The anti Thai king thread

**Papewaio** · 01-19-2009, 23:28

People might want to review the current political climate within Thailand.

He is being made an example of given all the protests against the government that have occurred. Much easier to make an example of a foreigner then a protest leader.

That said, if Australians are that offended by this they can choose to holiday in another nation. Thailand is a very popular choice for Aussies and they are in the top ten of country of origin in Thailand. Given the current economic climate this case could be just one more reason to not go there.

It probably would be worse for Thailand if Bali and Fiji were more stable.

**Beren Son Of Barahi** · 01-20-2009, 00:31

Originally Posted by Papewaio

People might want to review the current political climate within Thailand.

He is being made an example of given all the protests against the government that have occurred. Much easier to make an example of a foreigner then a protest leader.

That said, if Australians are that offended by this they can choose to holiday in another nation. Thailand is a very popular choice for Aussies and they are in the top ten of country of origin in Thailand. Given the current economic climate this case could be just one more reason to not go there.

It probably would be worse for Thailand if Bali and Fiji were more stable.

I think other places around the region will become more popular; who ever not many other places want what has happened to Thailand to happen there.

what has the king done for his people in the last 5 -10 -15 years?

**Beefy187** · 01-20-2009, 01:29

A while back but in 1993, the current Thai king has resolved a coup de tat (I definitely spelled that wrong) by being the middle man for both parties. I suppose thats one way to use royal families status.

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 01-20-2009, 02:24

Originally Posted by Beren Son Of Barahi

I think other places around the region will become more popular; who ever not many other places want what has happened to Thailand to happen there.

what has the king done for his people in the last 5 -10 -15 years?

A great deal, actually. He is greatly loved and his appeals for clam have prevented coups from becoming bloody revolutions. The country is very unstable and were it not for the King the regular extra-constitutional changes of regime might become open Civil War.

**Mooks** · 01-20-2009, 02:48

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

A great deal, actually. He is greatly loved and his appeals for clam have prevented coups from becoming bloody revolutions. The country is very unstable and were it not for the King the regular extra-constitutional changes of regime might become open Civil War.

Doesnt make sense that a greatly loved king would censor criticism. If he was "greatly loved" then it wouldnt make any difference if there were a few dissidents.

**Lord Winter** · 01-20-2009, 02:49

Originally Posted by Mooks

Doesnt make sense that a greatly loved king would censor criticism. If he was "greatly loved" then it wouldnt make any difference if there were a few dissidents.

Do we even know if the King gave the order for some obscure author to be arrested?

**Beefy187** · 01-20-2009, 04:10

King cannot afford any criticism. If the royals aren't absolute then they are nothing more then annoying celebrities who reigns high above the commoners. Absolute kings is often popular because they can take out any elements of criticism. Soon as they allow gossiping, they will end up like poor king Louis 16th.

King should worry about the seven books bought and the publisher who went ahead and published.

**CountArach** · 01-20-2009, 04:36

Originally Posted by 187Beefyz

King cannot afford any criticism. If the royals aren't absolute then they are nothing more then annoying celebrities who reigns high above the commoners. Absolute kings is often popular because they can take out any elements of criticism. Soon as they allow gossiping, they will end up like poor king Louis 16th.

So wait... you are defending the breach of free speech this action represents?

Also Absolute Kings were only ever popular because:
1) The enlightenment had not occurred.
2) The Aristocracy were the only ones they had to keep happy.
Absolute Monarchy is never going to be popular today.

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 01-20-2009, 04:14

It is far more likely that the current government, which is deeply unpopular, is using the king as a means to intimidate the populace. Thailand's tendancy to change government via coup seems to have prevented them from developing the patience necessary for a democracy.

**rasoforos** · 01-20-2009, 11:16

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

A great deal, actually. He is greatly loved and his appeals for clam have prevented coups from becoming bloody revolutions. The country is very unstable and were it not for the King the regular extra-constitutional changes of regime might become open Civil War.

Does it make anyone wonder why this country with the 'stabilizing king' is the most unstable in the area?

I don't think he prevents coups. He supported the last one...

Everyone who attempts a coup in Thailand can easily succeed by twisting the king's arm into supporting it...

The king is mainly there to eat Tom Yam, wear yellow and own a whole lot of money. He could stop all this nonsense about arresting people who say his shirt is crinkled and stuff...but he doesn't....so he is a

to me.

**Evil_Maniac From Mars** · 01-20-2009, 23:12

Originally Posted by rasoforos

Does it make anyone wonder why this country with the 'stabilizing king' is the most unstable in the area?

I don't know about you, but I would prefer a little bit of "unstability" to Burma (a military dictatorship), Laos (socialist/communist dictatorship), or Vietnam (same thing).