Thaksin Will Return With Pride And Dignity

[blaze]

Interesting to see the arguement over which of two regimes that heavily stifled freedoms was the worst. Surely a higher benchmark could be set.

Would it be safe to make the following assertions:

1. the purpose of government in Thailand- is to administer the state- not to change its essential essential core- its core- including what we might regard as inequities- is taken as a given- it is part of "thainess'- and any government that would seek to substantially upset that ancient balance would be viewed in many quarters as practically treasonous.

2. That prior to elected government, and now, along with elected government those that were tasked with administering the state were what we now call the 'civil service- the beaurocracy. It's job was to serve as interlocateur between the emergent bourgeoise- it served to benefit not the bourgeoisie- nor did it pretend to- but to employ the bourgoeoise and capitalists in the interests of the aristocrats.(Hence the fear that many commentators have of the new constitution which gives the beaurocrats so much power).

3. That along with the civil service- the other institutions that are expected to maintain the harmonious status quo have historically been the military and the media and the judiciary.

4. That civil rights exist primarily to ensure the social harmony of the nation. The 'wrongness' in trampling civil rights is not based on the philosophical concept of the rights of man- but rather that such trampling COULD lead to social disharmony.

And I don't know if any of this is ultimately true- though I am prepared to argue that they are, nor if they are important- just kind of helps put everything in perspective.

[hammered]

Interesting to see the arguement over which of two regimes that heavily stifled freedoms was the worst. Surely a higher benchmark could be set.

Would it be safe to make the following assertions:

1. the purpose of government in Thailand- is to administer the state- not to change its essential essential core- its core- including what we might regard as inequities- is taken as a given- it is part of "thainess'- and any government that would seek to substantially upset that ancient balance would be viewed in many quarters as practically treasonous.

2. That prior to elected government, and now, along with elected government those that were tasked with administering the state were what we now call the 'civil service- the beaurocracy. It's job was to serve as interlocateur between the emergent bourgeoise- it served to benefit not the bourgeoisie- nor did it pretend to- but to employ the bourgoeoise and capitalists in the interests of the aristocrats.(Hence the fear that many commentators have of the new constitution which gives the beaurocrats so much power).

3. That along with the civil service- the other institutions that are expected to maintain the harmonious status quo have historically been the military and the media and the judiciary.

4. That civil rights exist primarily to ensure the social harmony of the nation. The 'wrongness' in trampling civil rights is not based on the philosophical concept of the rights of man- but rather that such trampling COULD lead to social disharmony.

And I don't know if any of this is ultimately true- though I am prepared to argue that they are, nor if they are important- just kind of helps put everything in perspective.

It sounds a reasonable arguement to me. You may want to put academics in number 3 as well as the education system at all levels acts in the way you suggest imho. There is also some underdevlopment theory that is similar to your line of analysis although it tends to concentrate more on how powerful bureaucracies were left by ex-colonial powers, somethign Thailand didnt experience of course. Then again Thai leaders were pretty adept at recognising and implemeting western ideas that suited.

One wonders, if the iniquities are never resolved, if one day Thailand will see its own Morales or Chavez or could it be a Milosevic or Taylor?

[cclub75]

Yes, with two thirds majority in an appointed Senate.

It doesn't seem correct. First the Senate has 1/2 of its members "selected".

However, the trick is that the current NLA will act like the Senate. For how long, tthat's the question ?

Then, to amend the Constitution it appears that minimum 50 % of members of both houses (representative and senat) must vote for.

Read here.

Edited December 10, 2007 by cclub75

[Tony Clifton]

I guess some will need to see events like New Year's eve 2007 repeating after or just before the elections to have a second look the true face of the old power clique packed with criminals and their real intentions which consist mostly of betraying the country as Surakiart, an ex-TRT member, has mentioned this week.

[younghusband]

I guess some will need to see events like New Year's eve 2007 repeating after or just before the elections to have a second look the true face of the old power clique packed with criminals and their real intentions which consist mostly of betraying the country as Surakiart, an ex-TRT member, has mentioned this week.

Can you clarify whether you are implying TRT was responsible for the bombings last New Year's Eve? If this is the case few people on any side of the political divide believe that now and I was wondering whether you are going to share any new evidence with us?

Or is any old lie permissable if it can tar what you call the old power clique?

[hammered]

I guess some will need to see events like New Year's eve 2007 repeating after or just before the elections to have a second look the true face of the old power clique packed with criminals and their real intentions which consist mostly of betraying the country as Surakiart, an ex-TRT member, has mentioned this week.

Can you clarify whether you are implying TRT was responsible for the bombings last New Year's Eve? If this is the case few people on any side of the political divide believe that now and I was wondering whether you are going to share any new evidence with us?

Or is any old lie permissable if it can tar what you call the old power clique?

Dont know about the last new year bombings and lets be fair, who does, but it may be fair to assume that after the election things could get a whole lot worse. Pessimist I am right now;)

[Ricardo]

So people are saying clean politician actually exists?

In theory yes ... although it might make an interesting thread, if you can frame it to include Thailand, so it is relevant to TV.

For sure, there are many corrupt politicians here, with some being much more corrupt than others, IMHO. And then there are the totally greedy & corrupt, who would try to dismantle the institutions of democracy, stifle free-speach, and stamp out any and all differing opinions, to establish a kleptocracy.

I was of course referring to Thaksin & the former TRT-government here, although that seems to have been missed, by some other posters, who view the new constitution & holding of elections later this month as anti-democratic steps ?

Oh, I didn't miss anything. What I did was cleverly turn your post around against you, and you didn't miss that did you? Of course you didn't.

No, I did miss it, what point were you trying to cleverly make ?

I don't see where you mentioned the new Constitution and the elections in your earlier post quoted above however?

That's because I didn't mention them in the earlier post. Well spotted.

Or were you attempting a weak strawman? Sorry, you're too clever for me again, what are you trying to say ?

[Tony Clifton]

I guess some will need to see events like New Year's eve 2007 repeating after or just before the elections to have a second look the true face of the old power clique packed with criminals and their real intentions which consist mostly of betraying the country as Surakiart, an ex-TRT member, has mentioned this week.

Can you clarify whether you are implying TRT was responsible for the bombings last New Year's Eve? If this is the case few people on any side of the political divide believe that now and I was wondering whether you are going to share any new evidence with us?

Or is any old lie permissable if it can tar what you call the old power clique?

Are you saying I'm a liar?

No more than 24 hours after the NYE bombings, Thaksin himself immediately and publicly went on the defensive, pointed a finger, from abroad mind you, at Southern insurgents, blaming someone else.

No such events have repeated since in and around Bangkok, meanwhile, bombings and killings are still a regular thing down South.

Just like the other bomb related events in Bangkok, all related to politics, the boys in brown again conveniently went nowhere with their investigation, I'm sure Pol. Lt. Col. Thaksin was pleased the whole time.

What more do you need to see a pattern here?

Just wait and see how TRT/PPP, familiar with violence and cheats, react around Dec 23rd.

Sadly, history will repeat.

Maybe then you won't interpret my suspicion as lies.

Edited December 10, 2007 by Tony Clifton

[younghusband]

I guess some will need to see events like New Year's eve 2007 repeating after or just before the elections to have a second look the true face of the old power clique packed with criminals and their real intentions which consist mostly of betraying the country as Surakiart, an ex-TRT member, has mentioned this week.

Can you clarify whether you are implying TRT was responsible for the bombings last New Year's Eve? If this is the case few people on any side of the political divide believe that now and I was wondering whether you are going to share any new evidence with us?

Or is any old lie permissable if it can tar what you call the old power clique?

Are you saying I'm a liar?

No more than 24 hours after the NYE bombings, Thaksin himself immediately and publicly went on the defensive, pointed a finger, from abroad mind you, at Southern insurgents, blaming someone else.

No such events have repeated since in and around Bangkok, meanwhile, bombings and killings are still a regular thing down South.

Just like the other bomb related events in Bangkok, all related to politics, the boys in brown again conveniently went nowhere with their investigation, I'm sure Pol. Lt. Col. Thaksin was pleased the whole time.

What more do you need to see a pattern here?

Just wait and see how TRT/PPP, familiar with violence and cheats, react around Dec 23rd.

Sadly, history will repeat.

Maybe then you won't interpret my suspicion as lies.

Just to clarify I'm not accusing you of being a liar, and I have no reason to believe you are not confident of the truth of what you say.Nevertheless your comment shows you have a very contrarian view of what most informed people think.One can never exclude any possibility for example the equally far fetched rumour that coup elements were themselves responsible.Needless to say you produce no new evidence just woozy bar room "theories".I'm more sympathetic to your cause than you might credit but frankly it's counterproductive to attribute every problem or incident to Thaksin.It spoils the case for which there is plenty of real ammunition.

[sriracha john]

Gee...perhaps this internet discussion forum needs to adopt a new logo then:

but it's the nerdy ties and sports jackets I'd object to having to wear.

[sriracha john]

I'd just never demean a member to point of saying they don't belong here simply because they aren't aware of all the verbage used in formal forensics debating.

[Ricardo]

Sorry, you're too clever for me again, what are you trying to say ?

Correct.

If you don't understand what a stawman argument is you've no business discussing politics.

Sorry but, since you're obviously far more clever than me, perhaps you could please help educate me. I have no idea what a 'stawman argument' is, but I'd like to learn, if you're not too clever to condescend to enlighten me, and others ?

And I reject utterly your assertion that I have no right to discuss politics, just because I've never heard of some technical term, which I politely asked you to explain ! Professional people often descend into technical terms, to avoid making a clear plain-English explanation, but I was always trained to do the opposite, and also to keep asking until I do understand the answer.

[hammered]

Maybe if the average Thai voter doesnt know the correct terminology they shouldnt be allowed to vote (Gets coat and leaves the room rapidly)

[Prakanong]

Maybe if the average Thai voter doesnt know the correct terminology they shouldnt be allowed to vote (Gets coat and leaves the room rapidly)

John Stuart Mill the father of Liberalism (as in the classical English sense and not the newly bastardised American sense - thought I would explain the terms ) was fearful of the tyranny of the majority so wanted a "Citizenship" terst you had to pass before you could vote did he not?

Or was I dreaming in that tutorial?

Never mind the Thai's there are a few TV members would not get a vote in their home country if this applied

Got my coat and will join you

[Plus]

Anyone with half a brain knows in their own heart that the current military dictatorship is desperate to prevent a government popular with the majority of voters from coming to power in the forthcoming elections.

Thanks for the insight into what people with half-brains think...

>>>>

There was a press freedom day on Dec 9, I think. Media professionals don't seem to think they face more restrictions now than under Thaksin.

>>>>

In no way Thaksin intended to change essential Thai society landscape - millions of shafted people with selected few enjoying the benefits. He just made them feel less shafted in exchange for unquestionable loyalty.

>>>>

It's a delusion to think that if Thaksin takes the power away from the elites he will give it to the people.

>>>>

Former leftists among his strategic advisors initially might have had plans to let common people to have a say, but by now it generated into building of a giant orc army to take over the world, under the direction of the all-suing eye of Mordor (presently located in London, UK).

>>>>

When posters point out deficiency in terminology/grammar/language use of others they are expected to spell it right themselves ("stawman" argument).

[Prakanong]

Anyone with half a brain knows in their own heart that the current military dictatorship is desperate to prevent a government popular with the majority of voters from coming to power in the forthcoming elections.

Thanks for the insight into what people with half-brains think...

>>>>

There was a press freedom day on Dec 9, I think. Media professionals don't seem to think they face more restrictions now than under Thaksin.

>>>>

In no way Thaksin intended to change essential Thai society landscape - millions of shafted people with selected few enjoying the benefits. He just made them feel less shafted in exchange for unquestionable loyalty.

>>>>

It's a delusion to think that if Thaksin takes the power away from the elites he will give it to the people.

>>>>

Former leftists among his strategic advisors initially might have had plans to let common people to have a say, but by now it generated into building of a giant orc army to take over the world, under the direction of the all-suing eye of Mordor (presently located in London, UK).

>>>>

When posters point out deficiency in terminology/grammar/language use of others they are expected to spell it right themselves ("stawman" argument).

So in your view there is no hope for the Thai people as the leaders are all as bad as each othwer?

As a conservative you like this status quo and hope the thai people will put up with their lot and keep schtum!

[hammered]

Anyone with half a brain knows in their own heart that the current military dictatorship is desperate to prevent a government popular with the majority of voters from coming to power in the forthcoming elections.

Thanks for the insight into what people with half-brains think...

>>>>

There was a press freedom day on Dec 9, I think. Media professionals don't seem to think they face more restrictions now than under Thaksin.

>>>>

In no way Thaksin intended to change essential Thai society landscape - millions of shafted people with selected few enjoying the benefits. He just made them feel less shafted in exchange for unquestionable loyalty.

>>>>

It's a delusion to think that if Thaksin takes the power away from the elites he will give it to the people.

>>>>

Former leftists among his strategic advisors initially might have had plans to let common people to have a say, but by now it generated into building of a giant orc army to take over the world, under the direction of the all-suing eye of Mordor (presently located in London, UK).

>>>>

When posters point out deficiency in terminology/grammar/language use of others they are expected to spell it right themselves ("stawman" argument).

So in your view there is no hope for the Thai people as the leaders are all as bad as each othwer?

As a conservative you like this status quo and hope the thai people will put up with their lot and keep schtum!

It would be nice to see the development of some political ideology in Thailand and development of parties that reresented the interests of groups and people rather than their own family/clan/business/allies interests. Ok the Dems have an ideology and represent some small groups but are far from perfect even if well beyond any other party. Maybe the complete breakdown of the feudal patronage system is needed to achieve this. However, the rapid urbanisation that has been going on will probably free poorer younger people from the strictures of the feudal village/feudal overlord/patronage control system. Leaders need pushing or even rising from within a movement, and luckily most of the hideous intransigent self importnant leaders like Samak, Banharn and god forbid Chavalit cant have too many more years left in them although Thaksin probably has!

Anyway sorry to intrude on a question i was not nvited to.

[hammered]

Anyone willing to have a guess or speculate at what will happen at the election and after and how that will affect things including the return of Mr. T with or without pride and dignity?

[Plus]

As a conservative you like this status quo and hope the thai people will put up with their lot and keep schtum!

I'm not sure I am qualified as a conservative - in the PAD days Thai people stood up to their rulers and I supported them.

>>>

Why do you expect the political change will come from lower classes? PAD members demanded government's accountability and transparency, something Thaksin's supporters have absolutely no interest in.

Urban middle classes have been out of the feudal patron-client system for a long time and they have been very assertive ever since May 1992. Thaksin ignored them at his own peril.

This is where the change will come from, I think/hope.

[Prakanong]

As a conservative you like this status quo and hope the thai people will put up with their lot and keep schtum!

I'm not sure I am qualified as a conservative - in the PAD days Thai people stood up to their rulers and I supported them.

>>>

Why do you expect the political change will come from lower classes? PAD members demanded government's accountability and transparency, something Thaksin's supporters have absolutely no interest in.

Urban middle classes have been out of the feudal patron-client system for a long time and they have been very assertive ever since May 1992. Thaksin ignored them at his own peril.

This is where the change will come from, I think/hope.

I do not mean "Conservative" with a big "C" but a little "c".

A rising middle class will have an effect on the electoral system - how fast is it growing though?

Thailand is not developing as fast as it needs to - it has the low growth in the second divison of Asian economies. As Jagdish Bhagwati says, "Less than 6% is a failure for a developing country"

China and India a case on their own

Korea, Taiwan, HK and Singapore (the gang of four) in the first

Malaysia, Thailand, PI and Indionesia in the second

Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and others all following behind

[blaze]

As a conservative you like this status quo and hope the thai people will put up with their lot and keep schtum!

I'm not sure I am qualified as a conservative - in the PAD days Thai people stood up to their rulers and I supported them.

>>>

Why do you expect the political change will come from lower classes? PAD members demanded government's accountability and transparency, something Thaksin's supporters have absolutely no interest in.

Urban middle classes have been out of the feudal patron-client system for a long time and they have been very assertive ever since May 1992. Thaksin ignored them at his own peril.

This is where the change will come from, I think/hope.

Plus you make it sound like the PAD was the vanguard of a popular uprising. It wasn't. It represented a relatively small but vocal portion of the society- backed by very powerful conservative elements- including elements in the army and the media. It existed to TOPPLE- not to bring about- popular government.

The muteness of the middle class over the last year demonstrates fairly clearly that they are more than content to live under a military dictatorship IF they are not being taxed to fund 'populist' (read, progressive social) programs. It has shown iteslf to be content with the type of 'guided democracy' which the new charter provides and whereby future governments avoid censure at the pleasure of the (conservative) civil service (which also includes judges and military). Where even the government agency responsible for monitering human rights will be composed of members selected- not from NGOs- but from the civil service.

It has not risen up to demand a solution to the problem in the south- to demand an end to police incompetence and corruption- to demand a full accounting of the money drafted to the military in the last year. In short, it has shown very little interest in real transparency.

To suggest that the Thai middle class is preoccupied with issues of social fairness is, I submit, to totally underappreciate the financial pressures that the Bangkok middle class finds itself under- they can't afford luxuries like compassion for their impoverished country cousins. Not when that compassion will be expressed through higher labor costs or increased taxes.

Ask your middle class friends which means more to them- making money or having a functioning democracy. What scares me most about the middle classes though is that whether in terms of fashion, pop music or politics- they have shown a herd instinct that lends itself to being even more easily manipulated than the herd instincts of the poor.

But I do agree that the urban middle classes have been assertive since 92 and that a polititian ignores them at his peril.

I expect that political change won't come from anywhere. There are aspects of thai culture that function to prevent substantive change. Certainly it won't come from the kind of coalition governments that the charter seeks to ensure. The one force that will stay strong will be the military at whose pleasure all others will serve.

And the relative popularity of this coup has ensured that the military option is never far away.

Edited December 12, 2007 by blaze

[jackspratt]

We're all big boys here. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

Or alternatively, if you can't take it, use the Tud defense - put the other person on "ignore".

Hypocrite is the first description that springs to mind.

[Plus]

... you make it sound like the PAD was the vanguard of a popular uprising. It wasn't. It represented a relatively small but vocal portion of the society- backed by very powerful conservative elements- including elements in the army and the media. It existed to TOPPLE- not to bring about- popular government.

It was a massive movement uniting people from all sectors of society who'd normally won't even sit at the same table.

The muteness of the middle class over the last year demonstrates fairly clearly that they are more than content to live under a military dictatorship IF they are not being taxed to fund 'populist' (read, progressive social) programs. It has shown iteslf to be content with the type of 'guided democracy' ...

I agree that they don't see democratically elected government as a main requirement - they demand transparency and accountability, they need government that would listen to the people and value their opions. On that front the Surayud's govt did far better than Thaksin's, and it was temporary. They tolerate it only for that reason.

The issue of taxes doesn't even exist, there have been no changes in taxation for the past ten years, there's nothing to discuss there.

It has not risen up to demand a solution to the problem in the south- to demand an end to police incompetence and corruption- to demand a full accounting of the money drafted to the military in the last year. In short, it has shown very little interest in real transparency.

People have been occupied with bigger issues than that. And don't expect people to take to the streets to investigate military spending, it doesn't work that way. There are civil society leaders who voice these opinions and people expect the government to listen, they don't all jump on the hotline demanding answers themselves.

To suggest that the Thai middle class is preoccupied with issues of social fairness is, I submit, to totally underappreciate the financial pressures that the Bangkok middle class finds itself under- they can't afford luxuries like compassion for their impoverished country cousins. Not when that compassion will be expressed through higher labor costs or increased taxes.

Sending money back to their parents upcountry is a widely accepted social obligation of people who "made it in Bangkok". does that qualify?

What scares me most about the middle classes though is that whether in terms of fashion, pop music or politics- they have shown a herd instinct that lends itself to being even more easily manipulated than the herd instincts of the poor.

Any class will follow herd instincts, so what? It's unavoidable. And it's far more difficult to manipulate middle classes. You can't pay them to vote, for example. It just doesn't fly. You can't win their allegiance forever, they spot bullshit miles away. Bangkok is filled with characters who have lost all their popularity -look at ex-governors like Chamlong or Bhichit Rattakul and even Samak.

I expect that political change won't come from anywhere. There are aspects of thai culture that function to prevent substantive change. Certainly it won't come from the kind of coalition governments that the charter seeks to ensure. The one force that will stay strong will be the military at whose pleasure all others will serve.

Looking at the bigger world - have you seen any big political changes in the past hundred years? Which Asian country has even approached Western standards of democracy? I'm afraid changes you are talking about are a pipe dream.

[Prakanong]

"Looking at the bigger world - have you seen any big political changes in the past hundred years? Which Asian country has even approached Western standards of democracy? I'm afraid changes you are talking about are a pipe dream."

You are kidding about the first question up there are you not? Totalitariaism, rise and fall of state socialism, end of colonies etc etc

As for the second - maybe the west had a head start - maybe the Asian democracies will move to more open more free societies respecting the rights of the individual rather than the patriarchial top down attitude of many.

There has been moves this way elsewhere - little by little ie Korea, Taiwan etc

Even in Singapore many commentators such as Martin Woolf think the current system will not survive much longer after the "founding fathers" pass away and the patriarchail "We knowwhat is good for you" system will change. Maybe singapore needed that in 65 to move from third world to first but now are different times and the post 65 generation do not have the same values or needs as wer required in 65.

Many would argue Singapore will change before Thailand in this respect - there are some similarities in their current situations.

It will be peaceful in Singapore - will we have a peaceful transition in Thailand?

[Plus]

I wasn't kidding. I was looking for feudalism to democracy+capitalism shift, and it was largely completed in the 19th century. Communism/totalitarism was an aberration and after it was over people realised that it has contributed nothing. Note how all post-communism countries stress their democratic roots - they WERE democratic before communists took over.

From that point of view the world hasn't really progressed very far in the past hundred years. Democracy has certainly improved, but the principles have stayed the same.

Just a decade ago Korean and Taiwanese political culture was similar to Singapore, no dissent allowed, no real opposition. I wouldn't count them as democracies in the Western sense yet.

As a societies, I was under the impression that Korean hierarchial system is far stronger than Thailand's and the coutnry and it's economy is basically divided between chaebols. Taiwanese rely on small enterprises, but they are so proud of their Chinese heritage that I doubt democracy has made any impact on their social structure.

They will evolve into something similar to Japan, I think, and so will Singapore.

I can't think of any successful example of a "newly" democratised country, and as China takes over the world there's a whole new model out there for Asians to follow, and it's not democratic.

[Prakanong]

So you take your history in epochs then - feudalism to capitalism and nothing in between - how boring that must be!

Thailand seems not to be able to make the leap - or at least the conservative forces in the country are hanging on as long as they can.

[Ricardo]

If you don't understand what a stawman argument is you've no business discussing politics.

it's certainly not my fault he made himself look foolish by admitting he didn't know what a strawman was!

We're all big boys here. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

Please note though, I have never told you that you have no business discussing politics, or referred to you as foolish, as I would regard it as rude. We don't do that on TV - there is a basic respect for other members. Indeed, I would defend your right to hold whatever opinions you want, and to free speach, and did so for the pro-Thaksin posters way back before the coup. I hope you would equally defend mine. I apologise for using your use of 'clever' to suggest that you felt you were in some way superior. Things got too heated, for a while. This is not personal - it is about issues.

Thanks for the definition of 'strawman' - it adds a bit, to my knowledge of political science. My degree & professional qualifications were in other unrelated subjects.

Looking back to when this started, Younghusband had challenged some posters, who he felt were junta-philes, to put up 3 points where they felt the current government had failed. I did so. I hope it is therefore accepted that I'm not in any way a fanatical supporter of the junta, although I do believe it was the lesser of two evils at the time, and I do look forward to its (hopefully) peaceful passing at the election this month, if at all possible.

I agree with your views, as I understand them from your post on the 'Poll on another coup soon' thread, on the failure of most Thai politicians to act in the interests of the ordinary people, and would also agree that Thaksin tried to help them, during his early years at least. I suspect that, if he has succeeded in putting poverty and the voters on the political map, then he will have achieved something worthwhile. Sadly I don't see much evidence of it yet - in any of the parties to this election.

But I also feel that he became corrupted by power in the end. So do not see him returning with 'Pride and Dignity' anytime soon, unless the PPP win the election, and the military do not act, which seems unlikely.

[hammered]

Just an aside guys and i'll leave you to argue the points but the middle class in Thailand is miniscule and therefore politcally irrelevent considering they lack any power. The main groups are the poor - huge - and admitterdly divided into rural and urabn poor that are ver different and the elite - small - but with immense poower -.

[Plus]

Thailand seems not to be able to make the leap - or at least the conservative forces in the country are hanging on as long as they can.

My point is that Thailand is not alone, I can't think of any country that did this leap in the past hundred years. Hundreds tried, but none succeded, especially bottom-up attempts that all ended disastrously.

So, I don't think the "revolution" is imminent, I'm afraid it's not coming at all.

Thailand's urban population is about 50% and growing, and apart from urban poor most of it can be counted as middle class, politically speaking, so it's not insignificant. In a couple of decades villagers who are still under feudal boot will be in a clear minority.

Traditional communities that survived inside fast growing cities can still be under influence of local pooyais, I suppose, but most urbanites have no bosses or patrons to answer to, they are out of the "system".

[blaze]

Just an aside guys and i'll leave you to argue the points but the middle class in Thailand is miniscule and therefore politcally irrelevent considering they lack any power. The main groups are the poor - huge - and admitterdly divided into rural and urabn poor that are ver different and the elite - small - but with immense poower -.

"The traditional emphasis on the “middle class” (that characterizes Bangkok “culture”), as an engine of democracy appears to be declining in favor of a view that middle-class support for democracy exists primarily when it coincides with class interests in curbing the power of government. This means that one cannot expect middle-class enthusiasm for democracy when it poses conflicts with private interests of the middle class. This latter view is expressed both by Laothamatas (1996), who argues that the 1991 coup could not have been sustained except for support from the middle class, and Samudavanija (1998), who notes that the role of the middle class in Thailand, vis- a-vis democracy, has been “reactive rather than proactive” (156) and that its primary interest in democracy has been “to safeguard their own freedom and the freedom of the market” (158). Similarly, the coup of 2006 is often conceived as a revolt of the Bangkok-middle-class against dominance of the government by populist politicians who gain their support from rural masses."

This is from the introduction to a research paper submitted to the journal, Asian Barometer- and a very interesting read. Some interesting tables- analysis- historical perspective. Worth bookmarking.

http://www.asianbarometer.org/newenglish/p...apers/no.34.pdf