rubl

<quote>'Middle-class prefers a controlled democracy'</quote>

Yes, all 15 of them. Thailand has no real "middle-class" to speak of. There are the poor, working poor and psuedo-elite.

And this is precisely the single most important requirement before Thailand can have a true democracy.

They need a large "middle class" that has a common interest to give the government a common middle ground from which to work.

The issue is how to grow this middle class.

And I am ashamed of the person who said the poor were too uneducated to have a democracy. Shame on you!!! They are not too uneducated to understand and implement a democracy - they are poor!!! The poor have their own interests which are contrary those of the elite. Not right or wrong, just contrary. Build the common ground of a large middle class, and democracy will take hold by it's very nature.

It isnt a requisite to have a middle class to have a democracy. Why can't representative democracy be made with the balance of power with the lower end of economic society? Happens every day all over the world with left wing socialist governments being elected all over the world.

Nonsense idea that a country is too poor for democracy.

The interesting aspect of a democracy is that it only needs some demagogues and before you know it you have a 'Democratic Peoples" state.

With all comments it would seem posters here have seen a near complete 'somewhat' final draft of the new charter proposal in English. Any pointer where it's available?

This new charter is a huge, sad joke and a huge step backwards for Thailand.

It's a real shame what is happening. They are specifically setting this up so no one elected from the Northeast will have a majority party in power. The resulting government will NOT be a Democracy at all...not even a hint of Democracy. They know if it was a real Democracy then someone from the Northeast would be elected PM and the Bangkok elite WILL NOT let this happen again.

Someone from the NorthEast? Who might that be?

""Elected politicians will be weak [under the new charter] as they will be overseen by unelected bodies,"

That is to some extend in all democracies. Prime example are the independent courts.

That's a misunderstanding. Even in evolved democracies, or especially in evolved ones, courts do not oversee members of the legislative in their function as legislative. If a member of parliament as a person (not as a MP) has to respond to a court, first the parliament has to lift his immunity.

In some countries there is a constitutional court with the power to declare unconstitutional a piece of legislation, but that is not so in all (evolved) democracies. And if the court can challenge the legislative, all that has to change is the piece of law, not the MPs.

But in a true democracy (whatever that is) I would believe that a court should not be able to overturn a piece of legislation the legislative has formally enacted. I am not talking about rules and regulations issued by the government, I am talking about a formal law introduced, debated and voted by the legislative. These laws are the will of the people as expressed through their representatives. Courts should respect that if democracy is the power of the people.

Now the new Thai draft constitution violates many principles of democracy, and of them them is that part of the legislative is NOT elected, thus does not represent the Thai people. So who do they represent?

There's a lot of truth in what you say. Still keep in mind that a democracy tends to be easily corrupted by people with less scruples and / those with demagogic capabilities. For Thailand the shenanigans around the blanket amnesty bill are a good example of that.

BTW I don't want to sound too pedantic, but whether elected or appointed the legislative represents the Thai people, but not necessarily or directly the Thai electorate as such.

"47 meters of cables and sold the copper for more than 60,000 baht."

If that's the current price one gets for scrap copper I fear more people will find their landline out-of-order soon.

Answering his own question, Prayuth continued, "The [interim] constitution has already been written ... this is my road map. We have 60 days, 90 days, it has to be like that. If it can be different, find me a way. How can I amend that?"

Just off the top of my head I can think of 3 ways:

1) Another coup

2) Section 44

3) Rubber stamp by the hand picked NLA

That would be undemocratic

Interesting that some still complain about the junta and the junta appointed NLA is not democratic with all which goes with democracies. Almost as if some are prepared to accept the junta if they 'democratise' a wee bit. Imagine to have poll to elect members of the junta. Now that would be democratic.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

Does your country also allow criminal fugitive to run your country from afar? Does your country allow such figures to own political parties, skype-in into cabinet meetings to give orders? Allow criminal fugitives to recall his party and government underlings to him to pass a few more orders?

It's interesting that a month ago some here pointed out that the Founding Father of Singapore had endorsed Thaksin as a strong leader and a few agreed with that. Possibly because they don't come from real democracies.

So, poll delayed, mentality of Thai and farang alike still not correct. An election now wouldn't solve any problems.

In your previous post you state that it is unreasonable to compare the unchecked power of a military junta that grants itself amnesty to the checks and balances in an elected government that attempted to use the legislative process to grant amnesty to people no longer in government.

Here you ask for a comparison in governments between a country where the military doesn't stage coups or get involved in politics, and a country where the military stages coups and routinely plays politics. You're not big on logical consistency, are you?

I'll give you the obvious comparison; the country where the military doesn't stage coups has the better government and better future prospects.

You asked for it with your "I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. " and "Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election.".

So, polls delayed, consistently. Reforms first, to prevent coups and criminal fugitive involvement.

"and never informed the media of the meeting".. Is there a law that politicians, PMs or anybody has to inform the media about what meetings they have?

Well, first there was the near automatic denial and in the end is was a meeting which included the then Minister of Finance and several businessmen from the property sector with then PM Yingluck being advised and hearing their opinion. Further details still lacking.

So what are the "fake disasters" referred to? A bit hard to fake an earthquake or a volcano in Isaan, or a plane crash for that matter, but there is one "disaster" that never fails to ensure a shower of baht from Bangkok to the bank accounts of dodgy officials and their politician chums, and that is a drought. It's a dead cert way of opening the floodgates of central funds, as everyone knows how arid and drought-prone Isaan is, right? Now, there doesn't actually have to be a drought by any standard definition of the term, but all one needs is a normal dry season spell of 2 or 3 months of no or little rain, rally up enough headmen and Or-Bor-Tor officials to send in a form saying "drought" at the top and a few photos of withered rice plants and cracked soil to accompany it, and before you know it......it's declared a "disaster" and BINGO!

In recent years, the usual suspects in the Ministry of Agriculture have been joined by the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (formed Boxing Day post-tsunami) in the Min of Interior, to form a formidable cabal of officials and politicians who can cash in big time, when they declare a "drought" disaster. And they have learned to also shout "disaster" every time it rains heavily and a river overtops its banks, like it would normally and naturally in the rainy season or the wind blows hard and a few trees topple and the odd roof is blown off. You can always exagerrate by a factor of 10 or 100 the damage done, and nobody in Bangkok is going to know......perhaps until now, when there are a few old political scores to settle and the scale of the fund skimming has become ridiculous.

The "best" or worst climate-related "disaster" I came across, however, was one cool season a few years ago and the temperature got down to 19 C minimum at night in the hills of Phu Phan. That is the coolest area of Sakhon Nakhon province and I was there to witness it, yet a day or two later, I read in the B Post that a "cold disaster" had been declared in upper Isaan, including Sakhon Nakhon. This was code to request millions of baht from Bangkok to be spent on a few blankets and coats to distribute to villagers (who incidentally, get given the same stuff year in year out) as an act of caring by the government. But who checks how the money is spent, who it is give to and whether it represents good value for the taxpayer? And since when is 19 C a "cold disaster" in any country of the world, anyway? Only in Thailand I suspect.......

Anyway, this is only speculation as maybe there were some other fake "disasters" I hadn't considered. Suggestions?

The English in theNation article is not always intelligeble (and I'm friendly phrasing it as such).

A cool spell, an earth shake, a bit of flooding is called a disaster. Ingenious as Thai are more people like to claim support than are really entitled to. At times government officials (i.e. bureaucrats) are easily induced to support claims especially when the 'right' inducement in provided.

At least that's my interpretation.

The Cambodia government seems to be MIA in this action. I would think the two constituional monarchies would work closely to prevent Cambodians from illegally crossing the Thai border. Especially since Prayut has established a friendly immigrant-worker system that would eliminate human trafficking brokers. Yet, Cambodians seem to continue to be motivated to illegally enter Thailand for work.

Something is wrong on the Thai side. Prayut wants to build a border fence along Thailand's border with Malaysia. Maybe he should consider a similar fence between Cambodia and Mayanmar. Thailand can become the Hub of Being Fended In.

With the more close military cooperation between Thailand and China and with China willing to provide expertise, manpower and financing, we might soon have a new tourist attraction in Thailand: The Great Wall

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

it is truly amazing how you cannot stop yourself from trolling....

here on a thread about a delayed election, in response to a comment about one side being rather afraid of elections, you end up blathering on about Thaksin skyping ...

Seriously, have you got all your marbles?

Well, your

"Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination... "

was about Thaksin. Following you go into denial.

PS you seem to have come with a new definition of 'trolling': any writing you don't agree with. Next you add a few descriptives as if to annoy and provoke (dweeb, possibly lacking marbles). You seem to feel very insecure. If I could a would give you a hug to make you feel better.

I don't knowingly hug fascists.

trolling, ... no, not anything I disagree with... there is plenty of that around this forum, but it's not trolling.

however, your inane, off-topic, obtuse posting is definitely trolling

ciao

A continuation of name calling and the usual 'troll' accusation. You really don't like opinions which go against your own, now do you and facts may really disturb you.

Ah well, you can still look in the mirror and get your image to agree with you.

Have a good night's sleep,

uncle rubl

As for violence:

I have stated repeatedly that there was violence from both sides of the protesters and I have stated many times that I do not support the violence. I have never denied the existence of the MIB in 2010 nor have I ever denied the presence of navy guards at PDRC protests. I don't condone red shirts shooting off RPGs any more than I condone the PDRC firing the same.

(snipped for brevity and topic relevance.).

How nice of you to not condone the PDRC firing RPGs - but have they ever done that? Could you spare a little condemnation for those who did?

I have already "spared a little condemnation for those who did", as you state with tongue in cheek.

Now, I always figured that you were unaware of current events.

Remember back when the royalist courts prohibited the government from using basic means of crowd control against the PDRC protesters because they were "peaceful"?

As a note, the yellow courts did something similar in 2006.

Oddly enough, they didn't do that in 2010...

Well, now, that ruling was made right after a confrontation between police and protesters. Here are a couple of links for you...

after Tuesday's violence, in which four protesters and one police officer were killed in a gun and grenade attack after police attempted to remove demonstrators from protest sites,

or this report:

A Human Rights Watch researcher told VOA that militants had M79 grenade launchers and were firing at police.

Oddly enough, no grenades were fired at police or pro-government supporters in 2013/2014, only one IED was throw at the police with the officer courageously kicking the device away. Lots of real grenades lobbed on anti-government protesters, mostly cowardly in the night, although an IOD was thrown in the crowed when Suthep marched past. Only one or two killed, but that's normal when 'democracy lovers' get annoyed.

Anyway, the topic is 2010 with lots of real grenades lobbed at non-red-shirts. A topic to be avoided, ridiculed, distracted from, etc., etc.

And if the charter with its attendant ten independent organizations fail to scrutinize the breathe out of democracy, there is always the military waiting to abolish everything. Now a charter that would SCRUTINIZE the military and place it under civilian COMMAND, that would be a game changer for Thailand.

A charter doesn't scrutinise, a charger gives a framework which get filled in with organic laws.

The Military are under the Minister of Defence, like they were under MoD Ms. Yingluck. The only difference a new charter, reforms and so should bring is the actual application of 'responsibility' and 'accountability'. That would include all, including the military, the police, the ministers, the MPs and Senators, etc., etc.

As it is, the last part is and was missing.

"Now a charter that would SCRUTINIZE the military and place it under civilian COMMAND, that would be a game changer for Thailand."

I am convinced the current draft Charter is designed to do exactly the opposite. Instead, the military will be enshrined in a direct political role by the numerous appointed groups, including:

1) The largely appointed Senate, with positions carved out for the Generals

2) The various other appointed bodies, too numerous to mention, likewise including the military

3) The appointed (but only if there is a "crisis") PM

(and there is the additional feature of an elected lower house that is almost guaranteed to be an ineffectual mess of small parties, which only enhances the power of the appointed bodies. How nice!)

Assuming The Great Winged Charter actually flies.

So, did you already get access to a nearly complete draft charter, or are you basing your "I am convinced" on all statements, rumours and what have we which got floated around?

^^

Billy No-mates, chuntering on and on to himself about irrelevant points on off topic subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested...

Did you get fed up just talking to a mirror?

PS even on topic subjects are wasted on people who are not interested.

So that gives you Carte Blanche to blether on about any old off-topic flapdoodle you fancy, does it?

I was giving a reply to member candide. I agreed with him. Of course if you think he wrote some old off-topic flapdoodle feel free to tell him. If possible in a proper response. You might have noticed that at the bottom of a post on the right side there are buttons like MultiQuote and Quote. Just press the "Quote". Apart from making it easier to see what you are referring to than with just "^^" it's also more polite, more nettiquette.

^^

Billy No-mates, chuntering on and on to himself about irrelevant points on off topic subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested...

Did you get fed up just talking to a mirror?

PS even on topic subjects are wasted on people who are not interested.

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

It is a bit more complex than what the curve shows, as it shows the ranking among countries, not the index. In fact the ranking is worse because corruption perception has decreased in other countries, not because corruption perceptionj has increased in Thailand

If we look at the index itself, it was 3.5 in 2010, 3.4 in 2011, 3.7 in 2012, 3.5 in 2013, and 3.8 in 2014. So it does not show much variation over time. In fact it has remained more or less stable during the last decade, with a maximum of 3.8 and a minimum of 3.4, since 2004.

So your conclusion is wrong, the figures don't show that Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

I agree that the figures as such don't mean too much. Thailand is still a basket case.

Of course, Ms. Yingluck had her government take special care of corruption and staged shows to tell every one, pity it doesn't show.

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

the forgotten part wasn't forgotten, it was dismissed as the irrelevant prattle that it is.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

it is truly amazing how you cannot stop yourself from trolling....

here on a thread about a delayed election, in response to a comment about one side being rather afraid of elections, you end up blathering on about Thaksin skyping ...

Seriously, have you got all your marbles?

Well, your

"Sure, the PTP were "ooooooh, scared to death" of elections which is why they dissolved parliament and started the process of asking the people to exercise their sovereign right to self-determination... "

was about Thaksin. Following you go into denial.

PS you seem to have come with a new definition of 'trolling': any writing you don't agree with. Next you add a few descriptives as if to annoy and provoke (dweeb, possibly lacking marbles). You seem to feel very insecure. If I could a would give you a hug to make you feel better.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

I come from a real democracy where coups are not accepted. If there were a coup, I suspect that the ousted leader would receive strong support when democracy returned, simply so the voters could say "up yours" to the military. That's assuming there wouldn't be a nation shattering rebellion as a result of the coup.

Of course in my country the military is forbidden by law to take any position on a election. Officers are allowed their own private views, but aren't allowed to make public statements for or against candidates or parties. Thailand will not have a true, stable democracy until it reaches this state, and it won't get there by way of a military government.

Does your country also allow criminal fugitive to run your country from afar? Does your country allow such figures to own political parties, skype-in into cabinet meetings to give orders? Allow criminal fugitives to recall his party and government underlings to him to pass a few more orders?

It's interesting that a month ago some here pointed out that the Founding Father of Singapore had endorsed Thaksin as a strong leader and a few agreed with that. Possibly because they don't come from real democracies.

So, poll delayed, mentality of Thai and farang alike still not correct. An election now wouldn't solve any problems.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/662768-argument-rages-on-over-thai-senate-changes/

Indeed the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index does support my statement that the Yingluck administration was the most corrupt in history.

Check out the dive after PT took over :

576x544xCorruption-Perceptions-Index-THAILAND-2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.NKNgav0HXt1.jpg

Although you may like to argue that in the year of the Sonthi military Govt corruption was worse, but then that could be because it was detected in that year much the same as corruption is coming to light now.

You may also note that General Sonthi teamed up with PT as part of their coalition Govt, make of that what you will.

To wait until a new election to vote against a corrupt Govt may be to late as legislation will have already have been passed to change laws which are detrimental to the country.

A prefect example of this is the legislation that PT had on the table, first the senate changes as discussed. Then changes to section 190 of the constitution which would have given them the power to make international deals without scrutiny of parliament: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/opposition-slams-amendment-article-190

Then there was the rice pledging scheme which would have continued for another 2 years with farther huge loss to the country.

Followed by the amnesty bill which would not only have forgiven all crimes committed but would have wiped all corruption in the time of the bill, meaning that all the corruption that is coming to light now would never have surfaced and the corrupt could have safely kept their ill gotten gains.

Then there was the 2.2 trillion which would have been obtained out of budget with no checks and balances as to where it went.

There is also the 350 billion that was supposed to be for flood protection work, nobody seems to know if that was obtained and disappeared or was still to be got.

We also had a situation where there had been grenade attacks on judges and checks and balances organisations, courts had been ignored, the police refused to do their job and their own people had been put in key positions.

These are all indications of a govt out of control and only working for their own good.

When the people of the country see that politicians are doing things for their own benefit and not for the country I would say they not only have a right but a duty to step in, for waiting for an election may be to late, indeed there is no guarantee that an election would ever come.

I see, Thailand's history began in 2001 with Thaksin, is that it?

Transparency International changed their scoring system in 2012, making comparisons difficult. Your newspaper reference confuses the issue by using a scale other than the one on the TI website http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results, without explaining the scale. However a comparison of the 2010 score of 3.5 http://www.transparency.org/cpi2010/results, the 2004 score of 3.6 under Thaksin http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, and the pre-Thaksin 1995 score of 2.79 http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpi_2004/0/, seems to indicate that corruption was worse in Thailand before Thaksin.

As far as the rest, do you want a comparison of amnesty proposals and the checks and balances in place between the Yingluck government and the junta?

Well, Thailands history begon a wee bit longer ago than just with Thaksin. Mind you, a few years ago the UDD celebrated an even in 1932 (I think) when the military brought the first glimpses of democracy to this country.

BTW a comparision between a democratically elected government and a junta doesn't make too much sense, even if it gives you the possibility to stress the form of democracy the Yingluck government represented, the one with a criminal fugitive being the strong man behind the strings with others dancing.

Another who twists things out of context.

There was no problem with making the senate fully elected in fact the first reading of the bill was passed in the house with the agreement of the Democrats.

The trouble arose when changes were made in the committee stage to make it possible for family of sitting MP's to become senators and to abolish the 6 year term.

It was these amendments that were unpalatable and facing opposition PT got all sneaky and passed the bill at 4 in the morning after the opposition had gone home.

But you know all that you are just ignoring it in a feeble attempt to defend the most corrupt administration in the history of this country.

If true (references would be nice) it indicates politics are messy.

Any comment on:

"The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats."

Also, can you defend your claim that this was the most corrupt administration in history? The Transparency International Corruption Perception Index doesn't support it.

Interesting question. Some have it even anti-democrats are allowed an existence in a real democracy. Some even defend criminal fugitives who rule a country through an elected clone.

You seem to forget the "to the point that previous manipulations regarding 'respect your vote till it's counted' became more and more obvious."

Of course, none so blind who don't want to see.

Cheers,

uncle dweeb

It is a very forgettable statement. Politicians often fail to keep campaign promises, although in the case of the PTP they were vilified for trying to keep their campaign promise to make the Senate fully elected. The correct response is to vote against these politicians in the next election, assuming an election can be held in spite of the obstructions of the anti-democrats.

It's very unfortunate that Thaksin likes to talk and boost too much. Interviews about him ruling the country through his clone, skyping-in into his cabinet meetings, telling all the RPPS should continue for a few more years, etc., etc.. Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Yingluck campaigned on the promise to be Thaksin's clone, her party won a convincing victory, no one has claimed this was illegal, and the majority of the country seemed quite happy with it. Seems like democracy to me.

Of course there are a great many people who only believe in democracy when their party wins. When another party wins they maintain the country isn't ready for democracy.

Even in real democracies people started to wonder about Thai elections which could lead to such results.

Of course, you come from a real democratic country where clones and criminal fugitives are democratically accepted ?

Anyway, poll delay. With all obstructions no real surprise.

Strange. I thought that last year all illegal Cambodians scrambled back home to get all required legal papers and came back already as 'legal aliens'?

Are there no Thai candidates for certain jobs, or is the 300 Baht/day law not enforced?

The 72% reduction of rice production is 72% of rice that doesn't lose any profit margins.

You imply that the 26% remaining has no profit margin or lost it. Time for farmers to seek another crop or another job. Maybe time to blame other countries for distorting the market mechanism causing prices to drop and Thai production costs to rise ?