Khun Gonzo's Invigorating Question

[orang37]

Sawasdee Khrup, TV CM Friends,

Khun Gonzo the Face wrote :

Now to all those foreign guests, think about this...... stand back from the issue if you can.....

We deplore the actions that are going on in the south of Thailand at the time...... why ??? well if you are honest with your own mind, those people are fighting for something that they want,,,,,, right or wrong,,,,,, they want things their way,,,,,, but it is against the law, so we agree with the government in most cases...... or is the reason we agree really because they are Mulsim...???? THINK ABOUT HONESTLY .... why do we take sides in our opinions there silently, and express little or no opinion when there are many times the number of deaths involved??? ... snip ...

What is the difference between the southern group and their demands and wants and the redshirt wants and demands.

We think the rhetorical question Khun Gonzo asks here is a very astute invitation for us all to consider our perceptions and emotional biases as we may compare ... or not compare ... the current national psychodrama being played out in Bangkok with the conflict in the south of Thailand.

Thanks, Khun Gonzo, for an "elevation" of the discourse on that thread (now closed).

best, ~o:37;

Edited April 11, 2010 by orang37

[lannarebirth]

What is the difference between the southern group and their demands and wants and the redshirt wants and demands.

I think at the root their isn't much difference. Both "struggles" would appear to stem from disenfranchisement, marginalization of the concerns of those populations by the central government (or its proxies). What they also seem to have in common is that both "movements" have been co-opted by other groups for widely varying agendas.

Edited April 11, 2010 by lannarebirth

[ollylama]

i fully agree with the esteemed mr. gonzo.

i only take issue with the supposition that all or most deplore the actions of those in the south. i'm not saying i personally support them. but it should be obvious to the sober observer that the red shirts and the muslim separatists have similar grievances. and these are the same grievances that the disenfranchised have had since the beginning of civilization.

the only real point of debate is whether their tactics are practical and necessary or, conversely, bloodthirsty and driven by power hungry agitators. i don't think any of us are at liberty to make a definitive statement on the matter. although internet forums are generally pretty anarchistic, so liberty usually trumps consideration.

it would be nice if more people took gonzo's attitude and instead of championing one particular view and castigating the other as stupid or evil, tried to look at the whole thing in a broader context. thanks gonzo!

[garyh]

The red shirts want an election, that is not the same as the south.

[mamborobert]

How can you even compare the two. For me religion (honestly) has no part. I do accept that violence is a part of both and condone neither

One group is seeking to establish a separatist state at the least, or at the very best a half way step of unification with Malaysia.

The other is seeking the restoration of a democratically elected (and we can argue eternally over "corrupt") government.

One wants to destroy in order to build, one wants to rebuild what was destroyed.

I can agree that bias is shown in a lot of things. I have no doubt that had the Balkan states been killing or ethnically cleansing Christians there would have been a lot quicker and larger intervention by the UN and Nato. Same for the Asian Tsunami aid and rebuilding effort, particularly in Aceh, Indonesia.

But for me the "Red issue" is not a red issue at all, its a democracy issue. There are a lot of firebrands with vested interests ready to whip up hysteria for their own gain......just think of weapons of mass destruction.

There are a lot of people that have a vested interest in the status quo and with Thailand having no elections at all.

But fundamentally here the two times elected winning government was overthrown with a coup and some people now sing the praises on the restraint by the government and Abhisit.

Just as Gonzo wanted to challenge thinking on religion...what would our thoughts be if our twice democratically government was thrown out by a coup ..in say the US, UK, France, Germany, Australia, Japan etc. I would suggest there would be just as much prolonged and sometimes violent protest seeking restoration of (if not our elected government) democracy (through perhaps another election).

Edited April 11, 2010 by mamborobert

[whiterussian]

The Kra Isthmus, Thailand's only geopolitical strategic asset.

Don't know if they won it by conquest.

A canal has long been proposed. The Chinese would build it, and manage it, but with the violence, they are persuing routes through Burma instead... but eventually they will get the canal if they continue to accrue vassal states.

Could in theory cut out Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia's stranglehold on 70% of world cargo by ship. Some say Thailand is 'aided','propped up', by these countries to NOT build the canal,thus giving Sinapore a reason to exist.

I guess some might think that Malaysia and the jihad in the south could actually give the victor an important chunk of turf.

Think Suez, think Panama.

Also there is the buffer factor.

Indonesia : 228,248,538 mainly muslim.

Malaysia: 26,992,577 mainly muslim.

Thailand: 67,386,383 bhuddist.

Can't help feeling the Thai army should go down south en masse, seal the borders, and stop the violence. Better than farting around in Bangkok playing armchair generals.

Edited April 11, 2010 by whiterussian

[Tywais]

Opening a new topic based on a closed topic and not even CM related forces me to close this one. There are plenty of political threads running and we need to try and keep redundancy to a minimum.

//Closed//