Re-educating people is actually much easier than educating, especially when it comes to politics.

To properly educate people, one needs teachers that are educated in the first place and know how to transfer the knowledge. It is also necessary to have students that are motivated to learn and think critically.

To re-educate, all you need is a re-education camp, for can be run by anyone wielding a big baton. Even Laos successfully ran such camps in the past — they re-educated critical parts of their population (including the former Lao royal family) with a 100% success rate. China is running them on an ongoing basis.

PAD would have no trouble running them — the thugs are there already, as well as sufficient the contempt for their fellow countrymen.

You are right we need to elaborate on the word ‘education.’ But I didn’t quote the word ‘education,’ I quoted the word “re-educating.”

Yes certainly a debatable words. There is a dangerous tendency to assume that when people use the same words, they perceive a situation in the same way. This is rarely the case.

It is difficult to educate; it is more difficult to re-educate; Now, by re-education we may mean all measures designed to change the character structure of the Thai people, or we may merely mean such measures as affect either the educational institutions (schools, universities, youth organizations), or the media of communication (press, theater, radio, movies, books).

OR DO WE MEAN BRAIWASHING (also known as thought reform or re-education) consists of any effort aimed at instilling certain attitudes and beliefs in a person — beliefs sometimes unwelcome or in conflict with the person’s prior beliefs and knowledge, in order to affect that individual’s value system and subsequent thought-patterns and behaviors.

Hence my final sentence that: The Thai nation now enters a new more dangerous stage and the outlook is terrifying.

I also tend to think that Thursday’s speech will not contain very specific content. But if it’s not precise the reactionaries will have a hard time to legitimate the installation of an interim government, especially if the reds are smart enough not to start something the coupsters could use as an excuse.

PAD is probably regrouping and wants to stop the parliament from electing a new government. That is most likely also the reason why they (partially) retreat from the airports – the troops are needed elsewhere next week. It will be just a continuation of the strategy to keep the pressure up high until an incidents happens which allows the military to take over.

The last angle of the Bermuda Triangle : the King.
I’ld say the speech is overrated. It’s a done deal.
The king is suppose to be above politic. Hence, the speech would contain message of unity, respect to the law, and prevent uprising, not a tad more.
With such strict lese majeste law, specific discussion is just impossible.

The speech would come, the red shirt would gather. Then the military would use the speech as pretext to step up and pressure/appoint an interim government. Amend constitution to 70/30, Viva la revolution!

“The people in the rural areas need education and not “free snacks” a la Thaksinomics.”

I beg to differ a little bit with this statement. We need to elaborate more on the term ‘education’. If it merely means schooling and college enrollment, I beg to differ. A large number of the people I know of being Anti-Thaksin do not receive normal school education. Many of them from the Northeast have lower than secondary school qualification but are Anti-Thaksin. Or many ethnic Chinese minority who marched with PAD don’t even read and write Thai at all. My dad who left school at M1 level is Anti-Thaksin while one of his friends, also an ethnic Chinese, got a degree but is Pro-Thaksin. I think there are individual way of thinking and how they access the information that also count.

Spare me your yellow mantra that everyone is brainwashed except for the enlightend PAD followers who are the only ones that have seen the light.

In regard to He-Whose-Doings-Must-Not-Be-Discussed it is still better to make educated guesses upon the avaiable material instead of mistake parital propaganda for truth.

The people in the rural areas need education and not “free snacks” a la Thaksinomics.

However in Thailand we live in an environment of people who vote someone who brings them the most material advantage so you can bet that Thaksin’s proxy parties will win every next election. ABAC polls prove that.

“One who talks most frequently about his/her concern about corruption is likely to be one who cares least about corruption.” – unless the corrupt stand on the “wrong” side of the power divide.

You are as brainwashed by Paul Handley as are Yellow Shirts allegedly brainwashed by the yellow propaganda. Haven’t you ever play sports?

I agree. The Thaksin side doesn’t care about the poor more than that they want to secure their support. That is also why the reactionary side is not actually concerned about Thaksin, he’s just another politician to be dealt with. What the reactionaries are really concerned about is that they need to suppress the rural poor’s awakening that they do constitute a weighty political factor and may use this power in order to enhance their living conditions. Just as empathy for the poor is used for power politics the same way concern for corruption is exploited. One who talks most frequently about his/her concern about corruption is likely to be one who cares least about corruption – unless the corrupt stand on the “wrong” side of the power divide.