Thailand: A Simple Guide To Anarchy And Chaos

[ratcatcher]

...

Never put a politician in charge of military, because they always they put good of themselves before the good of the country

Put that the other way round: Never put a military in charge of politics, because they have no clue what democracy is, they have only learned to give orders and obey.

Democracy is about compromise, negotiating, talk, respect for a different opinion (which you don't share), all things unknown to the military.

Want proof for that? Thailand 2006 - 2007

I believe that the military should always be tightly controlled by the politicians. The toys they play with makes them believe they have the power and can do whatever they want and that's dangerous.

Never put a "military" (soldier-military Man)in charge of politics?

History tells us that some of the greatest politicians have been military men., although some have been greater than others.

Oliver Cromwell, Arthur Wellesley (Wellington), Winston Churchill, George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant, Dwight Eisenhower and G.H.W.Bush.

[anotherpeter]

Absolute rubbish - 'shift' is happening - we move slowly forward - away from the elite who bankroll themselves and their family's lives to the detriment of the poor - here we have it - young and stupid 'boys' crashing their Porches into reds that Mummy and Daddy bought them - and we have poor Issan farmers who scrape together 100 baht a day if they are very lucky - change is coming - slowly, deftly and surely - it's a cultural shift that cannot die and will happen.

Don't think 'scaring' the poor into believing that western banks, with all their money grabbing, bonus loving greed can save them - and, of course, nor can the loan sharks. Shame on you for siding with the elite as they struggle and grasp and cradle their wealth and power at the expense of ordinary Thais.

CMF, you're making the statement about the "young and stupid 'boys' crashing their Porches" as if this doesn't happen with the children of the rich reds.

The ease with which the rich (on all sides) get away with crimes or with a slap on the wrist is a big problem in Thailand. But it isn't just the children of the 'elite' where this happens.

[bangkoklight]

The PPP set up a coalition with smaller parties to form government.

The PPP were disbanded, the PTP (ex-PPP MPs) were still in government.

At this point a group of MPs led by Newin (BJT) decided to no longer support the PTP "... for the benefit of the country" as Newin said.

This meant that the Democrats with the help of BJT and some other smaller parties were now able to form government.

All nicely engineered by the courts and then the Yellows left the airport. Tell me, why is it that only PPP MPs lose their seats? :-)

[Ponbkk]

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To start, Abhisit's government is not illegal . The government was voted in by parliament and therefore is legal.  

Abhissit's government is not illegal or in any way illegitimate. He took advantage of a situation and legally became PM. Constitutions are designed (or er should be at least) to pass power under certain events, Abhissit was there ast the right time and rightly took control.

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin's history to start in 2006. To even start to understand Thai constitutional matters you should start Thaksin's history with the 1997 constitution.

[BKjohn]

Lets see now, the children and husband of the dead women and the many injured from last nights "rethoric" eeeh grenade attacks might disagree with you on that point

Or the thousands of dead, had the RPG launched into the fuel tank in Lam Luka caused an explosion as was intended would have disagreed with you too

OK..but surely you are stating the obvious. Rhetoric may or may not lead to actions. There is also the assumption that the reds fired the grenades, but we can not be certain that they did (even though many will want to believe that it was them without leaving any possibility that it could have been somebody else). I think however that your statement is already covered by the last line of my post. "There has been a serious and ongoing lack of sound strategy here...from both sides" I'm not sure why so many of us take up these very partisan and at times almost hysterical positions. If you step back and take a hard look at the developments that started back on April 10th...the only thing that is clear is that nothing is really clear. We trade all kinds of theories, opinions, hyperbole, and unfortunately just plain nastiness---but we KNOW very little....other than the casualty count.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

come on, you can not seriously believe that the government did it ?????? this is red propaganda as they always do it after every crime that was committed by them.

This started a lot earlier tha April 10 of this year - this started when Thaksin managed to buy enough votes to get into power in Thailand and transformed it into his own PLC - subsequently leading to the coup which was absolute necessary and the following riots when the yellow shirts had to stop Thaksins supporters from re-claiming the power for him. I lost my business during that time due to lack of venues but still had to agree with their cause

Now he is throwing everything at his attempt of a coup t regain his money and power and you chaps are blind to facts or are part of his network

[rabo]

...

Never put a politician in charge of military, because they always they put good of themselves before the good of the country

Put that the other way round: Never put a military in charge of politics, because they have no clue what democracy is, they have only learned to give orders and obey.

Democracy is about compromise, negotiating, talk, respect for a different opinion (which you don't share), all things unknown to the military.

Want proof for that? Thailand 2006 - 2007

I believe that the military should always be tightly controlled by the politicians. The toys they play with makes them believe they have the power and can do whatever they want and that's dangerous.

Never put a "military" (soldier-military Man)in charge of politics?

History tells us that some of the greatest politicians have been military men., although some have been greater than others.

Oliver Cromwell, Arthur Wellesley (Wellington), Winston Churchill, George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant, Dwight Eisenhower and G.H.W.Bush.

Slightly OT. Ulysses Grant was not an example of a good president or businessman. In fact was horrid at business and drove his family into bankruptcy, which is why he had to write his memoirs. Other examples are OK.

Nothing personal.

Edited April 23, 2010 by rabo

[bangkoklight]

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin's history to start in 2006. To even start to understand Thai constitutional matters you should start Thaksin's history with the 1997 constitution.

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin’s history to start in 2006? Not sure about the term you're using there Ponbkk but you shouldn't ruse us.

And isn’t it the pro government supporters who want us to believe that corruption was invented in 2006 by Thaksin and that Thaksin is the only wealthy man in Thailand?

[Redsunset]

Sorry but you do have to negotiate with "terrorists" sooner or later. The British Government negotiated with the IRA (behind closed doors) Many senior NATO commanders, diplomats and politicians are stating openly that negotiations with the Taliban will have to take place because they can not win an overall military victory so they need a political solution. Every major conflict in modern history has ended with people sitting down and cutting a deal. Calling the reds terrorists was a tactical error in the first place, and quite frankly is ridiculous. A few random acts of terror does not make a whole movement or its leaders terrorists. The term terrorist is thrown around in a very loose manner these days. During the Bush years, just about anybody who disagreed with US policy was called a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer. When the Taliban and the Muhjah Hadeen were fighting the Soviets--they were freedom fighters...now they are terrorists.... just depends on who you are fighting with. There is no question that some of the redshirt leaders have engaged in over the top rhetoric but that is just what it is...rhetoric to put pressure on the government. SOP. Putting them in he terrorist category is just raising the heat...nothing more...and it makes any possibility of future negotiations even less likely. There has been a serious and ongoing lack of sound strategy here...from both sides.

You do? I beg to differ... What have been the results of all the negotiations between terrorists and incumbents? Do terrorists really ever negotiate or are they martyrs who only want to achieve their goals with no compromise?

[Jingthing]

I agree that you can try to negotiate with SOME terrorists. It's worth talking at least even when the prospects are dim. Let us know when the red leaders are willing to sit down and talk and actually negotiate something. So far, they have not been willing.

My reaction to the OP. The leftists and NGOs have made poor judgments before in "people's" movements they have backed in other parts of the world. My view is the reds are fatally tainted by corrupt Thaksin, and are too heavy with violent anarchic factions that would likely bleed through to their actual ruling style should they win. In short and I have said it before, they lack moral authority. Thus, if they win to rule, I doubt they will be better than what they propose to replace, and based on Thaksin's record, I suspect they would be much worse. I respect more idealist leftists who actually think a red win would bring positive social change in Thailand. I think they are terribly naive, but if the reds do win, of course I hope they are right and I am wrong.

I have never been comfortable being on the more right wing side of this issue. I am lifetime leftist/progressive politics person. However, I believe you have to judge each situation for what it is. What I have seen from Thaksin and the red shirts has made me conclude that a victory for them would bring about massive misery for Thailand. Again, hope I am wrong.

Edited April 23, 2010 by Jingthing

[BKjohn]

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin's history to start in 2006. To even start to understand Thai constitutional matters you should start Thaksin's history with the 1997 constitution.

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin's history to start in 2006? Not sure about the term you're using there Ponbkk but you shouldn't ruse us.

And isn't it the pro government supporters who want us to believe that corruption was invented in 2006 by Thaksin and that Thaksin is the only wealthy man in Thailand?

Of course there has always been corruption in Thailand like there is in every country - here just more obvious - but to compare Thaksin with anyone before him would be the same as to compare a boy stealing a sweet in a corner shop with the Brinks Matt robbery

forgot - and he isn't in Thailand , if he was he would be in Klong Prem where he belongs

Edited April 23, 2010 by BKjohn

[rabo]

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin's history to start in 2006. To even start to understand Thai constitutional matters you should start Thaksin's history with the 1997 constitution.

The anti-monarchists want Thaksin's history to start in 2006? Not sure about the term you're using there Ponbkk but you shouldn't ruse us.

And isn't it the pro government supporters who want us to believe that corruption was invented in 2006 by Thaksin and that Thaksin is the only wealthy man in Thailand?

Ponbkk, this is absolutely correct. It is my opinion that the sweeping new freedoms envisioned in the 1997 constitution led to the unbridled corruption of the Thaksin regime. Perhaps Thailand should have addressed the level of corruption in the system before introduction such a constitution.

Edited April 23, 2010 by rabo

[Methuselah]

Two months may seem a long time ago,and a lot has changed since then.However I would be interested to learn what exactly was wrong in the way the government was running Thailand two months ago.

[selftaopath]

Never put a politician in charge of military, because they always they put good of themselves before the good of the country

Not in a developed, civilsed country.

I think you will find that Winston Churchill (plus others) would take exception to your comment.

Who in Lack of Sanctions (LOS) put the country before their self serving and greedy selves? Does the military? Do politicians? Does the police and last but not least does Toxic? My view in NO NO NO. Land of Scams (LOS) seems very much like a me me me society where corruption and money RULES. Pity because the hard working and truly Buddhist minded Thai people deserve better.

[rabo]

Two months may seem a long time ago,and a lot has changed since then.However I would be interested to learn what exactly was wrong in the way the government was running Thailand two months ago.

Nothing in my opinion (relative to Thai things), which could have been considered as threatening to the other side.

Two weeks seems a long time ago. Sigh.

Edited April 23, 2010 by rabo

[jrtmedic]

I wonder --------------if the poor people of theUSA rioted on Wall St --------------and demand a fair share of the USAs wealth --------------------------backing up their demands by using bombs , rockets and gun fire -------------------------What would happen and how long would they be allowed to stay on the streets ??

[vicco]

Lets see now, the children and husband of the dead women and the many injured from last nights "rethoric" eeeh grenade attacks might disagree with you on that point

Or the thousands of dead, had the RPG launched into the fuel tank in Lam Luka caused an explosion as was intended would have disagreed with you too

OK..but surely you are stating the obvious. Rhetoric may or may not lead to actions. There is also the assumption that the reds fired the grenades, but we can not be certain that they did (even though many will want to believe that it was them without leaving any possibility that it could have been somebody else). I think however that your statement is already covered by the last line of my post. "There has been a serious and ongoing lack of sound strategy here...from both sides" I'm not sure why so many of us take up these very partisan and at times almost hysterical positions. If you step back and take a hard look at the developments that started back on April 10th...the only thing that is clear is that nothing is really clear. We trade all kinds of theories, opinions, hyperbole, and unfortunately just plain nastiness---but we KNOW very little....other than the casualty count.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

come on, you can not seriously believe that the government did it ?????? this is red propaganda as they always do it after every crime that was committed by them.

This started a lot earlier tha April 10 of this year - this started when Thaksin managed to buy enough votes to get into power in Thailand and transformed it into his own PLC - subsequently leading to the coup which was absolute necessary and the following riots when the yellow shirts had to stop Thaksins supporters from re-claiming the power for him. I lost my business during that time due to lack of venues but still had to agree with their cause

Now he is throwing everything at his attempt of a coup t regain his money and power and you chaps are blind to facts or are part of his network

That response barely warrants a reply, but I will try. First of all, where did I ever suggest that the government did it? I simply said that we can not be certain that the reds did it. There are many other players involved here, it could have been any of them. We simply do not KNOW yet. I won't even go there on the Thaksin bit----I think we have beaten that to death already. Anyway it's all covered in my original post...but quoting a line or two out of the context of posts and ignoring the core points, seems to be the current style of debate on here.

[BKjohn]

I agree that you can try to negotiate with SOME terrorists. It's worth talking at least even when the prospects are dim. Let us know when the red leaders are willing to sit down and talk and actually negotiate something. So far, they have not been willing.

My reaction to the OP. The leftists and NGOs have made poor judgments before in "people's" movements they have backed in other parts of the world. My view is the reds are fatally tainted by corrupt Thaksin, are too heavy with violent anarchic factions that would likely bleed through to their actual ruling style should they win. I respect more idealist leftists who actually think a red win would bring positive social change in Thailand. I think they are terribly naive, but if the reds do win, of course I hope they are right and I am wrong.

If you start negotiating with Terrorists and give in to them you are on a very slippery slop - you will only encourage them to demand more - its the same as with a blackmailer once you start paying it will never end

Scenario - the reds win and Thaksin returns - first he will get rid of anyone in his way now or who could be in his way in the future - considering his actions in the so called "drug war" one does not need too much imagination as to how he would accomplish that. He will secure his position as the stickers that turned up already confirm only he will add the bit that say's "for life".

The leaders of the reds will get their money ad some positions in gvernment. The Isaanies will get some cash, mainly the poo yais and that will be the end of it. He will not allow any opposition or free press.

Thailand will become Thaksinland with close ties to Burma, North Korea .....

[Kervon]

The PPP set up a coalition with smaller parties to form government.

The PPP were disbanded, the PTP (ex-PPP MPs) were still in government.

At this point a group of MPs led by Newin (BJT) decided to no longer support the PTP "... for the benefit of the country" as Newin said.

This meant that the Democrats with the help of BJT and some other smaller parties were now able to form government.

All nicely engineered by the courts and then the Yellows left the airport. Tell me, why is it that only PPP MPs lose their seats? :-)

Nicely engineered.. LOL... Nice word to use..

Anyways, I know this is like a broken record and it's been years... But I'm still amazed at how some people fail to accept the fact that Abhisit was not elected via the ballot boxes by CITIZENS.....

But of course we're way past that issue now.. and I personally see Thailand heading 3 directions...

1: Snap elections:- Temporary solution. Reds will go home. Yellows will be made.. and the whole episode will become a staple example in Thailand's political system on how protestors can get what they want by swarming up in big numbers. Yellows will do their airport stance again... whole cycle repeats itself..

2: Military coup:- We're so familiar with this word, aren't we?. Thailand has gone through numerous coups and regimes under military juntas in her history books. Reds will go home, Yellows will suck their thumbs.. and the whole cycle will repeat itself in a couple of years time.

3: Crackdown/Martial Law:- Anyone recalls Tiananmen Square Protests on 4th June 1989 in Beijing, China... Where about 100000 protestors were 'dispersed' in little less than 5 hours.. Streets lights were turned off, soldiers and tanks went in at 1am.. Bullets flew, people screamed...540am.. the whole protest site was 'cleared'..or flattened.. Reds are flattened. Yellows are happy.. Government back in control.. However, this will throw Thailand into UN's eye...and face world condemnation...etc etc...

Sad... But I can't think of any other solutions... which I hope I can.

[BKjohn]

Lets see now, the children and husband of the dead women and the many injured from last nights "rethoric" eeeh grenade attacks might disagree with you on that point

Or the thousands of dead, had the RPG launched into the fuel tank in Lam Luka caused an explosion as was intended would have disagreed with you too

OK..but surely you are stating the obvious. Rhetoric may or may not lead to actions. There is also the assumption that the reds fired the grenades, but we can not be certain that they did (even though many will want to believe that it was them without leaving any possibility that it could have been somebody else). I think however that your statement is already covered by the last line of my post. "There has been a serious and ongoing lack of sound strategy here...from both sides" I'm not sure why so many of us take up these very partisan and at times almost hysterical positions. If you step back and take a hard look at the developments that started back on April 10th...the only thing that is clear is that nothing is really clear. We trade all kinds of theories, opinions, hyperbole, and unfortunately just plain nastiness---but we KNOW very little....other than the casualty count.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

come on, you can not seriously believe that the government did it ?????? this is red propaganda as they always do it after every crime that was committed by them.

This started a lot earlier tha April 10 of this year - this started when Thaksin managed to buy enough votes to get into power in Thailand and transformed it into his own PLC - subsequently leading to the coup which was absolute necessary and the following riots when the yellow shirts had to stop Thaksins supporters from re-claiming the power for him. I lost my business during that time due to lack of venues but still had to agree with their cause

Now he is throwing everything at his attempt of a coup t regain his money and power and you chaps are blind to facts or are part of his network

That response barely warrants a reply, but I will try. First of all, where did I ever suggest that the government did it? I simply said that we can not be certain that the reds did it. There are many other players involved here, it could have been any of them. We simply do not KNOW yet. I won't even go there on the Thaksin bit----I think we have beaten that to death already. Anyway it's all covered in my original post...but quoting a line or two out of the context of posts and ignoring the core points, seems to be the current style of debate on here.

The reds and the blacks are one group and it doesn't matter who within their compound launched the grenades, if you side with criminals / terrorists you become guilty yourself. The farmers among them obviously have no clue of their real agenda but if they have not figured out what is going on by now and left, they can not be helped

[bangkoklight]

Of course there has always been corruption in Thailand like there is in every country - here just more obvious - but to compare Thaksin with anyone before him would be the same as to compare a boy stealing a sweet in a corner shop with the Brinks Matt robbery

forgot - and he isn't in Thailand , if he was he would be in Klong Prem where he belongs

The fortune that Thaksin accumulated was/is obscene, yes, but Thaksin's wealth is rather small when you compare it to the entire wealth of the old money elite ruling the country. I'm sure these people too didn't get their money from an honest day's work.

Why were the courts so keen to nab Thaksin for his crimes? - Because he got popular vote and was upsetting the balance of power. “No, no, no!” said the old boys, “We'll start a Yellow movement and the army can't touch us.”

[BKjohn]

The PPP set up a coalition with smaller parties to form government.

The PPP were disbanded, the PTP (ex-PPP MPs) were still in government.

At this point a group of MPs led by Newin (BJT) decided to no longer support the PTP "... for the benefit of the country" as Newin said.

This meant that the Democrats with the help of BJT and some other smaller parties were now able to form government.

All nicely engineered by the courts and then the Yellows left the airport. Tell me, why is it that only PPP MPs lose their seats? :-)

Nicely engineered.. LOL... Nice word to use..

Anyways, I know this is like a broken record and it's been years... But I'm still amazed at how some people fail to accept the fact that Abhisit was not elected via the ballot boxes by CITIZENS.....

But of course we're way past that issue now.. and I personally see Thailand heading 3 directions...

1: Snap elections:- Temporary solution. Reds will go home. Yellows will be made.. and the whole episode will become a staple example in Thailand's political system on how protestors can get what they want by swarming up in big numbers. Yellows will do their airport stance again... whole cycle repeats itself..

2: Military coup:- We're so familiar with this word, aren't we?. Thailand has gone through numerous coups and regimes under military juntas in her history books. Reds will go home, Yellows will suck their thumbs.. and the whole cycle will repeat itself in a couple of years time.

3: Crackdown/Martial Law:- Anyone recalls Tiananmen Square Protests on 4th June 1989 in Beijing, China... Where about 100000 protestors were 'dispersed' in little less than 5 hours.. Streets lights were turned off, soldiers and tanks went in at 1am.. Bullets flew, people screamed...540am.. the whole protest site was 'cleared'..or flattened.. Reds are flattened. Yellows are happy.. Government back in control.. However, this will throw Thailand into UN's eye...and face world condemnation...etc etc...

Sad... But I can't think of any other solutions... which I hope I can.

Your point 3 is somewhat incorrect and an affront to those who participated in the Tiananman Square demonstration - the demonstrators in China did not launch grenades or use other weapons and kill people but were a none violent real demonstration looking to gain freedom of speech and travel.

I ca assure you that the UN is not impressed with the violent mob on Bangkok's streets and neither is any western country and most are surprised that no decisive action has been taken yet against them.

Please do not use the Tiananman Square protesters in this subject and compare them to this rioting mob in it for money

Edited April 23, 2010 by BKjohn

[anotherpeter]

The PPP set up a coalition with smaller parties to form government.

The PPP were disbanded, the PTP (ex-PPP MPs) were still in government.

At this point a group of MPs led by Newin (BJT) decided to no longer support the PTP "... for the benefit of the country" as Newin said.

This meant that the Democrats with the help of BJT and some other smaller parties were now able to form government.

All nicely engineered by the courts and then the Yellows left the airport. Tell me, why is it that only PPP MPs lose their seats? :-)

Only the PPP Executive lost their seats in this case, because they were caught committing electoral fraud.

After the 2007 election, a number of MPs from many parties (including the Dems) lost their seats.

[anotherpeter]

Two months may seem a long time ago,and a lot has changed since then.However I would be interested to learn what exactly was wrong in the way the government was running Thailand two months ago.

What was wrong was that it wasn't a Thaksin puppet government.

[BKjohn]

The PPP set up a coalition with smaller parties to form government.

The PPP were disbanded, the PTP (ex-PPP MPs) were still in government.

At this point a group of MPs led by Newin (BJT) decided to no longer support the PTP "... for the benefit of the country" as Newin said.

This meant that the Democrats with the help of BJT and some other smaller parties were now able to form government.

All nicely engineered by the courts and then the Yellows left the airport. Tell me, why is it that only PPP MPs lose their seats? :-)

Only the PPP Executive lost their seats in this case, because they were caught committing electoral fraud.

After the 2007 election, a number of MPs from many parties (including the Dems) lost their seats.

anotherpeter, the reds here in this forum and those holding these speeches on their stage have a medical condition called "selective memory" especially as far as Thaksins crimes are concerned, including vote buying as well as the crimes of the PPP or "Thai love Thai" pary etc etc and there is no way of convincing them with facts-

[bangkoklight]

The reds and the blacks are one group and it doesn't matter who within their compound launched the grenades, if you side with criminals / terrorists you become guilty yourself. The farmers among them obviously have no clue of their real agenda but if they have not figured out what is going on by now and left, they can not be helped.

So the YELLOWS / NO COLOURS / PINKS / MULTI COLOURS / GAY STRIPY COLOURS are all one, right? Yes! YELLOWS! Messengers of the old money elite who don't want to lose power to majority vote.

[BKjohn]

The reds and the blacks are one group and it doesn't matter who within their compound launched the grenades, if you side with criminals / terrorists you become guilty yourself. The farmers among them obviously have no clue of their real agenda but if they have not figured out what is going on by now and left, they can not be helped.

So the YELLOWS / NO COLOURS / PINKS / MULTI COLOURS / GAY STRIPY COLOURS are all one, right? Yes! YELLOWS! Messengers of the old money elite who don't want to lose power to majority vote.

who had a majority vote ?? Thaksin the PPP ??? check your facts before posting

and yes, those people are fat up with a violent mob ripping Bangkok and the country apart - those are the people who pay taxes and work and they are the majority in this country

Edited April 23, 2010 by BKjohn

[rixalex]

Taken with a greater cultural overview - this is paradigm shift happening NOW - countries go through it in different ways. The point is that, at the very basic, grass roots there is a call for CHANGE... a change from the 'old' ways of being ruled by an elitist group who make all the money and have all the power. It is true that most of the 'foot soldiers' will not realize they are a part of this shift - but they are.

Although the story of a lower class awakening and realizing their political power is a compelling and sympathetic one, sadly that is not what we have here. What we have is an exiled politician who is using every means necessary to regain his lost power and money and the red shirts are simply a tool at his disposal, just as the rural population were used to place him into power to begin with.

Any of us who remember how things were under Thaksin will remember that the government was no less elitist than now. In fact Thaksin was accelerating in his consolidation of power and manipulation of the system and any rivals, whether they be in business or politics or in the media, were steamrolled. He was a force of personality and anything he wanted happened, regardless or whether or not it followed legal or other protocols and regardless of the impact on other people.

Crash999 - great post - at least there are some here who understand what is really going on

Whole-heartedly concur. Bang on the money Crash999.

[bangkoklight]

and yes, those people are fat up with a violent mob ripping Bangkok and the country apart - those are the people who pay taxes and work and they are the majority in this country.

Yeah, coz there's 30 million people living in Bangkok, eh? And only 10 million farmers. (I didn’t include children who can’t vote)

[kenai]

de·moc·ra·cy

1.

government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

2.

a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.

3.

a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.

4.

political or social equality; democratic spirit.

5.

the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

Who are the people of thailand? Do they have equal rights and privileges?

70% of thai population reside outside of cities so if we are talking numbers it brings up an interesting point.

If I voted for a president based on getting a tax break, should I not be allowed to vote?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Democracy

1) politicians make a lot of promises they know they can't keep

2) politicians live the life of Riley on taxpayers expense

3) the politicians main interest is to be re-elected

4) In a democracy a politicians main asset is to be able to lie while appearing totally sincere

What you call privileges and the "elite" are hard working Thais who have made something of themselves and who were fat up with Thaksins blunt theft, using the country as his own PLC. Now they are going on the streets again to fight this Thaksin inspired mob. Thais are free to do as they want. This is a free country for the Thais. What you call underprivileged means really the poor who want more of the cake but are not willing to work for it or are simply not able.

here is some news for you, In Europe and in the USA there are and have always been poor people. You probably don't know that every 6th person in The US of A would go hungry if it wasn't for institutions like the salvation army and others that offer low priced or free food items to those.

In Europe pensioners freeze during the winter because they can not afford to have the heating on.

Communism does not work as the USSR has clearly shown. The poor only get poorer and famine is the result. Communism is the ultimate capitalism with an extremely small elite that has it all and lives in luxury and the majority of the population goes hungry.

The world is not perfect but we have to live here. Those rioters have no right to cause this anarchy and apparently they are not even aware of the real agenda of their leaders.

Thanks for your insight on American democracy, poverty, healthcare.. If you didnt speak of all this my apologies maybe it was another poster assisting. Im not sure what any of it had to do with the crisis in BKK but I found it amusing and revealing.

And no I never knew 1 in 6 americans would go hungry without the help of institutions!

[rabo]

Of course there has always been corruption in Thailand like there is in every country - here just more obvious - but to compare Thaksin with anyone before him would be the same as to compare a boy stealing a sweet in a corner shop with the Brinks Matt robbery

forgot - and he isn't in Thailand , if he was he would be in Klong Prem where he belongs

The fortune that Thaksin accumulated was/is obscene, yes, but Thaksin's wealth is rather small when you compare it to the entire wealth of the old money elite ruling the country. I'm sure these people too didn't get their money from an honest day's work.

Why were the courts so keen to nab Thaksin for his crimes? - Because he got popular vote and was upsetting the balance of power. "No, no, no!" said the old boys, "We'll start a Yellow movement and the army can't touch us."

Can you please provide any information concerning your statement that the wealthy families and businesses in Thailand did not earn their money through honest work or business? If so, what percentage was from corruption? Do you know the families and businesses in Thailand? Do you know anything about the economics of Thailand?

You often talk about the elite. I would like to know who you are talking about when you discuss them.

Are you OK with K. Thaksin killing 2500 poor Thai people?

Do you know at what rate per day these 2500 people were shot?