Progressive Dementia

Recent comment by Hobby reminded me of the arguments usually presented to justify the alliance of progressive Thai thinkers and pro-Thaksin movement. Hobby wasn’t the one who invented it and I’ll quote him just because it’s the most recent occurrence: “they see him as just about the only chance to topple the old guard”. Nothing personal.

Feel free to correct me if my interpretation is wrong, but the more I think about this, the less sense it makes.

So, it goes like this:

The old guard is detrimental to the development of Thai democracy so progressives want Thaksin’s help in toppling it. Then, after Thaskin have established democracy here, they’d use it to remove him, via democratic means. Is that the plan?

When I was in third grade me and my mates had a plan to start a band. We didn’t have any money so we decided to play the lottery to finance it. That had better chance of success than the hope that Thaksin would establish working democracy and obey by its rules.

Tanks, judges, and elites can’t curb that man’s aspiration to power, what chance does “democracy” under his direct control have?

Where will they find democratic majority to vote him out? Who is going to support them? Sellout elitist Democrats? PAD fascists? Thaksin’s own fans? Thailand doesn’t have an unlimited supply of voters, you know.

Also there’s something fishy with their idea to first use poor to bring Thaksin back and them use them again to oust him. Using people to achieve your own ends is neither progressive nor democratic.

I’d say it again – nonsense like this makes them unacceptable to the mainstream society and so they are reduced to hanging around Thaksin’s karaoke parties, hoping someone would also listen to their songs. It makes sense in one way, though – those parties have politically fresh electorate, clean slates ready to be molded into whatever you want. They are also quite gullible.

Another questions to these revolutionaries – you don’t have any leaders, how can you hope to pull this off without leadership? Current red leadership is too tainted to be acceptable outside red circles. Sometimes Chaturon gets mentioned as a possible leader. Hmm. Chaturon has spotless and untainted record of serving first Chavalit and then Thaksin through all the abuses those two dished out to the democracy, what are the chances he’d lead the electorate against his masters he never ever disagreed with?

Nah, that’s just progressive dementia.

If anyone has a better explanation, I’d love to hear it.

Advertisements