Thai Establishment Fears A More Open And Democratic Society

[chaoyang]

Strange how the pro Thaksin posters many who have been in Thailand by their own admission for a short period of time didn't rise to the above excellent post. these new boys on the block might do well to look back at Thaksins record it might well open their eyes as to the true nature of Thaksin.

We long term residents here in Thailand well remember the spouting of how Thaksin was gong to solve Bangkoks traffic problem within six months, helicopters to be based at strategic junctions so as to be able to airlift vehicles that may have been causing traffic flow problems clear of the scene.

Thaksins attempts to control nay buy the Democrat party when he was a minister in the Democrat administration of the time, his subsequent action of throwing his rattle out of his pram when he didn't get his own way and the classic flouncing away from his duties which in fact he had no idea of how to perform.

Some things never change do they Thaksin?

So when you chaps that live in Isaan and love to go diving just like the average Isaan person does so very often and the chaps that wears the trousers in their houses as his wife lets him have had a few years here you might just well see the actual way that Thailand for all its perceived faults runs.

Many an armchair socialist who has the money to afford his or her principles have come to rue the day they espoused a very left leaning socialist policy.

Pray please can or would you be able to tell us, why you left your country of birth, dislike of the system or to engineer a political upheaval here in Thailand to liberate the masses to satisfy your own ego's ?

One wonders how many of you are really committed to Thailand with a wife children, an extended family network, property a business, twenty years here and that like many others is what I have, not starry eyed political ideals.

Pray tell us why did you leave your country of birth, dislike of the system or to engineer a political upheaval here in Thailand

Nothing wrong with Socialism provided all benefit not just one person and his family who are more than willing to sacrifice their supporters on the altar of money and absolute power.

Remember Castro the freedom fighter?

Once in power he revealed his true policy Communism, Pol Pot the same Mao Tse Tung , the rallying cry for the freedom of the people actually masked the cruel reality of totalitarian administration and the terrorism on the citizens of those '' workers paradises.

I well recall Thaksin's arrogance and was unfortunate enough to live near one of his many ill-conceived brainstorms -- the Royal Flora Park (or whatever it was called) in Chiang Mai.

I recall his endless hubs and crackdowns, his harassment of the press and the time he used a child's toy to signal yes or no during press conference as his reply to questions.

I also recall he finally got the airport finished and some semblance of a "mass transit" line, the skytrain and subway, done. Has it been substantially improved since?

But beyond all that is the way the yellows decided they would once again get back in their comfort zone by using the army to stage a coup.What ensued was just more directionless non-business as usual. The don't want any change. They have already gathered all the good stuff for themselves and they want to keep it.

With your commitment and sacrifices over 20 years in Thailand you are indeed a stakeholder in the nation, even though they offer foreigners so few rights. How about the millions of THAIS who have voted for Thaksin over and over as the BKK elite pulled every stunt in the book to negate their interests?

The people have again spoken. It is within the realm of possibility that Yungluck may turn out to be far more balanced than her brother. Indeed it is a gamble, but people boxed into a corner with no other option except the same old crap are willing to take a gamble.

The Dems and their ilk should have begun to address the glaring problems of the poor decades ago. These cats spend all their time jockeying for power and dividing up the spoils.

As for Mao and the rest you mentioned, they came to power with a barrel of a gun, not the ballot box. This situation might be better likened to Germany in the early 1930s when Hitler was voted into power -- but Thaksin is nowhere in that league.

[tlansford]

wasting breath is one thing, being accurate is another.

There are some on the forum who accept the reality that Abhisit came to power through maneuvers within the Thai society that leveraged the rules of parliament, but one cannot from the outside consider the manner in which he came to power to be "democratic", only that it technically followed the rules of the system. This is, naturally, where some people call into question the legitimacy of the Abhisit gov't.

Summary :

Technically, the Democrats formed a coalition government and Abhisit became the PM.

Technically, the Democrats never won and election and then formed a gov't in this past decade.

These statements are not contradictory.

The PPP never won an election, yet they were able to form government. Were they illegitimate?

Whybother, it would seem that you are deliberately trying to pretend that you don't understand, yet clearly you do...

[siampolee]

It seems like your post at the end wants to imply that Thaskin is a socialist/communist... Is that really what you intended, or did I mis-read it?

History provides the answer to your question in the case of National Socialism in which one person with his assorted colors of shirt wearers caused a not inconsiderable amount of inconvenience to many people in the world for some years.

[looping]

Amazing that the Nation printed anything remotely, possibly balanced about Thaksin and the old establishment. Unusually its just more of the red are thugs stuff.

Those who decry Thaksin's cronyism and unsavory friends should remember the past 60 years other political parties' cronyism and unsavory friends. We see the condition of the "average Thai" after those 60 years.

Maybe Thaksin's brand of corruption can do better.

Certainly anyone's preferable to that buffoon Sondhi.

Maybe you're right, why should Abhisit continue to NOT persue a goal of becoming a corrupt billionairre when Thaksin is more than willing to carry on the Thai 'tradition' of corruption, refining it beyond belief. Maybe Abhisit is missing the point, for politics in Thailand is about helping yourself, not others.

Honestly, I'm beginning to believe that Thailand and Thaksin actually deserve each other, although I do hold Abhisit in the highest regard for defending what is good and right, despite the arrogance and ignorance which he faces daily. IMO Abhisit is the only long term solution for Thailand, but alas they are easily fooled and respect only money. What a shame.

[looping]

Just as an observation, people on this forum who "hate" Thaskin, tend (IMO) to not recognize the difference between a pro-Thaskin and an anti-coup perspective.

...

The opposite also happens.

Anti-Thaksin = pro-coup = anti-poor = pro-establishment ... etc.

from your perspective, where does the "Thai-people-are-ignorant-gullible-and-too-stupid-to-vote-unless-paid" group fall? Are they pro-establishment, anti-poor, pro-coup, or anti-Thaskin?

Those are the ones that really get under my skin...

Totally, It's unfortunate that Thaksin can fool most of the people (or just pay them) most of the time, effectively nullifying every election process.

[whybother]

The PPP never won an election, yet they were able to form government. Were they illegitimate?

Whybother, it would seem that you are deliberately trying to pretend that you don't understand, yet clearly you do...

I understand that a lot of people don't understand the parliamentary system.

[tlansford]

The PPP never won an election, yet they were able to form government. Were they illegitimate?

Whybother, it would seem that you are deliberately trying to pretend that you don't understand, yet clearly you do...

I understand that a lot of people don't understand the parliamentary system.

well that is perfectly clear.

So please stop being so obtuse about this.

Thank you.

[Siam Simon]

It is called a parliamentary system. Look it up.

Dear Samran,

Just wondering whether your wasting your breath on this point.

Because there are many who don't accept abhisit's legitimacy simply because they don't want to accept it and nothing more. But of course they never make the same comments about samak and somchai who came to the PMs seat through the same process.

you are probably right. But, you never know. Some people seem to think that Thailand has a presidential system of government - and base their opinions on illegitimacy on that misconception.

Australian politics, which I'm also interested in, has the same problem with the current government being a minority government, and despite having the support of minor parties and independent MP's, many people in Australia still think the government in unelected and illegitimate.

Moron's everywhere. Occasionally hope to educate a few.

You might fool a few morons, but you are not providing any education for anybody.

A parliamentary system wrt coalitions works by (now, read this slowly) parliamentarians negotiating with each other to form a government. When a coalition is formed by the military brass banging politicians' heads together at a military barracks, it's a military coup without tanks and guns. You and the rest of your like-minded fantasists can soap this reality up to your hearts' contents on TVF. But it doesn't matter, because judgement was passed emphatically at the recent general election despite the military and their government proxy holding most of the boss cards.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Siam Simon

[samran]

That is a bit naïve on your part there Siam Simon. Extra-parliamentary influences always have power over how parliament is run. For instance they can be unelected union officials, party elders and power brokers, think-tanks, influential ex. political leaders. In Australia in 2010 unelected union leaders knocked off a sitting Prime Minister and replaced her with the current one.

All this is part and parcel of a parliamentary system.

The important thing, as you have shown, is in the party hands power following an election, which they did. This is the most democratic thing one can do.

The question is, when the day comes when Dear Leader looks like he is on the ropes. I wonder what will happen then when he's sued every journo under the sun for defamation, shut down non-sympathetic news outlets, will he mobilise this Red Shirt SS to 'protest' in non-PT seats, and perhaps burn down another shopping centre or two.

[MengWan]

I mostly agree with the "pro-democracy" die-hards, maybe because of my western education BUT ...

As a pragmatic thinker, what can a country do when it has fallen under the paws of a mafia-like clan or, worse (cf. Germany ...)

The problem for the "pro-democracy bigots" is that they do not propose any solution for this type of "drift" ...

The Judiciary should be independant, free of nepotism, as the Police, if not then the rise to power of cliques is just too easy and we started to witness this ...

Some (historically) very famous dictators started as corrupt and manipulating politicians and I hope Thailand will not be a case of just that ...

But I start to despair !

[Siam Simon]

That is a bit naïve on your part there Siam Simon. Extra-parliamentary influences always have power over how parliament is run. For instance they can be unelected union officials, party elders and power brokers, think-tanks, influential ex. political leaders. In Australia in 2010 unelected union leaders knocked off a sitting Prime Minister and replaced her with the current one.

All this is part and parcel of a parliamentary system.

The important thing, as you have shown, is in the party hands power following an election, which they did. This is the most democratic thing one can do.

The question is, when the day comes when Dear Leader looks like he is on the ropes. I wonder what will happen then when he's sued every journo under the sun for defamation, shut down non-sympathetic news outlets, will he mobilise this Red Shirt SS to 'protest' in non-PT seats, and perhaps burn down another shopping centre or two.

Keep soaping it. Party elders, union leaders, business leaders, etc, sticking their noses in is one level of attempted influence. A military making a bunch of politicians an offer they can't refuse is a coup without tanks and guns.

[samran]

Soaping it, love it.

Problem is with your theory is if there was a threat of a coup 20 odd months ago why isn't there one today? Using your logic surely a coup is even more important today given the election result went strongly in a way which doesn't favour them.

Why weren't there tanks on the street last month?

[Siam Simon]

Soaping it, love it.

Problem is with your theory is if there was a threat of a coup 20 odd months ago why isn't there one today? Using your logic surely a coup is even more important today given the election result went strongly in a way which doesn't favour them.

Why weren't there tanks on the street last month?

Now who's being (or pretending to be) naive?

[samran]

Soaping it, love it.

Problem is with your theory is if there was a threat of a coup 20 odd months ago why isn't there one today? Using your logic surely a coup is even more important today given the election result went strongly in a way which doesn't favour them.

Why weren't there tanks on the street last month?

Now who's being (or pretending to be) naive?

Nothing naive about it at all.

I think the chances of a coup are next to nill. For a couple of reasons.

All the first coup did was serve to reinforce the Thaksin persona as the 'victim'. It has given him another 5 to 10 years of political power, if not more, where by rights if the military didn't intervene first time around, Thaksin would have been a goner at a subsequent election.

Secondly, the Democrats - military backed and all - HANDED OVER POWER at the last election. Let me repeat, they handed it over. Once more, they respected democratic process (to which you've already admitted can be extra-parliamentary)and gave it to the people they despise.

So all that is left now is for me to watch your lot 'soap it up'. I especially look forward to your justifications of liable suits being put against jurno's going about their jobs. Journo's dragged into ministers offices and intimidated.

I look forward to when lawyers start going missing. I look forward to your reasoning when people start getting mysteriously shot in this current drug crack down.

I look forward to your reasoning when we start seeing red-shirted thugs being let loose on the streets again - destroying property and intimidating voters.

Plenty of that to come, I can guarantee.

I'm sure it will somehow have to do with the 'elites'. Yep, it will all be their fault.

Edited September 14, 2011 by samran

[Siam Simon]

Soaping it, love it.

Problem is with your theory is if there was a threat of a coup 20 odd months ago why isn't there one today? Using your logic surely a coup is even more important today given the election result went strongly in a way which doesn't favour them.

Why weren't there tanks on the street last month?

Now who's being (or pretending to be) naive?

Nothing naive about it at all.

I think the chances of a coup are next to nill. For a couple of reasons.

All the first coup did was serve to reinforce the Thaksin persona as the 'victim'. It has given him another 5 to 10 years of political power, if not more, where by rights if the military didn't intervene first time around, Thaksin would have been a goner at a subsequent election.

Secondly, the Democrats - military backed and all - HANDED OVER POWER at the last election. Let me repeat, they handed it over. Once more, they respected democratic process (to which you've already admitted can be extra-parliamentary)and gave it to the people they despise.

So all that is left now is for me to watch your lot 'soap it up'. I especially look forward to your justifications of liable suits being put against jurno's going about their jobs. Journo's dragged into ministers offices and intimidated.

I look forward to when lawyers start going missing. I look forward to your reasoning when people start getting mysteriously shot in this current drug crack down.

I look forward to your reasoning when we start seeing red-shirted thugs being let loose on the streets again - destroying property and intimidating voters.

Plenty of that to come, I can guarantee.

I'm sure it will somehow have to do with the 'elites'. Yep, it will all be their fault.

Good points in your first couple of sentences. But the Dem-led coalition thought they could form the next government from the last general election. They thought the time was ripe for them. They didn't call it to hand over power to the Opposition. And they didn't have any sane choice other than to concede defeat to the Opposition after said Opposition's emphatic victory. As to whether the general election result is being respected by the new opposition and their patrons..... hmmmmm.....imo not.

As to the rest of your post, spare me, please. I didn't see you in the Rohingya threads of the last couple of years. I don't recall you naming and shaming high ranking military human rights abusers. There will be plenty of such abuse to come regardless of what the colour of the government is.

[ianf]

quote name='JurgenG' timestamp='1315962983' post='4695701']

A couple of sentences in this column really hit the mark "

"... the military and the old establishment together have further intensified the crisis. Violent confrontations have become normal events in Thailand."

" Throughout the past five years, the political stalemate that has shaken the nation - playing with the Thai people's emotions and deeply polarising our society - has unveiled so many dark secrets in politics. For one thing, it has revealed the anxiety on the part of the old establishment about a more open society. This has now clearly emerged as a threat to their power position. From this view, Thaksin is not really a menace to the Thai elite - an open political space is. "

What people really want today is put these five years behind them. If you read Thai forums, what real Thai people talk about in the social forums, you will realize they have moved on.

It's true that for the past five years, violent confrontation was becoming an "acceptable" way of solving political dispute. But Thai people realized they didn't solve anything and they were left footing the bill. Now, all they want is peace and reconciliation.

One more time, a couple of TV posters show they are out of touch with the realities of the country. It's not good for foreigners in Thailand. How long before the government realizes that a couple of foreigners still call for civil war and some even for murder and makes us all pay the price ? As guests in a democratic country we are of course entitled to express freely our opinion but it should be done in a moderate and balanced way.

The biggest menace to Thai Society, to political freedoms and to democracy itself is the dictator in exile.

The guy is a cardboard cutout of all the great despots.

Unfortunately there are things we cannot talk about on this forum, or indeed Thailand.

But the truth is hidden in what we cannot see.

Open your eyes Jurgen!

Edited September 15, 2011 by ianf

[Siripon]

I haven't heard any news about the monthly red rally on the 19th at Ratchaprssong. Are they too busy playing football in Cambodia or have they stopped now their friends are in power?

[samran]

Soaping it, love it.

Problem is with your theory is if there was a threat of a coup 20 odd months ago why isn't there one today? Using your logic surely a coup is even more important today given the election result went strongly in a way which doesn't favour them.

Why weren't there tanks on the street last month?

Now who's being (or pretending to be) naive?

Nothing naive about it at all.

I think the chances of a coup are next to nill. For a couple of reasons.

All the first coup did was serve to reinforce the Thaksin persona as the 'victim'. It has given him another 5 to 10 years of political power, if not more, where by rights if the military didn't intervene first time around, Thaksin would have been a goner at a subsequent election.

Secondly, the Democrats - military backed and all - HANDED OVER POWER at the last election. Let me repeat, they handed it over. Once more, they respected democratic process (to which you've already admitted can be extra-parliamentary)and gave it to the people they despise.

So all that is left now is for me to watch your lot 'soap it up'. I especially look forward to your justifications of liable suits being put against jurno's going about their jobs. Journo's dragged into ministers offices and intimidated.

I look forward to when lawyers start going missing. I look forward to your reasoning when people start getting mysteriously shot in this current drug crack down.

I look forward to your reasoning when we start seeing red-shirted thugs being let loose on the streets again - destroying property and intimidating voters.

Plenty of that to come, I can guarantee.

I'm sure it will somehow have to do with the 'elites'. Yep, it will all be their fault.

Good points in your first couple of sentences. But the Dem-led coalition thought they could form the next government from the last general election. They thought the time was ripe for them. They didn't call it to hand over power to the Opposition. And they didn't have any sane choice other than to concede defeat to the Opposition after said Opposition's emphatic victory. As to whether the general election result is being respected by the new opposition and their patrons..... hmmmmm.....imo not.

As to the rest of your post, spare me, please. I didn't see you in the Rohingya threads of the last couple of years. I don't recall you naming and shaming high ranking military human rights abusers. There will be plenty of such abuse to come regardless of what the colour of the government is.

If you'll excuse me, I've had a few more important personal things keeping me occupied than such threads, but if you want me on the record, it is disgusting what happened there. If you care to do some searching, you'll see that we employ a Burmese maid, do so legally, pay her WAY above standard rates, give her private health care and pay for her daughters school (golf clap please). I've been one of the people on this board who have been active in posting on how to do things legally, especially when it comes to employing migrant labour. Look them up, they are quite detailed. I've also tried (and failed so far) to get our maid refugee status in Australia...but that is something I'm working on slowly.

RE military: I have no great love for the military, nor the police, but I've also got their roles in perspective. People like to chuck out the word 'elites' here as if it some sort of homogeneous block of people who all sit down together in a small room at the RSBC and decide Thailand's fate. It is far from the case, it is alot more nuanced than that, and it is in that context I make my comments about the military.

RE Thaksin: I'm happily on the record as someone who doesn't like him. The main reason is that the bloke doesn't have a democratic bone in his body. One of the greatest disappointments of the coup was - as I said - it restored his credibility in the eyes of the Thai people. The Dems have a lot of soul searching to do. The great danger going forward is he is going to use this vacuum to cement his place in politics, with the help of extra-judicial 'pressure' which will shut down some of the tenuous remaining independent institutions in Thailand. The guy just doesn't like criticism, and gets nasty with those who do dare to stand up to him. I think his idea of Thailand's future is a nastier version of Singapore.

Re: the Dems - you were probably right that they were wearing the rose coloured glasses. But, that goes back to my comments that hey have alot of soul searching to do. But they did hand over power peacefully, which is a crucial point often overlooked. I have very serious doubts Thaksin would have been capable of doing a similar thing without throwing his toys out of the cot first.

My main wish for them is to grow a set of balls. They almost did in the 2006 April elections where they simply boycotted them. It was a strategically brilliant move. The end-game could have been a lot different had the military not get involved.

The other 'problem' with them is that they are (in my opinion) relatively good policy makers. Unfortunately good policy is very rarely good politics, especially in Thailand. Even if it was, they couldn't sell a prostitute to a horny guy who has been stuck on a space station for 2 years.

I didn't get to vote in the last election given I was out of the country, but if I did get the chance it would have been none-of-the-above, or at the very least, I would have voted for Chuwit if I could, partly for the entertainment value and partly cause I think he'll be the most effective opposition voice in this parliament.

Edited September 15, 2011 by samran

[Siam Simon]

If you'll excuse me, I've had a few more important personal things keeping me occupied than such threads, but if you want me on the record, it is disgusting what happened there. If you care to do some searching, you'll see that we employ a Burmese maid, do so legally, pay her WAY above standard rates, give her private health care and pay for her daughters school (golf clap please). I've been one of the people on this board who have been active in posting on how to do things legally, especially when it comes to employing migrant labour. Look them up, they are quite detailed. I've also tried (and failed so far) to get our maid refugee status in Australia...but that is something I'm working on slowly.

RE military: I have no great love for the military, nor the police, but I've also got their roles in perspective. People like to chuck out the word 'elites' here as if it some sort of homogeneous block of people who all sit down together in a small room at the RSBC and decide Thailand's fate. It is far from the case, it is alot more nuanced than that, and it is in that context I make my comments about the military.

RE Thaksin: I'm happily on the record as someone who doesn't like him. The main reason is that the bloke doesn't have a democratic bone in his body. One of the greatest disappointments of the coup was - as I said - it restored his credibility in the eyes of the Thai people. The Dems have a lot of soul searching to do. The great danger going forward is he is going to use this vacuum to cement his place in politics, with the help of extra-judicial 'pressure' which will shut down some of the tenuous remaining independent institutions in Thailand. The guy just doesn't like criticism, and gets nasty with those who do dare to stand up to him. I think his idea of Thailand's future is a nastier version of Singapore.

Re: the Dems - you were probably right that they were wearing the rose coloured glasses. But, that goes back to my comments that hey have alot of soul searching to do. My main wish for them is to grow a set of balls. They almost did in the 2006 April elections where they simply boycotted them. It was a strategically brilliant move. The end-game could have been a lot different had the military not get involved.

The other 'problem' with them is that they are (in my opinion) relatively good policy makers. Unfortunately good policy is very rarely good politics, especially in Thailand.

I didn't get to vote in the last election given I was out of the country, but if I did get the chance it would have been none-of-the-above, or at the very least, I would have voted for Chuwit if I could, partly for the entertainment value and partly cause I think he'll be the most effective opposition voice in this parliament.

There's not much I disagree with in this post, other the statement that Thailand has independant institutions, and your opinion that the 2006 election boycott wasn't connected to the coup.

The other 'problem' that you fail to address is that the Dems, as they stand with their patrons, are at least as corrupt as Thaksin's bunch. No matter how much crap is posted on TVF, Thai people who have to deal with this day in day out know this. I really thought Abhisit would make a stand on it, but he proved to be a paper tiger.

Sadly, there are many important 'nuances' that we can't discuss, but that's the law.

[samran]

There's not much I disagree with in this post, other the statement that Thailand has independant institutions, and your opinion that the 2006 election boycott wasn't connected to the coup.

The other 'problem' that you fail to address is that the Dems, as they stand with their patrons, are at least as corrupt as Thaksin's bunch. No matter how much crap is posted on TVF, Thai people who have to deal with this day in day out know this. I really thought Abhisit would make a stand on it, but he proved to be a paper tiger.

Sadly, there are many important 'nuances' that we can't discuss, but that's the law.

I think there are a few tenuously independent bodies. When i say that, there are a few outspoken individuals inside them who currently win the day. I won't name names, but they are around. Media I think will suffer in the next few years.

I don't like corruption, the problem is that Thaksins bunch, I think, take it to a whole new level. It isn't more of the same, it is insidious.

As for the 2006 boycott and coup not being linked - I don't think the Dems started down the boycott track wanting an coup, but it did produce a constitutional stalemate as to who would be able to govern if there was less than 20% of the vote in a substantial minority of seats. That was the pure constitutional issue. But the impasse it caused opened the way for a coup, for sure. It is only much later that the Dems really got into bed with the military and there was a confluence of issues which made them the bed partners with the yellows.

I note now though that the yellows of 2006 were nothing like the yellows of 2009/10 and the yellows of 2010, well some of them are no longer yellows.

[samran]

ps...I will now stop writing long responses.

From here on in, my posts will revert to narky one liners and calling Thaksin 'Dear Leader' or 'Brother number 1'.

[kutjebu]

A couple of sentences in this column really hit the mark "

"... the military and the old establishment together have further intensified the crisis. Violent confrontations have become normal events in Thailand."

" Throughout the past five years, the political stalemate that has shaken the nation - playing with the Thai people's emotions and deeply polarising our society - has unveiled so many dark secrets in politics. For one thing, it has revealed the anxiety on the part of the old establishment about a more open society. This has now clearly emerged as a threat to their power position. From this view, Thaksin is not really a menace to the Thai elite - an open political space is. "

What people really want today is put these five years behind them. If you read Thai forums, what real Thai people talk about in the social forums, you will realize they have moved on.

It's true that for the past five years, violent confrontation was becoming an "acceptable" way of solving political dispute. But Thai people realized they didn't solve anything and they were left footing the bill. Now, all they want is peace and reconciliation.

One more time, a couple of TV posters show they are out of touch with the realities of the country. It's not good for foreigners in Thailand. How long before the government realizes that a couple of foreigners still call for civil war and some even for murder and makes us all pay the price ? As guests in a democratic country we are of course entitled to express freely our opinion but it should be done in a moderate and balanced way.

Alas, we are paying (a lot) guests in a very un-democratic society...... but there is cheap booze, cheap and young girls to play with, and soon to be many more... and lots of fun watching the locals fight and kill each other... . the food is almost as tasty as the girls are... and cheap same as... any problems , you pay the relevant authority, no problems.. Thats the only reason us Farang men are here and if anyone says different, who are they trying to kid.... look in the mirror Billy...!!

Thats the only reason us Farang men are here and if anyone says different, who are they trying to kid.

You're absolutely right

[Lite Beer]

Posts using fictitious names have been removed.

[GazR]

The role of the establishment in causing problems rarely gets mentioned in the English language media (unlike Thai language which is a lot more balanced) who fixate only the Thaksin role. This is probably not surprising considering the ownership of the English language media and that it is aimed at a higher income English speaking Thai group. Interesting to see this change to a little more balanced opinion. This conference will be interesting for anyone with an open mind and who isnt fixated on the standard memes and viewpoints. Hopefully his invite to the establishment will be taken up.

In my opinion, your own statement that the English language media "fixate only the Thaksin role" (sic) itself clearly lacks balance.

Moreover, if the page 3 cartoons of the past few years at least in the Thai Rath vernacular daily is anything to go by ( and this being Asia it probably is) then Thaksin is getting an easy ride every day there.

As for news reporting rather than editorials, cartoons and other 'opinion' pieces, I can't comment: Would anyone else care to?

[GazR]

A couple of sentences in this column really hit the mark "

"... the military and the old establishment together have further intensified the crisis. Violent confrontations have become normal events in Thailand."

" Throughout the past five years, the political stalemate that has shaken the nation - playing with the Thai people's emotions and deeply polarising our society - has unveiled so many dark secrets in politics. For one thing, it has revealed the anxiety on the part of the old establishment about a more open society. This has now clearly emerged as a threat to their power position. From this view, Thaksin is not really a menace to the Thai elite - an open political space is. "

What people really want today is put these five years behind them. If you read Thai forums, what real Thai people talk about in the social forums, you will realize they have moved on.

It's true that for the past five years, violent confrontation was becoming an "acceptable" way of solving political dispute. But Thai people realized they didn't solve anything and they were left footing the bill. Now, all they want is peace and reconciliation.

One more time, a couple of TV posters show they are out of touch with the realities of the country. It's not good for foreigners in Thailand. How long before the government realizes that a couple of foreigners still call for civil war and some even for murder and makes us all pay the price ? As guests in a democratic country we are of course entitled to express freely our opinion but it should be done in a moderate and balanced way.

Alas, we are paying (a lot) guests in a very un-democratic society...... but there is cheap booze, cheap and young girls to play with, and soon to be many more... and lots of fun watching the locals fight and kill each other... . the food is almost as tasty as the girls are... and cheap same as... any problems , you pay the relevant authority, no problems.. Thats the only reason us Farang men are here and if anyone says different, who are they trying to kid.... look in the mirror Billy...!!

Thats the only reason us Farang men are here and if anyone says different, who are they trying to kid.

You're absolutely right

Absolutist over-generalized rubbish which reveals little more than the low company some people prefer to keep.

[GazR]

ps...I will now stop writing long responses.

From here on in, my posts will revert to narky one liners and calling Thaksin 'Dear Leader' or 'Brother number 1'.

I for one hope you change your mind about writing long responses.

[GazR]

Lots of opinion presented as fact.

IMO, if Thailand fears democracy it's because of the nature of democracy in Thailand. Thailand has much to fear at this stage, but not from true democracy, quite the opposite.

Very well said. Either they will become a true democracy, or become the next Cambodia.

More likely they fear a more easily manipulatable political scene,

because of the obvious abuses with in the Thai democratic system...

or lack of one in the true meaning of 'Democratic System'..

All the real players would remain perfectly confortable in the business interests, in MOST Democracies, but in this one, a win for one side typically means aggressive, directed, but slightly stealthy attack on the losers side. All of nothing zero sum politics. This is not the aim of true democracy, but a bastardization of the concept to manipulate the credulous and win power over others. Once power is won, enemies get it in the neck, back or pocketbook ASAP.