Populist promises have almost always been the springboard for dictatorships. Part of the problem is the PTP policies are only window-dressing & nobody actually knows what their long-term agenda and policies are.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great. everything will be okay when Thaksin gets back, or maybe in the time of his son's rule, or his grandson, great-grandson.

PTP run the country on a skeleton-crew basis, ticking only the mandatory boxes and avoiding everything else. IMO their energies are devoted behind the scenes to installing a permanent familial oligarchy.

I would guess the next step will be to give all poor people a free colour TV, & by coincidence people will be watching red-government propaganda on the free TVs along with brain-meltingly bad soap operas and game shows. That wouldn't be so bad if the Govt actually made people's lives better (as promised).

The mistakes made pre-flood & post-flood which were shockingly inept, were brushed aside by the regime as unimportant, but the flood exposed the government-level complete lack of robust quick-thinking which are the trademarks of competent leadership. It also raised the question of what they consider important. Even the request to have a state of emergency during the worst floods for over 50 years, was rebuffed by Yingluck along partisan and control-freak lines.

All the meaningful pre-election promises by PTP have failed to appear even in start-up phase, except for a few stragglers that emerged blinking into the light & feeling all alone.

People in the opposition are very concerned that the country they love is being hijacked, and in the worst case scenario the groundwork for a dynastic oligarchy is being laid-out. The feeling among many international observers is that the worst is yet to come & Thai peoples future is one of being industrially-fleeced & exploited & deceived.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great.

you could say this about a lot of politicial parties world wide, you could say it about obama, cameron (who are both using that kind of rhetoric in the current economic climate)... it's certainly not confined to dictatorships.

what's 'dictatorship' about the current government?

They are working on it have patience you will get it.

I certainly hope no one is blaming Yingluck for this, she is never there and doesn't know anything about anything. Particularly when it concerns her brother.

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Actually they had a honest leader Abhist His problem was no one wanted honesty they just wanted to fill their own pockets. Witness the fact that 40 Thaksin trained supporters saw the writing on the wall so they switched to the Dems to continue on with their Thaksin trained corruption. He just did not have a lot of support.

Sheep-like mentality is easily swayed to vote a certain way....does anyone else hear that Pied Piper music.

No, but the rats are clear as daylight.

Populist promises have almost always been the springboard for dictatorships. Part of the problem is the PTP policies are only window-dressing & nobody actually knows what their long-term agenda and policies are.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great. everything will be okay when Thaksin gets back, or maybe in the time of his son's rule, or his grandson, great-grandson.

PTP run the country on a skeleton-crew basis, ticking only the mandatory boxes and avoiding everything else. IMO their energies are devoted behind the scenes to installing a permanent familial oligarchy.

I would guess the next step will be to give all poor people a free colour TV, & by coincidence people will be watching red-government propaganda on the free TVs along with brain-meltingly bad soap operas and game shows. That wouldn't be so bad if the Govt actually made people's lives better (as promised).

The mistakes made pre-flood & post-flood which were shockingly inept, were brushed aside by the regime as unimportant, but the flood exposed the government-level complete lack of robust quick-thinking which are the trademarks of competent leadership. It also raised the question of what they consider important. Even the request to have a state of emergency during the worst floods for over 50 years, was rebuffed by Yingluck along partisan and control-freak lines.

All the meaningful pre-election promises by PTP have failed to appear even in start-up phase, except for a few stragglers that emerged blinking into the light & feeling all alone.

People in the opposition are very concerned that the country they love is being hijacked, and in the worst case scenario the groundwork for a dynastic oligarchy is being laid-out. The feeling among many international observers is that the worst is yet to come & Thai peoples future is one of being industrially-fleeced & exploited & deceived.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great.

you could say this about a lot of politicial parties world wide, you could say it about obama, cameron (who are both using that kind of rhetoric in the current economic climate)... it's certainly not confined to dictatorships.

what's 'dictatorship' about the current government?

They are working on it have patience you will get it.

That is the point

Thaksin dictates to PTP,

they win partly from his cult of personality

partly from populist promises tied to his cult of personality.

He is having government ministers coming to him for talks,

and giving him public blessings and bowing the knee in fealty,

He is 'advisor' to the government,

and control of the Shin clan members in the government.

speaks in it's name on foreign countries while just maintaining the charade of not doing so.

All this while he is still officially on the run from the justice system.

The last part of Thailands governance he has NOT been able to buy control of.

Not that he hasn't tried several times/

Thaksin Speaks PTP Does: He Dictates and they jump and ask;

Is that high enough master?'

This is a dictatorship, the defacto Dictator just is too worried about

being assassinated to come back right now, but he will.

It seems the inmates are already running the asylum.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by animatic

i think you'll find it was still popular.

I'll take your word for it. None of the Thais i know, if presented with the truth about not what was advertised, but what actually happened, would support what did. Perhaps i'm simply lucky with the Thais that are around me, and the rest are all different heartless creatures with no care for innocents being killed?

but anyway my argument wasn't pro the war on drugs, so i didn't say it somehow made what happened better, but we knew what the public thought about it.

Every time there is a discussion on the war on drugs, and that as you know is many times, there is not an occasion when you haven't continually brought up the popularity thing. If you aren't bringing it up to in some way lessen the gravity of what happened and spread the blame, that is certainly how it appears, because as i say, i can't see how whether a government policy has no public support or total public support, makes any difference whatsoever to the rights and the wrongs. No doubt you'll say you agree, but then along you'll trot whenever this topic comes up next with the ubiquitous, "ah yes, that was terrible wasn't it..... but a lot of people did support it, didn't they..."

It always interested me that George Orwell, despite being from a lower-middle class family, was such a great believer in the previous era's philosophy of 'fair play'. Other writers have talked about how his own class & upbringing clashed so much with his profound love of the old-ways 'sportsmanship, gentlemanliness, dutifulness,' and physical courage to stand for ones beliefs no matter what the dangers to oneself.

Orwell disliked agrarian populism, and he saw his nightmare unfold in WW2's national socialism which was an almost entirely populist movement. Most sociologists ditched populism as a viable theory in favour of progressivism a long time ago. The blunt-instrument idea of populism & its "masses versus the elites" is what was so clumsily played out in the red-mob speeches of 2010. This crude mass-philosophy is actually the ultimate control tool for the ruling class, of which Thaksin the above-the-law billionaire most truly is.

Orwell and many others always believed that the elites had to be onboard for any kind of democracy to function. Academics, doctors, lecturers, teachers, engineers, lawyers etc. are all elites. They are highly-trained often at great cost in money and time & are paid higher wages for their expertise. But if you are traditional populist then you believe the red-mob speeches about 'crush the hi-so elite', this would actually mean that when you need life-saving surgery or a lawyer to represent you, there will only be farmers & politicians. It also interests me that Orwell believed in honesty and the courage to face the consequences of ones own actions with bravery & integrity. I think Orwell would be horrified at this story of a billionaire corporate crook, who hides far away from danger while funding uprisings of the 'masses against the elites'. Its a truly nightmare dystopia.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by Yunla

It always interested me that George Orwell, despite being from a lower-middle class family, was such a great believer in the previous era's philosophy of 'fair play'. Other writers have talked about how his own class & upbringing clashed so much with his profound love of the old-ways 'sportsmanship, gentlemanliness, dutifulness,' and physical courage to stand for ones beliefs no matter what the dangers to oneself.

Orwell disliked agrarian populism, and he saw his nightmare unfold in WW2's national socialism which was an almost entirely populist movement. Most sociologists ditched populism as a viable theory in favour of progressivism a long time ago. The blunt-instrument idea of populism & its "masses versus the elites" is what was so clumsily played out in the red-mob speeches of 2010. This crude mass-philosophy is actually the ultimate control tool for the ruling class, of which Thaksin the above-the-law billionaire most truly is.

Orwell and many others always believed that the elites had to be onboard for any kind of democracy to function. Academics, doctors, lecturers, teachers, engineers, lawyers etc. are all elites. They are highly-trained often at great cost in money and time & are paid higher wages for their expertise. But if you are traditional populist then you believe the red-mob speeches about 'crush the hi-so elite', this would actually mean that when you need life-saving surgery or a lawyer to represent you, there will only be farmers & politicians. It also interests me that Orwell believed in honesty and the courage to face the consequences of ones own actions with bravery & integrity. I think Orwell would be horrified at this story of a billionaire corporate crook, who hides far away from danger while funding uprisings of the 'masses against the elites'. Its a truly nightmare dystopia.

"WAR is PEACE"

" Freeedom is Slavery"

"IGNORANCE is STRENGTH"

RECONCILIATION is PROFITABLE (for the winner.)

VOTES overcome LAWS

THAT YOU WIN trumps HOW YOU WIN

IGNORANCE is BLISS,

but bliss can go up in smoke in the face of angry, but organized masses,

blindly following demagogues parroting the ideas of cynical manipulators,

and political strategists working for big money, to feed the ego of one

hubris filled pro-dictator-in-waiting, to fill his obsessive need of ego gratification.

'He who spoils for war often gets the spoils of war. Or the grave.'

But many find that grave sooner than those that shove them forward first.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by animatic

But she didn't forget to give herself and the rest of the government raises.

+1

Perhaps one of the big preceived differences between little sisters government and big brothers is the latter seemed to be successful at keeps mistakes/faults out of the public info sources. Both seem to be adapt at giving the public something as headlines, while plundering the bank vault

.It seems to be a repeat of big brothers propoganda war, but those bitten before seem to still remember and are not so accepting this time around. Another similarity seems, that the real boogey man threat to Thailand, is still running the show, as much as that is possible in Thailand.

In all the guesstimates to the popular support for Thaksin bandied around, I think it was worth noting that only 36 MP's showed up to break bread with the self proclaimed Messiah, in Cambodia.

"Yingluck has not yet been able to raise the minimum wage and salary but the prices of consumer goods have been inflating dramatically in advance of the pay hikes."

It's called profiteering.

And there is no hope that a three year time frame for the rapid transport lines extensions will come to be, as some, at least, are currently stalled.

This government is going to get a shock when their own supporters start to turn against them, and the poor start to realize they have been misled.

Only if the opposition are willing to start a credible campaign to convince the rural poor they'll at least go through the motions of looking after their interests, even it's just offering as much or more in the way of bread and circuses.

My perception is they think they have divine right to rule and would prefer not to, maybe even think they don't need to kowtow to the masses.

I do feel sorry for Yingluck and her boomerang problem.

She thought she was eventually ridding of her brother's interference, but for unknown reasons it keeps on coming back!

-mel.

This government is going to get a shock when their own supporters start to turn against them, and the poor start to realize they have been misled.

Only if the opposition are willing to start a credible campaign to convince the rural poor they'll at least go through the motions of looking after their interests, even it's just offering as much or more in the way of bread and circuses.

My perception is they think they have divine right to rule and would prefer not to, maybe even think they don't need to kowtow to the masses.

Yes but the masses have a terrible record for being unpredictable.

It always interested me that George Orwell, despite being from a lower-middle class family, was such a great believer in the previous era's philosophy of 'fair play'. Other writers have talked about how his own class & upbringing clashed so much with his profound love of the old-ways 'sportsmanship, gentlemanliness, dutifulness,' and physical courage to stand for ones beliefs no matter what the dangers to oneself.

Orwell disliked agrarian populism, and he saw his nightmare unfold in WW2's national socialism which was an almost entirely populist movement. Most sociologists ditched populism as a viable theory in favour of progressivism a long time ago. The blunt-instrument idea of populism & its "masses versus the elites" is what was so clumsily played out in the red-mob speeches of 2010. This crude mass-philosophy is actually the ultimate control tool for the ruling class, of which Thaksin the above-the-law billionaire most truly is.

Orwell and many others always believed that the elites had to be onboard for any kind of democracy to function. Academics, doctors, lecturers, teachers, engineers, lawyers etc. are all elites. They are highly-trained often at great cost in money and time & are paid higher wages for their expertise. But if you are traditional populist then you believe the red-mob speeches about 'crush the hi-so elite', this would actually mean that when you need life-saving surgery or a lawyer to represent you, there will only be farmers & politicians. It also interests me that Orwell believed in honesty and the courage to face the consequences of ones own actions with bravery & integrity. I think Orwell would be horrified at this story of a billionaire corporate crook, who hides far away from danger while funding uprisings of the 'masses against the elites'. Its a truly nightmare dystopia.

I must say top class Yunla and you are totally right about the "fair play" issue.

People can share just about any deprivation or calumny as long as it is a shared deprivation or calumny. People are at their best when they are fighting against the odds with a shared dynamic. This was the root of the centuries of the British ( predominantly English ) struggle for parliamentary representation and for the Rule of Law, not the Rule of Man.

Thailand has a democratic system corrupted by the Rule of Man. This is the real battlefield for Thailand, the Rule of Man must be defeated, it has a stranglehold on every aspect of life in this amazing country.

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Actually they had a honest leader Abhist His problem was no one wanted honesty they just wanted to fill their own pockets. Witness the fact that 40 Thaksin trained supporters saw the writing on the wall so they switched to the Dems to continue on with their Thaksin trained corruption. He just did not have a lot of support.

But Abhisit was inefficient. He didn't do much in his time. He let people like Suthep stay close to him.

He did major mistakes, like the Victor Bout case, where he broke national and international law and made Russia very upset.

Don't understand me wrong, Of course he was 1000 times better than every Thaksin puppet, but still it was very weak.

There was no real reason why to vote him.

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Actually they had a honest leader Abhist His problem was no one wanted honesty they just wanted to fill their own pockets. Witness the fact that 40 Thaksin trained supporters saw the writing on the wall so they switched to the Dems to continue on with their Thaksin trained corruption. He just did not have a lot of support.

But Abhisit was inefficient. He didn't do much in his time. He let people like Suthep stay close to him.

He did major mistakes, like the Victor Bout case, where he broke national and international law and made Russia very upset.

Don't understand me wrong, Of course he was 1000 times better than every Thaksin puppet, but still it was very weak.

There was no real reason why to vote him.

I can give you in between 300 and 500 reasons why they did not vote for Abhi in many area's in the North East.

"Only one populism policy could be deemed as progressing and that is the women's development fund. More than 10 million women have joined the fund since it was launched on Women's Day on March 8."

I hadn't heard about that one before. Can someone explain what it is?

Thanks, Terry.

I hadn't heard about that one before. Can someone explain what it is?

Thai Women's Fund Open To All: Nalinee

I hadn't heard about that one before. Can someone explain what it is?

Thai Women's Fund Open To All: Nalinee

Let's hope that the 15 year-old adolescent teen girls who are eligible to participate in the scheme and receive loans will have no difficulty paying back their Women Empowerment Fund debts on loans provided for by the taxpayers.

.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by Buchholz

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Actually they had a honest leader Abhist His problem was no one wanted honesty they just wanted to fill their own pockets. Witness the fact that 40 Thaksin trained supporters saw the writing on the wall so they switched to the Dems to continue on with their Thaksin trained corruption. He just did not have a lot of support.

But Abhisit was inefficient. He didn't do much in his time. He let people like Suthep stay close to him.

He did major mistakes, like the Victor Bout case, where he broke national and international law and made Russia very upset.

Don't understand me wrong, Of course he was 1000 times better than every Thaksin puppet, but still it was very weak.

There was no real reason why to vote him.

I can give you in between 300 and 500 reasons why they did not vote for Abhi in many area's in the North East.

Yes, but you can't name one reason why people voted for him.

But we can both find 500 reason why to vote for Thaksin or why not to vote for him.

I am sure I can name 4 PTP policies. I can even name one for Chuvit. But I can't name any from Abhisit.

Sure he would be a good man as legal adviser of a PM. But as PM I didn't see any vision, power, drive, rhetoric, etc

Yes, but you can't name one reason why people voted for him.

But we can both find 500 reason why to vote for Thaksin or why not to vote for him.

I am sure I can name 4 PTP policies. I can even name one for Chuvit. But I can't name any from Abhisit.

Sure he would be a good man as legal adviser of a PM. But as PM I didn't see any vision, power, drive, rhetoric, etc

Abhisit's performance as PM i think has to be viewed with consideration given to the financial crisis he had to deal with (that consideration goes for the current administration to some degree too) and to the repeated insurgency attempts mounted against him. Perhaps had he not had these major distractions we may have a better idea of his capabilities in terms of vision, power, drive, rhetoric, etc. His capabilities in terms of dealing with crisis were seen and i don't think he did too badly in that regard - put it this way, i don't think any of the recent past and present Thai PMs would have done any better, in fact, i daresay they would have done a darn sight worse. Of course not that any of that changes the fact that he didn't win the election. In that regard he failed miserably, although of course there were many factors in what made the electorate vote in the way they did, and Abhisit's performance was but one... and some might say, a small one, but this is where we move into pure speculation.

"Only one populism policy could be deemed as progressing and that is the women's development fund. More than 10 million women have joined the fund since it was launched on Women's Day on March 8."

I hadn't heard about that one before. Can someone explain what it is?

Thanks, Terry.

The 10 million was the goal of the heads in charge, doub seriously that they have this number of members signed up. How many loans have they made, may be a more astute question to the spokeswoman?

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Actually they had a honest leader Abhist His problem was no one wanted honesty they just wanted to fill their own pockets. Witness the fact that 40 Thaksin trained supporters saw the writing on the wall so they switched to the Dems to continue on with their Thaksin trained corruption. He just did not have a lot of support.

What evidence do have that he was honest? He definitely had the face of honesty and yes I guess you may be right. He "was" Thailand's best bet. Yingluck is feeling a bit like the Sex Pistols line, "Have you ever felt like you have been cheated" Rock'h'Roll Swindle. However I did not like his last bastion of the scoundrel is patriotism attitude. However, yes, it is quite possible the increase in inflation is "partly due" to rampant corruption. However there will always be some ministers on the take. You have to chose the best evil I guess - which from Taksin's past peformance must be the Yellows. Yep, Taksin - I guess they call him Peter Piper in England. However in all honesty I don't believe Thailand will ever retain its former economic power due to wold wide recession, floods, education and many others like Burma and Vietnam catching up. I am of the opinion the yellows were the best evil. However until bank books of politicians and associated people can be checked on a daily basis and their homes its economic performance will always be held to ransom until someone is found who loves his people and wishes for them to better their lives. Perhaps Abhisit was that man.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by heiwa

Thank you, Jerry, but re-posted to comply with thaivisa rules on posting news articles:

Thai rice exports drop, surge in Vietnamese shipment

BANGKOK: Thai rice exports have halved from a year ago due to unrealistically lofty prices caused by government intervention, and prices are likely to stay high until the end of the second quarter which will cause exports to slump, according to traders.

From January to April 17, Thailand exported 1.8 million tonnes, down 47% from the same period of last year, when it sold 3.4 million tonnes.

“That was definitely due to government intervention that pegged Thai prices at uncompetitively high levels,” said Chookiat Ophaswongse, an honorary president of the Thai Rice Exporters Association.

Continues:

http://biz.thestar.c...84&sec=business

Reuters - April 19, 2012

.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by Buchholz

From January to April 17, Thailand exported 1.8 million tonnes, down 47% from the same period of last year, when it sold 3.4 million tonnes.

Rice exports dropped by nearly half.

Well done to Yingluck's Pheu Thai Party.

"boomerang", indeed.

.

Edited April 19, 201214 yr by Buchholz

Bucholtz---better Bloomer-hang????---well half dropped-the same as the rice.

...

He [Abhisit] did major mistakes, like the Victor Bout case, where he broke national and international law and made Russia very upset.

...

What laws (either national or international) did he break?

Why does it matter if he made Russia upset?

i think you'll find it was still popular.

I'll take your word for it. None of the Thais i know, if presented with the truth about not what was advertised, but what actually happened, would support what did. Perhaps i'm simply lucky with the Thais that are around me, and the rest are all different heartless creatures with no care for innocents being killed?

but anyway my argument wasn't pro the war on drugs, so i didn't say it somehow made what happened better, but we knew what the public thought about it.

Every time there is a discussion on the war on drugs, and that as you know is many times, there is not an occasion when you haven't continually brought up the popularity thing. If you aren't bringing it up to in some way lessen the gravity of what happened and spread the blame, that is certainly how it appears, because as i say, i can't see how whether a government policy has no public support or total public support, makes any difference whatsoever to the rights and the wrongs. No doubt you'll say you agree, but then along you'll trot whenever this topic comes up next with the ubiquitous, "ah yes, that was terrible wasn't it..... but a lot of people did support it, didn't they..."

typical bs, what are you talking about? show me examples of this everytime there's a discussion on the war on drugs me defending it!

again, you've taking what i've said out of context, it's just ridiculous.

i'm NOT saying that popular support justifies it, got it? obviously you haven't.

i was discussing it in context to the type of atrocities that are generally associated with dictatorships and stating that there is a difference between a (popular with the people) law enforcement and the type of acts committed on people that we would negatively associate with dictatorship.

if you can't understand this very simple point, then i can't help you.