Thaksin And Pheu Thai Have 'Failed The Red Shirts'

[webfact]

Thaksin and Pheu Thai have 'failed the red shirts'

By THE NATION

In a curious coincidence, a Pheu Thai MP and an anti-coup activist have aired critical views sharing the common theme that the main opposition party and former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra have both failed the red shirts.

Giles Ungpakorn, an activist living in London exile to escape a lese majeste charge, wrote an opinion piece critical of Thaksin on the Prachatai news website.

Giles said he was disappointed with Thaksin and the Pheu Thai campaign platforms unveiled last Saturday.

"Thaksin talked about himself too much… he made it sound easy for Pheu Thai to secure the election victory, as if the country could revert back to the situation before the 2006 coup, and he failed to notice the political progress of the red shirts," he said in reference to Thaksin's speech via phone-in from Dubai.

Thaksin focused the whole speech on Pheu Thai without mentioning the role of the red shirts, he said.

Thaksin talked about winning the poll but didn't mention punishment of government and military leaders responsible for the bloodshed last year, he said.

Dreams about mega-projects were promoted at the expense of advancing the red shirts and empowering the people, he said.

The Pheu Thai platforms on the poor were a rehash of old policies like the Village Fund, the debt moratorium, the One Tambon One Product scheme and universal healthcare, he said.

He said Thaksin and Pheu Thai had failed to live up to the slogan "New Thinking, New Action" due to the failure to come up with any plans to root out injustice and revamp the political system.

He called on the red shirts to start planning to run their movement independent of Pheu Thai.

Pheu Thai MP Jatuporn Promphan lashed out at Pheu Thai figures who he saw as electioneers, saying they should not try to win the vote by trampling on the red shirts.

Jatuporn was reacting to attempts by Pheu Thai MPs and executives to distance themselves from the red-shirt movement, which is mired by accusations of offending the monarchy.

"The red shirts know what they are doing, which will not affect voting," he said.

Jatuporn said he and fellow red shirts designated as electoral candidates would not take part in red rallies during the campaign, allaying concern about campaign regulation violations if the red rallies were linked to swaying votes.

The red shirts had done so much for Pheu Thai, hence the party should not treat them like they posed problems, he said.

He said it would be a big mistake if the party tried to dominate and dictate to the red shirts regarding what to do or not to do in the lead up to the ballot.

He urged the party to embrace the red shirts instead of alienating them. He also vowed to fight to the full extent of the law in order to clear his lese majeste charge.

-- The Nation 2011-04-28

[geriatrickid]

Giles apparently does not read Thai Visa. According to the political experts, he is supposed to be a supporter of Thaksin and the PT is one and the same as the Redshirts. Perhaps, he should write a memo to these experts? I suggest 16 Bold font and delivered by a cheap bar girl so that these foreign experts will pay attention.

Edited April 28, 2011 by geriatrickid

[animatic]

Apparently these two think the world revolves around their navels as they gaze lovingly at them.

Edited April 28, 2011 by animatic

[virtualtraveller]

Giles the idealist has finally woken up to the reality that Peua Thai are mostly interested in whitewashing Thaksin and themselves and would cut a deal of amnesty for the Generals tomorrow if it meant springing Thaksin, and the Red Shirts are mainly a group of dodgy leaders using the masses towards this goal. The Reds love Thaksin for his money, Thaksin loves the reds for their numbers and ability to create havoc. Though there is a socialist agenda and many red supporters desperately in need of more equality in Thailand, PT isn't genuinely the way forward for them.

And he asks 'why Thaksin didn't mention pursuing the military for punishment for the deaths last April', well duh! that's because the biggest punishment that ought to be dished out from the incident is to the Red Shirts themselves. Honestly this apparently respected commentator comes across as really naive or blinkered sometimes.

As for Jatuporn, he should know that the Red Shirts have cooked their goose, they are a liability to the Peau Thai in the same way the PAD became a liability to the Dems.

[Pi Sek]

Well, Ji "Giles" Ungpakorn is an idealist academic and so it's no surprise to me that he's not happy with PTP/Thaksin's actions. I'm sure he's not such a bad guy, but he is incredibly naive for such an obviously-clever chap - he's not someone who takes note of real-world situations.

On top of that, having read one or two of his articles, he is most certainly guilty of lese majeste - knowingly and brazenly. So he skips the country to avoid prosecution by the Law... the exact opposite of Socrates, a true idealist, whose actions and sacrifice are still discussed nearly 2,500 years later.

Anyone who does not see the relevance here should read Plato's Crito (but, in short, the opening paragraph of Wikipedia's page on Crito states, "It is a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (dikē), injustice (adikia), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison".

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". He says "Two wrongs don't make a right", whereas the Red Shirt movement says "We will continue to do wrong until we see your wrongs righted".

[SanSaiExPat]

Well, Ji "Giles" Ungpakorn is an idealist academic and so it's no surprise to me that he's not happy with PTP/Thaksin's actions. I'm sure he's not such a bad guy, but he is incredibly naive for such an obviously-clever chap - he's not someone who takes note of real-world situations.

On top of that, having read one or two of his articles, he is most certainly guilty of lese majeste - knowingly and brazenly. So he skips the country to avoid prosecution by the Law... the exact opposite of Socrates, a true idealist, whose actions and sacrifice are still discussed nearly 2,500 years later.

Anyone who does not see the relevance here should read Plato's Crito (but, in short, the opening paragraph of Wikipedia's page on Crito states, "It is a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (dikē), injustice (adikia), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison".

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". He says "Two wrongs don't make a right", whereas the Red Shirt movement says "We will continue to do wrong until we see your wrongs righted".

Et tu, Brute?

[yoshiwara]

Well, Ji "Giles" Ungpakorn is an idealist academic and so it's no surprise to me that he's not happy with PTP/Thaksin's actions. I'm sure he's not such a bad guy, but he is incredibly naive for such an obviously-clever chap - he's not someone who takes note of real-world situations.

On top of that, having read one or two of his articles, he is most certainly guilty of lese majeste - knowingly and brazenly. So he skips the country to avoid prosecution by the Law... the exact opposite of Socrates, a true idealist, whose actions and sacrifice are still discussed nearly 2,500 years later.

Anyone who does not see the relevance here should read Plato's Crito (but, in short, the opening paragraph of Wikipedia's page on Crito states, "It is a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (dikē), injustice (adikia), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison".

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". He says "Two wrongs don't make a right", whereas the Red Shirt movement says "We will continue to do wrong until we see your wrongs righted".

Giles Ungpakorn is neither naive or an idealist. He is a Trotskyist and formerly a member of a group in Thailand which failed to build any lasting support in the Thai working class. Now just a big mouth. Unlike the Stalinist Thai CP which believes in a popular front but in practice completely subordinates itself to Thaksin's interests, Giles now criticises Thaksin. Big deal. This would be part of the mantra of 'unconditional but not uncritical' support for Thaksin and his reds. Not that any one really cares, but the so-called left doesn't know whether it is coming or going. Not to be confused with the forum Che T-shirt wearers who run a mile from socialist organisation but like the idea of foreign 'adventure' and 'revolt'. Petty-bourgeois dilettantes the lot of them.

Edited April 28, 2011 by yoshiwara

[Arkady]

Giles tried unsuccessfully to hitch a lift on Thaksin's coat tails via the red shirt movement because it was the only revolutionary game in town. As a true Marxist, he would anyway have looked for an opportunity to liquidate Thaksin and other red wing elements in the red shirts after the revolution, representing them as counter revolutionaries, capitalists and revisionists. He was very critical of Thaksin when he was in power. So it is not a surprise that he has reverted to his former stance. Looking at red websites like New Mandala, there has been a swing against Thaksin from the farang and Thai intellectual left wing of the red shirts, since he has made it obvious that the only political platform he has for Pheua Thai is getting an amnesty, recovering his ill gotten wealth and getting his fat snout back into the trough. Favouring his sister, Yingluck, as PT leader was the last straw for many. With his own deplorable record, how could accountability for human rights abuses be something Thaksin would push for? And as the peasants in Isaan, why would he give a dam_n about them as people? They are not part of his clan and not even Chinese for God's sake.

While he is obviously very bright and well educated, Giles has now spent most of his life outside Thailand and has an idealistic view of a Thailand that doesn't exist. Much of his thought is routed in the 70s, as he tries to make atone for being safe in England while students in Bangkok were being shot and hung by right wing vigilantes and the Communist Party of Thailand was systematically being destroyed by the military and its own internal dialectical differences.

As for Jatuporn he is completely the opposite. He has no ideals or political ideology. He is merely a Southern 'nak leng' gangster type throwing his weight about to see how far he can get. He is only motivated by money and power and is as cynical as Thaksin who is now necessarily de-emphasizing Jatuporn to improve PT's election chances. Hired guns like Jatuporn are completely disposable in Thaksin's opinion.

Edited April 28, 2011 by Arkady

[kumsamut]

FYI - the nation belongs to the yellow shirt group.

[ToffeEFCpower]

As Thaksin is such a self confessed royalist, will he be watching the wedding tomorrow?

[animatic]

FYI - the nation belongs to the yellow shirt group.

No, the nation belongs to ALL of the Thai people in equal measure.

Within the nation some people try to take greater advantage than others.

[jdinasia]

FYI - the nation belongs to the yellow shirt group.

No, the nation belongs to ALL of the Thai people in equal measure.

Within the nation some people try to take greater advantage than others.

I think he meant The Nation (the OP), but then again ... who knows what he meant.

[hyperdimension]

A more accurate title would be "Thaksin, Pheu Thai, The Red Shirts Have Failed".

[lannarebirth]

Well, Ji "Giles" Ungpakorn is an idealist academic and so it's no surprise to me that he's not happy with PTP/Thaksin's actions. I'm sure he's not such a bad guy, but he is incredibly naive for such an obviously-clever chap - he's not someone who takes note of real-world situations.

On top of that, having read one or two of his articles, he is most certainly guilty of lese majeste - knowingly and brazenly. So he skips the country to avoid prosecution by the Law... the exact opposite of Socrates, a true idealist, whose actions and sacrifice are still discussed nearly 2,500 years later.

Anyone who does not see the relevance here should read Plato's Crito (but, in short, the opening paragraph of Wikipedia's page on Crito states, "It is a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (dikē), injustice (adikia), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison".

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". He says "Two wrongs don't make a right", whereas the Red Shirt movement says "We will continue to do wrong until we see your wrongs righted".

Giles Ungpakorn is neither naive or an idealist. He is a Trotskyist and formerly a member of a group in Thailand which failed to build any lasting support in the Thai working class. Now just a big mouth. Unlike the Stalinist Thai CP which believes in a popular front but in practice completely subordinates itself to Thaksin's interests, Giles now criticises Thaksin. Big deal. This would be part of the mantra of 'unconditional but not uncritical' support for Thaksin and his reds. Not that any one really cares, but the so-called left doesn't know whether it is coming or going. Not to be confused with the forum Che T-shirt wearers who run a mile from socialist organisation but like the idea of foreign 'adventure' and 'revolt'. Petty-bourgeois dilettantes the lot of them.

I think Giles "Useful Idiot" days have about run their course.

[TimeBandit2]

The Red Shirts have failed the Red Shirts. No revolution can succeed when the individuals have no clear idea what they are trying to accomplish and expect the leaders to do the thinking for them - it's recipe for exploitation, not liberation.

It reminds me of an old episode of He-Man about leadership. The moral was not only the importance of being a good leader, but being a good follower.

"You never have to do something you know is wrong just because someone tells you to," said He-Man.

It's too bad Thais don't watch it.

[asiawatcher]

THaksin and Peu Thai have failed the Red Shirts? Was there ever any doubt that politics and expendable pawns were in the same camp. Self serving narcissists both. But the kwai daeng have a case - they just have no real person who can present it. And the charade continues...

[bangkokeddy]

Anyone who does not see the relevance here should read Plato's Crito (but, in short, the opening paragraph of Wikipedia's page on Crito states, "It is a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (dikē), injustice (adikia), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison".

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". ...

Why was Socrates in prison? Was it just?

[newermonkey]

Giles Ungpakorn should have his UK visa revoked for inciting political unrest.

[Buchholz]

Giles Ungpakorn should have his UK visa revoked for inciting political unrest.

He has a UK passport, not a UK visa in his Thai passport.

Giles Ji Ungpakorn is the youngest son of former Bank of Thailand governor and Thammasat University rector Puey Ungpakorn and his wife Margaret Smith of London.

.

Edited April 29, 2011 by Buchholz

[Insight]

The Red Shirts have failed the Red Shirts. No revolution can succeed when the individuals have no clear idea what they are trying to accomplish and expect the leaders to do the thinking for them - it's recipe for exploitation, not liberation.

It reminds me of an old episode of He-Man about leadership. The moral was not only the importance of being a good leader, but being a good follower.

"You never have to do something you know is wrong just because someone tells you to," said He-Man.

It's too bad Thais don't watch it.

Thai Politics 0 He-Man 1

[jdinasia]

I think it is worth note that Giles slams Thaksin (Giles is no friend of capitalism) and Jatuporn never mentions Thaksin. It would be political suicide if he did! Jatuporn sticks with criticizing his own party.

[Thaddeus]

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". He says "Two wrongs don't make a right", whereas the Red Shirt movement says "We will continue to do wrong until we see your wrongs righted".

You have to love the old philosophers, Artistotle refused to accept that flies had more than four legs, and he was that well respected that no one else bothered to count them.

This is the Thaksin effect, for the rural poor anyway.

[jayboy]

Giles Ungpakorn is neither naive or an idealist. He is a Trotskyist and formerly a member of a group in Thailand which failed to build any lasting support in the Thai working class. Now just a big mouth. Unlike the Stalinist Thai CP which believes in a popular front but in practice completely subordinates itself to Thaksin's interests, Giles now criticises Thaksin. Big deal. This would be part of the mantra of 'unconditional but not uncritical' support for Thaksin and his reds. Not that any one really cares, but the so-called left doesn't know whether it is coming or going. Not to be confused with the forum Che T-shirt wearers who run a mile from socialist organisation but like the idea of foreign 'adventure' and 'revolt'. Petty-bourgeois dilettantes the lot of them.

How strange that you should resort to Trotskyite jargon - "petty - bourgeois dilettantes" !!

Surely he is both naive and an idealist, and I would add a pain in the neck too.He has no social skills or charisma.

You say he criticises Thaksin now, but he has always done so.I don't think he has any traction in Thailand at all.

I tend to agree he is a slightly absurd figure, not helped by a whining Kenneth Williams type voice.

And yet and yet.There is a kind of mad integrity in the man.Thailand should be able to contain this kind of man, without necessarily taking him too seriously.His father of course by any reasonable measure (intellect, competence, moral purpose, visionary) was the outstanding Thai of the post WW2 era.Thailand owes Giles some indulgence for this fact alone.

http://www.nectec.or.th/users/htk/dr-puey/

(Actually in the establishment Thai world - which I doubt the foreign military cheerleaders fully understand - they don't move in those circles - Giles would be regarded as an irritating lefty but definitely "one of us".

[jdinasia]

1) Who here is Jayboy characterizing as a "foreign military cheerleader"?

and

2) Does anyone believe that Giles U. would be considered "one of us" by the "establishment Thai world"? When Giles has been so vocally anti-establishment?

and

3) Why would Thailand owe Giles anything for the work of his father? (That statement is absolutely stunning!)

[animatic]

So it's fine to be totally manly in an utterly wrongheaded fashion, and this is better than being less manly but correct?

[jayboy]

1) Who here is Jayboy characterizing as a "foreign military cheerleader"?

and

2) Does anyone believe that Giles U. would be considered "one of us" by the "establishment Thai world"? When Giles has been so vocally anti-establishment?

and

3) Why would Thailand owe Giles anything for the work of his father? (That statement is absolutely stunning!)

!.No explanation needed.The evidence is clear and out there.This isn't the first time you have asked this question..must be preying on your mind

2.You are obviously unfamiliar with the nuances of upper class Thailand.At St John's Oxford a few years ago Abhisit was perfectly happy to debate with Giles in a reasonable way.They have a lot in common - both upper middle class Anglophiles.Abhisit came off best by the way.

3.Thailand doesn't owe Giles for Dr Puey's enormous contribution except perhaps a mild indulgence, rather in the way Randolph Churchill was indulged by the British establishment.But I agree there are limits on this

[Pi Sek]

Anyone who does not see the relevance here should read Plato's Crito (but, in short, the opening paragraph of Wikipedia's page on Crito states, "It is a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (dikē), injustice (adikia), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito's offer to finance his escape from prison".

Maybe this is why so many foreigners' knee-jerk reaction to the Thaksin issue is "he should be in prison", as Socrates is widely regarded as the "father of modern Western thought". ...

Why was Socrates in prison? Was it just?

I wrote my dissertation on exactly this question, which was 20,000 words!

Socrates was in prison for "impiety and corruption of the young" and was sentenced to death for it. Whether it was just or not depends on your personal views, but the first two examples of martyrdom that most people who have learnt about it will give you are Jesus and Socrates.

Not on the charges was his making the oligarchy in Athens at the time look very stupid by using "Socratic method" to get them to disagree with themselves. He is responsible for people thinking for themselves... just look at the differences between East and West. The West had Plato (and so Socrates - Socrates didn't actually write anything that has been published); the East had Confucius.

I'm sure the more radical Red Shirts that actually want social change would welcome comparisons between themselves and Socrates. This is exactly why "Thaksin and Peua Thai have failed the Red Shirts".

edit - just to add... I'm clearly no Red Shirt, but it seems I am moreso than Thaksin Shinawatra.

Edited April 29, 2011 by Pi Sek

[yoshiwara]

Giles Ungpakorn is neither naive or an idealist. He is a Trotskyist and formerly a member of a group in Thailand which failed to build any lasting support in the Thai working class. Now just a big mouth. Unlike the Stalinist Thai CP which believes in a popular front but in practice completely subordinates itself to Thaksin's interests, Giles now criticises Thaksin. Big deal. This would be part of the mantra of 'unconditional but not uncritical' support for Thaksin and his reds. Not that any one really cares, but the so-called left doesn't know whether it is coming or going. Not to be confused with the forum Che T-shirt wearers who run a mile from socialist organisation but like the idea of foreign 'adventure' and 'revolt'. Petty-bourgeois dilettantes the lot of them.

How strange that you should resort to Trotskyite jargon - "petty - bourgeois dilettantes" !!

Surely he is both naive and an idealist, and I would add a pain in the neck too.He has no social skills or charisma.

You say he criticises Thaksin now, but he has always done so.I don't think he has any traction in Thailand at all.

I tend to agree he is a slightly absurd figure, not helped by a whining Kenneth Williams type voice.

And yet and yet.There is a kind of mad integrity in the man.Thailand should be able to contain this kind of man, without necessarily taking him too seriously.His father of course by any reasonable measure (intellect, competence, moral purpose, visionary) was the outstanding Thai of the post WW2 era.Thailand owes Giles some indulgence for this fact alone.

http://www.nectec.or.th/users/htk/dr-puey/

(Actually in the establishment Thai world - which I doubt the foreign military cheerleaders fully understand - they don't move in those circles - Giles would be regarded as an irritating lefty but definitely "one of us".

Some of the more entertaining socialist tracts are those attacking so-called 'revisionists' and members of the 'swamp' eg the type of person who performs cheerleader and coat hanging services for Thaksin and the reds. This I sometimes speculate is in penance for their failed or missed opportunities to do something organisationally in the past, or maybe are just making up from being expelled from some small organisation which still hurts a bit. In short, Thailand also provides a playground for political tourists as well as the other kind.

One of the current essential hard-left positions in the UK for example is that of 'taking sides', the end result being on the side of all sorts of crooks who know how to spin the anti-capitalist rhetoric. Unfortunately those who embark on this journey (its gone beyond, its not about Thaksin etc)think they are ahead of the curve and are just using Thaksin as a sling-shot to power, but in reality it is they who are the ones being played and Thaksin is so crude that his supporters are now muttering that they have been had (but watch them fall back into line during the next few weeks).

The establishment in most countries will happily tolerate their children going off on a tangent particularly when they are ineffective, but if a serious threat the gloves are off.

One of the key characteristics of our friendly red supporting political tourists is that they are anti-working class and will prefer to use words like 'the people' 'the poor' 'the disenfranchised' etc Instead of socialist organisation they will place themselves in charlatan pockets time and time again. This is not surprising since 1989 as left-wing parties fade into the mists of time and all we are left with are joy-rides of ridiculousness. 'Petty-bourgeois dilittantes'? A lovely little souvenir phrase from the past which looks as good as it ever did.

[otherstuff1957]

I'm not at all surprised to see this development, I'm just surprised at the timing. Either the whole Red movement is coming apart at the seams, or Thaksin is so confident that he will win that he can afford to discard part of his followers.

The Thaksinista Redshirts and Red Siam have always been in an alliance of convenience. If and when Thaksin returned to power, the leftists would no doubt be promptly expelled from this alliance and would resume the role of being a radical minority opposition group... a role that they would be very used to and comfortable with. Remember, Giles and the others were quite critical of Thaksin when he was in power, they only joined him because they found the coup so distasteful.

Edited April 29, 2011 by otherstuff1957

[jdinasia]

1) Who here is Jayboy characterizing as a "foreign military cheerleader"?

and

2) Does anyone believe that Giles U. would be considered "one of us" by the "establishment Thai world"? When Giles has been so vocally anti-establishment?

and

3) Why would Thailand owe Giles anything for the work of his father? (That statement is absolutely stunning!)

!.No explanation needed.The evidence is clear and out there.This isn't the first time you have asked this question..must be preying on your mind

2.You are obviously unfamiliar with the nuances of upper class Thailand.At St John's Oxford a few years ago Abhisit was perfectly happy to debate with Giles in a reasonable way.They have a lot in common - both upper middle class Anglophiles.Abhisit came off best by the way.

3.Thailand doesn't owe Giles for Dr Puey's enormous contribution except perhaps a mild indulgence, rather in the way Randolph Churchill was indulged by the British establishment.But I agree there are limits on this

1) Nothing is "preying on my mind" and imho your characterization of other unnamed posters as "foreign military cheerleaders" does need explanation, but that is simply my opinion.

2) Your anecdotal evidence of how 2 classmates got along being indicative of how Giles is perceived by "the Thai establishment" just doesn't make sense. 2 guys in the same school with similar backgrounds debated amicably certainly doesn't extend to either of them being "one of us" in the eyes of the Thai establishment.

3) Trying to make a case that Thailand owes anything to Giles certainly explains why Giles is PNG in Thailand, now doesn't it