As I wrote about it before, the fate of Thaskin is depending upon how well the peaceful protest can mobilize the silent majority (yes, majority of Thai people are so apathy about politics and that why we don't progress that much in the past 75 years since we became a democracy) However, I now doubt that this silent majority will care enough to actually do something about it. I hope that I'm wrong if not then it is a matter of time before all hell break lose!

In modern society it is easy to get distracted by lots of things, thus appearing apathetic. But it seems these days a lot of people are really engaged in these protests, from the little I see/understand on the news and in the papers. Not everyone is going to hit the streets and march, but it doesn't seem like the majority is silent.

And I wouldn't downgrade the progress in the political system (or do you prefer Singapore's one-party state?)

I think there is quite a lot of progress here in Thailand. It took 190 years for the US to even start to deal with discrimination and actually allowing everyone to vote. If you look across Asia, I think you could argue that Thailand is one of the more successful multi-party democracies in Asia.

Here's a question, where else in Asia has multi-party democracy taken hold with a relative sense of stability?

Japan? - largely has had one party rule since WWII. Taiwan - yes it's advancing, put really only had its first 'real' elections in 1996 after 40-years of martial law and had political prisoners up until 1992 (plus few recognize it as a country...). Malaysia? Again, long-term one-party rule and the only viable opposition makes a lot of people nervous. Korea? Certainly interesting nowadays, but any more advanced there? Philippines? Indonesia? Don't think so....

are u one of the apathetic silent majority?

the opposition should talk with the farmers. When thaksin promises welfare for the ifarmers and give some better schooling and healthcare for those, the farmers will never support the well-educated middleclass who now protesting in the streets of BKK

all very well....but will somebody please tell me...who is the alternative and what empty promises do they have? In all this (paid for) anti-taksin hype, has any body sat down and figured out who would be better than him? I have been here 15 years and guess what. I haven't seen ONE leader who even bothered to try anything slightly controversial and positive. Sorry, I am not saying that Taksin is the best, I am saying that we should not believe the hype and that we should consider that there has been nobody up to now that can offer anything better, in my opinion. The Democrats are weak knee'd as usual and the other old guard are simply looking to continue their power base to make money for themselves (i.e Chavalit, Suchinda, Banharn, Capt. Scumbag and his two rogue sons). There is one politician in the Democrat party that I would give 100% support to, but he is not yet ready to lead. Nor will I say his name since he is still being groomed for position.

beginning to agree with mikee....it would appear the only choice thai people have is "the frying pan" or "the fire"..........

breakofdawning-No, I'm one of the few western educated Thai political sceintist who still try to understand the Thai system and you should be able to guess what side I am by now

zdownlow-Very well said...however, comparing US and Thailand might not be the best way to go. One is a federal states white another is a constiutional monarchy but yes, there were many hyprocrites out there in the histories of the American Republic. Now, In the case of Thailand, we were only few countires that got of WWII relatively well off (other being China) and we became a democracy quite early on but thanked to our less than enlightened leaders and our not so interested population (We probably have the most "bloodless" coups in the whole world!) With regard to political developments, littles have changed in Thailand from let say WW II to the first student uprising. with several more protests and little bit more coups later, we have this so called "People Constitution" Now back to my argument, (from the limited knowlege of Thai history I have) The Thai political frameworks ONLY change when there are serious crisises and as aftermaths of violents. This is why I hope I'm wrong in my assumptions. The non-violent peaceful protest will not work if it does not mobilize the passive population into actions either for or against it.