On the question of Fu Fu’s supposed military rank: I appreciate that it’s trivia, and a distraction, but can anyone out there provide more information.
According to the Crown Prince, as reported in this article, “[f]or fun, I had him made a captain”. Roi Ek Fu Fu? Although I note that in a different article he is described in the following (non-military) terms: “Khun Fufu, a white male poodle belonging to HRH Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn, also exuded charm and executed clever stunts”.
Has anyone out there met Fu Fu? And has this poodle now gone on to achieve higher rank? I would like to think that Fu Fu has been promoted over the years.
Sawarin, thanks for the reply. It’s a pity that your blog is no longer active. But I suppose you will still contribute to NM and Prachatai as Submarine or Sawarin:-)
and I’m looking forward to your new articles and comments.
The Economist‘s chief concern is the economy… in its narrow Western definition
…the rules of the game will need to be reset… Thailand was once an outpost of freedom in a fairly repressive region. Scrappy politics did not choke rapid economic growth, as the bureaucrats kept a steady hand on day-to-day management… some now see Thailand as a cautionary tale of a botched democracy…
As long as the “steady hands” of bureaucrats see to day-to-day management… what’s the problem, according to The Economist? “reset” by whom?..
Well…
Anyone who speaks out of turn in Thailand risks arrest under the lèse-majesté laws or a new, equally nasty computer-crimes law…
even though
King Bhumibol famously said in 2005 that he was not above criticism.
…and that sort of authoritarianism is the only way the bureaucrats’ steady hands will be allowed to continue to manage things to The Economist‘s specifications.
My new favorite economist is Chatthip Nartsupha. Thailand seems to me to be in the unusual position of having, still, a huge portion of its population in position to effect the change, to pick up the traces, to a post-industrial society and I surely hope the Thais are able to do just that.
I also agree with the great insight brought through by Silenced, Siamiddlepath and Nigella.
As stated by Siamiddlepath, “I work with mostly foreigners so I don’t have to pretend to hate the reds as it is now fashionable.” This is exactly it. It has become fashionable to “hate” the reds publicly. I believe this is because of image and double standard.
What Bangkok social climber would ever associate themselves with the redshirts? Surrounded by symbols of capitalism like Paragon, Gaysorn and CentralWorld, many Bangkokians are very concerned with their perceived social status. If it’s not a RED carpet, they are not interested.
We can all see our facebook feeds loaded with anti-red comments, but where are the pro-red? That’s unacceptable to publicise. What is acceptable? Well, it’s acceptable to post the new “Thai People – No Violence” flower picture as your profile pic then comment in your status that “Pah Fah [protest stage] should be bombed to clear out the buffalo.” Yes, this was posted…
This is because Thailand is full of double standards. It is ok for the yellow side to spout off at the mouth like uneducated fools, while directly referring to the reds as uneducated buffalo. It is ok for PAD to occupy the airport costing the country an estimated 8 billion USD, but it wasn’t ok for the reds to occupy our streets for a few days last Songkhran. Double standards. Thai society is based upon double standards and that is what needs to change. Until there is some sense of equality the reds will continue to fight for their equal voice and equal right.
Silenced – excellent statement and analysis of middle (upper) class Bangkokian, like you, I was born in Bkk in the era of “after’76- brainwashed-before ‘92 generation” but fortunately got a chance to go study abroad and like, siammiddlepath, (though I’m not getting paid in six figured, yet.) working as a white collar in an air-con office as well. However, when the protesters walked pass my office in Wireless road the other day in, front of my office, I saw several of my office mates (who actually graduated from the most prestigious university in Thailand as well) grab what ever that’s red and went down stair and waving to the protesters.
Logically if you have a group of protesters of, say 100 people strong, and about 60 people in the group came from upper-middle class, it is easy to say that those group are made up of mainly upper class elite, while if we have 1,000 strong protesters, and 100 people in the group that are from upper-middle echelon, then by de facto the group majorities are made up of the uneducated poor.
siammiddlepath – I know from your surrounding that the future looks grim indeed, I’m actually in one right now, but lets say Ayatola Komani tooks 10 years with no modern communication tools like the internet (he was using tape cassette) to start the islamic revolution in Iran, so people like us that have the mean to do spread the awareness should get up and do it, an old saying among the old day revolutionist said “No one will give you the freedom, you have to fight for it”
From Ban Nong Bua to Phan Fa: Ideology, Compromise, and Institutional Collapse
Over the last year or so I have been studying the etymology of the Thai term udomkan (р╕нр╕╕р╕Фр╕бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣М, р╕нр╕╕р╕Фр╕бр╕Бр╕▓р╕г), as well as Buriram local politics. I happened to time my fieldwork during the run-up to the current Red Shirt protests, starting in Buriram and Surin near the end of February and ending in Bangkok from the 14th to 18th of March. Among the interviews conducted in many districts of Buriram and Surin, I followed one group of Red Shirts from Ban Nong Bua, Amphur Ta Thum, Surin to the Bangkok rally.
My quick, rough observations fall into four broad categories:
тАв The relationship between the elite and mass “games”
тАв The complete separation between social movements and the electoral system and other political institutions
тАв Beyond Thaksin: Red Shirt Ideology
тАв Red Shirt Strategy
The relationship between elite and mass has changed rapidly over the last decade, to say the least. While previously commentators may have seen elites manipulating the mass to achieve their own ends, the mass these days is more independent and able to discern form from substance. However, each plays their own “games” in that there are complicated relationships or social interaction, strategizing, public relations campaigns, and negotiating among red elites, the red membership, yellow elites, the (quiet or waning) yellow membership, and the “neutrals” or “society at large”.
While Buriram may be a special case, the fact that most of the people who reside in the districts where there are MPs belonging to the Friends of Newin Group still love Thaksin (to the point of participating in the protests) but will *not* vote for his party shows that there is a complete break between the Red Shirt movement and electoral or regional politics. Many Northeasterners are indifferent about Thaksin and many Southerners are ardent Red Shirts. While hardcore members say that they will not support traitors like Newin and his ilk, there is in general no contradiction between supporting the local patron and fighting for the so-called populist programs, which brings us to the next topic of ideology and interests.
The reason why politicians were able to compromise in the past was because, as most Thais will say, they had no “udomkan” (which is confusingly translated into English as ideology). Essentially, post-1976, they were all right-wing anyway. I won’t get into the history of the intellectuals (and the so-called “intellectual left” ) and their complicated divisions and weakness, but suffice to say that there has developed a clear Red Shirt ideology that has gone beyond the so-called left-wing movements of the past, and most importantly, beyond Thaksin. A young man outside the Royal Hotel was selling a t-shirt with a poem written by Chiranan Pitpreecha, along with other Octoberist books and memorabilia. I asked a woman in her fifties passing by, “Thais don’t have udomkan, right?” She pointed to herself and the sea of red shirts, “This is udomkan!” “But there are no true friends and no permanent enemies,” I replied. She dismissed it as, “Oh, that’s normal.”
That the movement has gone beyond Thaksin may be the good news, but the bad news is the same as always: there are no avenues for representation and the accommodation of various interests. The media has done nothing to further this possibility of “compromise” and the exchange of views at the mass level, only hyping up the possibility of violence.
The Red Shirts have short and long-term strategies. The long-term strategy on everyone’s mind is waiting for Prem and those backing him to die. Thaksin and the Red Shirt core leaders have a short-term strategy that is marked by internal divisions, personal interests, and above all, weak PR (Surachai of Red Siam was holding court at his own little table on Rajadamnoen on Sunday but the ordinary RS members at the rally do not make much of the split, ultimately). For the ordinary members, the expression of their purity (р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕кр╕╕р╕Чр╕Шр╕┤р╣М) and unity of purpose is more important than immediately “winning” because they see victory in the long run. The Red Shirts of Ban Nong Bua cobbled together less than 3,000 baht to send their members to Bangkok, and coordinated via mobile phone with their relatives and friends working in and near the capital. They said they were satisfied with the UDD strategy, and even though they were tired, perspiring, fighting mosquitoes and the stench of urine, they were intent on having their voice heard.
Right now, unless you are not really interested in the news, it is hard to be neutral in Thailand. You either like or hate Thaksin. I don’t think it is going to be an easy ending. The story involves in many complications. A lot of which are not revealed and may never be.
As one of the red shirts’ supporters, I just wish they get what they want.
As one of the born after’76- brainwashed-before ’92 generation, I couldn’t agree more about assessments from earlier commenters. Judging from my Facebook feeds, expressing various degree of disdain to the so-called rural hordes, I have to say the pro-abhisit propaganda machine works quite well on this group. Most worrisome for the future of this society.
I believe that the “Brahmin” in this blood sacrifice does not imply that the ritual is Hinduism. The discourse of “Brahmanic” or “Brahmanism” in Thailand has, for a longgggg time ago (at least since the mid-19th c.), little or nothing to do with Hinduism. It could mean a number of things, among them the most important meaning is a signal that it is “not Buddhism”. Sometimes it is used to mean “supersitution,” another old word which is also vague and often means “non-Buddhism” as well. But “superstition” includes non-ritualistic beliefs while “Brahmanism” are mostly associated with some kinds of formalized rituals. A classic article by Thomas Kirsch (Journalof AsianStudies in 1976) offers some explanation of this. He used the word “Bramanism” in quote throughout to make it clear that it is not Hinduism.
I agree with Susie Wong that more analysis is needed. The example of Singapore is, however, misleading. The current crisis in Thailand is not a specific Thai crisis, but a crisis of the bureaucratic, neo-feudal systems of domination in SEA, which started with the Asia crisis in 1997. Then the decision was made, who will be bailed out by the state (which actually means by the savings of the farmers, middle class, employees etc.) and who will suffer. At least in Malaysia and Thailand the decision was clear. In Malaysia we have, since then the Anwar – Mahathir dichotomy, while in Thailand we find Thaksin – who ever. Due to the extreme concentration of political and financial power in a very small clique, the situation in Indonesia was slightly different. In Singapore the professional and efficient bureaucracy (in terms of carrot and stick) allowed for some modifications.
In terms of a strategic group analysis, one could say that at least since the 80’s we have a process of class formation of a small elite that consists of the peak of the bureaucracy/military, politician/neo-feudalist and big business (or better Tycoon-business). Whenever such class-formation occurs it means that democratization and public life gets limited.
Concerning the “middle classes” in SEA which during the 80’s were seen as agents for democratization in Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia these clearly showed that most should better be described as “petty bourgeoisie”, for whom it is more relevant to get some left over from the tables of the elites to show that they are better then the farmers, workers etc. They could get quite a few left overs during the 90’s! However, when it came to pay for the party, together with the farmers, workers etc., they received the bill. However, instead of understanding their position, for them it was more relevant to maintain their “virtual status” as the better off’s. This petty bourgeoisie and “Lumpenproletariat” makes itself known at present be it in UNMO by burning churches etc. or as yellows in Bangkok occupying international airports, etc. In both cases they are nothing else then the ready tools of the elites! Like nice dogs they lick the hands that beats them, as long as they get some bones.
The danger at present is that the entrenched elites are unwilling to let go of any of their power. Thus, reform is out of the question. They try to stick to their power as long as possible by any means available. The problem with the petty bourgeoisie is that they tend to favour, like always, fascist forms of elite leadership, and thereby can easily be used. In other words, let the country go down the drain, if it provides another six month or one year of power.
These Bangkok Siamese supporting the now self-defining, Thaksin-free Red-Shirts are just that – FREE SIAMESE.
The days of the American-backed fascist construct “Thailand” are collapsing.
i knew Dave before he joined the Regt. I have read his book and I have spoken to him in person. I believe he is a man who is passionate about the welfare of the Burmese people. While I don’t agree with some of his past methods. I do see that a man can not stand by a let evil happen. All men must do what they believe to be the right thing. Whether that is through assisting the armed struggle or assisting peaceful community based projects. A man must live with their own conscience.
George Jetson @#11 :
re. POSSIBLE Isaarn secession, you wrote :
“And if they seceded, who would their support come from?”
CHINA – that’s where their support would come from.
Already Isaarn is doing far more business directly with China than ever before – and this is re-directing large parts of Isaarn’s economy away from Bangkok, towards China, via Laos.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
The Economist stomps on some media taboos
On the question of Fu Fu’s supposed military rank: I appreciate that it’s trivia, and a distraction, but can anyone out there provide more information.
According to the Crown Prince, as reported in this article, “[f]or fun, I had him made a captain”. Roi Ek Fu Fu? Although I note that in a different article he is described in the following (non-military) terms: “Khun Fufu, a white male poodle belonging to HRH Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn, also exuded charm and executed clever stunts”.
Has anyone out there met Fu Fu? And has this poodle now gone on to achieve higher rank? I would like to think that Fu Fu has been promoted over the years.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
The Economist stomps on some media taboos
john francis lee, post-industrial feudalism is still feudalism
Education of the clone
Sawarin, thanks for the reply. It’s a pity that your blog is no longer active. But I suppose you will still contribute to NM and Prachatai as Submarine or Sawarin:-)
and I’m looking forward to your new articles and comments.
The Economist stomps on some media taboos
The Economist‘s chief concern is the economy… in its narrow Western definition
As long as the “steady hands” of bureaucrats see to day-to-day management… what’s the problem, according to The Economist? “reset” by whom?..
Well…
even though
…and that sort of authoritarianism is the only way the bureaucrats’ steady hands will be allowed to continue to manage things to The Economist‘s specifications.
My new favorite economist is Chatthip Nartsupha. Thailand seems to me to be in the unusual position of having, still, a huge portion of its population in position to effect the change, to pick up the traces, to a post-industrial society and I surely hope the Thais are able to do just that.
The Economist stomps on some media taboos
Khun Thong Daeng >> Ee Foo Foo
Support for Reds from Bangkok at large
I also agree with the great insight brought through by Silenced, Siamiddlepath and Nigella.
As stated by Siamiddlepath, “I work with mostly foreigners so I don’t have to pretend to hate the reds as it is now fashionable.” This is exactly it. It has become fashionable to “hate” the reds publicly. I believe this is because of image and double standard.
What Bangkok social climber would ever associate themselves with the redshirts? Surrounded by symbols of capitalism like Paragon, Gaysorn and CentralWorld, many Bangkokians are very concerned with their perceived social status. If it’s not a RED carpet, they are not interested.
We can all see our facebook feeds loaded with anti-red comments, but where are the pro-red? That’s unacceptable to publicise. What is acceptable? Well, it’s acceptable to post the new “Thai People – No Violence” flower picture as your profile pic then comment in your status that “Pah Fah [protest stage] should be bombed to clear out the buffalo.” Yes, this was posted…
This is because Thailand is full of double standards. It is ok for the yellow side to spout off at the mouth like uneducated fools, while directly referring to the reds as uneducated buffalo. It is ok for PAD to occupy the airport costing the country an estimated 8 billion USD, but it wasn’t ok for the reds to occupy our streets for a few days last Songkhran. Double standards. Thai society is based upon double standards and that is what needs to change. Until there is some sense of equality the reds will continue to fight for their equal voice and equal right.
Support for Reds from Bangkok at large
Silenced – excellent statement and analysis of middle (upper) class Bangkokian, like you, I was born in Bkk in the era of “after’76- brainwashed-before ‘92 generation” but fortunately got a chance to go study abroad and like, siammiddlepath, (though I’m not getting paid in six figured, yet.) working as a white collar in an air-con office as well. However, when the protesters walked pass my office in Wireless road the other day in, front of my office, I saw several of my office mates (who actually graduated from the most prestigious university in Thailand as well) grab what ever that’s red and went down stair and waving to the protesters.
Logically if you have a group of protesters of, say 100 people strong, and about 60 people in the group came from upper-middle class, it is easy to say that those group are made up of mainly upper class elite, while if we have 1,000 strong protesters, and 100 people in the group that are from upper-middle echelon, then by de facto the group majorities are made up of the uneducated poor.
siammiddlepath – I know from your surrounding that the future looks grim indeed, I’m actually in one right now, but lets say Ayatola Komani tooks 10 years with no modern communication tools like the internet (he was using tape cassette) to start the islamic revolution in Iran, so people like us that have the mean to do spread the awareness should get up and do it, an old saying among the old day revolutionist said “No one will give you the freedom, you have to fight for it”
The Economist stomps on some media taboos
Why did the article did not broach the topic of the role and health of Queen Sirikit as well?
Red soi, Red city: A brief commentary from the streets
From Ban Nong Bua to Phan Fa: Ideology, Compromise, and Institutional Collapse
Over the last year or so I have been studying the etymology of the Thai term udomkan (р╕нр╕╕р╕Фр╕бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣М, р╕нр╕╕р╕Фр╕бр╕Бр╕▓р╕г), as well as Buriram local politics. I happened to time my fieldwork during the run-up to the current Red Shirt protests, starting in Buriram and Surin near the end of February and ending in Bangkok from the 14th to 18th of March. Among the interviews conducted in many districts of Buriram and Surin, I followed one group of Red Shirts from Ban Nong Bua, Amphur Ta Thum, Surin to the Bangkok rally.
My quick, rough observations fall into four broad categories:
тАв The relationship between the elite and mass “games”
тАв The complete separation between social movements and the electoral system and other political institutions
тАв Beyond Thaksin: Red Shirt Ideology
тАв Red Shirt Strategy
The relationship between elite and mass has changed rapidly over the last decade, to say the least. While previously commentators may have seen elites manipulating the mass to achieve their own ends, the mass these days is more independent and able to discern form from substance. However, each plays their own “games” in that there are complicated relationships or social interaction, strategizing, public relations campaigns, and negotiating among red elites, the red membership, yellow elites, the (quiet or waning) yellow membership, and the “neutrals” or “society at large”.
While Buriram may be a special case, the fact that most of the people who reside in the districts where there are MPs belonging to the Friends of Newin Group still love Thaksin (to the point of participating in the protests) but will *not* vote for his party shows that there is a complete break between the Red Shirt movement and electoral or regional politics. Many Northeasterners are indifferent about Thaksin and many Southerners are ardent Red Shirts. While hardcore members say that they will not support traitors like Newin and his ilk, there is in general no contradiction between supporting the local patron and fighting for the so-called populist programs, which brings us to the next topic of ideology and interests.
The reason why politicians were able to compromise in the past was because, as most Thais will say, they had no “udomkan” (which is confusingly translated into English as ideology). Essentially, post-1976, they were all right-wing anyway. I won’t get into the history of the intellectuals (and the so-called “intellectual left” ) and their complicated divisions and weakness, but suffice to say that there has developed a clear Red Shirt ideology that has gone beyond the so-called left-wing movements of the past, and most importantly, beyond Thaksin. A young man outside the Royal Hotel was selling a t-shirt with a poem written by Chiranan Pitpreecha, along with other Octoberist books and memorabilia. I asked a woman in her fifties passing by, “Thais don’t have udomkan, right?” She pointed to herself and the sea of red shirts, “This is udomkan!” “But there are no true friends and no permanent enemies,” I replied. She dismissed it as, “Oh, that’s normal.”
That the movement has gone beyond Thaksin may be the good news, but the bad news is the same as always: there are no avenues for representation and the accommodation of various interests. The media has done nothing to further this possibility of “compromise” and the exchange of views at the mass level, only hyping up the possibility of violence.
The Red Shirts have short and long-term strategies. The long-term strategy on everyone’s mind is waiting for Prem and those backing him to die. Thaksin and the Red Shirt core leaders have a short-term strategy that is marked by internal divisions, personal interests, and above all, weak PR (Surachai of Red Siam was holding court at his own little table on Rajadamnoen on Sunday but the ordinary RS members at the rally do not make much of the split, ultimately). For the ordinary members, the expression of their purity (р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕кр╕╕р╕Чр╕Шр╕┤р╣М) and unity of purpose is more important than immediately “winning” because they see victory in the long run. The Red Shirts of Ban Nong Bua cobbled together less than 3,000 baht to send their members to Bangkok, and coordinated via mobile phone with their relatives and friends working in and near the capital. They said they were satisfied with the UDD strategy, and even though they were tired, perspiring, fighting mosquitoes and the stench of urine, they were intent on having their voice heard.
Red soi, Red city: A brief commentary from the streets
Right now, unless you are not really interested in the news, it is hard to be neutral in Thailand. You either like or hate Thaksin. I don’t think it is going to be an easy ending. The story involves in many complications. A lot of which are not revealed and may never be.
As one of the red shirts’ supporters, I just wish they get what they want.
Jim
Support for Reds from Bangkok at large
As one of the born after’76- brainwashed-before ’92 generation, I couldn’t agree more about assessments from earlier commenters. Judging from my Facebook feeds, expressing various degree of disdain to the so-called rural hordes, I have to say the pro-abhisit propaganda machine works quite well on this group. Most worrisome for the future of this society.
Keyes on Thailand’s blood protests
On the news now, Channel 5, Red Shirts in Samut Prakarn are asking people to collect their faeces to dump on Government House, etc. etc.
Profound symbolism or plain stupidy?
Education of the clone
Joy: thanks for your interest. The blog is actually on the aesthetics of nation & nationalism. It’s now closed and I have no plan to reopen it, sorry.
Life imitates art. Love imitates life. Ah, the beauty of the blood, and the love of the land. Nationalism manifests her best.
What do “theorists” understand?
Support for Reds from Bangkok at large
I wonder if the latest issue of The Economist will be banned in Thailand because of this write up: Thailand’s Succession: As Father Fades, His Children Fight – http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15718981
Crispin on Thailand’s bloody feud
Andrew Johnson,
I believe that the “Brahmin” in this blood sacrifice does not imply that the ritual is Hinduism. The discourse of “Brahmanic” or “Brahmanism” in Thailand has, for a longgggg time ago (at least since the mid-19th c.), little or nothing to do with Hinduism. It could mean a number of things, among them the most important meaning is a signal that it is “not Buddhism”. Sometimes it is used to mean “supersitution,” another old word which is also vague and often means “non-Buddhism” as well. But “superstition” includes non-ritualistic beliefs while “Brahmanism” are mostly associated with some kinds of formalized rituals. A classic article by Thomas Kirsch (Journalof AsianStudies in 1976) offers some explanation of this. He used the word “Bramanism” in quote throughout to make it clear that it is not Hinduism.
Keyes on Thailand’s blood protests
I agree with Susie Wong that more analysis is needed. The example of Singapore is, however, misleading. The current crisis in Thailand is not a specific Thai crisis, but a crisis of the bureaucratic, neo-feudal systems of domination in SEA, which started with the Asia crisis in 1997. Then the decision was made, who will be bailed out by the state (which actually means by the savings of the farmers, middle class, employees etc.) and who will suffer. At least in Malaysia and Thailand the decision was clear. In Malaysia we have, since then the Anwar – Mahathir dichotomy, while in Thailand we find Thaksin – who ever. Due to the extreme concentration of political and financial power in a very small clique, the situation in Indonesia was slightly different. In Singapore the professional and efficient bureaucracy (in terms of carrot and stick) allowed for some modifications.
In terms of a strategic group analysis, one could say that at least since the 80’s we have a process of class formation of a small elite that consists of the peak of the bureaucracy/military, politician/neo-feudalist and big business (or better Tycoon-business). Whenever such class-formation occurs it means that democratization and public life gets limited.
Concerning the “middle classes” in SEA which during the 80’s were seen as agents for democratization in Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia these clearly showed that most should better be described as “petty bourgeoisie”, for whom it is more relevant to get some left over from the tables of the elites to show that they are better then the farmers, workers etc. They could get quite a few left overs during the 90’s! However, when it came to pay for the party, together with the farmers, workers etc., they received the bill. However, instead of understanding their position, for them it was more relevant to maintain their “virtual status” as the better off’s. This petty bourgeoisie and “Lumpenproletariat” makes itself known at present be it in UNMO by burning churches etc. or as yellows in Bangkok occupying international airports, etc. In both cases they are nothing else then the ready tools of the elites! Like nice dogs they lick the hands that beats them, as long as they get some bones.
The danger at present is that the entrenched elites are unwilling to let go of any of their power. Thus, reform is out of the question. They try to stick to their power as long as possible by any means available. The problem with the petty bourgeoisie is that they tend to favour, like always, fascist forms of elite leadership, and thereby can easily be used. In other words, let the country go down the drain, if it provides another six month or one year of power.
Support for Reds from Bangkok at large
These Bangkok Siamese supporting the now self-defining, Thaksin-free Red-Shirts are just that – FREE SIAMESE.
The days of the American-backed fascist construct “Thailand” are collapsing.
Keyes on Thailand’s blood protests
Mmm…
Red Shirts shirts are red, blood is red, blood on the hands, blood on the feet, blood rituals, and blood on the streets.
Blood signs, bloody symbols and bloody astrology, blood curdling curses and a bloody Brahmin black magic analogy.
Impassioned solidarity or frenzied hysteria?
Bloody hell, where are the anthropologists when you need them?
Dave Everett and fighting for the KNLA
i knew Dave before he joined the Regt. I have read his book and I have spoken to him in person. I believe he is a man who is passionate about the welfare of the Burmese people. While I don’t agree with some of his past methods. I do see that a man can not stand by a let evil happen. All men must do what they believe to be the right thing. Whether that is through assisting the armed struggle or assisting peaceful community based projects. A man must live with their own conscience.
Red soi, Red city: A brief commentary from the streets
George Jetson @#11 :
re. POSSIBLE Isaarn secession, you wrote :
“And if they seceded, who would their support come from?”
CHINA – that’s where their support would come from.
Already Isaarn is doing far more business directly with China than ever before – and this is re-directing large parts of Isaarn’s economy away from Bangkok, towards China, via Laos.