Thailand imposes state of emergency

[communard resolution]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090412/tpl-thailand-imposes-state-of-emergency-2bb92f9.html

Can someone tell me what this is all about and briefly outline the politics of the opposing factions? Thanks.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Yeah I wanted to know the same thing but no one responded. BBC describes them as anti-government.

[OneNamedNameLess]

I have been wondering about this too.

The current party and their supporters wear blue and the demonstrators are all in red. I am not sure if these protestors are leftist or are simply wearing striking colours deliberately. Maybe red was the colour of the former party :confused:

[Dimentio]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090412/tpl-thailand-imposes-state-of-emergency-2bb92f9.html

Can someone tell me what this is all about and briefly outline the politics of the opposing factions? Thanks.

Thailand is a country marked by extreme differences between city and countryside - or rather, between Bangkok and the rest of the country. Bangkok is a glimmering metropolis of brothels, casinos, hotels and all kind of depraved joys any wealthy western tourist could enjoy.

The country at large is underdeveloped and impoverished. The countryside has no sufficient infrastructure, and unemployment is very high. So high in fact that many children are sold to brothels in Bangkok to serve western and Japanese businessmen and tourists sexually.

Thailand is also a paradise for heroin and other drugs. The Thai bourgeoisie is basically a mixture between a traditional comprador bourgeoisie and organised criminality.

In 2001, the Thai Rak Thai (Thai Love Thai) party come to power. It was led by the businessman and populist Thaksin Shinawatra, the guy in the picture.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Thaksin.jpg

Thaksin wanted to divide the country's wealth in a way which - if not egalitarian so at least more beneficient for the rural population. He also wanted to fight organised crime and prostitution. He was and still is the most beloved politician in Thailand.

He came to power in the wake of the Asian crisis of 1997-1999, and quickly started to enact reforms which the rural population saw benefit them, like building schools, roads and give the villages electricity.

In the west, he was most known for sending Thai troops to Iraq and for quashing drugtraders and prostitution in Bangkok. This later policy made the bourgeoisie unite against him. With the motivation that he was corrupt and authoritarian, the military ousted him in late 2006.

For nine months, Thailand was ruled by a military junta before elections could be held, and TRT yet again won the elections with huge numbers, but this time not with Thaksin as Prime Minister as Thaksin is under trial for corruption.

This second TRT cabinet was dissolved when "a student NGO" basically besieged the government with badly hidden aid from the police and the military. The parliament then voted in a right-wing government in late 2008 which is supposed to hold new elections later this year. The Thai supreme court is also making some gestures to ban the TRT.

Thaksin is definetly no socialist or even a left-winger. He combines conservative moral views with populist (social democratic) economics. But his policies has served to redistribute wealth and empower the rural population.

Moreover, Thaksin and the TRT enjoy the support from the lower classes, while the army, the king and the bourgeoisie all are anti-TRT.

Now, due to the global financial crisis, the situation has become even more unstable. The majority of the people outside of Bangkok are basically against the current right-wing government.

It could even end in civil war.

Here is the wiki article about Thaksin by the way - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra

EDIT: Red is the colour of the Thaksin-adherents, while blue are those who are loyal to "democracy" (they want to abolish the voting rights for peasants and villagers). Yellow as far as I'll know is a holy colour since it is the colour of the king.

[Dust Bunnies]

This is bad news, but if it does descend into Civil War could we profit through the means of a Communist revolution there? Is there enough people interested to form a revolution?

[Dimentio]

This is bad news, but if it does descend into Civil War could we profit through the means of a Communist revolution there? Is there enough people interested to form a revolution?

The most "progressive" believable faction to take power in Thailand is probably the Thaksin-adherents. Thailand strikes me as a very right-leaning country.

[Killfacer]

I thought they all hated Thaskin and that's why he had to go to thailand to face charges and stop being manchester city chairmen.

[Dimentio]

I thought they all hated Thaskin and that's why he had to go to thailand to face charges and stop being manchester city chairmen.

All the Thai who have internets hate Thaksin.

The Thai upper-class look at Thaksin as the Venezuelan upper-class look at Chavèz.

Those who love Thaksin in Thailand are those who live on the country-side. But the people in the capitol hate him.

The people in the capitol also hate the people in the countryside.

Thaksin is some sort of... how should I put it... gangster. But he's a gangster who has given the people universal healthcare, schools, roads and electricity.

[Dimentio]

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/HC30Ae04.html

Here is a pro-right-wing summary over Thaksin's government.

[dez]

seems like a reactionary gangster that deserves our support

[Dimentio]

seems like a reactionary gangster that deserves our support

Yes, actually.

[jbaez]

This clears up a lot for me. I've been hearing a lot about the protests and seen some videos of people dressed in red demonstrating and even climbing on top of tanks (very courageous in my opinion). I had no idea who Thaksin was though.

[redarmyfaction38]

Yes, actually.
funny really innit how a "gangster" can actually reflect the aspirations of the poor, whilst the "gangsters" in charge wail about his "gangsterism".
having read all the above posts and thought about it for a bit, i also think we should support those supporting him.
i don't think however, we should give anything other than guarded support for him personally.
on the lines of "new boss, just like the old boss" politically.

[Dimentio]

funny really innit how a "gangster" can actually reflect the aspirations of the poor, whilst the "gangsters" in charge wail about his "gangsterism".
having read all the above posts and thought about it for a bit, i also think we should support those supporting him.
i don't think however, we should give anything other than guarded support for him personally.
on the lines of "new boss, just like the old boss" politically.

Yes, I am in agreement there. Thaksin is not a guy which we should look up to as a political ideal figure.

[Patchd]

I have family there, it's very much split between the urban population (workers, middle classes etc.) and the rural communities, Thaksin is mainly supported by the poor, he is seen to help them in the same way that say, Chavez is, although to a much much lesser extent. He is a fraud, even in bourgeois terms, and has stolen a lot of state money to fund his own wants, if you remember, not long back, he bought off, or was trying to buy off Man City FC.

Families in Thailand, including mine, are usually split if one family member holds a different position on Thaksin to another family member. My family has seen this to an extent.

What's interesting is that many of the police force in Thailand are standing idly by or even participating in the protests on the side of Thaksin, because most in the police force are native Thais, many from rural areas, and thus same the hold position as many poor in Thailand, the same goes for taxi drivers, many of whom come to Bangkok or other cities during working periods.

In fact, this is the first time in my lifetime where anti-Monarchy protests, and slogans are ignored by the police force. Before, I remember my family members telling me to keep it down when it came to the Monarchy and not criticise or slur them.


But he's a gangster who has given the people universal healthcare, schools, roads and electricity.

Not true at all, there have been some state initiatives, many of which are actually supported by, or initiated by the Monarchy, not Thaksin. In addition, healthcare is still private, and definitely not universal, many of the poor still have no access to healthcare although it has been made cheaper and more readily accessible.

In many cases, the poor will have to give up certain luxuries or necessities in the near future just to get healthcare! Royal Family initiatives have probably done more for the rural poor than Thaksin's state initiatives. He is a power hungry gangster that the left should not support in one bit. Either way, military junta or Thaksin, the people of Thailand will continue to be oppressed and exploited, however this is a time when we'll most likely see a change, and perhaps something more substantial in terms of revolutionary politics. Remember that Thailand has been through a number of military juntas in the past, and a civil war between the Maoists and the state, to the extent that the CIA once thought Thailand would "go red".


This clears up a lot for me. I've been hearing a lot about the protests and seen some videos of people dressed in red demonstrating and even climbing on top of tanks (very courageous in my opinion). I had no idea who Thaksin was though.

Thailand's military is very weird. You either serve 3 years in the cadets, which most people do, and that would relieve you of having to do compulsive military service for 2 years in the Army. So military service is still compulsory, and those in the Armed forces are usually conscripts or from very poor backgrounds. There have been cases of soldiers defending the Thaksin supporters and taking sides with them.


This is bad news, but if it does descend into Civil War could we profit through the means of a Communist revolution there? Is there enough people interested to form a revolution?

As Serpent said, the most progressive faction is Thaksin's one, Communists in Thailand have all but dissappeared, they have either been pardoned by the King back in the 80s and became pacified as a result, or were pardoned and now own market stalls in certain tourist market places selling Mao hats, Marx pictures and shit like that.

[dez]

If the man is promoting political cohesion amongst the opressed, regardless of what he represents or intends to do, why shouldnt the revolutionary left support him?

[Patchd]

If the man is promoting political cohesion amongst the opressed, regardless of what he represents or intends to do, why shouldnt the revolutionary left support him?

Hitler promoted political cohesion amongst the oppressed (German working class), or so he said. Would you have supported him for the same reasons?

In addition, he is not in one bit, he is a complete fraud, how do you think we would be seen if we support him today and tomorrow when he is back in power completely ignores the poor, or offers them menial concessions while taking millions from their taxes through fraudulent schemes and the state?

[dez]

Hitler promoted political cohesion amongst the oppressed (German working class), or so he said. Would you have supported him for the same reasons?


Godwins law, right?

Hitler did not promote political cohesion amongst the opressed.
Hitler, as well as nazifascism, promoted itself as the ´element of connection between the brain (the elite) and the hands (the workers)` .
They were collaborationists.
This man is promoting class struggle.
And he cannot control the masses.



In addition, he is not in one bit, he is a complete fraud, how do you think we would be seen if we support him today and tomorrow when he is back in power completely ignores the poor, or offers them menial concessions while taking millions from their taxes through fraudulent schemes and the state?

Just like the bolsheviks when they worked with the mensheviks in the social democratic party.

[Patchd]

Godwins law, right?

Hitler did not promote political cohesion amongst the opressed.
Hitler, as well as nazifascism, promoted itself as the ´element of connection between the brain (the elite) and the hands (the workers)` .
They were collaborationists.
This man is promoting class struggle.
And he cannot control the masses.

Yeh, obviously because I raised the issue of Hitler my point is invalid. :confused:

Thaksin is not promoting political cohesion amongst the oppressed. There are many workers who do not support him and who he has not shown much support for either.
Thaksin promotes himself as the brain, and the workers as the hands. He seemingly represents the workers, yet he himself is from (in Thailand) a middle class, from a privileged Chinese property owning background.

This man is not promoting class struggle, he is promoting social reforms. He is promoting the idea that he is the benevolent man in all of this when in fact he has done as much to harm the working class in Thailand as the military junta has.

In addition, the fact is that he does control most of these protesters, he pays a lot of them, even 1000baht which some are getting paid is more than they earn in a month, and he's using the money which he scummed off the state to pay them with, and another important point to make is that they are protesting on is behalf.

[dez]

Yeh, obviously because I raised the issue of Hitler my point is invalid. :confused:

Thaksin is not promoting political cohesion amongst the oppressed. There are many workers who do not support him and who he has not shown much support for either.
Thaksin promotes himself as the brain, and the workers as the hands. He seemingly represents the workers, yet he himself is from (in Thailand) a middle class, from a privileged Chinese property owning background.

This man is not promoting class struggle, he is promoting social reforms. He is promoting the idea that he is the benevolent man in all of this when in fact he has done as much to harm the working class in Thailand as the military junta has.

In addition, the fact is that he does control most of these protesters, he pays a lot of them, even 1000baht which some are getting paid is more than they earn in a month, and he's using the money which he scummed off the state to pay them with, and another important point to make is that they are protesting on is behalf.

I understand he is not perfect, but hasnt he polarized the entire status quo against his figure and managed to rally support from the working class and peasantry to himself?

[Hoxhaist]

Thaksin was a populist charlatan who exploited the support of the people in order to use his office for personal gain thats why Gen. Soonthi Boonyaratgalin did a coup while Thaksin was out of the country

[Patchd]

I understand he is not perfect, but hasnt he polarized the entire status quo against his figure and managed to rally support from the working class and peasantry to himself?

Well, I'm not too sure of how the rest of the ruling class sees Thaksin, the King is a tool and usually remains apolitical, in the sense that he backs whatever government comes to power, whether it be democratic or a military junta. Many will hate Thaksin because of rivalry and competition, and because they see his support as coming from the poor.

However, the truth is it doesn't. Not all the poor support him, especially not most of the urban working class. In fact there are riots and street battles, and not all is conducted between the state and Thaksin's followers, but between Thaksin's followers and workers who oppose him. It is probably more like Thaksin having separated the working class along rural and urban lines (to an extent), that now they are fighting his battles (and the state's) for them.

[Hoxhaist]

Thaksin is not a friend of the working people

[Patchd]

... and neither is the military junta, or the Royal Family. No support to either one of them!

[PoWR]

This was posted here before when the protests were going the other way around. It gives some background


This is a good example of why we don't just support any protest or uprising. You have to look at the class nature of everything.

In this case, a bunch of privileged members of the bourgeoisie and especially the petit-bourgeoisie want to eliminate any pretenses of democracy that exist in Thailand. They're angry that the toiling majority in the rural area has selected two candidates in a row which they oppose (along with others from the ruling social-democratic People's Power Party), and so they want to replace voting with a system in which middle class "specialists" and "social groups" select politicians.

They are rightists.

Sondhi Limthongkul, who is a rich owner of several media outlets and leader of the People's Alliance for Democracy (the group that started this) says "Representative democracy is not suitable for Thailand."

They dress up in yellow clothes and claim to be "defending the honor of the king" against "traitors" like the PPP.

This may look like a mass outpouring, but the fact is that the current President still has majority support in the country.

So this outpouring is in support of the elected social-democratic leadership that has been forced out.

Could that lead to something more? It's possible.

The defeated revolution in the Dominican Republic in 1965 broke out after the elected liberal Juan Bosch was removed from power.

[Patchd]

Something may well come out of it, I doubt it, most likely I think we'll see a radical insurrectionist reform of the current system, not a complete overhaul, however this is my belief and things can always turn on their heads in times like this. Thanks for your post PoWR, the Yellow shirts was a weird, yet large phase throughout the whole of Thailand, many of Thaksin's supporters also wore Yellow shirts as a sign of respect and a wish for good health/luck to the King.

That movement was pretty cross-class, and crossed between different political factions, although obviously, not every poor worker in Thailand has the ability to buy a new yellow shirt.

[Dimentio]

Yeh, obviously because I raised the issue of Hitler my point is invalid. :confused:

Thaksin is not promoting political cohesion amongst the oppressed. There are many workers who do not support him and who he has not shown much support for either.
Thaksin promotes himself as the brain, and the workers as the hands. He seemingly represents the workers, yet he himself is from (in Thailand) a middle class, from a privileged Chinese property owning background.

This man is not promoting class struggle, he is promoting social reforms. He is promoting the idea that he is the benevolent man in all of this when in fact he has done as much to harm the working class in Thailand as the military junta has.

In addition, the fact is that he does control most of these protesters, he pays a lot of them, even 1000baht which some are getting paid is more than they earn in a month, and he's using the money which he scummed off the state to pay them with, and another important point to make is that they are protesting on is behalf.

The main thing is that Thailand lacks a left-wing alternative, so the best people could hope to get is some sort of mixture between Huey Long, Julius Caesar and Berlusconi. Moreover, it seems to be some conflicts between the rural inhabitants and the urban inhabitants, even alongst ethnic lines. I don't think Thaksin invented these oppositions. He is merely using them.

[Patchd]

The main thing is that Thailand lacks a left-wing alternative, so the best people could hope to get is some sort of mixture between Huey Long, Julius Caesar and Berlusconi. Moreover, it seems to be some conflicts between the rural inhabitants and the urban inhabitants, even alongst ethnic lines. I don't think Thaksin invented these oppositions. He is merely using them.

I agree, yet at the same time, I wouldn't call for revolutionaries to support either faction. Thaksin probably is better than the other factions, but that is "better" is bourgeois terms, if we go to Thailand, as revolutionaries, we shouldn't give illusions to the workers that Thaksin or any other faction can actually do anything substantial for them.

[Dimentio]

I agree, yet at the same time, I wouldn't call for revolutionaries to support either faction. Thaksin probably is better than the other factions, but that is "better" is bourgeois terms, if we go to Thailand, as revolutionaries, we shouldn't give illusions to the workers that Thaksin or any other faction can actually do anything substantial for them.

2000 years ago, we had a republic where a greedy group of elder men prevented the proletariat from advancing socially and economically. Populists used to appear sometimes and promise bread and games in turn for political support. One of these populists made himself emperor, but the people turned much better off.

[Patchd]

2000 years ago, we had a republic where a greedy group of elder men prevented the proletariat from advancing socially and economically. Populists used to appear sometimes and promise bread and games in turn for political support. One of these populists made himself emperor, but the people turned much better off.

What's your point? Are you a bourgeois revolutionary? If not, then why would you advocate something which is "much better" but not what we want? In addition, when you say "much better off", do you mean in terms of material conditions?

Are the people really much better off? Were they still not exploited and oppressed? Just because someone might give some concessions to the exploited and poor does not make them saints, at the same time Thaksin was responsible for taking even more money for his own gains from the people! When Thaksin was still in power, there were still many many people living in cramped conditions, with little electricity, beside train tracks, getting discriminated and targeted by the state (police force), the rich got richer, the poor remained poor and in some cases got poorer. It's a battle between politicians, the workers should not get involved, they should fight for their own freedom, and their own power, and next time I'm in Thailand I'll make sure I echo that sentiment.

[Dimentio]

What's your point? Are you a bourgeois revolutionary? If not, then why would you advocate something which is "much better" but not what we want? In addition, when you say "much better off", do you mean in terms of material conditions?

Are the people really much better off? Were they still not exploited and oppressed? Just because someone might give some concessions to the exploited and poor does not make them saints, at the same time Thaksin was responsible for taking even more money for his own gains from the people! When Thaksin was still in power, there were still many many people living in cramped conditions, with little electricity, beside train tracks, getting discriminated and targeted by the state (police force), the rich got richer, the poor remained poor and in some cases got poorer. It's a battle between politicians, the workers should not get involved, they should fight for their own freedom, and their own power, and next time I'm in Thailand I'll make sure I echo that sentiment.

I prefer a corrupt family dynasty who give the poors education and somewhat better conditions before I prefer a liberal-capitalist cosmopolitan establishment.

And I hold no illusions about Thaksin. He got blood on his hands.

What Thaksin's government was about to accomplish, when he got ousted, was to turn Thailand from a raw material-exporting country to a country able to live on domestic production and consumption.

That would weaken the traditional wealthy elite which is based on Thailand's dependence on the West and Japan. I therefore think that in this case, the Thaksin supporters are on the side of history, given the material and social conditions emerging in Thailand.

[Patchd]

I prefer a corrupt family dynasty who give the poors education and somewhat better conditions before I prefer a liberal-capitalist cosmopolitan establishment.

Likewise, I just ask others not to support them in whatever form.


That would weaken the traditional wealthy elite which is based on Thailand's dependence on the West and Japan. I therefore think that in this case, the Thaksin supporters are on the side of history, given the material and social conditions emerging in Thailand.

I agree, but remember that Thaksin himself has more interests in foreign ventures than some of his opponents. One of the main reasons why he got ousted was because of his interests in an Indonesian, or Singaporean (I can't remember now) industry, as well as in Bangkok Airways which has been bust for a while now, with Thaksin having a decent bail out from it.

[Dimentio]

Likewise, I just ask others not to support them in whatever form.



I agree, but remember that Thaksin himself has more interests in foreign ventures than some of his opponents. One of the main reasons why he got ousted was because of his interests in an Indonesian, or Singaporean (I can't remember now) industry, as well as in Bangkok Airways which has been bust for a while now, with Thaksin having a decent bail out from it.

Thaksin is somewhat of a combination of Silvio Berlusconi and Huey Long, I am in agreement. If Thailand had any kind of "normal" or centrist political establishment, I would probably condemn him. But given the context, I understand the sentiment of those who love him.

[Hoxhaist]

... and neither is the military junta, or the Royal Family. No support to either one of them!
I agree we must find a fourth option!!

[Dimentio]

I agree we must find a fourth option!!

The problem is that the forth option is a group of old men who are selling Che Guevara-t-shirts to foreigners.

[Hoxhaist]

The problem is that the forth option is a group of old men who are selling Che Guevara-t-shirts to foreigners.
that seems to be the problem around the world; people think that the only options are what already exist and they have been stripped of the courage to dream of a better life and better opportunities and I dont think even this forum can reach out and reinspire them

[Dimentio]

that seems to be the problem around the world; people think that the only options are what already exist and they have been stripped of the courage to dream of a better life and better opportunities and I dont think even this forum can reach out and reinspire them

I think that if the Thai maoists, anarchists or whateverists start to work now, they will have a viable option around year 2019 or something.