Transcript of the above video: 

You know, I have got say, I think this video has been kind of a long time coming. Why do I say this? Well, I have not wanted to, I don't want to make this video, I will be candid. I want Thailand to kind of continue to be the place that I first came to in 2008. It promptly changed in roughly 2009 with the Airport shut down, and then 2010 with the riots, and then we got into '11 and the floods, and then the currency kind of went upside down in the aftermath of the great financial crisis when we started seeing the ripples of that coming over here, and then from about '12, '13 - and people have asked me and I want to be actually clear, I am not blindly partisan, I'm not blindly, I don't have blind dislike of the Shinawatras for example. I didn't mind the Yingluck era; I lived through it. She came in, I thought she was actually pretty good all things considered. I think it is interesting, her brother was not physically here during the bulk of that period and that may have had something to do with it. Also, she was his sister not his offspring which may have had something to do with it. But I lived under her Prime Ministership up until she was no longer Prime Minister. All things considered, you can have your issues with the rice-pledging scheme and all of this stuff, but overall she kind of was a calming influence in terms of call it brand Thailand; I think internationally she represented as well and internally she kind of had a calming influence, I'll put it that way in the aftermath of some rather traumatic events, especially 2010 and having gone through that, that was very welcome. Then we went through sort of 10 years, 9 years and change under some have called it the three Pores, I think with Por, Por, Por, the Prayut, Anupong and Prawit sort of the triumvirate of those guys, and there was a lot of transition during that period. We came out of that in 2023, and I was personally optimistic, cautiously optimistic, but optimistic and my hope was circumstances were such that Mr. Thaksin was going to return, see that 'hey you may be sort of Primus Inter Pares the Coalition table, but it's still Inter Pares, meaning you may be first among equals sitting at the Coalition table, but you are among equals. There are other parties to the Government, other voices to keep in mind. It wasn't quite the unilateral political moment that he had had in the past. My hope was, in the aftermath of, yeah he went through his legal proceedings and then got to be in the hospital or whatever and they are still sort of adjudicating the proprietary of that - I am that not going to get into that in this video - but my hope was he would sort of see that, 'hey, reconciliation is the order of the day; I'm one voice among many. Also, I am kind of getting older and maybe it's time for me to step back a little bit.' I was kind of hopeful of that as well that very much a new generation would come forward but no, that has not been the experience at all. 

Quite frankly, I have been disconcerted almost from the outset of this Government with the immediate attempt at implementing the so-called Digital Wallet which I found to be Orwellian and frankly totalitarian and very creepy. I also thought it was terrible policy, especially financially and monetarily at the time because it called for a deep expansion of the national debt at a time that we really didn't need it. They said, I did the videos on this. Did we need stimulus at that time? I don't really think so. Might we in the future? and now we have spent up a lot of "dry powder" during that time when we didn't really need it, and now we have less ability to go into debt for further stimulus moving forward, that was the concern I had - and I made the videos, I'm on the record saying that then - so I stand by that now that hey that Digital Wallet really was a terrible idea. Then meanwhile we have seen this casino, the attempt to get casinos through which again, it was one of these things where I was initially favourable to it; I come from a casino background, I worked in casinos when I went through law school, but I felt like there was a way to bring it in and that was not the way it was going to be brought in. It was going to be brought in under tremendous foreign influence for one. We didn't even really get to see the Bill and then Reuters put out information on the Bill and like foreign Casino interests were all involved in it. It was very creepy. And then, the more we got to see of it, one of the things as I noted in prior videos was, 'hey, foreigners could end up operating these casinos at 100%, and then as I made another video, when Bhumjaithai got jettisoned effectively, or became part of the opposition instead of part of the Coalition, it seemed to be that the real impetus for that was to get their guy, the current “Core” Coalition or I call it “Rump” Coalition's guy, into the Ministry of Interior. Well my question was, is that because he could sign off on getting land, on selling land to the foreign interests that would own the casinos? Not least of which, as I have discussed in other videos was, it appears the attempted stuffing of the administrative apparatus especially surrounding elections that seems to be going on during this sort of interim period while we are awaiting the final decision of the Constitutional Court here in Thailand which took up the case of the now suspended Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra in a 9-0 decision and in a 7-2 decision opted to suspend her in lieu of or while they made the adjudication which by the way, when Mr. Srettha was removed, he was not suspended pending removal, he was just removed. They adjudicated it while he was still the Prime Minister and then they removed him, so I think that that speaks to the gravity of the situation involving Ms. Paetongtarn. 

But again, going back to 2023 and then moving forward, we had the Digital Wallet, then we had Srettha going to France and saying we are just going to unilaterally illegalize Cannabis again, which I don't think they can do as I have discussed in other videos. I think it's highly violative of notions of Civil Law legislative due process, most notably the Doctrine of Codification, he was saying all that stuff which caused real uproar. Then he is attending the World Economic Forum and again Ms. Paetongtarn hosted an envoy of the World Economic Forum here at the Purple Room; I did videos on that. And these people are openly against National Sovereignty. They are openly in favour of a policy of "you will own nothing and be happy". They've released that in their own press releases, okay? These are not people that have the best interests of the rank-and-file Thai, the rank-and-file anyone around the world at heart. These are, I think it is safe to say they are self-evidently elitist, but they are not even like benignly neglectful or even benevolent elitist, they are elitist that actively want to push down and oppress the little people further than whatever problems they already have. Again, you will own nothing and be happy; that is one of their slogans. That is the creepiest thing I have ever heard. So moving forward from 2023, we have just seen this continuous trend, and bringing in Visa schemes that have really not - they were sold one way and now we are dealing with the blowback, because it really wasn't implemented well. There are also concerns about work authorization issues and foreigners impinging and infringing upon the local labour pool here - I'm not going to get too deep into that, but we had a perfectly usable work authorization mechanism. Coming in and disrupting that I don't see the point. And disrupt is a good word. I keep thinking of that term in sort of a tech sense of a “disruptor”, and that is kind of what Thaksin seems to have been at least since 2023. He is bringing in all of these frankly foreign influence notions to my mind or at least what has come in since he has returned has been these sort of foreign influence notions. It's also interesting to note, it did not seem to be coming in in earnest and acutely until after he came out of the hospital. Which if you go back, yeah the Digital Wallet was kind of bandied about and there was this kind of vague World Economic Forum kind of paradigm being pushed forward, but it didn't get very acute until he was back out on the streets and frankly, doing things that he said that he implicitly was not going to do, and was part of his sort of the deal if you will for him returning. I remember he immediately was talking to foreign leaders and stuff and it was like, wait, what? That's you are not supposed to be, that wasn't the deal kind of thing. And again I'm not trying to get into the, ‘you can do this, you can't do that’, I'm simply bringing up the fact that the whole reason, one of the main reasons I at least was optimistic about his return was the notion of reconciliation which it seems like everything has moved the opposite way. It hasn't moved toward reconciliation it has moved toward more division, as evidenced by the fact that now we have this Rump Coalition that frankly, it's causing a lot of again disruption I think is the right word, but it doesn't really have much of a mandate as noted by the fact that it keeps going through quorum calls and things that are frankly causing it issues. Now that said, I am going to jump into some stuff here where I am going to cite some things. That said, as I have discussed in other videos, I do long-form content on this; issues surrounding the Border dispute, issues surrounding local politics, issues surrounding issues of tax, banking, visas, stuff that impacts expat land. For information on the long form videos, we send that out on an email list. You can email us, [email protected], to get on that list and we will send you - there are already 10 episodes - we'll send those out to you if you go ahead and subscribe, and we will put you on the list to send you the new ones. I intend to be making a new one contemporaneously with this video on Sunday 27 July, 2025. Also while I am talking that, as I have discussed in other videos, my better half and I have set up a pancake place, Pancake Palace, breakfast anytime and American Diner style food. If you are interested in that, we are in downtown Bangkok. The link is in the description below to come on by.  But let's jump in here.

So quoting from a recent article in the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com. I've been a little critical in the past of the Bangkok Post's coverage of Mr. Thaksin; I've kind of felt like in certain instances they were acting as something of a cheerleader; I'm going to say that it looks like their coverage is a little bit more balanced lately. The article is titled: Thaksin's magic and influence fading. I urge those who are watching this video go check out that article in Bangkok Post, it's a long one, it's an editorial, and I think that the title kind of sums up what the gist of the article is, but sort of the reason for the thumbnail, ‘that's the problem’, comes from this particular part where he has been quoted directly, quote: "Don't be daunted by declining voter support -- it can be regained. Keep working. I'm still around. You chose to stay with Prime Minister Ing [Paetongtarn's nickname], so you get her father as an adviser." It was the "I'm still around"; yeah, that's the issue. You're not supposed to be. You were supposed to sort of go into the background. And yeah, I mean the presumption was in 2023 he would be sort of a wise old man of the political scene; he would be sort of around on the periphery but not jumping into the arena. And by the way isn't he like 76 years old? Can we make some room for some new people? And by the way, not necessarily new people that are just basically stand-ins for some old guy. It's just a genuine question, I'm asking. Quoting further: "As if to reassure Coalition parties of continuity, Chaikasem Nitisiri -- Phue Thai's third Prime Ministerial candidate, expected to replace Ms. Paetongtarn if she is removed -- also attended the dinner."  Well, that has been another big issue of mine. I have been asking the question repeatedly why she hasn't resigned. I think under any other circumstances I have asked the question, "if she was a man would she have resigned?" Is this like a sex thing, like we sort of give her a pass because she was female or something? To my mind, the easy solution to this would have been okay, she steps aside, they reform a coalition under the third guy. Why keep this going unless there is intention behind it and those intentions are maybe not necessarily in Thailand's best interest. Quoting further: "The truth is Thaksin has lost much of his influence. Few MPs attended the dinner, with several citing constituency visits as the reason for their absence." Now that is interesting because, just notably, MPs aren't attending the dinner but also that they are saying, hey I have got to visit my constituency. Well in the past, attending something with Thaksin would be a good excuse to say why you're not in your constituency. Quoting further: "Thaksin's remarks meanwhile hinted at his discomfort with the situation yet he appears to hold a misplaced perception of himself - - remaining self-centred in his belief that Phue Thai and his Coalition partners still rely on him to solve their problems." Well, again this has kind of been my thing more and more and look I come at this from an even further, I come at my opinions and my paradigm on him, I should just say him, I come at it honestly. I was here in 2010, and I watched him, and this is why I get sort of acutely worked up about all of this going on and then these problems with Cambodia. He was in Phnom Penh, under the wing of Hun Sen in 2010, doing things and saying things that stirred up real strife here in Bangkok, and it caused a lot of people to go through real pain here in Bangkok. And I can't stress that enough. And for him to sort of return under the kind of rubric of, "hey, let's have reconciliation," but to then turn around and do quite the opposite of that, I find it deeply disturbing; I find it deeply disturbing. Quoting further: "Remaining self-centred in his belief that Phue Thai and the Coalition partners still rely on him to solve their problems." Yeah, and that is kind of the point of the video. I'm going to put this up on screen. It's a quote from Ronald Reagan where he said, "Government is not the solution to our problem, Government is the problem." Well I am paraphrasing that here. It might be time for Mr. Thaksin, I'm saying this honestly, I'm not saying this from a standpoint of personal animosity. I really want what is best for the country and perhaps it is time to look in the mirror and say maybe you are the issue, and stepping back, would not only be good for the country, but good for your own Party at this point. If all you care about is partisanship, well are you helping Phue Thai by doing the things you are doing? It's my understanding that being viewed as having undue influence might violate the Political Parties Act and if so, could lead to Phue Thai's dissolution. Would that be good for them? It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Quoting further: "At the same time, the dinner seating arrangements revealed how much Thaksin values certain Coalition partners. Pirapan Salirathavibhaga -- the United Thai Nation Party's (UTN) Prime Ministerial candidate endorsed by Gen. Prayut Chan-o-Cha -- was seated next to him. After all Phue Thai cannot afford to lose the UTN support; with its 36 MPs, the Party is essential to the coalition's political survival." As I have discussed in other videos, I'm not convinced that UTN is lockstep behind the Coalition. Their Executive Board, I've also stated this with regard to the Democrat Party, their Executive Boards, both of them had signed on and said 'yeah, we're part of the Coalition - but the rank-and-file membership do not seem to be in lockstep behind that decision. And exactly how much of the rank-and-file membership is not on board with that could determine whether or not this Coalition survives at all. So it's fair pointing that out. Depending on what you read, there's a "razor-thin” majority of 10 seats in favour of this current government and again, this is why we see these quorum calls causing so much problem because they are not really having an easy time let's say, continuing to govern. Within that same Bangkok Post article, one more quote: "Thaksin seems largely unaware that he is the problem." Fair point. 

Now quoting from a later article from Bangkok Post and sort of in connection with this ongoing Cambodian Border dispute, there's an article titled: Thaksin: Let military 'complete their mission'. Quoting directly: "Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra denies a family feud is behind the Thai-Cambodian border conflict." Really? How? I mean it directly involves your daughter and her phone call to Hun Sen. And meanwhile, there has been this ongoing presumption, and I have been if you will guilty of this presumption as well, that she made that phone call sort of out from under his watchful eye if you will. Well my question is one, do we need, do we want a Prime Minister who has to be under the watchful eye of somebody, and two, did she really do it out from under the watchful eye of him? I have been wondering that because we have all kind of presumed she did - or we don't know, it's sort of vague - but what if he wanted that, and I don't know the answer to that but if he did, that's more concerning than what we are already dealing with in a way. That said, quoting further: "Saying the military must be given a free hand to "complete their mission" before any talks can take place." Yeah, whoop-de-doo! Why are you saying this? Apropos of what? Why the constant need to be in the spotlight right now? We have got enough problems in Thailand, especially at the border, and I don't really think that the Commanders and the personnel and the boys who are on that front line, in some cases giving their lives for the cause, really need to have this politicized in this way. Quoting further: "Speaking during a visit to Ubon Ratchathani to support civilians displaced by the clashes, Thaksin insisted the recent deadly skirmishes between Thai and Cambodian forces were not caused by personal dispute between political families, as widely speculated." Is this really the time for that? To be going up there and talking to these poor people that have been displaced and maybe even lost family or been hurt in this, and to be using it as a platform to say, 'hey this isn't my fault. This doesn't have anything to do with.." what? Quoting further: "He was referring to the apparent rift between his family and that of former Cambodian Premier Hun Sen which flared following a leaked audio clip in which Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra was heard pleading with Hun Sen saying she would do anything in return for a cessation of the conflict. Thaksin, who turned 76 on Saturday, rejected claims of political interference," - while he's up there arguably politically interfering - quoting further: “and said military operations should proceed professionally and independently." And I would say independently of frankly political wannabe hacks trying to muddy up the waters of all of this. Quoting further: "Quote: "I deny this is a conflict between two families. There was never any personal dispute." he said" Well great. But is that the time or the place to be making those statements? What's that doing for those people? How is that helping? If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Quit being part of the problem; to paraphrase John McClain in Die Hard. 

I hope that the situation along the Border resolves itself as peacefully as it possibly can, and in such a way that Thailand does not see her sovereignty any further impinged. And I definitely hope it happens in such a way that no further loss of life occurs. But I don't think anything is helped by political wannabe players in a way, injecting themselves in the situation in order to either gain political points or shore up their political position. That helps no one. That said, we will certainly be keeping people updated on this channel as the situation evolves.