jayboy

I agree that Thaksin was just a renegade elite, which is why the idea that the red shirt's uprising being a "poor vs elite" battle doesn't wash.

It's much more than a poor versus elite issue, as I suspect the election results will prove beyond dispute.

The problem for those fixated by Thaksin hatred is that they can't get to grips with the fact that his significance was as a catalyst more than anything else.If he vanished off the face of the earth tomorrow, the elite couldn't force the genie back into the bottle.The old habits of deference which kept the Thai people more or less silent in the face of society's unfairness are vanishing fast.Nothing is going to be easy in the transition, not least the burden of reactionary and corrupt generals.But the final outcome is crystal clear.

That's correct. The leading party gets first chance to form government. That doesn't give them the *right* to be there though.

Agreed, I think!

I'm still however unclear however whether the party with the largest number of seats has a constitutional right to make an attempt to form a government or whether this is just an informal convention.Anyone know exactly how this works? What if for example the Democrats had fewer seats than the PTP but Abhisit was able to put together a coalition immediately without giving the PTP an opportunity to try.Is that allowed?

The courts have already determined that she perjured herself but she has not been charged with it so that determination has no standing.

My understanding is that the courts have determined no such thing.Unless you can produce evidence your statement is defamatory, and contrary therefore to forum rules.Even the most ardent Thaksinphobes preface the charge with "alleged" and I suggest you do so as well.

The courts determined she provided false testimony (isn't that perjury?). Charges have not been brought so she has not been convicted of perjury but it is alleged.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255405200012

No,"false testimony" isn't perjury.As you say charges haven't been brought so strictly speaking "alleged perjury" isn't really correct either, but it would be unreasonable to quibble about this.

The courts have already determined that she perjured herself but she has not been charged with it so that determination has no standing.

My understanding is that the courts have determined no such thing.Unless you can produce evidence your statement is defamatory, and contrary therefore to forum rules.Even the most ardent Thaksinphobes preface the charge with "alleged" and I suggest you do so as well.

That you fail to see that the Army isn't a singular cohesive unit and that PTP has not only some Army former top brass with it, but that it also has ties with current military top officers suggests to me that you may have missed the point of last year's red-shirt political violence being aimed at having control on Oct 1st to allow them to appoint the next army chief. Nothing about not being able to think logically in noting that the PTP and Thaksin has some strong allies in the military though the opposite can surely be said about people who fail to see that PTP and Thaksin have strong allies in the military

This is a absurd depiction of the Thai army and its loyalties, as though there are a number of equally powerful factions linked to different political factions.He simply doesn't understand the dynamics.

No sense looking too cosy, or giving appearances of being in bed together with ANY players, this early.

Thanks for the best laugh of the day.

The military just threw a press conference a few days ago to address this very issue, saying that this exact thing would be inappropriate. Did this simple instruction not register? Does she not care about the in propriety or even the appearance of in propriety during this election or was she just following orders?

Am I missing something here? The leader of the main opposition party and potential future Prime Minister seeks a meeting with General Prayuth, and that is controversial?

But not hardly as compromised as the PTP Party List is.

A whole other level, nay, universe, of the morally bankrupt in that grouping.

Not all virtuous characters in the PTP list by any means.But the point here surely is that generally perceived virtuous men (Abhisit, Korn, Kasit etc) are are being profoundly evasive, even dishonest, in trying to distance themselves from the PAD.

Democrat Party's leader Abhisit Vejjajiva clarified today on his Facebook page that he came to power purely with the support of parliamentarians, not the military...

...and neither with the support of the majority of the Thai people.

It's interesting how the Democrats are attempting to distance themselves from the PAD, but the reality is that many of its leaders are badly compromised.Abhisit himself to some extent, Korn definitely and as for Kasit...say no more.

BTW, didn't you claim to be a professor or instructor at a university? If so, I sincerely hope that you do not write in this fashion when preparing your lectures. Horrid syntax, and the spelling, my goodness. Fiscal Policy, not phiscal policy.

I hope you're not suggesting he's phibbing.

the only sin of this policy is that it comes from PTP ,cuz if suthep offer the same many people in this forum will celebrate as a great idea

With the key being that the Democrats are NOT offering it..... which precludes anyone from voicing any opinion on their offering it.

They are not offering it at the moment.But on the other hand they weren't offering a range of populist policies before the rural majority became politically conscious and active.So in the event of the Democrats being able to put together (translation : bribe the minor parties as they did last time) a government after the election expect some version of this policy to emerge.Of course as before there will be the mantra of the PTP version being impractical and counterproductive, while a rather similar policy to encourage young graduates will be implemented.

On a more general theme the Democrats have the disadvantage of being perceived as a rather stuffy and old fashioned party in a country where young people are increasingly dominant.The younger Thais of all classes have little time for deferential behaviour particularly towards the discredited elite, or slithering around on the floor in the presence of their elders and betters.There's a new spirit in the world -the Arab Spring being just one example - and the Thai establishment should adapt to it or be washed away.Basically the Democrats need a PR makeover.

It is easy to see who amongst us have never been a manager or had a company of their own, they celebrate ideas like this. Anyone who has every hired people knows how bad forced minimum salaries are.

Absolutely correct and it's surprising so many of those celebrating this proposal don't realise Thai Visa is stuffed to the brim with high flying corporate hotshots (not deadbeat not very well educated foreign oldsters with way too much time on their hands as some unworthy cynics have it).I say pish to those decryers and may the minimum wage idea be consigned to hell where it belongs.

In a week's time, he's attacked the Election Commission, the Deputy Prime Minister, and now the Army Chief... all with unproven and unsubstantiated wild claims.

I fully agree it's shocking he has criticised the EC, General Prayuth and Mr Suthep.I mean they have such excellent reputations and so universally respected.

It's all about perceptions. A large chunk of the population most likely want change for the sake of change. Is it any different than the elections in the US that saw the rise of extremist supporters of the republicans in the USA last November, only to see the support for that group start to fall off and the recent loss of a historical republican seat ito an Obama democrat in NY? Or the ground shaking change in Canada that saw the left of center NDP become the official opposition in Canada tossing aside the once strong centrist Liberals? Or the beating Liberal Democrats took in the UK local elections not so long after they made strong gains in the national elections? Electorates around the world are frustrated and want a quick fix. It's the 5 minute noodle syndrome,

Of course it's unrealsitic for people to expect immediate results, but that's not what's driving the voters' intention. They are volatile. I also predict that if large numbers turn out to support the PTP, those same numbers would turn against the PTP 6 months to a year later if they didn't get what they expected.

The great thing about electoral democracy is that the people can always throw the bums out - as is the case in Canada, the UK and the US.In Thailand the electoral system works reasonably well but vested interests tend to combine to set aside the Thai peoples wishes.That's what's poisoning the political arena here.

Personally, I feel Mr McCargo over simplifies things, but I suppose he's aiming for a "Thai elections in 5 minutes" soundbite. As for his statements about a "reckoning" in the background, I disagree. I think it will be very much in the foreground; both when the anti Thaksin mobs attempt to disrupt any amnesty being declared, and then when the pro Thaksin mobs counter protest. This is why I think he's too divisive a figure to be involved. If the PTP were smart, and they do manage to form a coalition, they'd probably be better served by having him remain out of the country, at least until they have proved the effectiveness, or not, of their/his policies. The question is, would his ego allow that? I see him as having a vision of making a triumphant, runway kissing, return, although, more likely, he'll slip into the country undercover before the elections and lay low until he sees what transpires.

I'm still interested in what the posters who support him think. Do you not agree with my conclusion of another period of protests and violence, or do you agree, but see it as an acceptable step in the country's "progress"?

Duncan McCargo is of course an extremely distinguished Thai scholar so when he simplifies one can be fairly sure he doesn't lose sight of the essential aspects.But you are right complexity is hard to deal with briefly.

I note you assume I'm a Thaksin supporter but, as alluded to above, the reality is more complex.Even now if I had a vote I would be tempted to give it to Abhisit because although Yingluck is interesting I don't yet have confidence in the PTP leadership as a whole.I think your comment about the amnesty scenario is astute and I agree the PTP would be well advised to put this on hold.But I think I differ from you in believing thsat McCargo's conception of the post election reckoning is spot on.We can deliberate what the PTP would do if it was smart but the ruling elite also will need to consider what is smart.It's simply not feasible in the long term for the Thai people to make a clear electoral choice, and be thwarted again by vested interests - whether the military or others.The pressure is building up and old patterns of deference are fading.In this scenario Thaksin, who I see mainly as a catalyst, will simply become irrelevant in the face of something terrible and bloody - putting the violence to date in the shade.What's needed therefore on all sides is a sense of enlightened self interest in which there is a real negotiation.Up to now the Thais involved have foolishly seen it as a zero sum game.

I'd say that Bangkok is going to be a battleground, but after the election. I'd like one Thaksin supporter to answer what they think will be different this time round should PTP get into government and try and bring him back under an amnesty? We all saw what happened last time, when the PPP tried exactly that. All the key players are the same, with the exception that now it's his sister, rather than his brother in law, that is playing a lead role. The PAD may appear to be a spent force, reduced to burbling on about border conflicts, but does anyone really think that they won't be able to mobilise/pay a large group of protestors to disrupt the country? Would the army march against them? Barring a calamitous event before July 3rd, its true leadership will be exactly the same as it was in 2008. In fact, should the PTP attempt to carry out its proposed amnesty, the entire country would be back in exactly the same mess it was in 2008. Albert Einstein famously defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" I'd say old Albert was spot on in his diagnosis of Lt Col. Dr Khun Dear Leader Thaksin.

Last time I remarked on this I had one reply which did nothing to answer the questions, but more or less just said "well, if the PTP do get in power that would reflect the will of the majority of the people". I'm not arguing with that, just thinking about the large, well funded, minority that don't want him back, and have a history of making that clear. What would/could the (making a big assumption here) PTP government do differently from what the PPP one did to control the situation? What could they, and their supporters, really do to stop a peaceful but disruptive protest? And, when it all became violent, what could they really do to prevent the army stepping in again?

I think this is a very fair summary, my main caveat being my doubt PAD will be the chosen instrument to overturn the will of the Thai people.I expect more judicial activism.

The area is discussed by Duncan McCargo in an Asia Society clip.

http://asiasociety.org/video/policy-politics/duncan-mccargos-thai-election-primer

Who mentioned Thaksin? I certainly didn't.

[/quote

Apologies.You must have been thinking of someone else when you wrote

"A certain ex Police Lt.Col said he had been awarded a Ph.D in criminal law and he drove a horse and cart through the Thai codes."

I certainly agree that it's a well researched academic text and rarely resorts to mere rumour, but it still must be the most infamous book on its subject around. Prem, in an interview with Far Eastern Economic Review, once said: "I don't like it. The nation doesn't like it. It's a hearsay book and is not based on fact. We are worried [about] the foreigners who read it. My suggestion is please ignore that book. It's useless."

I doubt it'd make a difference to what he says about it, but it would be interesting to know whether Prem actually read it.

You are right. It doesn't matter what Prem thinks about it. In fact it will soon not matter what Prem thinks about anything but the remark was revealing for the insight it provides into the myopic elite mentality. The old boy deserves peace and quiet now for his past services, but history will judge him very harshly. Classic example of a man of charisma and influence who could have been a great reformer, but ended up undermining the institutions he was most attached to.

He sure was right, although making a prediction about "weird" thinking and then providing it in ones own post doesn't really prove much. Your addition, however, is an admirable proof. Well done!

Can you explain what you mean because it doesn't make any sense at present.

And over the last few weeks you have made a series of praising and speculative posts about Yingluck, based on heaven knows what.

Can you give me any examples of any comments on her record I have made not fully justified.I have certainly said she seems to have an attractive personality - do you want me to justify that as well?

As to your comments on her abilities, no evidence or convincing argument have been provided at all.I haven't checked but I believe your sexist jibes about marital status etc have quite rightly been removed by mods

Jayboy, the other side of the coin is that there is not the slightest bit of evidence that Ms. Yingluck is a remarkable capable person. I don't see why an understanding of Sino-Thai business would change that unless you want to suggest that that type of business is 'all-in-the-family'. Ms. Yingluck's CV shows various high-level positions in business her family owns / owned and in which she also has/had a stake; not through ability, but because of her brother.

People have been asking if Ms. Yingluck had experience in non-family controlled business and till now I don't think I've seen any positive reply to that. I'm willing to believe Ms. Yingluck is capable, as so many other people, nothing special though.

I think an understanding of how families operate in Sino - Thai businesses is actually relevant and helpful.

Has anybody said she is remarkable? We don't have much to go on other than her qualities of an attractive personality and obvious intelligence.She has, I would argue, the likelihood of understanding commerce and business quite well (I'll put it no more than that.We will find out one way or another soon enough.)

As to your comment:

"I'm willing to believe Ms. Yingluck is capable, as so many other people, nothing special though." I would happy to agree with that, an entirely rational position free of snide innuendo and based on what we know.

It'd be nice to see some of these platitudes of her exceptional abilities be backed up with some evidence, otherwise they seem dishonest.

It would also be interesting to see the many that have had transactions with her come forward and cite anecdotal evidence that she was something more than a drone.

It would be nice if you avoided dishonesty about other members posts.Nobody has talked about her exceptional abilities.The consensus is that she is intelligent and with a pleasant attractive character, but obviously she will become better known to the public as the campaign progresses.There is not the slightest bit of evidence to suggest she is not a very capable person.

You have over the last few weeks made a series of snide and speculative posts about Yingluck, based on no evidence at all - you obviously have no understanding of how large Sino-Thai businesses operate - and earlier sexist jibes for which I believe you have been warned.We know you don't share her politics and you can certainly make the case to the best of your abilities.But don't make up stuff about her and don't lie about other members posts please.

These are completely separate issues. The war on drugs and how it was put together was ridiculous at best. I believe the Hit men on that list have been of interest to the police for sometime and that unlike the blacklist on the "war on drugs" which names could be added to that list daily that I am pretty sure a war on known murderer's is quite different and I am pretty sure from what I read there is a clear and present danger to the folks playing politics right now.

That's a new one.The police didn't have reason to believe that any of those of their list were drug dealers.Piffle.The police would be aware of local drug dealers as they are of hitmen with a record.

I thought this thread might produce some weird strains of illogical thinking, and I was right.

I think i made the point quite clearly that working for a family business doesn't automatically mean a person is not fit or capable, it simply means that as outsiders not privy to the inner workings of the company in question, we simply don't know to what capacity that person worked to. Dead weight can and is tolerated at times in this situation, in a way it rarely is for employees working outside of the family realm. It's a consideration is i guess all that i am saying. If you refuse to consider it, your choice...

To your comment about evidence of her bright confidence and obvious intelligence... i'm getting the confidence but yet to be convinced about the intelligence. Perhaps you could point me in the direction of this evidence you speak of? Her employment record we have established (well at least i have) doesn't necessarily tell us the whole story about her abilities, and her education record seems reasonable but hardly jumping off the paper at us. What else is there to look at? The way she presents her vision for the country in interviews? The ideas she puts forth? Can't say i've been dazzled yet. Still, i'm sure there is time.

As a side note, i notice these days you seem a bit more liberal in your usage of catchy pigeon-holing labels that seem to exist for the purposes of undermining and ridiculing, such as "military cheerleaders" and, as in the above, "Thaksin haters". Such a tactic is of course sadly common around here and i'm sure almost all of us are guilty at one time or other - me included. It's a shame because i don't think it does anything to raise the level of the debate. Anyway, if you feel happy with this style of posting then you obviously don't need my permission...please continue.

I am very familiar with the Sino - Thai business model.Dead weight as I've said several times is almost always shifted to the periphery.You and I may not know how Yingluck was perceived in the business world:there will be many who had transactions who did.None have come forward to suggest she was a drone, and anecdotal evidence suggests the opposite.I don't know her other than from the media.I guess this discussion might have a bit more meat in a few weeks time, as you suggest.Maybe I will be proved wrong - let's see.But I do object to dishonest slurs and speculation (not from you I hasten to add) without any evidence.

You have a point and I'm not entirely happy with these labels, useful though they sometimes are.However if you have a alternative suggestion for those who irrationally demonise Thaksin, are uncritical of the army's many crimes, who believe the main objective of Thai politics is to keep the Rajdamri malls open for the middle classes to prance around, who hold the rural majority in contempt and who believe that the redshirts murdered themselves last year - I will be interested to hear from you.

So just who decided on this policy? Was it by Government decree or has some bumptious policeman whose other activities probably wouldn't pass close inspection decided what should be done? I am well aware that PC Plod's knowledge of Thai law is negligible and his view is that he can make it up on the spot, but surely senior cops should know better. Oh dear, I forgot that I live in Dodge City. A certain ex Police Lt.Col said he had been awarded a Ph.D in criminal law and he drove a horse and cart through the Thai codes.

I was going to nominate you for the Sriracha John memorial prize for bringing Thaksin into a post where there is no possible relevance.

But on reflection you do touch on an important point, namely the dangers of a shoot to kill policy where there is no proper judicial process.

It will be interesting to see whether all those who condemned the Drugs war feel equally strongly about this murky exercise.