'red October'- Red Shirts Plan Major Rallies

[Plus]

You underestimate the importance of ideology in Thailand..

Apart from Democrats, no party has any ideological platform and voters don't care.

Ideology seems important only to those who have one, and they are rare breed on Thai political scene. Their numbers are too small to matter and they can't sustain their ideological aspirations once they absorb themselves in this profession.

Politics in Thailand leaves no room for ideology.

[justanothercybertosser]

You underestimate the importance of ideology in Thailand..

Apart from Democrats, no party has any ideological platform and voters don't care.

Ideology seems important only to those who have one, and they are rare breed on Thai political scene. Their numbers are too small to matter and they can't sustain their ideological aspirations once they absorb themselves in this profession.

Politics in Thailand leaves no room for ideology.

Also the Democrat party has no other ideological platform than a continuation of the status quo of the Thai state ideology as it is. It is an increasingly factionalized group with as little in common as you can find in any other party here in Thailand. The parliamentary political scene has not adapted to the changes in Thai society, and large sectors of the population find representation in either the PAD or the Red Shirts. No wonder when politics and politicians have never been given room to develop in Thailand, a result of a long history of military coups.

As long as Thailand does not leave room for differing ideological platforms in parliamentary politics, especially in political parties, it will be impossible to revert this dangerous trend of representation by partly violent street movements.

[tig28]

.

..So now you would have conditionial elections containing caveats that favor the banned alphabet soup of the TRT/PPP/PT worst violators of the integrity (as it may exist) of the Thai electoral processes. You're a piece of work!

I think this is best illustrated in an article from "that newspaper"--- 15/may reporting how a democrat candidate who had been charged with electoral fraud by the E.C.--- was acquitted --- whilst on the same day an opposition candidate was red carded for slandering his opponents during the campaign. ----- absolutely" worst violators of the integrity (as it may exist) "

You want to grant some sort of amnesty to the most electorally corrupt politicians in the country, those convicted of outragous electoral crimes by the courts so that like the alcoholic they can be escorted into the most well stocked tavern on an open tab.

Yep!!!---as described above "outragous electoral crimes"----- saying bad things about your opponent during the campaign.

[Valentine]

The only ideology I see is money & power whether it be a political party or any other politically motivated group. I am sure there are individuals within the various groups who have higher ideals but they get suffocated by the mob. There are many factors which contibute to the continuance of the status quo, the feudalistic patronage system, education, lack of moral & ethical guidance from almost all sectors, just to name a few.

[Gary A]

The entire Thai political system is run by power brokers. Much has been said about buying votes but that is a minor thing. I would bet that many of our farang political experts do not know that all provincial governors except Bangkok are appointed rather than elected. The post goes to the highest bidder and that person is appointed by the power broker.

Why is buying votes a minor thing? Because people take the money then vote for whoever they want to vote for. Minister jobs are appointed depending on who owes who.

[justanothercybertosser]

The only ideology I see is money & power whether it be a political party or any other politically motivated group. I am sure there are individuals within the various groups who have higher ideals but they get suffocated by the mob. There are many factors which contibute to the continuance of the status quo, the feudalistic patronage system, education, lack of moral & ethical guidance from almost all sectors, just to name a few.

The three pillars are a very strong ideology. The army may be factionalized and corrupt, but anything that could threaten the slightest this ideology compromise is not possible. Any diverging ideology is still not permitted in the political spectrum. That doesn't mean though that this is not existing, but, as you said, they have to join the mob.

It is interesting and somewhat contradictory, but in TRT many of such politicians have gathered besides the mobsters, many of those have been the victims of the bans. And different than the mobsters, they have not the networks to keep playing by proxy. As we have seen - the maybe worst offender is now elementary part of this government.

[justanothercybertosser]

The entire Thai political system is run by power brokers. Much has been said about buying votes but that is a minor thing. I would bet that many of our farang political experts do not know that all provincial governors except Bangkok are appointed rather than elected. The post goes to the highest bidder and that person is appointed by the power broker.

Why is buying votes a minor thing? Because people take the money then vote for whoever they want to vote for. Minister jobs are appointed depending on who owes who.

Compared to what you have described (and yes - i am aware how provincial governors etc. are appointed), vote buying is minor. This is because vote buying is not a direct exchange of money for vote anymore, but nothing but a further incentive to vote for a candidate they would vote for anyhow.

Even Korn has admitted that in the last election in the north, out of the biggest parties PPP has spent the least (if i recall Puah Pandin spent most), but received the most votes. A major transformation happened under TRT, when suddenly populist policies were intruduced into electioneering, and people began voting because of those policies. If politics would be allowed to develop, vote buying would one day disappear by itself, as it already has lost much importance it once had when it began. We also would be able to move beyond populism one day. Well, if there would be room given for development...

Edited October 5, 2009 by justanothercybertosser

[Valentine]

Populism, pork barrel, & vote buying is all pretty much the same. It happens in many "democratic" countries. The problem here seems to be that many of the crumbs thrown out to appease the voters have no long term benefits to said voters. The million Baht per village scheme most likely got people more indebted than they were before through buying phones, TVs, motorbikes etc. Tax money straight into the ruling power's pockets via the voters but the beauty of it is that people believe their lives have been improved even if they are in more debt which they in turn believe will be forgiven one day. Nothing much has changed but the way the money is moved around has become more sophisticated.

Until the people take on honest, ethical & moral role models it will always be this way. The belief that "greed is good" is a big factor.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Valentine

[Plus]

Policies still mean very little to the voters and to the parties, too.

In the last elections it was proven once again that strong local candidates is the bread and butter and they bring the victory, not policies.

On party list votes that reflect political platforms and policies PPP was beaten by Democrats, but they pulled a comprehensive victory when it came to voting for local candidates.

Asia Foundation survey shows the same thing, too. Party policies are way down the list for the voters (from memory).

Vote buying is a lot more sophisticated now than just handing out banknotes, there are a lot of other forms of fraud that are probably more effective. People on this board often use the term "vote buying" for its simplicity. What they mean is any form of fraud that translates money into votes.

[xminator]

Vote buying is not really a big problem. As long as the voters can vote anonymously and have access to all candidates when he/she enter the voting boot, the election is still free and fair. Of course this is where detail is important. If the thai system give you a voting card and part of the currency exchange is 50 baht - cross my name while I see it, vote buying is a huge problem.

[Plus]

If the outcome depends on the amount of money invested, you can't talk about free and fair.

Thaksin came from the business world, so he threw junkets and PR events around just like one would do to promote your company. It still starts with money, even though the people/customers see and experience lots of other things. Free food, free transport, concerts, giveaways or cheap (subsidized) consumer products, warm and friendly service, impressive hi-tech presentations - all that stuff matters.

[brahmburgers]

What Thailand needs are some politicians with Bill Clinton type vision and energy.

When carpenters go to work, they get the wood, the nails, get out their tools, take measurements, and start putting up structures.

When Thai politicians go to work, they...... woops, they don't even go to work, most of the time. Even when they do stray away from their golf and mia noi, all they seem to do is back-room power-shuffling deals, a la Newin and Thaksin.

Someone like Clinton looked at politics as a means to get things done, hopefully things that would benefit his constituency, the American people. In contrast, Thai politicians see politics as a means to make masses of money, so all their calories are spent buffeting up their positions.

Another American, Ralph Nader, has been the butt of jokes on Late Night TV shows, but even Nader has been a tireless advocate for consumer rights and cleaning up the environment. He stands for something. Have any Thai politicians done anything like that? Have any written a book or presented an idea that is visionary and could tangibly ease the hardships of disadvantaged Thais? Not that I know of.

How to get decent and wise people to politics? First there has to be a tide change in attitudes. Lying has to be discouraged. Education, on all levels, needs to be pursued. Creative/innovative thinking, plus studying what's going on in western countries needs to be encouraged.

Instead, Thai political aspirants have been treated to endless years of Thaksin-type education which teaches that lying is ok, cheating is fine, and getting filthy rich by any means is quite alright. All that counts in Thai politics is amassing as much money as possible, and consolidating power in every way possible. All else is window dressing. That's what Thaksin taught, and many Thai politicians before and after him are singing from the same hymnal.

Edited October 5, 2009 by brahmburgers

[justanothercybertosser]

Populism, pork barrel, & vote buying is all pretty much the same. It happens in many "democratic" countries. The problem here seems to be that many of the crumbs thrown out to appease the voters have no long term benefits to said voters. The million Baht per village scheme most likely got people more indebted than they were before through buying phones, TVs, motorbikes etc. Tax money straight into the ruling power's pockets via the voters but the beauty of it is that people believe their lives have been improved even if they are in more debt which they in turn believe will be forgiven one day. Nothing much has changed but the way the money is moved around has become more sophisticated.

Until the people take on honest, ethical & moral role models it will always be this way. The belief that "greed is good" is a big factor.

That is a misconception.

There are studies that have proven the opposite - mobile phones do contribute to increased income in rural communities. A study out of Kerala has shown that extremely well, farmers losing dependency on the nearest mill by being able to call up different mills for prices was just one of the examples. Motorcycles do as well, it allows farmers to send some of their produce to local markets easier and more cost effective.

The million baht scheme has not increased debts under farmers, it has regulated borrowing, and enabled farmers to borrow to acceptable interest. Previously were much less opportunities to borrow from legal sources, and farmers had to go to underground lenders who had exorbitant interest rates (an interesting aspect is that many upcountry PAD leaders are exactly those underground money lenders who have lost out massively under these loan schemes). Of course there were NPL's and graft by local elites, but not beyond the standard of any normal loan system. The million baht also had community based safe guards, which all micro loan systems have.

Farmers need to borrow to finance their crops, that is an economical fact. The state has to provide a system for this. Romanticized views on sufficient farmers are unrealistic in today's economy.

[Publicus]

That which you call political compromise others call political suicide. You've quite exposed yourself this time, advocating amnesty now for the poisoned alphabet soup of the banned slimebags of the TRT/PPP/PT so that these dogs of lawlessness can be set upon the announced upcoming election.

Your calls of the past several months for elections now have been cloaking this nefarious and pernicious scheme revealed by you today.

This is an extremist position that has nothing to do with reality. Many of the banned politicians have been young and very able politicians who have personally not violated any election law.

The mafia types are in every political party (for example Suthep in the Democrats - he has been personally implicated in serious election violations). The maybe worst offender in TRT/PPP - Newin Chidchob - is now part of the new coalition, and can even dominate by proxy the extremely powerful MOI.

Nafarious and pernicious scheme...

Sorry, but you are barking up the wrong tree. I am neither a politician, nor any other player in this game. I have no schemes, and i have said the same many times before. The "laws" that led to the ban of the many politicians have been disputed by many neutral observers. There are more than a few studies and academic articles available that support my views. It would be useful for you to read some of them.

The lunatic advocacy that all the banned politicians of the TRT/PPP be given an amnesty and set loose on the upcoming election has now been abandoned in favor of a new focus on "innocent" and "able" pols in each of the two parties who have not been part of the system but who have been victimized by the old pols in it and by the political system itself. Who specifically, by name, are these young and new shining lights to which you refer? Some names please as they seem to have escaped the attention of most if not all of us. Tender your insider knowledge to us.

Rather, for some of the reasons pointed out above, the history of Thai politics and government demonstrates that Thai culture is incapable of producing the new and vibrant leaders most other societies are capable of nurturing and do develop. This has been true throughout the 20th century and, further, the 21st century gave us Thaksin.

Indeed, the best leader of integrity and dynamism Thailand has produced since the 1932 end of absolute monarchy is Abhisit who can look relatively good but, as I say, only in comparason and contrast to any of his predecessors. Abhisit plays the same old game and presently needs to transform from the 'stop Thaksin' plug to an actual leader (I'm not holding my breath). Where are the great orators and leaders of accomplishment in Thailand? There aren't any nor are there going to be any, the army notwithstanding.

Thailand doesn't need any more maladies such as ideologies either. Among other things, Thailand needs education, professionalism, ethics, viable institutions and laws people accept and can trust, the ability to belive that opportunity does exist, role models who have character and records of achievement and accomplishment. Thanksin gave the peasantry only money and only some of the huge amounts he swindled while continuing to take Thailand down the road to nowhere.

Are the Reds or PAD, or both together giving Thailand better?

[Plus]

mobile phones do contribute to increased income in rural communities. A study out of Kerala has shown that extremely well

In Thailand the scheme was operational for about four years during Thaksin's terms and not a single study has been released to show those alleged benefits, and that's despite TRT having the best polling teams in the country. Not even a study on overall village funds performance.

The million baht scheme has not increased debts under farmers, it has regulated borrowing, and enabled farmers to borrow to acceptable interest.

One way or another household debts have doubled in four-five years. There were some numbers regarding village funds themselves, not from the government (which never disclosed any such information), and they showed that in some villages nearly a third of loans were non-performing. In many cases the loans were paid on time by borrowing from loan sharks specifically to make the fund look good on paper, then, a couple of days later, money was taken from the fund again to repay those illegal money lenders.

Given TRT and Thaksin's reputation to never shy any good publicity, the fund probably hasn't produced any results worth showing.

In some cases local funds were managed very effectively, but the government still doesn't have any tools to separate success from failure and reward/punish fund operating committees accordingly. On the national level the fund is managed exceptionally poor. I wonder who is in charge of it now and what Democrats are going to do about it, if it's under their jurisdiction.

[justanothercybertosser]

The lunatic advocacy that all the banned politicians of the TRT/PPP be given an amnesty and set loose on the upcoming election has now been abandoned in favor of a new focus on "innocent" and "able" pols in each of the two parties who have not been part of the system but who have been victimized by the old pols in it and by the political system itself. Who specifically, by name, are these young and new shining lights to which you refer? Some names please as they seem to have escaped the attention of most if not all of us. Tender your insider knowledge to us.

The best known non mafia type banned TRT politician is Chaturon Chaisaeng. He is regularly talking at many events, also in English. No doubt though that you will find ways to character assasinate him.

A young, charismatic politician and brilliant orator is Nattawuth Saikua. If you speak Thai, i would suggest to listen to some of his speeches - they are outstanding, and very courageous.

Those are just two of the better known names of people who will play a large role in the future of Thai politics, when politics will finally be permitted here.

[Plus]

Without character assassinating Chaturon, but what he has ever done that separates him from the pack? His only distinction is that he can carry presentable image and pontificate on democracy.

And Nattawut - that's a tough sell.

Both are demagogues of the highest order, I give them that.

[justanothercybertosser]

Without character assassinating Chaturon, but what he has ever done that separates him from the pack? His only distinction is that he can carry presentable image and pontificate on democracy.

And Nattawut - that's a tough sell.

Both are demagogues of the highest order, I give them that.

Chaturon is an extremely soft spoken politician, for many he is far too intellectual as a politician - the exact opposite of a demagogue. What he personally has done that seperates him from the pack you can see from his very interesting CV.

Nattawuth is an extremely funny speaker. His speeches are very intelligent, and he has shown much personal conviction and courage. Qualities you have to admit he has, even if you do not like his politics.

Your hero Abhisit has done nothing impressive or exceptional though, neither personally, nor professionally. In a normal country he would be a bank manager. Instead of winning an election, he became PM on the tails of his superiors. As PM he has done nothing else than holding variations of the exact same boring speech, while the decisions have been done by others.

Edited October 5, 2009 by justanothercybertosser

[Publicus]

Without character assassinating Chaturon, but what he has ever done that separates him from the pack? His only distinction is that he can carry presentable image and pontificate on democracy.

And Nattawut - that's a tough sell.

Both are demagogues of the highest order, I give them that.

Chaturon is an extremely soft spoken politician, for many he is far too intellectual as a politician - the exact opposite of a demagogue. What he personally has done that seperates him from the pack you can see from his very interesting CV.

Nattawuth is an extremely funny speaker. His speeches are very intelligent, and he has shown much personal conviction and courage. Qualities you have to admit he has, even if you do not like his politics.

Your hero Abhisit has done nothing impressive or exceptional though, neither personally, nor professionally. In a normal country he would be a bank manager. Instead of winning an election, he became PM on the tails of his superiors. As PM he has done nothing else than holding variations of the exact same boring speech, while the decisions have been done by others.

I think one needn't try to shoot down one politician to try to build up another even given that two so-called brilliant stars of Thai politics were named and the two were instantly dismissed here. And what says an intellectual necessarily can't be a demagogue (Trotsky for one comes most immediately to mind).

The two you name and presumably a host of others will fundamentally and radically change Thai politics and government/governance? What do these two have that would fundamentally change the swamp of Thai politics and government that has existed without interruption or hope through most of the 20th century and which gave us Thaksin as Thailand's transition by the calendar only into the 21st century?

What, another or more "soft-spoken" Thai politicians. Thailand needs an Abraham Lincoln or a Teddy Roosevelt, an F.W. DeClerk or a Nelson Mandella etc. An Aung Saan Su Kyi would do just find too, thank you.

The fact is however that Thailand hasn't nor will it ever produce any such leaders because despite the fact its population numbers equal those of highly successful countries in Europe and elsewhere, Thailand doesn't have the civilizational resources to produce any that can rise to the requisite levels.

You're riding a losing horse, I reget having to advise you. Thai socio-economics and political culture have plenty of personalities but Hollywood had the Three Stooges too.

There isn't anyone or any group of even sufficient character or substance to completely transform Thailand and propell it into the modern world. And effecting a fundamental and radical change to Thai civilisation would require more than a few stray standouts who exist only within the uninterrupted and uninterruptable, ever grinding framework of Thai culture and society.

[justanothercybertosser]

The fact is however that Thailand hasn't nor will it ever produce any such leaders because despite the fact its population numbers equal those of highly successful countries in Europe and elsewhere, Thailand doesn't have the civilizational resources to produce any that can rise to the requisite levels.

No further comment needed - a cultural chauvinist in the end always exposes himself.

[Publicus]

The fact is however that Thailand hasn't nor will it ever produce any such leaders because despite the fact its population numbers equal those of highly successful countries in Europe and elsewhere, Thailand doesn't have the civilizational resources to produce any that can rise to the requisite levels.

No further comment needed - a cultural chauvinist in the end always exposes himself.

Paths to modernizing Thailand and to create a new Thailand have been presented by numerous forumists to numerous threads over an extended period of years, yet anytime we present such avenues in real life we get shot down and called nosey or cultural imperialists or worse.

The horse you're riding is not only a losing one but it collapsed a half furlong out of the starting gate. It's your business if you want to bang your head against the wall while Thais ignore you or tell you to buzz out. Likewise it's my business to state my analysis, perceptions and views based on experience.

Don Quioxte.

[animatic]

The lunatic advocacy that all the banned politicians of the TRT/PPP be given an amnesty and set loose on the upcoming election has now been abandoned in favor of a new focus on "innocent" and "able" pols in each of the two parties who have not been part of the system but who have been victimized by the old pols in it and by the political system itself. Who specifically, by name, are these young and new shining lights to which you refer? Some names please as they seem to have escaped the attention of most if not all of us. Tender your insider knowledge to us.

The best known non mafia type banned TRT politician is Chaturon Chaisaeng. He is regularly talking at many events, also in English. No doubt though that you will find ways to character assasinate him.

A young, charismatic politician and brilliant orator is Nattawuth Saikua. If you speak Thai, i would suggest to listen to some of his speeches - they are outstanding, and very courageous.

Those are just two of the better known names of people who will play a large role in the future of Thai politics, when politics will finally be permitted here.

One down 110 to go, you're on a roll.

So much for round one, round two hasn't even be brought up... yet.

So who is the shining light on a hilltop for PPP?

Too bad it doesn't make your point.

Too bad he isn't the actual shinning light you make him up to be.

Humorous speeches sure makes me feel better as a constituent...

Excessive intellect mis-applied is another winning attribute.

And extremely smart crook that gets caught for being in bad company is not much of an accolade

Most in Thai Visa need not actually create character assignations from thin air,

we can just read the politicians list of accomplishments, whole cloth,

that is sadly enough of a dagger in most cases.

Edited October 5, 2009 by animatic

[Valentine]

Going back to the original post which states the rallies are to bring back the 1997 charter & demand progress on the royal petition. To me it seems the rallies are designed to specifically benefit a single person, Mr T, who instead of upholding the fine spirit embodied in the 1997 charter went on to twist & exploit it to suit his own agenda. The mere fact that his household servants held millions of Baht worth of shares in Shin Corp right at the beginning of his leadership should have had everyone on guard but many, & I was one, in the early days thought he might be sincere when in fact the only sincerity he has is to his family & cronies.

Mr T was one of the first elected leaders who had the means to truly make Thailand a better place & could have set a wondeful precedent but chose to go the route of money & power with no upper limit. A president in waiting?

If the reds were to produce a leader with a good vision for Thailand's future they would have far more credibility but they choose to blindly follow orders from abroad.

[Publicus]

This can seem easy to say now, especially with all the present confessions and mia culpas about Thaksin as a rookie PM way back when, but I was strongly against Thaksin from the start. His cheap populism (morally) and his TRT monolith electorally and in parliament indicated he was a wrong answer to the gross excesses and stupidity of the 1997 meltdown of the Thai economy. (Remember the East Asia 1997 finaincial/economic meltdown originated in LOS to take down much of the region.)

My Thai Social Science students however, circa 2001-04, were in the back pocket of Thaksin and TRT, speaking to me in class (in English) of how Thaksinomics was going to create such a fury of money velocity throughout the land that LOS was going to propel itself to First World status because its GDP soon would bump up against the then top ten economies of the world. That back then was the first inkling to me that Thais themselves weren't playing with a full deck, and while the criminologist Dr. Thaksin has since been removed from the playing table, the deck unfortunately continues to be short a significant number of playing cards.

Shortly after Thaksin took office there was a report that a train full of gold that the Japanese had left behind at the end of WWII was in a cave in some part of Thailand (at this point I don't recall the part of Thailand). When Thaksin helicoptered to the cave I knew for certain the guy was more than a fraud, that he was indeed a nutter of the first degree, which leaders of foreign governemts and investors who had been trying to get a read of the new guy in charge of Thailand's government also quickly concluded as well.

Thailand hasn't ever had an exceptional political leader or group of parliamentarians nor will it ever have either. Thai voters get the government and leaders they were paid to vote for, and they get them good and hard. The cycle continues to reincarnate itself.

[Plus]

Chaturon's been in politics for over a decade. He risen under Chavalit and prospered under Thaksin, all the while being soft-spoken and intellectual. What has he done during those years of shameless abuse of democracy here? Where was he during the drug war - the often mentioned test on TV? Where was he when dozens of journalists were under secret investigations? Where was he all these years?

He led TRT before it was dissolved, and it was largely his fault as he just kept ignoring the misdeeds of Thammarak and co. Yeah, he talks... He was not the first politician with a sweet tongue.

And Nattawut - doesn't matter how good speaker he is - he's forever red who tried to burn the country to save Thaksin. He's not gong to save anyone.

[brahmburgers]

During T's last weeks in office, I compiled a list of the three best candidates for top position in Thailand. I admit I don't know much about the large numbers of men who incessantly jockey for favor in the corridors of Thai politics. However, each time one of their heads pop up from the crowd, he shows himself to be inept at best.

Here are the list of three (sorry I don't have the names of two. Am too short on time to research them right now):

1. Ms Porntip. Thailand's best known forensic specialist. Author of several books. Wild hairstyle. Not afraid to buck the trend of always doing what superiors tell her to do, even to the extent of locking horns with police chiefs, when standing up for what she feels it right.

2. The woman who was (still is?) in charge of National Counter Corruption Commitee (or some such thing) and who was locked out of her office for months by TRT loyalists, for doggedly pursuing corrupt politicians.

3. The young woman reporter who didn't bow to intense pressure when sued by Thaksin. She was sued because of an Op-Ed newspaper report she put together which wasn't flattering to Thaksin.

All three are women, all three share a commendable quality (among others) of sticking with what they feel is right, in spite of immense pressure to conform to the power structure's status quo.

[justanothercybertosser]

Going back to the original post which states the rallies are to bring back the 1997 charter & demand progress on the royal petition. To me it seems the rallies are designed to specifically benefit a single person, Mr T, who instead of upholding the fine spirit embodied in the 1997 charter went on to twist & exploit it to suit his own agenda. The mere fact that his household servants held millions of Baht worth of shares in Shin Corp right at the beginning of his leadership should have had everyone on guard but many, & I was one, in the early days thought he might be sincere when in fact the only sincerity he has is to his family & cronies.

Mr T was one of the first elected leaders who had the means to truly make Thailand a better place & could have set a wondeful precedent but chose to go the route of money & power with no upper limit. A president in waiting?

If the reds were to produce a leader with a good vision for Thailand's future they would have far more credibility but they choose to blindly follow orders from abroad.

The question in Thailand is not to have one leader that somehow shows the way. The problem is a system that is designed for certain elites to be able to stay in power. While i do agree that Thaksin is a very faulty character and a more than unlikely symbol of democracy in Thailand, i strongly disagree that the Red Shirts rallies are designed to only benefit Thaksin. Unfortunately very little in the general english language media is written about the aims of the Red Shirts, and the different philosophies within the Red Shirts. You have though an increasing awareness and literature about the political aims, and a strong vision for Thailand's future. Much of that goes far beyond Thaksin, and touches issues of such as inherent inequalities, stiff social hirarchies, Thai history, etc.

Many of the Red Shirt leaders have been politically active long before Thaksin made his name, and are not just Thaksin's lackeys, as some like to portray them. And one should not forget here that the Red Shirts are not just political leaders, but huge numbers of ordinary people with a rising political awareness. The Red Shirts can clearly be defined as a social movement. Of course not all in the Red Shirts is nice - they have their violent elements, they have their patronage networks. But defining the Red Shirts solely along those lines simply is wrong. I can only suggest to have a look at one or the other Red Shirt meeting - speak with the people, ask them about their political aims, and discuss issues with them. Don't just follow what others tell you - make up your own mind.

Edited October 6, 2009 by justanothercybertosser

[ratcatcher]

During T's last weeks in office, I compiled a list of the three best candidates for top position in Thailand. I admit I don't know much about the large numbers of men who incessantly jockey for favor in the corridors of Thai politics. However, each time one of their heads pop up from the crowd, he shows himself to be inept at best.

Here are the list of three (sorry I don't have the names of two. Am too short on time to research them right now):

1. Ms Porntip. Thailand's best known forensic specialist. Author of several books. Wild hairstyle. Not afraid to buck the trend of always doing what superiors tell her to do, even to the extent of locking horns with police chiefs, when standing up for what she feels it right.

2. The woman who was (still is?) in charge of National Counter Corruption Commitee (or some such thing) and who was locked out of her office for months by TRT loyalists, for doggedly pursuing corrupt politicians.

3. The young woman reporter who didn't bow to intense pressure when sued by Thaksin. She was sued because of an Op-Ed newspaper report she put together which wasn't flattering to Thaksin.

All three are women, all three share a commendable quality (among others) of sticking with what they feel is right, in spite of immense pressure to conform to the power structure's status quo.

OK I had some time to check,

here they are:

1. Khunying Porntip Rojanasunant.

2. Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka

3. Supinya Klangnarong

All three of these good ladies have more balls and moral courage and ethics than most of the men presently serving in the Thai government.

They are not afraid to speak the truth and seek out corruption.

Perhaps if the country was governed by this type of character it would make more progress.

[Plus]

Many of the Red Shirt leaders have been politically active long before Thaksin made his name..

They didn't matter then, they don't matter now.

As a social movement it failed to transcend Thaksin groupies club, no matter how much you praise them.

Yes, there are all kinds of weirdos in the red camp, attracted by the opportunity to sign up converts - where else can you find such a large group of extremely gullible people with no previous exposure to politics or ideology?

[caf]

Going back to the original post which states the rallies are to bring back the 1997 charter & demand progress on the royal petition. To me it seems the rallies are designed to specifically benefit a single person, Mr T, who instead of upholding the fine spirit embodied in the 1997 charter went on to twist & exploit it to suit his own agenda. The mere fact that his household servants held millions of Baht worth of shares in Shin Corp right at the beginning of his leadership should have had everyone on guard but many, & I was one, in the early days thought he might be sincere when in fact the only sincerity he has is to his family & cronies.

Mr T was one of the first elected leaders who had the means to truly make Thailand a better place & could have set a wondeful precedent but chose to go the route of money & power with no upper limit. A president in waiting?

If the reds were to produce a leader with a good vision for Thailand's future they would have far more credibility but they choose to blindly follow orders from abroad.

The question in Thailand is not to have one leader that somehow shows the way. The problem is a system that is designed for certain elites to be able to stay in power. While i do agree that Thaksin is a very faulty character and a more than unlikely symbol of democracy in Thailand, i strongly disagree that the Red Shirts rallies are designed to only benefit Thaksin. Unfortunately very little in the general english language media is written about the aims of the Red Shirts, and the different philosophies within the Red Shirts. You have though an increasing awareness and literature about the political aims, and a strong vision for Thailand's future. Much of that goes far beyond Thaksin, and touches issues of such as inherent inequalities, stiff social hirarchies, Thai history, etc.

Many of the Red Shirt leaders have been politically active long before Thaksin made his name, and are not just Thaksin's lackeys, as some like to portray them. And one should not forget here that the Red Shirts are not just political leaders, but huge numbers of ordinary people with a rising political awareness. The Red Shirts can clearly be defined as a social movement. Of course not all in the Red Shirts is nice - they have their violent elements, they have their patronage networks. But defining the Red Shirts solely along those lines simply is wrong. I can only suggest to have a look at one or the other Red Shirt meeting - speak with the people, ask them about their political aims, and discuss issues with them. Don't just follow what others tell you - make up your own mind.

You make some good points but people like Plus will never see anything other than their own views. Thailand will change eventually. His point about democratic people not having influence is nonsensical. They mattered then and they matter now. But TIT. It will take time and will be evolutionary.