Making Good Use Of The Poor

Probably traveled too much through the former Soviet Union and the old Eastern Bloc before the fall of the Berlin Wall, but to hear the communist terminology of class war out of the mouth of the probably most monopolist figure in Thailand’s recent history makes it not hard to have a good laugh. You witness one of the richest communists in history.

Thaksin is denouncing his very self by denouncing the “ammart,” the elite – no matter how you look at it, Thaksin belongs to the cast of the ammart. That makes for a unique contradiction: Thaksin is denouncing everything he himself wants to be again, while promising the usual vague combination of capitalism (a computer for every kid everyone gets rich) and socialism (everything for everyone).

By promising a world without the evils of the rich he’s actually promising a world without him. No revolution ever succeeded without participation of a country’s intelligentsia. Take the rich out of the equation – and you got a real problem. A more holistic approach wouldn’t look bad on Thaksin, but this is populism in full swing and yes, Thaksin makes good use of the poor. Yes yes, city people join the reds. Don’t fool yourself. Bangkokians ignore the rally so far. And they’re angry.

Yes, so many motorcycles ahead of procession and people waving … come on, you know how things work here. All one sees is an even deeper divide between the urban and the rural Thais, giving the taxpaying urban Thais a right to say: Hey, who’s footing all those promises.

Still, Thaksin gives the poor a chance to see Bangkok for free, now even with an extended sightseeing tour.




Sphere: Related Content

Related posts on absolutelyBangkok.com:

  1. Making Way
  2. Backlash Say Hi!
  3. From Million Man To Billion Baht March
  4. Carpetbaggers Or Else!!!
  5. A Pointless Reminder
  6. Thitinan & The Symbolism Of Ratchaprasong
  7. Quo Vadis Prathet Thai

March 20, 2010 | Filed Under On Our Own, Politics, Society 

Comments

54 Responses to “Making Good Use Of The Poor”

  1. Hobby on March 20th, 2010 10:56 am

    Big picture Dan – does it really matter even if Thaksin is currently a big part of the cause?

    Thaksin has said enough just in this last week that if he ever were to regain power he could be held to account – one way or another (via parliament, public outrage, ridicule and ultimately elections).

    That seem an immensely more satisfactory situation that the present system of untouchables and unmentionables, and military coup as the ultimate “solution.”

    (Again I refer you to Jakrapob’s “A state within a state” and his FCCT speech.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Andy on March 20th, 2010 11:04 am

    Great thoughts and true.

    Thaksin always has been the champion of bending any meaning into the direction off his bank account. Since years … That they still believe him just shows how desperate it’s time to start with a decent promised eduction reform in this country.

    Give the new government some time and yes keep watching their fingers too! ;O) New election with this opposition would only bring new chaos to the country currently.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. JJ on March 20th, 2010 11:21 am

    I keep trying and trying, cut can’t see any red movement without the self-serving humiliations of Thaksin.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. David Brown on March 20th, 2010 3:40 pm

    Rather meaningless anti-Thaksin stuff …

    As Andy intimates the important thing is that Thaksin was prepared to call an election to allow the people to choose if he should keep his position.

    And the red shirts want ALL Thais, including the rich, to be able to freely and fairly vote to choose who will be their government, Thaksin will have to continue to compete otherwise he will be out.

    Prem, the generals and Abhisit and his “mates” just want to hang on to power whether the Thai people wan them or not…

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. sssmui on March 20th, 2010 3:55 pm

    “… gives the poor a chance to see Bangkok for free …”

    - who writes, belongs in the madhouse …

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Andy on March 20th, 2010 10:46 pm

    OK David, what do you say e.g. about this then?

    Thaksin today during his live phone-in:

    “We will work for democracy for the wealth of everyone.”

    “Thailand is a land of plenty if it is properly managed. If you support the birthing of true democracy. Will you fight?”

    “With democracy, everything is easy. We can make 10 BTS and expand the city. Everyone will be rich and happy with good houses.”

    “As long as you share our vision, we will generate wealth together. BKK brothers, patience.”

    “Democracy + freedom is even higher. Everyone, join us!”

    “We just want freedom, equality and justice under democracy for people.”

    “I built myself up from nothing. Wealth is very easy. All we need is justice and democracy.”

    “Without democracy, there will be no peace. Without peace, there will be no wealth.”

    “Brothers, are you ready to demand the return of democracy?”

    This all within one hour.

    I’m really sorry for this democracy – but this is what Dr. Thaksin had to say to his red shirts tonight.

    Well I hope no one forgot how Thaksin ruled and he himself declared during his own dictatorship:
    DEMOCRACY IS NOT MY GOAL!

    It’s very obvious that the reds definitely are being taken for a rude ride.

    Plus don’t forget: allegations of corruption, authoritarianism, treason, conflicts of interest, acting non-diplomatically, muzzling of the press, accused of tax evasion, selling national assets to international investors. Independent bodies, including Amnesty International criticized Thaksin’s human rights record, 3′000+ killed (or let) during war on drugs etc.

    How on earth can Thailand move on with this man involved any further in Thai politics?

    … I mean the most funny thing he said this eve was maybe the truth itself (another T-slip):

    “Thaksin: Chavalit said that he has waited for democracy for 78 years” … well if u say so Dr. T…

    And David, with rigged elections, it’s not really what you claim, what the majority wants; is it? Again, is Thailand ready yet for fair and clean elections, as long as Thaksin the billionaire is in the game and wants us all to get rich? I doubt it it very much.

    (Thaksin quotes ex https://twitter.com/smartbrain)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. John Walsh on March 21st, 2010 12:07 am

    Usual right wing nonsense from the bought and paid for wing of the blogosphere.

    (BD: You’re an academic John, so you must know.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. rageltjie on March 21st, 2010 12:50 am

    Dude, you are misguided.

    Do you sleep with a hi-so whore?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Foxy on March 21st, 2010 9:28 am

    In one of Thaksin’s phone-ins to the red rally the other night he made a most bizarre statement. He warned people not to watch the news on public TV channels because “they are against the red cause,” so instead, he advised these people should get their news updates from their BlackBerry!

    Is this guy so out of touch that he expects these struggling people to all have BlackBerrys? Or is he planning to distribute free BlackBerrys to his followers?

    (BD: Shows how much he understands his poor.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. geomark on March 21st, 2010 10:11 am

    Quite odd some of these commenters attacking the writer as anti-Thaksin when it’s Thaksin’s own words. Seriously, were any of them here when as PM Thaksin was sending in the police to close media outlets that were criticizing him? Isn’t Dan just saying the solution has to be something/someone else?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. JJ on March 21st, 2010 11:12 am

    Dan you must be very rich by now! I for myself don’t wonder any longer who might be paid here.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. max on March 21st, 2010 12:02 pm

    BD – A free computer for every child is descriptive of a capitalist system?

    I never read that in a comparative politics textbook, even when my site wasn’t closed and reopened by government censors.

    Stick to general interest and tourist pieces and there won’t be so much _hack_ed up mucous all over your words.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Hobby on March 21st, 2010 2:09 pm

    Re: Getting news updates via BlackBerry – Why are you assuming it’s only the poor who need access to better news sources?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. GeGee on March 21st, 2010 7:01 pm

    Hobby I think you missed or ignored the Dog Whistle:

    1. Not Many poor people could afford a THB 20,000+ BlackBerry.

    2. Thaksin seemed to be implying, the only way to get the “truth today” (555) is to follow his tweets.

    If so, he forgets that many who don’t agree with him (even English-language journos and opinion makers) also tweet these days.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. just passing by on March 21st, 2010 7:07 pm

    You mean Hobby he has to explain BlackBerry users how to use their BlackBerry to make use of a BlackBerry?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. David Brown on March 21st, 2010 8:35 pm

    The good thing about the internet (BlackBerry) is the diversity of opinions, sadly missing from the Thai traditional media.

    So, good advice for everyone, even you and you and you …

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. Leopold on March 21st, 2010 9:39 pm

    Dan, from now on, I think your blog has to be nothing but red.

    Clearly, the red movement and its leadership cannot be criticized because they do not only walk on water, but they also fly over it.

    A mere criticism seems to get you nowhere. Let’s see, you have been called gullible, right-wing lackey, and customer of a “hiso-whore.” This is unjustifiably too nasty and, ironically, resembles the radicalism of the PAD itself.

    Only if they know how much they are alike …

    If I may humbly give you some advice, you should not post anything that points to any of the red shirt’s leadership’s tactical mistakes as the leaders of the red shirt are the wisest messiah ever walked on the face of the earth.

    All material quoted by you have to be either from the always honest with fact red shirt publications or the tweets of truth, exclusively by Thaksin.

    You may also want to change your background color to red, for no one likes nonpartisan wimps, and failure to do so would mean you don’t support the legitimate causes of any protest movement and hate the poor.

    Your domain would need to be changed to “Absolutely Red Bangkok” as well, unless you want to be just another right-wing propaganda like The Nation or Bangkok Post, which may have columnists supporting the red movement like Songkran and Suranand but is nevertheless ring-wing propaganda cow manure!

    (BD: Yeah I say since the beginning they’re mimicking the yellows while denouncing all that’s not red = yellow. Adorable simplification. And you’re laughing, but was actually thinking about reddening the header somehow.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Egalitarian on March 22nd, 2010 7:51 pm

    I agree with this; Thaksin is the charlatan to end all charlatans. Über-capitalist masquerading as some kind of economic Che Guevara. If only he hadn’t already proven that his aim is to make Thailand his personal company with all contracts and profits going to him. It’s like a communist ideal, but instead of the state benefiting it will just be Thaksin.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. max on March 22nd, 2010 11:42 pm

    Thanks for clarifying the minor error in your example of what fundamental characteristic of a capitalist society might look like.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Qualtrough on March 23rd, 2010 12:25 am

    Your point depends on how you translate “ammart.” As Bangkok Pundit points out, a better way to characterize ammart would be ‘aristocrat’ rather than elite. If that is the case, and I agree with BP, Thaksin’s wealth certainly puts him in the elite sector, but not in the aristocrat group. If you can’t read the original texts I think you are out of your depth with this kind of stuff and should leave it to BP and others who can.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. BangkokDan on March 23rd, 2010 7:03 am

    With all due respect, that’s quite an elitist stance to only allow some to do the arguing. It is furthermore pointless semantics leading nowhere, some would say a desperate diversion attempt. Elite is, intentionally, a slightly wider, but not less accurate term. He tried to be one of them, wanted to be part of them, even more so of the aristocracy, and made no secret of it. Who would resent him his wish. See shot below.

    BangkokDan

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. Mithran on March 23rd, 2010 11:04 am

    Dan, fair enough let’s leave semantics out of it. Let’s try observational methods.

    How To Tell If You Are A Member Of The Amnart 101

    1) Were you removed from office by a coup?

    (Note to examinees: There is only one correct answer and it’s not “yes”).

    I agree he’s not exactly Che bleeding Guvera, but criticizing the amnart from his point of view is hardly surprising or unreasonable.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. max on March 23rd, 2010 11:32 am

    What’s with the graphics and who’s the lady? A little information would be helpful to make your point.

    While it may be elitist to suggest you are not qualified to comment on Thai politics on the internet, it is perfectly reasonable to criticize you for your semantic judgments for which you are unqualified due to your shaky grasp of Thai language.

    (BD: If you don’t know who this lady is then good night on the Thai language debate. For further condescending suggestions use your valuable knowledge in another forum. When it’s getting personal they’re running out of arguments. Just classic. More of the same cheap stuff won’t make it through here. Censored, deleted, never received, whatever. If you add to the debate though: most welcome.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. StanG on March 23rd, 2010 12:20 pm

    Prem and Surayud are not aristocrats, they got their positions due to their service, not the purity of their blood.

    Ammart, in red speak, means enemies of Thaksin, no other definition really works. Abhisit is Thaksin’s junior, so he is a servant of ammart.

    By what definition a media mogul like Suthichai Yoon, with his barefeet background, is ammart, for example?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. Hobby on March 23rd, 2010 6:07 pm

    I think the best definition is “those who have protection from you know who” – but I hardly expect the reds to put in in those terms. :)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. David Brown on March 23rd, 2010 6:58 pm

    Hobby …

    How about “those that use you know who for their own protection.”

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. Hobby on March 23rd, 2010 7:52 pm

    DB: But I think it’s more of an exclusive club – many would like the same protection, but only the “special” people get it.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. David Brown on March 23rd, 2010 9:18 pm

    Hobby …

    Ummm yes … maybe what makes them special is that they are “mates” of you know who’s chief advisor.

    This revolves around the degree to which you know who has or is permitted free and “informed” judgement, and who filters and shapes the information?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. Hobby on March 24th, 2010 8:51 am

    DB: Have I been mistaken in thinking he was omniscient?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. StanG on March 24th, 2010 9:01 am

    “Enemies of Thaksin” is still the best description.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. Ordinary reader on March 25th, 2010 1:01 pm

    This lady really makes ammart/aristocrats so upset that The Nation starts vicious campaigns to discredit her. Imagine a lady richer than Public Enemy Number One is now backing red shirts.

    If you understand Thai, you will notice she said many other things more than what The Nation has translated. This includes her warning to the mainstream media.

    Last night, she appeared for the second time lighting candles.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. StanG on March 25th, 2010 1:56 pm

    The Nation had a Before & After show on their main page for a couple of days. About a year ago, during an interview, she was recorded as saying that reds shirts were stupid (“mai chalat,” repeated at least twice).

    Yellows accuse her of stealing millions in profit from selling “authorized” blue shirts (Queen blue, not Newin’s).

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. Hobby on March 26th, 2010 9:08 am

    Mr Wrigley has an excellent analysis on the phrai/ammart war of words here.

    The concusion identifies three broad choices of system:

    (a) The natural order – a system with the military, bureaucrats and royalists calling all the shots and the parliament acting as a second-fiddle to create the illusion of democracy for the masses and the international community.

    (b) A Thaksin-system whereby the prime minister, cabinet and parliament move to the top of the power pyramid, but rather than creating real democracy, they behave as hybrid-democrats. As hybrids, they come to power through democratic elections and implement various nationally beneficial policies, but at the same time they are corrupt authoritarians (equal to their ammart bretheren), implementing policies to enrich themselves and their cronies. Instead of encouraging the independence of political bodies and media, to create checks and balances, they erase the institutional boundaries of power and try to monopolize everything in their own hands.

    (c) A system with the king as head of state and royalists remaining “above politics”; the military becoming accountable, transparent and bound to the barracks; and a massive reform of political parties so that the public interest does not become subservient to the interests of rich business people and their families?

    I’m for (c) and I believe thats the system most red shirts would like to see. I also believe that system would be the preference of the majority of the original PAD protesters.

    Which system do you prefer Dan (and StanG)?

    Mr Wrigley goes on:

    “Whether PT MP’s are “real ammart” or not is impossible to judge? Likely they are a little of both. Importantly for the phrai, they should demand better than a return to the Thaksin system. A return to Thaksinocracy may provide some economic and social benefits, but at what cost? Their business-MP overlords will likely end up subverting democratic institutions again and continue to rob them by pocketing 25-40% from every government project.”

    I think Thaksin has said enough this last week to suggest that if he regained power and tried to return to his old ways, the same red shirt protesters in BKK now would be out protesting against him (alongside the PAD).

    If I’m right, would the protests this week really have been the complete waste of time you seem to think they are, Dan?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. BangkokDan on March 26th, 2010 9:42 am

    Thanks for this Hobby.

    Safe bet that we’d all agree on (c), point though being that all of a sudden multimillionaires pretend to be a true phrai and the past seems to be so far away that all the difficulties we faced under Thaksin seem forgotten. He can even suggest he’d subject himself to the law – something he has never done. Remember William L. Monson? Thaksin’s career is full of such victims. And suddenly he turns into a saint.

    Reds, get rid of Thaksin, and I’m all with you. So far the movement is mainly an extension of his own anger and desires. Look around, all his smiling mugshot is everywhere.

    He can swear a million times the red movement now stands on its own feet. Blesseth are those who believe. There’s not much left if they drop Thaksin.

    Whatever system, the end doesn’t justify the means the reds currently apply. They only widen the divide. A system has to mature over time, and we were on an OK path, lead by the lesser of many evils. Hey this is Thai politics. Whoever promises the end of abuse is a freak. Thai politics is about the lessening of abuse, about compromise. I for myself don’t wanna be lead by those drama queens we’ve seen on stage for nearly two weeks now. No vision, just a vague political Disneyland. Sounds great, feels even better. Nothing but air in real life.

    You have to admit that Abhisit doesn’t promise some fantasy.

    Much has to be changed around here. Step by step. And we need a strong, credible opposition. Whatever side.

    In this sense yes, I think the protest is not only a waste of time and resources. It’s another setback for Thailand because it’s clear there’s no strong, credible opposition.

    BangkokDan

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. Hobby on March 26th, 2010 9:57 am

    That’s where we disagree Dan – IMO, Abhisit is not about change, he’s “trasformismo.”

    (But if he had true electoral legitimacy, I could/would accept that.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  36. StanG on March 26th, 2010 7:04 pm

    I don’t agree with his (a) at all, it might have been the case in Prem’s time but it’s certainly not the case now.

    It’s beyond the military and royalists expertise to call any shots beyond their immediate sphere of interest. I can’t even see what interests the royalists might have in the parliament.

    The relationships with bureaucrats are not as simple as “call the shots.”

    Case study – remember dealing with 1997 crisis aftermath? With 56 finance companies closed by the government, it was at least three way tussle between finance minister, Bank of Thaialand, and FIDF. There were probably thousands of bureaucrats working for all sides and no one called all the shots, and it somehow WORKED. They dealt with hundreds of issues and trillions of baht in a space of only a couple of years, and everybody accepted the solutions.

    Right now Korn has to decide what to do with that FIDF debt and he is looking for answers from both BOT and his ministry, because the complexity goes way over his head.

    In a modern world no minister should be allowed to call all the shots, there needs to be consultation and cross checking at all levels.

    As for point (c) – reforming political parties is impossible, they are in a class of its own and if they don’t want to change, nothing short of dictatorship can make them. That’s why PAD proposed to bypass them altogether and select representatives in a different way.

    Abhisit, on the other hand, is trying to force them to play by parliamentary rules and put a cap on the old style corruption. If they manage to adapt, that would be a change.

    With New Politics a no-go it’s the only hope, I’m afraid. Reds have brought absolutely nothing to the table.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  37. Hobby on March 26th, 2010 8:22 pm

    StanG: Don’t you agree that (a) is a succinct summary of the status quo?

    (Oh, I forgot, you’re still justifying a military coup. (…) )

    (BD: (…) = deleted by admin.)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  38. StanG on March 27th, 2010 9:23 am

    Yes, Hobby, I disagree that “military, royalists and bureaucrats” are calling all the shots.

    It is an annoying oversimplification. They play their roles and don’t infringe on subjects outside of their immediate interests.

    You could argue whether the army should be protecting the government from the reds at all but there’s no one else. The police can’t spend weeks and possibly months hanging around political rallies, certainly not in the numbers required to contain any potential trouble.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  39. Hobby on March 27th, 2010 11:41 am

    Thanong even admitted the military & judiciary were on the side of the yellow protesters, and it still took them 193 days to remove the government.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  40. StanG on March 27th, 2010 1:58 pm

    The military, judiciary and yellow protesters shared the same, 1997 constitution inspired value system, and having shared values is a prerequisite for any society to function and solve its problems.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  41. Hobby on March 27th, 2010 2:23 pm

    StanG: Last time I looked it was the reds who were calling for a reinstatement of the 1997 constitution, not your “values” inspired military, judiciary or yellows.

    BTW, StanG, can you remind me what happened to that hard fought 1997 “people’s” constitution?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  42. StanG on March 27th, 2010 4:04 pm

    Reds want to reinstate the paper, not principles.
    At least they don’t want those principles applied to Thaksin and his party.

    1997 constitution was replaced by 2007 version that is even stricter in accountability for the rules.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  43. antiPADshist on April 2nd, 2010 6:38 pm

    Hobby

    I marvel your tireless debate with fallacious guys!

    Truly, you came a long way to this point. :)

    Personally I’m tired even to read certain comments, which are mostly nothing else than “straw man” arguments (switching everything to Taksin-bashing, the old good “Yellow Fever“, once very well described ). And of course there is too blatant reason for that, perfectly explained by Thinitan:

    “The government’s allies have deliberately fixated on the corruption and abuse of power during the Thaksin years because they fear that the reforms demanded by the red shirts can only be detrimental to their interests.”

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  44. Oneditorial on April 3rd, 2010 9:51 pm

    For as long as the reds continue to be linked with poor old Thaksin, their fight for an equal society will always be questionable. Isn’t Thaksin the one who makes frequent appearances by video link to encourage this mob to fight for what he calls ‘true democracy’? Do people really think he is doing that for the sake of these people, rather than for himself? Have some people never wondered why the leaders of the reds did not accept Abhisit’s proposal to dissolve parliament within nine months? The offer is reasoned, fair and compromising. Why, for the reds, does dissolution have to be within three weeks? Their dogmatic refusal to accept the proposal does not come across very well at all. What is their hidden agenda here? Then again, one should not expect much from stooges.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  45. David Brown on April 4th, 2010 4:49 am

    Oneditorial

    The other question is more relevant …

    Why is Abhisit requesting to wait nine months before dissolution? Who is calling his shots and what is their “hidden agenda”?

    He mentioned the budget and stabilizing the country.

    Does he mean satisfying the “needs” of the military to get their phenomenal, ludicrous demands for new high tech weapons systems whose purpose seems to be to achieve maximum corrupt payoffs in the government budget?

    And securing the planned elevation of crazy anti-Thaksin Gen Suchart(?) to military chief?

    So whose “hidden agenda” is more “important for the country”?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  46. Ordinary reader on April 4th, 2010 10:12 am

    Hobby, the military & judiciary are just two of the four pillars (in Thai called Si Sao) that support the current ammat elites. The other two are media (we need not discuss it because everyone knows how biased the mainstream media are, especially NBT) and the so-called independent agencies, such as the Election Commission. The DSI already submitted evidence on how the Democrats broke the law punishable by party dissolution with the illegal 258-million baht donation but the EC keeps dragging its feet by saying it needs more details. If this happens to a pro-Thaksin party, the EC would have acted promptly and dissolves such party.

    The four pillars or Si Sao happens to be the name of residence where Mr. Prem lives in the Thevet district. The four pillars look very strong and solid now but once they break down one by one, the entire ammat system will collapse.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  47. Oneditorial on April 4th, 2010 5:32 pm

    Baby, I think Abhisit offered to carry out a referendum on this issue. If I were in Abhisit’s position, I would not give in to these people’s demands either. I think it is a bit arrogant, self-serving and selfish of them to think that they can just defy the leader of the country and do whatever they want. What they are doing is a tad PAD-like, don’t you think? I don’t think any sane leader should acquiesce. The country does not belong to either the Reds or the Yellows. You have to bear in mind that they represent a small minority of the electorate in Thailand. There are other Thai people too, don’t you know, perhaps the vast majority, who have so far remained silent and who just want to go about their daily lives in peace. Who do the Reds think they are to go around trying to boss people into doing whatever they want. If they think they have a valid argument, they should at least accept the results of a referendum or go back for the third round of negotiations offered by the Government. Truth is, they do not dare to have another round of talks as they know they were completely outclassed by Abhisit’s side last time. Instead, they have chosen to carry on being a public nuisance on the streets and this will get them nowhere: it will just get on the nerves of ordinary Thai people who are already showing signs of losing patience. In the end, they will have to resort to more intense tactics and that will suit the Government just fine as the authorities will have the justification to disperse these people. Talk about desperation.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  48. David Brown on April 4th, 2010 5:44 pm

    Hi Ordinary …

    Thanks for the four pillars … and seemingly Prem thinks of himself as the same (or can control them all)?

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  49. Hobby on April 4th, 2010 5:49 pm

    Thanks for the additional information Ordinary Reader.

    OneEditorial:

    - Do you see any hypocrisy in Abhisit’s current stand when compared with the way he acted when his opposing PMs were being protested against? (Also any hypocrisy in the actions of the army boss in picking which PM he will support, and which PM he will recommend resign?)

    - Do you think removing an elected PM by military coup is preferable to removal by election?

    - Do you think anyone who is against a military coup is therefore pro-Thaksin? (including a red shirt)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  50. David Brown on April 5th, 2010 9:25 am

    Oneditorial … old man …

    “They represent a small minority of the electorate in Thailand. There are other Thai people too, don’t you know, perhaps the vast majority, who have so far remained silent and who just want to go about their daily lives in peace.”

    Amazing delusion … dreaming there is some mysterious silent majority …

    Elections based on the 1997 constitution involved all people of Thailand voting.

    The Democrats, PAD and their military bosses want most of the population to be silent and for their votes to be ignored … but the redshirts are the previously silent demanding they and all people in Thailand continue to be heard, regularly at every election!

    Or don’t you want to listen?

    (BD: “Democracy” brought us into quite a mess under Takki. So we’ll have to see (again?) …)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  51. Hobby on April 5th, 2010 1:34 pm

    BD:

    “Democracy” brought us into quite a mess under Takki. So we’ll have to see (again?) …)

    Don’t you think its about time Thailand gave democracy a try?

    (I think you know what I mean, or were you only paying lip service to Federico and his book?)

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  52. Oneditorial on April 5th, 2010 6:54 pm

    I think I deserve to be labelled as one of the Thai people who used to be silent about this ongoing political fiasco, though I wear neither red nor yellow. Accordingly I am, in a small way, partly responsible for the current Thai political situation. I don’t think I have the right to be critical of the Reds and I shouldn’t have been, as at least, unlike me, they chose to vote in the election, albeit their ignorance knows no bounds. I should not have expected much maturity or common sense from these people about who they want to run the country. When the next election takes place, I will definitely participate. I will also support the reds’ fight for equality in Thai society as long as their aim is genuine; not because they are doing it for the sake of one individual. That’s why their leaders are not prepared to go along with Abhisit’s proposal which is reasoned and should be acceptable. I think the government deserves respect for its handling of the situation by trying to sort this problem out around the negotiating table as well as being patient with this disruptive nuisance. I feel for many of the Reds as they are oblivious to the fact that they are being used as pawns. I disliked the coup and was unhappy with the PAD’s seizing the airport. Thaksin shoud have been removed via the democratic system. However, the man thoroughly abused the entire system. He was a megalomaniac then and he still is. He feathered his own nest while he was in power. The verdict of the assets case is proof of how guilty he is. I see nothing wrong with Abhisit’s current stance. I think his strategy of doing all he can to maintain the support of the army is perfectly acceptable. If I was him, I would do the same. If the reds are genuine about their cause, it will not be difficult for them to disassociate themselves from the square-faced man who is currently on the run.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  53. Leopold on April 5th, 2010 10:56 pm

    @ David Brown

    People like to talk as if the 1997 constitution was completely flawless. It can certainly be argued as a more democratic constitution, but it does not automatically give a perfect and functioning democracy.

    While I somewhat do not understand you statement that “elections based on the 1997 constitution involved all people of Thailand voting,” I feel obliged to remind you that people without a bachelor degree cannot stand in a general election under the 1997 constitution. Your average Somchai with primary education can forget about being a representative for his own people even if he has worked for them almost all his life. The best he could do within that democratic process was to be a local canvasser for provincial feudal lords.

    The 2007 constitution only requires five years of any education.

    Also, under the 1997 constitution, the Democrats would have gained a lot more party-list seats.

    But, I’m also not arguing that 2007 version is more democratic or more workable. For one thing, the Map Ta Phut impasse serves as an example of the irresponsibility of the drafters. This is where I am in agreement with the red shirt elites. (Yes, “phrai” do have elites of their own.) A lot of urban upper middle class red shirts think that too much rights have been given to the people.

    So, I’m all for amending the constitution if it is to evolve.

    @ Hobby

    I think you posted these questions at Bangkok Pundit as well, so I’m gonna guess they are not rhetorical and that you really want answers.

    1. Yes, and I do see hypocrisies from the red shirts and PTP as well. This comment being too long, let’s just say the political stalemate is about the same as what has happened in the past. We’re living in a parallel universe where everyone switched their roles, except you if I recall correctly. :)

    2. Of course, it’s preferable. Still, coup happened, and we all want to turn back time, and “we” being everyone is the problem.

    3. Not necessarily.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  54. gohmer on April 18th, 2010 9:10 pm

    All countries in the world, and for all of world history, have used the same exact arguments about why not to give the under-class the right to vote – they are naive, uneducated, their vote will be bought, they don’t care about politics, etc, etc, etc. This has been even been used in the U.S. to keep women and blacks from voting, in South Africa the same, and pretty much every other country in the world at one point in time or another.

    All of this has some legitimacy, but at the end of the day, a country that does not have its people chose its leaders (despite how bad they may be) is a dictatorship and no dictatorship in world history has created a quality life for its masses, only it elites.

    These people deserve the right to vote and decide who leads them. If they choose incorrectly, then the next election they correct their mistake. Just like America did when we decided the Bush way was the wrong way and America made a historic statement by being the first developed country in the world to elect a minority as its leader. We all make mistakes, are taken on one ride or two down a bad path, and are occasionally fooled, but not always.

    Let the red shirts bring Thaksin back, let them elect him, that’s what might have to happen for Thailand to develop into a stable democracy. You can’t keep a child from falling down when they are first learning to walk.

    If I am incorrect in this analysis, name the country that has not vote, run by the military that isn’t totally messed up economically and socially.

    Quality comment? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply