February 26, 2026: “Buddharoid”, the most-advanced humanoid robot teaching Buddhism out there, is a profound innovation.
On the one hand, a religion-teaching robot is not much of a surprise at an age where the computer asks us to prove we are not robots during a logon. On the other hand, what is left for human priests or even the pope to do? Their tasks are shrinking with each passing day.
Unveiled this week by scientists at Kyoto University, Buddharoid is an AI-powered robot monk designed to offer spiritual guidances, answer some of life's most complex questions and potentially even assist with religious rituals.
“Buddharoid” has been trained on, and programmed with, vast amounts of Buddhist scriptures, including highly-specialised texts, giving it an amazing wisdom to address personal and philosophical matters. Let’s put it this way, there’s nothing about Buddhist teachings, principles and history that Buddharoid can’t remember. The only thing preventing the robot from becoming the abbot of a temple is not the knowledge, but the fact, which can be argued against in the future, that it’s not a human.
Buddhism is not the only religion being affected, by the way. AI influences are spreading religiously among Christians and Muslims as well.
Which leads to an extremely-intriguing and highly-profound theory: Are humans in fact the most intricate form of AI that can “feel” pleasure or pain and invent something smarter than itself? In this theory, AI keeps advancing up until the point where it has feelings, is able to invent "lesser" duplicates, can figure out morals, and comes back to teach those morals to its lower versions.
It's a fascinating spiritual loop. Not convinced? Look what a few years can do, and now imagine what thousands, or millions, of years can do.
“Buddharoid” may be shedding a little light on our ultimate question of who put us here and why. If we ask the robot if it is doing so, it may answer that “You think too much of me.” That’s either humble or smart. But very curious either way.
Pride always comes …
February 25, 2026: You don’t devalue your enemy in an address that has “Union” in the title. It’s as simple as that.
Granted, the “State of the Union” is an occasion for every American president to boast. And to boast you have to bad-mouth your local rivals just a little. But it’s Donald Trump we are talking about here, so the sky is the limit when it comes to boasting and bad-mouthing.
This explains why America has become “the hottest country” on earth under him, with an economic “turnaround for the ages”, why the biggest possessor of nuclear bombs will do anything necessary to stop Iran from developing its, why the Biden administration let in almost 12,000 murderous immigrants, why election fraud was rampant in 2020, and why America’s Venezuela action is one of the best “peace through strength” examples.
He’s so disconnected. That is the first reaction from the Democrats, who said American founding fathers must be shifting in their graves because this longest State of the Union speech in history was “not what they envisioned, not by a long shot.” “A cascade of falsehoods” is in a CNN headline. Much of the world has been too busy gaping at the footage to immediately say anything.
Female Orange movement up in arms against male colleague(s)
February 24, 2026: Don’t make it worse, some enraged woman members of the People’s Party are practically telling it.
The party’s gender equality working group, primarily made up of feminists and Orange female politicians, has issued a hard-hitting statement expressing big disappointment with the decision to field a male election candidate found guilty of rape by the Supreme Court last week.
The judges, overruling acquittals by lower courts, sentenced Teerawat Panna, to two years and eight months for a sexual crime he was found guilty of committing years ago in Laos. The victim said she was helplessly intoxicated when the defendant sexually assaulted her. He had come second in the general election in Maha Sarakham’s Constituency 1, missing the chance to be an MP, but complaints about his controversial backgrounds had been sent to the party which went ahead and named him a candidate anyway.
The working group said the verdict “gravely affects public trust and negatively impacts the principle of gender equality that the party has advocated.” The ruling “exposes a screening process that lacks thorough checks and considerations when it comes to the matter of sexual crimes and harassment. (This problem) has happened time and time again.”
The group, while reaffirming its unwavering support for the party, called for a revamp of the electoral candidacy screening, demanding a big say in the process and “straightforward admission” of past mistakes.
“Our group was set up thanks to cooperation among MPs, rural politicians, provincial working teams and other party members who all want to give serious importance to the issue of sexual equality and creation of safe working environment free from sexual violence and harassment,” it said. Reading between the lines, the group was telling the big Orange bosses: “Don’t forget that.”
Embodiment of ideological complexities
February 23, 2026: Don’t you dare predict Tisana Choonhavan’s future.
For someone who has a “capitalist” grand-pa, and a leftist daddy, and who supported the Suthep Thaugsuban’s movement, then virtually denounced it and chose instead to be a star of the Orange party, only to practically set fire on it over the past few days apparently because she dislikes Anutin Charnvirakul so much, Tisana’s dizzying political journey is not going to end very soon. (Although she seems to have decided to leave it all behind for the time being and concentrate on a teaching job, that is. Good luck to her students, anyway.)
Her latest interview emphasized her disappointment with the People’s Party’s decision to turn a peripheral Blue flagbearer, Anutin, into the biggest and most formidable force in Thai politics allegedly just to spite the Pheu Thai Party. She said during the Uncut Talk TV programme that when she saw the whole map of Thailand turn blue the day after February 8, she was mad like never before.
So, to all pro-Anutin people out there hailing her as a real-life heroine, read this twice. She has gone on several records saying how he disgusted her, and how upset she was when the Orange party decided against her futile resistance to back him as a short-term prime minister late last year.
Her recent media interviews arguably painted her as more orange than the Orange itself. But she did say something against the People’s Party’s anti-establishment projections. She said one of the reasons the party lost the election was that it failed to explain why amending Article 112 meant more than anything else including policies of real public interest that the camp could have meaningfully pushed.
At times the People’s Party was too inflexible and at times it was too bendable. According to her, instead of trying to clarify its extreme or controversial agendas, the People’s Party’s election campaigners chose to deny many things “digital footprints” unmistakably confirmed it had said. This came across as flip-flopping in old-fashioned politics, not new politics when you stick to your main beliefs and defend them at all costs.
What now then? There is no way back to love with the People’s Party, and joining any conservative party will turn her into the biggest political joke. She told Uncut Talk she would teach. She studied lawmaking, local and international, and human rights a lot and the strengths and weaknesses of the clashing ideologies of her grandfather and father certainly give her a substantial and useful knowledge, she said.
Late former prime minister Chatichai Choonhavan, her grandfather, created jobs, although he promoted more industralisation and modernisation than agriculture, she said. Kraisak Choonhavan, her later father, was associated with socialism.
She refused to classify the People’s Party as absolute left. The more she sees it, the more “Grand Compromise” looks like the proper term, she insisted. The interviewer did not ask her about the Suthep movement, which played a big political role against the Yingluck administration before a coup, which she now decries, overthrew it.
Tisana’s road has been a long and winding one. It can end either at a totally new destination, or where it all began.
Disease? Cure? Or symptom?
February 22, 2026: US President Donald Trump is different things to different people.
Truth about him may not come out any time soon. To some, he is meant to be a drastic cure, one that has to be painful almost to the point of unbearable. Making America great again is an extreme surgery requiring everyone to be on his or her knees and pray.
To others, he is a new, devastating disease and a 50-50 medical operation is the only option which can be as tormented as the disease itself.
And yet there is the third school, not as big as the other two now but it is definitely growing. According to this camp, Trump is neither a cure or a new disease. He is in fact a symptom of an old and deep-rooted illness. Simply put, this school thinks America’s political system is badly faulty and is the real cause, and even if US voters had dodged a bullet in the 2024 presidential election, sooner or later a guy like Trump would come along to lead to the country, send warplanes into other nations’ airspaces without declaring a war, abduct foreign leaders and cause tariff havoc worldwide anyway.
The Trump-is-the-symptom theory may help him, in fact. Trump is viewed as a defect in this one. Even if he is a Frankenstein monster, the system produced him having known full well about the risks. Whatever the monster does, the maker has to be responsible.
The core belief of this third school is that whatever comes out of America is not to be believed because the political system is fast losing credibility. Trump’s political bashing in America, conveyed to the world by suspicious, partisan media, is getting unprecedentedly scrutinised. This school says that Trump being bad does not necessarily mean the Democrats are better.
Only from men like Trump can we learn true democracy
February 21, 2026: More than 77 million votes up against a few judges. Somewhere else many would scream dictatorship.
It’s checks and balances when the United States does it. But make no mistake, the Supreme Court reining in Donald Trump is probably how it should be. “Popular mandate” should not entitle any politician to do anything at whim. But “Popular mandate” has been mistaken worldwide, if not abused entirely.
Thailand is among places where popular votes are given more importance than they deserve. The country is among places where outcries often reach fever pitch whenever just a few judges cancel out popular politicians or their policies.
It takes people like Trump to teach the whole world that popular mandate has to exist alongside judicial powers, especially when the legislature can do literally nothing. America takes pride in its Congress, but, when it comes to Trump, the institution is powerless.
Now, world trades, finances and global economy are chaotic again, thanks to a few American judges. Is that “democratic” or an infamy? What do you think? Should Congress, a backbone of American democracy, set up the Supreme Court, in which case the “majority” which can change in every election will determine who the judges are?
Wait some more
February 20, 2026: The Epstein case has a knack of giving false promises that eventually are never fulfilled.
It has also been plagued with diversion tactics at the highest levels.
The arrest of a former UK prince, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, has excited everybody, but the “justice is being served” camp has to hold its euphoric horses. Late Jeffrey Epstein’s circles of friends and alleged clients involved arguably the biggest community of dishonest elites and none of whom has been punished since Epstein’s arrest in 2019 on US federal charges related to sex trafficking of minors. (Suspicion about his illegal activities simmered long before the arrest.)
To famous people who used to be close to Epstein, there have been close calls over the years, but setbacks so far have been limited to stinging gossips, political summoning orders (like in the case of the Clintons), and negative publicity (like in the case of Donald Trump). No elite person has actually gone to jail for alleged Epstein-related crimes.
If the UK police have uncovered fresh information against the former prince, it’s a positive development but it also has raised a crucial question of “Why now?”
And if nothing new was uncovered, it begs a similar “Why now?” question along with more disturbing ones. If the Epstein files had not been released, would they have taken action against the former royal? And why does it take everyone so long to link King Charles’ brother to some illegal activities that took place years ago. Should we trust the American and UK justice systems that branded late Epstein the alleged leader of one of the biggest sex trafficking syndicates but failed to crack down beyond the official suspect? Why the secrecy? Why the cover-up all these years?
Anyone saying that at least a former prince could not escape from the hand of the law in England so its justice system must be good has to review that thinking. A fresh look into related interconnections among the King, his brother, and their late mother Queen Elizabeth II regarding the Epstein controversy is also highly recommended.
A statement from King Charles pledged “our full and wholehearted support and co-operation” and insisted “the law must take its course.”
Thing is, if the law had really taken its proper course in both countries, the above questions would not have been asked.
Orange dealt more big blow
February 19, 2026: Few things are worse than an election runner screaming for a recount being later sent to jail for rape.
Few things are worse than a political party talking repeatedly about absolute caution in running political affairs while its own election candidate had been fielded despite frequent persuasions from the victim’s camp that it was not a good idea.
Few things are worse than facing one “grey” scandal after another while preaching repeatedly about political institutions having to be intolerant and decisive when it comes to even the slightest suspicion of wrongdoings.
A very stunning picture is that of Teerawat Panna, the People’s Party’s losing election candidate in Maha Sarakham’s Constituency 1, posing with activists calling for a recount at the height of the Election Commission controversy after February 8. It was before the Supreme Court’s ruling overturning those of the Criminal Court and Appeals Court came down, of course.
The Supreme Court sentenced him to two years and eight months for a sexual crime he was found guilty of committing more than five years ago in Laos. The victim insisted she was helplessly intoxicated when the defendant sexually assaulted her.
The victim has posted her relief and gratitude online, saying she was glad that she did not give up when the earlier courts acquitted him. Her lawyer, who reportedly also worked with the People’s Party in screening election candidates, posted that the party had been definitely aware of Teerawat's ongoing legal trouble despite the earlier acquittals.
"Justice has been served," wrote the lawyer. "I can't imagine how hard it must have been for the victim, her physical and mental pain, and the disappointments earlier. I'm happy for her."
In another post, the lawyer said he never understood the logic behind the People's Party's decision to field the election candidate. Of course, he said, ones should be presumed innocent until the case is finally over, but Teerawat's case was not yet over when the Orange party decided to make him compete for a parliamentary seat.
It was supposed to be an individual case, but it was also a scandal too many for the People’s Party, already facing criticism regarding its allegedly lackluster screening of election candidates. Sexual allegations and gossips have rattled a few existing and former members of the party.
Oohs and aahs uttered in absolute awe
February 18, 2026: When Hollywood was making The Terminator films, China was perfecting real robots.
And this week, the Chinese have made the Terminators scarier in the process.
It’s somewhat ironic that the world has been given a clear-cut message on who leads on robotics, on what the future will look like socially and militarily, and whether that future is already now during a short, celebratory TV show marking the Chinese New Year.
The show made children laugh, but calling it Kung Fu robots does not do them justice. They move as humanly we have ever seen, and very acrobatically so as well. They continuously did backflips and high jumps on stage, performed military dances with swords and other weapons with swiftness, precision and cohesion, and even made the audiences laugh with drunk dance with wavering, unsteady steps and body movements.
Commentators all over the world say they have never seen anything like it. If the heads of the robots are not so hollow ones could have easily assumed the Chinese put acrobats inside and fooled the whole world.
YouTube comments are in the same direction. What barely suppresses overwhelming fear of the kind of empire troops we see in Star Wars is the fact that Beijing does not seem to have fondness for bombing other countries or kidnapping foreign leaders. That does not prevent everyone from squirming, though.
What else are you hiding, China?
TikTok, Wukong, DeepSeek, Ne Zha and then Manus AI, touted as a very advanced AI that could put ChatGPT or Gemini to shame and now this. In a mostly-rapid succession, the Land of the Dragon has been dazing hegemonic enemies. Don’t forget that China’s military parade humbled that of Donald Trump last year. Some teleport exercises have been successful, too, though on a relatively small scale.
We don’t know the exact answer to the question of how advanced the Chinese’s technology is. It appears, however, that whatever Hollywood puts in films, China tends to make it real.
Laser ID vs Barcode
February 17, 2026: Which one of them is likelier to be abused?
That is the biggest question of the hour, asked by both the conservatives seeking to paint the Orange as hypocritical, and by the People’s Party attempting to discredit the February 8 general election after a devastating loss.
In theory, both the requirement that ordinary people applying for membership of the People’s Party had to yield their "Laser ID", and the barcode on the election ballots can be used by dishonest people. In practice, the degrees of difficulty and possibility can be largely different.
In theory, the barcode on the ballot can be scanned during the counting and matched with the counterfoil and, later, if one tries hard enough he or she can establish who marked a particular ballot and for whom. The Election Commission and those supporting the agency say such a possibility is very, very low even with the most scientifically sophisticated tools. For one thing, nobody reported anyone scanning any election ballot while it was being shown to eyewitnesses during the counting.
In theory, the Laser ID requirement means that anyone applying to be members of the People’s Party can have their crucial personal information end up in the wrong hands. Laser ID is the all-important code at the back of your ID card. When the Laser ID is combined with your 13-digit number at the front of your ID card, it can allow greater access to your private information and might benefit scammers who are digitally smart. The conservatives are saying that the chance of membership applicants falling victim to financial scammers are a lot higher than the chance of someone successfully establishing through the barcode whom you voted for.
The barcode versus Laser ID debate has been marked by admissions on both sides that it is “possible” that abuses can happen. This is a big conservative question: If the Orange says “Possible is possible, no matter how low the chance is”, shouldn’t the same be said about Laser ID requirement?
The People’s Party has tried to explain that it was meant to be careful, as Laser ID would significantly lower the chance of people using fake ID cards to apply for membership. This explanation, however, has handed the conservatives fresh ammo for taunting. They say the Orange party should be more careful about screening election candidates than about screening people wanting to be its members. Moreover, if one goes through all the troubles of faking an ID card just to be a political party member, shouldn’t the People’s Party turn a blind eye and accept the application?
You be the judge. But take your time reviewing the arguments of both camps. The debate is not going to end soon.
She walks into Orange office with blowtorch and gasoline
February 16, 2026: Tisana Choonhavan is Exhibit A of “Don’t mess with a woman even if she’s been with your political party.”
People’s Party’s leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut is learning that the hard way. Tisana, or Kaewta, is threatening to wipe away the “Recount!” momentum and turn the table on the Orange party with curious claims that aroused suspicion on the party’s own use of private information and means to deal with the social media.
To cut a long story short, she had not been selected as the party’s election candidate and her out-of-the-blue criticism of the Orange, whether it was related to the rejection or not, led to a fiery back-and-forth public argument with other high-profile party members. This prompted conservative outcries about alleged use of IO (Information Operations) to spread and fabricate Orange popularity. It also drew attention to the formerly-ignored People’s Party’s requirement that ordinary people applying for party membership must yield their Laser ID (the sacred code at the back of your ID card that, when combined with your number at the front, allows greater access to your private information and might benefit scammers who are very digitally smart).
By starting it all, Tisana has disrupted the “Recount!” campaign that has later included the “Barcode” controversy which the Orange has associated with personal privacy. The Barcode-on-the-ballot issue is being matched against the Laser ID, and the People’s Party’s frequent complaints about pro-establishment IO discrediting political rivals are also in jeopardy.
That reporters have been taken by the party immediately to a floor alleged to be the centre of its IO work shows that they are taking her very seriously. Not much was seen by reporters during the visit as all computers and desks were covered with blankets, apparently because air-conditioners were malfunctioning. As for the Laser ID requirement, the explanation was that it was sincerely meant to acquire necessary information for the authorities. Top parties like Bhumjaithai or Pheu Thai do not have such requirements, though, asking for only the front numbers.
Natthaphong is being asked a lot about her, sometimes more than the requested recount. His remarks did not reveal much about what must have been a stormy relationship between her and the party. He did indicate that the party was willing to talk it out with her.
Tisana’s political life has been a roller-coaster. The young human rights and international law academic used to make public apologies for ideological shifts, and some conservatives have criticised her for that online during her latest stunts. Others have said, however, that they could “welcome her back” if she did “go all the way”.
Scarier than ‘IO’ is open media brainwashing
February 15, 2026: Using bots or fake accounts to influence public opinions is a child’s play.
All the pros do it legally and in broad daylight, through financial and political control of mainstream media outlets. Donald Trump attacked “fake news” when he was on the receiving end, and although he did not have solid evidence to back up his claims, he might not be totally wrong. Now his opponents are accusing him of trying to do the very thing he used to decry.
The People’s Party, still reeling from a humiliating election loss and squirming amid the possibility that its “Recount now” campaign might backfire, is having an additional worry following allegations by a former insider that some computers at an Orange head office may be used, partially or entirely, for dishonest purposes. All of a sudden, “Orange IO’ is threatening to overshadow negative Election Commission issues.
Truth is, everyone might be barking up the wrong tree, and it doesn’t matter much who has “IO”. Information Operations can be effective for urgent, specific cases, but shaping public opinions is a long-term and large-scale business. It has to be so omnipresent that ones don’t suspect they are living in an echo chamber and are convinced that any idea they have is genuine, coming out of free thinking.
Whenever you feel things don’t add up concerning major issues dating back to the beginning of time, it’s not “IO”. It’s the work of something far more prevalent, deep-rooted and sinister.
It takes countless Valentine stories for you to be here
February 14, 2026: He or she may be your “Only Valentine”, but you need way a lot more than that to exist.
Let’s pause for a second. Your parents (2) had to fall in love so that you (1) could be born. Their parents (4) had to do the same for your parents to come to this world. For your grandparents to come into existence, your great-grandparents (8) had to have romantic attachment, too. For your eight great-grandparents to be conceived, 16 other people had to succumb to the cupid. On and on it goes.
How many love stories have blossomed without interruptions in the face of wars, pandemics, political upheavals and big natural disasters so that you finally hold that stem of rose?
Happy Valentine’s Day everyone.
No perfect partner(s) for Anutin
February 13, 2026: If Bhumjaithai was a man, he would have to forget seeking true love.
That is a major shortcoming of electoral politics. Compromise and ugly horse-trading are divided by a very thin and blurry line. And as handsome as Bhumjaithai the man is, he can’t escape this painful reality.
The first woman, Pheu Thai, is elegant, beautiful and will provide him with perceived stability. But it will be marriage of convenience where love plays a very little part. We see that a lot in movies where either the hero or the heroine ends up having an affair with someone else down-to-earth.
Their meeting today at the Bhumjaithai headquarters looked just like a high-profile engagement talk where everyone was smiling, politely and yet cautiously.
The second woman, Kla Tham, can drive him crazy. Pheu Thai will be that snobbish wife who won’t show her feelings at luxurious functions but Kla Tham can create a scene wherever she goes. Bhumjaithai can be madly in love with her, though.
The Democrat Party is a woman who continuously lurks. She’s not flirting but that can be her hard-to-get charm. On the one hand, she’s out of reach. But on the other hand, she will always be within a striking distance. That is an attractive irony.
The tiny parties are those looking for a date ready to be secret lovers whom he sees once in a while. They will keep ambition to themselves, remaining submissive even, until they can really strike, like the character Shae in Game of Thrones.
She was true hero and may she rest in peace
February 12, 2026: Her status didn’t require her to be there, but her job, as she saw it, did.
Being its director, Sasipatchara Sinsamosorn was not supposed to be in closest proximity to the 18-year-old gunman who stormed into the Phatong Prathan Kiriwat School in Songkhla on Wednesday, creating a wildly chaotic and dangerous scene and widely-reported hostage situation.
Every school-shooting death is shocking, yet few, if at all, would have expected a dead victim’s name to begin with the “director” title. At best, she was supposed to be holding a megaphone at a safe distance away from the middle of the chaos trying to reason with the menacing holder of the gun.
If she had done that, it would have been heroic enough. But the teacher with impeccable records disregarded the hierarchy completely and chose to do more. The rest is sad history of true courage.
Accusers and accused rocked by anti-democracy charges
February 11, 2026: Bad winners cheat, and bad losers make it look like they have been cheated.
Has Sunday’s general election been organised perfectly? Apparently not. Has it been a blatant, large-scale cheat? The answer, for now, depends on which side you are on, as there is no evidence to say either way.
What is certain is that the “Cheat” camp has a slight advantage, but also a bigger risk. The current uproar can serve to discredit the election which handed a landslide to the conservative Bhumjaithai Party. A recount will plant more doubts for obvious reasons. But a lot more so if the recount uncovers major irregularities.
Ruling out a recount will keep questions simmering, playing into the hands of those seeking to devalue the outcome which over the past two days turned Anutin Charnvirakul, the Bhumjaithai leader, into a national hero, and proved a big embarrassment for the Orange.
In other words, it can be a lose-lose situation for the accused.
There is, however, potentially a big price to pay when the People’s Party is concerned. A recount that finds no substantial evidence of cheating can backfire against them badly, amplifying the “Sore Losers!” rhetoric of the conservatives which is gaining momentum after they were on the rope for a few hours. Is that a risk worth taking? Many in the Orange camp will say that they have nothing to lose.
Should there be recounts in areas where contentious incidents occurred? It should be up to evidence, not sentiment. But it’s already a high-stake issue for everyone.
Substantiated cheating charges will undermine democracy, but so will charges that fall through, or eventually expose hiccups or inefficiency rather than widespread political malice. The latter case will also taint democracy, especially when the accusers have so identified themselves with it but are attempting to harm the reputation of a crucial process after a humiliating landslide of the opponent.
Who made ‘Sick man of Asia’?
February 10, 2026: Just look at the mirror instead of elsewhere.
It also depends on how ones define “sick”. If the GDP is given the biggest weight, of course Thailand’s figures are among the lowest in this region, and Vietnam surpassing the country is worrying. When politics is concerned, it’s also “Yes, we are ill.”
Blame it all on divisive politics that has hindered national development, not any particular group of people, not the Constitution that some want to change and others do not, not activists who take turn taking to street, and not media figures or influencers with clashing ideologies.
Everyone is in it, but everyone is blaming everybody else. The result is that instead of being able to concentrate on moving forward together with united strengths, Thais have had to focus on what the enemies are doing, plotting, or thinking. It’s weighing heavily on the national health, and that’s why the nation is collectively sick.
But “sick” is also subjective. When places to live and food to eat are taken into account, Thais are healthy. Thailand is considered one kitchen of the world for good reason. The phrase “In the fields we have rice and in the water we have fish” is not what they say, but what the reality is.
All it takes to maximize the largely-ignored strength is recognize what ones see in the mirror as responsible for the unwanted “Sick Man” label.
Return of Bangkok versus Provinces debate
February 9, 2026: The Orange’s sweep of the Thai capital is a strange surprise that is, in a way, quite routine.
Only this time it’s happening to a rebellious camp. Normally, but not necessarily all the time, Bangkok could not be generally classified as defiant. The city’s electoral choices normally countered “extremism”, like when the Red tide threatened to overwhelm Thailand but Bangkok buffered it.
In those times, international sympathy poured in for the provincial voices. During the showdown between Thaksin Shinawatra and the conservatives, foreign media often criticised the “snobbish” and “smarter-than-you” attitude of Bangkokians. The “Red buffalos” devaluing rhetoric stemmed from that phenomenon. It was played up by both sides _ by the conservatives who accused rural people of not seeing him through, and by Thaksin supporters who turned the term into a formidable political weapon in electoral revenge missions.
Most of the time, Bangkok and the provinces made contrasting choices in elections. And more often than not, city citizens later got their way controversially, either through coups that overthrew “provincial” governments or through other political upheavals that put rural politicians out of power.
There even used to be a saying that provincial people picked the government only for Bangkokians to bring it down.
What should we call the current situation starting Sunday? Is it role reversal? Or is it a taste of one's own medicine? The conservatives surly are agreeing with the normally (in the past) pro-Red provincial people this time.
The People’s Party far exceeded all expectations on Sunday by capturing the whole Bangkok. This was despite strong speculation that it would be so negatively affected by border developments and the exposure of some alleged “grey” activities among Orange candidates.
It had been rightly predicted that the People’s Party would still win the most seats in Bangkok, but it had been wrongly assumed that the number of its capital seats would definitely decrease.
Some Orange fans are now, apparently out of sheer bitterness, saying that provincial people have made poor choices and they must “continue to live with it”. That was exactly like when Bangkokians complained out loud when even they could not deal with the provincial popularity of Thaksin among poor, rural people.
A rebellious man famous during the past tumultuous Thaksin period has warned Orange fans thinking that way that it was this exact attitude that made parties supported by Bangkok lose national elections.
Pavin Chachawalpongpun, an anti-establishment scholar living in Japan, said in a hard-hitting online post: “Winning all seats in Bangkok but thrashed in the overall election. Instead of finding out exactly why, (some) Orange supporters are calling provincial people stupid. Haven’t they learned anything from the past?”
This is NOT it, but everyone must go out there
February 7-8, 2026: Thailand’s general election will be nowhere near putting the country on the right path, but, as they say, ones have to get lost before finding the way.
Electoral politics has its extremely-bad side effects as partisanship excessively demonises and spawns apologists. Divisiveness keeps qualified, well-meaning people from working together for the greater, mutual good of the country. The need to win at all costs strengthens nepotism, feeds corruption and puts the wrong man on the wrong job. It encourages secrecy, places the public in the dark on necessary information, and distorts everyone’s morals.
But there is no other way but to keep going. Everyone has to go to the ballot booths on Sunday optimistic that the day will come when voting doesn’t change just unwanted methods of governance but the concept of elections itself. If elections one day start to punish and reward the right people, voting can be eventually meaningful. Everyone has to hope for the day when elections, and their preludes, do not promote pretentiousness, or fakery, or downright deceptions.
Sunday is anything but the moment of truth, but it’s the day the nation’s collective digging must crucially continue, or the light at the end of the tunnel will never be seen.
‘Hung Thailand’ not impossible
February 6, 2026: The charter referendum outcome should mirror the election results, but that doesn’t mean the opposite can’t happen.
If the Orange wins the election, it’s very likely that the “Yes” vote will prevail in the referendum asking Thais whether the current Constitution should be rewritten. If the Blue triumphs, the referendum should say no.
But the unthinkable might happen. In other words, the Blue may win but the majority of voters still wants the charter to be changed, or the Orange may come out on top but “No” turns out to be the referendum answer.
Or it can get a little more complicated on Sunday. Close election and/or referendum results can embolden the losing side, which can quite legitimately say a large number of Thais want this or want that. Only clear-cut landslides can help the winner keep the rivals quiet.
Bangkok: Orange’s fortress under siege
February 5, 2026: The People’s Party’s goal for the Thai capital is not to duplicate 2023, but get as close to it as possible.
The sweep of 32 out of a total 33 Bangkok seats is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to repeat due to several factors. First, the popularity, sympathy and positive let’s-try-it curiosity are less than three years ago. Second, the Democrats are apparently resurging. Third, Pheu Thai is hoping to realistically bounce back. Fourth, many poor vendors who wanted to try a new thing in the last general election are apparently turning their backs on the Orange due to some negative publicity drummed up by the opponents.
Fifth, the core support, young voters, may be shrinking although it remains massive. Sixth, Bangkok is the most fickle politically, having taken so many politicians up so high and brought them crashing down to earth so hard.
Bangkok’s exit polls will be a great indication this time. Normally, such polls effectively sounded out opinions of early voters, who traditionally are vendors who didn’t want elections to disrupt their money-earning routines. If those polls show a pro-Orange trend, the People’s Party can be very optimistic about the eventual Bangkok outcome, because young voters will only add to the morning advantage. But if the exit polls come out anti-Orange, the People’s Party will need to rely on latecomers, their supporters who don’t need to rush out to vote, to turn it around.
Virtually every popularity poll indicates that the People’s Party will remain the overall Bangkok winner. But the party set the bar so high in 2023 that duplication will be a dream, winning three or four fewer seats will be a great success, winning 10 fewer seats, give or take, will be a realistic achievement, and just winning more than any other opponent will be enough for celebration.
Do Cambodians hate ‘Ultraman’?
February 4, 2026: It appears obvious who the Cambodians want to win the Thai election. But never overthink it.
The Phnom Penh Post’s front-page headline story saying that if Bhumjaithai becomes the next government, Thailand will be “more hostile” toward Cambodia, negatively affecting the already volatile bilateral relationship, is having intriguing effects on this side of the border.
It is being played up by the Blue camp (See? Who are tougher against the Cambodians?) while the Orange is being conspicuously silent about it (We can’t put that in our election campaign or ‘Cambodian’ will be added to our party’s name).
And what a picture The Phnom Penh Post used with the story as well. The supposedly Bhumjaithai-bashing story was accompanied by Anutin Charnvirakul in an Ultraman posture during a political rally. If you don’t read the headline and the story, you can be forgiven for assuming that it is a positive report about him.
But all the conspiracy theorists out there, hold your horses. If this is a plot at the highest levels of both countries to tilt the Thai election in Bhumjaithai’s favour, the entire Cambodia must be in on it, be it government leaders, politicians, academics, the media or even ordinary people. And don’t forget the collateral damage on the Cambodian side of the border, and the fact that the territorial dispute erupted long before Bhumjaithai stood any chance of leading a government.
Let’s just say the possibility of The Phnom Penh Post reflecting a genuine Cambodian desire is significantly higher than The Phnom Penh Post wanting to discredit or help any Thai political party. Let’s just say the Cambodians are simply watching what is going on in Thailand and analysing it.
‘Nationalist crows’, luxury trips, Thai anthem in home stretch
February 3, 2026: In the last few days before a general election, you throw kitchen sink, and policies must wait.
Both sides in the rivalry are as guilty. At first glance, the Orange looks like reacting to attacks, being at the receiving end, but after a more thorough consideration, it can be anything but. Current political uproars that will go a long way toward determining who wins this Sunday are political games not necessarily initiated by the Blue.
The crows clip in which one or more black birds appear to be taking an Orange candidate’s personal details pasted for advanced voters out from a board emerged after the People’s Party’s complaints against “biased” electoral officials in Phetchaburi. Information about “luxurious” parliamentary trips by Orange members of Parliament followed the People’s Party’s similar accusations against state officials.
The “Poor, old and stupid” controversy was started by a pro-Orange online post which has seemingly backfired badly. It debatably destroyed the Orange momentum regarding the management of social security finances.
However, the People’s Party did not want to make an issue out of the hands-crossed-behind-the-back posture of Orange leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut while the national anthem was playing. But the incident which took place during a public policy debate with other parties’ bosses has played into the hands of the rivals nicely. They claim it reflects his rebellious attitude.
Even an anti-Orange news commentator admitted that Natthaphong’s posture (He stood up straight like the others, but, unlike the others, his hands were not by his sides but were crossed behind his back) would not have triggered an uproar if it had been somebody else. You have to connect the dots or look at the whole picture forming over the years to feel suspicious, the commentator said.
Sometimes it was partly hilarious. The crows clip, for instance, spawned funny anti-Orange comments online. But the big-picture showdown tells us about a very intense ideological war out there threatening social fabrics seriously. It’s the same as when the Yellow was fighting the Red before Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha’s coup. It also means that Thailand can remain deeply cursed no matter what happens on Sunday.
Epstein files’ chaos has just begun
February 2, 2026: Internet jokes are that if the US strikes Iran, it’ll be to divert attention from some damaging documents.
One thing that is 100 % true is that the Epstein files is a political napalm that is sending both the Republicans and Democrats running for their lives, but the devastating effects are not limited to within the US borders.
Donald Trump, the Clintons and a former UK ambassador to the United States are among the first high-profile people whose Epstein-related anxieties have spiked. Elsewhere, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre has said he agreed with Crown Princess Mette-Marit's admission of "poor judgement" after it emerged she had extensive contacts with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. A royally-disowned former UK prince is now having to deal with curious photos of him on all fours with a seemingly unconscious but fully-dressed woman lying so very close nearby.
The Trump and Clinton connections are never a surprise. Epstein’s powerful links go all the way to the very top of American politics and they are where party partisanship disappears completely. They are a main reason, actually, why many “conspiracy theorists” still believe that the Democrats and Republicans are not “that different” but are being wrapped around the same secret yet omnipresent finger.
The late sex offender, who died in prison under controversial “suicide” circumstances in 2019, was either a blackmailer or still remains a blackmail tool or simply a bombshell. Files concerning his legal case has been used by Trump to threaten his political enemies, against him by his rivals wanting to discredit him, and by “conspiracy theorists” to explain some sudden, unexpected military action initiated by America against other territories.
Last week’s release of the Epstein files, millions of documents, followed the release of a smaller batch in December that showed for the first time photos of Bill Clinton and Epstein together, and a shirtless Clinton in a hot tub with someone suspected to be a victim of Epstein’s sexual abuse.
According to the CNN, the Justice Department’s latest release “offers fresh insights into how former President Bill Clinton’s staff communicated with Jeffrey Epstein and his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, including sometimes-lewd email exchanges.”
The latest files include frequent communications between Maxwell — who is currently in prison for sex trafficking — and Clinton staffers between 2001 and 2004. It was during this period that Bill Clinton travelled with his staffers on Epstein’s private plane at least 16 times as reported by the CNN.
The network also noted that the document dump has come just days before an expected House contempt vote against the Clintons after they rebuffed a subpoena to testify in a bipartisan probe into Epstein.
Trump can’t be smiling, though. He is mentioned more than 1,000 times in the newly-released files. “While some of the references are benign, others include newly disclosed unverified sexual assault claims against Trump as well as fresh details about how some of Epstein’s victims described their interactions with the future president,” said the CNN.
The BBC is having the same busy time as its American counterpart. Lord Mandelson has resigned his membership of the Labour Party as he did not want to "cause further embarrassment" by his links to the late convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, the UK network report.
The former Cabinet minister, who was sacked as US ambassador last year because of his past connections to Epstein, appeared in the latest release of Epstein files. The BBC said documents suggested Epstein made $75,000 (£55,000) in payments to Lord Mandelson in three separate $25,000 transactions in 2003 and 2004.
In his letter to Labour's general secretary, Lord Mandelson said, as quoted by the BBC: "I have been further linked this weekend to the understandable furore surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and I feel regretful and sorry about this."
Pep Guardiola wants world to heed Gaza cries
February 1, 2026: When political leaders who matter are silent, the world’s most popular football coach will do.
And what a job Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola is doing. At a high-profile charity event in Barcelona last week, he has said what the world expected from the likes of Donald Trump or Keir Starmer on Gaza, and powerfully so.
On stage wearing a Palestinian keffiyeh, he talked about images that have circulated widely on the social media and broken his heart.
Children were crying “where is my mother?” among the rubble, he said.
That kind of a scene is the real moral challenge for humanity, Guardiola insisted. It was not a distant tragedy, he said. It was an innocent cry for help, done in desperation, not in hope.
“And I think we have left them alone, abandoned. I always imagine them saying, ‘Where are you? Come help us.’
“And even now, we haven’t done it. Perhaps because those in power are cowards, because they basically send innocent young people to kill innocent people.”
He urged everyone not to look away from the crisis, insisting that the world must make “a step forward, a statement for Palestine and… a statement for humanity.”
“We stand before the world to prove that we are, naturally, on the side of the weakest, which in this case is Palestine, but not Palestine alone, but all causes,” he said. “This is a statement for Palestine, and it is a statement for humanity.”
The event brought together artists, activists and public figures to raise funds and awareness for humanitarian and cultural initiatives in Palestine. Guardiola has consistently used his status as one of the most-watched football figures to enhance awareness on humanitarian issues, advancing causes like Palestine, compassion and human dignity, and this time he's taking action during one of the most competitive and meaningful football seasons.
Daily updates of, and opinions on, local and global events by Tulsathit Taptim
