Thread: Giles off to the UK

Originally Posted by plorf

a left-wing Social Democrat in Europe

Social Democrat are centered left or maybe centered right if I am not mistaken, hardly Socialist in the true sense of the word

^ Depends on the country really, in Switzerland they are clearly left to extreme left. In Germany they had regular fights between the moderate center left and the old commies and marxists from eastern Germany pre-'89 who later joined the SD. They now split into SD and "Die Linke". Similar elsewhere, they still call themselves comrades and sing the Internationale at meetings. They can appartently be Social Democrats and call themselves Socialists, Marxists or whatever. Seems to be similar with Giles IMHO.

Living in Thailand no one is free to say what they think. Now that he is abroad I wonder if he will keep quiet or let it all out and so his chance of ever returning. Besides being the land of smiles, this is also the land of silence. When in rome...

Apparently fish rot from the head first.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

It's a class conflict in many ways. Thaksin and his cronies competed with the military, other groups of capitalists, and conservative bureaucrats to govern and exploit us.

Thaksin had his gimmicks, which were populist policies that really benefited poor people, to build up a power base, to calm society, and to adjust the efficiency of the Thai economy after the 1997 crisis. His government suppressed the mafia associated with the military, and modernized the bureaucracy, and that upset the military and old-fashioned bureaucrats. The middle class, businessmen, and capitalists at first were impressed, but later became sick of him. And some capitalists had conflicts with Thaksin when they didn't get a share of the pie. Eventually, there were protests to oust Thaksin. The regressive civil sector, including the People's Alliance for Democracy, joined hands with royalist capitalists to usher in the coup d'état.

he is right on the mark here,

Originally Posted by DrB0b

The Thai Sakdina has long disappeared since King Rama V's day, both in terms of politics and the economy. They have transformed into a modern Head of State and capitalists, with the artificial image of long-standing respectability. As a matter of fact, after Oct 14, 1973 capitalists and capitalist-cum politicians have continued the task of promoting the monarchy from where Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat had left off.

Therefore, the capitalists, including Thaksin, do not have conflicts with the monarchy, but have conflicts with the conservatives who claim the monarchy to legitimize themselves.

Can't be more clear. Now try to explain that to the thousands of people that are brainwashed by Manager every day....

The thing to remember about Giles Ji Ungpakorn is that his appeal is mainly to foreigners. Most of his writing is only read by foreigners (it appeals to our historical sense of what politics should be about) and his political influence in Thailand is nil. He can be compared in influence to the 1st year pol-sci student selling Socialist Worker on a European Street. He is smart, observant, and a very able academic but for all the truth in his writing, and there's a great deal of it, he's almost totally unknown to most Thais. While I'd like to think he's representative of a political current in Thailand the sad truth is that he's not, not yet anyway, the thieves and thugs that make up the political class in Thailand are far more representative of the true state of politics at all levels here. He does express, in a rather brash way, undercurrents in Thai society but it would be wrong to think of him as being in any way typical of any meaningful Thai political movement.

Where does this then leave the Cockroach leadership? Have they won the endgame, or is the struggle still young?

Once again thanks to DrBOb for the clear analysis and good information provided.

Originally Posted by watterinja

Where does this then leave the Cockroach leadership? Have they won the endgame, or is the struggle still young?

In my opinion we're only at the beginning of the end-game. What we're seeing here is a society growing up, to grow up is to leave the parent's protection, no?. Growing up is a painful thing and none of us (by which I don't only mean farang) are in a position to know how it will go. Good opinions expressed here are more in the way of hopes than predictions. I hope for the best in Thai society but I fear it will be a long (it's already long) and painful road, we've only taken the first few steps.

Would the current overlords of society willingly relinquish their power & security?

Originally Posted by watterinja

Would the current overlords of society willingly relinquish their power & security?

Of course not. When has any overlord anywhere ever done that? I refer you to the wise words of Lord Acton.

The absolute monarchy in Thailand ended in 1932 with a revolution, but with all its symbols intact, has brought it into a new era. He has had some good mentors. His uncle the Regent Prince Rangsit, quoted Buddha's words to him: 'For as long as there are bullies and liars, kings are needed'. how true is this!!

Originally Posted by edwinclapham

'For as long as there are bullies and liars, kings are needed'. how true is this!!

Not true at all. Bloody stupid thing to say, typical self-justification from a class of worthless parasites - bullies and liars themselves.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by watterinja

Would the current overlords of society willingly relinquish their power & security?

Of course not. When has any overlord anywhere ever done that? I refer you to the wise words of Lord Acton.

The changes suggested in Gile's manifesto would surely suggest a new paradigm.

With paradigm shifts comes tremendous social upheaval. Are the Thai people ready for a smooth transition, bumpy transition, or no transition?

Will the ostrich syndrome prevail until the bitter end? Nepal comes to mind.

^^ well, Kings and veneered Religious leaders can serve a unity purpose and provide stability, so you can't discount entirely their roles

Originally Posted by DrB0b

What we're seeing here is a society growing up, to grow up is to leave the parent's protection, no?. Growing up is a painful thing and none of us (by which I don't only mean farang) are in a position to know how it will go. Good opinions expressed here are more in the way of hopes than predictions. I hope for the best in Thai society but I fear it will be a long (it's already long) and painful road, we've only taken the first few steps.

agree, but what makes you think that the Thai population even wants to grow up.

^ This is an interesting question, indeed.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by DrB0b

What we're seeing here is a society growing up, to grow up is to leave the parent's protection, no?. Growing up is a painful thing and none of us (by which I don't only mean farang) are in a position to know how it will go. Good opinions expressed here are more in the way of hopes than predictions. I hope for the best in Thai society but I fear it will be a long (it's already long) and painful road, we've only taken the first few steps.

agree, but what makes you think that the Thai population even wants to grow up.

No child ever wants to grow up. It's the responsibility of the parents to educate their children, prepare them for adult life, and then boot them out the door where they'll have to stand on their own two feet. Collectively much of the Thai population is like a 30 year-old who still lives in his parent's basement and spends his life playing computer games. Only emerging to demand more pocket money and snacks.

I blame the parents!

Originally Posted by Butterfly

^^ well, Kings and veneered Religious leaders can serve a unity purpose and provide stability, so you can't discount entirely their roles

I don't entirely discount their roles. The problem with Royalty is that it's a sexually transmitted disease. One day you've got Frederick the Great, the next you've got mad King Ludwig of Bavaria. Giving power to people based solely on the fact that their great-great-grandfather poisoned their uncle's granny is no basis for sound governance.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by edwinclapham

'For as long as there are bullies and liars, kings are needed'. how true is this!!

Not true at all. Bloody stupid thing to say, typical self-justification from a class of worthless parasites - bullies and liars themselves.

Right you are Bob!

Originally Posted by DrB0b

The problem with Royalty is that it's a sexually transmitted disease. One day you've got Frederick the Great, the next you've got mad King Ludwig of Bavaria. Giving power to people based solely on the fact that their great-great-grandfather poisoned their uncle's granny is no basis for sound governance.

Over the top. Most Royalty do not have power, even in Thailand, they only mingle when "stability" is at risk, which is exactly what their role is. The Royal Descendants is exactly what provide stability. We might disagree with that process, but until we can clone Kings and Queens, this is the only way.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

I blame the parents!

You can't have parents forcing their kids to grow up. What make you think that a 5yr old should act like an adult ? it's a natural process, and I don't see the population here at that stage yet.

I'm of the firm belief that the Thai Royals weld extreme power throughout all circles....political, financial, social, and criminal. I don't buy this 'observing through their windows' theory. One doesn't really have to do much deepeened research/study to understand what kind of irons they have in the fire...and the majority of irons envolved. It's an underworld that we don't have an invitation to have knowledge about.

Originally Posted by Rural Surin

I don't buy this 'observing through their windows' theory. One doesn't really have to do much deepeened research/study to understand what kind of irons they have in the fire...and the majority of irons envolved

well if you mean they are protecting their assets, then yes you have a point. But why shouldn't they ? Criminal ? how ? now that would be an interesting "speculative" theory to hear