Newly elected Future Forward leader Thanathorn vows to dump 2017 charter

[GarryP]

6 hours ago, Eligius said:

The thing that will probably be their undoing (if they start to gain real popularity) is that one of their founder members is a supporter of change to the lese-majeste law. That is like a ticking timebomb in the very midst of this new political party, which could blow up in their face. Now wouldn't that just suit the Powers That Be!

Supporting or proposing a change to that particular law is not an offence under that law. What it would do though is incite many of the ultra royalists, which include many of the men in green. So yes, if that happened the men in control would be quite happy, although they could not take legal action against it. 

 

When deciding on which party to vote for, one of the first things I would consider is whether a party advocates decriminalizing defamation.  It is about time Thais and the press could name names of the corrupt and influence peddling without worry. Hopefully, this party will do something about this too. 

  

[Fish Head Soup]

2 minutes ago, GarryP said:

When deciding on which party to vote for, one of the first things I would consider is whether a party advocates decriminalizing defamation.  It is about time Thais and the press could name names of the corrupt and influence peddling without worry. Hopefully, this party will do something about this too. 

Do you vote in Thai elections?

[Media1]

CHAMPION 

Burn that rubbish. 4 years of wasted time and have done serious damage to the country. 

[GarryP]

 

4 hours ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

If you are, as you seem to be, saying that the army does not have loyalty to one person, I believe you to be fundamentally wrong. Indeed, that is the essence of the problem. In my opinion.

 

4 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

Bang on.

 

Otherwise Thai politics would just be like the Mad Hatter's tea party-and it isn't.The opacity is there for a purpose.

I don't believe it is as clear cut as that. That is the reason for strengthening certain battalions and increasing numbers in the same. 

[Samui Bodoh]

52 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

You are forgetting a tiny little detail, the army was able to tear down the 2007 constitution by the thread of their weapons. Any government will be heavily curtailed by the NCPO and by the framework of this constitution and the 20 year roadmap, non compliance will give the NCPO appointed senate the right to send the government packing. 

 

And you bet your ass that it will happen, these people, starting with Suthep have invested too much to just stand by and see their powerbase being eroded. 

 

Yes a future government might be allowed to amend the constitution here or there, rest assured that the provisions dealing with their powerbase, cannot be amended.

 

You make a valid point, which is why I mentioned the size of the electoral mandate.

 

If the mandate (assuming one occurs) is quite small, then I think you are correct and the government will be hamstrung.

 

However, with a large mandate a government would be able to resist pressure against it. Yes, Suthep and all the others who have invested their time in gaining power will fight, but the balance of power is directly related to the mandate. It would be hard to fight against a newly-formed government if they had a large mandate; if the Thai people didn't come out into the streets (a la 1992), then it would be the international community. Thailand would be an international laughing stock and that would not be acceptable or accepted.; the loss of face would be too great.

 

There is an assumption on this Forum these days that neither the Thai people not the international community will do anything, ever; I think this is mistaken. I tend to consider 1973 as the start of modern Thai politics, and since 1973 many, many, many, many times Thai people have fought for their political rights; why do you assume that they will never do so again? Yes, they look a bit cowed at the moment, but that doesn't mean they will be cowed forever.

 

It is all in the size of the mandate. Yes, size does matter!

 

Finally, everything changed recently; I'll leave it at that.

 

[JAG]

1 hour ago, sjaak327 said:

You are forgetting a tiny little detail, the army was able to tear down the 2007 constitution by the thread of their weapons. Any government will be heavily curtailed by the NCPO and by the framework of this constitution and the 20 year roadmap, non compliance will give the NCPO appointed senate the right to send the government packing. 

 

And you bet your ass that it will happen, these people, starting with Suthep have invested too much to just stand by and see their powerbase being eroded. 

 

Yes a future government might be allowed to amend the constitution here or there, rest assured that the provisions dealing with their powerbase, cannot be amended.

 

Unless the Army comes out onto the streets, and is defeated...

[jayboy]

To change the constitution requires more than half the members of both houses, and in the third reading must include the votes of at least 10% of MPs from every party, votes from every party with more than ten MPs, and at least 10% of votes from all parties with fewer than ten MPs..

There are circumstances in which these requirements would be irrelevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[CantSpell]

6 hours ago, cliveshep said:

 "Rich Elite" here seem to win out every time because bribery is a way of life? No one is prepared to tackle them head-on from what I can gather.

 

 

5 hours ago, jayboy said:

Yes you are missing something because invariably a successful coup is pre-authorised.What can be called the establishment (i would rather not go into details) provides this.Where an attempted coup is not pre - authorised as with that of General Chalard Hiranysiri, the perpetrator faces the firing squad.

Best word for a short answer..

 

Politics, business and military are all about factions here: who you know, who you are friend with, who you hold power upon (few compromising files will do).

Then Merry go round, back doors negotiation, threats if needed, check the current and temperature: answer the question: no one with higher power going to interfere..?

Name your coup maker and send him front line..

About a year later, let him then name a PM as happened in the paste and all is peachy...

 

Prayut did it different, he consolidated most of the high military powers with people from his own faction.

He is kind of clear from a coup since the top Elite (no name) and the full military are backing him up together with top corporate companies who are anyway ruling that country... Top 3 powers are atm more or less of the same faction..

He doesnt need to name a PM and wants to keep the job for himself...

 

Former PM were +/- alone against those three powers.. Yingluck did try to befriend Prayuth at the time but it is well recognize that he is just a front..

 

Until discontent hits the street....

 

What is that word? Collusion isn't it, collusion to keep the masses silent and ignorant and the money flowing..

That about sums up Thai politics 

Edited May 28, 2018 by CantSpell

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

Have you read any of the multiple articles pointing out how events in Malaysia have given the Thai Junta the collywobbles? Thought not.

 

Actually one doesn't need to do much research to understand the significance of a popular electoral revolt against an entrenched elite.The reasons are self evident as this extract from "The East Asia Forum" make clear.

 

"The solution to Thailand’s political problems is clear enough. The voters must choose their leaders in a free and fair election, and the winning party must have its mandate to govern respected. In the event that a government exceeds fair legal limits, independent institutions and civil society must hold it to account. Immediate resort to turning out a democratically-elected government and to declaring that the voters got it wrong only sustains the grassroots anger that gave rise to populism in the first place.

It was disregard for this reality on the part of Thaksin’s civil society opponents and the opposition Democratic Party that got Thailand into the political mess it is in today, and it is far from certain that Prayuth’s junta can cleanly lead Thailand out of it. Having appeased the Thai public and the international community with the promise of elections, the junta has only encouraged impatience with the status quo. It will face a backlash, even from anti-Thaksin civil society and political parties, if that promise isn’t kept. If the heated and often violent street politics of years past makes a reappearance, then the junta has merely defeated the whole purpose of its own political intervention and has set Thailand’s political development back even further."

 

 

 

Ahh, you didn't disappoint me jb.

[GarryP]

32 minutes ago, Fish Head Soup said:

Do you vote in Thai elections?

I am eligible to vote in 3 years. 

[jayboy]

13 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Ahh, you didn't disappoint me jb.

Good idea let's keep it personal.Otherwise we might have to think hard and re-examine our prejudices.And that would never do.

[Fish Head Soup]

9 minutes ago, GarryP said:

I am eligible to vote in 3 years. 

So the answer is 'No'.

[bangrak]

I don't know how many candidates there were for the presidential function of Future Forward (a bit of a pleonasm that name, as having ones future in its back is really not a good thing..., but maybe 'lost in translation'), but for a co-founder to get the votes of 473 of the 700 attending founding members of your own party is not really a glorious score, IMO, and I wonder who the 226 other founding members voted for (...there was 1 abstention, LOL), or didn't they vote ...? On the positive side, he got nearly 70% of the possible votes, an ample majority, but, on the negative side, in the party he co-founded, there were 30% of the founding members who did not approve of him as their president, at the first vote... This might be a first thorn in Mr. Thanatorn's side.

Edited May 28, 2018 by bangrak

[KiwiKiwi]

42 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

Finally, everything changed recently; I'll leave it at that.

 

 Yes it did, and I for one am still coming to terms with the popular rhetoric before the change compared with the popukar rhetoric after the change. If the ennui becomes too graet, then I believe uncle Too will be blamed for foisting unwelcome changes upon the Thai people, and crying fait accompli will not fly.

 

Several things done and reported upon elsewhere have been done under a claok of secrecy and darkness, and one would be quite justified in asking why? Why the secrecy? In my humble opinion, the answer is 'fear'. I don't think the position of either is as secure as they like to pretend. The mask slips from time to time, as it did with Prayuth's hand-wringing over theperepmtory jaiiing of his friend and benefactor. There will be more if and when they get around to Suthep. In the meantime, deeds done under cover of darkness and the perpetrators never being identified seems like a way to prevent the chickens coming home to roost, and some of those changes go right back 80+ years and involve settling very old scores. Stiking while the iron is both hot and seemingly strong.

 

I have been vocal in the past about what I believe is the lily-livered nature of Thais, but as recently as the past couple of weeks, I have come to wonder if the worm might not be in the process of turning. If it starts, it will gather pace quickly and become a tsunami. Brother Prayuth is going to have to make some tough decisions, Time, as always, will tell.

Edited May 28, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[tomta]

7 hours ago, cliveshep said:

What puzzles me is that while it seems de rigeur to prosecute former Prime Ministers here, from what I have gleaned there have been a few including the last one, Yingluck and her brother before, and I make no comment about the truth or otherwise of the charges. What astonishes me is how after every coup the coup leaders are not imprisoned for treason. How does that work? Don't the military here also have to swear allegiance to the King or the country? How do they survive the aftermath of a coup when the country becomes governed by an elected government? Nothing I read suggests any form of censure let alone punishment for breaking the Oath of Allegiance or whatever. 

 

Can someone who understands the system here explain what happens? Am I missing something? Sorry to express ignorance.

The system cannot be explained openly without breaking the law. Even the law that one would be breaking if one were to fully understand the system cannot be named or discussed because that would be breaking the law. I'm not sure if you really are ignorant or whether you are trying to make the same point I am through a pretence of ignorance but anyway ignorance is legally, culturally  and socially mandated so no need to apologize. 

[JAG]

23 minutes ago, GarryP said:

I am eligible to vote in 3 years. 

Well don't worry, it's unlikely that there will actually be an election before then...

?

[bangrak]

'...The party aims to raise Bt350 million to fund its campaigning...': a lot of money to spend for a small party, a small budget for a large party, but a huge one to raise for a new party! Did I miss something, are there some big wealthy names hidden behind this 'initiative'?

[Eric Loh]

11 minutes ago, bangrak said:

I don't know how many candidates there were for the presidential function of Future Forward (a bit of a pleonasm that name, as having ones future in its back is really not a good thing..., but maybe 'lost in translation'), but for a co-founder to get the votes of 473 of the 700 attending founding members of your own party is not really a glorious score, IMO, and I wonder who the 226 other founding members voted for (...there was 1 abstention, LOL), or didn't they vote ...? On the positive side, he got nearly 70% of the possible votes, an ample majority, but, on the negative side, in the party he co-founded, there were 30% of the founding members who did not approve of him as their president, at the first vote... This might be a first thorn in Mr. Thanatorn's side.

Try reading this news extract again and get the answer. To ease your understanding, I have underlined the important points: -

 

"The scion of the Thai Summit Group won 473 votes with one abstention during the party’s first official meeting, attended by more than 700 founding members from all provinces nationwide and a couple of thousand people at Thammasat University’s gymnasium hall.

 

Voting members raised their hands to approve the party’s name, logo, policies as well its executive board. Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, another co-founder and a former campaigner to amend the lese majeste law, was elected secretary-general".

[saminoz]

40 minutes ago, GarryP said:

I am eligible to vote in 3 years. 

They might  actually have gotten around to holding an election by then!

(sorry,hadn't seen JAG's post at the time of writing!)

Edited May 28, 2018 by saminoz
clarity

[bangrak]

When the logo of the new party had also to be approved by its founding members at this general assembly, outside of a huge, fabulous, magic trick, I fail to understand how it was possible to already hav that logo on pins, prints, etc.! ...Or was there only that, one, single, possibility to 'choose' for? 

[Eligius]

1 hour ago, Fish Head Soup said:

A coup is only illegal if it fails. If successful then it gains royal endorsement as happened in may of 2014.

There is a lot that I (and I dare say many others here) could say in this connection.

 

But we are not allowed to breathe a word.

 

Such is Thailand in the year 2018.

[JAG]

58 minutes ago, GarryP said:

 

 

I don't believe it is as clear cut as that. That is the reason for strengthening certain battalions and increasing numbers in the same. 

Certainly the units in more, umh, sensitive garrisons, have more regulars, recruited from certain regions and fewer conscripts. It is the boys from Issan and the North who end up down south, equipped with Toyota pick ups and 40 year old M16s. The Tavors and new APCs are kept in more central locations, where they are more needed as it were...

[bangrak]

I guess it will be interesting to see the reactions of PTP/UDD on this new FFP party, and of course these of their dedicated propagandists on TV. I do sincerely hope that my first 'gut feeling' about this FFP will be shown to be wrong...

[GarryP]

31 minutes ago, Fish Head Soup said:

So the answer is 'No'.

The election hasn't arrived yet. At the pace things are going I may actually be able to vote in the next election. 

[tomta]

1 minute ago, Eligius said:

There is a lot that I (and I dare say many others here) could say in this connection.

 

But we are not allowed to breathe a word.

 

Such is Thailand in the year 2018.

Yes though we are allowed to whisper, read lips and talk in impenetrable codes that ultimately become gibberish. Everything is allowed except clear thinking and honest expression

[KiwiKiwi]

3 minutes ago, tomta said:

Yes though we are allowed to whisper, read lips and talk in impenetrable codes that ultimately become gibberish. Everything is allowed except clear thinking and honest expression

 

And thus does Thailand subvert all thinking and sentient beings, and reduce them to the level of Thais.

[bangrak]

17 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Try reading this news extract again and get the answer. To ease your understanding, I have underlined the important points: -

 

"The scion of the Thai Summit Group won 473 votes with one abstention during the party’s first official meeting, attended by more than 700 founding members from all provinces nationwide and a couple of thousand people at Thammasat University’s gymnasium hall.

 

Voting members raised their hands to approve the party’s name, logo, policies as well its executive board. Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, another co-founder and a former campaigner to amend the lese majeste law, was elected secretary-general".

So, it may not be exactly, but 'more than', 700 founding members, Khun Eric, can you tell me though who the 'Voting members' could have been, when not these (registered?) founding members, please, as you seem to be so well informed about this FFP? Thank you!

(P.S.: you don't say that Mr Thanathorn got 473 votes amongthe whole audience of 2,000 + 700 do you?)

Edited May 28, 2018 by bangrak

[Happyman58]

3 hours ago, MaxLee said:

He'll never get a chance, 'cause there ain't gonna be any elections,...... sad, but true.....

you so right max lee. I would have more chance of winning the Thai lottery than him holding an election. 

[Eligius]

Just now, Happyman58 said:

you so right max lee. I would have more chance of winning the Thai lottery than him holding an election. 

I agree with you - but I always add the rider, 'a GENUINE election' (a fraudulent, fake one is quite possible - after a long, long wait)!

[Happyman58]

27 minutes ago, JAG said:

Well don't worry, it's unlikely that there will actually be an election before then...

?

I think you are safe and u can vote.