Do We Want The Reds Shirts To Lead Thailand Forward?

[needforspeed]

Why do you want to deny that right to the Thais?

You may not agree with the demonstrator's cause or methods, but calling them 'morons' says more about you than them!

Agree with you on this. You western liberal elitists need to keep your noses out of Thailand's political affairs. You complain about freedom but support those who have dismantled two free elections becuase they did not like the outcome. Then you complain when people protest in the streets. Enjob Thailand but keep your noses out of politics...look at what your views have done to your home countries.

Western keep there noses out of Thai politics but givin there own opinion isn't a crime, "listen and learn is the message".

Edited April 3, 2010 by needforspeed

[mca]

In my humble opinion I think the threads we engage in would benefit a lot more if we moved away from the single argument of " the reds are paid to protest " and "uneducated poor " as the bottom line and accept that it's not quite as simple as some would wish it to be.

About 3 weeks ago I was driving near KK provincial hall on a Saturday evening and a red stage was set up. Fiery rhetoric as per usual coming from the stage being met with great approval by the middle class crown gathered. Cars parked all over the place and not an iron buffalo nor knackered pick up in sight. The stage was on a football field and the crowd took up about 2/3 of that which closely packed is a fair few number of people.

3 houses in my soi have the red channel on when I pass and my soi is strictly middle class. One of my acquaintances is hardcore red and is an engineer for Chevron. A couple of nice new cars in his driveway. One of my daughter's friends at school has a father who owns a small resort near town. Hardcore red. Proportionately these people are better off and better educated than a lot of us on this forum.

I could go on and on with examples of Thais I know who are what we would term middle class and educated who support the idea of Thaksin coming back. To some of us the idea of Thaksin coming back is a case of <deleted> but these folks have made their choice and as abhorrent as it is to some it's their choice to make. They're the ones with the right to vote after all.

Speaking to some of the aforementioned they simply believe that Thaksin was hard done by. They accept his corruption as just a case of "same old, same old" and believe that he was ousted because he was interfering with the army. Nothing more.

Sure the majority of the protesters and his supporters are rural poor. But there's also an awful lot round my way who don't support Thaksin because they need a handout.

Many of us feel that having Thaksin as your poster boy isn't the best way forward and how on earth could people even consider that he's a top chap.

As I'm sure it's a case with many American's who still shake their heads that GWB got a second term too.

[timekeeper]

Whistleblower, you have obviously never seen a protest in London by the cyclists. No coordination with the police; just thousands of cyclists riding in large groups and blocking the roads.

Maybe you should remember that Thaksin was democratically elected and then removed by a military coup. You will now doubt say that he and his party were guilty of bribing voters etc.; to which my reply is that if you believe no other party in Thailand did the same then you are very naive!

Remember that democracy not only means you can express your opinion, but those with whom you disagree can as well!

as a mod or otherwise, you should remember to try to get your facts right when commenting, Thaksin was not a democratically elected prime minister at the time of the 2006 coup, parliament had already been dissolved and he was a 'caretaker' prime minister, (s)elected by no-one but himself

[7by7]

When a parliament is dissolved, the standard practice is for the sitting government, and prime minister, to carry on until a new parliament is elected.

The UK parliament will be dissolved later this year when Gordon Brown calls the election; yet Brown will remain as Prime Minister until after the election.

So, using your logic that means Brown will become a 'caretaker' prime minister, (s)elected by no-one but himself!

[WinnieTheKhwai]

To be honest it seems 7by7 is a breath of fresh air to this forum. And desperately needed it was too.

(Someone who can actually master the same respect for both sides, and take a neutral and well reasoned stance when either side comes up with mindless sniping or hyperbole. So many join the chorus of Thaksin bashing even when Thaksin is nowhere around in the topic to be bashed.)

Edited April 4, 2010 by WinnieTheKhwai

[kraxlhuber]

One of the democratic freedoms we in the west enjoy is the right to demonstrate, even though others may be inconvenienced by that demonstration; Parts of central London, for example, is often closed to traffic for just such a reason.

Why do you want to deny that right to the Thais?

You may not agree with the demonstrator's cause or methods, but calling them 'morons' says more about you than them!

I disagree.

They were offered talks (3rd round) and declined cos they couldnt get the govt to dissolve in 15 days. If you listen to the MORONS on the stage you would understand what i'm talking about.

And in London demonstrators dont wander around aimlessly. The protest route is planned, submitted to the police so security, traffic re routing can be done in advance.

Ive never seen a protest leader in London teaching the masses to 'bang plastic bottles on the ground in tune with the chants' Nor have i seen a protest leader in London on a stage demanding toilets or "we'll piss in the street"

If they had something decent to say, or they were protesting for a real cause instead of being paid by a man who has lost face and is using them to try and regain power, then maybe i wouldnt call them morons!

Yes,Morons,by definition ,somebody is doing something which he cannot control.

Pissing ,spitting and shiiiiting in the streets ,is done everyday in normal life here,just enter a parking house,smells like ...

how about the rouge thai, taking a bath and change their clothes sometimes??!!

[timekeeper]

So people/countries with businesses here dont have a right to voice their opinion about who they would prefer to run the country?

Anyone has the right to express their opinion.

What foreigners, rightly, don't have is the right to vote. Are you saying that, for example, the owners of Nissan should have a say in who forms the next British government because they have factories in the UK?

What about McDonalds; they're all over the place! So, following your line of thought they should have a say in who forms the government in every country where they have a presence!

McDonalds owners will be able to do exactly that, as there are as nearly as many locally owned McDonalds franchisees in UK as there are company owned units

whilst franchisees are not in as significant numbers in other countries, this is the same principal worldwide.

Edited April 4, 2010 by timekeeper

[timekeeper]

When a parliament is dissolved, the standard practice is for the sitting government, and prime minister, to carry on until a new parliament is elected.

The UK parliament will be dissolved later this year when Gordon Brown calls the election; yet Brown will remain as Prime Minister until after the election.

So, using your logic that means Brown will become a 'caretaker' prime minister, (s)elected by no-one but himself!

wasn't Brown elected as PM by no-one but himself anyway....?

Edited April 4, 2010 by timekeeper

[7by7]

What about McDonalds; they're all over the place! So, following your line of thought they should have a say in who forms the government in every country where they have a presence!

McDonalds owners will be able to do exactly that, as there are as nearly as many locally owned McDonalds franchisees in UK as there are nearly as many company owned units

whilst franchisees are not in as significant numbers in other countries, this is the same principal worldwide.

No.

The owners of a McDonalds franchise, assuming they are citizens, will be able to vote and so have a say, but the company itself wont. Or are you saying that in order to get a McDonalds franchise you have to agree to vote the way McDonalds wants you to? Does that apply to employees as well?

wasn't Brown elected as PM by no-one but himself anyway....?

No, he was elected (unopposed, if I recall correctly) as leader of the Labour party by the party on Blair's retirement. As leader of the party commanding the majority in the House of Commons he became prime minister.

It's how the parliamentary system works.

[timekeeper]

What about McDonalds; they're all over the place! So, following your line of thought they should have a say in who forms the government in every country where they have a presence!

McDonalds owners will be able to do exactly that, as there are as nearly as many locally owned McDonalds franchisees in UK as there are nearly as many company owned units

whilst franchisees are not in as significant numbers in other countries, this is the same principal worldwide.

No.

The owners of a McDonalds franchise, assuming they are citizens, will be able to vote and so have a say, but the company itself wont. Or are you saying that in order to get a McDonalds franchise you have to agree to vote the way McDonalds wants you to? Does that apply to employees as well?

wasn't Brown elected as PM by no-one but himself anyway....?

No, he was elected (unopposed, if I recall correctly) as leader of the Labour party by the party on Blair's retirement. As leader of the party commanding the majority in the House of Commons he became prime minister.

It's how the parliamentary system works.

i believe Gordon Brown was selected by his peers NOT elected.

my family owned a number of McDonalds franchises and you are very naive if you believe that McDonalds do not try to influence everything you do as a franchisee to protect the brand, including how they want you to vote.

following any other path but the McDonalds doctrine is frowned upon

many owners live in fear of 'the company'

they have been known to buy the franchise back from uncooperative operators who become independant thinkers

rest assured McDonalds, 'the company' do get a say in the way things are run in any country

[taff33]

Oxford Dictionary: Moron 1. An adult with intelligence equal to that of an average child of 8-12 years. 2. (informal) A very stupid person.

So yes i do

Please try to under stand that a lot of these 8-12 morons had no say in their education

because the parents could not afford further education for them

[7by7]

i believe Gordon Brown was selected by his peers NOT elected.

Then I'm afraid you have no idea how parliamentary democracy nor the Labour party leadership election process work.

Had Brown been opposed then a vote would have been held at that years party conference; but he was unopposed (his one opponent didn't get enough support to be nominated) so there was no need for a vote.

No prime minister is ever elected by the general electorate, they are always the leader of the party that can command a majority; in a coalition with other parties if necessary.

my family owned a number of McDonalds franchises and you are very naive if you believe that McDonalds do not try to influence everything you do as a franchisee to protect the brand, including how they want you to vote.

following any other path but the McDonalds doctrine is frowned upon

many owners live in fear of 'the company'

they have been known to buy the franchise back from uncooperative operators who become independant thinkers

So how did they know the way your family voted in a secret ballot?

rest assured McDonalds, 'the company' do get a say in the way things are run in any country

Whether this is true or not, it doesn't make it right; which was my original point.

Although whistleblower seems to think that they, and other foriegn business owners in Thailand, should have a say!

[simmons9]

In my humble opinion I think the threads we engage in would benefit a lot more if we moved away from the single argument of " the reds are paid to protest " and "uneducated poor " as the bottom line and accept that it's not quite as simple as some would wish it to be.

About 3 weeks ago I was driving near KK provincial hall on a Saturday evening and a red stage was set up. Fiery rhetoric as per usual coming from the stage being met with great approval by the middle class crown gathered. Cars parked all over the place and not an iron buffalo nor knackered pick up in sight. The stage was on a football field and the crowd took up about 2/3 of that which closely packed is a fair few number of people.

3 houses in my soi have the red channel on when I pass and my soi is strictly middle class. One of my acquaintances is hardcore red and is an engineer for Chevron. A couple of nice new cars in his driveway. One of my daughter's friends at school has a father who owns a small resort near town. Hardcore red. Proportionately these people are better off and better educated than a lot of us on this forum.

I could go on and on with examples of Thais I know who are what we would term middle class and educated who support the idea of Thaksin coming back. To some of us the idea of Thaksin coming back is a case of <deleted> but these folks have made their choice and as abhorrent as it is to some it's their choice to make. They're the ones with the right to vote after all.

Speaking to some of the aforementioned they simply believe that Thaksin was hard done by. They accept his corruption as just a case of "same old, same old" and believe that he was ousted because he was interfering with the army. Nothing more.

Sure the majority of the protesters and his supporters are rural poor. But there's also an awful lot round my way who don't support Thaksin because they need a handout.

Many of us feel that having Thaksin as your poster boy isn't the best way forward and how on earth could people even consider that he's a top chap.

Your anecdotal notes are worth remembering.

It runs distinctly contrary to all the so-called "Class War" rhetoric and rich versus poor chants that the red leaders themselves use.

Edited April 4, 2010 by simmons9

[Cayenne]

Whenever there's a power struggle, the poor are the easiest proxies to use; they can be led by money and by propaganda. After all, how many of the "rich" red shirts are actually down there struggling with their upcountry brothers? The red leaders sleep in air conditioned tents while the rest sleep on the pavements. As for Thaksin, he's sleeping afar in his luxury hotel.

[mca]

So how did they know the way your family voted in a secret ballot?

Ronald knows everything 7by7.....

I can say no more. But if I should meet with an " accident " there's a safety deposit box in TMB Khon Kaen in my name.

You know what to do.

[noahvail]

So people/countries with businesses here dont have a right to voice their opinion about who they would prefer to run the country?

Anyone has the right to express their opinion.

What foreigners, rightly, don't have is the right to vote. Are you saying that, for example, the owners of Nissan should have a say in who forms the next British government because they have factories in the UK?

What about McDonalds; they're all over the place! So, following your line of thought they should have a say in who forms the government in every country where they have a presence!

Donations can be, and are, made to the party which the company thinks will best represent them after the next elections. These monies can be used in PR before the vote, thereby influencing the way the voters feel toward one party or against another.

So, the companies don't vote; but the monies they donate are used to influence voters. Of course there are rules procribing excess amounts of donations; but it's a fairly simple task to get around those rules.

Bottom line: Nissan effects the UK elections, imho.

[ableguy]

One of the democratic freedoms we in the west enjoy is the right to demonstrate, even though others may be inconvenienced by that demonstration. Parts of central London, for example, are often closed to traffic for just such a reason.

Why do you want to deny that right to the Thais?

You may not agree with the demonstrator's cause or methods, but calling them 'morons' says more about you than them!

He called them morons because thats what they are

[timekeeper]

i believe Gordon Brown was selected by his peers NOT elected.

Then I'm afraid you have no idea how parliamentary democracy nor the Labour party leadership election process work.

Had Brown been opposed then a vote would have been held at that years party conference; but he was unopposed (his one opponent didn't get enough support to be nominated) so there was no need for a vote.

No prime minister is ever elected by the general electorate, they are always the leader of the party that can command a majority; in a coalition with other parties if necessary.

my family owned a number of McDonalds franchises and you are very naive if you believe that McDonalds do not try to influence everything you do as a franchisee to protect the brand, including how they want you to vote.

following any other path but the McDonalds doctrine is frowned upon

many owners live in fear of 'the company'

they have been known to buy the franchise back from uncooperative operators who become independant thinkers

So how did they know the way your family voted in a secret ballot?

rest assured McDonalds, 'the company' do get a say in the way things are run in any country

Whether this is true or not, it doesn't make it right; which was my original point.

Although whistleblower seems to think that they, and other foreign business owners in Thailand, should have a say!

7by7

No prime minister is ever elected by the general electorate, they are always the leader of the party that can command a majority; in a coalition with other parties if necessary.

yes i do know actually, its same process in Thailand too as its based on the British model, Brown was not elected to be prime minister by the general electorate, just as Abhisit was not elected to be prime minister by the general electorate and just as Thaksin was not elected to be prime minister by the general electorate.

you said he was elected and intimated he was elected as PM, he was not, he was elected as an MP, but not elected as PM

when it came to being the prime minister they were SELECTED by their peers

as to influencing politics in UK, do you really imagine that Nissan decided to spend millions of $ to open a factory in UK without first exploring/exploiting/exerting some political influence to make sure things went according to their plan?

if you think it does not happen then you are more naive than i imagined and you should take a look over here at another car manufacturing giants influence problems to put it into some context:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Daimler-Merc...Br-t352653.html

[whistleblower]

i believe Gordon Brown was selected by his peers NOT elected.

Then I'm afraid you have no idea how parliamentary democracy nor the Labour party leadership election process work.

Had Brown been opposed then a vote would have been held at that years party conference; but he was unopposed (his one opponent didn't get enough support to be nominated) so there was no need for a vote.

No prime minister is ever elected by the general electorate, they are always the leader of the party that can command a majority; in a coalition with other parties if necessary.

my family owned a number of McDonalds franchises and you are very naive if you believe that McDonalds do not try to influence everything you do as a franchisee to protect the brand, including how they want you to vote.

following any other path but the McDonalds doctrine is frowned upon

many owners live in fear of 'the company'

they have been known to buy the franchise back from uncooperative operators who become independant thinkers

So how did they know the way your family voted in a secret ballot?

rest assured McDonalds, 'the company' do get a say in the way things are run in any country

Whether this is true or not, it doesn't make it right; which was my original point.

Although whistleblower seems to think that they, and other foriegn business owners in Thailand, should have a say!

I said they had a right to voice their opiniion.

[whistleblower]

Note to Mods - i was suspended for calling an American stupid before, Is it ok For Americans to call me stupid without a warning?

Ignorant i meant

From the Oxford English Dictionary:-

Ignorant

adjective, 1) lacking knowledge or awareness in general. 2) (often ignorant of) uninformed about or unaware of a specific subject or fact.

Posted as a member, not a Mod; I'll let others decide what action, if any, needs to be taken.

I was accused of being ignorant on the subject of Castro. I have already posted 2 pieces from time magazine to prove my point and if you google it there are thousands more!

[Jockey]

Why can't the Thai people have a democratically elected government? I support the Red Shirts in their quest for their right to have a valid vote.

[dominique355]

Why is everybody trying to make us believe that this is a class struggle, the poor farmers against the rich middle class ? It's not. It's a power play between two groups of ruthless, corrupt and power-hungry politicians.

One of them gets sick from eating too much caviar and flying around in his private jet, the other trying to get us much cash as possible for his new toys, such as submarines, fighter jets, aircraft carriers etc.

The "red shirts" are just pawns on the big political chess game, nothing less and nothing more. Sad that they don't realize this.

What is dangerous now is that those who are leading the red shirts, have gotten addicted to the power they believe to have and - as any drug addicted - will stop from nothing to get their drug (i.e. the power).

In all this screaming and shouting and name calling all in the name of democracy, nobody seems the have an idea what democracy is all about. It's mostly about compromise but none of that has been seen lately, certainly not from the Red Shirts.

[jdinasia]

Why can't the Thai people have a democratically elected government? I support the Red Shirts in their quest for their right to have a valid vote.

They have a democratically elected government. I support the reds in finding someone worthy of voting for that doesn't throw some of their votes away by cheating!

[dominique355]

Why can't the Thai people have a democratically elected government? I support the Red Shirts in their quest for their right to have a valid vote.

OK here perhaps some fundamentals about a parliamentary democracy. Members of the parliament are elected by the people “as a person”, and whether or not this candidate will later be able to form a government is not known at the time of the election. When they say that the people wanted the PPP candidates to run the country, that may be true, but at the time of the election there was no guarantee that they will be able to do that. In fact the people who voted for the Democrat candidate also wanted their candidate to run the country. So this not a valid argument.

I rather believe that every candidate is elected as a person with his conscious and his abilities. If he is not allowed to act according to his conscious, change his opinion and form new coalitions for a project of law or even for a new government, then we might as well abolish the parliamentary system and election of the MPs. We can then simply elect one (1) leader and let him do whatever he wants. But that's not democracy, that's dictatorship. The formation and change of alliances in a parliament in fact is what a parliament is all about and in many democracies all over the world new governments are formed this way. Nobody would consider this as cheating or as undemocratic.

You may better remember the time of the election in 2007 than I. But if I remember well, several political parties first announced that they will form an alliance with the Democrats but then, after the election, switched sides and went with the PPP to form the government. Nobody questioned their right to do so and nobody cried foul at the Samak's government for having cheated by building an alliance with these parties.

Aphisit's government is democratically elected and legally in power. Everybody, who went to vote (with or without being paid) had a valid vote.

[atyclb]

Oxford Dictionary: Moron 1. An adult with intelligence equal to that of an average child of 8-12 years. 2. (informal) A very stupid person.

So yes i do

Please don't insult my child as she falls in that age range.

[gregb]

This all comes down to a very warped view of democracy by the red shirts.

2 wolves and a sheep voting on who to eat for dinner is NOT a democracy.

A democracy ONLY exists when the rights of all are protected. Now, the reds may have some valid claims that they have been subjected to injustices. I do not deny that and I would even fight to help them if that is true if we can ever sit down and be reasonable.

However, Thaksin can never come back. I don't care how many people vote for him to return, just as the sheep doesn't care how many wolves vote that he should be the main course. That is not democracy. It is tyranny and it is patently unjust.

The red shirts can not lead Thailand forward because they are too ignorant to understand this simple concept. Many have said they find the term "moron" offensive. Therefore, I will not promote that phrase. I will instead refer to the reds as "ignorant". The are ignorant about the responsibilities of a democracy. They are ignorant about the moral code that all men should live by. They are ignorant about how they are being used by their square faced puppet master. They are ignorant about what is in their own best interest.

No, ignorant people can not be trusted to run the government. It will be civil war first. Once they display some intelligence and vocally denounce Thaksin, then we can revisit the issue of them leading the country forward.

[lannarebirth]

You have a video do you? Well how much are they being paid. If thousands are being paid it can't be so much of a secret now can it?

That's the problem - it's not, and us BKK residents generally don't have to wait long until we hear first or second hand accounts of people paid to attend.

Not only is it not a secret, it is the Red Shirt organizers themselves that would like this widely known . They want to make sure evryone knows they can make some money for showing up. They can apply the "everyone does it" argument later if need be, but there's no substitutute for having bodies on the street in a protest.

Edited April 4, 2010 by lannarebirth

[CaptHaddock]

 It's depressing how many of the expats on this board see their interests as aligned with the junta and the royalists.  All of this discussion of Red Shirts being paid to protest as a basis for discrediting their drive for enfranchisement overlooks the inconvenient fact that most of the bribery in the country is undoubtedly on the other side.  It's the big pot of USD 35 billion that buys the generals, the politicians and the courts and has underwritten all the coups.  By contrast Thaksin's USD 2 or 3 billion is small change.  

As I pointed out in another thread, under the Thaksin government incomes in Isaan rose 50%, according to the NY Times.  The Red Shirts are rationally pursuing their economic and political interests.  Thaksin's undeniable corruption does not justify disenfranchising the majority of the country.   

Abhisit will have to call an election eventually.  The majority will still be there.

[traderjm]

So funny how a lot of you members like to believe everything you see on television or read in the newspapers, which are owned by the current government.

There are also stations owned and run by the REDS so your point cuts both ways.

For the record I have lived here for a number of years do speak the language to a reasonable level and have been out and about among the REDS a number of times.. and the vast majority of the people I've talked to really have no clue as to what the point of it all is.. bring back our Dear Leader... does that sound like democracy to you?

It's even more sad when NON Thai's pretend they know all about what goes on behind the scenes in either camp..and then come to TV and pretend ONLY they know the real story.... BTW if the shoe fits and all that...

[blumenkraft]

The red shirts can not lead Thailand forward because they are too ignorant to understand this simple concept. Many have said they find the term "moron" offensive. Therefore, I will not promote that phrase. I will instead refer to the reds as "ignorant". The are ignorant about the responsibilities of a democracy. They are ignorant about the moral code that all men should live by. They are ignorant about how they are being used by their square faced puppet master. They are ignorant about what is in their own best interest.

No, ignorant people can not be trusted to run the government. It will be civil war first. Once they display some intelligence and vocally denounce Thaksin, then we can revisit the issue of them leading the country forward.

What a thoroughly unpleasant post. Arrogant and insulting.