The White Masks That Give A New Face To Thai Protest: Special Report

[GentlemanJim]

Well I for one would love to see 100K protestors march on Government building wearing these masks from "V' and in total silence. Stand looking at Government building for an hour in silence then all walk away. The politicians of all flavour would absolutely crap themselves.

[whybother]

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

Poor logic.A better example is the use of the swastika since this often crops up in Thailand.It cannot be detached from its Nazi link any more than Guy Fawkes can be detached from attempted regicide.It is true however that many Thais have no understanding of the historical connotations but there is a world of difference between ditzy Chiangmai teenagers(a recent swastika use example) and the so called "educate" people with their Guy Fawkes masks.However they should be allowed to demonstrate and wear what masks they like - they can't hide their malice and their deep stupidity.

Is it a "Guy Fawkes" mask or a "V for Vendetta" mask? Most people (not just Thais) would relate the mask to the movie, and not know anything about Guy Fawkes.

[khaowong1]

A mask? Instead of just wearing the mask - why don't people do something more constructive if they want change. Go out and protest "peacefully". Boycott products and events and whatever else unhappy citizens do that's within the law. Speak out more as in this country they like to throw the word democracy about a lot.

The white mask it feels is more of a fashionable thing with Thais here at the moment. A gimmick.

That's my take also.. most probably don't know why their wearing a mask.. It's just a fun thing to do.. like a group of children at a birthday party or halloween party.. look at me, I'm so cute.

[jayboy]

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

Poor logic.A better example is the use of the swastika since this often crops up in Thailand.It cannot be detached from its Nazi link any more than Guy Fawkes can be detached from attempted regicide.It is true however that many Thais have no understanding of the historical connotations but there is a world of difference between ditzy Chiangmai teenagers(a recent swastika use example) and the so called "educate" people with their Guy Fawkes masks.However they should be allowed to demonstrate and wear what masks they like - they can't hide their malice and their deep stupidity.

Is it a "Guy Fawkes" mask or a "V for Vendetta" mask? Most people (not just Thais) would relate the mask to the movie, and not know anything about Guy Fawkes.

That's a rather odd thing to say since Guy Fawkes and the gunpowder plot is referenced throughout the movie.

In any case most educated people both inside and outside Thailand would understand the Guy Fawkes connection.As previously noted however the fatuous "educate" element who look down on most of their fellow citizens probably haven't the faintest idea.

[dcutman]

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

Poor logic.A better example is the use of the swastika since this often crops up in Thailand.It cannot be detached from its Nazi link any more than Guy Fawkes can be detached from attempted regicide.It is true however that many Thais have no understanding of the historical connotations but there is a world of difference between ditzy Chiangmai teenagers(a recent swastika use example) and the so called "educate" people with their Guy Fawkes masks.However they should be allowed to demonstrate and wear what masks they like - they can't hide their malice and their deep stupidity.

So how do you feel about the rebuttal from the your Red Shirts and their red mask? Would this not be showing a stupidity much deeper?

[creekside]

"Thirdly, they really need to research a bit more into the history of whom the V for Vendetta mask is portraying and more specifically the ultimate aim of the plot in which he was "involved"."

That takes work and some thinking.

However, I don't think that the plot in which Fawkes was involved has any parallel or similarities to anything to do with this kingdom.

IMHO, of course.

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

What the co-creator of "V" said,

[waza]

There are many facets of this struggle for the heart and soul of Thailand, this is one of them. Anonymity is desirable when dealing with a political machine like the criminal Thaksin's, PTP and redshirt alliance. After all it has displayed it willingness to crush any dissidence through litigation, miscommunication, censorship, personal threats, violent measure and even killings.

The use of the mask is an advantage in this political climate, it also resonates with the international community. This government is very sensitive to international opinion, after all its depending on this community to fund the growing Thai debt burden. The mask is generally recognise as a symbol of the democratic struggle against a draconian government, as such it identifies the protestors likewise. It gives them international legitimacy and will be a beacon for international support. As we have seen its already having and effect on the criminal Thaksin's political alliance as they feel the need to stymie this movement with threats of questionably legal or moral action.

Overall I feel its a very clever marketing ploy and a relatively safe option.

You are profoundly mistaken about many points, but I will emphasize just one - international legitimacy.The current government enjoys unanimous support overseas:there is not one government that questions it not least because it has an unquestionable democratic mandate.Any government which followed other than through an election victory (ie through a military coup or more likely a trumped up judicial intervention) would become an outcast in the world community.Life would of course go on but the consequences would be appalling.

Your naivety borders idiocy if you think that international recognition and support in any way relates to the legitimacy or morality of a government.

Edited May 28, 2013 by waza

[OzMick]

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

Poor logic.A better example is the use of the swastika since this often crops up in Thailand.It cannot be detached from its Nazi link any more than Guy Fawkes can be detached from attempted regicide.It is true however that many Thais have no understanding of the historical connotations but there is a world of difference between ditzy Chiangmai teenagers(a recent swastika use example) and the so called "educate" people with their Guy Fawkes masks.However they should be allowed to demonstrate and wear what masks they like - they can't hide their malice and their deep stupidity.

Is it a "Guy Fawkes" mask or a "V for Vendetta" mask? Most people (not just Thais) would relate the mask to the movie, and not know anything about Guy Fawkes.

That's a rather odd thing to say since Guy Fawkes and the gunpowder plot is referenced throughout the movie.

In any case most educated people both inside and outside Thailand would understand the Guy Fawkes connection.As previously noted however the fatuous "educate" element who look down on most of their fellow citizens probably haven't the faintest idea.

But 90% of people who do remember the gunpowder plot remember it as an attempt to blow up parliament, not as an attempt at regicide.

Edited May 28, 2013 by OzMick

[jayboy]

There are many facets of this struggle for the heart and soul of Thailand, this is one of them. Anonymity is desirable when dealing with a political machine like the criminal Thaksin's, PTP and redshirt alliance. After all it has displayed it willingness to crush any dissidence through litigation, miscommunication, censorship, personal threats, violent measure and even killings.

The use of the mask is an advantage in this political climate, it also resonates with the international community. This government is very sensitive to international opinion, after all its depending on this community to fund the growing Thai debt burden. The mask is generally recognise as a symbol of the democratic struggle against a draconian government, as such it identifies the protestors likewise. It gives them international legitimacy and will be a beacon for international support. As we have seen its already having and effect on the criminal Thaksin's political alliance as they feel the need to stymie this movement with threats of questionably legal or moral action.

Overall I feel its a very clever marketing ploy and a relatively safe option.

You are profoundly mistaken about many points, but I will emphasize just one - international legitimacy.The current government enjoys unanimous support overseas:there is not one government that questions it not least because it has an unquestionable democratic mandate.Any government which followed other than through an election victory (ie through a military coup or more likely a trumped up judicial intervention) would become an outcast in the world community.Life would of course go on but the consequences would be appalling.

Your naivety borders idiocy if you think that international recognition and support in any way relates to the legitimacy or morality of a government.

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

[OzMick]

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

Did any country refuse to recognise the Democrat government as the legitimate government of Thailand? What is your point?

Edited May 28, 2013 by OzMick

[whybother]

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

Poor logic.A better example is the use of the swastika since this often crops up in Thailand.It cannot be detached from its Nazi link any more than Guy Fawkes can be detached from attempted regicide.It is true however that many Thais have no understanding of the historical connotations but there is a world of difference between ditzy Chiangmai teenagers(a recent swastika use example) and the so called "educate" people with their Guy Fawkes masks.However they should be allowed to demonstrate and wear what masks they like - they can't hide their malice and their deep stupidity.

Is it a "Guy Fawkes" mask or a "V for Vendetta" mask? Most people (not just Thais) would relate the mask to the movie, and not know anything about Guy Fawkes.

That's a rather odd thing to say since Guy Fawkes and the gunpowder plot is referenced throughout the movie.

In any case most educated people both inside and outside Thailand would understand the Guy Fawkes connection.As previously noted however the fatuous "educate" element who look down on most of their fellow citizens probably haven't the faintest idea.

How many people, particularly Thais, have seen the movie? Even if Guy Fawkes is mentioned through out the movie, how many people, particularly Thais, would know it referred to real events? Even if people knew that it related to real events, how many of them would know the details of those events.

A lot of people would relate the mask to some movie, and more than likely, many would relate it to recent protests against governments, without knowing the history of events some 400 years ago, on a little island off Europe.

[Thai at Heart]

All this historical arguments are pointless, the people behind this campaign make it clear what is the source of the image and what is the meaning they intend to convey from it.

What some people here are doing is akin to argue with a Christian that by wearing a crucifix they are condoning the brutality of the ancient Romans. In other words cherry picking a historical moment related to a particular symbol to ascribe to it connotations not intended by the person using that symbol.

Another more recent example would be to assume that every person you see wearing a Che T-Shirt is a communist revolutionary. Symbols can transcend their origins or acquire new meanings in the course of history, so instead of arguing over irrelevant historical details try to see what this people message is.

Poor logic.A better example is the use of the swastika since this often crops up in Thailand.It cannot be detached from its Nazi link any more than Guy Fawkes can be detached from attempted regicide.It is true however that many Thais have no understanding of the historical connotations but there is a world of difference between ditzy Chiangmai teenagers(a recent swastika use example) and the so called "educate" people with their Guy Fawkes masks.However they should be allowed to demonstrate and wear what masks they like - they can't hide their malice and their deep stupidity.

99.9% of Thais have no idea who Guy Fawkes was, or his historical significance. But you can bet a lot of tech savvy, and a few more worldly people in Thailand know about anonymous and the use of the mask in fighting overbearing governments.

[Thai at Heart]

There are many facets of this struggle for the heart and soul of Thailand, this is one of them. Anonymity is desirable when dealing with a political machine like the criminal Thaksin's, PTP and redshirt alliance. After all it has displayed it willingness to crush any dissidence through litigation, miscommunication, censorship, personal threats, violent measure and even killings.

The use of the mask is an advantage in this political climate, it also resonates with the international community. This government is very sensitive to international opinion, after all its depending on this community to fund the growing Thai debt burden. The mask is generally recognise as a symbol of the democratic struggle against a draconian government, as such it identifies the protestors likewise. It gives them international legitimacy and will be a beacon for international support. As we have seen its already having and effect on the criminal Thaksin's political alliance as they feel the need to stymie this movement with threats of questionably legal or moral action.

Overall I feel its a very clever marketing ploy and a relatively safe option.

You are profoundly mistaken about many points, but I will emphasize just one - international legitimacy.The current government enjoys unanimous support overseas:there is not one government that questions it not least because it has an unquestionable democratic mandate.Any government which followed other than through an election victory (ie through a military coup or more likely a trumped up judicial intervention) would become an outcast in the world community.Life would of course go on but the consequences would be appalling.

Your naivety borders idiocy if you think that international recognition and support in any way relates to the legitimacy or morality of a government.

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

Western governments on the whole prefer to deal with governments that win general elections.

It doesn't mean that they don't deal with many other forms of appointed governments either. Does anyone think they wouldn't deal with the democrats of they could win an election? If the same thing happened as before with MPs defecting, the world would just get on with it and deal with it.

[jayboy]

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

Did any country refuse to recognise the Democrat government as the legitimate government of Thailand? What is your point?

No but you have missed the point.Given the excellent democratic credentials of the current government there would be strongly adverse international reaction if it was removed through a coup or judicial activism.But more troubling for the unelected elites would be the angry internal reaction and unpredictable outcome - hence in my personal view the probability is the government will see out its term.

If at the next general election the government is so unpopular as you suggest no doubt the Thai people will be seeking an alternative.

[Thai at Heart]

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

Did any country refuse to recognise the Democrat government as the legitimate government of Thailand? What is your point?

No but you have missed the point.Given the excellent democratic credentials of the current government there would be strongly adverse international reaction if it was removed through a coup or judicial activism.But more troubling for the unelected elites would be the angry internal reaction and unpredictable outcome - hence in my personal view the probability is the government will see out its term.

If at the next general election the government is so unpopular as you suggest no doubt the Thai people will be seeking an alternative.

And most foreign governments knew quite quickly that the dems wouldn't win the election.

So they dealt with them politely and awaited the next incarnation of trt to take power again.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[rubl]

"Given the excellent democratic credentials of the current government" any non-=aligned voice will be 1) muzzled, 2) threatened, 3. prosecuted, 4)eradicated. All in a democratic way acceptable by those pesky foreigners of course.

As for Thai seeking an alternative at election time, that's foreign wishfull thinking. All depends on how much there's still in the (state) coffers to be promised at that time.

IMHO of course

[jayboy]

There are many facets of this struggle for the heart and soul of Thailand, this is one of them. Anonymity is desirable when dealing with a political machine like the criminal Thaksin's, PTP and redshirt alliance. After all it has displayed it willingness to crush any dissidence through litigation, miscommunication, censorship, personal threats, violent measure and even killings.

The use of the mask is an advantage in this political climate, it also resonates with the international community. This government is very sensitive to international opinion, after all its depending on this community to fund the growing Thai debt burden. The mask is generally recognise as a symbol of the democratic struggle against a draconian government, as such it identifies the protestors likewise. It gives them international legitimacy and will be a beacon for international support. As we have seen its already having and effect on the criminal Thaksin's political alliance as they feel the need to stymie this movement with threats of questionably legal or moral action.

Overall I feel its a very clever marketing ploy and a relatively safe option.

You are profoundly mistaken about many points, but I will emphasize just one - international legitimacy.The current government enjoys unanimous support overseas:there is not one government that questions it not least because it has an unquestionable democratic mandate.Any government which followed other than through an election victory (ie through a military coup or more likely a trumped up judicial intervention) would become an outcast in the world community.Life would of course go on but the consequences would be appalling.

Your naivety borders idiocy if you think that international recognition and support in any way relates to the legitimacy or morality of a government.

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

Western governments on the whole prefer to deal with governments that win general elections.

It doesn't mean that they don't deal with many other forms of appointed governments either. Does anyone think they wouldn't deal with the democrats of they could win an election? If the same thing happened as before with MPs defecting, the world would just get on with it and deal with it.

Of course there would be no issue if the Democrats won an election.Nor would there be an issue if MPs defected.Foreign countries have no quarrel with Thailand and look if at all possible to get along.However a coup whether from the military or the judiciary would not be welcome.What would they do about it? Probably not a great deal.

The internal reaction would be the only significant one.

[Thai at Heart]

"Given the excellent democratic credentials of the current government" any non-=aligned voice will be 1) muzzled, 2) threatened, 3. prosecuted, 4)eradicated. All in a democratic way acceptable by those pesky foreigners of course.

As for Thai seeking an alternative at election time, that's foreign wishfull thinking. All depends on how much there's still in the (state) coffers to be promised at that time.

IMHO of course

I can't believe the government even has bothered to acknowledge this group. Messing with internationally based social media can have bad reactions.

Mess with Thai's and their Facebook and they could actually cause quite a big problem.

[rubl]

The government has not officially acknowledged the 'white masks' is would seem, but we had their majority party "Pheu Thai spokesman Prompong Nopparit said he and party legal experts would meet today to discuss legal action against the Facebook users, who use the white mask from the Hollywood movie 'V for Vendetta' as their profile photo."

Then the red shirt came with their own version and only then we had

"Deputy Government Spokeswoman Sunisa Lertpakawat said no matter if it was white or red masks, in the social media and in the real world everyone had a constitutional right to express political opinions, as long as they conformed to the law."

So, nothing to see here, just don''t mess with our great thinker.

[Trembly]

Er . . . haven't you lot ever heard of "Anonymous"???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8XCURPPl8I

Edited May 28, 2013 by Trembly

[whybother]

Of course there would be no issue if the Democrats won an election.Nor would there be an issue if MPs defected.Foreign countries have no quarrel with Thailand and look if at all possible to get along.However a coup whether from the military or the judiciary would not be welcome.What would they do about it? Probably not a great deal.

The internal reaction would be the only significant one.

So, foreign countries wouldn't have had a problem with the Dem government, since they came to power through the defection of MPs.

Sent from my shoe phone.

[Thai at Heart]

Of course there would be no issue if the Democrats won an election.Nor would there be an issue if MPs defected.Foreign countries have no quarrel with Thailand and look if at all possible to get along.However a coup whether from the military or the judiciary would not be welcome.What would they do about it? Probably not a great deal.

The internal reaction would be the only significant one.

So, foreign countries wouldn't have had a problem with the Dem government, since they came to power through the defection of MPs.

Sent from my shoe phone.

The issue was that just about everyone knew the dems had a pretty slim chance of winning the coming election.

So, you deal with them politely knowing that in a year or two there will be someone else in that position. Hardly conducive to long term stability and planning.

[rubl]

"Hardly conducive to long term stability and planning."

Note the Abhisit Government had a maximum term of December 2008 till December 2011. The current government has from July 2011 till July 2015. What a difference a year makes :-)

[jayboy]

Of course there would be no issue if the Democrats won an election.Nor would there be an issue if MPs defected.Foreign countries have no quarrel with Thailand and look if at all possible to get along.However a coup whether from the military or the judiciary would not be welcome.What would they do about it? Probably not a great deal.

The internal reaction would be the only significant one.

So, foreign countries wouldn't have had a problem with the Dem government, since they came to power through the defection of MPs.

Sent from my shoe phone.

Well that's in the past so we know foreign governments had no problem with the Dems coming to power that way.It was within the rules of the parliamentary system and the grisly details wouldn

[Thai at Heart]

"Hardly conducive to long term stability and planning."

Note the Abhisit Government had a maximum term of December 2008 till December 2011. The current government has from July 2011 till July 2015. What a difference a year makes :-)

I was looking more from foreign government and business perspective. Having a government switch mid term is not ideal. Policies come on, then out.

They the last 6 months is given to campaigns and pretty much everyone knew the Dems weren't going to win.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[waza]

Morality is a different question altogether.But on legitimacy the position of the international community towards Thailand is very clear.

Did any country refuse to recognise the Democrat government as the legitimate government of Thailand? What is your point?

No but you have missed the point.Given the excellent democratic credentials of the current government there would be strongly adverse international reaction if it was removed through a coup or judicial activism.But more troubling for the unelected elites would be the angry internal reaction and unpredictable outcome - hence in my personal view the probability is the government will see out its term.

If at the next general election the government is so unpopular as you suggest no doubt the Thai people will be seeking an alternative.

lol, excellent democratic credential, good one. So your definition of a democratic government is one whose leader is an unelected criminal on the run from justice and its PM and cabinet are party list MPs and therefore unelected by the people of Thailand as well. They rule with threats and intimidation and their only agenda is to remove judicial oversight and white wash their criminal boss?

Edited May 28, 2013 by waza

[Robby nz]

lol, excellent democratic credential, good one. So your definition of a democratic government is one whose leader is an unelected criminal on the run from justice and its PM and cabinet are party list MPs and therefore unelected by the people of Thailand as well. They rule with threats and intimidation and their only agenda is to remove judicial oversight and white wash their criminal boss?

Hay Waza you forgot about all the PM's and cabinet members, including a deputy PM who are either on bail for or facing criminal charges.

And of course all the cabinet who are not MP's but are only there as a reward.

A wonderful lot of upstanding citizens to be running the country.

Don't know about the Dems not being able to win an election.

Every day we see more people and groups coming out in opposition to PT and if the country wants to get rid of them in an election there isn't really anywhere else to turn.

If the were to start getting their act together and their profile up by getting stuck into the stupid statements that PT come out with then they must have a good chance.

The Don Muang by election could give an indication.

[Curt1591]

" ... a new face to Thai protest"

"Thai protest" has become such a common occurrence that is has about as much effect as farting in a tornado.

[Baerboxer]

Of course there would be no issue if the Democrats won an election.Nor would there be an issue if MPs defected.Foreign countries have no quarrel with Thailand and look if at all possible to get along.However a coup whether from the military or the judiciary would not be welcome.What would they do about it? Probably not a great deal.

The internal reaction would be the only significant one.

So, foreign countries wouldn't have had a problem with the Dem government, since they came to power through the defection of MPs.

Sent from my shoe phone.

Well that's in the past so we know foreign governments had no problem with the Dems coming to power that way.It was within the rules of the parliamentary system and the grisly details wouldn

Hmmm. Wonder how the foreign governments will react as this government continues to remove checks and balances, reduce freedom of speech, ignores the rule of law and progresses to the one party state vision of its great thinker.

I remember many foreign governments had no problem with the Robert Mugabe government when it came to power. Another great man of the people democrat who successfully milked a country. Coming to power is one thing, holding onto it was different.