7 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

The editorial above is correct, if not a bit simplistic.

 

However, in a society where the leadership comes to power through coups and once there disregards even the already shambolic laws available, why would anyone expect the society NOT to be corrupt?

 

As long as General Rolex retains his position with the blessing of General Coup, nothing will change.

 

Leadership, and thus change, is setting examples as well as talking.

 

 

You are right, but leadership that has come to power through elections has also, once in power, disregarded laws and been seen to be corrupt, arrogant, lying and in many cases, sought to dismantle the checks and balances essential to democracy whilst ensuring they can never be removed, by whatever means.

 

The phenomena seems to be prevalent in Africa, South East Asia, and South America to various extents and in various forms. Hun Sen, Duerte, and Madura are good current examples. Mugabe was. The guy currently pilfering Malaysia is. 

 

Here, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad. People kick out a caretaker government, and undoubtedly corrupt government, who were trying to get themselves re-elected and carry on, on the basis of stamping out corruption. And then seem to be hell bent on surpassing the corruption and ludicrous behavior of the ones they booted out.

 

But in any country where corruption as become a way of life, it becomes very difficult to stop it spreading and becoming stronger.

 

Sadly, looking around the world, (UK, Germany, France, Australia,US, Korea, Japan) it seems politicians and "leaders" in the so called developed first world countries aren't always much better!).

 

It's become much much harder for them to cover up, lie, and simply dismiss things now. But still nothing is done about actually changing it. 

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Worthwhile to look at Singapore's zero tolerance framework and see where Thailand failed and where it needs reform. 

 

The framework is based on:-

1. Effective laws (maybe Thailand has but lacking enforcement)

2. Independent judiciary (serious deficit in Thailand)

3. Effective enforcement (selective here)

4. Responsive public service (acceptance of corruption is shocking)

 

The framework rest on a "Strong political will". Never had and never will happen when the elites and the military thrive in a corrupt system milking the country.

 

It will take a strong paradigm shift with a like minded single vision leader and decades to rid corruption to a level like Singapore. Mind you, leaders of Singapore still say that corruption zero tolerance is a work in progress. 

 

Genuine question Eric, since I believe you are Singaporean.

 

Do you believe the Lee clan / dynasty, whilst turning Singapore into less than a democracy, but succeeding in eliminating dire corruption and vastly improving the country, were whiter than white themselves?

 

 

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Genuine question Eric, since I believe you are Singaporean.

 

Do you believe the Lee clan / dynasty, whilst turning Singapore into less than a democracy, but succeeding in eliminating dire corruption and vastly improving the country, were whiter than white themselves?

 

 

Define whiter than white. Are you making allegation they are corrupted? 

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

Define whiter than white. Are you making allegation they are corrupted? 

 

No, I'm not making any allegations. I'm asking the question.

 

Whiter than white - took no commercial advantages from their political positions other than published salary and remunerations. Did not indulge in nepotism or appoint family, friends, cronies to positions based purely on their relationship. Did not encourage advantages to the businesses of family and friends. Did not legislate in their own family interests. Did not suppress bona fide criticism and political opposition. Did not influence the judiciary to gain favorable judgments. Did not engage with leaders from other countries in secretive of dubious deals for commercial gain regardless of the impact on the peoples of said countries. etc etc.

 

 

17 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

You are right, but leadership that has come to power through elections has also, once in power, disregarded laws and been seen to be corrupt, arrogant, lying and in many cases, sought to dismantle the checks and balances essential to democracy whilst ensuring they can never be removed, by whatever means.

 

The phenomena seems to be prevalent in Africa, South East Asia, and South America to various extents and in various forms. Hun Sen, Duerte, and Madura are good current examples. Mugabe was. The guy currently pilfering Malaysia is. 

 

Here, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad. People kick out a caretaker government, and undoubtedly corrupt government, who were trying to get themselves re-elected and carry on, on the basis of stamping out corruption. And then seem to be hell bent on surpassing the corruption and ludicrous behavior of the ones they booted out.

 

But in any country where corruption as become a way of life, it becomes very difficult to stop it spreading and becoming stronger.

 

Sadly, looking around the world, (UK, Germany, France, Australia,US, Korea, Japan) it seems politicians and "leaders" in the so called developed first world countries aren't always much better!).

 

It's become much much harder for them to cover up, lie, and simply dismiss things now. But still nothing is done about actually changing it. 

You really have to stop this nonsense; I am about to start ignoring your posts as I do the ones from Robblok!

 

Yes, the elected governments in Thailand were corrupt.

 

But, the idea that there is some kind of moral equivalence is ridiculous; the Thai military set the tone of corruption in the country and has kept the flame alive through thick and thin and for decades. If you want to blame someone for corruption in Thailand, it is the military. They are the ones who let corruption in, made it a way of life, and allowed the malignancy to settle in.

 

Your attempt at moral equivalency is crap; the corrupt 'reds' simply learned from the Master Greens.

16 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

No, I'm not making any allegations. I'm asking the question.

 

Whiter than white - took no commercial advantages from their political positions other than published salary and remunerations. Did not indulge in nepotism or appoint family, friends, cronies to positions based purely on their relationship. Did not encourage advantages to the businesses of family and friends. Did not legislate in their own family interests. Did not suppress bona fide criticism and political opposition. Did not influence the judiciary to gain favorable judgments. Did not engage with leaders from other countries in secretive of dubious deals for commercial gain regardless of the impact on the peoples of said countries. etc etc.

 

 

You have anything to back up your allegations or you just throwing mud and hope something will stick. Sorry I don’t indulge in your personal fantasy. You really are sinking to despicable low. 

2 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

You really have to stop this nonsense; I am about to start ignoring your posts as I do the ones from Robblok!

 

Yes, the elected governments in Thailand were corrupt.

 

But, the idea that there is some kind of moral equivalence is ridiculous; the Thai military set the tone of corruption in the country and has kept the flame alive through thick and thin and for decades. If you want to blame someone for corruption in Thailand, it is the military. They are the ones who let corruption in, made it a way of life, and allowed the malignancy to settle in.

 

Your attempt at moral equivalency is crap; the corrupt 'reds' simply learned from the Master Greens.

 

Quite frankly, you can ignore my posts if you want - I really couldn't give a toss. But I guess anyone not agreeing with your nonsensical "let's blame the military for everything agenda" and posting reality is too challenging at times.

 

Your continual efforts to portray corruption in Thailand as a product of the military, with corrupt politicians learning from them is nonsense. 

 

Corruption is endemic here, and to suggest it's all the fault of one part of society is ludicrous. Or perhaps you want to pretend that the police, civil service, and commerce only have minor corruption issues?

 

The US, UK and EU all beefed up their anti corruption legislation over the last few years. It's a growing phenomenon. The EU, btw, recently introduced specific legislation for member states to adopt, that many see as making it more difficult to investigate and prosecute corrupt politicians.

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

You have anything to back up your allegations or you just throwing mud and hope something will stick. Sorry I don’t indulge in your personal fantasy. You really are sinking to despicable low. 

 

Stop being childish. People who normally respond with silly playground remarks either can't or don't want to answer the questions.

 

I have not made any allegations. You imagine them, for some reason. Now an experienced questioner might make something of that. 

 

You post Singapore as a glowing example of a country where rampant corruption has been dealt with, seemingly effectively. I ask a question regarding the family dynasty that were responsible for achieving that.

 

Now if you think they are somehow above and beyond any questioning, or don't wish, or don't know the answers, that's fine. 

 

But don't insult me.

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Quite frankly, you can ignore my posts if you want - I really couldn't give a toss. But I guess anyone not agreeing with your nonsensical "let's blame the military for everything agenda" and posting reality is too challenging at times.

 

Your continual efforts to portray corruption in Thailand as a product of the military, with corrupt politicians learning from them is nonsense. 

 

Corruption is endemic here, and to suggest it's all the fault of one part of society is ludicrous. Or perhaps you want to pretend that the police, civil service, and commerce only have minor corruption issues?

 

The US, UK and EU all beefed up their anti corruption legislation over the last few years. It's a growing phenomenon. The EU, btw, recently introduced specific legislation for member states to adopt, that many see as making it more difficult to investigate and prosecute corrupt politicians.

The Thai military has been the leading institution in Thailand since 1932. On the rare occasions when it wasn't directly running the country, it was first among equals, hugely influential and accountable to no one.

 

The lesser organizations; the bureaucracy, the police, commerce, etc. followed its lead.

 

The military led the way, decade after decade after decade.

 

But, you don't seem to think it was their doing.

 

Odd, to say the very least...

 

Just now, Samui Bodoh said:

The Thai military has been the leading institution in Thailand since 1932. On the rare occasions when it wasn't directly running the country, it was first among equals, hugely influential and accountable to no one.

 

The lesser organizations; the bureaucracy, the police, commerce, etc. followed its lead.

 

The military led the way, decade after decade after decade.

 

But, you don't seem to think it was their doing.

 

Odd, to say the very least...

 

So before 1932 there was no corruption in Thailand? It isn't a complexity of Thai society, it's culture, it's feudal social development etc? 

 

There are other nations that have similar ethnicity and history to Thailand and have similar societies now. 

 

Maybe you need to look back earlier than 1932 and wider your research rather than coming to the odd conclusion the Thai military invented corruption in 1932.

 

No one denies they're proficiency. But they aren't the reason, just take advantage, as lots of others do.

12 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

So before 1932 there was no corruption in Thailand? It isn't a complexity of Thai society, it's culture, it's feudal social development etc? 

 

There are other nations that have similar ethnicity and history to Thailand and have similar societies now. 

 

Maybe you need to look back earlier than 1932 and wider your research rather than coming to the odd conclusion the Thai military invented corruption in 1932.

 

No one denies they're proficiency. But they aren't the reason, just take advantage, as lots of others do.

Er... Ah... Ahem... Gee... Er...

 

Wow! 

 

Okaaaaaaaaay. 

 

There isn't much to say to that, so... 

3 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I have not made any allegations.

You posted "indulge in nepotism or appoint family, friends, cronies to positions based purely on their relationship. Did not encourage advantages to the businesses of family and friends. Did not legislate in their own family interests. Did not suppress bona fide criticism and political opposition. Did not influence the judiciary to gain favorable judgments. Did not engage with leaders from other countries in secretive of dubious deals for commercial gain regardless of the impact on the peoples of said countries. etc etc.".

 

Ok, all that not allegations. Whatever pleases you. 

On 3/19/2018 at 2:34 PM, pearciderman said:

 

This is a quote from page 21 " In an experiment in Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona, Cialdini placed signs at entrances asking people not to take home petrified wood. The sign at one entrance showed three thieves with an X over them, while at another entrance, the sign depicted just one thief. The latter was far more effective at reducing theft."

 

So it is about the theft of petrified wood.

 

:-)

 

 

Ah, that would be page 19.

 

So, right link just the wrong page. I stand semi corrected. I should have done a search in the first place rather than just read page 21.

 

 

 

I understand you wanting to correct me, especially given the effort put into finding the source material (hats off to you). I think it's a shame though that the only response to my post was to tell me I was wrong. That's not your fault, it's me that apparently can't write something interesting while intentionally avoiding armchair naysayers and habitual flamers.

 

Thanks for being polite with your post. Something not to be expected here....   :)