Jump to content

PilotEd

Member
  • Posts

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by PilotEd

  1. The key word is formed. I do no see the word "elected" mentioned.

    MP's are elected (directly as constituency candidate, or indirectly as party list candidate), governments are formed by parties with the most elected MPs (either single party or multy-party).

    That is not democracy. By definition democracy is one person one vote. There is no other. The word has its' roots in Greek and cannot be anything else. I am not sure what you would call what is being proposed but it is not democracy.

    The term originates from the Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) "rule of the people",[4] which was found from δῆμος (dêmos) "people" and κράτος (krátos) "power" or "rule", in the 5th century BC to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens; the term is an antonym to ἀριστοκρατία (aristokratía) "rule of an elite".

    Let me be clear, I support the Thai monarchy which is so important to the Thai people and to the stability of the country. My beef is with the economic elite that conspire to keep the peasants in constant servitude and subservience. Specifically the constituency mp's who represent the economic elite.

    Your reply has no relation with the OP however correct it may be.

    BTW we're still with one person one vote in the charter and I understand it shows more 'proportional representation' than the 1997/2007 version. Mind you some have rejected 'proportional representation' as not working in Thailand. Strangely enough by some of the more vocal anti-junta, return to previous 'democracy'. Seems they forget the North and NorthEast are the more populous areas of Thailand.

    You are exactly right that the north and northeast have the larger population and therefore will have more impact on election results. That is exactly how a democracy works. What so called proportional representation provides is heavier weight to elite privileged classes What the new constitution is trying to achieve is to take the deserved representation away from the majority of Thai citizens.

    It is precisely why I am opposed to the junta. It is obvious they are trying to aid the return to control of Thailand to the economic elite.

    From your post I suspect you are one of them.

  2. The key word is formed. I do no see the word "elected" mentioned.

    MP's are elected (directly as constituency candidate, or indirectly as party list candidate), governments are formed by parties with the most elected MPs (either single party or multy-party).

    That is not democracy. By definition democracy is one person one vote. There is no other. The word has its' roots in Greek and cannot be anything else. I am not sure what you would call what is being proposed but it is not democracy.

    The term originates from the Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) "rule of the people",[4] which was found from δῆμος (dêmos) "people" and κράτος (krátos) "power" or "rule", in the 5th century BC to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens; the term is an antonym to ἀριστοκρατία (aristokratía) "rule of an elite".

    Let me be clear, I support the Thai monarchy which is so important to the Thai people and to the stability of the country. My beef is with the economic elite that conspire to keep the peasants in constant servitude and subservience. Specifically the constituency mp's who represent the economic elite.

  3. "NCPO's stay in power until a new government assumes office.

    Until that point the NCPO under Article 44 can refuse to recognize a new government, citing national security, devisive political conflict, etc.

    It can then cite authority from the (assumed) passed 2015 draft constitution to appoint itself as an interim government until the "right" kind of government is formed.

    "The function of the law is to keep those who hold power, in power." - Gerry Spence

    You hit the nail on the head. If, after elections, the "wrong" group wins, the junta will find an excuse to not recognize them. They will hold election after election until they get the results they want.

  4. I have found ibuprofen gives relief to my back pain (after spinal operation) and sciatica. It does not act as a blood thinner so will not affect you in that manner. It also has minimal effect on the liver.

  5. An election after October 2015, which is true, it will be, how long after, well who knows, when the time is right, whenever that might be. Its not worth getting excited about when the elections will take place, we all know its a while off, but whilst there is no violence and some corruption is disappearing, then things are moving slowly in the right direction. Remember this is not a democracy like we have been used to in the west, this is not the west and they have to eventually come out with something that works for Thailand, not the UK or USA or wherever.

    There is only one definition of democracy. There is not Thai democracy and the rest of the world democracy.

    One person, one vote. Not the military having weighted votes in the parliament. Under no circumstances does that fit the definition of democracy.

    Right now Thailand is favoring its' oligarchs who are really controlling Prayuth.

  6. How many times has the government try to help the farmer with there financial burden in the last two years. They don't want to learn, they just want free money.

    Very easy for types like you to say but I can tell you as an ex-pat living in a rice growing village, the farmers work very hard to grow the crops and then the brokers rip them off and make huge profits.

    These people are not looking for a hand out just fair treatment. And this government won't help in that regard because they represent the class to which the brokers belong.

  7. While I hold no brief for Yingluck and her policies she was elected in an internationally certified election. I call that democracy.

    What Suthep did was not unlike the infamous Munich beer hall putsch of one Adolph Hitler. In other words you go my way or I disrupt the government. That is not democracy.

    Yes, and she was removed for an abuse of power by a court of law. That's called not being above the law.

    The fact she was in reality no more than a puppet for a non elected criminal fugitive, her brother, to run and manage the government how he saw fit, in his interests and in pursuit of his agenda does cloud the water somewhat.

    But, in the end, the one indisputable fact is that she was democratically elected. Don't like her, elect someone else in the next election.

    And, you know as well as I (although I doubt you will admit it) that the court was stacked against her.

    She broke the law, knowingly and willingly. Dumb ass thought she could do anything she liked and simply lie her way out, just like her brother. The disrespect of the law, following procedures and any form of accountability is the Shin's Achilles' Heel. They leave themselves wide open then lie and/or scream it's all political.

    If the followed the law, observed procedures and did what they swore to do they'd still be in office. But they just can't which given criminal leadership is understandable.

    Or do you think people in government should be allowed to break the law as they like and only be removed from office if they loose an election?

    You mean like the laws Suthep broke by preventing people from voting or obstructing commerce or encouraging others to break the law or taking over the government by coup as Prayuth did?

  8. While I hold no brief for Yingluck and her policies she was elected in an internationally certified election. I call that democracy.

    What Suthep did was not unlike the infamous Munich beer hall putsch of one Adolph Hitler. In other words you go my way or I disrupt the government. That is not democracy.

    Yes, and she was removed for an abuse of power by a court of law. That's called not being above the law.

    The fact she was in reality no more than a puppet for a non elected criminal fugitive, her brother, to run and manage the government how he saw fit, in his interests and in pursuit of his agenda does cloud the water somewhat.

    But, in the end, the one indisputable fact is that she was democratically elected. Don't like her, elect someone else in the next election.

    And, you know as well as I (although I doubt you will admit it) that the court was stacked against her.

    She broke the law, knowingly and willingly. Dumb ass thought she could do anything she liked and simply lie her way out, just like her brother. The disrespect of the law, following procedures and any form of accountability is the Shin's Achilles' Heel. They leave themselves wide open then lie and/or scream it's all political.

    If the followed the law, observed procedures and did what they swore to do they'd still be in office. But they just can't which given criminal leadership is understandable.

    Or do you think people in government should be allowed to break the law as they like and only be removed from office if they loose an election?

    You mean broke the law like Suthep did by obstructing people from voting along with so many other laws he broke or encouraged others to break, or breaking the law by taking power by coup rather than election. Which one?

  9. thanks to this guy thailand now have a military junta running the country.

    Please also remember the phrase: Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    Elections will be continually delayed indefinitely. Prayuth will not give up his position readily because as a puppet of the elite class they will not let him.

    It is important to those people to keep demonizing Thaksin so no one pays attention to their oppression. Keep 'em uneducated, barefoot and pregnant so that the upper classes can continue to enjoy a lavish, entitled life style.

  10. This guy is to blame for the destruction of the Thai democracy and led to the takeover by the junta. He should be in jail.

    On the other hand I hope he creates havoc again. My dollar and Euro pensions will become worth more when the Baht falls.

    But very sad for the Thai people.

    What rubbish, suggest you do some more research.

    "This guy is to blame for the destruction of the Thai democracy...." False, there was no democracy for his to destroy.

    There was a democracy but he and his followers blocked the voting booths and the election commission so the country could not vote at the last election or did that just slip your mind? You don't have to research that it's black and white. Maybe you should do some research before you get on social media and make a fool of yourself next time you decide to mouth off.

    "There was a democracy....."

    Wrong in the first few words. No further comment needed.

    Everyone on this thread who are denying that there was a democracy are ignoring the fact that Yingluck was democratically elected by an internationally certified election. If you didn't like her policies then put up a better candidate in the NEXT election. You don't create havoc and enable a takeover by the military.

  11. While I hold no brief for Yingluck and her policies she was elected in an internationally certified election. I call that democracy.

    What Suthep did was not unlike the infamous Munich beer hall putsch of one Adolph Hitler. In other words you go my way or I disrupt the government. That is not democracy.

    Yes, and she was removed for an abuse of power by a court of law. That's called not being above the law.

    The fact she was in reality no more than a puppet for a non elected criminal fugitive, her brother, to run and manage the government how he saw fit, in his interests and in pursuit of his agenda does cloud the water somewhat.

    But, in the end, the one indisputable fact is that she was democratically elected. Don't like her, elect someone else in the next election.

    And, you know as well as I (although I doubt you will admit it) that the court was stacked against her.

  12. Persecution of the dissenting press will keep Thailand on tier 3 until they allow total free speech.

    They have to learn the concept of I abhor what you have to say but will defend to the death your right to say it.

    Only people who are afraid and paranoid try to throttle free speech.

    If the Junta thinks that negative statements prevent them from moving forward they will see what stifling them will do in the future.

×
×
  • Create New...