Tulsie, after providing details of the rural background and upbringing of various staff from The Nation, then states:

Somebody shouted, “Let’s have a class war” and many “sympathisers” of the poor immediately jumped on the bandwagon. A man drove his luxury car into parked red-shirt motorcycles and it was decried as symbolising the travesty in this country. Think carefully and we will see if the man is a product of a real class war, or if he’s just, like many of us, a victim of some people’s attempts to make the current political problem look like one.

A big political fight is going on out there. The antagonists are employing the only tactic they know, but we must not fall into their trap. America used to hate and be afraid of the Soviet Union, and vice versa, but that is more excusable than Bangkok and provincial Thais starting to feel that way toward each other. 

BP: First, it was symbolic of the poor-rich gap given the status of his family. You will also see from BP’s post that the driver recently wrote a diatribe directed at the red shirts referring to them amongst other insults as f*cking buffaloes. Now, the driver has since posted on Facebook that it was not done with the intention to hurt anyone or out of anger, but then later calls himself the “hero of Rajaprasong” (see screenshot of the page here). 

Tulsie continues:

Where did the accusation about middle class “contempt” for the poor come from? I have read this written by some people who should know better, and it hurts. Let the alleged “insults” and “contempt” continue to be the exclusive weapons of the political animals fighting for power – those who don’t know what else to do but to pitch Thais against Thais.  

BP: Where does one start? Well, not sure it is really middle-class – as that term is so broad particularly for those working in urban areas – but more say upper middle class and the elite. In fairness, to Tulsie, he may not know what is said by others so will limit references to his own newspaper.

The Nation‘s editorial on June 6, 2006:

The five-and-a-half years under Thaksin Shinawatra and his Thai Rak Thai Party offer a valuable lesson on why voters should not allow themselves to be manipulated by a populist politician like Thaksin, who pandered to the unprincipled wants and needs of the populace to gain political power, which he then exploited to maximise his personal gains at the expense of the public interest.

In February 2006:

An autocratic leader who bankrolled his way to the highest political office by pandering to the unprincipled wants and needs of the attention-deficient, politically apathetic masses, who then proceeded to maximise personal gain at the expense of public interest.

In July 2006:

On the other, the rural majority remain enamoured of Thaksin’s populist policies that pander to their unprincipled wants and needs.

In August 2006:

However, while the Democrat Party is doing what it can to establish itself as an alternative to the Thai Rak Thai in providing leadership to the country, which is being held down by political turmoil, an economic slowdown and social decay, the Thai Rak Thai Party unfortunately continues to wallow in the kind of populist policies that pander to the unprincipled wants and needs of the masses

In September 2006:

Thaksin’s efforts at manipulation have been well documented. They include the ingenious use of populist policies that pander to the unprincipled wants and needs of the people

COMMENT: Is this not contempt for the poor?

Tulsie again:

A big political fight is going on out there. The antagonists are employing the only tactic they know, but we must not fall into their trap. America used to hate and be afraid of the Soviet Union, and vice versa, but that is more excusable than Bangkok and provincial Thais starting to feel that way toward each other.

BP: Are the red shirt supporters afraid of the elite? If so, what are they doing at the protest? In regards to hatred, Tulsie has a better point here (but Cold War-level antagonism?) although the NYT has some anecodotal evidence that suggests the feelings of on one red shirt supporter is not about hate towards the rich:

Among the protesters Sunday was Samai Suporn, a 50-year-old rice farmer from northeastern Thailand, who said she had come to Bangkok for the protest because she remained upset at the coup.

“We’re here for a long time,” she said of the protest. “Until they dissolve Parliament.”

She came with 10 other people in a pickup truck still caked with the red dirt of rural Thailand and has never been inside the shopping malls that surrounded her.

Protest leaders have portrayed the current political troubles in Thailand as rich versus poor, but Mrs. Samai, who clears the equivalent of only $300 a year from her small rice farm and fruit orchard, said she had nothing against the rich.

“There are good and bad people among the rich and the poor,” she said. “I’m not jealous of the rich.”

She says she is upset at the government, especially because news reports on government television stations play down the strength of the red-shirt movement.

BP: Now, BP thinks the rhetoric at the protests does regularly get out of hand. There are certainly attacks on the aristocratic elite that extends to demonizing them. But this is hardly unique to the red shirts