Protesters from around the country arrive in Bangkok for anti-government rally

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, holy cow cm said:

What they are trying to reform and or kick out is like going against a goliath and seems like the impossible, but there is hope. The noise in the background from the old factions on both sides has to be sat down and out for sure, but there seems to be a honest sincerity of change with this generation. Look at the force growing against global warming. It is happening and has taken some huge roots.

 

 

 

We're kinda limited in what we can post on here regarding this (which, granted, is an example of one issue). I'll try and put it this way, that IMO, the protests are focusing too much on the wrong Goliath. In this, I think they are either being played, or simply adhering to a questionable narrative (the latter relating to old faction voices).

 

It's funny you mention the global warming movement as an example - just used it the other day with family. IMO, there are parallels - as in the core tenets being laudable, whereas much of the accompanying rhetoric, activism and reasoning involved failing to achieve the same caliber.  

[holy cow cm]

16 minutes ago, Morch said:

We're kinda limited in what we can post on here regarding this (which, granted, is an example of one issue). I'll try and put it this way, that IMO, the protests are focusing too much on the wrong Goliath. In this, I think they are either being played, or simply adhering to a questionable narrative (the latter relating to old faction voices).

 

Oh its out in the world media hot and heavy if you search for it right now. The PM and his cronies who are pawns for the PC who are...  Not off target just really sensitive and there is definitely going to be some fallout coming for some of those brave ones.. 

[blackcab]

Off topic posts have been removed. This topic is not about BLM, antifa or the in depth discussion of covid transmission rates.

 

The issue of mask wearing has now been well covered. Please keep the discussion on topic.

[Morch]

21 minutes ago, holy cow cm said:

Oh its out in the world media hot and heavy if you search for it right now. The PM and his cronies who are pawns for the PC who are...  Not off target just really sensitive and there is definitely going to be some fallout coming for some of those brave ones.. 

 

I'm aware it's covered in non-Thai venues. Not sure if it's possible to actually discuss this by hints and going in a very roundabout way, at least not in a way both can understand each other's position clearly. Maybe in other times.

[teacherclaire]

6 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

I think you mean to say: sad, very sad indeed as these are signs that Prayut's days are numbered

I truly hope so. These army guys have to go, they aren't wanted by anybody else than themselves. 

[jerolamo]

7 hours ago, steven100 said:

sad, very sad indeed as it is a recipe for the virus to spread. I am sure we'll see a spike in the numbers in the coming days and next week. 

Democracy is not a virus, it is a human respect tradition.

 

And COVID can be compared with a flu season virus. It doesn't kill more than the cars and motorbikes on your road.

 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, teacherclaire said:

I truly hope so. These army guys have to go, they aren't wanted by anybody else than themselves. 

 

While that's a common sentiment, at least on this forum, there were actually a fair number of Thais who voted for them. Even subtracting cronies, families, fake and coerced votes, I think it still a wee bit more than you imply. Could very well be people voted for them not because of thinking them best, but rather not much impressed with the opposition, or not into the instability offered by others.

[jerolamo]

25 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I'm aware it's covered in non-Thai venues. Not sure if it's possible to actually discuss this by hints and going in a very roundabout way, at least not in a way both can understand each other's position clearly. Maybe in other times.

The idea is not to understand a dictatorship situation, but to fix the problem with a democracy.

As you said in an other forum's thread on the same subject (i copy: """"""

Obviously people living under the rule of dictators cannot generally be said to be "happy and content".

"""""").

And it is absolutely wrong.

The fact is that under dictators rules, people HAVE TO SAID that they are happy (if they don't, they have to lie with that), and they have to love the dictator. They don't have choice if they want to be quiet. That is what the word "dictatorship" describe.

And as you can see, it can have a mix of free market and dictatorship (like a far west mixed with a personality culture).

[jerolamo]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

While that's a common sentiment, at least on this forum, there were actually a fair number of Thais who voted for them. Even subtracting cronies, families, fake and coerced votes, I think it still a wee bit more than you imply. Could very well be people voted for them not because of thinking them best, but rather not much impressed with the opposition, or not into the instability offered by others.

yes, 30% maximum. it is far not the majority.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

The idea is not to understand a dictatorship situation, but to fix the problem with a democracy.

As you said in an other forum's thread on the same subject (i copy: """"""

Obviously people living under the rule of dictators cannot generally be said to be "happy and content".

"""""").

And it is absolutely wrong.

The fact is that under dictators rules, people HAVE TO SAID that they are happy (if they don't, they have to lie with that), and they have to love the dictator. They don't have choice if they want to be quiet. That is what the word "dictatorship" describe.

And as you can see, it can have a mix of free market and dictatorship (like a far west mixed with a personality culture).

 

That your "idea". I'm addressing an issue raised in other posts, regarding the degree to which 'dictatorship' label applies to Thailand. I was just pointing out that there are varying levels of such, and that using the term without context and coupled with exaggerations is not helpful.

 

My view is that Thai people do not seem to be ready to embrace the full scope of democracy as it is practiced in Western countries. This does not imply condoning or implying dictatorship as being the only alternative, or it being legitimate or being good.

 

 

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

yes, 30% maximum. it is far not the majority.

 

Never said anything about it being a majority, but 30% is far from being "not wanted by anybody".

[sammieuk1]

Welcome to the LOS ASQ high rollers????????

 

[jerolamo]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

That your "idea". I'm addressing an issue raised in other posts, regarding the degree to which 'dictatorship' label applies to Thailand. I was just pointing out that there are varying levels of such, and that using the term without context and coupled with exaggerations is not helpful.

 

My view is that Thai people do not seem to be ready to embrace the full scope of democracy as it is practiced in Western countries. This does not imply condoning or implying dictatorship as being the only alternative, or it being legitimate or being good.

 

 

sure, there is variable level. As there is variable level of corruption or variable level of criminality.

But it is still dictatorship as long as the majority of the population doesn't want this authority to drive the country.

Very simple to understand.

 

And the point of view that a population is not ready to embrace democracy is the argument of a dictator leader. It is exactly this argument to think that what we are thinking is better for the other and that we should drive the life of people even if they don't want this to be.

Also, an argument you can read and can help to understand the human life is that:

human learn by theory when they can paid for school or when a social law paid for them to learn good at school, but it is not enough, human learn by its own experience of life.

If you force human to obey and never let him his own choices to assume, then this human will stay a child. And that is the situation in all countries where a lot of forbid things exists... this cancel responsibility required for human to grow, it delete ability for them to choose there life by implicate themselves in social decisions.

 

So if you want a population to be able to be in democracy and to rich a good destiny, the only one way is to let them democracy and let them experimented there own history. It will have difficulties for sure because as you might think (same i think), they have a very low level of study comparatively to the world study level (who is going down by the time).

But the way to learn democracy and live it best, is to practice democracy.

 

[jerolamo]

14 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Never said anything about it being a majority, but 30% is far from being "not wanted by anybody".

sure, the real word to define 30% is: "minority". And when a minority obtain something, a new word appear: "dictatorship".

That's it what is it. Not my fault. Do you want to change the dictionary words definitions ?

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

sure, there is variable level. As there is variable level of corruption or variable level of criminality.

But it is still dictatorship as long as the majority of the population doesn't want this authority to drive the country.

Very simple to understand.

 

And the point of view that a population is not ready to embrace democracy is the argument of a dictator leader. It is exactly this argument to think that what we are thinking is better for the other and that we should drive the life of people even if they don't want this to be.

Also, an argument you can read and can help to understand the human life is that:

human learn by theory when they can paid for school or when a social law paid for them to learn good at school, but it is not enough, human learn by its own experience of life.

If you force human to obey and never let him his own choices to assume, then this human will stay a child. And that is the situation in all countries where a lot of forbid things exists... this cancel responsibility required for human to grow, it delete ability for them to choose there life by implicate themselves in social decisions.

 

So if you want a population to be able to be in democracy and to rich a good destiny, the only one way is to let them democracy and let them experimented there own history. It will have difficulties for sure because as you might think (same i think), they have a very low level of study comparatively to the world study level (who is going down by the time).

But the way to learn democracy and live it best, is to practice democracy.

 

 

It is hard to know what actual level of support the protestors garner, and if such support is on offer with regard to each and every of the issues raised. So implying a majority is nice, but not necessarily strongly demonstrated.

 

And no, opining that the population is not ready to embrace full democracy Western-style is not the argument of 'dictator leader' - I can't always get my way even in my own house. My view on this is based on living here long enough, having seen the previous episodes up close, and hearing enough Thai people airing their own views on this. You may disagree, but dismissing it in the manner offered is not a serious proposition.

 

Not sure what the rest of your post is about or how it relates to mine.

 

I will say this, that attempts to skip long socio-political processes and get straight to the level of freedom as applied in Western countries is a notion that doesn't always end well. Enough instances and examples of this worldwide.

[chickenslegs]

4 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

sure, there is variable level. As there is variable level of corruption or variable level of criminality.

But it is still dictatorship as long as the majority of the population doesn't want this authority to drive the country.

Very simple to understand.

 

And the point of view that a population is not ready to embrace democracy is the argument of a dictator leader. It is exactly this argument to think that what we are thinking is better for the other and that we should drive the life of people even if they don't want this to be.

Also, an argument you can read and can help to understand the human life is that:

human learn by theory when they can paid for school or when a social law paid for them to learn good at school, but it is not enough, human learn by its own experience of life.

If you force human to obey and never let him his own choices to assume, then this human will stay a child. And that is the situation in all countries where a lot of forbid things exists... this cancel responsibility required for human to grow, it delete ability for them to choose there life by implicate themselves in social decisions.

 

So if you want a population to be able to be in democracy and to rich a good destiny, the only one way is to let them democracy and let them experimented there own history. It will have difficulties for sure because as you might think (same i think), they have a very low level of study comparatively to the world study level (who is going down by the time).

But the way to learn democracy and live it best, is to practice democracy.

 

I agree.

 

Removing the armed forces from politics would be a good start, especially from the Senate, where they can exert undue influence - for example, ensuring the appointment of a Prime Minister who has never received a single vote in an election by the people of Thailand.

 

Another good move for the country would be removal of the LM laws, thus allowing people to discuss the future of the monarchy (therefore, the nation) without fear of imprisonment, or worse.

 

AFAIK, these are two of the main requests of the demonstrators. I wish them success.

.

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

sure, the real word to define 30% is: "minority". And when a minority obtain something, a new word appear: "dictatorship".

That's it what is it. Not my fault. Do you want to change the dictionary words definitions ?

 

No, that's nonsense. The fact that one party receives 30% support does not automatically imply all remaining 70% are directly opposed to it or that they agree on their positions.

 

Buy a new dictionary.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, chickenslegs said:

I agree.

 

Removing the armed forces from politics would be a good start, especially from the Senate, where they can exert undue influence - for example, ensuring the appointment of a Prime Minister who has never received a single vote in an election by the people of Thailand.

 

Another good move for the country would be removal of the LM laws, thus allowing people to discuss the future of the monarchy (therefore, the nation) without fear of imprisonment, or worse.

 

AFAIK, these are two of the main requests of the demonstrators. I wish them success.

.

 

With regard to the first, I think there's hardly any argument - apart, perhaps, from the mentioned party.

 

As for the second, a bit more complicated - and given that we cannot even freely discuss this (serves to demonstrate the problem) it's harder to address here. I'll say that IMO, the LM laws are sometimes used for political purposes, rather than being applied strictly in the manner implied by their name. As far as I recall, this became more of a thing during Thaksin's time in office. Not a legal expert, but I think that the greater issue is Thailand's draconian, over-reaching anti-defamation laws - whether the LM laws are the source or derivative, can't rightly say.

 

 

[jerolamo]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

It is hard to know what actual level of support the protestors garner, and if such support is on offer with regard to each and every of the issues raised. So implying a majority is nice, but not necessarily strongly demonstrated.

 

And no, opining that the population is not ready to embrace full democracy Western-style is not the argument of 'dictator leader' - I can't always get my way even in my own house. My view on this is based on living here long enough, having seen the previous episodes up close, and hearing enough Thai people airing their own views on this. You may disagree, but dismissing it in the manner offered is not a serious proposition.

 

Not sure what the rest of your post is about or how it relates to mine.

 

I will say this, that attempts to skip long socio-political processes and get straight to the level of freedom as applied in Western countries is a notion that doesn't always end well. Enough instances and examples of this worldwide.

it doesn't end well all the time there is violent oppression who skill to oppose the reality with there own process. We can not deny the human world wide history with that.

Let's look at Uruguay history... as you can see, the democracy did lot of good things for the population and then, for the country.

Politic is not a subject confined to our own house, by definition politic is a wide world subject talking about humans rights and diplomatic consensus for opposite ideas to find a way to go together as best as they can. This will imply to sacrifice some of our own point of view for the peace.

The opposition is clearly demonstrate from 14 years already when a coup did exist and does still exist. There is no honest arrangement with the reality of the history.

When a powerful own leader impose his rights by a coup, we can no more talk about something it is "maybe", but it is something id did happened for sure. Next to this, politic majority was cut, some other diluted. Which kind of this process can be something different than a dictatorship by facts ? There is no confusion there.

70% of the Thai population did want something, then politic party was denied and cut, an other one part was build then diluted.

We can also talk about some opposition (student) who was peaceful and protest, and for that, was killed 50 years ago, or people who was burned alive for there political thinking. When intellectual (high level or student, anyway) can not speak and has been killed, it is a strong dictatorship process and illegal from a trail international court point of view.

You are thinking that it is not sure that the majority want a democracy or an other one leadership. But the history of this country demonstrate that you are wrong (not me, i just conform with the history facts with humility).

But... why ?

[Caldera]

It's encouraging to see this unfold. About time that the people take possession of their country.

 

[jerolamo]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

No, that's nonsense. The fact that one party receives 30% support does not automatically imply all remaining 70% are directly opposed to it or that they agree on their positions.

 

Buy a new dictionary.

but in the history Thailand facts, it was like this. Are we talking for talking or do we talk about Thailand politics facts ?

I'm not talking for talking, i conform myself with historical facts there.

Please, do not deny history because this imply that you discredit yourselves and can no more be readable.

And i will not buy a dictionary you will write to deny facts and arrange yourself with the true by rhetoric sentences.

Edited September 20, 2020 by jerolamo

[jerolamo]

8 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

With regard to the first, I think there's hardly any argument - apart, perhaps, from the mentioned party.

 

As for the second, a bit more complicated - and given that we cannot even freely discuss this (serves to demonstrate the problem) it's harder to address here. I'll say that IMO, the LM laws are sometimes used for political purposes, rather than being applied strictly in the manner implied by their name. As far as I recall, this became more of a thing during Thaksin's time in office. Not a legal expert, but I think that the greater issue is Thailand's draconian, over-reaching anti-defamation laws - whether the LM laws are the source or derivative, can't rightly say.

 

 

yes, military is something to apply force by the law, for the law. In this point, it can not become a politic leadership, it is so logic. When army become a politic leader, all the time, it is a sign of failure process.

The hand should be controlled by the head, and never the the other way around.

All countries have an army a police, an immigration office, for sure, it is good.

What is not good is when one of this office get power up to the head or become a kind of (always to big) head.

Yes, you are not an expert. But you can read political history around the world and just notice how bad the story is when the army become the chief of the land and fight against political representatives (what ever they are thinking there is not the problem).

[nong38]

The authorities claim a crowd of 18,000 turned up whilst reporters said it was far more than that according to MSN news. An uncertain future beckons at least for now restraint is being shown but the authorities should take note of the developing situation, I am not sure they now to handle it, I am presuming that the coup option is off the table. Lets hope it stays peaceful.

[Morch]

29 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

it doesn't end well all the time there is violent oppression who skill to oppose the reality with there own process. We can not deny the human world wide history with that.

Let's look at Uruguay history... as you can see, the democracy did lot of good things for the population and then, for the country.

Politic is not a subject confined to our own house, by definition politic is a wide world subject talking about humans rights and diplomatic consensus for opposite ideas to find a way to go together as best as they can. This will imply to sacrifice some of our own point of view for the peace.

The opposition is clearly demonstrate from 14 years already when a coup did exist and does still exist. There is no honest arrangement with the reality of the history.

When a powerful own leader impose his rights by a coup, we can no more talk about something it is "maybe", but it is something id did happened for sure. Next to this, politic majority was cut, some other diluted. Which kind of this process can be something different than a dictatorship by facts ? There is no confusion there.

70% of the Thai population did want something, then politic party was denied and cut, an other one part was build then diluted.

We can also talk about some opposition (student) who was peaceful and protest, and for that, was killed 50 years ago, or people who was burned alive for there political thinking. When intellectual (high level or student, anyway) can not speak and has been killed, it is a strong dictatorship process and illegal from a trail international court point of view.

You are thinking that it is not sure that the majority want a democracy or an other one leadership. But the history of this country demonstrate that you are wrong (not me, i just conform with the history facts with humility).

But... why ?

 

I'm sorry, having difficulty following your reasoning and argument, maybe a language thing.

 

Picking a country where things turned out right after embracing democracy is fine, ignoring that in many countries things went pear shaped is another. Thailand's attempts at this cannot, IMO, be termed much of a success. More often than not, the governments elected in a democratic manner failed to live up to the ideals of democracy and/or exhibited other issues. Saying this time it's different is not a particularly strong argument.

 

I have already agreed with the position that the army's role in politics is a major problem. Then again, this also serves to make the previous point - if there's no army to intervene and political factions do not really respect the tenets of democracy, how are things to be handled?

 

I don't know that 70% of the Thai population support the protests, or at least, all of the issues raised on the protests. Kinda doubt there's that much of an actual consensus among Thais. The regime 50 years ago would have laughed at the current government being labeled a 'dictatorship'. That you try to claim it same same doesn't quite make it so. Nor does it lend much support for your 70% bit.

[Morch]

37 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

but in the history Thailand facts, it was like this. Are we talking for talking or do we talk about Thailand politics facts ?

I'm not talking for talking, i conform myself with historical facts there.

Please, do not deny history because this imply that you discredit yourselves and can no more be readable.

And i will not buy a dictionary you will write to deny facts and arrange yourself with the true by rhetoric sentences.

 

What historical facts are you on about? What was 'like this'? What facts did I deny?

 

This is a discussion about current affairs.

There was a claim nobody supported or wanted the current government.

The reality is that the ruling party got a large chunk of the votes (someone quoted 30%).

30% support does not mean 70% opposition.

70% does not mean all 70% support the same things, or that they agree on everything.

 

Hope it's clearer now.

 

 

[Morch]

34 minutes ago, jerolamo said:

yes, military is something to apply force by the law, for the law. In this point, it can not become a politic leadership, it is so logic. When army become a politic leader, all the time, it is a sign of failure process.

The hand should be controlled by the head, and never the the other way around.

All countries have an army a police, an immigration office, for sure, it is good.

What is not good is when one of this office get power up to the head or become a kind of (always to big) head.

Yes, you are not an expert. But you can read political history around the world and just notice how bad the story is when the army become the chief of the land and fight against political representatives (what ever they are thinking there is not the problem).

 

In the recent past, some of the democratically elected government and parties of Thailand acted in ways which were undemocratic and/or illegal. The opposition (which isn't made up of saints, either) was for the most part powerless to counter this. How do you suggest the Thai system is to deal with such instances with the army out of the picture? Again - I do not advocate for the army's role in Thai politics.

 

Your comment about me not being a legal expert has nothing to do with the context in which the remark was made.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, teacherclaire said:

I truly hope so. These army guys have to go, they aren't wanted by anybody else than themselves. 

There is still a chance that Apirat will stage a coup and take much stronger measures against the student protestors in an attempt to emulate his father. IMHO I think that he wants to go out with a bang. He has been threatening a coup for a while now but I think that if he does the reaction he will get may not be the one he hopes for.

Edited September 20, 2020 by billd766
Bad spelling

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

There is still a chance that Apirat will stage a coup and take much stronger measures against the student protestors in an attempt to emulate his father. IMHO I think that he wants to go out with a bang. He has been threatening a coup for a while now but I think that if he does the reaction he will get may not be the onr he hopes fot.

 

Domestically, maybe not. Internationally, this is probably not a bad time. World is preoccupied with Covid-19, no tourists anyway, and the PRC unlikely to have much issues with that anyway. At the same time, on the home front, the Covid-19 situation could be conveniently used to control the population and curb opposition.

[bobbin]

2 hours ago, jerolamo said:

sure, there is variable level. As there is variable level of corruption or variable level of criminality.

But it is still dictatorship as long as the majority of the population doesn't want this authority to drive the country.

Very simple to understand.

 

And the point of view that a population is not ready to embrace democracy is the argument of a dictator leader. It is exactly this argument to think that what we are thinking is better for the other and that we should drive the life of people even if they don't want this to be.

Also, an argument you can read and can help to understand the human life is that:

human learn by theory when they can paid for school or when a social law paid for them to learn good at school, but it is not enough, human learn by its own experience of life.

If you force human to obey and never let him his own choices to assume, then this human will stay a child. And that is the situation in all countries where a lot of forbid things exists... this cancel responsibility required for human to grow, it delete ability for them to choose there life by implicate themselves in social decisions.

 

So if you want a population to be able to be in democracy and to rich a good destiny, the only one way is to let them democracy and let them experimented there own history. It will have difficulties for sure because as you might think (same i think), they have a very low level of study comparatively to the world study level (who is going down by the time).

But the way to learn democracy and live it best, is to practice democracy.

 

 

Obviously you are not a native English speaker. The words do not flow as well as they could, but with a little effort you are perfectly understandable.

 

In your conversations with Morch, it seems that you are a little idealistic but that is not a bad thing. It's aspirational thinking.

 

Morch is quite a keen observer of politics and rightly skeptical of the political jockeying for influence, and one of my favorite posters because of this.. These current protests are still a little light-weight compared to previous versions but the fact that they are happening at all is noteworthy. The incumbents will not change unless pushed.

 

Anyway, I like what you are saying.. The Thai people, all people, need to be able to move forward towards a more equitable life.

[metisdead]

Some more off topic posts and replies about the spreading of Covid have been removed.

 

A post attempting to bring the Royal family into the discussion has been removed:

 

By law, the Thai Royal Family are above politics. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family.