A naked and shameful power grab [Editorial]

[tomta]

47 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Based on the above quote, it appears that you agree with the assertion that Thailand is among the countries of the world not capable have having a democracy. If having a fair election is a prerequisite to democracy.

 

 

Not at all. Thailand is quite capable of having both fair elections and democratic processes. They will need to defang the army though to do so.

[Ahab]

32 minutes ago, tomta said:

 

Not at all. Thailand is quite capable of having both fair elections and democratic processes. They will need to defang the army though to do so.

Not based on any history that I know of, but it is good that you are an optimist. 

[canuckamuck]

In order for democracy to work there needs to be strict adherence to a set of rules. Like the constitution. Thailand doesn't like to hemmed in by rules; which is demonstrated by an absence of the rule of law and a stack of shredded constitutions.

Culturally they are just too accustomed to inequality, stepping on the little guy, and class privilege.

Real democracy in Thailand would be cataclysmic.

[Eric Loh]

24 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Not based on any history that I know of, but it is good that you are an optimist. 

Would like to hear from you on the history that you basing on. Grassroots politics and parties formed to represent the grassroots were recent phenomenon. Prior to the 80's, there are more military governments than political parties and these parties were always bureaucrats, generals and wealthy elites. No grassroots parties. Only in 1988, when Chart Thai became the 1st democratically elected party and 3 years later a coup ousted PM Banharn. What I am implying is that fair and election and democratic process as stated by Tomta can be achieved, given time to mature and for the people to know that they have the power to chose their leaders. In just the last decade, there were 2 coups adding to the 15 other coups and 17 re-written constitutions. Should not be hard to understand why Thailand's democracy always faltered. 

[Ahab]

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Would like to hear from you on the history that you basing on. Grassroots politics and parties formed to represent the grassroots were recent phenomenon. Prior to the 80's, there are more military governments than political parties and these parties were always bureaucrats, generals and wealthy elites. No grassroots parties. Only in 1988, when Chart Thai became the 1st democratically elected party and 3 years later a coup ousted PM Banharn. What I am implying is that fair and election and democratic process as stated by Tomta can be achieved, given time to mature and for the people to know that they have the power to chose their leaders. In just the last decade, there were 2 coups adding to the 15 other coups and 17 re-written constitutions. Should not be hard to understand why Thailand's democracy always faltered. 

You inadvertently made my point for me.

[zzaa09]

11 hours ago, tomta said:

 

Not at all. Thailand is quite capable of having both fair elections and democratic processes. They will need to defang the army though to do so.

The military, historically, just follows orders from the usual puppet masters - as it's always been.

The intended ideals of limiting military influence/control might be akin asking to rid one of a great old tree by trimming selected branches.  

 

Many miss the bigger picture or any picture at all, for that matter. 

Don't have to be too much of a scholar to understand the traditional workings of contemporary Thai history and interpretations thereof.

[anon537687643]

the coup de tat ... power corrupts absolutely


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[zzaa09]

34 minutes ago, markaoffy said:

the coup de tat ... power corrupts absolutely


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

It is October.

'Tis the season. 

[ballpoint]

11 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Would like to hear from you on the history that you basing on. Grassroots politics and parties formed to represent the grassroots were recent phenomenon. Prior to the 80's, there are more military governments than political parties and these parties were always bureaucrats, generals and wealthy elites. No grassroots parties. Only in 1988, when Chart Thai became the 1st democratically elected party and 3 years later a coup ousted PM Banharn. What I am implying is that fair and election and democratic process as stated by Tomta can be achieved, given time to mature and for the people to know that they have the power to chose their leaders. In just the last decade, there were 2 coups adding to the 15 other coups and 17 re-written constitutions. Should not be hard to understand why Thailand's democracy always faltered. 

The Chart Thai party was actually led by Chatichai Choonhaven, and it was he who was ousted in the 1991 coup.  Banharn was the party's secretary general at the time, becoming its leader in 1994, and PM in 1995.  Democratically elected it may have been, but it was definitely not a grass roots party.  It was formed in 1974, by Chatichai, who was a general and son of a Field Marshal, along with two other generals, and represented the pro-military right wing of Thai politics.  In 1976, they famously came up with the slogan "the Right to kill the Left", and declared it was time to destroy the student movement - culminating in the Thammasat University massacre in October the same year.  They won 19% of the votes in 1988, the single largest share, and formed a coalition until overthrown in the 1991 coup.

 

The subsequent history of the party is a good summary of Thai politics, showing that trying to place an ideology on a Thai political party is a pointless exercise, as they wheel and deal for power - as Banharn famously said "for a politician, being in opposition is like starving yourself to death".  Following the 1991 coup, the party joined with the pro-Suchinda grouping, in effect brown nosing the very person who had deposed them.  They then formed the main opposition to the 1992 - 1995 Democrat led government, were briefly in power again from 1995 - 1996, then opposed the 1996 - 1997 Chavalit government, supported the Democrat government from 1997 - 2001, and then the TRT until 2006, when they joined the Democrats in boycotting the election, only to rejoin with Thaksin's new PPP in 2007 until they were disbanded in 2008.  This is the chain of trough feeding and duplicity that must be dealt with before any real grass roots party can emerge.

[baboon]

2 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

The military, historically, just follows orders from the usual puppet masters - as it's always been.

The intended ideals of limiting military influence/control might be akin asking to rid one of a great old tree by trimming selected branches.  

 

Many miss the bigger picture or any picture at all, for that matter. 

Don't have to be too much of a scholar to understand the traditional workings of contemporary Thai history and interpretations thereof.

Buddy, most other people know that too. It isn't in fact a revelation.

A "great old tree"? No, a particularly murderous and sleazy organised crime network in uniform.

Edited October 4, 2018 by baboon

[sjaak327]

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 3:09 AM, robblok said:

We seen how it went when Thaksin got in power and removed all checks and balances. So its safe to say democracy Thai style has its problems. 

 

I believe it does not matter much anymore if there is a democracy here or a junta corruption wise. The whole system is based on nepotism the politicians use it the junta uses it and nobody will change it. They will do whatever they need to get part of the corruption money. As long as this does not change it does not matter who is in power they will all be dirty. With democracies only advantage being that they can send a corrupt party home after an election.. but if there are no non corrupt choices democracy won't clean up anything either.

 

The culture needs to change before you will see any change. Its this culture of corruption that is holding Thailand back. They can make all the laws they want but when the police and judiciary are not corruption free it will never work. You see it all the there are enough laws but they are not enforced by the police as they get money not to do so. Unless there is some serious change in thinking in this country corruption will stay and as long as corruption stays the amount of money that can be made if in power is huge.. so they will fight over it always.

 

Solve corruption and you solve the Thai political problem.. because without the money there the mercenaries and criminals won't be interested in it anymore.

Thaksin never ever did such a thing of course. Dear Rob, you are so utterly confused. the NCPO removed all checks and balances, Thaksin never could, as he was bound by the 1997 constitution. One that he not conveniently written himself either. Corruption as such is not the problem, the problem is that there is a tiny percentage of the population, that has a big percentage of power and money, and they fear democracy, and have the power to put democracy on the back burner. All the rest is just window dressing. Devised to fool the likes of you. 

[sjaak327]

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 3:28 AM, robblok said:

Why take responsibility she was deceived.. i was deceived too.  Maybe if the corruption was not so blatant at the PTP and others people would not have risen.. ever thought about looking at causes of why people came to protest.. rice program.. amnesty.. its all nice to blame the protesters while acting like the government at the time did not give them reason to protest. 30 billion of fake G2G deals is not peanuts.

You seem to forget that the government already was in care taker status. There was absolutely no need for further protests, the Thai people were ready to go to the polls. The only reason the protests continued, was that the protestors do not accept the outcome of elections. Amnesty, oh the irony, look what they got instead !

[zzaa09]

6 hours ago, baboon said:

Buddy, most other people know that too. It isn't in fact a revelation.

A "great old tree"? No, a particularly murderous and sleazy organised crime network in uniform.

Agreeable. 

 

I'm still firm that "most" haven't a clue, it's but a handful that care to know the reality. You, me and a few others. 

[faraday]

Interesting ..... whenever us mere mortals on here, use that word, the post disappears.

 

 

 

"Having four ministers become executives of the newly launched Palang Pracharath Party is the latest move towards that goal of quasi-dictatorship."

 

 

[robblok]

5 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

Thaksin never ever did such a thing of course. Dear Rob, you are so utterly confused. the NCPO removed all checks and balances, Thaksin never could, as he was bound by the 1997 constitution. One that he not conveniently written himself either. Corruption as such is not the problem, the problem is that there is a tiny percentage of the population, that has a big percentage of power and money, and they fear democracy, and have the power to put democracy on the back burner. All the rest is just window dressing. Devised to fool the likes of you. 

Your funny, Thaksin did remove checks and balance broke the law you know it but you keep spreading your lies. 

[robblok]

4 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

You seem to forget that the government already was in care taker status. There was absolutely no need for further protests, the Thai people were ready to go to the polls. The only reason the protests continued, was that the protestors do not accept the outcome of elections. Amnesty, oh the irony, look what they got instead !

Again twisting the facts, but I am used to it. I said the protesters came to the streets..because of corruption in the rice program (proven to be huge in a court of law) and Thaksins amnesty. I was 100% right and these people had every right to protest given the amount of corruption and nepotism. That the protest were abused at a much later stage has nothing to do with it. The initial protests  that i was talking about were valid and caused by the PTP. What happend later was that valid protestst were taken over but that had nothing to do why the people rose.. they rose because of the corruption and amnesty. Had YL been smarter and listened more to the people thing would not have happend.

 

But no she secretly pushed for Thaksin his amnesty.. combined with the fake G2G deals made people come out and get rid of her.

[tomta]

10 minutes ago, robblok said:

Again twisting the facts, but I am used to it. I said the protesters came to the streets..because of corruption in the rice program (proven to be huge in a court of law) and Thaksins amnesty. I was 100% right and these people had every right to protest given the amount of corruption and nepotism. That the protest were abused at a much later stage has nothing to do with it. The initial protests  that i was talking about were valid and caused by the PTP. What happend later was that valid protestst were taken over but that had nothing to do why the people rose.. they rose because of the corruption and amnesty. Had YL been smarter and listened more to the people thing would not have happend.

 

But no she secretly pushed for Thaksin his amnesty.. combined with the fake G2G deals made people come out and get rid of her.

The people came out onto the streets against the amnesty - including many redshirts. Yingluck, realizing it was a pathway to electoral defeat, ordered her supporters in the senate to vote it down. The protests had worked. They achieved their stated goal.

 

It was only then that the rice program was discovered and used to keep the protests going. And the elections that were sabotaged were used to ensure that rice farmers did not get their promised money. All of a sudden we saw the farmers who had been insulted as uneducated dupes now become martyrs to Suthep's movement. Nevertheless, the protests had diminished noticeably after the amnesty deal was done and were at the point of death when Prayuth stepped in to save the day and save his mate Suthep.

 

There was a pre-history to the protests. First the "white mask" protests very early in Yingluck's administration, then the Pitak Siam protests, both of which failed to catch a fire. What they demonstrate, together with Suthep's statement admitting complicity with Prayuth in planning to destroy Yingluck's government from day one, is that the elites never made or intended to make any democratic concession to the elections and never intended to pursue electoral politics as a way to have their agenda implemented. They were determined to get rid of PT by hook or by crook.Absolutely disgraceful.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, tomta said:

The people came out onto the streets against the amnesty - including many redshirts. Yingluck, realizing it was a pathway to electoral defeat, ordered her supporters in the senate to vote it down. The protests had worked. They achieved their stated goal.

 

It was only then that the rice program was discovered and used to keep the protests going. And the elections that were sabotaged were used to ensure that rice farmers did not get their promised money. All of a sudden we saw the farmers who had been insulted as uneducated dupes now become martyrs to Suthep's movement. Nevertheless, the protests had diminished noticeably after the amnesty deal was done and were at the point of death when Prayuth stepped in to save the day and save his mate Suthep.

 

There was a pre-history to the protests. First the "white mask" protests very early in Yingluck's administration, then the Pitak Siam protests, both of which failed to catch a fire. What they demonstrate, together with Suthep's statement admitting complicity with Prayuth in planning to destroy Yingluck's government from day one, is that the elites never made or intended to make any democratic concession to the elections and never intended to pursue electoral politics as a way to have their agenda implemented. They were determined to get rid of PT by hook or by crook.Absolutely disgraceful.

Yes even redshirts did not agree with the amnesty, they were far wiser (or less selfish) than YL knowing if Thaksin was included their loved ones had a smaller chance for a successful amnesty.  The rice program was also included and I am not talking about YL her mistake to NOT reserve money for the farmers, I am talking about the corruption and fake G2G deals they came out for that too. The non payment was much later after YL stepped down.

 

Problem with YL and the PTP is the same as the problem with the junta and the next government. This is not an unique PTP or YL problem but a problem that all Thai governments have. Once in power they don't listen to anyone.. think everyone is stupid and should believe them and act with utter arrogance even if facts point that they are wrong. I seen this with every government so far and it enrages people. 

 

Later indeed it was used to stop the elections but the first protesters were genuine and it could have all been prevented if YL had acted differently. Blame lands at her feet too.

 

Anyway the coup might still have happened but would have been far less supported. 

[tomta]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Problem with YL and the PTP is the same as the problem with the junta and the next government. This is not an unique PTP or YL problem but a problem that all Thai governments have. Once in power they don't listen to anyone.. think everyone is stupid and should believe them and act with utter arrogance even if facts point that they are wrong. I seen this with every government so far and it enrages people. 

They demonstrably listened to the people by reversing the amnesty policy. They went to an election and were prepared to accept the judgement of the people. That election was sabotaged - with the aid and complicity of the army in that they did not allow the police to do their work - and quelled by the courts. They offered compromise with Suthep, everything short of accepting his non-elected council to be appointed by him and his cronies. They were preparing for a new election when Prayuth, knowing what the result would be stepped in and took over.

 

Yingluck's government was not perfect but at least they had some sort of democratic sensibility. The basic mechanism to "listen to the people" is an election. It is not everything but it is basic. Listening to the people is not letting the loudest and most violent voices prevail.

[robblok]

14 minutes ago, tomta said:

They demonstrably listened to the people by reversing the amnesty policy. They went to an election and were prepared to accept the judgement of the people. That election was sabotaged - with the aid and complicity of the army in that they did not allow the police to do their work - and quelled by the courts. They offered compromise with Suthep, everything short of accepting his non-elected council to be appointed by him and his cronies. They were preparing for a new election when Prayuth, knowing what the result would be stepped in and took over.

 

Yingluck's government was not perfect but at least they had some sort of democratic sensibility. The basic mechanism to "listen to the people" is an election. It is not everything but it is basic. Listening to the people is not letting the loudest and most violent voices prevail.

You have a funny way of looking at it.. people said no Thaksin in the amnesty in a secret meeting they added Thaksin to the list (so the did not listen) only after huge protests did they change. So before there were people saying no Thaksin.. they did not listen.. even added his name.. and only later after they were faced with huge protest did they listen.

 

They said no corruption in the rice program and held a fast check that did not show a thing while everyone knew about the fake G2G deals it was in all the newspapers they kept denying it. Guess what after a court case now 2 people high ranking PTP members are in jail for the fake deals. So how do you see this as listening.

 

You mean they only listen after they have no other choice.. they did not listen before only after it exploded.  I would not call that listening, had they done so before things might have looked real different. 

 

As I said its normal here not a PTP or YL thing.. just look at Prawit and his watches.. everyone knows he is guilty.. it enrages people (me included) but nothing can be done as long as they are in power. Same went for the rice program, YL kept saying no corruption there.. only after she was disposed could it be proven. 

 

If anything my anti PTP and Thaksin stand and now anti junta stand s because of how they behave and lie and think we are all fools.

[anon2736434]

14 minutes ago, robblok said:

If anything my anti PTP and Thaksin stand and now anti junta stand s because of how they behave and lie and think we are all fools.

They dont think your a fool. Actually they dont even think about you or any other falang except as an income generator for the economy. Not sure why you guys get so worked up about this. The thai people get what they deserve.

[Eric Loh]

12 hours ago, ballpoint said:

This is the chain of trough feeding and duplicity that must be dealt with before any real grass roots party can emerge.

Let's deal with the regular coups that seem to appear whenever a sniff of grassroots movement or policies were detected. Uninterrupted democracy that allows the people to have confidence and empowerment to elect leaders to strengthen the institutions, corruption agencies, laws and transparency progressively will reduce corruption. 

[sjaak327]

14 hours ago, robblok said:

Your funny, Thaksin did remove checks and balance broke the law you know it but you keep spreading your lies. 

What checks and balances did Thaksin remove, and how could he even remove them. Again, the fact was that he was bound to the 1997 constitution, one he did not write himself. Instead of calling someone a liar, stop posting utter <deleted>. At no point in time had Thaksin the free hand. 

[sjaak327]

14 hours ago, robblok said:

Again twisting the facts, but I am used to it. I said the protesters came to the streets..because of corruption in the rice program (proven to be huge in a court of law) and Thaksins amnesty. I was 100% right and these people had every right to protest given the amount of corruption and nepotism. That the protest were abused at a much later stage has nothing to do with it. The initial protests  that i was talking about were valid and caused by the PTP. What happend later was that valid protestst were taken over but that had nothing to do why the people rose.. they rose because of the corruption and amnesty. Had YL been smarter and listened more to the people thing would not have happend.

 

But no she secretly pushed for Thaksin his amnesty.. combined with the fake G2G deals made people come out and get rid of her.

I am not twisting facts at all. It's really all very simple, Yingluck's government had 300 out of 500 seats in parliament, which constitutes as a huge mandate. Governments with mandates have every right to introduce policies, especially if that policy was one of the key points in their campaign. 

 

Do you honestly believe what you just wrote ? Eo you honestly believe Suthep was protesting against corruption or the amnesty ?

 

Stop being so utterly naieve. Suthep is massively more corrupt than Thaksin. He doesn't give a shit about corruption, as long as he as his buddies benefit from it, nothing more and nothing less.

 

As to the facts, Yingluck dissolved the house and called for new elections, she didn't need to do this, but she did. But of course, that was not what Suthep wanted, so he tried the "reforms before election" approach. No democrat worth a grain of salt, was fooled by this attempt. It was a gross violation of the very constitution he claimed to be defending just days before he came up with this scheme. 

 

Oh and it wasn't just Thaksin's amnesty, the law as proposed was much more broader. Again the irony, those poor misguided souls protesting against corruption and amnesty, got massive corruption (without any checks and balances) and the Mother of all amnesties (geared at a few people) back. 

 

Again, we told those people, be careful what you wish for. Just like you, they didn't listen, and now they too cry foul. It is so funny really ????

 

 

[zzaa09]

12 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Let's deal with the regular coups that seem to appear whenever a sniff of grassroots movement or policies were detected. Uninterrupted democracy that allows the people to have confidence and empowerment to elect leaders to strengthen the institutions, corruption agencies, laws and transparency progressively will reduce corruption. 

 

And yet, most aren't able to connect the historical dots. 

What's wrong with the picture. 

[sjaak327]

14 hours ago, robblok said:

Yes even redshirts did not agree with the amnesty, they were far wiser (or less selfish) than YL knowing if Thaksin was included their loved ones had a smaller chance for a successful amnesty.  The rice program was also included and I am not talking about YL her mistake to NOT reserve money for the farmers, I am talking about the corruption and fake G2G deals they came out for that too. The non payment was much later after YL stepped down.

 

Problem with YL and the PTP is the same as the problem with the junta and the next government. This is not an unique PTP or YL problem but a problem that all Thai governments have. Once in power they don't listen to anyone.. think everyone is stupid and should believe them and act with utter arrogance even if facts point that they are wrong. I seen this with every government so far and it enrages people. 

 

Later indeed it was used to stop the elections but the first protesters were genuine and it could have all been prevented if YL had acted differently. Blame lands at her feet too.

 

Anyway the coup might still have happened but would have been far less supported. 

wait, you now blame Yingluck for not paying the farmers ? She was denied paying the farmers by the constitutional court, and for all the wrong reasons, the policy was enacted when the government was still active, therefore any budget spent, could not be considered new policy, due to the care taker status of her government, this too is a perfect example of the forces at play, forces that you don't seem to recognize at all. 

 

The elite have played a very dirty game, geared at disabling the Thai electorate. They have succeeded for now. The irony is that papers such as the Nation, missed what was really going on too, and finally after four years have seen the light. This to me is not possible, they knew, but since the tides are turning, they are now backpeddeling. 

[sjaak327]

13 hours ago, robblok said:

You have a funny way of looking at it.. people said no Thaksin in the amnesty in a secret meeting they added Thaksin to the list (so the did not listen) only after huge protests did they change. So before there were people saying no Thaksin.. they did not listen.. even added his name.. and only later after they were faced with huge protest did they listen.

 

They said no corruption in the rice program and held a fast check that did not show a thing while everyone knew about the fake G2G deals it was in all the newspapers they kept denying it. Guess what after a court case now 2 people high ranking PTP members are in jail for the fake deals. So how do you see this as listening.

 

You mean they only listen after they have no other choice.. they did not listen before only after it exploded.  I would not call that listening, had they done so before things might have looked real different. 

 

As I said its normal here not a PTP or YL thing.. just look at Prawit and his watches.. everyone knows he is guilty.. it enrages people (me included) but nothing can be done as long as they are in power. Same went for the rice program, YL kept saying no corruption there.. only after she was disposed could it be proven. 

 

If anything my anti PTP and Thaksin stand and now anti junta stand s because of how they behave and lie and think we are all fools.

Bullshit, absolute bullshit. Yingluck was impeached well before the coup. To claim she was untoucheable is a downright lie. The only ones that are untoucheable are the current lot. Simply because they got to write their own little constitution. And rest assured, that short from a counter coup, they will never be touched by anyone. 

 

Wake the hell up, you are living in your own little bubble, devoid of any reality. 

 

[anon2736434]

Yeah the current gov amnesty for themselves beats the heck out of yinglucks proposed one lol.

[robblok]

9 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

Bullshit, absolute bullshit. Yingluck was impeached well before the coup. To claim she was untoucheable is a downright lie. The only ones that are untoucheable are the current lot. Simply because they got to write their own little constitution. And rest assured, that short from a counter coup, they will never be touched by anyone. 

 

Wake the hell up, you are living in your own little bubble, devoid of any reality. 

 

Bullshit on your side not on mine (by way the nothing personal here just debate). The protest were there before the coup. She was untouchable because she investigated her own crimes. The rice program would never have been checked as well as with her out of power. You just don't like it that your hero did anything in her power to stop that investigation and only when she was gone did it go into full swing AND showed the 30billion baht in fake trades. Her own investigations during her reign had shown no corruption. So while in power she was able to influence investigations. That is proof.

[robblok]

9 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

wait, you now blame Yingluck for not paying the farmers ? She was denied paying the farmers by the constitutional court, and for all the wrong reasons, the policy was enacted when the government was still active, therefore any budget spent, could not be considered new policy, due to the care taker status of her government, this too is a perfect example of the forces at play, forces that you don't seem to recognize at all. 

 

The elite have played a very dirty game, geared at disabling the Thai electorate. They have succeeded for now. The irony is that papers such as the Nation, missed what was really going on too, and finally after four years have seen the light. This to me is not possible, they knew, but since the tides are turning, they are now backpeddeling. 

Of course I and others blame YL for this, all she needed to do before stepping down was making some provisions. She was just in a rush to step away from the mess and never thought of the farmers. Legal minds agreed Sjaak. You might not but they did.

 

Maybe the nation is backpedaling maybe like me they were appealed by the scale of corruption and nepotism and hoped for something better. Do remember all coups were short in the recent history. Like me they did not expect this. 

 

Even I now prefer a corrupt PTP government over a corrupt junta one.