I will say that when I give him information I will give information from multiple angles because it must be understood that he knows as much as he knows. He sees as much as he sees. You will meet some people who like to look at Thailand through Western eyes. This means why Thailand is not like his homeland? I love meeting people like this. Because it was explained and sometimes they argue with each other.
Another group is I don't know anything about Thailand. And you really want to know but maybe you don't want to know how profound her influence is on Thai society. I just want to know how this affects the company and its products. This is considered fair, the other group is “Ru Dee”, “Ru Dee” means looking at Thailand through Western eyes and teaching it, but this is not enough. Some people take it to the next level and become judgmental.
It is difficult to find the meaning of this word in Thai. Translated directly, judgment means “to judge” or “to criticize.” But my sentiments are, “Judgment, in my view, involves inserting the words ‘education’ and ‘good knowledge’ as well as ‘judgment’ and ‘criticism’ together. For example, every time in an embassy in the Western Hemisphere (in a given era) talk about Events in Thailand It's a statement or an interview that makes a lot of Thai people feel uncomfortable. Or if I'm being honest, I feel upset because there will be conflicting things about who is right and who is wrong. It's like teaching a subject that is not your duty to teach. (Can you see Image?)
When I met these groups I really enjoyed it. Not because I don't think he has the right to think that way. Because he wasn't in Thailand long enough. This is not relevant. Everyone has the right to express their opinions. No matter how long you've been in Thailand but when I meet a client like this it's a fun conversation (fun for me) because it's a test to see if he really knows or knows well. If you really knew, it would be considered that everyone exchanged blows with each other. They both kiss each other but if you know better..I will enjoy.
One day (on a day when there was a huge traffic jam in Bangkok), I made a call with a client who had a deep and real knowledge about Thailand. It is the exchange of ideas and direct information, in addition to the fact that its analysis may not be deep. As a foreigner looking at Thailand and working in Thailand (he does a lot of work too.) he has two things he wants to know and wants to understand about the future of the Progressive Party from now on. And the story of Thaksin Shinawatra
He asked the question (about the Progressive Party) “How does the Constitutional Court ruling and the possibility of its resolution affect democracy in Thailand?” This is a question that I probably will not go into detail in answering. But I answered him, the decision of the Constitutional Court is one thing, and the possibility of dissolving the party is another matter. Because the court did not dissolve his party. For anyone who wants to file a complaint, it is considered an open channel. Then I told him that sometimes (even if it's just a play on words) the word democracy is difficult to interpret because of the meaning of democracy in one country. It will have a different meaning for another country. (Don't just talk about international matters, within the country, villages, alleys, and your home. There are many different meanings.)
You said that “democracy in Thailand” and “Thai democracy” are different. (It's a play on words to spice things up, you might say.) But it's ours. It is like this It is not accurate and satisfies people 100%. It's not transparent at all. It is sometimes transparent, it is clean, it is dirty, and it is easy to understand. Some are difficult to understand, others will thrive, and others will fall behind. But the matter was like this, so I told him either to dissolve the party or not to dissolve the party. Who will say what? But in the big picture, the big picture, the dissolution of any party does not make “democracy in Thailand” stagnant or stalled. Of course, those who loved the dissolved party felt angry and resentful, and the discussion about it is long. I don't argue with that and I understand. But it does not make “democracy in Thailand” stop or die completely.
But when it comes to “Thai democracy”, this strengthens it even further. The group believes (and the eyes of outsiders look) that there is an attempt to discourage groups of people who step into the line of being “Thai” set for them by one group of society.
It is difficult to remove this idea from the understanding of outsiders. Because he saw what he saw. He knows what he knows. So there is no harm in him understanding what he understands. I consider it fair that he asked. I will answer as I did my best. I continued to tell him that the Constitutional Court's decision and the possibility of dissolving the party might have no more impact on “democracy in Thailand” than Mr. Thaksin's case.
I told him that the events (process?) in the Thaksin case “from the time I returned to Thailand and stayed on the 14th floor until I got out of prison, it was as if nothing had happened. He destroyed democracy in Thailand more than anything else, every unit, every part, Every organization, every organization and every person included. Let's participate in the destruction of democracy in Thailand together. I have no other word to describe this than “disgusting.”
But this Mr. Thaksin incident is very representative of Thai democracy.
So it's hard to argue when outsiders look at Thailand through their eyes. He understands what he understands because he sees what we see….no matter what….
“Subtly charming student. Pop culture junkie. Creator. Amateur music specialist. Beer fanatic.”