New parties must tackle the great income divide

[jayboy]

13 hours ago, robblok said:

That is not what we were discussing... we were discussing that if someone stays clean he cant be disposed. You had to go back more then half a century to find something you could use. That kinda says enough that they don't invent stuff but only use peoples crimes against them. Exactly the point I am making.  Your deflecting because your argument failed. 

 

I wan't the current government to be gone I want them to be replaced by new people like this guy. Not by the democrats or PTP. If there is any hope for this country it comes from the new parties because the old have all been proven to be corrupt. 

The established parties are the most likely to emerge as the dominant ones.They will of course have to adapt and change to meet current circumstances and challenges, and discard people and policies that have no place in modern Thailand.The reason for my conclusion is that the traditional parties (Democrats and PTP) do actually stand for something.Though not really ideal these old political groups are somewhat "baked in" to the public consciousness.There are of course some interesting political personalities coming forward and they should have their chance, but my hunch is they will gravitate to one side or another.Needless to say the overarching plan of the old order is to encourage a plethora of small parties that can easily be divided, add a large dollop of appointed military stooges and press for an "outside" PM.(Answers on a postcard please on who that might be).

 

Underlying the old order's distaste for elected politicians is a self serving and arrogant complacency.But there is also a more credible strand - namely that high calibre bureaucrats answerable to the self appointed "good people" are more likely to produce decent government than a pack of corrupt politicians answerable only to a naive and ignorant electorate.This is not a Thailand specific debate - it goes on in one form or another in many countries.The problem in Thailand is that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny;indeed it's complete hogwash because the bureaucratic behemoth is itself corrupt from top to bottom.And the "good people" - do we think they are sea green incorruptible? Give me a break.

 

 

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, jayboy said:

The established parties are the most likely to emerge as the dominant ones.They will of course have to adapt and change to meet current circumstances and challenges, and discard people and policies that have no place in modern Thailand.The reason for my conclusion is that the traditional parties (Democrats and PTP) do actually stand for something.Though not really ideal these old political groups are somewhat "baked in" to the public consciousness.There are of course some interesting political personalities coming forward and they should have their chance, but my hunch is they will gravitate to one side or another.Needless to say the overarching plan of the old order is to encourage a plethora of small parties that can easily be divided, add a large dollop of appointed military stooges and press for an "outside" PM.(Answers on a postcard please on who that might be).

 

Underlying the old order's distaste for elected politicians is a self serving and arrogant complacency.But there is also a more credible strand - namely that high calibre bureaucrats answerable to the self appointed "good people" are more likely to produce decent government than a pack of corrupt politicians answerable only to a naive and ignorant electorate.This is not a Thailand specific debate - it goes on in one form or another in many countries.The problem in Thailand is that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny;indeed it's complete hogwash because the bureaucratic behemoth is itself corrupt from top to bottom.And the "good people" - do we think they are sea green incorruptible? Give me a break.

 

 

Jayboy,

 

I come from a country that has multiple parties and have seen the rise and fall of old parties and seen new parties rise. It is possible but one should not expect a landslide victory for new parties. That is just not how it works. But with this new voting system they have a chance to build their party and get into opposition and or government and prove themselves. This was something that was really hard to do (in the old IMHO not really democratic voting system, not talking about vote buying here but about how the system works i think the Dutch system is far more fair and the new system looks like the Dutch system)

 

I can only agree with your second paragraph, as I said it before not much faith in the junta after they shown themselves to be as corrupt as the politicians (or at least as unwilling to go after their own as all other parties before them). I don't really care much who gets into government (would prefer it if its not the junta). I don't see any change here unless new blood has enough power (if that new blood can stay honest). I see new parties as the only way forward. Your right that the democrats and PTP stand for something but they have shown themselves to be corrupt. They won't change they have not before so why would they. Unless new parties that are not corrupt win loads of votes. 

[The manic]

On 3/19/2018 at 10:09 AM, Eric Loh said:

Certainly not economically. China and Vietnam have transitioned from command to mixed economy that features communistic and capitalistic elements. China is soon going to be the largest economy in the world, Vietnam will catch up with Thailand to be the second largest economy in ASEAN. Even communist countries like Laos have significant economic growth with double digits GDP. 

By failed I was referring to mass murder, political imprisonment, human rights abuses, lack of any semblance of people's rights to change their leadership, the suppression of dissent and corruption on a massive scale. Communism in Europe was a massive failure. As for the the Asian countries you mention they would be wealthier and more successful without communism.. But who know as the people have no say or voice. 

[Eric Loh]

4 minutes ago, The manic said:

By failed I was referring to mass murder, political imprisonment, human rights abuses, lack of any semblance of people's rights to change their leadership, the suppression of dissent and corruption on a massive scale. Communism in Europe was a massive failure. As for the the Asian countries you mention they would be wealthier and more successful without communism.. But who know as the people have no say or voice. 

Point taken. The countries mentioned are at their pinnacle of economic success with China being the second largest global economy in just 25-30 odd years after decades of internal strife and Vietnam/ Loas recovering to current status from civil wars and destruction. IMO the command system is suitable for those war ravage situation. Japan similar under Marshall law and Germany under ally rule. Democracy should follow and people should be allowed more freedom after rebuilding the economy.