Opinion Allow me to point something out

[Coss]

Take the failure to communicate, multiply by the inability to comprehend and we have the sum of ''missing the point''.

 

For instance, (ready, aim, fire! and, oh, he misses the barnyard by a mile and a half), the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) is missing the point of ''democracy''.

 

If they want to get rid of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva so badly, why don't they wait for the next general election, which by all accounts will take place in the middle of this year _ June, in fact, according to Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban.

 

So go to the booth. Vote him out of office. You know, the democratic way? Instead of threats, intimidation and bullying.

 

If they're lying and an election isn't held, then you may come out.

 

It's no different from when the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) missed the point. They marched for a general election, for democracy, for the return of power to the people. But when the prime minister offered them democracy, in the form of a general election in November last year, they said ''No''.

 

If the rumours that Sondhi Limthongkul and Thaksin Shinawatra met in Dubai are true, I imagine the conversation would have gone something like this:

 

Sondhi: ''Dude, somebody told me something very silly. Democracy is for the people and by the people.''

 

Thaksin: ''Dude, come on. Everyone knows it's a political system for Thaksin and by Thaksin! I just checked with Robert Amsterdam.''

 

Sondhi: ''No way, dude. That white boy is lying! It's a political system for Sondhi and by Chamlong!''

 

Well, both dudes would be wrong. Democracy is a political system for Suthep Thuagsuban and by Newin Chidchob, with a nod from army commander Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha.

 

Dear readers, the point is ''democracy'' is just a word to be used, abused and manipulated at our convenience.

 

Last semester, I taught political communication. When someone asked me what it was about, my answer was simple: I teach students to spot the lies and manipluations in politics, to see the point.

 

This semester, in an intercultural communication class, I teach students how to make a point when they write essays, because if you don't make a point, you're just wasting ink and paper. You don't have to repeat my point. I don't have to agree with your point. But please make a point and back it up.

 

Let's start with a simple exercise. The Bangkok Post is a conservative newspaper targeting families of respectable consumers. The top two most viewed videos in the multimedia section of the website are titled Fist Fight, and Girls Gone Wild.

 

Completely irrelevant? No, there is a point. Respectable conservative families and this improper, wisecracking, angst-ridden, anti-social writer have two things in common: a love of pugilism and jungle trekking. Who would have thought?

 

Here's something else. Over the past seven years, the violence in the South has resulted in 4,200 deaths: 3,643 civilians, 111 teachers and the rest security troops. On the other side? 215 dead insurgents.

 

According to Abdul Suko-din-a, an Islamic academic, the government has spent over a trillion baht on the southern conflict in the past seven years.

 

The authorities insist that their strategy has been successful and they will continue with it. I don't doubt the sincere intentions of the ''Understanding, Reaching Out and Development'' scheme and the dedicated hard work of the authorities. But 4,200 deaths on this side and 215 on that side. One trillion baht in seven years. Do we see the point?

 

Many Islamic academics point out that the situation in the South has deteriorated because people there want the one thing the government is unwilling to give: self-determination. Not separation. Not succession. But to simply enjoy special administrative zone status, elect their own governors, control their own budgets. If Pattaya can have it, why can't Pattani, Narathiwat and Yala?

 

I don't know the details, so I can't support it just yet. But 4,200 deaths on this side and 215 on that side. One trillion baht in seven years. Civilians are encouraged to carry firearms, which means, the law has failed to protect them; it's everyone for himself and anarchy reigns. So the point is please explore other options.

 

Or perhaps the point is that the conflict keeps certain people relevant, important and in power. But we simply can't make that point, because we have nothing to back it up.

 

Which brings us to the next exercise. Prime Minister Abhisit has been called a warmonger for his refusal to accept Hun Sen's ceasefire offer. No, he's not a warmonger. He's just election campaigning.

 

Let's divide the Thai voters like so: the hard core, the paid-for and the casual. Not much can be done with the hard core and the paid-for. But what about the average Thai? The person who loves the King, is proud of his/her Thai heritage, watches primetime lakorn, queues up for Krispy Kreme and drinks whisky-so (not whisky-soda, whisky-so) - his/her heart bleeding Bang Rachan red, white and blue.

 

They don't want war with Cambodia. They despise bloodshed and suffering. He or she loves peace. They are no different from any other everyday hard-working citizen who enjoys life around the globe.

 

But blast! When Thailand comes into conflict with Cambodia, they would like to see Thailand come out on top, to not give in too easily. It's a neighbourhood rivalry thing.

 

Barack Obama won't look good in the polls if those Canadians managed to pull one over on the US. And we're not even talking about the Mexicans.

 

If the French pulled something over on England, David Cameron would have a lot more to worry about than the economy and Muslim extremists.

 

It's that little thing that, on its own, seems irrelevant, but put into a package, may tip the balance: Pride.

 

The PAD and the UDD hope to fan that fire so that the causal Thai voter would, at best, vote for the New Politics Party or the Puea Thai, or at worst, stay home and not come out to vote for the Democrats.

 

For the prime minister, however, if the casual Thai voter wakes up on that fateful Sunday morning, thinking, ''Hmm, that Abhisit, he's not just a good looking Oxford grad, but he's pretty tough too. He's no Charlie Bronson, but he definitely put that Hun Sen in his place,'' then let's milk this conflict a little more and come out of it with some street cred.

 

Here's the point: a tough stance appeals to national pride, it's good public relations for the upcoming election.

 

How about one closer to home, right in the kitchen, in fact? Palm oil prices have jumped 42% in two months and there's now a shortage of it.

 

Is the price explosion because the government has controlled the price for a year?

 

Is it the businessman who, in a meeting with Commerce Minister Porntiva Nakasai, squashed a melon in his glass of water and stirred it as a subtle threat when she suggested that the government would import palm oil if businesses don't get a handle on the price of it?

 

Is the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) missing the point in investigating two major refineries?

 

Or could the DSI better make its point by having a chat with Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, who in addition to his position in charge of national security is also chairman of something absolutely, completely and totally relevant to this issue - the National Oil Palm Policy Committee?

 

Combating red and yellow shirts, keeping the streets of Thailand safe by day, directing palm oil policy by night _ it's a lot of work. But he should be an expert, since his family is a big player in the palm oil industry. But he's not, mind you.

 

That would be improper and perhaps even illegal; it's just his family that's involved. Mr Suthep can perhaps help to enlighten the investigation with his wisdom.

 

Like the point I made earlier, democracy is just a word and right now it's simply a political system for Suthep and by Newin, with a nod from Prayuth.

 

Link

 

[TheCorinthian]

Way too long to bother reading....

 

 

 

 

[bust]

Perhaps he was never aiming at the barnyard

[zzzz]

"Way too long to bother reading...."

 

I agree...but let me make a couple of points.

 

When the current Yellow Shirt Thai government was going up against the Red Shirts last year, I recall UNARMED protesters getting their heads blown off. There was one video of a Red Shirt protester waving the flag when suddenly his head was blown off. In another video, one of the Yellow Shirt leaders was giving an interview and he was shot through the head and killed. It appeared that there were snipers used to shoot UNARMED protesters. Compared to what happened in Egypt recently, where the army refused to shoot peaceful protesters, the shooting of UNARMED protesters last year in LOS looks bad, to put it mildly.

 

Another point I want to make is the promised election that never materialized last year. The government did offer new elections but placed impossible conditions. So the offer was rejected by the Yellow Shirts. To offer an election then later place unacceptable conditions is a way to back off on the promise.

 

Hopefully the coming election will be fair.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LizardKing]

Another point I want to make is the promised election that never materialized last year. The government did offer new elections but placed impossible conditions. So the offer was rejected by the Yellow Shirts. To offer an election then later place unacceptable conditions is a way to back off on the promise.

Your first bit (not quoted) I agree with. Your second bit is rife with misunderstandings or misrepresentations.

 

The current government is without question freely and fairly elected. The scheduled election is for December this year. An offer was made to the Reds before their rampage last year to disperse in exchange for an early election (a mistake IMHO as I think you do not negotiate with terrorists). They rejected the offer. The election is back on at the legally scheduled date. K Abhisit recently has been making noises about an early election again. I am not so fussed about that as it will not appear he is giving in to terrorists. Not sure what that would accomplish, but it will not encourage any further terrorism either. So, I don't care.

[Flashermac]

<< 3,643 civilians, 111 teachers and the rest security troops >>

 

Teachers aren't civilians?

 

 

p.s. Ever written a regular column? You have to fill up space, even when you have nothing to say. Voranai is good at it. He could have said the same thing in less than 1/3rd as many words.

 

 

[pasathai1]

wait for the next election and vote for the next person they will learn to hate

[Flashermac]

<< When the current Yellow Shirt Thai government was going up against the Red Shirts last year, I recall UNARMED protesters getting their heads blown off. There was one video of a Red Shirt protester waving the flag when suddenly his head was blown off. In another video, one of the Yellow Shirt leaders was giving an interview and he was shot through the head and killed. It appeared that there were snipers used to shoot UNARMED protesters. Compared to what happened in Egypt recently, where the army refused to shoot peaceful protesters, the shooting of UNARMED protesters last year in LOS looks bad, to put it mildly. ??

 

 

First of all, your facts are fucked. I presume you mean Seh Daeng, who was hardly a Yellow Shirt leader. He was the leader of the black shirt snipers and terrorists who fired the M79 HE grenades into the Skytrain landing and other places. You can't even tell the red from the yellow. Oh, BTW ... Seh Daeng was an army officer himself.

 

It's strange that I can't seem to recall anyone getting their head blown off last year on either side. I am really sick of the ignorant pro-Red Shirt crap, especially since my wife is a red shirt and actually spoke on the stage at Festung Rachadamri.

 

Oddly enough, I do remember yellow shirt protestors getting their feet or legs blown off or even being killed by police grenades of the Thaksin pro tempore government. But that doesn't count. Thaksin is a god and can do no wrong.

 

p.s. Please explain to me WTF this means:

 

<< Another point I want to make is the promised election that never materialized last year. The government did offer new elections [color:red]but placed impossible conditions.[/color] >>

 

So what were these horrible conditions? If you paid any attention at all at the time, you'd be well aware that the red shirt leaders DID ACCEPT THE BLOODY TERMS AND WERE HAPPY TO GET THE ELECTION DATE. Then the T-man in Lalaland called up and said, "No, farking way! What's in it for me? ME ... ME ... MEEEEE?" That is when red shirt Veera Musikapong turned his back on the protests in disgust and went home, leaving the radicals to push it to a fight, which they got.

 

And if the current govenment is "yellow shirt", why are they aresting yellow shirt leaders? (But not enough of them )

 

Jeeze you pro-red shirt guys are something. It's like "1984", where history is constantly rewritten to suit their views.