On 24 May 2009, I attended the first of two days of the “People’s Alliance for Democracy Assembly” at Rangsit University. Its main purpose was to assess the political situation and prepare a decision about whether to turn the social movement, at least partially, into a political party or not.
With my registration, I received a booklet that summarized the People’s Alliance for Democracy’s (PAD) “new politics” and discussed questions concerning the establishment of a political party. Participants also received a four-page questionnaire with 22 questions. The result would be used to gauge the PAD supporters’ view on whether a party should be established. For example, respondents were asked:
- What profession could you most appropriately represent? (This might reflect PAD’s proposal to have members of occupational categories elect a certain number of MPs proposed by occupational associations.)
- Do present politics respond to the aspirations of the heroes who have sacrificed their lives and blood to change politics for the better?
- Do you think that present politics can lead to new politics?
- If you think that the present political parties cannot lead to new politics, do you think that the PAD should proceed with its intention or not?
- Which group do you think can truly create new politics? (Options: PAD; others-specify.)
- By which means do you think can the PAD successfully create new politics? (Options: continued protests, setting-up a political party, others-specify.)
- Do you know that protests are a constitutional right, and that politicians try to pass a law about protests to restrict peaceful assembly, regarding both their duration and their locations?
When I arrived Sondhi Limthongkul was on stage. Somkiat Phongpaiboon, Phiphob Thongchai, and Chamlong Srimuang followed him with more or less inspirational addresses. Their content was rather simple — the current crop of politicians was mostly evil and corrupt. Therefore, new politics was needed to enable good people to administer the country, and prevent bad ones from having power (this is a cliché derived from a piece of royal advice). Since the current political parties would not do anything to change Thai politics for the better, the PAD had to get into the parliamentary ring.
There was not anything much of a debate in the formal part of the assembly. Rather, after the speeches of the core leaders, other participants would merely deliver their separate statements. Yet, there were certainly many informal talks about politics (and other issues) among the assembly members.
For a while, I talked with the chairperson of the PAD from one province in central Thailand. Being curious what a farang was doing at the meeting, he had approached me (I saw only one more farang at the event; he was in the yellow camp). He was quite confident that a PAD party could win constituency MPs. For example, the two Democrat party MPs in his province, he claimed, had been elected with the help of the PAD. His view on the UDD (the “red shirts”) was simple: There were two groups within the UDD, namely those who were bought by Thaksin, and those who lacked the correct information. From this perspective, information seems to have an essential quality, and it allows for only one possible opinion. Democratic pluralism, obviously, is difficult under such circumstances.
Since the chairman was a little agitated, I could not resist the temptation to suggest that the 193 days of protests had had little practical political effect. Visibly surprised by this suggestion he attributed the disqualification of Samak Sundaravej from the position of prime minister by the Constitutional Court to the PAD’s pressure “from below.”
While I was approaching the queue for lunch, a man asked me to move ahead of him. He was also curious about what I was doing at the meeting. Thus, I introduced me as a researcher, who was collecting data on the PAD and the UDD by using a social movement approach. Treating the PAD as a social movement immediately convinced him. However, using the same approach for the “red shirts” seemed strange to him. How could they be a social movement in the same category as the PAD (after all, the usual cliché is that the reds are merely thugs and ignorant villagers hired by Thaksin to save his skin)? We then compromised by saying that the PAD and the UDD had both similarities and differences.
Images (click on the images for a larger version)
Title page of Sondhi’s newspaper ASTV Phuchatkan of 25 May 2009, saying that the PAD assembly had given the green light to establish a political party.
This cartoon appeared in the same edition. It shows the five core PAD leaders in front of the entrance to the dark cave of “politics of the parliamentary system,” with all sorts of dark creatures-the “evil politicians” — awaiting the pure newcomers. Sondhi holds the famous “candle of righteousness” to lead their way. The text in the right-hand corner below says, “A small candle in the darkest of caves.” Beneath the cartoon is a column by Chai-anan Samudavanija, one of PAD’s ideologues (who had been skeptical of the party idea), headlined, “The PAD party.”
Sondhi Limthongkul during his speech, reading from the booklet mentioned above. To his left are the other four core leaders of the PAD.
Somkiat Phongpaiboon – still a party-list MP of the Democrat Party.
Phiphob Thongchai
Chamlong Srimuang
Prasong Sunsiri, the hard-line chairperson of the coup-installed Constitution Drafting Committee, talking with Sondhi. Prasong already had attended one of the very first events of Sondhi’s pre-PAD protests at Lumpini Park. Note his gesture of affection towards Sondhi (left hand on right knee). Prasong also gave a speech that was met with big applause by the audience. To their right is Praphan Khunmee, still an advisor to Democrat Minister of Science Kanlaya Sophonpanich. He has written a book titled, “I want my life to be the leg of the king and the slave of the people.” In the upper left-hand corner of the title page of his book is a big hand clapper — a key symbol of the PAD. To Praphan’s right is Phatcharakriengchai Singhanat, two-time constituency MP candidate for the Democrat Party in Chachoengsao province.
The meeting of Sondhi with Prasong prompted photographers to rush to the scene.
Part of the audience
The right sign says “phak isan” (Northeastern region), the left one welcomes “our political party.”
“Who harms the country? Who uses violence? Who assassinates Sondhi?”
“The future of the nation depends on every one of us.”
The boxes for the return of the questionnaires.
Waiting in line for lunch. The text says, “Fighting 193 days for new politics that is transparent — for Nation, Religion, Monarchy.”
Having lunch
Members of Santi Asoke served khanom chin and kaeng khiew wan with a smile. Some people who passed me while I was sitting in the grass under a tree eating from my bowl turned towards me, smiled and asked “phet mai,” on which I responded with “phet nit noi” (in fact, the meal was quite nice).
On 25 May, tens of thousands of PAD supporters assembled in the sports stadium of Thammasat University’s Rangsit campus (I did not attend this event, but other New Mandala coverage is available here). On the following day, the front page of ASTV Phuchatkan was appropriately exuberant screaming, “Overwhelming decision to establish a party!” On the bottom (left-hand side), we read, “25-5-52 a historic day,” while the text on the right-hand side reads, “The PAD raises the curtain of new politics.”
That the PAD sets up its own political party is a very interesting political experiment. Hopefully, the PAD party will have sufficient time for preparations before the next general election will take place.
Postscript
In a funny coincidence, political forces in the United Kingdom have also called for “new politics.” Combining demands of the PAD and the UDD, conservative opposition leader David Cameron said, “The central objective of the new politics we need should be a massive, sweeping, radical redistribution of power: from the state to the citizens; from the government to parliament … from judges to the people; from bureaucracy to democracy” (Bangkok Post, 27 May 2009). Two important issues concern replacing the first-past-the-post election system with a proportional system (this has also been floated in Thailand, though with little resonance), and the introduction of a fixed term for parliament (at present, the prime minister can call elections anytime within a five-year period).
Michael H. Nelson is a visiting scholar at the Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. Email: mhnelson_bkk@yahoo.de.
25 responses so far ↓
1 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // May 28, 2009 at 10:25 am
On 25 May, tens of thousands of PAD supporters assembled in the sports stadium of Thammasat University’s Rangsit campus
I enjoy reading this interesting report by Prof.Nelson a lot. But I’m afraid, regarding the PAD’s 2nd day rally at TU Ransit campus, the number of attendants wasn’t as that many as he suggests. The whole stadium has a full capacity of only 20,000, and it was visibly far from full. That the number was smaller than PAD sympathizers had hoped, was in fact one topic discussed among them on some webboards. They admitted that much themselves, but tried to explain in a numbers of way, for in stance, the later downpouring of rain, etc. This might partially be true. I think, however, that the lack of clear policies and direction, in contrast to the days of “Thaksin (or, Thaksin’s Nominees) Get Out!” campaign, must surely have contributed to the rather lame ’show of force’, especially toward the end of the rally (around 22 pm. – crowd in early afternoon was noticably much bigger).
2 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // May 28, 2009 at 10:49 am
At the moment, on the previously, strongly pro-PAD webboard called “Seri Thai on the Web”, fiece in-fighting has broken out (over rather trivial matters, like money, etc.). I think this’s just one example of waning integration among PAD supporters.
The Red Shirt movement could suffer the same disintegration too if Abhisit goverment could hold on to power a little while longer, say one or two years from now. But at the moment they still have stronger ‘motive’ to unite. (But even they too already show some sign of internal conflicts over what to do next. One issue currently emergin is whether to boycott the next general elections, belived to be coming soon.)
I don’t think, in the Thai context, founding a party to fight for some vague ‘New Politics’ is a very strong motive to hold a big political movement together.
3 nganadeeleg // May 28, 2009 at 2:15 pm
The Red Shirt movement could suffer the same disintegration too if Abhisit goverment could hold on to power a little while longer, say one or two years from now.
Could the apparent wane in PAD ‘enthusiasm’ be partly attributed to the successes they have already achieved (Thaksin out, Democrats in)?
As for the ‘reds’, there is also the possibility that the longer the Abhisit government stays in place, the longer the reds will be able to hold together
(we have seen with the PAD how hatred of a common enemy is a strong unifying force)
4 Nobody // May 28, 2009 at 3:01 pm
As has been pointe dout it is very easy to get a group of diverse minded people to unite against something whether it be Thaksin or Abhisit or Prem. However, when then trying to find common values to unite around the diversity of the group becomes a problem resulting either in disintegration or a vague and fuzzy common goal meaning all things to all men and which will probably only delay the inevitable.
The PAD face the problem that many of their supporters and especailly sympathisers just wanted Abhisit as PM. They now have that. The PAD would seem to need the Democrats to be very badly tarnished or to fall apart for them to succeed. As the Democrats have always managed to retain a fairly large loyal base that seem sunlikely and the PAD will probably only manage to convince a few lesser Dems to swop party and risk running against a party that seems to get its votes on party loyalty rather than individual following. The other route to success would be fo rthe PAD to hire in a few influential heavyweights who can deliver a variety of constituencies. Even though none of us are sure of the meaning of new politics, we can probably assume the traditonal hiring of sitting MPs and influential people is not in line with the new ethos, so it looks like it will be difficult for the PAD party.
As an aside. It is funny how whenever Thaksin has an impending court decision the red/PTP action or manouvers seem to heat up. Well Sondhi et al are seeing the investigations into PAD at GH and airport get slightly more serious, the PAD has seemingly been abandonded by a few “backers” and of course there was the curious affair of the assassination attempt. Setting up a politcal party increases leverage somewhat especially when the EC could be forced to rule on eligibility to be leader, and the party itself would seem to be a threat to the current status quo at the next election through vote splitting.
5 Somsak Jeamteerasakul // May 28, 2009 at 5:24 pm
nganadeeleg :
As for the ‘reds’, there is also the possibility that the longer the Abhisit government stays in place, the longer the reds will be able to hold together (we have seen with the PAD how hatred of a common enemy is a strong unifying force)
Well, if you continue to “not winning” for a long time (and one or two years from now would be ‘longer’ for the Red Shirts, as they already lost big since Sep 2006), the difficulty of hoding on would be greater despite the hatred for the Abhisit government.
If we look at the lesson of the PAD, toward the end of August last year prior to the seizing of Gov House, their morale was clearly waning. There’s even complain among PAD supporters that “Why Someone who we are fighting for has not come out to help us yet?” (yes, they menat HMK!). The complain was widesrpead enough among them, some wrote on Manager webboard! In fact one could say that the tactic of seizing the Gov House was in large part a response to this waing morale. But just two weeks later, the Court dismissed Samak (together with the military refusal to remove them as ordered by Samak), and the PAD sprang back to life again.
As you know, I have declared my political support of the Red Shirt movement. I still have great sympathy for them, but I view their prospect less rosy than most of them do. For one thing, many of them believe that Abhisit gov is failing and being torn by in-fighting (Dems v Newin party) and will be forced to call general elections soon. I on the other hand think Abhisit will try to stay on a few years and has good chance of doing so, despite internal fighting among his coalition and the economic difficulty. I have in mind Prem gov in the 1980s which also faced similar situation (in fact, worse as the military was not always on their side), but manage to stay on for quite a few years. Abhisit needs not hope to stay as long as Prem, but I do think he can reasonably expect to hold on till the next scheduled general elections in over two years time. Should that happen, the Red Shirts as a political movement will be greatly tested.
6 Michael H. Nelson // May 28, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Ajarn Somsak:
Thanks for your comment. Concerning the number of people who attended the second day, I have consulted with Nick Nostitz, who was there. He confirmed your information about the capacity of the stadium and that many seats were unoccupied. However, he also pointed out that there were many people on the football field and outside the stadium. Altogether, he estimates that 30,000 people or somewhat fewer attended the meeting
Estimates for the first day ranged from 2,000 to 5,000 participants.
Amongst the interesting questions following the establishment of a PAD party is what will happen with ASTV. Even at Rangsit University, PAD was proud about this most important means of communication, and they had satellite dishes and membership forms on display. However, as newspaper commentators already have pointed out, a political party must follow the party law and the election law and their restrictions re the use of electronic mass media. Thus the question of what the PAD will do with ASTV, since they cannot possibly give it up without cutting ties with many up-country supporters of both the movement and the party.
7 Les Abbey // May 28, 2009 at 7:24 pm
I find it disappointing that the PAD has gone the route of forming a political party to fight the next election. This is for two reasons. First, although Thailand surely does need a party that would be different from the corrupt parties that now exist, the PAD isn’t the one needed. Second that the PAD has become the most successful civilian extra-parliamentary opposition that Thailand has have ever seen.
In my view the party Thailand needs is a genuine social democrat/socialist party either on the European model or similar to the Congress Party in India. Although these parties are often discredited they do tend to push countries in a more progressive direction and they often hold a fairly wide range of views so they act as a shelter for those with an even further left agenda.
What the PAD offers is a rather mixed up set of ideals and the result will probably be splits similar to the demise of the Palang Dharma.
The success of the PAD as an extra-parliamentary opposition is easily seen in the removal of two prime ministers post-coup and being the real opposition to Thaskin before that. If it stayed that way it would be a threat to any overly corrupt government. I suspect it causes the Democrats to look over their shoulders.
8 nganadeeleg // May 28, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Thanks for the analysis, Ajarn Somsak.
IMO, for Abhisit to hang on that long he will need to be a very skilful politician, or blessed from above (or both)
I know Thailand is not a normal democracy and electoral cycles do not apply to the same extent as other democracies, but could now actually be not a bad time to be in opposition?
(to let the government take the flak for the economy, and eventually disintegrate, or fall to the inevitable corruption scandal?)
I suppose a lot depends on when the economic recovery is expected, what happens regarding the banned politicians, and also the health of certain individuals.
FWIW, I too have great sympathy for the aspirations of the ordinary rank & file reds.
9 antipadshist // May 29, 2009 at 5:45 pm
@Les Abey
well, yes, you might be right that it can “easily be seen”. but that’s just a “tip of the iceberg” and it would be too naive to consider this “easily seen” part as an actual reason of the removal you mention !
however what is not as easily seen – or rather everyone pretends not seeing it? (as that proverbial elephant in the room) – is the REAL reasons why Samak and Somchai (not to mention Thaksin) were ousted and their parties dissolved : the HUGE, uncomparable backing up of PAD by army, judiciary, beurocracy, elite, huge corporations and even NGOs. only funds alone necessary to maintaing PAD’s 193 days of “siege”, with state-of-art 24/7 LIVE mutli-channels broadcast which were envy of even police and other Thai MSM, also professional logistics supply which even US army in Iraq and Afghan would envy (thanks to Chamlong’s organazational skills and unlimited funds given by “sponsors”).
not to mention the other support – up to the highest level (as some unprecedented public appearances revealed)
so, Abey – be honest and don’t try to pull here some such cheap reasoning as “sucess … as an extra-parliamentary opposition” ! because most of people here know very well that PAD was mostly (if not only) and merely a “cover” (or figurhead) for the GIANT COMBINED reactionary force which actually started all this since 2006 (0r even 2005?) – all those players.
Prasong, Surayudh, Dhanin (from CP), Pa P. to mention only a few here …
(aka “Amart” as it is called shortly – BTW reportedly a term coined by …. Pridi back in 70s or even 60s ?)
and you just say – “sucess … as an extra-parliamentary opposition” ? give me a break !
PAD was, is and WILL be NOTHING , zero, nada – without those guys.
Prasong was on PAD stage since 2006. – you wondered why?
here in M. Nelson’s post there are photos of him carassing tenderly Sondhi …
10 Les Abbey // May 29, 2009 at 8:46 pm
@ antipadshit
Fortunately I don’t have to go through the mental gymnastics that you do, although the “(0r even 2005?)” might make it easier for you… but then what were the Marxists doing supporting the PAD before the coup?
So was the PAD extra-parliamentary or not? Was it in opposition to those shining lights of democracy Thaksin, Samart and Somchai or not? Was it successful or not? What’s your argument?
Oh, I see it’s because they were backed by all those guys and Chamlong has great organizational skills. (He certainly was the most honest and efficient Governor that Bangkok has had.) But does that change any of the above?
As I said what they have achieved for better or worse, depending on where you stand over Thaksin, doesn’t make them in my opinion suitable as parliamentary political party. But I could say the same about the anti-war movement in the US in the sixties. Would it have made a good political party? I suspect not.
I guess what I’m trying to tell you is whether you like it or not, the PAD has done things that no other opposition movement has done. You can say it had support from the army, industrialists or the palace but then again you can say that the red-shirts had support from crooked politicians, police, gangsters and Thaksin’s wealth and friends but didn’t manage to achieve much at all.
11 antipadshist // Jun 3, 2009 at 9:00 am
@les abey #10
and what I am trying to tell you is – that it was NOT PAD who as achieved something, but rather all those who were behind them. you though continue being stubborn and say that it is PAD who has achieved something.
PAD is NOTHING, I repeat.
and it has already realized that itself quite well – even before attempt on Sondhi’s life, and especially after they have voiced it themselves, that they were USED by those whoever used them, and then discarded.
yet you continue trying to push on the idea that PAD is something …
it is totally FAKE as a political movement, only may be as some sort of millenarian fundementalist sect – at MOST. they don’t even have any substantial political agenda even now, when they already decided to become a political party, rather than some anarchist (or more precisely fascist) mob as they are. they were pulled together by a giant propaganda machine (ASTV) which now is almost bankrupt (on their website Chamlong himself has placed add asking people to make donations to pay salary to staff) and therefore very unlikely to be as sucessful in mass-brainwashing as last year, when they had almost UNLIMITED funds.
so, now they are able to continue existing ONLY because there are still some who consider them useful.
you comparing PAD and UDD is totally unappropriate. because one is a reactioany anti-democratic (aka “New politics”) force comprised by “muddle-class” and elitist and another is a grass-root movement – using your own words “whether you like it or not” – which naturally has NO ANY such support of any of those powerful backers.
you say “you can say that the red-shirts had support from crooked politicians, police, gangsters and Thaksin’s wealth and friends but didn’t manage to achieve much at all”
well, first of all – I would NOT say that, it is you who “can say” that.
second – please name those who support “red-shirts” ?
“Thaksin’s wealth” ? any realiable sources of reference?
so, “red-shirts”/ UDD do NOT have any such GIANT backing and financial support as PAD DID have (lat year – not any longer, as now).
also UDD are supressed and practically and literally enslaved people in they own country by those very their country-men who comprise and support PAD.
therefore it is not at all surprising that as you say they “didn’t manage to achieve much at all” !!!
of course ! and they will not achieve anything for many more years. because it will take GENERATIONS to change their submissive and obedient mindset. although the fact they they now at least DARE to raise their voices – it is already a huge achievement !
but of course I bet you do not realise this achievement at all, or concsiously overlook it.
I suggest you read for example books by Pira Sudham (as “Moonson country” and “Forces of karma”) to at least get SOME idea of the peasants and slaves mentality, even perhaps now still. THEN perhaps, may be, you will get some realization of the UDD’s ACHIEVEMENT of much greater scale than PAD could ever accomplish: the awakening of the grassroot people and CHANGE in their “maimed minds” as P. Sudham terms it.
and this change is that very “genie” which has came out of the bottle and not going back.
taking into consideration the “culture” (aka brutal propaganda and brainwashing of “reconciliation, unity, non-violence”) which tells the peasants and common people to bow down and accept their fate, as well as the ruthless power of thail military and all those blood-suckers (middlemen, corporations, money lenders, all sorts of mafia etc) – it will take a very long time before the real change will happen (aka social welfare state, as at very least in UK) !
but the fact is : this change is INEVITABLE, irreversible and unstoppable now.
that is why we can see so much depserate efforts by army (ISOC) and Amart to control all the media more than ever, as well as BRUTAL supression of protesters by “Democrat” government ! because all those blood-suckers DO KNOW (unlike you) this achivement of UDD : the CHANGE in the mentality of slaves ! and what the consiquence for “masters” this change will bring.
so, you can go on believing that PAD has achieve something.
hopefully there will emerge some INTELLIGENT and progressive people among the middle-class, elite and perhaps even military (well, Chamlong after all, even being a former General himself, has made SOME help back in 91, while he was still pro-democratic – although now I wonder – was he ever at all ?) .
let’s hope it will be so, and Thailand will be able to skip the painful (or more exactly – bloody) development stage as elsewhere, most recently in Cambodia under Pol Pot, when peasants has mass-slaughtered all the blood-suckers.
I really do help Thailand can learn from the history lessons provided by examples of pther countries.
however the chance is very slim – seeign the very strong reactionary clashback time and again, whenever “voiceless” dare to attempt to raise their voice.
12 Les Abbey // Jun 4, 2009 at 1:26 pm
@antipadshit #11
Well I guess I had better accept that you are right as you can shout the loudest, so PAD is nothing, never achieving anything, and the red-shirts have nothing to do with Thaksin and none of his money was ever involved.
Yes Monsoon Country was a fine book and Pira deserves congratulations on it. I probably know more about life in Isaan than you suspect. What you should remember is Bangkok’s population is made up of probably 50% people from the northeast doing a variety of jobs which “muddle classes” doesn’t really cover.
I would say this though, if people want a progressive party representing Thailand’s peasants they should build one, not piggy-back on a right wing movement financed by one of the most corrupt politicians the country has produced. Go up into the northeast towns and fight for your policies. It’s been done before in the 70s. Don’t hide behind the skirts of the Shinawatra family.
It’s a bit pointless keeping this argument going because we will end arguing about white being black or red shirt being blue shirt so have another shot, but I give up.
13 antipadshist // Jun 5, 2009 at 7:37 am
@Les Abbey
“Don’t hide behind the skirts of the Shinawatra family”
who is hiding, huh ? what ai pile of nonsense. don’t you just love it how some people would divert ANY discussion or subject to Thaksin ! LOL
you trying to sound like slighted (or “noi jai”) – sort of I’ve out-shouted you. however I didn’t shout – only emphasized some words. (shouting in forums or on-line chats is considered when someone types everything – all words – in capital characters)
yet you still do not provide the references for your claims – what I’ve requested you.
you switch the subject with your irony :
“red-shirts have nothing to do with Thaksin … ”
these are your own words. I didn’t say that – but only asked you to provide references, which you ignored.
also this phrase by itself is sort of “gotcha” trick (mostly favored by Fox news) – trying to trick the opponent into “false dilemma” or be on defensive and finally diverted into the pre-designed rut: like here you’re trying to trick me into saying something like “it has to do … ” – which is NOT the point actually. sure, red-shirt movement involves Thaksin – however it is highly fallacious to continue claiming that it is ALL and ONLY about Thaksin – which you trying to prove without … proofs.
“so PAD is nothing, never achieving anything … ”
that’s right – try to prove me wrong, why don’t you.
so far you have not made any efforts to eve indicate what do you mean by “achieve”. alright, let’s see your original statement:
“The success of the PAD as an extra-parliamentary opposition is easily seen in the removal of two prime ministers post-coup and being the real opposition to Thaskin before that.”
I guess here it can be used this word “sucess” as what you mean by “achievement” – am I right?
alright, correct me if I’m wrong :
1) Samak was removed by decision of Court – because of the silly and funny case of coocking show.
2) Somchai was removed again by decision of court due to some alleged electoral fraud and cooked up by junta law.
as I can see – both of them were removed NOT by PAD – but by a “judiciary coups”.
same with Thaksin – he was removed by another sourt of coup – military coup.
so, again – WHAT is PAD’s achievement in that?
to me it is pretty clear that PAD did NOT “remove” either of these 3 fellas from their positions of PM. it was done rather by REAL powers – military and judiciary, not by some bunch of fascistic mob.
as for being “real opposition” (during 2006) – even this I can’t accept either 100%. I would say they were “part of” opposition. the real opposition were some other people – first of all Prem, then Prasong Soonsiri, Surayudh (who came to encourage Sondhi and promise him new TV channel once Thaksin is out) , many corporal big guys AND Thai main stream media.
so, PAD was only a “ride the tide” cover for all this HUGE opposition. they were NOT the “real” opposition as you say.
so, no need to :”accept” that I’m right – just be consistent in your own statements, make them clear and provide the sufficient evidences.
so far you could not do any of these.
14 tettyan // Jun 5, 2009 at 9:33 am
antipadshist & Les Abbey:
The PAD is certainly not “nothing,” but I wouldn’t call it a successful, extra-parliamentary popular movement either. What the PAD has done is give the powers that be who work behind the scenes the cover needed to do their dirty work, whether it be the army’s coup or an activist judiciary that apparently only targets parties and politicians with ties to Thaksin. In a sense, the PAD is the tool of certain factions in the elite who are capable of wielding real power, and these elites at the same time are also a tool of the PAD who have their own agenda.
And that agenda isn’t by any means “liberal,” “progressive” or “pro-democratic.” Just take a look at the movement’s leaders. Chamlong might have been on the right side during Black May, and I don’t want to belittle his brave stance back then. But we also must not forget that the guy is an ultra-right-wing fanatical religious cult leader. He resigned from Prem’s cabinet back in the 1980s because the Prem government supported a law that would relax Thailand’s strict ban on abortion for of rape or incest, or if the health of the mother was at risk (even though the Queen spoke out in favor of the new law). He has bullied the Stock Exchange of Thailand into preventing the public listing of Beer Chang’s parent company, even though no laws bar the trading of shares in alcoholic beverage companies, and even though the company is engaged in a perfectly lawful business. His close association with a fringe religious cult (which has split from mainstream Buddhist sangha), and their role as foot-soldiers in his movement, draws religion into politics to an unhealthy degree (though I am a religious person, I am also a firm believer in the separation of church and state).
And what about Sondhi L? The guy is the exemplar of a crony capitalist – probably the most ruthless crony capitalist in Thailand besides Thaksin himself. His reckless overborrowing destroyed his media empire when the 1997 crisis hit. His mountain of debts mysteriously disappeared after Thaksin appointed his old buddy, Viroj, president of Krung Thai Bank during his first term. When Viroj became engulfed in unrelated scandals, Thaksin threw Sondhi’s old mate under the bus. Around the same time, Sondhi’s company lost a concession to operate a subsidiary of Channel 11 because of legal complications that arose when the concession was granted. Coincidentally, Sondhi not long after all this transpired went from being Thaksin’s cheerleader-in-chief to his public enemy number 1.
I’ve never liked Thaksin, and I don’t want to downplay the role the PAD has played in the last few roles. But don’t be under any illusions that it somehow represents a “progressive” or “popular” strain of the Thai polity. To the extent it has any coherent ideological agenda, it is deeply conservative, nationalistic and xenophobic (I once counted myself a PAD supporter briefly in 2006 until I actually listened in on one of their rallies and the disgusting, racist speeches). And it’s leaders are crafty, ruthless, dangerous and not to be trusted.
15 antipadshist // Jun 5, 2009 at 2:15 pm
@tettyan
thanks for interesting details about Chamlong and Sondhi.
I hope someday someone will write in all the details the whole complete saga of both Chamlong and Sondhi – the real reasons why they have beef with Thaksin. coz both of them previously were his supporters. hell ! even Pa P back in 2001 has winked to Courts to drop cases against Thaksin to give him green light.
you say:
well, here is my original statement (comm. #9):
in other words, yes, they are / were something – but ONLY with the huge backing from all those behind-the-curtains players (aka Amart). take out that backing – and PAD is nothing, or almost nothing, reduced to the milenarian cult.
) – funds and support to PAD were almost instantly reduced or stopped, so that even eventually ASTV / Manager has posted add with Chamlong 
and it his quite evident in the 5 monhts of the current Dems gov. : once PAD has served its purpose to install Abhisit’s frankenstein coalition (and oh so coincidentally – some guys like that chap from CP group into minesterial seat
beggingrequesting fellow yellow shirts to give donations “because otherwise there are no more money to pay ASTV stuff”.Sondhi and others also expressed their strong dissapointement that “some people used them” and when they are not needed anymore – even let them be called to court (20 PAD leaders, in March). there is video recorded right there, after reporting to Court, of Sondhi spewing obsenities in front of reporters and damning Anupong and others, as well as calling Abhisit and his gov. as “ninny gov.” and saying “let red-shirts destryo them!”
so, as I said above, even PAD leaders themselves became disillusioned. in fact that’s one of the main reasons mentioned by Sondhi for forming the new party: “we should not depend on others who use us when they need us and then abandon when they need no longer …”
another your statement:
that’s exactly my course of thinking :
practically we are saying same things with slight variations.
yes, PAD played SOME role, but it was rather superficial.
so, I repeat: neither Thaksin nor Samak nor Somchai were “removed by PAD” but ONLY but much more powerful “behind the curtains” players!!! and Chamlong, Sondhi, Suriyasai, Somsak etc are nor even near to be considered as those “main players” – although they certainly love to trumpet that they are “power of people” and charge even Anupong and some others as sort of trembling in the face of PAD’s wrath – what a pathetic ridiculous self-decieving and shameless propaganda ! claiming that it is PAD’s credit – is a self-indulgent wishful thinking by brainwashed PAD followers, or their unscrupulous demagogue leaders.
therefore more and more of them eventually “wake up” to reality, which leads to unprecendented statements even by Sondhi himself like: “actually PAD and red-shirts are not so different… ” who could have even imagined hearing such things from Sondhi, self-proclaimed champion of Thaksin-bashers just few months ago.
hahaha
so, I will never accept such statements as Abey – and I am confident that neither he no anyone else would be able to prove such statements that it was PAD who “removed” anybody from power !
16 hclau // Jun 5, 2009 at 2:31 pm
“The success of the PAD as an extra-parliamentary opposition is easily seen in the removal of two prime ministers post-coup and being the real opposition to Thaskin before that.”
A statement that should rightly belong to “Comedy central”
17 tettyan // Jun 6, 2009 at 12:05 am
antipadhist
practically we are saying same things with slight variations.
yes, PAD played SOME role, but it was rather superficial.
You’re right, we’re not really that far apart on this matter. I think the main difference is that I emphasize that without the PAD, the elites could not do what they’ve been doing, at least not in this day and age. Manipulating events completely behind the scenes was possible in the 1970s and 1980s, but it’s harder to pull off today w/o attracting criticism. They need something that appears to be a popular movement to legitimize their machinations. The PAD need the old elite – but the old elite need the PAD just as much, if not more. It will be interesting to see what happens when the interests of the two sides begin to significantly diverge – some say it already has …
18 Dickie Simpkins // Jun 7, 2009 at 1:18 am
Antipadshit,
While I agree with what you are saying, I would also give PAD a LOT more weight than you have.
Remember 1992, a lot of the PAD guys are the same if not similar. As such, PAD has a ‘history’ of having at least landing a few tough punches (though not a knockout) on the military and the invisible involvement in Thai politics..
The PAD hold the key to ‘knocking out’ these power players, but the problem with PAD (less Sonthi) isn’t so much their ideology –> bottom-up organization, sustainable development, tough screening of government policies, et al –> but it is actually their sense of belief that they are ‘higher’ than the ‘other people’. As such, they side with the thai ‘elite’ but the basic structure of their belief in bottom-up movement puts them directly against the elite.
By the last statement I will refer to what they refer as the ’selling’ of votes of the ‘dumb red’ followers, and also I refer to their ‘moral’ high ground in banning Chang to be listed in the stock market as 2 examples.
I wouldn’t underestimate the PAD. As tettyan above said, the elite need them more than they need the PAD.
19 antipadshist // Jun 7, 2009 at 7:35 pm
@ Dickie
I do not underestimate PAD. I am rather wuite realistically aware of their capabilities and role. but once again – I will never accept their alleged credit in removal of someone or in “change” for better !
they did NOT remove anyone and neither WILL NOT remove the “Old politics” or whatever the corruption. because they are themselves pretty much an integral part of the old system – many of their members are elite, or high-up middle class, as well as middle class.
so, yes – they do have SOME power and influence – however it is NOT a progressive power for real change, but a reactionary force !
therefore, they will not be able and even not willing to change anything. they only talk. in reality though – they want things to remain as they are – that rural majority continue being kept enslaved and provide an easy source of cheap labour, cheap food, cheap everything (and meat for brothels – another huge industry which elite runs and middle urban class enjoys).
that’s why they have joined or aligned with ultra-right, whome they themselves battled back in 1992. now though they support them – back in 2006 they supported coup, although in 1992 they vwere eagerly giving their lives to oust Suchinda.
why is that ?
so, as I said – I do not underestimate PAD. I merely view them in a more realistic way: as a reactionary, not progressive pro-democracy force. and that certainly creates a complications and difficulties for any change to happen in Thailand.
therefore PAD will bear the consiquences sooner or later for this their reactionary role. unless they correct their course and realise that they are doing disservice to country and place themselves at disadvantage (of being between hammer and anvil – doesn’t even metter who is the anvil and who is the hammer, army/ elite or grassroot movemement !) and even into dangerous risky position. because if the development of events takes some truly ugly turn (if peasants and labour get too pissed off and start slaughtering all the reactionaries – as most recently it was in Cambodia under Pol Pot), then PAD and their followers will be exterminated too, along with their masters and patrons.
or otherwise if opposite will happen (like some ugly ultra-right dictatorship ala Nazi Germany or later after WWII in Argentina, Guatemala, Salvador and
Chile in 70s and 80s or may be as what is Burma now?), again PAD will not be spared either, because in fascist dictatorship ANY sort of political and socilal movements will not be tolerated.
@tettyan
well, I can agree with this only to some extgent: in the sense that elite needs SOME sort of “cover”. however I don’t agree that ONLY PAD can be used as such. because for elite – PAD is just another disposable group. and they can compile and use any and many such groups. so, PAD is nothing special or unique in this sense – it just happened at that time that Sondhi started his own fight with Thaksin out of personal reason first of all. so, elite has simply taken opportunity and enriched, expanded, supplied and nourished PAD – which was ALREDY ready available. there was no need for them to create something new – it was CHEAPER so to say.
I know that elite (and to say more broadly – Amart) needs PAD and PAD needs elite. that’s the whole point.
however the difference is : this dependence is NOT mutually proportional. because elite can easily creat any number of other groups and movements (in other colors of T-shirts so to say
). and in last few months we’ve seen the examples of that : Blue shirts emerged in Pattaya, then later “white shirts” started their own so called “unity movement”.
so, elite / Amart doesn’t need PAD as much as PAD needs Amart !
and that’s precisely what PAD has realised and expressed already by saying many times “when they don’t need us anymore … ”
Amart can EASILY get rid of PAD, because for them it is disposable and expandable ! Sondhi’s attempted assasination was a clear message about it – because he started to talk too much and foul-mouthing his masters / patrons – and again, he did so because of … too good understanding that he and PAD are expandable !
if you might remember – Nation has mentioned after his attempted assassination that “Sondhi knew very well about it, and was warned – but chose to ignore it”.
there are also several videos where he speaks things like “while we were fighting for you – you were playing gold. and now you want to get rid of me? I’m not afraid – I wasn’t afraid even of Thaksin, and you think I will be afraid of you? if only even 1 single drop of my blood falls to the ground – you will see ! …”
so, why would he say that unless he knew very well that he and PAD ARE disposable ?
another example: Chamlong and Sondhi back in April , BEFORE the UDD started their rallies on Wed Arp 8th has issued a statement to all their PAD followers to “stay away from Bangkok for at least a week or two”. they said that time and later (also there are videos) that they already knew about a plan (mostly by army ) to create a situation where yellow will clash with reds on the streets so that take this opportunity to crash and destroy both of them. therefore PAD has strongly warned their followers NOT to get involved and in their statement published on MCOT ENgl. on Apr 12th (after cancelling ASEAN in Pattaya) news I remember Chamlong or Sondhi saying that they will NOT go to the streets and endanger their own members, as well as implicate them ! so, they already knew what is going to happen (the bloody crackdown).
so, my main point is : PAD already knew and continue knowing that Amart doesn’t need them so much, if at all anymore !
that’s why they have started to change the tune into “formal politics” (aka official party – which till even few month back was out of question !), their attitude towards “Reds” (as Sondhi saying : “we are almost same”) and the color of their T-shirts into “green-yellow”. I guess to change yellow color into some entirely different (without any traces or hues of yellow; although “orange” color is rumored as possibility of PAD uniting with UDD – I think it is out of question, at least by now) would be too abrupt and too blatant reverse of their course.
so, I consider Dickie’s point even more unrealistic than Tetyan’s :
I don’t think so. and there are mamy too clear evidences of that – as I said, “Blue T-shirts”, “white T-shirts”, as well as the many other ANY colors in stock ! LOL
in fact, in Thailand there are only 2 colors which matter: khaki (the military) and gray ( as in the famous saying “gray cardinals” – the elite, judiciary and whoever else power brokers, rich chaps) – only these 2 colors have REAL and strong power and influence. other “rainbow” colors are disposable. even “white” or “blue” T-shirts too.
20 nganadeeleg // Jun 7, 2009 at 10:40 pm
AntiPADshist: “they said that time and later (also there are videos) that they already knew about a plan (mostly by army ) to create a situation where yellow will clash with reds on the streets so that take this opportunity to crash and destroy both of them”
Who warned them?
Are they very smart or do they still have friends on the inside of the group that was apparently trying to destroy them?
Finally, if the PAD are so unimportant, perhaps it might be a time for a name change???:)
btw, I think you write some good stuff, but, by your own admission above, you are possibly spending too much time focussing on the wrong enemy.
21 antipadshist // Jun 8, 2009 at 2:33 pm
@Nga
well, I am not spending so much time on them lately as I used to. just a litle bit.
as for name change …. ha, I know – you’re trying to catch me.
name still has to remain as a reminder and as an encouragement to create awareness – coz their ideological propaganda is too fallaciously poisonous and rutheless and therefore still needs to be exposed. (if it wasn’t – there won’t be the whole this discussion here and some people claiming that PAD has got some credits for something which is too obviously and evidently belongs to others).
besides, they are perhaps the main if not the only comparatively open target to aim at – apart from Abhisit and Dems may be. “open” in the sense that they are “in the open” (not that they are “open minded” or liberal
), on the surface, while others (army, judiciary, elite, etc.) are more like concealed and therefore it is more difficult to critisize them, or often impossible (for the lack of exposure or some taboos).
naturally being on the surface or acting as the cover – they get all the fire, being on the surface or acting as the cover, which is precisely the whole design of their puppeteers, I guess.
so, they can’t complain about it. hahaha
but anyway, thanks for reminding me – I was thinking the same more or less in past few days (like “wasting my time”).
regarding “Who warned them” – well, that I guess you should ask Nation newspaper (or MCOT ?), who as usually do not bother much to provide sources for reference. I merely tried to quote by memory what I’ve read in that article.
22 Dickie Simpkins // Jun 8, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Antipadshit said, “in fact, in Thailand there are only 2 colors which matter: khaki (the military) and gray ( as in the famous saying “gray cardinals” – the elite, judiciary and whoever else power brokers, rich chaps) – only these 2 colors have REAL and strong power and influence. ”
Let me again remind you that between 1992 to 2006, the 2 colors you refer to lost a lot of their ‘power’, only to be regained once key ‘liberalists’ (PAD leaders) aligned themselves with a self-serving media magnate (Sonthi) in an attempt to oust Thaksin. That these “liberalists” sided with the real elite allowed the military out of the barracks to enact in a power grab resulting in the see-saw of power games we have seen till today.
Even today, with almost explicit “invisible” backing and a ’successful’ putsch against Thaksin’s Red Shirts, the current government is hanging on only by a thread.
Anyone can see that by entering politics with weird or almost nonsensical statements like “We only wish to make politics clean, etc.” show that the PAD leadership is at odds and a little bit dazed right now.
Like a torn person, the PAD can no longer decide who is their worst enemy, the ‘untouchable’ caste who has aligned themselves with the Devil Thaksin, or the ‘elite’ class who used them.
I argue is crazy to discard the PAD. The PAD obviously don’t want to leave yet; but when they do (and they will soon if things remain stagnant or if a very particular charismatic person passes from the scene), and the PAD align themselves with certain aspects of the Red Shirt (less Jakraphob, Truth Today, and Thaksin), you will the formation of a very real and extremely powerful force that will have the khaki shirts and the grey shirts quaking in their boots and wetting themselves.
I do not succumb to your ridiculously slippery slope argument stating that the PAD are stuck in a lose-lose that Thailand will either fall to a popular uprising from the Northeast or turn into a facist state. No one will financially support the first, and the image-concious elite will have too much trouble in the Western world justifying the second. For all their complaints about the western world, the elite love travelling and showing off their ‘virtues’ to the foreigners who ‘don’t understand’ Thailand. Shades of facism will be too uncomfortable and there are a lot of Royal-Liberalists who will not give their “independent” backing of this kind of state of affairs.
There is one difference I would like to make though. The Red Shirts can live without the PAD, and perhaps even achieve their long-term goals without the PAD. Though, a joining of PAD and Red alliance would be game-changing.
There are no permanent enemies in Thai politics, so it will be interesting how things go.
Again, I agree with you that the PAD were only successful because of the backing from behind, without which the PAD would probably have been just another footnote in history. But the PAD also provide the only fathomable legitimacy (as of now) for the invisible people to keep in control. Blue and white shirts have not caught on and probably won’t either. There is no obvious bottom-up part in that organization that the PAD achieved.
So again I conclude, for the elite to remain powerful, they do need the PAD more than the PAD need them.
The PAD can always (and are) rebranding themselves as a group who will remain clean and fight all dirty politics, as such, they will try their best to remain ‘clean’. If pushed too far, I am sure that the PAD will go back to the battle of 1992 as their rallying cry.
23 antipadshist // Jun 9, 2009 at 10:15 am
@ Dickie
well, I guess we “agree to disagree” – particulalry regarding who needs whom more. so, I stand by my statements.
)
(I’ll skip “ridiculously slippery slope argument” remark
but I do not “discard the PAD” as you say. if you read my previous comments, as my answer to Ngadaleeng – I still consider PAD as a source of too radical and ruthless poisonous demagogic propaganda, therefore very misleading. so, I neither “discard” nor “underestimate” PAD.
let’s wait and see who is right or wrong.
it is pretty clear that PAD has no real substantial influence, because even now already PAD is quoted (on Nation) saying something like :
‘Power not primary objective’
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/06/08/politics/politics_30104566.php
to me it actually means that they do realise pretty well that they can’t win any substantial number of seats. that’s why they are trying to make such excuses in advance, like “oh, we are not actually eager to get power”. silly ! or even stupid.
24 antipadshist // Jun 14, 2009 at 12:05 pm
here is a fresh update on PAD & ASTV finansial status :
25 Nobody // Jun 15, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Hmm. PAD set up a party that could arguably be seen as having a negative impact on the Dems vote and then find that their advertisining revenue dries up. Business may have liked the PAD marching around saying up yours to Thaksin, but they probably dont want them jackbooting their way into a few parliamentary seats at the Dems expense. Realpolitik.
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.