Making A Noise That No One Hears Or Cares About

[clausewitz]

I think there are several issues in Thailand politics that push peoples buttons. The prolific Thaksin haters on Thaivisa have varied motives but seem to feel that the Democrats are basically good people who treat everyone fairly and never play political games or tell lies. They feel that the redshirts allied with thaksin went so far as to kill and shoot there own members - and wounded around a thousand - but made it look like the army was doing the shooting. Such lies must be corrected.

Another group feel the redshirts and Thasin hate gays - and so they should be opposed. The fact that so many redshirts are gay is a phenomena they are possibly unaware of:

Take this case: red shirt leader has been found dead with his throat slit in his wreath shop in Phrae’s Muang district."Udomsap Thammuang, 56, was found dead in the shop with a 20cm long knife wound on his throat around 11am yesterday, police said.

. They say Udomsap was gay, and may have had a tiff with an admirer."

Edited September 3, 2011 by clausewitz

[Felt 35]

Nothing anyone who is not a citizen says will make the slightest of difference or even be cared about by the locals.

You are correct, but that is not a sign of strength and is very far from any democratically ideology.

[LindsayBKK]

Because we live here to.

Oh they hear and DO care what farang think and say.

Otherwise they would not be members of forums like this one.

Politics affects everybody whether they care about issues or not.

Politics = rules, immigration, rates, travel, visa, fee's,

regulations, insurance, fuel prices, economy, monarchy,

corruption,currency, cost of living, religion .. just to name a few

And what do we talk about in Thaivisa...drrrrrrrrr

Edited September 3, 2011 by LindsayBKK

[GreenSnapper]

Because we live here to.

Oh they hear and DO care what farang think and say.

Otherwise they would not be members of forums like this

You may believe so, but the reality is: you have an "extension of stay" and are an "alien".

Live with it and remember the recent mobs in England.

[Moonrakers]

And what do we talk about in Thaivisa...drrrrrrrrr

Sin-sod, ladyboys and where to buy bovril

[Jingthing]

It doesn't matter if Thais care what foreigners think or if it makes a difference in Thai politics (of course it doesn't). The point is many foreigners are interested in what is going on, are at least potentially impacted by what happens here, and some of us want to talk about it. So that is a problem, why?

[Headgame]

I wonder how many foreign national expat websites in Britain have heated debates about David Cameron and Ed Miliband.

Yet, hasn't it been Western tradition to comment, opine, write about affairs across the seas?

Few Americans have any idea that so many Brits and Aussies hate them. It is a shock when they start reading Thai Visa.

Everyone hates Americans.

It makes me laugh when my TGF and I go to our favorite bar on Saturday nights that has live bands playing almost exclusively American rock and roll. One of the bands lead singers goes through a routine of asking where everyone in the bar is from and when it finally comes to the US and I signify that's my homeland, lots of boos. I guess they love the rock and roll but hate the American songwriters, bands and singers. My TGF and I have a good laugh.

[gregb]

Thaksin is actually accused of crime against Thainess, that he is going to destroy the fabric of the Thai society, that he is compromised with foreign nations, that he is against the Monarchy .... To create such an emotive response, it has to be much deeper than just corruption, most people of the anti-Thaksin brigade completely miss the point.

That may be what is being spoken about on the outside, but there are now many Thais who were raised overseas who aren't really "Thai" anymore and have come home. Heck, Abhisit could even be accused of not being Thai. I even know Thai-Americans who don't like the monarchy, but I don't think they are truly evil.

Thaksin is a problem because of 2 things: he is a demagogue and he listens to nobody but himself. That kind of a person is dangerous. That kind of person is a Hitler. That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years. It is common to come across people who are arrogant in the extreme. It is also normal to come across people who are sociopathic and know how to play on people's emotions. Those two qualities together in someone with political ambitions however are extremely rare.

That kind of person needs to be removed from the scene no matter the cost. That kind of person destroys lives and countries in a way that nobody else can. The problem with Thaksin is merely one of degree, but that degree is off the scale. He is so extremely arrogant that he defers to absolutely noone. Not even laws apply to him. He is also a demagogue and extremely good at manipulating people and twisting reality to get what he wants. He doesn't even care what he says. To him it is irrelevant. Thaksin cares only about Thaksin and nobody else.

If you want to survive with Thaksin, you need to venerate him like a god. That is the only way it works. People like that who are also successful politicians are exceedingly rare. What Thailand is facing today has only ever been faced by a few other countries at any point in history. Anybody who thinks that any noble cause of the PT/red shirts can advance and exclude Thaksin is delusional. Thaksin always comes first. It is impossible for it to be any other way.

That is the problem with Thaksin, and that is why unless he dies quickly Thailand is essentially guaranteed to have a civil war. Too many people know what he is, and want to protect this beautiful country from him.

[kerryk]

Thaksin is actually accused of crime against Thainess, that he is going to destroy the fabric of the Thai society, that he is compromised with foreign nations, that he is against the Monarchy .... To create such an emotive response, it has to be much deeper than just corruption, most people of the anti-Thaksin brigade completely miss the point.

That may be what is being spoken about on the outside, but there are now many Thais who were raised overseas who aren't really "Thai" anymore and have come home. Heck, Abhisit could even be accused of not being Thai. I even know Thai-Americans who don't like the monarchy, but I don't think they are truly evil.

Thaksin is a problem because of 2 things: he is a demagogue and he listens to nobody but himself. That kind of a person is dangerous. That kind of person is a Hitler. That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years. It is common to come across people who are arrogant in the extreme. It is also normal to come across people who are sociopathic and know how to play on people's emotions. Those two qualities together in someone with political ambitions however are extremely rare.

That kind of person needs to be removed from the scene no matter the cost. That kind of person destroys lives and countries in a way that nobody else can. The problem with Thaksin is merely one of degree, but that degree is off the scale. He is so extremely arrogant that he defers to absolutely noone. Not even laws apply to him. He is also a demagogue and extremely good at manipulating people and twisting reality to get what he wants. He doesn't even care what he says. To him it is irrelevant. Thaksin cares only about Thaksin and nobody else.

If you want to survive with Thaksin, you need to venerate him like a god. That is the only way it works. People like that who are also successful politicians are exceedingly rare. What Thailand is facing today has only ever been faced by a few other countries at any point in history. Anybody who thinks that any noble cause of the PT/red shirts can advance and exclude Thaksin is delusional. Thaksin always comes first. It is impossible for it to be any other way.

That is the problem with Thaksin, and that is why unless he dies quickly Thailand is essentially guaranteed to have a civil war. Too many people know what he is, and want to protect this beautiful country from him.

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

He makes Thaksin look like a Sunday school teacher.

[Jingthing]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

[kerryk]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

[zzaa09]

It doesn't matter if Thais care what foreigners think or if it makes a difference in Thai politics (of course it doesn't). The point is many foreigners are interested in what is going on, are at least potentially impacted by what happens here, and some of us want to talk about it. So that is a problem, why?

Probably not a problem with Thais [generally speaking], but largely the problems arise from the Farang community - they're more offended or threatened than not.

[rgs2001uk]

Thaksin is actually accused of crime against Thainess, that he is going to destroy the fabric of the Thai society, that he is compromised with foreign nations, that he is against the Monarchy .... To create such an emotive response, it has to be much deeper than just corruption, most people of the anti-Thaksin brigade completely miss the point.

That may be what is being spoken about on the outside, but there are now many Thais who were raised overseas who aren't really "Thai" anymore and have come home. Heck, Abhisit could even be accused of not being Thai. I even know Thai-Americans who don't like the monarchy, but I don't think they are truly evil.

Thaksin is a problem because of 2 things: he is a demagogue and he listens to nobody but himself. That kind of a person is dangerous. That kind of person is a Hitler. That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years. It is common to come across people who are arrogant in the extreme. It is also normal to come across people who are sociopathic and know how to play on people's emotions. Those two qualities together in someone with political ambitions however are extremely rare.

That kind of person needs to be removed from the scene no matter the cost. That kind of person destroys lives and countries in a way that nobody else can. The problem with Thaksin is merely one of degree, but that degree is off the scale. He is so extremely arrogant that he defers to absolutely noone. Not even laws apply to him. He is also a demagogue and extremely good at manipulating people and twisting reality to get what he wants. He doesn't even care what he says. To him it is irrelevant. Thaksin cares only about Thaksin and nobody else.

If you want to survive with Thaksin, you need to venerate him like a god. That is the only way it works. People like that who are also successful politicians are exceedingly rare. What Thailand is facing today has only ever been faced by a few other countries at any point in history. Anybody who thinks that any noble cause of the PT/red shirts can advance and exclude Thaksin is delusional. Thaksin always comes first. It is impossible for it to be any other way.

That is the problem with Thaksin, and that is why unless he dies quickly Thailand is essentially guaranteed to have a civil war. Too many people know what he is, and want to protect this beautiful country from him.

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

He makes Thaksin look like a Sunday school teacher.

The elderly Chinese round my way still speak fondly of him.

Probably the first to establish a personality cult, ended up in Japan did he not?

[kerryk]

Thaksin is actually accused of crime against Thainess, that he is going to destroy the fabric of the Thai society, that he is compromised with foreign nations, that he is against the Monarchy .... To create such an emotive response, it has to be much deeper than just corruption, most people of the anti-Thaksin brigade completely miss the point.

That may be what is being spoken about on the outside, but there are now many Thais who were raised overseas who aren't really "Thai" anymore and have come home. Heck, Abhisit could even be accused of not being Thai. I even know Thai-Americans who don't like the monarchy, but I don't think they are truly evil.

Thaksin is a problem because of 2 things: he is a demagogue and he listens to nobody but himself. That kind of a person is dangerous. That kind of person is a Hitler. That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years. It is common to come across people who are arrogant in the extreme. It is also normal to come across people who are sociopathic and know how to play on people's emotions. Those two qualities together in someone with political ambitions however are extremely rare.

That kind of person needs to be removed from the scene no matter the cost. That kind of person destroys lives and countries in a way that nobody else can. The problem with Thaksin is merely one of degree, but that degree is off the scale. He is so extremely arrogant that he defers to absolutely noone. Not even laws apply to him. He is also a demagogue and extremely good at manipulating people and twisting reality to get what he wants. He doesn't even care what he says. To him it is irrelevant. Thaksin cares only about Thaksin and nobody else.

If you want to survive with Thaksin, you need to venerate him like a god. That is the only way it works. People like that who are also successful politicians are exceedingly rare. What Thailand is facing today has only ever been faced by a few other countries at any point in history. Anybody who thinks that any noble cause of the PT/red shirts can advance and exclude Thaksin is delusional. Thaksin always comes first. It is impossible for it to be any other way.

That is the problem with Thaksin, and that is why unless he dies quickly Thailand is essentially guaranteed to have a civil war. Too many people know what he is, and want to protect this beautiful country from him.

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

He makes Thaksin look like a Sunday school teacher.

The elderly Chinese round my way still speak fondly of him.

Probably the first to establish a personality cult, ended up in Japan did he not?

Better have a talk with your Chinese friends.

Part of his nationalistic campaign in 1939 was a spate of anti-Chinese policies to curb ethnic Chinese dominance of the economy, restrict Chinese education, newspapers and culture. He was fervently anti Chinese and one of the main reasons he sided with Hitler and the Japanese was his refusal to fight next to Chinese people who he considered inferior.

[rgs2001uk]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

He makes Thaksin look like a Sunday school teacher.

The elderly Chinese round my way still speak fondly of him.

Probably the first to establish a personality cult, ended up in Japan did he not?

Better have a talk with your Chinese friends.

Part of his nationalistic campaign in 1939 was a spate of anti-Chinese policies to curb ethnic Chinese dominance of the economy, restrict Chinese education, newspapers and culture. He was fervently anti Chinese and one of the main reasons he sided with Hitler and the Japanese was his refusal to fight next to Chinese people who he considered inferior.

You mistook the sarcasm in my post.

Wont go into the reaction this name brings to many old enough to remember.

[Jingthing]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Scratch -- modern.

Add -- current.

I truly find your line of argument bizarre. Because other stuff happened in Thai history, we should act like there is not a big problem today, we should not bother even discussing what is happening today, and assume everything is going to be hunky dory because of what exactly? Because bad stuff happened in the past? Egads!

Next ...

[kerryk]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Scratch -- modern.

Add -- current.

I truly find your line of argument bizarre. Because other stuff happened in Thai history, we should act like there is not a big problem today, we should not bother even discussing what is happening today, and assume everything is going to be hunky dory because of what exactly? Because bad stuff happened in the past? Egads!

Next ...

If I was a banker with billions at risk in Thailand I would not worry about civil war. If I was Ford or Chevron with similar amounts invested I would not worry about civil war.

Now I have a pretty good idea none of the above entities are not worried about civil war mainly because of their in depth knowledge of the Thai people which comes from looking at recent Thai history.

Should Jingthing be worried about civil war? Well of course. Makes perfect sense to me. Next.

[Jingthing]

If I was a banker with billions at risk in Thailand I would not worry about civil war. If I was Ford or Chevron with similar amounts invested I would not worry about civil war.

Now I have a pretty good idea none of the above entities are not worried about civil war mainly because of their in depth knowledge of the Thai people which comes from looking at recent Thai history.

Should Jingthing be worried about civil war? Well of course. Makes perfect sense to me. Next.

How absurd. Many of us expats have MUCH MORE of our lives/assets invested in Thailand than this fictional big bank and certainly more than Chevron and Ford as a PERCENTAGE of our life energy and/or assets. I also don't know if "worry" is the correct word either. It's like you have put yourself in the position of Grand Guru who gets to decide if it is worthy for OTHER people to bother to even DISCUSS these current event issues, because you are ever so more knowledgeable about Thai history than the masses. You've made your opinion quite clear. What's offensive is your arrogant certainty that you know all the answers and know what's right for everyone else.

Edited September 3, 2011 by Jingthing

[StreetCowboy]

I sometimes express an opinion about rugby league, but I sometimes think no-one really gives a monkey's...

True and Astro don't seem to be listening.

But if we didn't voice our opinions, it might be even less likely that anyone would take any notice.

As I mentioned elsewhere, we can always leave, and perhaps, with our constant carping, and counterpoint "piss off home" cries, somebody in Thailand might think "could we really get rid of them so easily?"

Anyway, rugby, particularly Superleague and the Challenge Cup on TV was not bottom on my list of things I took into account when I took the project in Dubai. Probably above bacon.

SC

[kerryk]

If I was a banker with billions at risk in Thailand I would not worry about civil war. If I was Ford or Chevron with similar amounts invested I would not worry about civil war.

Now I have a pretty good idea none of the above entities are not worried about civil war mainly because of their in depth knowledge of the Thai people which comes from looking at recent Thai history.

Should Jingthing be worried about civil war? Well of course. Makes perfect sense to me. Next.

How absurd. Many of us expats have MUCH MORE of our lives/assets invested in Thailand than this fictional big bank and certainly more than Chevron and Ford as a PERCENTAGE of our life energy and/or assets. I also don't know if "worry" is the correct word either. It's like you have put yourself in the position of Grand Guru who gets to decide if it is worthy for OTHER people to bother to even DISCUSS these current event issues, because you are ever so more knowledgeable about Thai history than the masses. You've made your opinion quite clear. What's offensive is your arrogant certainty that you know all the answers and know what's right for everyone else.

I really don't know all of the answers. I set out to correct some historical errors that were made by other posters.

You of course will draw your own conclusions. Some people think the king is wearing clothes and some people don't. Ford and Chevron have think tanks that think about stuff. One of the things they think about is political conditions in Thailand. So do banks. You can see their conclusions in bond interest rates and new production in Thailand. I was merely pointing out that Thailand has survived much greater trials than the current one with little ill effect.

Why do you use such value laden words, like bizarre, absurd, grand guru and of course your dismissive “next” designed to make the other person feel retarded? Is it really to start an argument? Are you so emotionally out of control that you can't have a civil discussion.

It is very difficult to have a nice discussion with you. It seems anyone who disagrees is bizarre, absurd and nexted. It is a shame because you are a bright person worthy of talking to but your manner of speaking is so condescending and rude it becomes a chore.

Contrary to your opinion because I disagree with you does not mean that I am arrogant. It simply means that I disagree with you. Oh, and lose the next thing. It is really offensive.

Edited September 3, 2011 by kerryk

[gregb]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Very well. You are correct. I do know little of history that long ago. My parents were still in grade school at that point. Anything before the 80's doesn't seem modern to me, but I should not have blithely said "80 years" when I had no idea if that was true. Mea culpa.

Now, having gotten that out of the way, I fail to see why the fact that there may have been as bad or worse cretins in the past means that the current cretin is not someone to be worried about. If I had been around in 1957 I would probably have been stating my opinion just as loudly as I am today.

The uprising last year tells me people are willing to take up arms over this, and as soon as a revered person passes away that threat becomes serious. There are many people who are refraining right now out of respect. And whether or not this has happened before does not mean the tragedy would be any less serious if it happened today.

Since I wasn't here then ONLY today matters to me. Why would you have such a problem understanding that?

[StreetCowboy]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Very well. You are correct. I do know little of history that long ago. My parents were still in grade school at that point. Anything before the 80's doesn't seem modern to me, but I should not have blithely said "80 years" when I had no idea if that was true. Mea culpa.

Now, having gotten that out of the way, I fail to see why the fact that there may have been as bad or worse cretins in the past means that the current cretin is not someone to be worried about. If I had been around in 1957 I would probably have been stating my opinion just as loudly as I am today.

The uprising last year tells me people are willing to take up arms over this, and as soon as a revered person passes away that threat becomes serious. There are many people who are refraining right now out of respect. And whether or not this has happened before does not mean the tragedy would be any less serious if it happened today.

Since I wasn't here then ONLY today matters to me. Why would you have such a problem understanding that?

I think he was trying to reassure you, and assuage your worries. We are not in unusual circumstances, we are no more in unprecedented straits than we have ever been before.

Anyway, why worry? Will you live on your ulcers in the future?

SC

[kerryk]

Phibun was Prime Minister and virtual military dictator of Thailand from 1938 to 1944 and 1948 to 1957. Actually in power from 1932 on.

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Very well. You are correct. I do know little of history that long ago. My parents were still in grade school at that point. Anything before the 80's doesn't seem modern to me, but I should not have blithely said "80 years" when I had no idea if that was true. Mea culpa.

Now, having gotten that out of the way, I fail to see why the fact that there may have been as bad or worse cretins in the past means that the current cretin is not someone to be worried about. If I had been around in 1957 I would probably have been stating my opinion just as loudly as I am today.

The uprising last year tells me people are willing to take up arms over this, and as soon as a revered person passes away that threat becomes serious. There are many people who are refraining right now out of respect. And whether or not this has happened before does not mean the tragedy would be any less serious if it happened today.

Since I wasn't here then ONLY today matters to me. Why would you have such a problem understanding that?

You probably should read a bit more to find out just what the Thai people are willing to put up with and have always put up with. I don't have a problem understanding you. It is why someone wrote a long time ago "those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it." At a minimum you should read about the coups and why they happened, what was the result and how many people got shot in each one. You should also have some understanding of how financial markets reflect the wisdom of the smart money guys. They are the people who get paid to know. Not always right to be sure but who would you trust, an old expat philander or a PhD from Oxford school of Economics?

Everybody in Germany knows who Hitler was, Phibun was a contemporary of Hitler. Any educated Thai person knows who Phibun was. To have an intelligent discussion of Thai politics one should know at least a little bit about Thai history.

Edited September 3, 2011 by kerryk

[gregb]

That's true. He was a fascist dictator. However, that is history, and today is today, and Thailand is facing a real threat of civil war in these modern times.

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Very well. You are correct. I do know little of history that long ago. My parents were still in grade school at that point. Anything before the 80's doesn't seem modern to me, but I should not have blithely said "80 years" when I had no idea if that was true. Mea culpa.

Now, having gotten that out of the way, I fail to see why the fact that there may have been as bad or worse cretins in the past means that the current cretin is not someone to be worried about. If I had been around in 1957 I would probably have been stating my opinion just as loudly as I am today.

The uprising last year tells me people are willing to take up arms over this, and as soon as a revered person passes away that threat becomes serious. There are many people who are refraining right now out of respect. And whether or not this has happened before does not mean the tragedy would be any less serious if it happened today.

Since I wasn't here then ONLY today matters to me. Why would you have such a problem understanding that?

You probably should read a bit more to find out just what the Thai people are willing to put up with and have always put up with. I don't have a problem understanding you. It is why someone wrote a long time ago "those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it." At a minimum you should read about the coups and why they happened, what was the result and how many people got shot in each one. You should also have some understanding of how financial markets reflect the wisdom of the smart money guys. They are the people who get paid to know. Not always right to be sure but who would you trust, an old expat philander or a PhD from Oxford school of Economics?

Everybody in Germany knows who Hitler was, Phibun was a contemporary of Hitler. Any educated Thai person knows who Phibun was. To have an intelligent discussion of Thai politics one should know at least a little bit about Thai history.

Given that I have never met Phibun or Hitler, but I have met Thaksin and know what kind of a person he is, I'll stick with the risk of repeating history. Perhaps if more people had spoken up vocally about Phibun and convinced the Thais to denounce him then Thailand could have been saved that ugly chapter.

Give me a military junta any day over Thaksin. I won't say nobody could be worse than Thaksin, but there are very, very few who could rise to that level.

In any case, it won't be me who decides if there is civil war or not. Let's wait until the revered someone dies and then see how events pan out.

[flying]

OP said :

It fascinates me why people who will never have any right to vote or influence politics or even be considered on an equal footing with any Thai citizen should be so passionate about the national politics.

Many have come to realize even in countries of which they are voting citizens they have relatively little influence on what *their* elected officials do after elected.

It's all relative. If you don't realize Thailand is a very politically unstable country right now and has been for years, that's fine. But my opinion is that you are very wrong.

These days you could just as easily insert many of the so called Greatest Nations names in place of Thailand in that comment . You could also add Financially unstable to the comment. Looking at it that way you may just choose financial stability as an additional requirement.

Edited September 3, 2011 by flying

[roamer]

"Not always right to be sure but who would you trust, an old expat philander or a PhD from Oxford school of Economics?"

Probably the expat philanderer on the grounds that that the Oxford School of Economics does not exist.

[kerryk]

"Not always right to be sure but who would you trust, an old expat philander or a PhD from Oxford school of Economics?"

Probably the expat philanderer on the grounds that that the Oxford School of Economics does not exist.

Sorry meant London School of Economics, it was late.

[kerryk]

I was responding to GregB's statement, "That kind of person has not been threatening Thailand for the last 80 years." He was clearly wrong and knows little of Thai history. I also think 1957 is considered modern times. Thailand has been continually facing the threat of civil war since the 1930's. Now a lot less than at other times in modern history. There were many pitched battles between the army and police only a few years ago. I could go into more detail but I know it bores those destined to repeat it.

Very well. You are correct. I do know little of history that long ago. My parents were still in grade school at that point. Anything before the 80's doesn't seem modern to me, but I should not have blithely said "80 years" when I had no idea if that was true. Mea culpa.

Now, having gotten that out of the way, I fail to see why the fact that there may have been as bad or worse cretins in the past means that the current cretin is not someone to be worried about. If I had been around in 1957 I would probably have been stating my opinion just as loudly as I am today.

The uprising last year tells me people are willing to take up arms over this, and as soon as a revered person passes away that threat becomes serious. There are many people who are refraining right now out of respect. And whether or not this has happened before does not mean the tragedy would be any less serious if it happened today.

Since I wasn't here then ONLY today matters to me. Why would you have such a problem understanding that?

You probably should read a bit more to find out just what the Thai people are willing to put up with and have always put up with. I don't have a problem understanding you. It is why someone wrote a long time ago "those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it." At a minimum you should read about the coups and why they happened, what was the result and how many people got shot in each one. You should also have some understanding of how financial markets reflect the wisdom of the smart money guys. They are the people who get paid to know. Not always right to be sure but who would you trust, an old expat philander or a PhD from Oxford school of Economics?

Everybody in Germany knows who Hitler was, Phibun was a contemporary of Hitler. Any educated Thai person knows who Phibun was. To have an intelligent discussion of Thai politics one should know at least a little bit about Thai history.

Given that I have never met Phibun or Hitler, but I have met Thaksin and know what kind of a person he is, I'll stick with the risk of repeating history. Perhaps if more people had spoken up vocally about Phibun and convinced the Thais to denounce him then Thailand could have been saved that ugly chapter.

Give me a military junta any day over Thaksin. I won't say nobody could be worse than Thaksin, but there are very, very few who could rise to that level.

In any case, it won't be me who decides if there is civil war or not. Let's wait until the revered someone dies and then see how events pan out.

Cowboy said it in an earlier post, I was only trying to reassure you that everything will be OK.

The Farang have about as much political power in Thailand as the Thai people which is mainly placebo democracy. Take a pill have an election and then things are pretty much as they have always been. There have been 20 or so coups since 1932. There have been no real attempts at the formation of a democratic government. So that is 20 to 0. You get a new government and a new constitution and if the powers that be get what they want that government stays in power for a while.

What I find amazing is that the amount of Thais that vote without being paid to do so and that Farangs get emotionally involved in arguments about Thai politics.

I can understand wanting to understand Thai politics and trying to figure out what will happen in the future but from a point of view of an observer.

How could any rational Farang observer get emotionally involved? Wouldn't you have to be a little nuts? It is like getting upset because the sun is shining to bright or it is raining.

So are Farangs in Thailand who get involved emotionally in Thai politics mentally deranged?

Is a person who gets distraught or angry about things that he has no way of altering a nut case?

If you saw a guy outside shaking his fist and the rain and cursing the clouds what would you think?

[Tarric]

Kerry makes a good point about the history of Thailand and how civil war is always on the cards. My personal experience and that of my family going back generations is that Thailand is a powder keg ready to blow and has been for years, however only now with the advent of the red and yellow shirts not entirely obeying their masters would I be deeply worried about a civil war.

The elites on both sides of the fence both have far too much to lose if a civil war does somehow come about. Neither side hates each other that much, its more about who can be in the right political positions to make the most money and influence policies towards their side of politics in the long run.

If the red and/or yellow shirt movements truly go rogue then civil war goes from being something on the periphery to being something that may very well happen.

In summing up as long as someone from the elite is holding the leashes then I am not worried as they have far too much to lose to instigate any sort of civil war, however if the red and/or yellow shirt movement goes rogue these are people who have very little to lose and may see a civil war as a vehicle to accomplish their goals. I dont think its very likely but I wouldnt call it impossible either.

[Jingthing]

...

Wouldn't you have to be a little nuts?

...

So are Farangs in Thailand who get involved emotionally in Thai politics mentally deranged?

...

Is a person who gets distraught or angry about things that he has no way of altering a nut case?

...

Your list of rhetorical questions clearly imply you would answer in the affirmative.

So now we can add media pop psychiatrist to your rapidly expanding list of impressive self-appointed qualifications.

Edited September 4, 2011 by Jingthing