Oh I love to engage others with different political views or haven’t you noticed you won’t find Vichai N wasting time with people who agree with his views.
Singaporean empathy at its finest! I am so glad that I left when I did. Singaporeans are a bunch of sheep who have been brainwashed into believing that they live in paradise. It’s very shiny and very clean but it is a politically repressed 3rd world city state with lots of air con and complacent pliable people and not a whole lot else to offer.
Thailand has been one of the more successful countries in Asia in building a modern, more or less unified nation state, without too much bloodshed over the last century or more. In just the last decade the vicious jockeying for power between different sets of the elite is threatening not just to overthrow whatever remains of the country’s nascent democracy but also the sense of national unity among ordinary citizens.
Forget rural or urban, monarchists or republicans. The real divide emerging in Thailand is turning out to be regional. The Ramkhamhaeng violence may be just a teaser of what more horrors are to come as the country gets split right in the middle between the ‘Red North’ and the ‘Yellow South’.
Maybe it is time for a third ‘Rainbow’ force to emerge that mobilises people nationally against both Thaksin and Suthep, and everything they represent. Or maybe its just that I have been smoking too much weed…
“I just never can imagine any Red Shirt being open to reason. I just never can imagine any Red Shirt who had not been indoctrinated with hatred-directed lies and brainwashed to respond with violence, not reason.” Perhaps Vichai you are not very imaginative? Is it allowable in your world for others to have political views different from yours? Just asking.
Dear Eddy,
Firstly Singapore is, and must remain, for Singaporeans. This makes sense in any country.
While your essay raises some valid points, you do miss out on some crucial points which as a foreign observer, is to be expected.
The majority of Singaporean Indians are Tamil-speaking, hence the government’s choice to pick the one Indian language which is most common amongst its local Indian population. (In fact, Singapore has 4 national languages, and foreigners are very welcome to speak any of these 4 to communicate.)
Secondly, most Indians are assumed to be Hindus, not Muslims – although there are many Indians who are Muslims.
And while it is easy to say that Singaporeans need to find a way to include immigrant workers in our larger society, it is also important that the immigrants learn to assimilate into our society. The onus is on them to fit in. Any European country will tell you this.
Loitering, rowdiness, blatant staring at women – these are not actions of people who wish to fit in.
This article also comes on the day of the remembrance service in Bangkok for Nelson Mandela. What a contrast!
Thank you so much Nick (again). There are two questions that I have which I hope you (or others) can help me with.
1. You say the UDD leaders cancelled the event. I have heard that it was the military that ordered/advised the red shirts to leave the stadium. What is your take on this?
2. Another thing that has bothered me for a long time is why vocational students in Thailand are so often thuggish. Is it true that vocational training sometimes was/is used as a punishment for criminal activity? Could this have anything to do with it? There must be a reason somewhere.
ah, but that requires funds. Almost everyone will agree with you that better living conditions should be provided. Yet, I believe there will be differing opinions as to who is to pay for it. If it is the private sector, the cost will be passed to consumers, which further inflates the already ridiculous prices of property (even public housing). If we are to shift the onus to the govt, now that’s coming form taxpayers. I am sure there will be quite a substantial amount of opposition to that.
Agreed- having lived in a (Karen) Tambon during a local election, it was fascinating to hear the glee with which villagers of every income/education/leadership level recounted stories of taking all money/lao kao/food on offer and then voting for their preferred candidate. It was the same attitude as expressed by women- “my husband can tell me whatever he wants, but I still vote by myself.”
If anything was at play in that case- and we’re talking AwBawDaw elections- it was an awareness of allegiances between a Nayoke candidate and the Samachiks for their village: certain candidates took a more positive view towards certain villages; certain potential Nayokes were more likely to funnel money towards their village.
I understand that the present anti-government protesters are looking at these sorts of cases and saying “preferential treatment is tantamount to vote buying.” But the reality is that government funds are going to be spent SOMEWHERE. If you, as a candidate, can put forth a platform and build a coalition whereby the preferential treatment that you have on offer is beneficial to the majority (or plurality) of voters, then good for you! It’s been said a thousand times on this site, but the opposite is to have the purse controlled by someone who is going to funnel government funds to the minority, instead.
And, again, to be clear, I am not saying that villagers were voting for a particular candidate because their local Pooyais were telling them to do so. They were voting for candidates with positive connections to their moobahn because they knew that it was in their own personal interest to do so. Furthermore, rural voters are not idiots with one hegemonic concern dictating their every voting decision. In this particular election, the winner was Thai- in a Tambon with a single Thai village. With three Karen running against him, there were certainly voters in the (Karen) villages that the victor had close connections with who voted against him on ethnic lines.
Just one bit of circumstantial evidence, but I do think it’s important to know what happens at the very-local level during election season before going off on diatribes about vote-buying.
Hmmm, there may be something to what you said, however to say that the law work against them is a rather heavy suggestion. Sure, there may be loopholes. Yet, I think we can all agree that the actions on Sun cannot be condoned under any circumstances. While I take your rebuttal against the proposition that working in Singapore is their only cause of action, given that the alternative of utter penury is not really an alternative, I believe those who suggested this allegedly “laughable suggestion” is merely pointing out that they may have it better than their compatriots back home. Granted, we can improve on our laws and treatment of them, but the reason why they still stick on is because they do realise that while situations are ideal, one is still relatively better than the other. However I still dont get the reference to third world countries. After all, no country owes their citizens a living, much less foreigners.
I think someone missed a point somewhere. If any group who feels oppressed start rioting, where will we end up? It doesn’t have to be a group of foreign workers. It could very well be a group of lowly-paid locals. But why has this not happened in the past decades? It’s because of the proper education and deterrence taught.
Or perhaps these workers have not been properly orientated (in the education sense) to the way things work in Singapore. This may be another issue when inviting more foreign workers to work here. Even after maids have fallen out of windows and now this, there doesn’t seem to be a proper system where these foreigners are properly introduced to our society.
All these issues caused by a series of unfortunate events like underpaid wages, salaries been withhold, poor living conditions and not to mention that these FT are also human beings, while overseas working hard to earn an honest living, they will also missed their home and families. But our local employers treat them like products, utilising them fully and discard them at the earliest sight of trouble living them to fend for themselves. All these could have been better managed with the support of the government when we know that FT is a cheaper version of resources that we can tap on for tasks that normal Singaporean may not want to do. There could be an government agency that manages all these FT and any employer that requires such resources need to register with the agency for processing. The fees collected can be used to facilitate better living conditions, wages and ensure that the FT are better taken care of. Not sure whether is that a better idea but at least create a better means of control and communication instead of violence.
Why don’t they just go home? They invite themselves into another country with an attitude that the country they invade owes them something. Furthermore, if wages are to be paid at reasonable rates, then Australian workers like me would be happy to work there. But the market of cheap labour is what has attracted them there in the first place. These problems are occurring everywhere in the world. The US with Mexicans, UK with Africans, Australia with boat people. There is an attitude amongst the populations of formerly third world nations that they have a right to eat the cake that another country has worked so hard to make. Singapore, or Australia with boat people, do not owe them anything. Maybe they should put their rebellious energy into sorting out their countries of origin, like poverty stricken people in Victorian UK did over a century ago.
The point is that criminality is not a trait either exclusive to or overrepresented in low-income workers. Quite the opposite. The reality is that they have far more to lose than Singaporeans. They are not pushed to violence or subversive acts on a whim, and are no more comfortable with such acts than Singaporeans.
These are acts of desperation, and of a marginalised community. Singaporeans can respect the laws, because the laws work for them. They certainly do not for low-income migrants. If anything, the law works against them, while their employers exploit them. The common argument is “well, then go back where you came from”. That is a laughable suggestion, when you realise that these are people, thousands of miles away from their family. They are not privileged to be in Singapore – they are there because it was the only course of action, other than utter penury.
I lived in Singapore for a few years and I can’t emphasise enough how comprehensive, thoughtful, and accurate this article is. I not surprised that the riot happened (though the images are still shocking given how placid Singapore is).
Another article, from last year, noted that these tensions would escalate:
” … On the way back, I saw that Red Shirt guards had captured a middle aged man with rge insignia of the anti-government protesters, and led him to the stage area, shouting at Red Shirt protesters not to attack him. (Photos of shooter by Nostitz above) They managed to bring him unharmed behind the stage even though enraged Red Shirts tried to attack him. The young 17-year-old boy who was shot in the arm just previously pointed him out there as the man who shot him. The middle aged man was brought to a room near the backstage entry for further interrogation, and was then handed to police …” – Nostitz eyewitness account
There you have it. The Red Shirts had captured a shooter and a young Red pointed him out as the same guy who shot and wounded him at the arm. And he is MIDDLE-AGED (not a student, an RU professor maybe?). He looks like a Black Shirt and/or a policeman to me. And these Black Shirts like shooting Red Shirts to make ‘martyrs’ out of goats.
So far no word from the Police Dept. about who this shooter is, eh? More likely one of their own and very likely a Black Shirt. Otherwise after all the third degree this shooter will get from the enraged police, he surely would have confessed already and pointed at Suthep as his master. Or the shooter had already been disposed of by the police in an alley somewhere.
I just never can imagine any Red Shirt being open to reason. I just never can imagine any Red Shirt who had not been indoctrinated with hatred-directed lies and brainwashed to respond with violence, not reason.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
Oh I love to engage others with different political views or haven’t you noticed you won’t find Vichai N wasting time with people who agree with his views.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
Singaporean empathy at its finest! I am so glad that I left when I did. Singaporeans are a bunch of sheep who have been brainwashed into believing that they live in paradise. It’s very shiny and very clean but it is a politically repressed 3rd world city state with lots of air con and complacent pliable people and not a whole lot else to offer.
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
Indeed.
And he needed a “white mask” for his inept comments.
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
Thailand has been one of the more successful countries in Asia in building a modern, more or less unified nation state, without too much bloodshed over the last century or more. In just the last decade the vicious jockeying for power between different sets of the elite is threatening not just to overthrow whatever remains of the country’s nascent democracy but also the sense of national unity among ordinary citizens.
Forget rural or urban, monarchists or republicans. The real divide emerging in Thailand is turning out to be regional. The Ramkhamhaeng violence may be just a teaser of what more horrors are to come as the country gets split right in the middle between the ‘Red North’ and the ‘Yellow South’.
Maybe it is time for a third ‘Rainbow’ force to emerge that mobilises people nationally against both Thaksin and Suthep, and everything they represent. Or maybe its just that I have been smoking too much weed…
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
If a man drops his pants and walk on the streets and a drunk did He hit the bus or the bus hit him? Who knows ?
Help came but the drunkards threw rocks, do you blame the paramedics?
The ambulance came and was set aflame, do you blame the firemen?
If I left my country to seek greener pastures and am disappointed, do I burn the place down and stomp around ?
This is what I call shifting the blame.
Hmm…
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
“I just never can imagine any Red Shirt being open to reason. I just never can imagine any Red Shirt who had not been indoctrinated with hatred-directed lies and brainwashed to respond with violence, not reason.” Perhaps Vichai you are not very imaginative? Is it allowable in your world for others to have political views different from yours? Just asking.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
Dear Eddy,
Firstly Singapore is, and must remain, for Singaporeans. This makes sense in any country.
While your essay raises some valid points, you do miss out on some crucial points which as a foreign observer, is to be expected.
The majority of Singaporean Indians are Tamil-speaking, hence the government’s choice to pick the one Indian language which is most common amongst its local Indian population. (In fact, Singapore has 4 national languages, and foreigners are very welcome to speak any of these 4 to communicate.)
Secondly, most Indians are assumed to be Hindus, not Muslims – although there are many Indians who are Muslims.
And while it is easy to say that Singaporeans need to find a way to include immigrant workers in our larger society, it is also important that the immigrants learn to assimilate into our society. The onus is on them to fit in. Any European country will tell you this.
Loitering, rowdiness, blatant staring at women – these are not actions of people who wish to fit in.
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
This article also comes on the day of the remembrance service in Bangkok for Nelson Mandela. What a contrast!
Thank you so much Nick (again). There are two questions that I have which I hope you (or others) can help me with.
1. You say the UDD leaders cancelled the event. I have heard that it was the military that ordered/advised the red shirts to leave the stadium. What is your take on this?
2. Another thing that has bothered me for a long time is why vocational students in Thailand are so often thuggish. Is it true that vocational training sometimes was/is used as a punishment for criminal activity? Could this have anything to do with it? There must be a reason somewhere.
Thailand’s stark choice
That is a lot of repetitive cliche in one running pAragraph.
Thailand suffers from a deception of three quarters of a century.
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
Great article, Nick. Confirms much of what is reported here.
http://www.prachatai3.info/english/node/3778
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
ah, but that requires funds. Almost everyone will agree with you that better living conditions should be provided. Yet, I believe there will be differing opinions as to who is to pay for it. If it is the private sector, the cost will be passed to consumers, which further inflates the already ridiculous prices of property (even public housing). If we are to shift the onus to the govt, now that’s coming form taxpayers. I am sure there will be quite a substantial amount of opposition to that.
Thailand’s stark choice
Agreed- having lived in a (Karen) Tambon during a local election, it was fascinating to hear the glee with which villagers of every income/education/leadership level recounted stories of taking all money/lao kao/food on offer and then voting for their preferred candidate. It was the same attitude as expressed by women- “my husband can tell me whatever he wants, but I still vote by myself.”
If anything was at play in that case- and we’re talking AwBawDaw elections- it was an awareness of allegiances between a Nayoke candidate and the Samachiks for their village: certain candidates took a more positive view towards certain villages; certain potential Nayokes were more likely to funnel money towards their village.
I understand that the present anti-government protesters are looking at these sorts of cases and saying “preferential treatment is tantamount to vote buying.” But the reality is that government funds are going to be spent SOMEWHERE. If you, as a candidate, can put forth a platform and build a coalition whereby the preferential treatment that you have on offer is beneficial to the majority (or plurality) of voters, then good for you! It’s been said a thousand times on this site, but the opposite is to have the purse controlled by someone who is going to funnel government funds to the minority, instead.
And, again, to be clear, I am not saying that villagers were voting for a particular candidate because their local Pooyais were telling them to do so. They were voting for candidates with positive connections to their moobahn because they knew that it was in their own personal interest to do so. Furthermore, rural voters are not idiots with one hegemonic concern dictating their every voting decision. In this particular election, the winner was Thai- in a Tambon with a single Thai village. With three Karen running against him, there were certainly voters in the (Karen) villages that the victor had close connections with who voted against him on ethnic lines.
Just one bit of circumstantial evidence, but I do think it’s important to know what happens at the very-local level during election season before going off on diatribes about vote-buying.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
Hmmm, there may be something to what you said, however to say that the law work against them is a rather heavy suggestion. Sure, there may be loopholes. Yet, I think we can all agree that the actions on Sun cannot be condoned under any circumstances. While I take your rebuttal against the proposition that working in Singapore is their only cause of action, given that the alternative of utter penury is not really an alternative, I believe those who suggested this allegedly “laughable suggestion” is merely pointing out that they may have it better than their compatriots back home. Granted, we can improve on our laws and treatment of them, but the reason why they still stick on is because they do realise that while situations are ideal, one is still relatively better than the other. However I still dont get the reference to third world countries. After all, no country owes their citizens a living, much less foreigners.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
I think someone missed a point somewhere. If any group who feels oppressed start rioting, where will we end up? It doesn’t have to be a group of foreign workers. It could very well be a group of lowly-paid locals. But why has this not happened in the past decades? It’s because of the proper education and deterrence taught.
Or perhaps these workers have not been properly orientated (in the education sense) to the way things work in Singapore. This may be another issue when inviting more foreign workers to work here. Even after maids have fallen out of windows and now this, there doesn’t seem to be a proper system where these foreigners are properly introduced to our society.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
All these issues caused by a series of unfortunate events like underpaid wages, salaries been withhold, poor living conditions and not to mention that these FT are also human beings, while overseas working hard to earn an honest living, they will also missed their home and families. But our local employers treat them like products, utilising them fully and discard them at the earliest sight of trouble living them to fend for themselves. All these could have been better managed with the support of the government when we know that FT is a cheaper version of resources that we can tap on for tasks that normal Singaporean may not want to do. There could be an government agency that manages all these FT and any employer that requires such resources need to register with the agency for processing. The fees collected can be used to facilitate better living conditions, wages and ensure that the FT are better taken care of. Not sure whether is that a better idea but at least create a better means of control and communication instead of violence.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
Why don’t they just go home? They invite themselves into another country with an attitude that the country they invade owes them something. Furthermore, if wages are to be paid at reasonable rates, then Australian workers like me would be happy to work there. But the market of cheap labour is what has attracted them there in the first place. These problems are occurring everywhere in the world. The US with Mexicans, UK with Africans, Australia with boat people. There is an attitude amongst the populations of formerly third world nations that they have a right to eat the cake that another country has worked so hard to make. Singapore, or Australia with boat people, do not owe them anything. Maybe they should put their rebellious energy into sorting out their countries of origin, like poverty stricken people in Victorian UK did over a century ago.
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
It’s hard to believe this article comes out on Human Rights Day and Thailand’s Constitution Day.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
The point is that criminality is not a trait either exclusive to or overrepresented in low-income workers. Quite the opposite. The reality is that they have far more to lose than Singaporeans. They are not pushed to violence or subversive acts on a whim, and are no more comfortable with such acts than Singaporeans.
These are acts of desperation, and of a marginalised community. Singaporeans can respect the laws, because the laws work for them. They certainly do not for low-income migrants. If anything, the law works against them, while their employers exploit them. The common argument is “well, then go back where you came from”. That is a laughable suggestion, when you realise that these are people, thousands of miles away from their family. They are not privileged to be in Singapore – they are there because it was the only course of action, other than utter penury.
Stop and think: Lessons from Little India
I lived in Singapore for a few years and I can’t emphasise enough how comprehensive, thoughtful, and accurate this article is. I not surprised that the riot happened (though the images are still shocking given how placid Singapore is).
Another article, from last year, noted that these tensions would escalate:
http://the-waiguoren.blogspot.ca/2012/12/race-class-and-civil-society-comparison.html
Ramkhamhaeng: A view from inside the stadium
” … On the way back, I saw that Red Shirt guards had captured a middle aged man with rge insignia of the anti-government protesters, and led him to the stage area, shouting at Red Shirt protesters not to attack him. (Photos of shooter by Nostitz above) They managed to bring him unharmed behind the stage even though enraged Red Shirts tried to attack him. The young 17-year-old boy who was shot in the arm just previously pointed him out there as the man who shot him. The middle aged man was brought to a room near the backstage entry for further interrogation, and was then handed to police …” – Nostitz eyewitness account
There you have it. The Red Shirts had captured a shooter and a young Red pointed him out as the same guy who shot and wounded him at the arm. And he is MIDDLE-AGED (not a student, an RU professor maybe?). He looks like a Black Shirt and/or a policeman to me. And these Black Shirts like shooting Red Shirts to make ‘martyrs’ out of goats.
So far no word from the Police Dept. about who this shooter is, eh? More likely one of their own and very likely a Black Shirt. Otherwise after all the third degree this shooter will get from the enraged police, he surely would have confessed already and pointed at Suthep as his master. Or the shooter had already been disposed of by the police in an alley somewhere.
I just never can imagine any Red Shirt being open to reason. I just never can imagine any Red Shirt who had not been indoctrinated with hatred-directed lies and brainwashed to respond with violence, not reason.
Gasoline-filled plastic bottles anyone?