So far - winners and losers in Thai unrest

[hellodolly]

As most people know, The Nation isn't exactly a fan of the government and Kavi is probably its most 'yellow' writer. His bias explains his thinking here. Most pro-govt and neutral people think that Suthep's days are numbered and protest numbers will gradually dwindle, unless something drastic happens. Can't see anticipate what Suthep's next move could be. He's gone as far as he can go in upping the ante without introducing outright violence, and govt has responded appropriately. Of course, if you talk to the anti-govt people, they seem to think they've never been stronger and are on the verge of a great victory. There's a lot of self-reinforcement that goes on in social movements.

I tend to think that both the government and the opposition will be weakened after this, and that might not be a bad thing if it leads to a more pluralistic society. And that should be the goal, not more bitter polarization and mindless hatred. I haven't seen any great awakening. But the conflict certainly has unleashed an orgy of online stupidy, coupled with the inevitable violence on the streets, tragic and pathetic in equal measure, rather like this article. Kavi seems to think this is a tyrannical and unpopular dictatorship rather than an elected government. I know that elections don't mean you can just do what you want and it's true that this government has made grave mistakes that need to be seriously looked at and punished.

The fact is, though, this government has millions of passionate supporters, probably still more than the opposition has. They're not just going to go away if the government is overthrown. I'd say the same to red shirts who seem to think that total victory can be achieved over the 'amaat' and their salim supporters, caring little for the concerns and feelings of those they intend to best. There can be no victory here which isn't phyric if the intention is to crush the other side rather than looking to work out some sort of modus vivendi.

'The second loser is the Red-shirt movement and its affiliated organizations. The confrontation they had over Saturday's night with the anti-government supporters at Ramkhamhaeng University, killing five persons and injuring scores have discredited further the groups as thuggish.'

Yes, well it certainly looks that way from the one side of the political divide, where they're completely ignoring pictures of student violence and fabricating an alternate narrative in which students were completely innocent and set upon by reds with hearts set on violence. The red shirts, of course, are also spinning a similar narrative in which they absolve their own side of any responsibility. The reality is, anyone that's followed this with an eye on the truth, rather than those motivated by partisan agendas, would see that neither the anti-govt RU students nor the red shirts have enhanced their reputations. On the one hand, we see students attacking old men unprovoked, smashing up a bus with scared old ladies inside, wrecking two minibuses and apparently setting another coach alight. On the other hand, we see red shirts reacting to those attacks with unnecesary and quite probably disproportionate violence.

Then things degenerated further into a chaotic brawl provocateurs took full advantage of, eventually trapping the students - the vast majority of whom were blameless and hadn't been involved in the fighting - in the university for what was no doubt a terrifying night. That's what happened as far as we can say for certain, though the exact truth, is as ever, murky.

But rather than viewing this savage incident as a chance to reflect on how this sort of violence can be prevented in future, both sides will instead believe exactly what they want to believe, feeling totally vindicated without a passing thought about how the other side might feel. For that reason, I very much doubt it'll have any effect on the way the wider conflict is perceived.

As usual a thoughtful post. How ever I can not buy

On the other hand, we see red shirts reacting to those attacks with unnecesary and quite probably disproportionate violence.

part.

There was no probable in it. It was an over kill reaction showing that the red shirts have not changed since 2010. There leaders quickly realized it and told them all to go home before it became a 2010 again with them being the instigators again.

I forget the exact wording but I believe it was She was going to allow them to go home like as if they had no choice.

All in all I take it to be a long range victory. Some losers and winners today but in the long run a victory for Thailand. They are now aware of what is going on and willing to do some thing about it. Some thing all future governments including this one will have to take into account when playing God/Buddha/Allah.

With the growth and understanding of the electronic social scene it will be harder and harder to ride roughshod over the people. On the down side it will be easier and easier to spread hatred and bigotry to those into that kind of thing.

[hellodolly]

The author is in dire need of English lessons.

You sound like my wife. If I don't get the word pronounced perfectly and the grammar perfect she is incapable of thinking a little bit about it. No lee way what so ever.

But I will admit her tunnel vision has gotten a little wider in 7 years.

[daiwill60]

By the way, don't they have any native English speaking editors at The Nation?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Is that because they cannot employ a farang into a job that a Thai can do , I wonder?

Or maybe it is worried that a farang may write articles that are unbiased and possibly honestly inflammatory or make sense , hence showing up the abilities of the current editing team.

[hellodolly]

I think Suthep's (the anti-govt opposition) end game is to negotiate directly with Thaksin. Why should they negotiate with Yingluck, she doesn't make any decisions? The deal will be ... Thaksin can have some of his money in return for withdrawing his mob from politics. Then there will be another election. PTP will run without Thaksin and without his money.

Before the flames begin .... understand that I'm not saying that this is the best solution or that I support this. I'm only saying I believe this may be the strategy.

----------

On another point, the English and grammar mistakes in Kavi's op-ed piece or any other English language newspaper in Thailand article don't bother me nor make the article any less interesting for me. And whether I agree with it or not ... it's an opinion and not "news". The opposite opinions are out there too.

Interesting post. I don't have a dog in this fight, but as a frequent visitor to the country and someone who has Thai friends there, I have followed the events over the last few days. I keep trying to figure out how Suthep becomes a winner here.

The demographics won't work - like most developing countries the poor vastly outnumber the middle class and the rich, so he will obviously always lose an election (as he and we all know).

Violence doesn't work for him either. I have several Thai middle class friends who do not like Thaksin and hated the idea of the amnesty, and went out and protested. But they are not the type to pick up stones, knives or whatever and do battle - they have jobs and families to take care of. They are not thugs (and I believe most Red Shirts are not either).

Doing a deal with the Big Man is possible, but what about a deal with the military? I don't think the Thai military really wants to run the country, it is outside of their pay scale. But what if Suthep creates as much havoc as he can (shutting down government), then goes to the military (who, as I understand it, does not like Thaksin), and says to them - Let's get rid of the Thaksin family from politics, I will run the country (we will call it a "People's Council"), and you can sit back fat and happy and do your thing.

I think that is the only way Suthep becomes a winner in this.

You are overlooking the history in the last two years. The democrats have won by-elections in two out of three red shirt strongholds the one they lost was the big sister of Yingluck here in Chiang Mai and even here the margin of victory was smaller.

You are correct in talking of the poor and uneducated masses but you are overlooking the social phenomenon they understand on face book and starting to see that all Thailand is not the same as they are and beginning to wonder why and where is all this prosperity that the government has promised them.

Electronics is just starting to make it's way into their society and it will make a huge difference. It is like that old Bob Dylan song about the times they are a changing. I predict a bright future for Thailand. I just hope my dollar can stand up in it. As I do love Thailand. Bottom line is I might have to budget.

I disagree with most posters here I think Thailand has become a big winner it will take time to develop but the seed was planted. This attitude of give me and give it to me right now if not ten minutes ago is self defeating. It has not and will not lead to any thing good. the people are now better armed with information and many of them see where they have been used and are willing to change.

Living in the past is a useless waste of time it is changing to fast. Look at what happened to the red shirts when they tried to return to their behavour of three years ago. They were instantly told to go home. Learn to live in the changing world, Yingluck will probably weather this storm but you can bet your bottom Baht she will be a changed leader. Let us hope a better one and not a vindictive one.

[sawadee1947]

As most people know, The Nation isn't exactly a fan of the government and Kavi is probably its most 'yellow' writer. His bias explains his thinking here. Most pro-govt and neutral people think that Suthep's days are numbered and protest numbers will gradually dwindle, unless something drastic happens. Can't see anticipate what Suthep's next move could be. He's gone as far as he can go in upping the ante without introducing outright violence, and govt has responded appropriately. Of course, if you talk to the anti-govt people, they seem to think they've never been stronger and are on the verge of a great victory. There's a lot of self-reinforcement that goes on in social movements.

I tend to think that both the government and the opposition will be weakened after this, and that might not be a bad thing if it leads to a more pluralistic society. And that should be the goal, not more bitter polarization and mindless hatred. I haven't seen any great awakening. But the conflict certainly has unleashed an orgy of online stupidy, coupled with the inevitable violence on the streets, tragic and pathetic in equal measure, rather like this article. Kavi seems to think this is a tyrannical and unpopular dictatorship rather than an elected government. I know that elections don't mean you can just do what you want and it's true that this government has made grave mistakes that need to be seriously looked at and punished.

The fact is, though, this government has millions of passionate supporters, probably still more than the opposition has. They're not just going to go away if the government is overthrown. I'd say the same to red shirts who seem to think that total victory can be achieved over the 'amaat' and their salim supporters, caring little for the concerns and feelings of those they intend to best. There can be no victory here which isn't phyric if the intention is to crush the other side rather than looking to work out some sort of modus vivendi.

'The second loser is the Red-shirt movement and its affiliated organizations. The confrontation they had over Saturday's night with the anti-government supporters at Ramkhamhaeng University, killing five persons and injuring scores have discredited further the groups as thuggish.'

Yes, well it certainly looks that way from the one side of the political divide, where they're completely ignoring pictures of student violence and fabricating an alternate narrative in which students were completely innocent and set upon by reds with hearts set on violence. The red shirts, of course, are also spinning a similar narrative in which they absolve their own side of any responsibility. The reality is, anyone that's followed this with an eye on the truth, rather than those motivated by partisan agendas, would see that neither the anti-govt RU students nor the red shirts have enhanced their reputations. On the one hand, we see students attacking old men unprovoked, smashing up a bus with scared old ladies inside, wrecking two minibuses and apparently setting another coach alight. On the other hand, we see red shirts reacting to those attacks with unnecesary and quite probably disproportionate violence.

Then things degenerated further into a chaotic brawl provocateurs took full advantage of, eventually trapping the students - the vast majority of whom were blameless and hadn't been involved in the fighting - in the university for what was no doubt a terrifying night. That's what happened as far as we can say for certain, though the exact truth, is as ever, murky.

But rather than viewing this savage incident as a chance to reflect on how this sort of violence can be prevented in future, both sides will instead believe exactly what they want to believe, feeling totally vindicated without a passing thought about how the other side might feel. For that reason, I very much doubt it'll have any effect on the way the wider conflict is perceived.

[sawadee1947]

I agree 100%. Probably one of the best analysis I've read in these days. And all without any polemis phrases. Well done

As most people know, The Nation isn't exactly a fan of the government and Kavi is probably its most 'yellow' writer. His bias explains his thinking here. Most pro-govt and neutral people think that Suthep's days are numbered and protest numbers will gradually dwindle, unless something drastic happens. Can't see anticipate what Suthep's next move could be. He's gone as far as he can go in upping the ante without introducing outright violence, and govt has responded appropriately. Of course, if you talk to the anti-govt people, they seem to think they've never been stronger and are on the verge of a great victory. There's a lot of self-reinforcement that goes on in social movements.

I tend to think that both the government and the opposition will be weakened after this, and that might not be a bad thing if it leads to a more pluralistic society. And that should be the goal, not more bitter polarization and mindless hatred. I haven't seen any great awakening. But the conflict certainly has unleashed an orgy of online stupidy, coupled with the inevitable violence on the streets, tragic and pathetic in equal measure, rather like this article. Kavi seems to think this is a tyrannical and unpopular dictatorship rather than an elected government. I know that elections don't mean you can just do what you want and it's true that this government has made grave mistakes that need to be seriously looked at and punished.

The fact is, though, this government has millions of passionate supporters, probably still more than the opposition has. They're not just going to go away if the government is overthrown. I'd say the same to red shirts who seem to think that total victory can be achieved over the 'amaat' and their salim supporters, caring little for the concerns and feelings of those they intend to best. There can be no victory here which isn't phyric if the intention is to crush the other side rather than looking to work out some sort of modus vivendi.

'The second loser is the Red-shirt movement and its affiliated organizations. The confrontation they had over Saturday's night with the anti-government supporters at Ramkhamhaeng University, killing five persons and injuring scores have discredited further the groups as thuggish.'

Yes, well it certainly looks that way from the one side of the political divide, where they're completely ignoring pictures of student violence and fabricating an alternate narrative in which students were completely innocent and set upon by reds with hearts set on violence. The red shirts, of course, are also spinning a similar narrative in which they absolve their own side of any responsibility. The reality is, anyone that's followed this with an eye on the truth, rather than those motivated by partisan agendas, would see that neither the anti-govt RU students nor the red shirts have enhanced their reputations. On the one hand, we see students attacking old men unprovoked, smashing up a bus with scared old ladies inside, wrecking two minibuses and apparently setting another coach alight. On the other hand, we see red shirts reacting to those attacks with unnecesary and quite probably disproportionate violence.

Then things degenerated further into a chaotic brawl provocateurs took full advantage of, eventually trapping the students - the vast majority of whom were blameless and hadn't been involved in the fighting - in the university for what was no doubt a terrifying night. That's what happened as far as we can say for certain, though the exact truth, is as ever, murky.

But rather than viewing this savage incident as a chance to reflect on how this sort of violence can be prevented in future, both sides will instead believe exactly what they want to believe, feeling totally vindicated without a passing thought about how the other side might feel. For that reason, I very much doubt it'll have any effect on the way the wider conflict is perceived.

[Richard Hall]

Strange, strange.

Guess, I am going to renew my Bangkok Post subscription rather than switching to The Nation.

[mgjackson69]

The problem with "the young", in general, is that they see issues as binary. Most do not have the life experience to understand that most of the nebulous thing called 'life' takes place in gray area somewhere between 0 and 1.

They see 'Thaksin' as the evil. So, simply get rid of Thaksin and all will be well.

Sent from my Xoom using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[smileydude]

I agree with emptyset that unless both sides can reflect impartially on how Thailand's political and social division has become so violent and learn how to avoid such future incidents there will no winners.

But I do see something positive coming out of this. Blatant disregard of the law and constitution was met with fierce resistance.

Any government in a developed country attempting to pass such laws would have been swifty voted out never to be seen again, but this is Thailand with rampant vote buying and corrupt, greedy politicians making up the majority.

Thai's who are normally known for their sabai sabai, mai pen rai attitude with preference to be non-confrontational are learning to fight for what is morally right , especially the younger generation. Maybe there is a glimmer of hope that with this attitude, corruption can be eventually weeded out.

Lets start by removing the tyranny of one.

Edited December 2, 2013 by smileydude

[robertson468]

On another point, the English and grammar mistakes in Kavi's op-ed piece or any other English language newspaper in Thailand article don't bother me nor make the article any less interesting for me. And whether I agree with it or not ... it's an opinion and not "news". The opposite opinions are out there too.

Up to a point I agree.But Kavi's article is so riddled with basic errors (eg chronograph for choreograph) to the extent that it becomes distracting.The Nation is an English language newspaper and Kavi is one of its key columnists:thus there is a responsibility to get this right and it can be easily done.

I have to agree about the poor standard of written English being a bit of a distraction. Is Kavi a professional journalist? I also found his article quite one sided and lacked any sort of balance, but perhaps that is the way he intended it to be? A good article should begin with an unbiased appraisal of the situation, then give the pro's and con's and if desired, conclude with the author's views/recommendations. Teacher's comments: good attempt, but needs to try harder.

[Frank James]

More yellow "journalism" from the Nation. Even they should be embarrassed by this piece.

[JoeLing]

> "Over the past weeks, they have done all these amazing things: demonstrating and peace marching on streets amid blazing sun, blowing whistles for hours including occupying government buildings" <

AMAZING THINGS HAPPEN IN THAILAND

[elzach]

The loser is Thailand...the winner is the army...let's see.

[whybother]

The loser is Thailand...the winner is the army...let's see.

The army lose either way.

(which is not a bad thing)

Edited December 2, 2013 by whybother

[elzach]

The problem with "the young", in general, is that they see issues as binary. Most do not have the life experience to understand that most of the nebulous thing called 'life' takes place in gray area somewhere between 0 and 1.

They see 'Thaksin' as the evil. So, simply get rid of Thaksin and all will be well.

Sent from my Xoom using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Another problem with the young (and not just in Thailand) is that they really don't know what they are protesting about or what specific objectives they have. After all, these are the "facebook and twitter young", ie. "let's go get our pics taken with tear gas in the background and make sure you upload them on FB instantly". Or, they will protest because their friends told them they will get the job with a new government ("why should it go to the Isaan guy"?)

In other words, there is no fighting for ideals here or elsewhere, to a large extent, for that matter. For that kind of "fighting", you need to go back to the late '70s or '80s at the latest.

[phitsanulokjohn]

My Exchange Rate is a winner

Winners = no one. Losers = everyone in Thai society,if they could only see it.

Exchange rates moreover a consequence in a slight reduction in interest rates.

[longway]

The author is in dire need of English lessons.

I am just happy he spelt 'loser' correctly and even more amazingly so did everyone in this thread; so far anyway.