“I’m sure you’d agree” >> Yes, I agree. In fact, 50% is a very high figure already given that the monarch is supposed to be universally revered and even loved by the population. Also, the “not-anti” half certainly is not necessarily actively “pro,” and when those who are skeptical of outright “anti” positions experience rallies in which those anti positions are socially accepted rather than rejected, then this points into the direction of more critical views. By the way, from the first marches on the Army headquarters in early 2007, I had been struck by the virtual absence of royalist symbols.
For so long, the Redshiorts been told that everything they say and do – their demands for no coups, for elections, for being recognized as citizens of worth, for justice for those killed in the protests – and all of their venues for saying these things – their TV and radio stations, their newspapers and websites – are “anti-monarchy” and that they should stop “dragging the monarchy into politics”.
But it was the PAD who claimed the “we fight for the king ground” so by implication being against the PAD was being against the monarchy. The PAD were the ones that dragged the monarchy into politics and set the monarchy up as something by which one had to define which side of the political divide one was on.
Maybe the Redshirts are starting to believe that they are what they have been accused of being. Maybe these accusations have had an actively prophetic nature.
Tiresome, Old, verbosity, recycle, all these literal dismissive, not pertinent to the future of Myanmar may do well in The Irrawaddy.
Here in New Mandala;
Facts rule:
1) There is an air tight standing resolutions in USA and similarly in GB as well as Australia that absolutely preclude any form of “your détent” with the general. Thank to the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, The Irrawaddy and SOros effort.
2) If the exploitation and abuses by SPDC is not the west concern as you ruefully and flippantly assumed why continuing their useless careless way? Easier to let Unocal and Chevron go at it, Eh!
3) Myanmar is unique comparing to S Africa is ludicrous. More closer will be DPRK. Which is exactly the same measure what Myanmar has received, with similar result in progress!
If you think advocating for the future of the most vulnerable is tiring you should just do your dog and pony routine at The Irrawaddy where you do not have to answer legitimate questions posed succinctly.
Im sure the exalted Mr. Streckfuss has spent many a night in the Thaksin idolising northern rural villages I have where discusing such a subject will result in if lucky a visit to the hospital and if not the morgue at the hands of those that will either willingly or under guidance from canvassers turn out enmasse to vote PTP at the next election unless of course any canvasser goes utterly insane and decides to test old Streckies quaint little ivory tower theory.
Now there may be a red hardline, a few irrelevent academics and a few red leaders and a even a few PTP MPs who may discuss such things and form old Streckies awakened conciousness but they remain in a very small minority. Still I guess Streckfuss gets his usual idolisation from Thai studies from abroad 101 students
One of themost noticeable aspects of this long lasting little power struggle is the number of people on all sides who want reds/yellows/Thaksin/Abhisit/etc to be exactly what they are not. This is especially true in academic circles which have have reached woefully low levels in their inadequate attempts to analyse everything into what they want it to be. Time to recognize things are complicated
#5 “The force of globalization has exerted pressure on states in developing countries to modernize, democratize, and undertake reform programs.”
Frankly, if you think ‘globalisation’ is going to do the job for you, you are sadly mistaken. About all we can really say about globalisation is that multinationals exert pressure on both developing countries and developed countries to suit their own business plans. And multinationals don’t really care a shit about reform. In fact, it is probably in their interests to stick with either the current mess or some alternative Thaksinite version of it. This is precisely what you get when you allow the already rich to run away with the revolution.
“whether they can stay the course. I also felt those who participated in the election from the democratic parties were making a sacrifice. ”
If I may, not just a sacrifice but a constantly life threatening ones without the protection afforded to the lady with such as “Nobel Peace Prize”.
If they truly represent the segments of the population that voted for them they have nothing to fear in their assertions for that segment. You know the loyalty of supporters in Myanmar can be.
I am quite sure they will not cower to the SPDC.
The only fear is they will be bought out by “the have” ie present established power that be, since being in a” have nothing” for so long.
Thanks to the concerted damages of the west policy and SPDC.
In any twisted xenophobic paranoid mind of any military government the conclusion to go Nuclear “Thus solve or mitigate all the wrongs by the West and garner respect through ultimate military strength/weapon ” is inevitable.
Debating or discussing the reality/possibility of Myanmar going “Nuclear” is akin to again validating Seligman & Maier’s well proven “learned Helplessness”
SPDC being subjected to treatments reserved for/worst than towards A Kim.
SPDC wanting to be like A Kim is assured as Seligman & Maier’s.
Nobody who has a faint idea of Myanmar history will be proud of the treatment the west has been meting out to Myanmar.
As history is the witness with Myanmar having more than the means of DPRK & Pakistan combined
Myanmar will succeed in going Nuclear as Pakistan and China did if this present punitive, and vindictive oriented West regards of the Citizenry proceed unabated.
It’s a rather tiresome apologist argument you like to recycle in your own inimitably verbose, repetitious and convoluted way, blurring the lines between the military regime and ASSK in relation to the plight of the people.
Exploitation, ruthless or gentle, is of no concern to the capitalist West, but relentless and brutal repression of the citizenry you profess to care so much about is. And there is no sign of let up in either respect on the part of the regime.
No greater incentive exits for the West than market share and profits, and Burma remains very attractive as a potentially very lucrative untapped market for Western businesses dying for a piece of the action, only it’s politically untenable for them to even relax their stance to any significant degree thanks to the intransigence on the part of the regime. They do have to listen to public opinion, to their own electorates. It has nothing to do with vindictiveness.
If the generals genuinely seek détente with the West in order to reduce their dependence on China, they’d do what they already know they should do. It’s mutual interest after all, since the West also has a strategic interest to contain China. Instead they just keep digging when they are already in a big hole.
Much as ASSK personifies Burma’s democratic opposition, her inevitable release from detention is not the end all and be all.
The effectiveness or otherwise of the sanctions depends on a concerted effort or the lack of it as you well know. The South African precedent differed precisely in that country’s real isolation in contrast to the spurious one some people apply to Burma. And they did have de Klerk who actually talked to Mandela and the ANC.
From what I saw the Democratic Party won a lot of support among what I would call “the educated elite”: upper middle class urban residents. They won over the local media, that’s for sure, and certainly were perceived as the “cleanest” viable alternative to the USDP. There were also those who would have supported the NLD but were ideologically opposed to the NDF and instead backed the Democratic Party as a middle path. Of course, this doesn’t necessarily translate into votes. While the result – three seats won from 47 candidates – was disappointing, it wouldn’t have been too surprising and the test now is whether they can stay the course. I also felt those who participated in the election from the democratic parties were making a sacrifice. For those behind the Democratic Party, their credibility in the eyes of the public seemed to mean more than winning on November 7, which was something I really respected.
Thanks for the story. I also heard similar experience from several friends who took taxi. What is most striking about this, in my view, is that a number of taxi drivers are willing to speak to complete strangers on this issue and on so explicit terms.. This is highly significant. Everyone in this country knows how risky it is. Yet these taxi drivers do it. Why is this happening? I think it reflccts pent-up frustration among many ‘grassroot’ sympathizers of the Red Shirts with the role of the monarchy in the ongoing crises of the past few years.
……………
Last week, after reading your comment #18, I wrote a few lines to add to yours, but decided not to post it. I think perhaps it could be of some use to post them now. Here they are:
Re: Srithanonchai #18
I’m sure you’d agree that the discussion of various ‘figures’ here, is just another way of saying “how large, or how widespread, the anti-monarchy sentiment among the Red Shirts; is it “small”, just about half, a mojority, a great majority?”. I’d still argue that it’s way, way passed ‘half’ or “50 percent”.
Let me give one illustration of the situation. Just two years ago, whenever there were expressions of critical attitudes (just mildly critical, not downright hostility as it is now) towards the monarchy among the Reds, there would be reaction of disapproval from among the Red themselves; the reason given ranging from tactical (“not the time”) to outright royalism. What struck me most these past few months is the virtually total absense of such disapproving reaction among the Reds. (In fact the reaction tends toward “joining in” more than anything else.) Let’s suppose only half of the Reds are now expressing strong anti-monarchy sentiment, what about the other half? Given how strong the expression of the “anti” half obviously is, it’s difficult to imagine how the “not-anti” half could remain in such total silence. This is why I estimate that a very large majority of the Red Shirts masses are now very critical of the role of the monarchy in the current crises. Certainly among the recent rallies of the Red Shirts that I witnessed, this is really the case of the people attending.
Srithanonchai #43, I’ve had similar experiences, quite a few of them, with taxi-drivers over the last few months. I was on a bus recently, just before 6pm, and the radio was blaring. At 6, as the National Anthem began, the driver leant over & switched it off. Not a murmur from the passengers. It’s not just people like that, though. I’ve been quite surprised to hear quite a few very well educated people speaking quite loudly in a similar vein about various members of the family & Prem – I felt like ducking the first few times, it felt so dangerous. I think this sort of thing has been lurking beneath the surface for a long time, and people are now so fed up with the tedious muck they are being fed, and the deviousness of the government in the ‘reconciliation’ campaign (numerous LM arrests, websites blocked, Abhisit’s denials or falsified justifications of everything, the ridiculous repression perpetrated by CRES, etc.,). It seems to me the ‘ultra-royalist’ Democrats & the army are doing a more effective job of destroying the monarchy than the non-existent plotting anarchist movement they are trying to convince us of could ever do.
Srithanonchai #43. If people continue to express themselves openly like this then the Thai establishment won’t get the confrontation they expect but will be bypassed by the cultural and historical change. Just having a parallel discourse opens up the possibilities of other options and directions.
#12 Exactly Peter. I would even have doubts about using the word culture. My point really is that the problems as seen in this thread are actually far more significant than any of the heavy-duty political punditry and pseudo-intellectualism hereabouts. To wit, Thailand has a lousy elite, a crap-headed bureaucracy and a fantasy-world guv’ because there is a long history of allowing boneheads to get clean-away scot-free. All the more reason to actively blame all of the manipulative color-coded goon squad sponsors and the knuckle-headed institutions they are trying to muscle in on! It isn’t necessary to have a slight preference for one side here, just because it is everso slightly less bad or more good. If we treat them all equally as unclean , they might eventually START to get the message.
I bagged the privilege of being the first to donate and I am not even a Malaysian citizen. Come on all you Malaysians living here. Put money where your mouth is.
Yesterday, on my way to an appointment, I had an interesting talk with a taxi driver. Or, rather, he talked, and I mainly listened. His main complaints were: He did not want to be called a “child” cared for by a royal “father.” And anyway, this “father”, he added, had done much less for his “children” than the propaganda wanted to make the people believe. He did not accept his assigned position as “dust under the feet” of the monarch; he repeated this issue a number of times. He did not agree with the notion of the king as the “Lord of the Land.” This could not be so, he said, because the Thai people were the owners of the country. Finally, he strongly disliked the fact that he was forbidden to express his political opinions in the public sphere.
Normally, these views are seen as being rather ordinary in any democratic system. But not so in Thailand. Here, they become seen as being “hardline” by those whose interest is to perpetuate the authoritarian political status quo. If anything was “hardline” in the statements, it was the obvious feeling of anger and conviction with which this taxi driver (in his 50ies) expressed his political views. Asked how many of his taxi driver colleagues shared his views, he thought it was the great majority. Needless to say, he was an ardent admirer of Thaksin Shinawatra.
The Thai establishment might well continue to suppress the people so that they cannot voice their disliked political opinions. But this won’t make these opinions go away.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Cambodia is not a province of Thailand
The airport is Bangkok is spelled Suvarnabhumi and pronounced Su wan a poom
How hardline have the redshirts become?
Somsak #46
Thanks for your additional info.
“I’m sure you’d agree” >> Yes, I agree. In fact, 50% is a very high figure already given that the monarch is supposed to be universally revered and even loved by the population. Also, the “not-anti” half certainly is not necessarily actively “pro,” and when those who are skeptical of outright “anti” positions experience rallies in which those anti positions are socially accepted rather than rejected, then this points into the direction of more critical views. By the way, from the first marches on the Army headquarters in early 2007, I had been struck by the virtual absence of royalist symbols.
How hardline have the redshirts become?
Thanks to Srithanonchai and Somsak Jeamteerasakul for your intelligence. Two questions occur to me :
1. How do you know these are exclusively ‘red shirt’ feelings and not just ordinary Thai feelings?
2. How do these expressions of feelings in Bangkok accord with the feelings of Thais/red shirts in Thailand?
How hardline have the redshirts become?
For so long, the Redshiorts been told that everything they say and do – their demands for no coups, for elections, for being recognized as citizens of worth, for justice for those killed in the protests – and all of their venues for saying these things – their TV and radio stations, their newspapers and websites – are “anti-monarchy” and that they should stop “dragging the monarchy into politics”.
But it was the PAD who claimed the “we fight for the king ground” so by implication being against the PAD was being against the monarchy. The PAD were the ones that dragged the monarchy into politics and set the monarchy up as something by which one had to define which side of the political divide one was on.
Maybe the Redshirts are starting to believe that they are what they have been accused of being. Maybe these accusations have had an actively prophetic nature.
Burma votes 2010 – Episode 3
Tiresome, Old, verbosity, recycle, all these literal dismissive, not pertinent to the future of Myanmar may do well in The Irrawaddy.
Here in New Mandala;
Facts rule:
1) There is an air tight standing resolutions in USA and similarly in GB as well as Australia that absolutely preclude any form of “your détent” with the general. Thank to the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, The Irrawaddy and SOros effort.
2) If the exploitation and abuses by SPDC is not the west concern as you ruefully and flippantly assumed why continuing their useless careless way? Easier to let Unocal and Chevron go at it, Eh!
3) Myanmar is unique comparing to S Africa is ludicrous. More closer will be DPRK. Which is exactly the same measure what Myanmar has received, with similar result in progress!
If you think advocating for the future of the most vulnerable is tiring you should just do your dog and pony routine at The Irrawaddy where you do not have to answer legitimate questions posed succinctly.
Streckfuss on reform of the institution
Im sure the exalted Mr. Streckfuss has spent many a night in the Thaksin idolising northern rural villages I have where discusing such a subject will result in if lucky a visit to the hospital and if not the morgue at the hands of those that will either willingly or under guidance from canvassers turn out enmasse to vote PTP at the next election unless of course any canvasser goes utterly insane and decides to test old Streckies quaint little ivory tower theory.
Now there may be a red hardline, a few irrelevent academics and a few red leaders and a even a few PTP MPs who may discuss such things and form old Streckies awakened conciousness but they remain in a very small minority. Still I guess Streckfuss gets his usual idolisation from Thai studies from abroad 101 students
One of themost noticeable aspects of this long lasting little power struggle is the number of people on all sides who want reds/yellows/Thaksin/Abhisit/etc to be exactly what they are not. This is especially true in academic circles which have have reached woefully low levels in their inadequate attempts to analyse everything into what they want it to be. Time to recognize things are complicated
Overseas Malaysians denied voting rights
Good on you John.
Yes, do hope, more will support this worthy cause.
Streckfuss on reform of the institution
#5 “The force of globalization has exerted pressure on states in developing countries to modernize, democratize, and undertake reform programs.”
Frankly, if you think ‘globalisation’ is going to do the job for you, you are sadly mistaken. About all we can really say about globalisation is that multinationals exert pressure on both developing countries and developed countries to suit their own business plans. And multinationals don’t really care a shit about reform. In fact, it is probably in their interests to stick with either the current mess or some alternative Thaksinite version of it. This is precisely what you get when you allow the already rich to run away with the revolution.
Myanmar elections: Notes from the campaign trail
Ko Kyaw
“whether they can stay the course. I also felt those who participated in the election from the democratic parties were making a sacrifice. ”
If I may, not just a sacrifice but a constantly life threatening ones without the protection afforded to the lady with such as “Nobel Peace Prize”.
If they truly represent the segments of the population that voted for them they have nothing to fear in their assertions for that segment. You know the loyalty of supporters in Myanmar can be.
I am quite sure they will not cower to the SPDC.
The only fear is they will be bought out by “the have” ie present established power that be, since being in a” have nothing” for so long.
Thanks to the concerted damages of the west policy and SPDC.
Burma’s nuclear ambitions redux
In any twisted xenophobic paranoid mind of any military government the conclusion to go Nuclear “Thus solve or mitigate all the wrongs by the West and garner respect through ultimate military strength/weapon ” is inevitable.
Debating or discussing the reality/possibility of Myanmar going “Nuclear” is akin to again validating Seligman & Maier’s well proven “learned Helplessness”
SPDC being subjected to treatments reserved for/worst than towards A Kim.
SPDC wanting to be like A Kim is assured as Seligman & Maier’s.
Nobody who has a faint idea of Myanmar history will be proud of the treatment the west has been meting out to Myanmar.
As history is the witness with Myanmar having more than the means of DPRK & Pakistan combined
Myanmar will succeed in going Nuclear as Pakistan and China did if this present punitive, and vindictive oriented West regards of the Citizenry proceed unabated.
Burma votes 2010 – Episode 3
plan B,
It’s a rather tiresome apologist argument you like to recycle in your own inimitably verbose, repetitious and convoluted way, blurring the lines between the military regime and ASSK in relation to the plight of the people.
Exploitation, ruthless or gentle, is of no concern to the capitalist West, but relentless and brutal repression of the citizenry you profess to care so much about is. And there is no sign of let up in either respect on the part of the regime.
No greater incentive exits for the West than market share and profits, and Burma remains very attractive as a potentially very lucrative untapped market for Western businesses dying for a piece of the action, only it’s politically untenable for them to even relax their stance to any significant degree thanks to the intransigence on the part of the regime. They do have to listen to public opinion, to their own electorates. It has nothing to do with vindictiveness.
If the generals genuinely seek détente with the West in order to reduce their dependence on China, they’d do what they already know they should do. It’s mutual interest after all, since the West also has a strategic interest to contain China. Instead they just keep digging when they are already in a big hole.
Much as ASSK personifies Burma’s democratic opposition, her inevitable release from detention is not the end all and be all.
The effectiveness or otherwise of the sanctions depends on a concerted effort or the lack of it as you well know. The South African precedent differed precisely in that country’s real isolation in contrast to the spurious one some people apply to Burma. And they did have de Klerk who actually talked to Mandela and the ANC.
Myanmar elections: Notes from the campaign trail
From what I saw the Democratic Party won a lot of support among what I would call “the educated elite”: upper middle class urban residents. They won over the local media, that’s for sure, and certainly were perceived as the “cleanest” viable alternative to the USDP. There were also those who would have supported the NLD but were ideologically opposed to the NDF and instead backed the Democratic Party as a middle path. Of course, this doesn’t necessarily translate into votes. While the result – three seats won from 47 candidates – was disappointing, it wouldn’t have been too surprising and the test now is whether they can stay the course. I also felt those who participated in the election from the democratic parties were making a sacrifice. For those behind the Democratic Party, their credibility in the eyes of the public seemed to mean more than winning on November 7, which was something I really respected.
People’s Alliance against Democracy
john francis lee – 5
The latest coup happened on 1 October, 2010 when Prayuth took over.
If you cry wolf too often when something really drastic does happen nobody will be listening to you.
How hardline have the redshirts become?
Re: Srithanonchai #43
Thanks for the story. I also heard similar experience from several friends who took taxi. What is most striking about this, in my view, is that a number of taxi drivers are willing to speak to complete strangers on this issue and on so explicit terms.. This is highly significant. Everyone in this country knows how risky it is. Yet these taxi drivers do it. Why is this happening? I think it reflccts pent-up frustration among many ‘grassroot’ sympathizers of the Red Shirts with the role of the monarchy in the ongoing crises of the past few years.
……………
Last week, after reading your comment #18, I wrote a few lines to add to yours, but decided not to post it. I think perhaps it could be of some use to post them now. Here they are:
Re: Srithanonchai #18
I’m sure you’d agree that the discussion of various ‘figures’ here, is just another way of saying “how large, or how widespread, the anti-monarchy sentiment among the Red Shirts; is it “small”, just about half, a mojority, a great majority?”. I’d still argue that it’s way, way passed ‘half’ or “50 percent”.
Let me give one illustration of the situation. Just two years ago, whenever there were expressions of critical attitudes (just mildly critical, not downright hostility as it is now) towards the monarchy among the Reds, there would be reaction of disapproval from among the Red themselves; the reason given ranging from tactical (“not the time”) to outright royalism. What struck me most these past few months is the virtually total absense of such disapproving reaction among the Reds. (In fact the reaction tends toward “joining in” more than anything else.) Let’s suppose only half of the Reds are now expressing strong anti-monarchy sentiment, what about the other half? Given how strong the expression of the “anti” half obviously is, it’s difficult to imagine how the “not-anti” half could remain in such total silence. This is why I estimate that a very large majority of the Red Shirts masses are now very critical of the role of the monarchy in the current crises. Certainly among the recent rallies of the Red Shirts that I witnessed, this is really the case of the people attending.
How hardline have the redshirts become?
Srithanonchai #43, I’ve had similar experiences, quite a few of them, with taxi-drivers over the last few months. I was on a bus recently, just before 6pm, and the radio was blaring. At 6, as the National Anthem began, the driver leant over & switched it off. Not a murmur from the passengers. It’s not just people like that, though. I’ve been quite surprised to hear quite a few very well educated people speaking quite loudly in a similar vein about various members of the family & Prem – I felt like ducking the first few times, it felt so dangerous. I think this sort of thing has been lurking beneath the surface for a long time, and people are now so fed up with the tedious muck they are being fed, and the deviousness of the government in the ‘reconciliation’ campaign (numerous LM arrests, websites blocked, Abhisit’s denials or falsified justifications of everything, the ridiculous repression perpetrated by CRES, etc.,). It seems to me the ‘ultra-royalist’ Democrats & the army are doing a more effective job of destroying the monarchy than the non-existent plotting anarchist movement they are trying to convince us of could ever do.
How hardline have the redshirts become?
Srithanonchai #43. If people continue to express themselves openly like this then the Thai establishment won’t get the confrontation they expect but will be bypassed by the cultural and historical change. Just having a parallel discourse opens up the possibilities of other options and directions.
Prelude to the bridge tragedy
#14 Forum rage? Luckily, no water cannon are available to the forum blowhards.
Prelude to the bridge tragedy
#12 Exactly Peter. I would even have doubts about using the word culture. My point really is that the problems as seen in this thread are actually far more significant than any of the heavy-duty political punditry and pseudo-intellectualism hereabouts. To wit, Thailand has a lousy elite, a crap-headed bureaucracy and a fantasy-world guv’ because there is a long history of allowing boneheads to get clean-away scot-free. All the more reason to actively blame all of the manipulative color-coded goon squad sponsors and the knuckle-headed institutions they are trying to muscle in on! It isn’t necessary to have a slight preference for one side here, just because it is everso slightly less bad or more good. If we treat them all equally as unclean , they might eventually START to get the message.
Overseas Malaysians denied voting rights
I bagged the privilege of being the first to donate and I am not even a Malaysian citizen. Come on all you Malaysians living here. Put money where your mouth is.
How hardline have the redshirts become?
Further on the issue of hardliners.
Yesterday, on my way to an appointment, I had an interesting talk with a taxi driver. Or, rather, he talked, and I mainly listened. His main complaints were: He did not want to be called a “child” cared for by a royal “father.” And anyway, this “father”, he added, had done much less for his “children” than the propaganda wanted to make the people believe. He did not accept his assigned position as “dust under the feet” of the monarch; he repeated this issue a number of times. He did not agree with the notion of the king as the “Lord of the Land.” This could not be so, he said, because the Thai people were the owners of the country. Finally, he strongly disliked the fact that he was forbidden to express his political opinions in the public sphere.
Normally, these views are seen as being rather ordinary in any democratic system. But not so in Thailand. Here, they become seen as being “hardline” by those whose interest is to perpetuate the authoritarian political status quo. If anything was “hardline” in the statements, it was the obvious feeling of anger and conviction with which this taxi driver (in his 50ies) expressed his political views. Asked how many of his taxi driver colleagues shared his views, he thought it was the great majority. Needless to say, he was an ardent admirer of Thaksin Shinawatra.
The Thai establishment might well continue to suppress the people so that they cannot voice their disliked political opinions. But this won’t make these opinions go away.