Both the government and the anti-government protesters should focus on being constructive rather than seeking to beat the other side into dust.
Both agree that reform is badly needed. Each, then, should put forward key proposals. These should be discussed and debated first among their own colleagues, then among the public at large, professional organisations, universities, etc, welcoming opposing views but keeping the discussions on-topic.
For example, the anti-government protesters insist on reform before elections. But BlueSky speakers give many proposals on myriad topics – can all that they propose be backed by the majority of protesters, when there is little evidence of in-depth, two-way discussions? Must all the proposals be implemented before elections – which ones are key? To what extent does Yingluck agree or disagree with each proposal?
During the past five months of protests, reform could have taken place where there was common ground, but instead we have witnessed non-constructive marches and counter-marches and an outpouring of vitriol. Not only that, we could have had a demonstration of democracy at its finest, reaching out to all, getting them buy in to whatever reforms were implemented.
Let’s get on with nation-building instead of drifting aimlessly with the tide.