Reds Back Out In Chiang Mai

[Ulysses G.]

A few weeks ago I asked my GF, who is from the South, 30 yo, Uni educated and holds a decent job in BKK, what she thinks about the reds. Her answer was "They are stupid"

The truth needs so little rehearsal. ~Barbara Kingsolver

[Ulysses G.]

it is the sign of a controlling, immature and frightened society - and that's why we have reds etc.

There are not many societies in the world that do not fit this profile and the red's tactics are not helping anything.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Quote-------

Has this thread now become about driving? The point is that some rich, yellow family could not care less about farmers and the poor and bought their son a BMW when he is only 15 and not earn't a baht or contributed to society - don't you see this is the whole point? The inequality of it all? Don't you 'get it'?

[-----------

THANK YOU !!!

-----end quote------

I get it.... basically you resent people with money. You think reds are team poor people and so repeate their lies coz u identify with them. If you could open your brain a little you might realise that not all poor people are reds, only those looking for a quick fix instant wealth handed down from their patron; most poor people just want to get on and work, provide for their familys, send kids to school. The example u give of sum redshirt kid in the village driving around all day and their pArrents don't care is prime example the kind of people the extreemistists red seem to be; on the other side I know poor farming yellow shirts who love their country and king, work hard, save their money and send their kids to school rather than blow it on lowkow and karryoky. You are like the lowkow mans all bitter and angry about how someone else has more than them "o it's so unfair, the innequality" - news flash - lifes not fair and all people are not born equal ! You make the best of the hand your dealt or not, down to the individuals.

If you realy cared about the lot of the poor then this governments policies should be embrased; but actualy it's not about poor or policy, it's about jellously ; you just want your side to win never mind the facts, the policies or any of the rest of it; just for them to win because they share the same jelousy, greed and resentment; thats why reds cannot be reasoned with, negotiated with or even engaged in any kind of sensible debate; that's why any point countered with fact is instantly forgoton and another rubbish line presendented as reasoning and so on endlessly round in cirlces; actually no real points, i don't even beleive you believe half what you say, just keep put out words to give reason to these irrational emotions your all feeling.

get a grip!

Btw what kind of cars do you think thaksins kids drive?

Do rich redshirts and pt/ ppp/ ptp people not try to buy their kids out of trouble? This is a problem with the police who are largely the left overs of thaksin time, as are most of the problems reds are using as an excuse; but No point trying you reason with you though as I've already realised it's impossible.

I gave up posting on these kinds of threads for quite a while as it's so sad that there are people like this. I hope Thailand never succumbs to your kind. It is litterally like a small but noticable percentage of the population have actualy lost their minds.

Well... I can see you are an educated guy ands appreciate your thoughtful and well written comments.

It is not a question of jealousy – although I guess if you are poor it may be sometimes – that would be like saying all people who aspire to improve themselves are ‘jealous’ of others.

It is about the wealth of Thailand being in the hands of the very, very few – and of advancement here being mainly due to ‘tea money’ and not skill and ability.

I am as much against Thaksin’s kids, or anyone’s kids, driving around in expensive cars bought through Daddy’s exploitation, as anyone – I am not a Thaksin supporter.

Unless you grasp the basics of why the reds are angry then you just don’t ‘get it’

[Ulysses G.]

Unless you grasp the basics of why the reds are angry then you just don't 'get it'

I think that we all know why Thaksin is angry and that is what really counts.

[ChiangMaiFun]

it is the sign of a controlling, immature and frightened society - and that's why we have reds etc.

There are not many societies in the world that do not fit this profile and the red's tactics are not helping anything.

G. name them - the one's that have LM laws...? England? Sweden? certainley not America, France, Russia, Germany, China who don't need them! that's my point... not that the State doesn't control in other ways but in all the countries I list you have the right of free speech and assembly - as you know - this is not a 'defence' of the reds hideous violence which I condemn.

Edited August 24, 2010 by ChiangMaiFun

[ChiangMaiFun]

Unless you grasp the basics of why the reds are angry then you just don't 'get it'

I think that we all know why Thaksin is angry and that is what really counts.

The reds are not all about Thaksin - and you should know better than that - there are deeper cultural issues, issues about poverty, issues about health and education - it's also not about 'reds' actually - it's about can this country 'develop' without corruption and violence and manipulation.

This is about cultural shift, paradigm shift, about people wanting a better life. A lot of the other stuff around it is just 'noise' around this shift. It cannot be stopped, although the 'ones in power' will do their damndest to try to halt it. The outward shows of violence are to be deplored and are the result of the uneducated and angry giving vent to their frustration and this has to be curtailed.

But the onward march of change cannot be likewise abandoned nor stilted for very long.

[Ulysses G.]

Sorry, I was not referring to the law that you are talking about. My comments were about "controlling, immature and frightened societies".

Edited August 24, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

The reds are not all about Thaksin - and you should know better than that - there are deeper cultural issues, issues about poverty, issues about health and education - it's also not about 'reds' actually - it's about can this country 'develop' without corruption and violence and manipulation.

IMHO these things are what they SHOULD be about, but they are not. They are about corrupt leaders exploiting the poor for their own wealth and power and not caring about anyone else.

[Lite Beer]

A post containing comments that were bordering the line of rule infringements has been deleted. Along with a post quoting it.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Sorry, I was not referring to the law that you are talking about. My comments were about "controlling, immature and frightened societies".

Ah... forgetting LM I completely agree with that of course - and in much more malevolent and subtle ways

[ChiangMaiFun]

The reds are not all about Thaksin - and you should know better than that - there are deeper cultural issues, issues about poverty, issues about health and education - it's also not about 'reds' actually - it's about can this country 'develop' without corruption and violence and manipulation.

IMHO these things are what they SHOULD be about, but they are not. They are about corrupt leaders exploiting the poor for their own wealth and power and not caring about anyone else.

Well... maybe I am being a tad idealistic... there's always a hope that a leader may emerge from the chaos - maybe I'm overlaying what it 'should be about' onto the reality

I still believe in the larger, wider panorama, of cultural shift - which will take ages - and I believe, looking back at history, that many 'birth pangs' are undergone in societies which later can be viewed as an unconscious longing for change for the better - badly expressed

[hanuman1]

The reds are not all about Thaksin - and you should know better than that - there are deeper cultural issues, issues about poverty, issues about health and education - it's also not about 'reds' actually - it's about can this country 'develop' without corruption and violence and manipulation.

IMHO these things are what they SHOULD be about, but they are not. They are about corrupt leaders exploiting the poor for their own wealth and power and not caring about anyone else.

I guess the test of your argument would be: if Taksin died tomorrow, would the redshirts never be seen again? I don't think so, and if you agree with me, then you agree that in fact as ChiangMaiFun quite rightly says - and as most of the red shirts I've spoken to say - this isn't actually ALL about Taksin.

I know you can probably produce photos of some red shirts wearing Taksin masks etc at some point over the past year, but I could show you pictures of some Americans acting like idiots. Doesn't mean they're all like that.

H.

[CMX]

I am getting the impression that Thaksinphobia is not a psychological condition but medical, one which attacks the centers of logic.

How can the difficulties of this nation, central ones in these times, be based on personalities when the "Road Map" developed by government is based on issues? Why is corruption on one side (and notorious and far more prevalent on the other, presently and historically) be more important than policy induced poverty for tens of millions with little hope of change? Maybe T-P Disease cripples caring?

And I must protest as strongly as I can against a post that suggests, because one family cannot make their youngster go to school, that initial steps by the (previous) government to extend education to the age of 15 is not wonderful. We all know that there is much work to be done, but to urge ignorance on purpose is ___________ (fill in the blank; there's a moderator out there ). If we're talking about democracy or economic progress, we're talking educational improvements; in this case even merely setting the goal is a large new element of dreaming, hoping.

Paradigm shift is a heavy phrase, often overused to mean just a big change, but in this nation in its present place in history, gargantuan re-referencing is going on in the minds of the citizens. Mai bpen rai and Buddhism alone don't get it any more (as someone in BKK Post opined).

As a side issue, to side with those of great wealth in order to tame corruption seems peculiar to me, but we don't yet know enough about T-P, be it a Syndrome or a Condition.

Edited August 24, 2010 by CMX

[Ulysses G.]

I guess the test of your argument would be: if Taksin died tomorrow, would the redshirts never be seen again?

I think that the honest answer to your question would be, without his funding, they never would not exist. They would not have done what they did in Bangkok and without his funding they would most likely fade away with only a whimper or two.

[hanuman1]

I guess the test of your argument would be: if Taksin died tomorrow, would the redshirts never be seen again?

I think that the honest answer to your question would be, without his funding, they never would not exist. They would not have done what they did in Bangkok and without his funding they would most likely fade away with only a whimper or two.

Okay, so you're saying that even after his death Taksin (via his money) could be blamed for any continued red shirt demonstrations, thus continuing to diminish any other motivating factors there may be for people to put on a red shirt and take to the streets. I'm sure you are aware of these other motivating factors - why don't you believe they are enough to make people want to act?

I don't doubt that it cost someone - or some people - money to stay at Rajprasong for so long, but what organised 'invisible hand' pays to stage demonstrations at various global economic summits and the like?

Have you ever felt the need to demonstrate for any cause? If not, then you're lucky - it means nothing impacted your life so adversely that you had to go to such inconvenient lengths.

I think you underestimate the red shirted people a little.

Edited August 24, 2010 by hanuman1

[ogb]

I guess the test of your argument would be: if Taksin died tomorrow, would the redshirts never be seen again?

I think that the honest answer to your question would be, without his funding, they never would not exist. They would not have done what they did in Bangkok and without his funding they would most likely fade away with only a whimper or two.

You've got it only half right.

Thaksin started the eye opening when TRT was in government by showing the little people that their vote can mean something and that a government can do what is says its going to do.

The coup, PAD shenanigans (and a few other unmentionable events) continued the eye opening.

With or without Thaksin, there's no way the movement is going away now that the government has killed so many

(and lets not forget the killing could easily have been avoided - Opposition leader Abhisit knew that, but PM Abhisit chose not to listen - or was told not to)

[Ulysses G.]

My guess is that he was told to come down on the demonstrators much earlier and much more heavily than he did - and he resisted. Heavy is the way that it usually works in this part of the world.

He did everything possible to end the thing peacefully, but there comes a point when a thousand ruined businesses and a ruined tourist economy have to be answered for.

[rixalex]

Thaksin started the eye opening when TRT was in government by showing the little people that their vote can mean something and that a government can do what is says its going to do.

What Thaksin did wasn't to show what you describe as being the "little" people that their vote can mean something; what he did was to show other politicians and aspiring, rich, power-hungry businessmen that the key to untold riches and total power was in fooling the less fortunate masses that you give a darn and by winning their favour with a series of short-term sweetners.

[rixalex]

With or without Thaksin, there's no way the movement is going away now that the government has killed so many

(and lets not forget the killing could easily have been avoided - Opposition leader Abhisit knew that, but PM Abhisit chose not to listen - or was told not to)

PM Abhisit did listen. He gave into their demands. He gave them what they supposedly wanted - an early election. The killing would have been avoided had Thaksin accepted what had graciously been offered.

[jdinasia]

Thaksin started the eye opening when TRT was in government by showing the little people that their vote can mean something and that a government can do what is says its going to do.

What Thaksin did wasn't to show what you describe as being the "little" people that their vote can mean something; what he did was to show other politicians and aspiring, rich, power-hungry businessmen that the key to untold riches and total power was in fooling the less fortunate masses that you give a darn and by winning their favour with a series of short-term sweetners.

Buying up the regional powerbrokers (some of whom like Newin eventually defected) was how he Dr/Pol Lt Col/ etc Thaksin managed what he did. I don't think those regional bosses will ever be bought again. It has cost them too much in both influence and cash. It was never about empowering the little guy .. it was about buying the big guys. People that can't see this just haven't looked at Thai politics regionally.

[ogb]

Thaksin started the eye opening when TRT was in government by showing the little people that their vote can mean something and that a government can do what is says its going to do.

What Thaksin did wasn't to show what you describe as being the "little" people that their vote can mean something; what he did was to show other politicians and aspiring, rich, power-hungry businessmen that the key to untold riches and total power was in fooling the less fortunate masses that you give a darn and by winning their favour with a series of short-term sweetners.

Buying up the regional powerbrokers (some of whom like Newin eventually defected) was how he Dr/Pol Lt Col/ etc Thaksin managed what he did. I don't think those regional bosses will ever be bought again. It has cost them too much in both influence and cash. It was never about empowering the little guy .. it was about buying the big guys. People that can't see this just haven't looked at Thai politics regionally.

It not for me to defend Thaksin. All I care about is seeing the Thai people be allowed to choose (and remove) their leaders.

It's clear they chose Thaksin, and Abhisit (and his backers) know that. Hence they avoid elections at all costs.

(Note how the November election offer was shrouded in so many proviso's that it was clear they wanted to wiggle their way out of it when the time came)

Politicians who think they can win an election will not hesitate go to the electorate to confirm their legitimacy (in Thailand and everywhere else in the world) - Don't you think that's a better alternative than killing people to stay in power?

[ChiangMaiFun]

My guess is that he was told to come down on the demonstrators much earlier and much more heavily than he did - and he resisted. Heavy is the way that it usually works in this part of the world.

He did everything possible to end the thing peacefully, but there comes a point when a thousand ruined businesses and a ruined tourist economy have to be answered for.

Bit like the yellows in the airport?...

[Ulysses G.]

Politicians who think they can win an election will not hesitate go to the electorate to confirm their legitimacy (in Thailand and everywhere else in the world) - Don't you think that's a better alternative than killing people to stay in power?

Yes and the PM offered to have an early election, but was turned down.

[Ulysses G.]

My guess is that he was told to come down on the demonstrators much earlier and much more heavily than he did - and he resisted. Heavy is the way that it usually works in this part of the world.

He did everything possible to end the thing peacefully, but there comes a point when a thousand ruined businesses and a ruined tourist economy have to be answered for.

Bit like the yellows in the airport?...

I do not like the yellows, but the other guys way outdid them.

[jdinasia]

Politicians who think they can win an election will not hesitate go to the electorate to confirm their legitimacy (in Thailand and everywhere else in the world) - Don't you think that's a better alternative than killing people to stay in power?

Yes and the PM offered to have an early election, but was turned down.

Clearly offered on the WORLD STAGE .. and rebuffed because it did not fit Thaksin's time schedule. It is clear that calling for early elections in a divided country is stupid unless the candidates and the electorate can be protected. I think killing people that are part of an armed insurrection against a legitimate government after having been fired on ... AND only have a relatively small number of deaths compared to the number of protesters ... AND knowing that some of those deaths were NOT caused by the military ... well it just shows that the reds in BKK were not after anything but violence.

They called for violence BEFORE they went to BKK. They stopped private vehicles and infringed on the basic human rights of people all over the country.

In the end, the government acted with restraint and patience and nothing they could do would change the violent intentions of the red (Thaksin backed) leadership. The people of BKK (and yes, the rest of Thailand!) needed to be protected from that mob.

[jdinasia]

My guess is that he was told to come down on the demonstrators much earlier and much more heavily than he did - and he resisted. Heavy is the way that it usually works in this part of the world.

He did everything possible to end the thing peacefully, but there comes a point when a thousand ruined businesses and a ruined tourist economy have to be answered for.

Bit like the yellows in the airport?...

I do not like the yellows, but the other guys way outdid them.

8 days and little violence (and most of that reactive -- not planned) versus the reds .. not even comparable. Bringing up the other yellows who were protesting a totally different government (actually protesting Thaksin and any attempt to exonerate him) is the typical response of people on the board that turn a blind eye to the violence of the Reds.

[canuckamuck]

The people need a voice in government, better social programs, and chance to improve their status if they are so motivated. The red shirt movement pretends to be about that and perhaps in the minds of the protesters it does mean that. But the leadership and the puppet master are not from that class and they are simply manipulating the masses, and their justifiable anger, to get a bigger piece of the pie. The red shirt movement is doomed because it is a lie. Perhaps the next wave of social outrage (post red) will be led from within and with the right leader who has the people's agenda as his own.

If the reds ever do get another head of steam going, Thailand will see violence and chaos with nothing gained at all.

Edited August 24, 2010 by canuckamuck

[jdinasia]

The people need a voice in government, better social programs, and chance to improve their status if they are so motivated. The red shirt movement pretends to be about that and perhaps in the minds of the protesters it does mean that. But the leadership and the puppet master are not from that class and they are simply manipulating the masses, and their justifiable anger, to get a bigger piece of the pie. The red shirt movement is doomed because it is a lie. Perhaps the next wave of social outrage (post red) will be led from within and with the right leader who has the people's agenda as his own.

If the reds ever do get another head of steam going, Thailand will see violence and chaos with nothing gained at all.

Succinct --- and covers it all. 2 thumbs up!

[hanuman1]

Perhaps the next wave of social outrage (post red) will be led from within and with the right leader who has the people's agenda as his own.

And what would be the chances, do you think, of such a leader ever gaining the kind of support among party cohorts and big business which would give him a shot at being PM?

The fact that Taksin has been the best thing for the 'masses' in living memory is an indictment of the entire political system itself. Yet the fact remains that he really was. So what do you expect the reds to do? Condemn the best leader they ever had because he was as corrupt as so many others?

It's the whole system that the reds are fed up with, and why shouldn't they be? I imagine most farangs would be as well, if they too were it's true subjects.

Edited August 24, 2010 by hanuman1

[mccw]

I'm not saying all people who wish to aspire are jelous; I'm theorising why some people (the bitter, jelous, angry one) turn to violence and a quick buck, while others better themselves or the chances of their children through hard work and savings.

Social mobility is entirely possable in Thailand. I know web designers and programers who came from farming comunities and government schools; also many of their friends are from humble backgrounds. From what I see the differrence is in how the families prioritise their lives.

Tea money has nothing to do with it.

I believe in a minimum living standard which no one can fall below, I also think that farmers along with all other workers are valuable members of society and this is why I support abhisit to try and set up a real sustainable welfare system; I also think he is the most genuine and likely to make progress in taking on curruption.

The reds have no real policies; just a bunch notions of injustice whipped up to a violent level of emotion beyond brain; this orcastrated by tyrants, only acting for their own self interest. The only reason I can see for people ignoring the this glaringly obvious truth is that they want to believe because they share in these emotions and feel empowered by bring part of the group.

The reason I'm going through all this is to make the point that these red shirts in chaingmai and elsewhere are the extreemist remains (all the half way ones have left after they have seen just how violent and terrible movement realy is), they can not be reasoned with; so my point is that given this i'd say the only way to deal with them is through tough meassures, I'd be happy if emergence laws continued indeffinately and don't care if some human rights groups get the hump about it.