Political Unrest in Thailand

as far as I know, to be anti-monarchist can still get you to prison immediately in Thailand ... some leftwing stuff is here: http://redthaisocialist.com/ ... but don't know, how good it is

Same old same...oligarchs versus the plutocrats.
Just posted this on SOYMB blog

http://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-plutocracy-v-oligarchy.html

Access to the redthaisocialist website is blocked by the government for web-users in Thailand.

The King Never Smiles is banned in Thailand. A translator who posted thai-langauge version on the web was jailed even though he was not a thai resident.

I have never before stood up so much for a national anthem, every movie starts with it and many public venues stop for it ...the alternative is arrest and deportation... and of course every school class starts with it too, and no opting out as the case in America with their daily morning pledge of allegience ritual.

The protest are organised by Suthep the former deputy Prime Minister, he was in the Democrat Party and his career full of corruption scandals, one was so bad he brought down his own party's government in in 1995. He's up on the murder charge along with former PM Abhiset, if the government doesn't fall they could well go to prison. This can be seen as their roll of the dice to avoid jail.

The protesters are a mixed bag, Democrats supporters and yellow shirts as well as general public. The Democrat party are opposition party, the party of business and best described as economic Thatcherites with most of the money, media, corporations, rich and middle class behind them, but not enough voters to win an election. The Yellow shirts are the ultra Royalist, group who believe in turning the country into a feudal monarchy. The Democrats and yellow shirts detest one another. Finally a lot of regular folk who are opposed to government corruption have joined them. The protest is a mixed bag of people with little in common who have once again temporarily decided they dislike the government more than they dislike each other.

The government are the "For Thai" party, a mixture of social democratic economics with conservative morality, They are supported by the Red Shirts a radical movement of poor people, encompassing everything from socialists to social democrats. There are parallels here with the Labour Party and Labour movement in the 1920's. The current government under Thaksin's sister is more moderate than the reds shirts would like and has played it safe this time, trying especially not to annoy the army like her brother.

The history is after three consecutive election wins Thaksin was overthrown by the army for annoying them. After a year's misrule by the military Thaksin's party (him in exile) won the election, but after six months was removed from power and the Democrat Party given power. Next election Thaksin's party won again and is in power now. They are way ahead in the polls and if their was another election would win.

The problem is despite having all the media and money the opposition can't defeat his party legitimately and being the middle and upper class can;t stand the fact a poor party is ruling them. However only the army can bring the government down, the army hates the Democrats and is not a big fan of the yellow shirts and has its own political agenda. It's also divided into factions and needs the big factions to agree before a coup can take place. And at the moment they don't seem that annoyed with the government. The protest seems a desperate attempt to make the army annoyed at them by people who aren't particularly liked by the army themselves.

After a few years in South India i moved to live in Thailand and been here for a couple of years now but i have personal connections to the country going back to the 1980s. I live in a rural provincial town which means i have not got much first hand knowledge of the events in Bangkok where the real power game is played out. Here, despite having a university, there is no perceptible political activity other than the usual jockeying for local government power.

As i mentioned in the earlier post, the country is very pro-Royalist. Any attempt to try and distinguish pro and anti government on the issue of allegience to the king is on the wrong track, even if the opposing forces try and accuse one another of disloyalty. The problem is that the king is in a near vegetative state, wheeled out for state and religious occasions. Unlike the situation a few decades ago where he personally made a rare intervention to end the military crack-down against protests.

Nor can it be all put down to simply rural poor v urban elite. The divide is also geographical, with the Isaan provinces in the NE pro-government and the southern regions anti-government. I won't add the complication of the southern border area armed rebellion.

I tend to agree with the last poster that the current unrest is to provoke a reaction to involve the army who so far have little inclination to do so.

All in all, how much should the working class or socialist movement get involved and take sides?...IMO...plague on both houses...but an SPGBer regardless of location would say that

But there are more vital concerns to concentrate upon than who rules...the workers organisation as Thailand industry booms and also the migrant workers from Cambodia, Burma, being used as cheap labour... but alas again i am an outsider looking in.

To give you two very different answers. Should the British working class get involved with third world peasants? I suppose this depends on how you feel about Eton school getting involved with the British working class. The relative wealth and privilege comparison are about the same.

Or alternatively this depends on how much you put in the idea of struggle. Many anarchist thinkers say first you get the anarchist theory right, and then you go out and do activism consistent with the theory and should not be interested in activism not in line with it......... The flaw with this it denies people can learn from struggle or that people can learn from experience, a rather naive view that last one. On the other hand there is the school of though people with little political knowledge can learn on the job through struggle............. The flaw with this is what they may learn is not anarchism.

Despite the flaw I'll go with the latter, because 10 years ago there was no radical movement in Thailand, people didn't even know how to do, so no anarchism. Now there is a radical movement, at least they have made an environment of politically aware people where anarchism may now come into being.

Finally as an anarchist, shouldn't you be supporting the Yellow shirts, after all there leader gave up all his wealth and lives in a vegetarian agricultural commune with no hierarchy and all property is common.

Kingy made the intervention against the Suchinda coup, true, but the 76 massacre at Thammasat kingy ordered personally and the Village Scouts (the proto Red Shirts) paraded before the queen and marched from the palace to do the massacre. As for love of the king, it's not as strong as many suspect, the super rich Chinese corporate types really look down their noses at royalty, the Red Shirts are not big fans and many have been jailed for Lese Majeste and also as a friend taught me to understand back in the 90s, Bangkokers have their own secret little Feng Shui/Semitic Code for criticising the king in the way they lay out their ornaments. One of those Thai cultural subtleties unique to them.

"As for love of the king, it's not as strong as many suspect"

On the Kings Birthday to-day, in a supposed red shirt power base, i stand at my door and see my neighbours, to honour the king, working cleaning up the streets. (your friend's anecdote of secret signs,btw, reminded me of the origins of the Freemasons, a safe space to criticise autocracy)

The question really will be when the present monarch passes away, will the playboy prince assume the crown? Then we can see polarisation increasing. It is at the moment female members of the royal family that dominate the news with royal visits to retain the affection of the people.

As for the Chinese Thais, i failed to mention that they are indeed pivotal for the Thai economy...a saying is that behind every successful Thai business is a Chinese owner... but they have always been side-lined when it came to political/military power.

My remark about getting involved was simply a caution against simplistic interventions such as declaring for one side because they use radical language such as peoples councils or the other because they implemented popular reforms such as the 30 baht health system. i agree with Pennoid's conclusions about little political choice being available.

I also agree that we are linked by being part of the global working-class which is why i specifically mentioned the areas where we should concern ourselves (and by implication involved)...industrial and immigration.

One aspect that is worth exploring is the radical environmental movement often associated with some forms of Buddhist beliefs that is gaining support but we should not mistake the Buddhist religion for anything other than the established status quo religion it is here, which gives legitimacy to the Thai ruling class. There is a big divide in Buddhist abbot hierarchy as there was between Friar Tuck and the Pope.

This little article I found gives an excellent insight.

http://www.thai-blogs.com/2009/03/11/last-bastion-of-the-orient/

It was quite fascinating, you used to be able to walk up a street in Bangkok,look into each shop at the mini shrine and tell by the way they had laid out the royal pictures whether they loved or were admonishing the king. It was during the 80's and 90's, even early 00's during the hey day of the cult of Chulalongkorn, sadly walking around today you see scant sign of this imagery.

It's most likely going to be him. They had no system of succession until the late 90s, when the government passed a law of primogeniture. A fascinating little law as 100% of Thais wanted the daughter. They did it because he was so hated they could then pass a series of constitutions de-powering the king to a constitutional monarch when he succeeded and no-one would complain, not wanting him to have any power. It got all party support in Parliament and was the politicians blatantly de-powering the army. Except in the last coup the army abolished the constitutional reforms. So he will not only be king but have power too.

10 years in Thailand really taught me to dislike Buddhism, something that really annoys a lot of western trendies when I tell them. I used to live next to a Santi Asoke commune, nice people but whenever I went into the commune I always felt like I had walked into Jonestown.

i believe this used to be a Thai-based website but now apparently Malaysia.

It offers a different perspective being very pro-protesters and very anti-Thaksin but i think another interpretation should be offered here so people can evaluate for themselves.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/search/label/Thailand

An article from the Counterpunch website that some may find an interesting read.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/29/down-and-out-in-thailand/

Been several posts recently on the American radical websites from the very pro-yellowshirt, anti-Thaksin, Tony Cartalucci (aka Land Destroyer).

very interesting.

There's an in depth analyses here that takes on board more issues than the average article.

Lillburne