[ZwHRoTTn]

Guava, these are really interesting experiences, thanks for sharing them with us. If nothing else, you got some unique memories, a nice change from the boring "I-went-to-Thailand-and-saw-the-Grand Palace" routine. :/

Glad you got back safely! I saw in TV that these Sondhi-initiated demonstrations can turn out to be quite violent, actually. One time, even the head agitator himself fled the yellow-shirt crowd, after the anti-Thaksin frenzy got out of control at the PM's house. (I believe it was on Children's day). Lucky you didn't get swept in THAT crowd!

Despite the possible dangers of getting caught in the political fluctuation of a developing country, I don't see any reason why foreigners shouldn't take part of shaping the country they chose to live in. Everyone even vaguely familiar with Thailand's history can name foreigners who, once given political power, had a profound positive impact on the country. Below is just one example.

I assume that informed readers here are familiar with the name Constantine Phaulkon. "The Greek", as he was called, reached Thai shores as an assistant gunner on a merchant ship in seventeenth-century Siam. He then became "First Counsellor", Prime Minister, essentially King Narai's right-hand man, the second-most influential man in Thailand. A foreigner.

Siam survived the rough colonial times; it's an unfortunate and false assumption that she did it all by herself, without the help of outsiders. Foreigners like Phaulkon played an essential role in preserving Thailand's independence, helping her navigate safely away from the greed of powerful Western nations. Without such people, Thailand wouldn't be what it is today.

If King Narai, a man who King Rama IV himself called "the most distinguished of all Siamese rulers", deemed foreigners to be suitable to take up the most powerful political role in Siam, who are the rest of us to say otherwise? We can safely presume that a supreme ruler of Thailand knows her needs better than some Farang outsiders.