blaze

But if the election date cannot be postponed, the PDRC should help campaign for a fair election and no vote buying, Somchai said.

Better tell them dems

Deputy Democrat party leader Alongkorn Ponlaboot in an interview that was broadcast on May 31, 2013 on John Winyu’s show (รองหัวหน้าพรรคประชาธิปัตย์กล่าวในรายการ “เจาะข่าวตื้น ตอน 99″) stated:

“Recently, if we speak directly, they [Puea Thai] use little money. I am not saying we [the Democrats] use more money than them [Puea Thai]. [host interprets with statement "they are using less money"]. It has become inverted [host interprets and says "They don't need to use so much money?"] I say if it is like that then don’t say we lost because of money”. “For the last election, it may be because we actually used more than them. Therefore, don’t talk about this issue anymore."

Very interesting post- thanks. (Suthep once made a similar statement- that the 'vote buying' by the PTP is not of the cash in envelope variety anymore- but rather populist policies.

There may be nothing wrong with delaying the elections providing both parties agree- but what is frightening is that this man who should know more about election law than anyone in the country, is unsure of whether or not the law would permit this delay

post edited due to sloppy reading of original post.

THOUGH expecting the PDRC to be 'educating' those in the south to vote independently, regardless of kamnan's instructions- might be asking a bit much of even that august and impartial body.

OK- that's a bit sarcastic - but shoudn't he have asked ALL the players (including UDD) tohelp campaign for a fair election and no vote buying-- if only for the sake of appearing balanced and impartial?

And only a couple of weeks ago, these same people were demanding that the US interfere in the scene

(By ending its relationship with the Thai government)- this is insane- but to be expected.)

And of course it is normal to demonstrate at embassies. happens all over the world- but threatening to seize an embassy?

Hope they have thought this through..;.

Back when Sondhi was ad-hoc ing a poltical vision on the PaD stages and now, with Suthep's "People's Council', many have compared these notions to fascism.

But it should be remembered that fascism was a coherent philosophy- in encompassed and intigrated a social, economic and political vision that would (it was believed) serve Italy well far into the future.

The Thai version exists for one and only one purpose- to expunge one man from the political conciousness. We had a constitution designed specifically to limit the influence of this one man. Now we have talk of 'reform' ;where the only goal of this 'reform' is to limit Thakin's influence.

There have been revolutions staged against one man- civil wars with one man as the focus- but I have never heard of an entire political system being developed solely to limit one man's influence.

Does any one seriously think that these ca;;s for 'reforms' are inspired by, among other factors, the nepotism, warlord politics of Nakhon Si Tammarat- Surat Thani? Within the state agencies and their cushy relationship with their unions? Of course not- 'corruption' is code for Thaksin.

This is more like an exorcism than the enactment of political vision- Perhaps it is simple skapegoating- get rid of Thaksin and Thailand will return to its pristine past. But ideology? Vision?

The danger of course is that reforms aimed specifically designed to limit Thaksin's influence will remain embeded in the system-- Then when a new political force comes on the scene in a few years or decades- the system will have to dismantled and reformed again-

If these people could concentrate solely on principles- and leave personalities out of the vision- then Thailand might be prepared to move forward.

Why is this not like interwar Europe?

A suspicion that democracy (relatively new in most of Central and South Europe) was vulnerable to corruption- that the economy, due in part to international circumstances (ie, the Great Depression) was slowing down- that corruption was rampant (which it was a)- that 'modern' selfishness had destroyed the pure essence of the national soul?

I think that at least, the situation here would benefit from some context.

and when Suthep demanded a solution that was almost cookie cutter copy of Mussolini--- The "People's Council'/ the Grande Council (study their mandate, their constiuents)--maybe this is a time to look at what is happening in thailand in a broader historical context.

Hitler did not make the Nazi Germany- the disenchantment with 'the system' made it.

Had there been no Hitler- another firebrand would have been publicly annointed- and had there been no Thaksin (especially now with comm,unication so available)-- well you could have Thida- and if THailand is not careful - you will.

You are probably right Roadman

Please explain the difference between feudalism and liberalism.

You might want to also consider explaining the sources of legitimacy for each.

You can do it- you're not a dumb buffalo -- so enlighten those on this forum as to just why the term feudalism, correctly used, applies to liberal and neo-liberal capitalism.

I think it's safe to say you really don't see the difference between feudalism and raw exploitation. But the Reds do- and there is a difference- the promise to exploit is open to all under capitalism- under feudalism it is open to a very select few regardless of how much cash they have.

And as you know- feudalism is legitimized by something greater than measly investment potential.

(and no- that something is not 'merit')

You don't find it a bit ironic that you would welcome a coup by the very people you refer to as 'Thaksin's henchmen'?

Can the Constitutional Court on its own ban the party- I can't recall how judicial coups in Thailand work... or is it the EC?

Well- reading the EC comments today ordering the government to smarten up, (as if policing government policies were part of its mandate), I think it's safe to say the PTP is pretty much finished- in this incarnation.

(Curiously, no mention of the Democrats pouting in the corner and not sure if they even want to play- an issue which SHOULD be part of some concern to the EC).

And then too- there was the firing of tear gas at protesters peacefully attempting to plunge the country into anarchy. Game's up for the PTP.

But I wonder how a judicial coup- (another judicial coup) will be greeted among the more ardent redshirts?

Uh- no- it's not about corruption- it is about the PERCEPTION of corruption- do people BELIEVE that corruption has gotten worse.

Now if you were to go to a Suthep rally and run the same survey- I can confidently say that the results will show that the perception of corruption is the absolute worst in the world.

If you go to a Yingluck stronghold- different story.

In rereading the thread, I see that this point has been made several times- and ignored- It suits our particular agendas to equate perception with reality- fine.

What this poll does show, unequivcially- that trust in the honesty of fellow Thais- perhaps the cops, perhaps the school head down ther road- the contracter bidding on building our house- and probably the government- is getting worse.

When the polls came out a few months ago- stating that an amazingly high percent of Thais are ok with corruption- then of COURSE the perception is going to be the corruption is getting worse.

IF you tell people that their neighbors quite like corruption- this might surprise them a bit- and so - in their perception- corruption is getting worse.

(not those neighbors blowing whistles to exorcise corruption from the national soul- in the form of the Demon Thaksin- no, those are the only people in Thailand who religiously file their taxes accurately, refuse to offer or accept a bribe, punish their children severely if caught cheating on tests... but the others- well they're ALL corrupt- And all because of that DEMON Thaksin who has entered their unsuspecting souls.

Thanks Uncle J

Good article--

What is ironic is that the two political careers that have really suffered the most in this are Abhisit's and Korn's.

What would you suggest Khuhken- this is a serious problem-- one that many of us have debated for twenty odd years in this country- how could Thailand become a fully functioning democracy- without coups, without street violence- with governments permitted to serve their terms-- without the perception of corruption (albeit unproved in most cases)--

Is it the system that needs changing- or is it the very culture from which the system derives- OR_ is it a case that the whole notion of liberal democracy as practiced (on paper) is incompatible with Thai culture?

If that is the case, what systemic changes would YOU initiate?

Cbluck58

It doesn't- that's why Suthep and co are intent on changing- not the constitution- but the system of governance. He has stated that.

There are many nations in the world that have appointed councils-- and some of those use the term 'Democratic' in their official names. As in Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Some people vote on some stuff- bingo- we are 'democratic'--

And there are ways this could be done- that an assembly of appointed 'good people' preside over an elected legislature. All legislation would have to be filtered through the upper house- from whom and by whom the prime minister could be elected.

The upper chamber - (not to be confused with a senate) could enjoy the rights of legislators- also proposing laws.

OR_ why have so many legislators in the first place- have one representative from each of the sectors- the agricultural, the manufacturing, civil service, military etc. (not the poor though- c'mon what do they know about running a country-- that the wise men from the fish canning industry don't know).

Let the sector figure out how it wants to go about selecting its representative (elections- reading chicken bones- primogeniter-- up to them).

Then all the sector reps get together and put on rabbit ears and do the bunny hop-- and then...

Well- is it time for recess?

And just how does one reform politics to guarantee 'good government'- (and by that I assume you mean regarded as 'good' by all citizens)?

Do we seriously need more courts?

Or is it that the courts are being soft on the current government?

If that is the case, should it not be judicicial rather than political reform that is required?

(First though, you would have to provide evidence to support the notion that the Constitutional Court etc are being soft on the gov't)

Why has there been no talk from the Suthep camp about changing the constitution?

Doesn't that alert you to the possibility that these people envision changes that go far beyond the constitution- that just maybe they want to change the entire process by which people assume the powers of government.

Or is the demand to somehow institutionalize the existance of Thaksin out of the minds of those who support the policies he introduced (or that they associate him with- rightly or wrongly). How could that be done.

It is interesting that we have not heard anything close to a concrete specific about these 'reforms' aside from the makeup of the People's Council.

I don't think Suthep is a fool one bit- I think he is biding his time- Start with the People's Council- and then tinker with it- expand it a bit- make it more appealing to those pesky foreigners and trade partners who stupidly equate it with a kind of fascism- Then write a constitution once the new 'system== the Brave New World is in place.

And in a sense this is very wise of him- he is capitalizing on the way that Thais are more afraid of freedom (with the individual responsibility and risks that come with freedom) than with surrendering some of their 'rights' as citizens. They like strong leadership- providing they have faith in the essental 'goodness' of that leader.

This of course seems far fetched- but then the notion of a "peoples Council' made up of a thousand individuals- many appointed to Suthep- to change the entire nature of politics in the nation also seems far fetched- But this has happened before in history- we all know that.

And there's no reason it can't happen again.

At least he's "clarifying" the Thai legal, bureaucratic, and political mumbo jumbo and bringing it down to the everyday Thai. He also seems way more adept at organization than Thais we've seen at the helm before. Too bad he's got too much land grab and under the table issues. He at least seems genuine and authentic, a rare Thai quality. let's see if he includes all the provinces north and south of Bangkok. Let's see who he identifies as his first tier leadership. Surely he doesn't expect to be able to reach a consensus on anything with 400 people in a people's council. Does he?

This is clear to you?

He is not demanding a new constitution- he is demanding to 're-form' Thailand.

Political institutions derive from the culture of the nation- he is going to change the entire culture of thailand-- in=- what? 15 months?

Re his including the provinces- he is NOT inviting representatives from provinces- but rather representatives from occupations! (Now why, if someone is attempting to redesign the political system of a country, do they invite represantives of occupations? Citizenship is not conditional upon your career choices.

(Though a clue can be found in examining the system of government put into place by Mussolini-- syndicalism).

The last constitution of this country- and I suspect Suthep knows this full well- was designed specifically to limit the influence of Thaksin-- It didn't work.

So what Suthep now (perhaps) feels he must do- is go beyond simply changing the constitution to changing the entire way that Thailand is governed.

And THEN writing a new consitiution to codify the new system-

and hints about this new system can be found in the composition of the 'design committee'.

The comparison of Suthep's 'People's Council' with the Grand Council of Mussolini is more than apt- almost uncanny,

And elections can be held under such a system- as Sondhi L earlier suggested and Suthep has promised. Each occupation could elect and forward a reprentative to the grand council. Each state department could do the same. There would be no corruption because all elected representatives could be screened by the appointed component of the regirme- who themselves are good people- (If they weren't they wouldn't be appointed by the good people doing the appointing).

This is a kind of Democracy- it is Fascist- (why beat around the bush?)- and it includes elections. Bear in mind that under Stalinism, there were constant elections in the old USSR- representatives of "The People'l were permitted to vote on certain issues. (Such as where to erect a new stature praising Stalin).

He told the delegates the People′s Council would contain 400 seats: 300 selected from "occupation-based" quota and another 100 seats would be given to "experts" selected by the PCAD.

Suthep must have been reading Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and decided that winding the clock back 2000 years to create a new Roman 'senate' is the way to go.

Not, perhaps, what most people would regard as 'absolute democracy'.

You don't have to go back that far. The March on Rome and Grand Council of Fascism - everything he's doing is a carbon copy of Mussolini.

Exactly-

Why are we not hearing details of specific instances of corruption in the government- or the beaurocracy for that matter? It is not as if the courts are shy about prosecuting members of the current government- all they need is evidence-- We hear about the horrible corruption in the government- surely someone can come up with something substantive that will verify what appears to be common knowledge (like Clinton's corruption in Whitewater was common knowledge-- only problem- as near as the courts could determine- it never happened).

Perhaps you don't understand a lot about the interwar period in Europe.

There was a great disappointment with democracy- (the Depression, the reparations that some were still paying from 1918 weren't helpineg- and yes, most of these fledgling 'democracies' were corrupt. And incomptentent.)

Many looked back to a golden age- which history shows, never existed.

An age of absolutism. Where the people were as one- when the poor had properly accepted their fate as dictated by emperors and living gods.

This was resurrected in Romania- then Italy- then Germany-

All rejected the corruption that democracy, unfettered by 'common sense' had unleashed.

All ended up in tears

Many Thais- and some very ignorant westerners, have demanded a 'benevolent dictatorship'.

Germany had one- So did Italy- and as they picked their lives from the smouldering ruins of their broken utopias- they became devotees of all that Suthep hates.

(Well, in fact part of Germany, all of Romania, all of fascist (arrow cross) Hungary- were to endure, thanks to their embrace of absolutism, a few decades of Stalinism- more absolutism)

Nothing in history has caused so much suffering as the quest for the perfect social order.

Given the ballooning level of personal debt, I'm sure he won't be the last. When the rice scam collapses and its after-effects felt, I'm sure there will be many more in grim financial straits.

jr

you are GREAT!!!

And maybe not entirely insane- I mean wrong - either.

I'm joking man-

TIT as ol' Bernie used to crow.

JRsoul

How I feel doesn't matter - not to me even- let alone my 'hosts'.

But how THEY feel will determine how this plays out.

I can say my feelings about Thaksin's alleged crimes but so what?

My point was simply that Thaksin has alienated his core.

And I think he knows that now- and for that reason-- there will be no further talk of amnesty- for anybody.

Surely the hostility from BOTH the red and the non-red camp will have taught him that even the affection he commanded from the hard cores is slipping away- and all thanks to this bill-

More important- the PTP, like all political parties, like the smell of power-- and I think that this will mark the beginning of a implosion.

And if continued power is the goal- then

thaksin must be sidelined.

Thaksin will be- I think, as a result of this bill, put to pasture.

And remember- having Thaksin back in the country does NOT gurantee an easy ride for his sycophants.

No-- I think it's going to be- 'well, we tried- but--- no hard feelings huh? Now we need to push a new promo scheme-'