elite. Yellows believe the reds are the puppets of criminals.

The old idea that "we are all Thais" and that "the things that unite us are stronger than those that divide us" is under severe stress.

still, there is nothing stopping a yellow or blue shirt putting on a red shirt and provoking the police & escalating violence. .... then the media will blame it all on the red shirts

I hope one does and that it escalates so much that the army has to step in and cleans these tugs of the steet for once and forever.

So bottom line:

> The "Reds" want elections, the "Yellows" dont.

> Would it be accurate to therefore define the Reds as Democratic, and the Yellows as Undemocratic?

> That being the case, why dont they define these political movements as such, and get away from non-politically-descriptive terminology dealing with colors. It would clarify things for most casual observers, and place things into a clearer political context.

Edited September 19, 200916 yr by Mezmerized

^^The call for elections is yet another Red-herring. Puea Thai and resulting probable PM CHALERM would only win a minority like last time. Without a coalition they wouldn't last a week and they know it. If a deal had already been made with Newin there wouldn't be a Red-alert presently (but don't count out another unholy Newin/Thaksin re-union to come...)

Several here suggest there is a plot to 'frame' the red shirts and blame them for any violent acts to come... Conveniently forgotten is Red Co-leader Nattawut's words spoken last week:

"On Sept 19, the three-year anniversary of the coup which toppled the Thaksin Shinawatra government, we will not retreat again but will stand and fight," said Natthawut Saikua.

This 'We were/are framed' plot follows the exact same pattern of deflecting blame for the violent Red-Songkran riots in Bangkok. Even now the red leaders along with Puea Thai MP's are still searching for the 'hundreds killed' at Songkran... The only thing killed in REALITY, is absolutely ANY credibility of deflecting statements like these spoken by the Red Leaders, Puea Thai 'handlers', or their overall leader Mr Thaksin.

The 'third hand' behind any 'plot' (to create chaos and then deflect blame) should be easily identifiable. Afterall, who 'squarely' has the most to gain via any further incited unrest?

Edited September 19, 200916 yr by baht&sold

> Would it be accurate to therefore define the Reds as Democratic, and the Yellows as Undemocratic?

that's certainally one way of defining it.

yellows are anti-democratic, afraid of elections, prefer coups, and are driven by hate.

reds are democratic, pro-election, despise coups and are driven by love.

So considering that you defined the "Reds" as election focussed Democrats, and the "Yellows" non-electoral anti-democrats, who is in power now?

The "democrats" or the "non-democrats"?

Does that mean this "Reds" focussed rally I have been reading so much about here, suggests they are not in power, and want Democracy returned??????

So considering that you defined the "Reds" as election focussed Democrats, and the "Yellows" non-electoral anti-democrats, who is in power now?

The "democrats" or the "non-democrats"?

Does that mean this "Reds" focussed rally I have been reading so much about here, suggests they are not in power, and want Democracy returned??????

they call themselves the "democrats" but they where put in power via the military (yes, the ones who did the coup and outsted the longest-serving democratically-elected Prime Minister of Thailand, Thaksin). perhaps they should be called "non-democrats" as you say.

Abhisit, leader of the non-democrats is actually a puppet.

Yes, that's what the rally is about - returning power to the people, returning democracy.

^^The call for elections is yet another Red-herring. Puea Thai and resulting probable PM CHALERM would only win a minority like last time. Without a coalition they wouldn't last a week and they know it. If a deal had already been made with Newin there wouldn't be a Red-alert presently (but don't count out another unholy Newin/Thaksin re-union to come...)

Several here suggest there is a plot to 'frame' the red shirts and blame them for any violent acts to come... Conveniently forgotten is Red Co-leader Nattawut's words spoken last week:

"On Sept 19, the three-year anniversary of the coup which toppled the Thaksin Shinawatra government, we will not retreat again but will stand and fight," said Natthawut Saikua.

This 'We were/are framed' plot follows the exact same pattern of deflecting blame for the violent Red-Songkran riots in Bangkok. Even now the red leaders along with Puea Thai MP's are still searching for the 'hundreds killed' at Songkran... The only thing killed in REALITY, is absolutely ANY credibility of deflecting statements like these spoken by the Red Leaders, Puea Thai 'handlers', or their overall leader Mr Thaksin.

The 'third hand' behind any 'plot' (to create chaos and then deflect blame) should be easily identifiable. Afterall, who 'squarely' has the most to gain via any further incited unrest?

If I may add, Natthawut also stated that UDD will be carrying weapons as well. The claims of self-defense, IMHO, are groundless and it seems that they are hoping for confrontation. So much for claims that the UDD is a peaceful lot and would never, ever carry any weapons.

Mr Natthawut said UDD demonstrators would carry weapons for self-defence but he did not elaborate on their nature.

Red Shirts Banned From Key City Areas

So bottom line:

> The "Reds" want elections, the "Yellows" dont.

> Would it be accurate to therefore define the Reds as Democratic, and the Yellows as Undemocratic?

> That being the case, why dont they define these political movements as such, and get away from non-politically-descriptive terminology dealing with colors. It would clarify things for most casual observers, and place things into a clearer political context.

Perhaps rather than looking for simple, or simplistic answers, you need to do a lot more research. I don't think there's much commitment on any side of politics in Thailand to western-style democracy. The election process here is not like it is in, say Britain or the US, even allowing for the role money plays in those places. And the idea that the elected government is elected to serve the whole community doesn't carry any weight at all. Find out about money politics, how it works and who benefits. Find out also about patronage and what that means for people who are dependent on it. Read a little Thai history. Read Pasuk & Bakers Thaksin: The Business of Politics in Thailand. There's a lot to learn. And listen to everyone, but believe only half of what they tell you.

Big Red Shirt rally here in Korat today,, march on Prems house apparently. At least 20,000 expected.

http://koratfarang.com/board/index.php?topic=6105.0

I think I,ll stay in and bask in the glory of Sheffield United beating Sheffield Wednesday at football.....

A calmer and more comfortable option IMHO.

reds are democratic, pro-election, despise coups and are driven by love.

ROTFLOL

Edited September 19, 200916 yr by noithip

that's certainally one way of defining it.

yellows are anti-democratic, afraid of elections, prefer coups, and are driven by hate.

reds are democratic, pro-election, despise coups and are driven by love.

Or another way of defining it is that most if not all of these people (yellow and red) are mindless <deleted> just doing what they are told and accepting the payments. BOTH are actually the minority but as all ways in Thailand the loudest voice wins.

Yeah, you may be right Xangsamhua.

Thai politics is very complicated, and perhaps cannot be reduced to simple explanations.

But being for or against elections seems to speak volumes, doesn't it? Regardless what jusrisdiction it is in.

Elections certainly are the starting point for any style of Democracy.

Eliminating them from the equation moves the entire political scene into a decidedly undemocratic direction.

I wasn't aware before that electoral democracy was in peril in Thailand.

But like you say, this may be too simplistic.

So considering that you defined the "Reds" as election focussed Democrats, and the "Yellows" non-electoral anti-democrats, who is in power now?

The "democrats" or the "non-democrats"?

Does that mean this "Reds" focussed rally I have been reading so much about here, suggests they are not in power, and want Democracy returned??????

they call themselves the "democrats" but they where put in power via the military (yes, the ones who did the coup and outsted the longest-serving democratically-elected Prime Minister of Thailand, Thaksin). perhaps they should be called "non-democrats" as you say.

Abhisit, leader of the non-democrats is actually a puppet.

Yes, that's what the rally is about - returning power to the people, returning democracy.

This is an expat forum and not a political one. This is your last warning to desist your electioneering on behalf of Thaksin.

that's certainally one way of defining it.

yellows are anti-democratic, afraid of elections, prefer coups, and are driven by hate.

reds are democratic, pro-election, despise coups and are driven by love.

Or another way of defining it is that most if not all of these people (yellow and red) are mindless <deleted> just doing what they are told and accepting the payments. BOTH are actually the minority but as all ways in Thailand the loudest voice wins.

at the end of the day, its not about the loudest voice (or the majority voice for that matter), its about what group has more financial and social power, and if push comes to shove.... military support.

Army chief Gen Anupong Paojinda admitted that he also had received an intelligent report about the plan to provoke unrest on Saturday night.

“It was reported that the agitators plan to use bomb attack on various state offices in order to create a situation”, Gen Anupong said.

http://bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/154804...incite-violence

that's certainally one way of defining it.

yellows are anti-democratic, afraid of elections, prefer coups, and are driven by hate.

reds are democratic, pro-election, despise coups and are driven by love.

Or another way of defining it is that most if not all of these people (yellow and red) are mindless <deleted> just doing what they are told and accepting the payments. BOTH are actually the minority but as all ways in Thailand the loudest voice wins.

at the end of the day, its not about the loudest voice (or the majority voice for that matter), its about what group has more financial and social power, and if push comes to shove.... military support.

Your team seems to have a way of spreading largesse, so what you just said is very true.

at the end of the day, its not about the loudest voice (or the majority voice for that matter), its about what group has more financial and social power, and if push comes to shove.... military support.

Finally admitting that it's not about democracy but about money?

Joke of the DAY: Thaksin and democracy in one sentence

The same as a Thai would go to the west and constantly tells everybody there how wrong they do things because back home in Thailand we do it different, and, thats the only right way....

To be brutally frank my country doesn't stumble from one f#ck up to the other like Thailand with no light at the end of the tunnel so we must be doing something right.

Not an attack on Thailand. It's my home. Just how I see it.

that's certainally one way of defining it.

yellows are anti-democratic, afraid of elections, prefer coups, and are driven by hate.

reds are democratic, pro-election, despise coups and are driven by love.

Or another way of defining it is that most if not all of these people (yellow and red) are mindless <deleted> just doing what they are told and accepting the payments. BOTH are actually the minority but as all ways in Thailand the loudest voice wins.

at the end of the day, its not about the loudest voice (or the majority voice for that matter), its about what group has more financial and social power, and if push comes to shove.... military support.

Your team seems to have a way of spreading largesse, so what you just said is very true.

I don't belong to any team. I certainly don't subscribe to the anti-thaksin hysteria and the "if your not with me you must be against me" attitudes that seems so prevalent on this board.

Im just one poster giving my opinion like everyone else, that's all.

Everyone else is not standing on a pro Thaksin soapbox. Try a reread of your posts here.

Can't he have his say dr? There's more than enough people on here posting anti-Thaksin stuff without getting warnings.

I never considered myself pro-Thaksin. I have critisised thaksin a number of times on various issues in the past.

I never considered myself pro-Thaksin. I have critisised thaksin a number of times on various issues in the past.

Try that reread of your offerings here.

Im pro-democracy and pro-elections and anti-coup and anti-"elite". simple as that. the peoples vote should be respected, WHATEVER choice they make. don't let the av confuse you.

Edited September 19, 200916 yr by mc2

Oh and here we go again ...GL to all in BKK and let's hope it doesn't escalate today/tomorrow.

This political soup is just plain hurting Thailand and your average Thai is sick to death of it. Every Thai I personally know is just totally fed up of the yellows and the reds as it ultimately knocks on to everyone financially etc.. Some Thai's do read TV too .... be nice to hear their words on this. However, maybe just the political stirrers would reply, though I hope not.

I'm confused by the heading of this article.

Who are these Red Shirts?

Certainly an odd way of describing political movements.

I understand some of them support the previous prime Minister, but what is their political context?

A local told me that one side of this political problem wants to abolish elections and simply appoint legislators, while the other side wants to have elections.

The side that doesn't want elections....why? Is it because they cannot win them or are they merely anti-democratic?

Where do these "Red Shirts" fit in, other than the association by some of them with the previous Prime Minister? Are they the ones wanting elections or do they want to appoint legislators without elections?

It fairer to say that yellow shirts are pro monarchy, in its purest sence. While the red shirts are more pro a Thaskin dictatorship. While the Democrats are pro democracy and currently lead a coalition government. I hope that helps.

I never considered myself pro-Thaksin. I have critisised thaksin a number of times on various issues in the past.

That is possibly the biggest load of crap you have posted to date, to say you are not pro-Thaksin is ludicrous.

Red shirts end protest in Korat

By The Nation

Pro-Thaksin protesters failed to reach residence of Privy Councillor President Gen Prem Tinsulanonda in Nakhon Ratchasima as they faced with barricades and hundreds of police.

Joint forces of police and soldiers set up a blockage on a road leading to Gen Prem's residence to prevent the protesters from going to Prem's residence.

Their leader; Arisamun Pongruengrong, spoke through a megaphone, demanding for Gen Prem to stay out of politics and calling for Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva to dissolve the House.

Gen Prem is now in Nakhon Ratchasima to chair a scholarship granting ceremony.

Arisamun, a former singer, has been charged with inciting unrest when he led the protesters to a building which was close to meeting venue of Asean Summit in Pattaya in April. The invasion forced the Thai government to cancel the summit.

After failing to march to Prem's residence, Arisamun dispersed the protest, inviting the protesters to go to Bangkok to join the protest in Bangkok.

-- The Nation 2009/09/19