Updater @# 3 :
Today (20/5/) Stephen Smiths’ Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade advised airlines flying into Bangkok from Australia that the only means of transport from Suvarnabhumi Airport was by limousine – i.e. all bus and taxi links had stopped.
Athita a#17 :
These truly redmarkable photos courtesy of Getty Images, are available in Australia via the iternet, no problem.
They clearly show snipers teams at work – usually two soliders, one the sniper using a rifle with precision sights, the other guarding him with a normal rifle.
Smith Jones @#20 ;
Both Bangkok Post and The nation web-sites confirm torching of government offices in at least four Isaarn and Lanna towns and cities (Udon Thani, Khon Kaen, Mukdahan, and Chian Mai).
” . . . If the foreign press were in fact able to speak Thai well enough to follow all the reportage here coming from all sides, they would also be including some of the following information in their reports. I want to insist yet again that I am not siding with anyone. The following is just information that people really need before they write their news reports.
тАв Thaksin was democratically elected, but became increasingly undemocratic, and the country gradually devolved from a nation where oligarchs skimmed off the top to a kleptocracy of one. During his watch, thousands of people were summarily executed in the South of Thailand and in a bizarre “war on drugs” in which body count was considered a marker of success.
тАв the coup that ousted Thaksin was of course completely illegal, but none of the people who carried it out are in the present government.
тАв the yellow shirts’ greatest error in moulding its international image was to elevate Thaksin’s corruption as its major bone of contention. Thai governments have always been corrupt. The extent of corruption and the fact that much of it went into only one pocket was shocking to Thais, but the west views all “second-rate countries” as being corrupt. Had they used the human rights violations and muzzling of the press as their key talking points, the “heroic revolution” archetype would have been moulded with opposite protagonists, and CNN and BBC would be telling an opposite story today.
тАв the constitution which was approved by a referendum after the coup and which brought back democracy was flawed, but it provided more checks and balances, and made election fraud a truly accountable offense for the first time.
тАв the parliamentary process by which the Democrat coalition came to power was the same process by which the Lib Dems and Tories have attained power in Britain. The parliament that voted in this government consists entirely of democratically elected members.
тАв no one ever disputed the red shirts’ right to peaceful assembly, and the government went out of its way to accede to their demands.
тАв this country already has democracy. Not a perfect one, but the idea of “demanding democracy” is sheer fantasy
тАв the yellow shirts did not succeed in getting any of their demands from the government. The last two governments changed because key figures were shown to have committed election fraud. They simply did not take their own constitution seriously enough to follow it.
тАв the red TV station has a perfect right to exist, but if foreign journalists actually understood Thai, they would realise that much of its content went far beyond any constitutionally acceptable limits of “protected speech” in a western democracy. Every civilised society limits speech when it actually harms others, whether by inciting hate or by slander. The government may have been wrong to brusquely pull the plug, but was certainly right to cry foul. It should have sought an injunction first. Example: Arisman threatened to destroy mosques, government buildings, and “all institutions you hold sacred” … a clip widely seen on YouTube, without subtitles. Without subtitles, it looks like “liberty, equality, fraternity”.
тАв the army hasn’t been shooting women and children … or indeed anyone at all, except in self-defence. Otherwise this would all be over, wouldn’t it? It’s simple for a big army to mow down 5,000 defenceless people.
тАв since the government called the red shirts’ bluff and allowed the deputy P.M. to report to the authorities to hear their accusations, the red leaders have been making ever-more fanciful demands. The idea of UN intervention is patently absurd. When Thaksin killed all those Muslims and alleged drug lords, human rights groups asked the UN to intervene. When the army took over the entire country, some asked the UN to intervene. The UN doesn’t intervene in the internal affairs of sovereign countries except when requested to by the country itself or when the government has completely broken down.
тАв Thailand hasn’t had an unbreachable gulf between rich and poor for at least 20 years. These conflicts are about the rise of the middle class, not the war between the aristocrats and the proletariat.
тАв Abhisit, with his thoroughly western and somewhat liberal background, shares the values of the west and is in fact more likely to bring about the social revolution needed by Thailand’s agrarian poor than any previous leader. He is, in fact, pretty red, while Thaksin, in his autocratic style of leadership, is in a way pretty yellow. Simplistic portrayals do not help anyone to understand anything.
тАв the only people who do not seem to care about the reds’ actual grievances are their own leaders, who are basically making everyone risk their lives to see if they can get bail.
тАв the King has said all that he is constitutionally able to say when he spoke to the supreme court justices and urged them to do their duty. The western press never seem to realise that the Thai monarchy is constitutionally on the European model … not, say, the Saudi model. The king REIGNS … he doesn’t “rule”. This is a democracy. The king is supposed to symbolise all the people, not a special interest group.
The above are just a few of the elements that needed to be sorted through in order to provide a balanced view of what is happening in this country . . .”
From Somtow’s article I could conclude that those Reds who made the long march from their villages were duped and used . . . as well as all foreigners and foreign media.
Thank you for the link to CNN report. As expected, the comments fired on the reporter. This is actually happening in Thailand. The middle-class and the elite are ruling the country. The poor lack of resource to speak out, they did when Thaksin was in power. The elite was unhappy. So they put blames on him.
And that is the root of all problems in Thailand.
The middle-class enjoy whatever TV program feed you, the poor has been neglected. No one care. However, in this uprising protest, I’m sure not so long, we will see the truth. Many middle class know, but they just keep it with themselves.
P.S. common words: “you know nothing about Thailand”. we know best, etc. Jonathan Head from BBC is a good example of this kind of accusation.
Duncan McCargo writes on subject of this post in “Bangkok’s battles a rehearsal for civil war” published today.
Some excerpts:
“This has been portrayed as a struggle between poor farmers from the countryside and an undemocratic Bangkok elite. Yet despite the sympathetic coverage for the Redshirts in much of the international media, this is not a classic “pro-democracy” struggle between good guys and bad guys. It is a savage and dispiriting civil conflict, from which nobody emerges with much credit.”
“At the election in December 2007, the ruling Democrat Party took 39.63 per cent of the party list vote — almost exactly the same as the 39.6 per cent of the People’s Power Party, from which the Redshirts are largely drawn. Neither side has had a monopoly on popular support; both have some valid arguments and positions; and neither has been playing by the rules.”
“The central problem is that Thailand is torn between two rival camps, each led and directed by rich and powerful factions. Though ostensibly divided by ideological differences, the anti-government Redshirts and the pro-government Yellowshirts are best characterized as competing patronage networks, bound together primarily by personal loyalties and emotional attachments. Supporters on both sides have been mobilized by intermediaries playing on local and family ties.”
“On one level, Thailand’s political crisis is an expression of collective anxiety about the succession. If the sides cannot negotiate a settlement before then, the recent spate of protests may be dress rehearsals for an even more dramatic, and more damaging, confrontation.”
Thank you to all posters. I’ve learnt a lot from reading your comments. It’s now 20 May, however, and the Red protestors are still leaving Bangkok, many having hidden from what they thought would be a military massacre. They were encouraged to believe this by two months of agitprop from their leaders on the stage. And while they’re now returning, their black-shirted brothers in arms are still sniping, burning and looting.
My point is that there is a tactical issue as well as a strategic one. While we are exhorted to cast our minds away from transient events and look to the big picture, the events are showing us something too. And what they tell me is that the rural people who came to Bangkok have been seriously misguided by their leaders. They seemed confident that mere squatting would bring success (and that Arisaman’s and Nattawut’s talk of burning and destruction was just rhetoric) and that an exit strategy was not required. They really had no idea that their actions were deeply offensive to the people of Bangkok; in fact they thought people supported them. Surely their leaders were not so naive; surely they knew that only violent intimidation had a chance of succeeding – indeed that violence was the best method, talk of “ahimsa” being just a sop to the “useful idiots” who went along with them.
We all know that Bangkok’s hegemony has been oppressive and offensive, to Isaan people especially, for a long, long time, and it’s time Bangkok got some kind of come-uppance, but I doubt most red followers feel angry and oppressed to the extent that they want to be part of an attempt to overthrow the government by violence, accompanied by large-scale arson (and let’s face it, the red movement has been notable for its violence from its beginning). The people for whom the red leaders speak have longstanding grievances, but most are not going to kill and burn. They have been manipulated by their leaders and others in the movement who are quite willing to initiate a violent “class war”.
Walker’s premise to explain why Thai farmers in the Northeast are angry about being disadvantaged, despite being relatively prosperous, seems to hinge entirely on analysis of economic data that he claims proves that the problem is an increasing wealth gap. After this exciting build up the reader is only titillated as Walker declines to show any of his economic analysis but effectivly invites the reader to find the data for himself before moving on hastily to his predictable conclusions. I suppose this is not a surprise, since Walker has not displayed any numeracy or in depth knowledge of economics in his writings to date, and we can assume that part of his education is still to come.
The stupidity of those YouTube comments caused me to lose a few brain cells through virulent pathogenic memetic infection. Due to this I’ve now lost approximately .5 IQ points. Thanks Andrew!
Team “Yellow” says that Thaksin was bad for the country and ruined the economy. That is an opinion, opinions are not fact. So let’s have a look at the numbers. Here are some GDP Purchasing Power Parity per citizen (Country wealth per citizen) data ranking for Thailand vs the World average. What do the numbers say?
Note the improvement during the Thaksin years and the decline after the coup in 2006. Anyone can have an opinion but the numbers don’t lie. Thailand from 2002 closed the gap with the world average in 2006 reaching rank 92 in the world with the global average being 89. After the coup it dropped to 120 in rank with the global average being 102.
*NOTE: all countries had to deal with the financial crisis so that cannot be used as an excuse for Thailand dropping from 92 to 120.
@ Athita. Do you really believe the CRES needs to gild the lily for the Bangkok middle class about the arson attacks? I think the reds have done a great job by themselves. Central was obviously made the prime target because of their association with the Bangkok Post and their blocking of Thaksin’s attempt to take it over through nominees.
If people thought that capital punishment without due process for suspeced drug dealing was a great idea under Thaksin, as convincingly elucidated by Farrelly and Walker, wouldn’t it be even better with due process for arson? Sarit’s summary executions of arsonists on the spot of the crime played even better with the public than Thaksin’s extrajudicial killings of alleged dope dealers and Muslim protestors. I can’t understand your squeamishness.
The story of Arisman’s latest failed arrest yesterday has not been adequately explained but he has been arrested again and is now in custody in Cha Am. So shooting while resisting arresting was not the plan for him. Defenistration perhaps – in recognition of his feats at the Royal Cliff and SC Park hotels?
Much of Nuomi’s explanation matches what I’ve been told by Thai friends and colleaques over the years. Thaksin was genuinely popular amongst many people, including some city folk and small to medium business owners.
I’ve also heard he “brought” the smaller parties/local feudal/family lords into the TRT creating an upstoppable election machine.
Many of the “qualities” that put me off Thaksin actually appealed to many Thais. To me he seemed an autocratic criminal intent on staying in power for decades much as Lee Kwan Yu or Mahatir with cynical PR exercises such as staying at Roi Et to listen and teach the poor. To many Thai’s this equals a strong decisive leader, a CEO politician that really cared, that really helped them with 30 baht health care etc. Up to a point many were willing to overlook his faults (I’ll never forget the the good question bad question paddles for journalists), and amongst a fair portion of the poor rural types, Thaksin is becoming less relevant, but they have has a taste of democracy and want a fair share.
On reflection he may well have been a bit of both.
I still think Thaksin exposed a weakness in the system and a lack of better alternatives. Instead of finding an enduring democratic/legal way of dealing with him, the Coup got rid of him before a “real” solution was found. The 1998 constitution may have been a step too far, or maybe the checks and balances need some work, or the culture and society and political landscape wasn’t quire ready.
Agree with the writer that the thai monarchy has stunted democracy, but not just through the actions of the monarchy and it’s cohorts, but also because of the “inate” nature of Thai culture and society, that wants a special monarch, a father figure, reinforced by years of PR.
Whatever happens with the Kings successor, the culture/society may be about to go through a new evolutionary stage, as the time for the type of monarch they have had is passing, and it is unlikely that his sucessor will have the same “moral authority” and discipline.
It would have surprised me if the Ambassador had not defended the royal family. It is his duty to do so as you can see that the Thai embassy is not just Thai embassy but everywhere on earth they are ROYAL THAI EMBASSIES, not just a symbolic term !!
Instead of protest to remove truly corrput people, the farmers are protesting to bring in Socialism into Thailand. A model that is failing worldwide as governments have to resort to fiat currency and governments going into debt to finance this “dream” of a better life that in reality is unsustainable. If your activities are not producing the results you want, you need to change what you do not use government go rob from people. That resembles communism. No one can ever be rich in this case as vultures always seek ways to rob you. The ultra rich will always have their tax shelters and off shore accounts and are untouchable. It is the small businesses and middle class who are hurt the most. These people are hooked on freebies. They want government care from cradle to grave. That is not government’s duty, it never was… These people will destroy Thailand and push it into a debt situation that would force Thailand to be subservient to international financial governance body and controlled by foreigners.
I am hearing reports of lots more burning in the cities in the North and North East today, however the “Thai Propaganda” channels are hiding it and not reporting it.
If anyone is in the location of the cities can they please update, as with the Thai government in total control of all local news, all local reporters, all local evidence finds, doctored photo’s and manipulated video’s (sic) some independent reports would be good.
“As far as I know, Abhisit was not involved in the campaign and came to power”
Hmm… You said you lived here for 13 years and you don’t know that Abhisit help Yellow Shirt got control of government building? He was there with the Yellow shirt that day. Not just being there but in the front line himself.
You need to study about the dark side of this man more.
Thailand has regular elections, there were four elections in the past ten years and next year there will be another one.
You don’t burn the city to move elections by a few months and you don’t fight the army to negotiate election dates either.
God knows what their real goal was. People were told one thing, leaders had different ideas, and puppet masters in the background had their own agendas.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Chaos, curfew and confusion
Updater @# 3 :
Today (20/5/) Stephen Smiths’ Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade advised airlines flying into Bangkok from Australia that the only means of transport from Suvarnabhumi Airport was by limousine – i.e. all bus and taxi links had stopped.
Athita a#17 :
These truly redmarkable photos courtesy of Getty Images, are available in Australia via the iternet, no problem.
They clearly show snipers teams at work – usually two soliders, one the sniper using a rifle with precision sights, the other guarding him with a normal rifle.
Smith Jones @#20 ;
Both Bangkok Post and The nation web-sites confirm torching of government offices in at least four Isaarn and Lanna towns and cities (Udon Thani, Khon Kaen, Mukdahan, and Chian Mai).
20 May 1992
Found this article “Thailand: Challenging the ‘heroic revolution’ archetype” by Somtow Sucharitkul who is a composer, author and media personality.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2905056.htm
Abstracts below:
” . . . If the foreign press were in fact able to speak Thai well enough to follow all the reportage here coming from all sides, they would also be including some of the following information in their reports. I want to insist yet again that I am not siding with anyone. The following is just information that people really need before they write their news reports.
тАв Thaksin was democratically elected, but became increasingly undemocratic, and the country gradually devolved from a nation where oligarchs skimmed off the top to a kleptocracy of one. During his watch, thousands of people were summarily executed in the South of Thailand and in a bizarre “war on drugs” in which body count was considered a marker of success.
тАв the coup that ousted Thaksin was of course completely illegal, but none of the people who carried it out are in the present government.
тАв the yellow shirts’ greatest error in moulding its international image was to elevate Thaksin’s corruption as its major bone of contention. Thai governments have always been corrupt. The extent of corruption and the fact that much of it went into only one pocket was shocking to Thais, but the west views all “second-rate countries” as being corrupt. Had they used the human rights violations and muzzling of the press as their key talking points, the “heroic revolution” archetype would have been moulded with opposite protagonists, and CNN and BBC would be telling an opposite story today.
тАв the constitution which was approved by a referendum after the coup and which brought back democracy was flawed, but it provided more checks and balances, and made election fraud a truly accountable offense for the first time.
тАв the parliamentary process by which the Democrat coalition came to power was the same process by which the Lib Dems and Tories have attained power in Britain. The parliament that voted in this government consists entirely of democratically elected members.
тАв no one ever disputed the red shirts’ right to peaceful assembly, and the government went out of its way to accede to their demands.
тАв this country already has democracy. Not a perfect one, but the idea of “demanding democracy” is sheer fantasy
тАв the yellow shirts did not succeed in getting any of their demands from the government. The last two governments changed because key figures were shown to have committed election fraud. They simply did not take their own constitution seriously enough to follow it.
тАв the red TV station has a perfect right to exist, but if foreign journalists actually understood Thai, they would realise that much of its content went far beyond any constitutionally acceptable limits of “protected speech” in a western democracy. Every civilised society limits speech when it actually harms others, whether by inciting hate or by slander. The government may have been wrong to brusquely pull the plug, but was certainly right to cry foul. It should have sought an injunction first. Example: Arisman threatened to destroy mosques, government buildings, and “all institutions you hold sacred” … a clip widely seen on YouTube, without subtitles. Without subtitles, it looks like “liberty, equality, fraternity”.
тАв the army hasn’t been shooting women and children … or indeed anyone at all, except in self-defence. Otherwise this would all be over, wouldn’t it? It’s simple for a big army to mow down 5,000 defenceless people.
тАв since the government called the red shirts’ bluff and allowed the deputy P.M. to report to the authorities to hear their accusations, the red leaders have been making ever-more fanciful demands. The idea of UN intervention is patently absurd. When Thaksin killed all those Muslims and alleged drug lords, human rights groups asked the UN to intervene. When the army took over the entire country, some asked the UN to intervene. The UN doesn’t intervene in the internal affairs of sovereign countries except when requested to by the country itself or when the government has completely broken down.
тАв Thailand hasn’t had an unbreachable gulf between rich and poor for at least 20 years. These conflicts are about the rise of the middle class, not the war between the aristocrats and the proletariat.
тАв Abhisit, with his thoroughly western and somewhat liberal background, shares the values of the west and is in fact more likely to bring about the social revolution needed by Thailand’s agrarian poor than any previous leader. He is, in fact, pretty red, while Thaksin, in his autocratic style of leadership, is in a way pretty yellow. Simplistic portrayals do not help anyone to understand anything.
тАв the only people who do not seem to care about the reds’ actual grievances are their own leaders, who are basically making everyone risk their lives to see if they can get bail.
тАв the King has said all that he is constitutionally able to say when he spoke to the supreme court justices and urged them to do their duty. The western press never seem to realise that the Thai monarchy is constitutionally on the European model … not, say, the Saudi model. The king REIGNS … he doesn’t “rule”. This is a democracy. The king is supposed to symbolise all the people, not a special interest group.
The above are just a few of the elements that needed to be sorted through in order to provide a balanced view of what is happening in this country . . .”
From Somtow’s article I could conclude that those Reds who made the long march from their villages were duped and used . . . as well as all foreigners and foreign media.
20 May 1992
Andrew:
Thank you for the link to CNN report. As expected, the comments fired on the reporter. This is actually happening in Thailand. The middle-class and the elite are ruling the country. The poor lack of resource to speak out, they did when Thaksin was in power. The elite was unhappy. So they put blames on him.
And that is the root of all problems in Thailand.
The middle-class enjoy whatever TV program feed you, the poor has been neglected. No one care. However, in this uprising protest, I’m sure not so long, we will see the truth. Many middle class know, but they just keep it with themselves.
P.S. common words: “you know nothing about Thailand”. we know best, etc. Jonathan Head from BBC is a good example of this kind of accusation.
Commentary on roots of the Thai crisis
Duncan McCargo writes on subject of this post in “Bangkok’s battles a rehearsal for civil war” published today.
Some excerpts:
“This has been portrayed as a struggle between poor farmers from the countryside and an undemocratic Bangkok elite. Yet despite the sympathetic coverage for the Redshirts in much of the international media, this is not a classic “pro-democracy” struggle between good guys and bad guys. It is a savage and dispiriting civil conflict, from which nobody emerges with much credit.”
“At the election in December 2007, the ruling Democrat Party took 39.63 per cent of the party list vote — almost exactly the same as the 39.6 per cent of the People’s Power Party, from which the Redshirts are largely drawn. Neither side has had a monopoly on popular support; both have some valid arguments and positions; and neither has been playing by the rules.”
“The central problem is that Thailand is torn between two rival camps, each led and directed by rich and powerful factions. Though ostensibly divided by ideological differences, the anti-government Redshirts and the pro-government Yellowshirts are best characterized as competing patronage networks, bound together primarily by personal loyalties and emotional attachments. Supporters on both sides have been mobilized by intermediaries playing on local and family ties.”
“On one level, Thailand’s political crisis is an expression of collective anxiety about the succession. If the sides cannot negotiate a settlement before then, the recent spate of protests may be dress rehearsals for an even more dramatic, and more damaging, confrontation.”
http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Bangkok+battles+rehearsal+civil/3050637/story.html
The rebellion of Thailand’s middle-income peasants
Thank you to all posters. I’ve learnt a lot from reading your comments. It’s now 20 May, however, and the Red protestors are still leaving Bangkok, many having hidden from what they thought would be a military massacre. They were encouraged to believe this by two months of agitprop from their leaders on the stage. And while they’re now returning, their black-shirted brothers in arms are still sniping, burning and looting.
My point is that there is a tactical issue as well as a strategic one. While we are exhorted to cast our minds away from transient events and look to the big picture, the events are showing us something too. And what they tell me is that the rural people who came to Bangkok have been seriously misguided by their leaders. They seemed confident that mere squatting would bring success (and that Arisaman’s and Nattawut’s talk of burning and destruction was just rhetoric) and that an exit strategy was not required. They really had no idea that their actions were deeply offensive to the people of Bangkok; in fact they thought people supported them. Surely their leaders were not so naive; surely they knew that only violent intimidation had a chance of succeeding – indeed that violence was the best method, talk of “ahimsa” being just a sop to the “useful idiots” who went along with them.
We all know that Bangkok’s hegemony has been oppressive and offensive, to Isaan people especially, for a long, long time, and it’s time Bangkok got some kind of come-uppance, but I doubt most red followers feel angry and oppressed to the extent that they want to be part of an attempt to overthrow the government by violence, accompanied by large-scale arson (and let’s face it, the red movement has been notable for its violence from its beginning). The people for whom the red leaders speak have longstanding grievances, but most are not going to kill and burn. They have been manipulated by their leaders and others in the movement who are quite willing to initiate a violent “class war”.
Commentary on roots of the Thai crisis
Walker’s premise to explain why Thai farmers in the Northeast are angry about being disadvantaged, despite being relatively prosperous, seems to hinge entirely on analysis of economic data that he claims proves that the problem is an increasing wealth gap. After this exciting build up the reader is only titillated as Walker declines to show any of his economic analysis but effectivly invites the reader to find the data for himself before moving on hastily to his predictable conclusions. I suppose this is not a surprise, since Walker has not displayed any numeracy or in depth knowledge of economics in his writings to date, and we can assume that part of his education is still to come.
20 May 1992
re: Andrew Walker #11
The stupidity of those YouTube comments caused me to lose a few brain cells through virulent pathogenic memetic infection. Due to this I’ve now lost approximately .5 IQ points. Thanks Andrew!
Commentary on roots of the Thai crisis
Team “Yellow” says that Thaksin was bad for the country and ruined the economy. That is an opinion, opinions are not fact. So let’s have a look at the numbers. Here are some GDP Purchasing Power Parity per citizen (Country wealth per citizen) data ranking for Thailand vs the World average. What do the numbers say?
91 World $ 7,900 2002 est.
99 Thailand $ 6,900 2002 est.
http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact2003/rankorder/2004rank.html
89 World $ 10,000 2006 est.
92 Thailand $ 9,100 2006 est.
http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact2007/rankorder/2004rank.html
102 World $ 10,500 2009 est.
120 Thailand $ 8,100 2009 est.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html
Note the improvement during the Thaksin years and the decline after the coup in 2006. Anyone can have an opinion but the numbers don’t lie. Thailand from 2002 closed the gap with the world average in 2006 reaching rank 92 in the world with the global average being 89. After the coup it dropped to 120 in rank with the global average being 102.
*NOTE: all countries had to deal with the financial crisis so that cannot be used as an excuse for Thailand dropping from 92 to 120.
Commentary on roots of the Thai crisis
This article is well worth a read.
http://andrewmarshall.com/blog/voices-from-the-aftermath/
.
20 May 1992
Strong words and sentiments from the Sentinel – a balanced commentary, I thought.
The CNN reporter was crude and unprofessional – a buffoon.
However, in essence, what she said was correct.
Why has the king been silent?
20 May 1992
@ Stuart Goddard. What does Mum want?
@ Athita. Do you really believe the CRES needs to gild the lily for the Bangkok middle class about the arson attacks? I think the reds have done a great job by themselves. Central was obviously made the prime target because of their association with the Bangkok Post and their blocking of Thaksin’s attempt to take it over through nominees.
If people thought that capital punishment without due process for suspeced drug dealing was a great idea under Thaksin, as convincingly elucidated by Farrelly and Walker, wouldn’t it be even better with due process for arson? Sarit’s summary executions of arsonists on the spot of the crime played even better with the public than Thaksin’s extrajudicial killings of alleged dope dealers and Muslim protestors. I can’t understand your squeamishness.
The story of Arisman’s latest failed arrest yesterday has not been adequately explained but he has been arrested again and is now in custody in Cha Am. So shooting while resisting arresting was not the plan for him. Defenistration perhaps – in recognition of his feats at the Royal Cliff and SC Park hotels?
20 May 1992
Related discussion in this Asia Sentinal article
20 May 1992
AW: About that CNN commentary, as an American I am mortified.
That is the state of “news” in American mass media now — and it comes from one of the most respected sources for news. Absolutely mortifying.
Too many eggs in the royal basket
Much of Nuomi’s explanation matches what I’ve been told by Thai friends and colleaques over the years. Thaksin was genuinely popular amongst many people, including some city folk and small to medium business owners.
I’ve also heard he “brought” the smaller parties/local feudal/family lords into the TRT creating an upstoppable election machine.
Many of the “qualities” that put me off Thaksin actually appealed to many Thais. To me he seemed an autocratic criminal intent on staying in power for decades much as Lee Kwan Yu or Mahatir with cynical PR exercises such as staying at Roi Et to listen and teach the poor. To many Thai’s this equals a strong decisive leader, a CEO politician that really cared, that really helped them with 30 baht health care etc. Up to a point many were willing to overlook his faults (I’ll never forget the the good question bad question paddles for journalists), and amongst a fair portion of the poor rural types, Thaksin is becoming less relevant, but they have has a taste of democracy and want a fair share.
On reflection he may well have been a bit of both.
I still think Thaksin exposed a weakness in the system and a lack of better alternatives. Instead of finding an enduring democratic/legal way of dealing with him, the Coup got rid of him before a “real” solution was found. The 1998 constitution may have been a step too far, or maybe the checks and balances need some work, or the culture and society and political landscape wasn’t quire ready.
Agree with the writer that the thai monarchy has stunted democracy, but not just through the actions of the monarchy and it’s cohorts, but also because of the “inate” nature of Thai culture and society, that wants a special monarch, a father figure, reinforced by years of PR.
Whatever happens with the Kings successor, the culture/society may be about to go through a new evolutionary stage, as the time for the type of monarch they have had is passing, and it is unlikely that his sucessor will have the same “moral authority” and discipline.
Ambassador Kriangsak in the SMH
It would have surprised me if the Ambassador had not defended the royal family. It is his duty to do so as you can see that the Thai embassy is not just Thai embassy but everywhere on earth they are ROYAL THAI EMBASSIES, not just a symbolic term !!
20 May 1992
Instead of protest to remove truly corrput people, the farmers are protesting to bring in Socialism into Thailand. A model that is failing worldwide as governments have to resort to fiat currency and governments going into debt to finance this “dream” of a better life that in reality is unsustainable. If your activities are not producing the results you want, you need to change what you do not use government go rob from people. That resembles communism. No one can ever be rich in this case as vultures always seek ways to rob you. The ultra rich will always have their tax shelters and off shore accounts and are untouchable. It is the small businesses and middle class who are hurt the most. These people are hooked on freebies. They want government care from cradle to grave. That is not government’s duty, it never was… These people will destroy Thailand and push it into a debt situation that would force Thailand to be subservient to international financial governance body and controlled by foreigners.
Chaos, curfew and confusion
I am hearing reports of lots more burning in the cities in the North and North East today, however the “Thai Propaganda” channels are hiding it and not reporting it.
If anyone is in the location of the cities can they please update, as with the Thai government in total control of all local news, all local reporters, all local evidence finds, doctored photo’s and manipulated video’s (sic) some independent reports would be good.
Burning, curfew
DaveH
“As far as I know, Abhisit was not involved in the campaign and came to power”
Hmm… You said you lived here for 13 years and you don’t know that Abhisit help Yellow Shirt got control of government building? He was there with the Yellow shirt that day. Not just being there but in the front line himself.
You need to study about the dark side of this man more.
Nick Nostitz in the killing zone
Kevina,
Thailand has regular elections, there were four elections in the past ten years and next year there will be another one.
You don’t burn the city to move elections by a few months and you don’t fight the army to negotiate election dates either.
God knows what their real goal was. People were told one thing, leaders had different ideas, and puppet masters in the background had their own agendas.
Nick Nostitz in the killing zone
sorry I gave the wrong nr. it should comment to @166 Siriorn