Anonymous lady versus Thaksin

[clubsiam]

Media bias?

Just look back at the October 7th, The Nation, front page.

BLACK OCTOBER!

3 Yellow Shirt people died. 2 of them by their own bombs that went off unexpectedly.

Another died... says a hospital spokesman. Yes, the same hospital that refused to treat some injured Red Shirt people.

Now you know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Flashermac]

<< ... wrote a commentary in Matichon newspaper on Monday denouncing much of Thailand's mainstream media. >>

 

Matichon is probably the most "elitist" journal in Thailand. Its readership is almost entirely university educated.

 

 

 

<< That is the fact the mainstream mass media overwhelming reflect the middle-class (and in some cases an elitist) political worldview. >>

 

Damn right! All you have to do is look at the front page of any issue of Thai Rath etc to realise that.

 

[Flashermac]

<< 3 Yellow Shirt people died. 2 of them by their own bombs that went off unexpectedly >>

 

So now we know where you get your "information" - the pro-Thaksin disciples.

 

I was a US Army combat demolitions specialist and know more about explosives than the average Joe. No "own bombs" killed any yellow shirts. That is pro-Thaksin nonsense, the same as the "hidden bodies" of those massacred red shirts the Thai army killed during Songkran. The police were issued Chinese made CS grenade, which EXPLODE on impact, unlike US made CS grenades that burn. Since no one bothered to tell this to the police, they aimed them AT yellow shirt protestors - which is itself idiotic, as even a US made 40mm CS grenade has a muzzle velocity of 247 feet per second, easily enough to kill anyone struck on the head. The police killed those dead yellow shirts, pure and simple. Ah, but the Thaksinistas can't have it that way! No, no, no ... the 20-something woman and a yellow shirt man were killed by "their own bombs".

 

Strange that no one believes it except the red shirts - and you.

 

 

 

[ThaiHome]

And in every successful democracy, it is the middle class that made it successful, not the self serving populist movements. Where those have succeeded, chaos soon ensued.

TH

[Flashermac]

It's a waste of time trying to talk to people. They believe what they want to believe. Noi, Daeng or Somsak told them so, and it therefore must be true.

 

 

 

[Flashermac]

HE NATION

May 4, 2009

 

 

Northeast and South Thai girls on YouTube: Thaksin, you are terrible

 

 

It's a new phenomenon. Two weeks ago, a Thai girl, speaking fluent English, posted a clip on the YouTube lambasting Thaksin Shinawatra for his actions. Just a few days ago, two Thai women, one speaking in the Northeastern and the other Southern dialects, posted their own clip, telling the ex-premier why he is such a hated guy in this country.

 

Don't be surprised with more clips of this nature start emerging. And be prepared for "counter-clips" by the other side as well.

 

It's a free-for-all, and all-for-free battle all over again. But it's better than beating up one another on the streets, for sure.

 

 

[playtheblues]

It's a somewhat sobering mental exercise to compare the massive dislike or even hatred of Thaksin these days with the almost unison popularity he enjoyed in some circles all the time up to 2005 or even later.

 

I disliked Thaksin already from the 2001 election, not out of any superior insight in political analysis on my side but rather because of instinctive antipathy towards populist bullies. But practically every single businessman from my country, leading figures form think thanks, other academics and consultants supported Thaksin and regarded him as "the leader Thailand really needs" etc.

 

What if he hadn't overreached in his ambitions and his greed which brought him to this turning point? He would still have remained the dangerous populist bully that he really is, undermining Thai democracy by corruption and by scaring media, commit awful human rights abuses, etc.

 

But he probably would still have enjoyed this wide spread popularity among people who always tend to admire a "strong leader"

 

I think it was Guenther Grass who said that the Germans after the First War were longing for their Santa Claus.

 

And yes, they got their Weinachtsman.

[Flashermac]

My father - a WWII combat vet - once said to me, "If Hitler had died in 1938, he'd have been regarded as Germany's saviour." (Only my father said it without the "u".)

 

When the T-man was first in the running for PM, I asked my university students whom they'd vote for. About 60% said Thaksin. The reason : "We've tried everyone else, so we may as well try him." The minority who opposed him spoke of how he'd made great promises as in previous governments and not kept a single one of them. (Remember the promise to solve Bangkok's traffic jams within 3 months? When later asked about it, he insisted he had never said that - even when shown the videos of him saying it!)

 

My feeling is that Thaksin didn't play by the rules. He was supposed to help "everybody" (meaning especially the established business families who dominate the country), but instead was greedy and wanted it all for himself, his relatives and his close cronies. He pissed off the very people who helped put him into office. He tried to balance this with his populist policies towards the upcountry proles, but that was not enough to protect him from the backlash for his selfishness when it came to power and money.

 

I'll never forget the taxi driver who bent my ear one day about what a bad man Thaksin was - only a few months after he became PM. He told me Thaksin was another Pibunsongkram, the 1940s and '50s military leader who played populist to stay in complete control. He informed me that Thaksin had said he wanted to be PM for 10 years. Like Pibunsongkram, Mr T may end up spending his final years in exile.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[playtheblues]

 

My feeling is that Thaksin didn't play by the rules. He was supposed to help "everybody" (meaning especially the established business families who dominate the country), but instead was greedy and wanted it all for himself, his relatives and his close cronies. He pissed off the very people who helped put him into office. He tried to balance this with his populist policies towards the upcountry proles, but that was not enough to protect him from the backlash for his selfishness when it came to power and money.

 

One might speculate about when the turning point of his popularity came. Fact is, he remained very popular among the groups that I mentioned (except in media such as the Nation) even after widespread corruption and human rights abuses were evident. Was it the telecom sale to Singapore and tax evasion that caused his downfall?

 

Since his populist policies now essentially are revealed as exactly being just that - sheer populism although with some substantial delivery in the rural areas - it will be important for Abhisit Vejjaviva to compartmentalise Thaksin's criminality and give it its proper place in the remaining perceived role of him as "the right leader" for Thailand and the Santa Claus for the poor.

 

I am somewhat embarassed about a certain contradiction in my own stance regarding the coup against Thaksin. I was and I am still against the coup - just because I am against bringing down an elected government by force - but it is good to be rid of Thaksin and i believe Thailand will be a better country without him.

 

It's like the Iraq thing - I was against the invasion (and I still am) but its good to be rid of Saddam Hussein and I am sure that Iraq will be a better country without him.

 

I am not proud of this contradiction which I seem unable to resolve in my own mind.

[..]

Well said PtB. I am in the same uncomfortable position re: the coup and Thaksin, so I lean more toward it was a necessary thing, so then it must be OK (vs the opposite leaning for Iraq).

 

Cheers,

SD