Protests update

[bkkguy]

"I'm sure you are right about the pampered elite who fear that the "buffaloes" will demand to be treated as citizens, not as cheap labour. I can assure you that it's not true of the north. I recall much the same argument being used in the US during the Civil Rights days. Not to mention in the banana republics of Latin America. That's the problem with the poor and disadvantaged; they have a tendency to vote out of self-interest, unlike the blessed middle-classes who never think of themselves.

Who writes your scripts for you? it can't be Amsterdam himself - he is too busy on Skype - one of his junior partners perhaps?

bkkguy

[Up2U]

A climate of fear. Thais I know say nothing as they know the military uses paid informants.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSK ... 2?irpc=932

Most Thai people don't want democracy and their wish has been granted.

Quite so, lego, and I'm full of admiration for the Generalissimo adding the word "democracy" to the Index of Banned Words during Friday evening's Fireside Chat. There's nothing like the firm jackboot of the Army to put these "democrats" in their place. Still, given that, as you assert "most" Thai people don't want the opportunity to have a say in how they are governed, you have to wonder why he thought it necessary. I guess Father Knows Best.

[Up2U]

Not exactly; I wonder what the junta's response would be to a few thousand Red Shirts behaving like the Suthep mob did in Bangkok?
It's no use running away from the fact that Thailand is now a military dictatorship, whatever the perceived shortcomings of previous governments. There is imprisonment without trial, torture and media censorship on an unprecedented scale....and who believes that the junta will ever willingly allow free and fair elections?
And no, as I said in my post, I don't blame GB for being nervous. If my boyfriend weren't a Thai, I'd stay clear of the place entirely. Tourist boycotts would bring the junta to its senses....but I'm not holding my breath.

We saw Red Shirt mobs in Bangkok before, so we know exactly what the response was and don't need to speculate. In my opinion, the initial leniency shown back then was part of the problem, for if you let a mob entrench (literally) itself in the heart of your capital city, you'll ultimately need deadly force to expel them. That's exactly what happened in 2010, law enforcement was too lenient in the beginning and then weren't able to break up the occupation without bloodshed.

The PDRC protests were much different, at least from my personal impressions: They didn't entrench themselves, they didn't intimidate people living or working in the areas they occupied, they didn't loot any shops and there was a street carnival atmosphere more than anything else. Without the cowardly grenade attacks on harmless protesters including little children, all this would have been a very peaceful affair, although "bad for business" because it did cause quite some inconvenience to many residents.

There won't be any tourist boycott and you know it. Even if the lies you're spreading were true, which they aren't, most people wouldn't give a damn as long as they can still go about their holiday unharmed. Most Thai people don't want democracy and their wish has been granted. Get over it.

My recollection of events is more inclusive than yours. I remember the PAD mob (forerunner of the PDRC, yellow shirts) holding the two airports hostage, tourists by the thousands with vacations ruined trying to escape the Land of Smiles. All the time, military did nothing because these were their buddies. Oh yes the recent PDRC camp at Lumpini was like a festival but the actions of this mob, taking over the Government House, physically blocking and attacking people from exercising their right to vote, was deplorable. Can you imagine the parliamentary buildings in western democracies coming under this attack and the military doing nothing. And now the man who could have done something but didn't, has basically "elected" himself the new PM.

I would not necessarily draw conclusions about Thais feelings towards democracy based on a totally Bangkok perspective. Outside Bangkok, the local elections of village chiefs, officials is very important and taken seriously. Of course, people don't have that right but they haven't forgotten.

[lego]

As for the Suthep mob, the crowd that I looked at in Lumpini and Silom included plenty of hired thugs whom I saw intimidating local people.

Isn't it strange how people always seem to see exactly that what serves to confirm what they've known all the time? Granted, it's very difficult to compare mass gatherings (mobs) in a fair and objective way, but I think the observation that the PDRC protests were more carnival-like and less confrontational towards regular local residents than the 2010 Red Shirt protests is shared by many who have witnessed both.

Can you imagine the parliamentary buildings in western democracies coming under this attack and the military doing nothing.

See, I guess that's exactly the point: Thailand simply isn't a Western democracy! And I doubt that most Thais would want to live in a country that resembles a Western democracy. In fact, ever since I moved to Thailand, I've been seeing countless things that would never happen in any other country I had lived in before (all of them Western democracies, to be clear). From little things all the way up to the country as a whole, I see "Thainess" first and foremost. I can only assume that's how the Thais want to run their country, and unlike others, I respect that.

I might add that Western democracies typically have a clear-cut distinction between police and military, so it's the police first and foremost that would have to deal with such a protest in a Western country. Once the military of a Western country will have to protect that country's infrastructure against a mob the police forces can no longer control, you can probably call this country a failed state.

I would not necessarily draw conclusions about Thais feelings towards democracy based on a totally Bangkok perspective.

Me neither. But your perspective seems to be that of a Westerner who thinks Thais should aspire to follow the Western lead. They don't seem willing, neither in Bangkok nor in the countryside.

[Oliver]

Once again, we hear the perspective of the Bangkok elite who, for the thousandth time, are not representative of the Thai people.
Time and again Thais have voted for parties that seek to create a fairer, more equal society. Each time, the same, dark forces- the ones with power, guns and the money- remove the elected government and replace it with a bunch of ignorant , right-wing militarists and royalists.
Some of us respect Thais enough to support their right to choose. I appreciate that most Thais are poor, particularly in Isaan and the north and that they haven't the power of the conservatives. But the demand for their voices to heard is not the application of western values but of universal human rights.

The disturbing truth is that the dark-skinned and the poor are regarded in much the same way as the Africans were by the Boers. The same arguments were applied then; democracy isn't suitable for the Blacks ; they need firm government by a benevolent (sic) white minority.

Which, by the way just happens to benefit that race/class financially.

[latintopxxx]

I really dont care who is in power. The only reason I preferred the Thaksin bunmch was that they didnt mess with the sex tourist trade, this army general turned politician is fat too moralistic. I will miss not seing the fuck shows when I visit in October.

Up2U and Oliver, you are wasting your breath. "Group Think" is rife in the ex-pat community, and remember their only source of information is via the Bangkok Post and/or The Nation, both of which are mouthpieces for the Establishment. Then the ex-pats feed off each other via The Wankers' Forum (Thai Visa). Most of them have no idea of what Thailand was like before about 2000, if that, and speak as if corruption was something invented by and imposed on Thailand by the wicked Dr Thaksin.

Thailand has been one of the most corrupt countries in the world as long as anyone can remember. All Thaksin did was take away the levers of corruption from the traditional elite by realising he could entrench his position by winning election after election. He did that by instituting populist policies that appealed in particular to the most populous and most alienated (from Bangkok) part of the country, the North and North-East. What the traditional elite has done throughout their many military and judicial coups this century is to re-calibrate how the spoils of corruption have been divvied up.

At least the latest coup is some senses the most politically honest, since Prayuth has said in effect "Our side can't win elections so we're going to abandon them" also known as "Democracy doesn't work for Thailand" - exactly the line that lego is parroting.

And speaking of short memories, latintopxxx's comment "the only reason I preferred the Thaksin bunmch was that they didnt mess with the sex tourist trade" is complete and utter nonsense.

[lego]

Hold your horses, kommentariat, this game is just starting to get interesting. While the General PM might well concede that "his side" couldn't win elections, I'm quite convinced that he thinks he can.

If he decides to pull a Sisi and to embrace the populist poison a tiny little bit (let's not forget that he's made some interesting decisions already), all bets are off. He's no Abhisit, that's for sure.

[Oliver]

Sisi won because Morsi's supporters boycotted the poll after their party was banned. You are right; that's the way forward sic) for the Junta- offer a choice between two far-right parties and ban the others.