This is a pessimistic take, but I increasingly feel it is a realistic possibility. Even if the military eventually loses power, I am not convinced Myanmar will emerge as a stable, democratic and united country.

Let's look at the reasons.

1. The military is incredibly difficult to defeat.

The Tat has lost substantial territory and many of its former strongholds. However, losing territory is not the same as losing a war. The military still has air superiority, heavy weaponry, established logistics and fortified positions in important urban centers.

The resistance has demonstrated that it can capture territory and inflict serious losses. But holding territory, defeating entrenched military positions and preventing the military from launching counteroffensives are different challenges. The conflict could drag on for years without either side achieving a decisive victory.

1. The resistance is not united, and removing a common enemy does not mean agreeing on what comes next.

There is unlikely to be a Star Wars-style Rebel Alliance that suddenly puts aside its differences and works towards a common political vision.

The NUG wants a federal democratic union of Myanmar. Various ethnic armed organisations have their own political objectives, territorial interests and ideas about self-determination. Some have historically pursued independence, while others favour autonomy or federalism.

Even those who agree that the Tat must go may disagree about who should govern, how power should be distributed and what the relationship between the central government and ethnic states should look like.

Military cooperation against a common enemy does not automatically translate into political unity afterwards. What happens when the military is weakened, but these disagreements remain?

1. Why should ethnic minorities necessarily want to remain in Myanmar?

This is probably the most uncomfortable question. I was shocked when my kayin friend told me that the only reason they are stick with the Bamar is because of borders created by the British. They never agreed to join voluntarily like the Scots and the English.

For decades, many ethnic minorities have experienced military oppression, displacement, restrictions on their languages and cultures, and exclusion from meaningful political power. These grievances predate the 2021 coup by decades. It's been there since 1948.

The Panglong Agreement and the promises associated with independence were supposed to provide a basis for a shared political future. Yet the relationship between the central state and many ethnic nationalities has remained deeply unbalanced.

From the perspective of an ethnic minority who has spent generations suffering due to the central government, why should a future federal union be trusted to deliver something fundamentally different?

Why should they feel a sense of solidarity with the Bamar majority simply because they share the same internationally recognised borders?

Of course, not all ethnic minorities want independence, and Bamar people are not collectively responsible for everything the military has done. But a united Myanmar cannot be sustained by insisting that everyone must remain together. It requires a political settlement that the constituent peoples actually consider worth accepting.

I am not convinced that such a settlement is guaranteed, even if the military disappears.

1. The Bamar civilian population has already tried constitutional politics, and the military overturned the results

The NLD won elections and formed a civilian government, but it had to operate under a constitution that reserved substantial power for the military. They always held the cards.

The military retained control over important security institutions and a guaranteed share of parliamentary seats. When the NLD won decisively again in 2020, the military seized power in February 2021.

This demonstrates how vulnerable civilian government was when the military retained its own institutional power and could disregard electoral outcomes. It had no way to control the military.

The uncomfortable question is: what institution can compel the military to accept civilian supremacy if it refuses to do so? Who else holds the guns?

Winning an election is not enough if the armed forces can simply overturn the result. And even if the resistance eventually wins militarily, establishing durable civilian control over the security apparatus will be another enormous challenge.

1. The civilian population faces enormous obstacles to sustaining political change.

I see three related problems here.

A. Many of the most ambitious and capable young people have left the country.

Millions of people have been displaced, and many young people have emigrated in search of safety, education and employment.

Leaving is entirely understandable. Nobody owes their country their safety or future. However, mass emigration also means that Myanmar risks losing people who could otherwise contribute to rebuilding its institutions, economy and civil society.

Even if conditions eventually improve, many of those who leave may establish their lives elsewhere. The country could face a serious shortage of the skills and institutional capacity needed for reconstruction.

B. Those who remain are often too busy surviving.

When people are struggling to afford food, obtain an education, find employment or protect their families, political mobilisation becomes much harder to sustain.

This does not mean ordinary people are apathetic. Many have taken enormous risks to resist military rule. But there is a limit to how much sacrifice a population can sustain, particularly when the conflict offers no clear end in sight. This is why so many even who joined the fight have to defect to the tat.

A revolution requires more than anger. It also requires organisation, resources, coordination and a credible vision of what comes afterwards.

C. Too much attention is directed towards external scapegoats.

I constantly encounter people on Facebook and other social media platforms blaming the Rohingya, China and the CCP, Thailand, Bangladesh, India, ASEAN and Western countries for Myanmar's problems.

Some of these criticisms have legitimate foundations. Foreign governments make decisions that affect Myanmar, and external actors can enable the military, undermine the resistance or fail to provide meaningful assistance. These decisions deserve scrutiny.

But there is a difference between criticising foreign governments for specific actions and treating outsiders as the principal explanation for everything that has gone wrong.

Authoritarian leaders frequently use external enemies to redirect public anger, encourage nationalism and present themselves as the defenders of the nation. The result is that people can become consumed by arguments about foreign interference, national humiliation and cultural grievances while the domestic institutions responsible for repression escape scrutiny.

We should be able to criticise China when it supports the military, criticise Western governments when their policies fall short, and discuss Thailand's treatment of Myanmar migrants without losing sight of the fundamental problem: Myanmar's political and military institutions have failed to establish a system in which power is accountable to its people.

The danger is that outrage becomes a substitute for a political strategy.

So where does this leave Myanmar?

I can see several possible outcomes: a prolonged stalemate, a weakened military regime that retains control of the central areas, a fragmented country in which ethnic organisations exercise increasingly independent authority, or a federal settlement that eventually works.

The last outcome is possible. I just struggle to see what would make it happen.

Myanmar could also remain one country on paper while becoming increasingly fragmented in practice, with different armed groups governing their own territories and the central government unable to exercise meaningful authority across the country.

That would not necessarily mean every ethnic state declares independence. But it could mean the end of Myanmar as a functioning, politically integrated state.

My question is this: what is the realistic pathway from where Myanmar is today to a stable, democratic and united country?

Not just how the military can be defeated, but how the resistance can agree on a common political settlement, how ethnic minorities can be persuaded to trust the union, and how a future civilian government can prevent another military takeover.

I genuinely hope I am wrong. But at the moment, I see plenty of reasons why the military might survive, and also plenty of reasons why defeating it might still not be enough.

And now, I am going to drink a lot of alcohol because this is all very depressing.

Check your status at www.ceir.gov.mm

The arrested Karen woman arrived in the United States in November 2024 through the UNHCR refugee resettlement program, and she was waiting for her permanent resident (Green Card).

I got deep into a rabbit hole and found that there are groups and channels in telegram which uploads child sex abuse materials,I got myself in one of these groups and it's fckin disgusting I wanna vomit now the fact that I witnessed these child sex abuse materials.It is sickening,Then I did a lil research and not just one there are many groups in viber also.I report these channels as much as I can but still another one pops up.These people actually leave a link of he groups in social media post such as tt comments and the thing is these post are not even sexual contents.I have a lot of nieces and I am so worried about our children futures.if u have Any other experiences like this please do share to bring awareness around people

My girlfriend wants one of those thigh highs like this in the image or black and white strip bottom to top and a cute modern skirt.

The thing is, idk where to buy em online. Her birthday is coming up and ill like to surprise her. Help!!

This is the source for the video and comments: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/183qKeVEK2/

What is this sub's thoughts on this? Most Burmese people commenting on his video say just because he was born in Myanmar, it doesn't mean he is a Bamar. They say if he is a muslim then he has heritage from India or Bangladash so he can't call himself Bamar, he has to say he is Kalar.

Basically they want him to say he is a Myanmar citizen of Indian heritage, or he is a Kalar living in Myanmar. They are annoyed with him calling himself Bamar.

Some comments also point out his face and say he doesn't look like a Bamar, while I saw one person say all Bamars are buddhists (which is not true).

What do you guys think he should call himself as?

တကယ်ကတော့အတိုအပြတ်ဝတ်လို့ဆိုတဲ့screenshotတခုကြောင့်အမျိုးသမီးထုကြီးကိုဒေါသထွက်သွားစေပြီးvictim blamingကိုဆန့်ကျင်ရာကနေလိုက်ယောင်ကြပြီးtrendပုံစံဖြစ်သွားတာ အဲ့တာနဲ့မိန်းကလေးကိုယ်လုံးတီးလျောက်သွားနေရင်တောင်rapeခွင့်မရှိဘူးဆိုတာတွေလျောက်spamရာကနေပြီးတော့တကယ့်သတင်းပါဖုံးကုန်ရော အခုအဖြစ်မှန်လဲသိရတော့ရူးရောပဲ ကျွန်တော့အမြင်အရတော့ဒီလိုအတိုအပြတ်ဝတ်လို့ဆိုတဲ့screenshotသာမပြန့်သွားခဲ့ရင်ဒီကိစ္စကိုသာမန်ဖြစ်ရပ်ပဲဆိုပြိးစောက်ဖက်တောင်လုပ်ကြမှာမဟုတ်လောက်ဘူးလို့မြင်မိတယ်

I’ve been wondering about this for a while: why do men in myanmar seem to have anger or hatred toward LQBTQ+, especially gay men?
As a gay guy growing up in a small town, discrimination was a pretty normal part of my younger years.
After moving from my small hometown to a bigger city, though, things changed a lot. I met people who accepted me, made friends, most people treated me normally. Of course, some people still don’t like me, and I’ve experienced some cyberbullying, but I no longer feeling on sense of discriminating.
What still bothers me is seeing how much LGBTQ+ people in Myanmar are attacked online—not just me, but the whole community. I got Déjà vu from my previous experience, not just me but the whole lgbt community.
I’ve seen people say things like gay people are being punished because of things we supposedly did in a past life, that homosexuality is “unnatural” according to Buddhism, or that being homosexual is a sin.
And honestly, sometimes I just wonder: what did we actually do wrong?
I didn’t choose to be gay. I didn’t choose to be bullied, discriminated against, or hated. Being gay is simply a part of who I am.
Why do some people, especially men, feel such a strong need to attack LGBTQ+ people? Is it culture, religion, masculinity, social pressure, or something else?
I still believe that everyone deserves kindness, acceptance, and a little bit of sunshine.

I know that this type of shit not only happening in Myanmar but not a single ppl talking about how wrong is this in a cmt section is crazy.

Quite honestly surprised on how many people supported him

not to be that guy but isn’t this the bare minimum? the moment that you decided to have a child that’s when you committed a selfless act. i think you shouldn’t expect anything from your child back. that child didn’t ask to be born, you made/birth that child. i think that the whole purpose of being a parent is to give not take. when you really think about it it’s real sad because the shit this country got so bad that the bare minimum is some god tier shit. the comments be overly glazing too💔

Recently 1.5K Rohingya (illegal) refugees were sent back from Malaysia. [malaysia does not partake in taking in refugees]

And about 3.5k more to be sent back over time.

Came to my attention that despite being Muslims, the Malaysians do not accept them.
And are in fact in conflict with them.
[image from a Malaysia redditor explaining the conflict between Malaysians and Rohingya]
And there seems to a lot of people who agrees/mention the same.

I do not support what the military has done to their people. But I must admit that the region has been a conflict zone for too long (not talking about military conflict, but conflict within the people living there)

And now I find out that, even after moving to another country (with a similar religious community)
They are still in conflict???? And resorting to such crimes like rape and murder?!?!?

It makes me rethink the whole situation, like why is there so much bloodshed and conflict wherever they go?

It’s preposterous to me that people seeking refuge would commit any form of crime there, like bro you ran away, why you trying to get kick out from the place that save you?

This isn’t gonna make me support the genocidal and exiling of their people, but it sure as hell make me not want to support or help them, especially since I heard a lot of them are coming or have moved to Yangon.

Alot of people explained to her that she's getting groomed. She didn't listen and said they were just jealous and hating on her. How is this normal?? It's just very weird. Even if it's just a joke, alot of teenagers might get bad ideas of thinking dating an adult as a minor is okay. The whole comment section is full of young teenagers bragging and showing off their partners that are alot older than them.

I don’t think this is a satire or a joke. The audacity of him to openly say that shit out like.

I grew up in a family that was quite racist. Muslims and Indians were called “Kway Kalars”. It was common to hear ethnic groups being derided too. Chins were dirty because they ate dogs. To my family, they were just “taw thars”.

I didn't really question any of this when I was young.

During the Rohingya crisis in 2016–17, my family and I were very much supportive of the Tatmadaw. Our Facebook feeds were full of support for our brave soldiers. We shared, without verifying them, reports that portrayed the Rohingya as villains. When Daw Suu rejected the genocide allegations at the ICJ in 2019, we cheered her on.

I remember seeing billboards of Daw Suu alongside Tatmadaw generals around Yangon. At the time, it genuinely seemed to me that the military enjoyed widespread popular support.

Looking back, I wonder if this period was a much more important turning point than I realised.

There are a few things I think about now.

1. Did the Rohingya crisis change Daw Suu's political calculations?

Perhaps Daw Suu understood that openly opposing the Tatmadaw over the Rohingya would alienate a large part of the Bamar majority and damage her political base. So she chose to defend Myanmar internationally rather than confront the military and the popular sentiment behind it.

I'm not saying this was necessarily her motivation. I obviously can't know what was in her head. But politically, I can understand why it might have seemed like the safer choice.

1. Did the generals misread Bamar nationalism as support for the Tatmadaw?

MAH and other generals may have interpreted the enormous public support for the military's actions against the Rohingya as evidence that they were genuinely popular.

The CDM showed how badly they had misunderstood this.

Being anti-Rohingya did not mean being pro-Tatmadaw.

A lot of people who had cheered the military in 2017–19 turned against it when the military took power from the elected government and started attacking people across the country.

But by then, the damage was done.

1. I think Myanmar's international image had changed enormously.

Before the Rohingya crisis, the international narrative was much simpler: the military versus the people, with Daw Suu as the symbol of democracy and human rights.

After 2017, that became much harder to sustain.

The world had seen large numbers of ordinary Bamar people openly supporting the military's treatment of the Rohingya. Myanmar was no longer simply perceived as a country whose people were suffering under a military dictatorship. There was now a perception that a significant part of the population had supported, or at least tolerated, atrocities against another ethnic and religious group.

I think that matters when we ask why the international reaction to Myanmar after the coup has sometimes felt so different from the reaction to other conflicts.

1. And this is where I have to look at myself.

Living abroad has made me realise how stupid and gullible I was when I was younger.

When I ask my friends why there doesn't seem to be the same level of sympathy for Myanmar as there is for Palestine, I sometimes hear something along the lines of: “Everyone seems to be the bad guy in Myanmar.”

My Kayin and Kachin friends sometimes laugh when I complain about MAH.

And honestly, I understand why.

I spent years saying nothing while the Tatmadaw was fighting ethnic groups and committing abuses. I didn't care because I didn't see those people as my people. I had absorbed a very Bamar-centric nationalism without even recognising it.

I was happy to believe army propaganda when it confirmed what I already wanted to believe.

Then the Tatmadaw came for people like me.

And suddenly I cared.

That's the part that makes me feel like a hypocrite.

I feel guilty knowing that I once supported a military that had been committing atrocities against ethnic minorities for decades. I feel uncomfortable wondering whether people like me helped create the political environment in which the generals believed they had enough popular support to seize power.

And I feel ashamed that I only really started questioning the Tatmadaw when its violence affected people I identified with.

I don't think ordinary Bamar people caused the coup. The responsibility for the coup belongs to the people who planned and carried it out.

But I do wonder whether people like my younger self helped create the political culture that made it possible.

So I'm curious what other people here think.

How much responsibility should ordinary Bamar people take for the nationalism, racism and indifference towards ethnic minorities that existed before the coup?

And perhaps more importantly: how do we genuinely reckon with that past without simply replacing one form of nationalism with another?

Just saw this news again today.

There's a very high chance that my mom got kidnapped on the roads between cities this early afternoon. We lost contact with her by then and we're gonna have to wait til morning for all of our investigation/connections to take effect.

Just a fucked up situation all around. Fuck the tatmadaw for cultivating this scary and lawless environment. Yet it's only at these moments that I'm glad for my father being high up in the military because he has phone numbers he can call to get info and ask requests from.

Am I just overreacting a platonic realtionship?

What are you guys opinions on them? @baba20253 it's their TT account. Go check it out. The individual in photo replied to some comments which asked on how they were related and she said she is the child's stepmother (I'm gonna use she as she is a queer and uses ကျွန်မ). She replies this way to all comments asking about how they are related. Also all photos and videos of the child are posted with romantic couple songs.

Hi saw this flag on one of the channels of the tatmadaw editors and wanted to know if this was a real thing of sorts? I think the patch may exist seperately though. I think we should talk more about this since it seems to be effecting a lot of Burmese kids; it could just be some sort of larp though.

EDIT:

Coincidentally, the same account I got the flag from changed their profile to an anime girl in the last few hours, I know I said coincidence but that can't be a coincidence. They're trying to make people see them as unserious as possible to prevent people from taking them seriously.

I think the logic for the design of the flag is Orthodox Christians=Theravada Buddhists. Both are the oldest, "purest" religious traditions and see themselves as such. Plus since Wagner has neo-nazi ties they've borrowed from Nazi traditions of seeing Burmans are "Aryans":

"In December 1938, Volkischer Beobachter, the official newspaper of the Nazi Party, gave its “seal of approval” to “the Nationalist party of the Myochites” following the 1938 riots and ensuing anti-kala campaigns, officially endorsing the ideology of “Burma for the Burmans.”632 Therefore, Myochit’s anti-kala ideology was both inspired by Nazi ideas and also based on the indigenous Burmese nationalist context. But even in this home-grown version, the Nazi party and the Myochit party mutually recognized each other’s policies."

https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:m046sc887/fulltext.pdf

Short wiki article on the rise of Galon Fascism I made, just a summary of the above not fully finished but could serve as short intro into origins of the Galons:

https://burma-wiki.globi.uk/wiki/Galon_Fascism

Also the role of Burmese Fascist co-option of the Sangha which is where the Buddhist component is from:

https://burma-wiki.globi.uk/wiki/Sanghaism

Just a note the Galon Fascists essentially believed in racial supremacy over the British and non-Burman groups and since Hitler fully agreed that they were racially above the British that would make them defacto Aryans, and the fact they "mutually recognized eachother" shows that this isn't some confusion between cultural frameworks, they were following the same sense of racial supremacy as eachother.

Okay so a commenter said this:

"This is a real group, the group is fighting in chin state against PDF chin-soldiers, The group seems to be a fan of both NLD and Tatmadaw, they are trying to protect the burmese nation according to their beliefs, they believe Aung San Su Kyi and both Min Aung Hlaing are good people, I am a pdf soldier and i knew this person in real life, he used to be in a government school we go to school together, during the 2021 coup he and i had other political beliefs, he was a pro-myanmar country while i wanted to make chin country, he has Russian DNA and Burmese DNA since both of his parents are russian and burmese, if i remember his name correctly, his name is "Txypa"

Txypa means Thura in Russian, so the original uploader of this flag may be in tatmadaw military and organizing a serious attack on rebel armed forces and he has a tictok account trying to brainwash all myanmar children"

They've also said "the group is real and they are beating us too badly".

This was from a PDF soldier that commented.

I saw a street interview about people views on LGBT community and one guy in the video said he hates all gay people and they don’t deserve rights. Which is absolutely insane, I can understand not supporting LGBT community but Hate is such a strong word to say. How can you hate a group of people that you have no negative experiences with.

His reasoning for it was that gay people are unnatural and not normal which is factually incorrect. What he said was objectively wrong because homosexuality and same sex attraction has been discovered in animals too.

It just not him a lot of Burmese teenagers in the comments are saying hate speech and posting pic of Hitler and Nazi officers in uniforms.

This isn’t just an issue about homophobia’s I found out that those teenagers are extremely racist and misogynistic too. Saying bad stereotypes about black peoples which is weird because they live in Myanmar and probably hasn’t have a single interaction with black peoples to be racist about.

They are extremely misogynistic too treating women like objects and saying borderline sexual harassment comments under girls posts.

all of this got me wondering why are we especially Gen z Burmese like this. I thought us Gen z would be more progressive and open minded but it’s sad and scary to see a lot of youth having all of these hateful and disgusting ideologies

We as Burmese people are too critical and too racist. From my personal experience (I'm Gorkha/ Nepali born in Myanmar) I have always been looked down and faced racism since my childhood.

The casual racism is insane, especially in genz Burmese. You'll always find ( ဝက်သားစားပြ၊ အမဲသားစားပြ) comments on Hindus and Muslims' posts. And don't get me started on those backhanded compliments.

I'm sorry for my English, I wanted to say so many things but I'm afraid I can't word it well