Red Shirts To Stage Mass Rally On Sunday Regardless Of Bail Rulings: Jatuporn

[ChiangMaiFun]

Thaksin maybe, in many ways, a focus and catalyst for the wider feelings of frustration - this is inappropraite in many and most ways - but many feel things were better (for them) back then.

Now there is a much wider feeling of dis-enfranchisment that has nothing to do with Thaksin - yes if his money disappeared it would be harder for them to continue and yes he has a large influence but to say that the whole frustration and cultural shift is to do with him is, frankly, born of lack of understanding of the larger picture.

I think many of us - including whybother - get this. That still doesn't answer his question though. We understand that the Red Shirts are pissed off with the elite. But the Red Shirts fail to recognise that Thaksin is the absolute paradigm of what they hate.

The pro-Thaksin Red Shirts (which, as whybother correctly pointed out, is the vast majority of them - as witnessed by anyone who has been to a UDD rally, past or present) DO feel like Thaksin helped them. They think that...

1) Thaksin totally cleared the national debt and any national debt the country has now is because of governments subsequent to Thaksin's;

2) The use of yaba dropped significantly since Thaksin's War on Drugs;

3) The 2,500 or so that died in said War on Drugs were mostly dealers and junkies.

4) They got richer when Thaksin was around and poorer since he left;

5) The military threw Thaksin out because he was trying to move the control of power from the military to the civilian government.

6) Thaksin introduced the 30 Baht healthcare scheme.

7) Thaksin was not an autocrat or a dictator.

I only know this because I, first hand, not some reporter with a politically-swayed translator or whatever, have talked to Red Shirts in their own language and dialect, about what they really want. Such discussion was not welcomed in March-May but is acceptable to them these days.

All of the above, of course, is simply NOT TRUE! And they heard it from the Red Shirt media networks, including those which were operating during Thaksin's time - the same ones who oversaw his electoral intimidation crews (see Kwanchai Praiphana). For me it is no sign of undue censorship, lack of democracy or whatever, that these media outlets were shut down, as they were unrepentantly lieing to the public about what never happened. What actually happened is:

1) Thaksin raised the national debt significantly.

2) The price if yaba rose significantly (result of less supply), but its use was more widespread than previously (higher demand as the campaign increased the reach of yaba - it was made more of a 'designer drug' - the rise in demand was larger than the fall in supply).

3) At last count and with the investigation still ongoing, approximately 1,400 people killed extrajudicially in Thaksin's War on Drugs were definitely not involved in narcotics.

4) They had more disposable cash for many months, but were left with long-term debt that they could absolutely not afford to pay back for approximately two generations. However, the world economy was booming in Thaksin's time and is not nowadays.

5) The military threw Thaksin out because he was trying to centralise the control of power to himself, undermining democratic principles and challenging the authority of the country's higher instutions.

6) Thaksin put into implementation former-PM Chuan's 30 Baht healthcare scheme, which was not introduced by Chuan as it was not ready. Its premature materialisation made it a failure and it was replaced by a free scheme because it was too expensive to collect the 30 Baht fee.

7) Thaksin is very much an autocrat and Thailand was making very clear steps to become a dictatorship under Thaksin.

This is not my point - and as you clearly demonstrate few people CAN grasp the wide cultural sweep that is happening nor understand that many of the 'personalities' are just pawns in the sweep of history - this is not condesending nor patronising it's a fact but, you may not like this sorry, it does take a degree of education and understanding to 'get it' if you don't understand the science of cultural and sociological 'shift' you won't understand what I am very poorly trying to convey.

[MunterHunter]

This is not my point - and as you clearly demonstrate few people CAN grasp the wide cultural sweep that is happening nor understand that many of the 'personalities' are just pawns in the sweep of history - this is not condesending nor patronising it's a fact but, you may not like this sorry, it does take a degree of education and understanding to 'get it' if you don't understand the science of cultural and sociological 'shift' you won't understand what I am very poorly trying to convey.

Try explaining it then, instead of just saying "if you dont get it, then you wont understand it"

As i see it, your getting your 'points' and 'arguments' torn to shreds and you can only come back with some mumbo-jumbo about education and understanding... so stop hiding behind cr@p and answer the bloody question!

And for the record, i was right slap bang in the middle of the red protest back in Songkran, right up until about a week before the Army moved in and cleared them out. I could hear the stage from where i sat for 10 hours a day, the entire bloody rally was all about Thaksin and i challenge you to prove me wrong.

[MrJohnson]

He said Deputy PM Suthep Thaugsuban had no justification in warning Thaksin Shinawatra against inciting unrest, as the fugitive ex-prime minister no longer had any involvement with the red shirts.

The little motivational letter Juttaporn read out during the last rally - who was the author of it again?

Indeed

A man who wants to lead the orchestra must turn his back on the crowd.

[gemini81]

who is going to pay them this time?

thaksin's spoiled brat kids, who got to keep all of that money.

[Bagwan]

I have a daydream that Thaksin spends all his ill gotten dosh on getting the Reds into power. Then when he returns the new Government have the entire family and hangers-on set behind bars until all charges against them have been processed by legal process and they are sent to take up long term residence in unfamiliar surroundings. Retribution and loss of face on a massive scale.

It's just a daydream so I'll keep taking the medication.

[Pi Sek]

This is not my point - and as you clearly demonstrate few people CAN grasp the wide cultural sweep that is happening nor understand that many of the 'personalities' are just pawns in the sweep of history - this is not condesending nor patronising it's a fact but, you may not like this sorry, it does take a degree of education and understanding to 'get it' if you don't understand the science of cultural and sociological 'shift' you won't understand what I am very poorly trying to convey.

Try explaining it then, instead of just saying "if you dont get it, then you wont understand it"

As i see it, your getting your 'points' and 'arguments' torn to shreds and you can only come back with some mumbo-jumbo about education and understanding... so stop hiding behind cr@p and answer the bloody question!

And for the record, i was right slap bang in the middle of the red protest back in Songkran, right up until about a week before the Army moved in and cleared them out. I could hear the stage from where i sat for 10 hours a day, the entire bloody rally was all about Thaksin and i challenge you to prove me wrong.

Yes, I saw this as a cop-out too. I'll give CMF the benfit of the doubt though and acknowledge that it is a very difficult situation to surmise and he may not have the patience to explain it to someone of as little education as me, as I clearly illustrate!

MunterHunter, are you a Red Shirt? Just asking because, if you weren't, how on earth did you sit through 10 hours a day of that bile?!

2 hours was far too much for me, moreso because I understand Thai language I think.

[gemini81]

Good for them - just watched one of the 'new' leaders of the red shirts on BBC World - credible, intelligent and against violence - hope they have learned and can now move forward to build a strong unity for a new government - as she said 'the vast majority of red shirst are against violence'

oh really!!!??/ you obviously live in a box up there in chiang mai, and not the burning mango!

Of course they say on thing and as proven, do another. They're exremely volatile, and so are the ones in chiang mai, up there wiring up explosive devices and murdering opponenents at the opponents' homes.

[MunterHunter]

MunterHunter, are you a Red Shirt? Just asking because, if you weren't, how on earth did you sit through 10 hours a day of that bile?!

2 hours was far too much for me, moreso because I understand Thai language I think.

Not a red shirt, not a yellow shirt... but my place of work was within hearing range of the stage and my journey to work each day took me through the red camp.

[ChiangMaiFun]

A very poor attempt to explain cultural shift:

bit like smoking... there has been a cultural shift away from smoking over many decades or like sex discrimination that's another cultural shift - so is the vote for women etc. these shifts took many decades to come through - the personalities are largely irrelevant all we remember to day is that once... there were slaves... once the majority smoked.... once women did not have votes... and the change in Thai culture will also take many decades and is not all centered around one man - who ever he may be. It's around changing 'attitudes' and they ARE changing - this is a cultural shift. The poor are saying (as the other poster rightly said) why should I work for 200 baht a day? that's nothing to do with Thaksin or the reds - but they are catalysts for change albeit not always good ones I grant you.

In the end anaylsis, when we look back, change will have happened and Thaksin will be footnote to the larger issues. Slag me off if you wish but I think I understand the process and don't get caught up in all the 'noise' as many posters on here do. You wanaa concentrate on the small picture go ahead!

[Pi Sek]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

Edited January 5, 2011 by Pi Sek

[hanuman1]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

[bkkjames]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

and then you woke up

[hanuman1]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

and then you woke up

thanks for that. add me to your facebook?

[bkkjames]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

and then you woke up

thanks for that. add me to your facebook?

sorry, my mistake, I thought this was the Man City thread. Please carry on.

[hyperdimension]

This is not my point - and as you clearly demonstrate few people CAN grasp the wide cultural sweep that is happening nor understand that many of the 'personalities' are just pawns in the sweep of history - this is not condesending nor patronising it's a fact but, you may not like this sorry, it does take a degree of education and understanding to 'get it' if you don't understand the science of cultural and sociological 'shift' you won't understand what I am very poorly trying to convey.

I've recently (skim) read Handley's book about the history of the most revered family in Thailand and can relate much of the book's content to what you are talking about. There have been a lot going on that even most Thai people have been unaware of.

However I don't see how supporting Pheu Thai (which the UDD leaders instruct their followers to vote for) is going to make things any better, as I feel that they are using the "poor versus elite" mantra just to take back power and the corrupt wealth that comes with it.

I think the focus should be on what is currently best for the people of Thailand instead of focusing on academic and theoretical socio-political ideologies such as "true" democracy.

A general election is coming up and my hope is that Thai people will make a thoroughly informed decision when they vote and not just blindly vote for a particular party just because that's how they voted previously or because the rest of the family voted for them.

I truly hope that Jatuporn will be Pheu Thai's chosen candidate for the general election.

[Pi Sek]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

and then you woke up

thanks for that. add me to your facebook?

Acrid wit as always, hanuman1 thou meddling pox-marked lewdster! I get what you are saying about the UK Labour party and the trade union movements a long time before. Point well noted.

But you can't really compare that - the trade unions pushed for worker power and the Labour party championing it for them - with this - the Red Shirts pushing for democracy and Thaksin championing it for them; because he's not. The Labour party at the turn of the industrial revolution did win better working conditions for trade union members whilst Thaksin was removed because he was fighting against democracy, not for it. That's the only reason why the PAD can actually get away with calling themselves the PAD!

In the long term of course, this is an act of history and all cultures learn from history. So you are again correct in assuming that "in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line". But that doesn't make the Red Shirts right, and it doesn't make the Red Shirt protest movement not about Thaksin. In short, the cultural shift that CMF is talking about has been happening before the Red Shirts were even conceived and will be happening until long after... well, I don't want to speculate, but I hope you get my point.

[hanuman1]

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

and then you woke up

thanks for that. add me to your facebook?

Acrid wit as always, hanuman1 thou meddling pox-marked lewdster! I get what you are saying about the UK Labour party and the trade union movements a long time before. Point well noted.

But you can't really compare that - the trade unions pushed for worker power and the Labour party championing it for them - with this - the Red Shirts pushing for democracy and Thaksin championing it for them; because he's not. The Labour party at the turn of the industrial revolution did win better working conditions for trade union members whilst Thaksin was removed because he was fighting against democracy, not for it. That's the only reason why the PAD can actually get away with calling themselves the PAD!

In the long term of course, this is an act of history and all cultures learn from history. So you are again correct in assuming that "in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line". But that doesn't make the Red Shirts right, and it doesn't make the Red Shirt protest movement not about Thaksin. In short, the cultural shift that CMF is talking about has been happening before the Red Shirts were even conceived and will be happening until long after... well, I don't want to speculate, but I hope you get my point.

Far from wishing to cast you in the role of puny doghearted hugger-mugger, I do feel it worth pointing out that I wasn't trying to compare the relative motivations of Taksin and the UK trades unions, but merely trying to suggest that they both were/are vehicles for change, be they good, bad or ugly. They will both eventually be forgotten, but the change that resulted (or may result) from their historical presence could be felt long into the future. Did the plight of the rural poor ever have such high profile as it does today? And who can remember governments of more than 15 years ago trumpeting populist policies aimed at improving their life? This is what I believe CMF was getting at.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Far from wishing to cast you in the role of puny doghearted hugger-mugger, I do feel it worth pointing out that I wasn't trying to compare the relative motivations of Taksin and the UK trades unions, but merely trying to suggest that they both were/are vehicles for change, be they good, bad or ugly. They will both eventually be forgotten, but the change that resulted (or may result) from their historical presence could be felt long into the future. Did the plight of the rural poor ever have such high profile as it does today? And who can remember governments of more than 15 years ago trumpeting populist policies aimed at improving their life? This is what I believe CMF was getting at.

yes it is exactly what I was trying to get across (poorly) - thanks you did a better job :jap:

[ChiangMaiFun]

To be honest, CMF, I think that we get what cultural shift is. What I don't get is that the Red Shirt protest movement is about a cultural shift, not about Thaksin. Like you say, must be my low education standards!

Or maybe the Red Shirt movement that you claim is part of the cultural shift over the last 50 years is actually only a few years old and is entirely related to Thaksin. Maybe the UDD represents something entirely different to the rest of the Red Shirt movement, and has only supported the other factions to bring the numbers up?

I realise you have no intention to go to a Red protest site and I understand why (despite my education), but I'm afraid it blows your credibility out of the water when you talk about what the Red Shirts want without ever having been to one of their protests. I have been to - well - more than one of their protests because I wanted to figure out what they were all so pissed off about - surely they can't ALL be angry just because the military threw Thaksin out?

My long post above lists 1) their answers to my questions and 2) why their answers show that they really are mis-educated which, ironically enough, is the fundamental basis of their protest - although they believe the "other side" is mis-uducating them when actually it's themselves, led by Thaksin. A truly sad situation, made even sadder by the clever insistence of Thaksin's associates that such an argument has been conjured up by the elite who want to keep you in your rice paddies forever.

I think the problem here is that CMF is talking in broad historical terms and you are addressing the short-medium term issues of Taksin and violence among small factions of the redshirt movement. Perhaps an illustrative parallel would be the Labour movement in the UK, which owes its existence to the massive trade union movement of the turn of the 20th century. Although nowadays we wouldn't link trade union power with that of the Labour party, it is nevertheless true to say that without the vehicle of the trade union movement a hundred years ago, the Labour movement couldn't have gone on to be responsible for things like the welfare state, free healthcare etc which the whole nation now benefits from.

Thus although Taksin and the current redshirts are problematic in the short-term, in years to come the heightened awareness of the plight of poor people generated by the current unrest will reap rewards for the whole nation further down the line, when Taksin will have been forgotten and the benefits of empowering the majority of the people of this country will be more widely felt.

This is the point - I am looking at the wider angle of historical cultrural shift where Thaksin's name (and the others) will be of no importance but the SHIFT will be - the change will be. This has been evident down history - yes the Labour Movement is a good example - you remember any of the hotheads who demanded revolution back then? I don't - but the change HAPPENED - thanks for 'getting it'.

[rixalex]

This is the point - I am looking at the wider angle of historical cultrural shift where Thaksin's name (and the others) will be of no importance but the SHIFT will be - the change will be. This has been evident down history - yes the Labour Movement is a good example - you remember any of the hotheads who demanded revolution back then? I don't - but the change HAPPENED - thanks for 'getting it'.

Some great posts in this thread, from all sides.

CMF, despite my lowly education, i have no trouble grasping the concept of cultural shifts and accept the possibility of the red shirts ultimately playing a positive role a long way down the road, much as i hate what it is that drives the movement. What i can't grasp is this:

I'm not a Thaksin supporter either - and nor are most reds...

I, like some others here, have experienced first-hand red shirt rallies. Your claim is i believe totally false and says much more about your own wishes than it does the truth.

[Pi Sek]

Quick question. The change from the Industrial Revolution was better working conditions. What are the changes we expect to see from this cultural shift?

(Difficult one I know!)

[whybother]

<snip>

I, like some others here, have experienced first-hand red shirt rallies. Your claim is i believe totally false and says much more about your own wishes than it does the truth.

You do have to remember, the a majority of Thais (30+ mil) are red shirt supporters, and only 1 million turned up to their biggest protest, so it must only be the red shirt Thaksin supporters that are turning up to rallies.

Edited January 5, 2011 by whybother

[Insight]

<snip>

I, like some others here, have experienced first-hand red shirt rallies. Your claim is i believe totally false and says much more about your own wishes than it does the truth.

You do have to remember, the a majority of Thais (30+ mil) are red shirt supporters, and only 1 million turned up to their biggest protest, so it must only be the red shirt Thaksin supporters that are turning up to rallies.

Wow.... Do you have a Master's degree too?

[webfact]

Govt Expects Peaceful Red-shirt Rally

The deputy prime minister in charge of national security believes that the rejection of a bail request for seven detained red-shirt leaders will not provoke any violence at the group's rally this weekend.

Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban commented on the Criminal Court's rejection of the bail request for seven detained red-shirt leaders, saying that the matter was carried out in line with the judicial system.

Suthep added that the red-shirt group is able to file another bail request and he believes that yesterday's rejection will not have any effect on the planned anti-government rally on January 9.

The deputy PM added the government will apply normal laws in handling this weekend's demonstration and insisted that it will provide full assistance to only red-shirt members being detained with minor charges.

-- Tan Network 2011-01-05

[ChiangMaiFun]

This is the point - I am looking at the wider angle of historical cultrural shift where Thaksin's name (and the others) will be of no importance but the SHIFT will be - the change will be. This has been evident down history - yes the Labour Movement is a good example - you remember any of the hotheads who demanded revolution back then? I don't - but the change HAPPENED - thanks for 'getting it'.

Some great posts in this thread, from all sides.

CMF, despite my lowly education, i have no trouble grasping the concept of cultural shifts and accept the possibility of the red shirts ultimately playing a positive role a long way down the road, much as i hate what it is that drives the movement. What i can't grasp is this:

I'm not a Thaksin supporter either - and nor are most reds...

I, like some others here, have experienced first-hand red shirt rallies. Your claim is i believe totally false and says much more about your own wishes than it does the truth.

You make it sound like I am trying to partonise people and that really is not the case - but some of the posts have been very much 'better dead than red' with no thought nor analysis and so the rebuff from me has been 'but you don 't understand' - this may come across as patronising in print but in fact was not my intention I wanted to recognise that if you don't know something then you don't know it (this is not aimed at you BTW). anyway...

...the point is this (to address your last point) that many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like - I, like you, do NOT support violence nor any of the claptrap that much of the reds came out with down in Krung Thep but this is a narrow viewpoint - let's widen our gaze (whch you seem to have done) to the context of history.

For me the reds are a catalyst for change - they are a 'symbol' of a deeper and more meaningful 'change' and I believe we will look back at Thailand in 20 years and think - hmmmm all that shouting and angst was a verbalisation of birth pangs for change and we will hardly remember the red leaders names nor care.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Quick question. The change from the Industrial Revolution was better working conditions. What are the changes we expect to see from this cultural shift?

(Difficult one I know!)

Not difficult... same... raised living standards, less deferential voting and maybe some other things we can't discuss - in time

[JetsetBkk]

You make it sound like I am trying to patronise people and that really is not the case - but some of the posts have been very much 'better dead than red' with no thought nor analysis and so the rebuff from me has been 'but you don 't understand' - this may come across as patronising in print but in fact was not my intention I wanted to recognise that if you don't know something then you don't know it (this is not aimed at you BTW). anyway...

...the point is this (to address your last point) that many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like - I, like you, do NOT support violence nor any of the claptrap that much of the reds came out with down in Krung Thep but this is a narrow viewpoint - let's widen our gaze (whch you seem to have done) to the context of history.

For me the reds are a catalyst for change - they are a 'symbol' of a deeper and more meaningful 'change' and I believe we will look back at Thailand in 20 years and think - hmmmm all that shouting and angst was a verbalisation of birth pangs for change and we will hardly remember the red leaders names nor care.

Great post CMF. :jap:

[rixalex]

many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like -

I think you are mistaken in thinking that sympathising with the plight of the poor equates to being "red". It does not. All of the Thais i live and work with sympathise with the poor, but wouldn't have anything to do with the reds, or for that matter, with the yellows, as they see those movements for what i believe they are: charades that use propaganda and lies to forward their own selfish agendas.

As far as the despising bit is concerned, the same Thais that i spoke of above, are far too contented in themselves, despite being neither rich nor wealthy, to waste time arbitrarily hating people because of what car they drive or how much money they appear to have. To quote a cliché, happiness comes from inside.

[ChiangMaiFun]

many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like -

I think you are mistaken in thinking that sympathising with the plight of the poor equates to being "red". It does not. All of the Thais i live and work with sympathise with the poor, but wouldn't have anything to do with the reds, or for that matter, with the yellows, as they see those movements for what i believe they are: charades that use propaganda and lies to forward their own selfish agendas.

As far as the despising bit is concerned, the same Thais that i spoke of above, are far too contented in themselves, despite being neither rich nor wealthy, to waste time arbitrarily hating people because of what car they drive or how much money they appear to have. To quote a cliché, happiness comes from inside.

Happiness, my friend, comes from inside when you have food inside too - no food = no happiness

It is no poor thing to defend those that do not have the education nor ability to defend themselves - you wear your friends 'wonderful life of happiness from inside' as a badge of purity! it is not - remember Maslow's Triangle? if not go look it up

Lastly the reds are a 'reflection' of the changes that are happening - once again - you fall into the trap - the trap of limited thinking.

[Siripon]

You make it sound like I am trying to patronise people and that really is not the case - but some of the posts have been very much 'better dead than red' with no thought nor analysis and so the rebuff from me has been 'but you don 't understand' - this may come across as patronising in print but in fact was not my intention I wanted to recognise that if you don't know something then you don't know it (this is not aimed at you BTW). anyway...

...the point is this (to address your last point) that many in the wide spread of the movement don't go to rallies and don't get involved but I would consider them 'red' in so far as they 'sympathise' with those on barely livable wages and despise those who roll around in Porches and the like - I, like you, do NOT support violence nor any of the claptrap that much of the reds came out with down in Krung Thep but this is a narrow viewpoint - let's widen our gaze (whch you seem to have done) to the context of history.

For me the reds are a catalyst for change - they are a 'symbol' of a deeper and more meaningful 'change' and I believe we will look back at Thailand in 20 years and think - hmmmm all that shouting and angst was a verbalisation of birth pangs for change and we will hardly remember the red leaders names nor care.

Great post CMF. :jap:

Most Thais envy, and in many cases, admire those with Porches.

There is no mass industrial base of Thais to compare with the Industrial Revolution situation in the West. Many Thais work for foreign companies in the Eastern Seaboard and Ayutthaya, mass strikes there would simply see companies moving their investments overseas. Millions of Thais still work for small companies, households, or independently,ie taxi drivers. Their work is often cyclical, back to the farm in the rainy season.

The unions of state enterprises are ridden with factions, with self interest being the norm.

A welfare state like Sweden would require a much larger tax base than the present Thai one, Apisit's gradual adoption of schemes benefiting the disadvantaged seems to me the best way forward at present.

To realize fundamental shifts in political power, ie farming cooperatives controlling the price of rice, MPs actually being selected by parties based on merit, rather than the size of their wallets, educational opportunities spread more equally, etc, requires a dismantling of the nationwide network of political patronage system which stakeholders from the MPs down to the village headmen would resist. They have too much to lose.

Education is the way forward, and that means the long haul, decades to build a fairer society, but it's the only way.