17 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

They were still voted in i.e. the did not come to power through a coup or revolution but by shrewd manipulation of the electoral system.

 

 

 

No, by that time the electoral system had become irrelevant.

 

It had produced no "decision" and was not likely to in the future.

 

Discussion or negotiation within the Reichstag had also produced no "resolution".

 

It was the unilateral appointment of Hitler, by Hindenburg, as Chancellor, that did it.

 

From that position he launched his........coup.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Indeed. Many who fought in WW1 did not enjoy the right to vote. Nor did ladies at that time. Nor were the masses, in general, well educated.

 

It took the calamity of two world wars to stimulate the massive social and cultural changes that brought about the changes to Northern European countries. 

 

Hopefully Asia will be spared such suffering and the change will be more evolutionary.

A little history lesson:-

Both Australia (1902) and NZ (1893) women had gained the "right to vote" BEFORE WW1.  

 

I can be corrected on those dates, if I have either or both dates wrong.

 

Notwithstanding my "lesson" on voting I do agree with your comments.

3 hours ago, JAG said:

The now predominantly democratic Northern European countries had, not so long ago opaque, elitist systems of government, underpinned by a complex patronage system.

 

As the population became more prosperous and better informed, and the everyday struggle for mere survival became less pressing, so these societies evolved into the democratic form they take today. It is an inevitable, and irresistible process.

 

It is happening here (and I dare say elsewhere in South East Asia). The pace of such change is many many times faster, modern medias and information technologies having been so enthusiastically embraced. That doesn't mean it will happen in months or next year, but I suspect in a generation or so things will look different.

 

Of course their may be catalysts which lead to much more rapid (and possibly violent) change. I hope not, I would like the change to be an evolution not a revolution. That is probably in the hands of the opaque, elitist systems of government, and patronage higherarchy - which on reflection doesn't bode well...

 

Of one thing we can be sure: the Constitutional Court, as currently structured and functioning will not play a constructive role in this.

I welcome your view but I am afraid I don't share your optimism for a Thai Enlightenment. The structure of society is too entrenched and the critical mass of people with the moral courage to change it (maybe 5% of the population) is nowhere to be seen. An endemically corrupt, highly inequitable society it will remain with every organ of the state, including the Constitutional Court, bent to the needs of those at the top of hierarchy. It could be worse though, look at Cambodia or Myanmar.

3 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

It is even more fundamental than that, clarity is missing in the laws themselves which can be interpreted by authorities any way they want, clarity is missing in authorities' rules and regulations which can be modified and amended from district to district.

Ah yes, the all too famous line used all over Thailand by bureaucrats in immigration .............

 

"New rules, new rules.'  ????

Put some Thais in the German court and see how long it stays respected with Judge Somchai at helm.

1 hour ago, lvr181 said:

A little history lesson:-

Both Australia (1902) and NZ (1893) women had gained the "right to vote" BEFORE WW1.  

 

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled wàs convincing the world that he didn't exist.

 

The greatest trick the politicians ever pulled was convincing the populace that they had a democracy because they could vote.

 

 

9 hours ago, Enoon said:

 

Actually they weren't.

 

They only got 230 out of the 608 seats in the Reichstag and did not come to power until the DNVP (Conservative Party) decided to support them in a coalition.

 

 

Nit picking doesn't help your argument, almost every western government has ruled in coalition for some time, were they all not elected to power??

16 hours ago, webfact said:

In Germany, the Federal Constitutional Court is a respected institution and enjoys an equal status with the three branches of a democracy, 

Can't even put tre's fingers up here so they won't be having none of this 3 branches of democracy business .. 

13 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Same old error over and over.

 

Northern European countries have, for the most part, transparent, democratic systems of government, underpinned by the rule of law, which in turn is underpinned by morality, justice and fairness.

 

South East Asian countries have, for the most part, opaque, elitist systems of government, underpinned by a complex patronage system, which in turn is underpinned by loyalty to and fear of one's seniors in the patronage hierarchy.

 

Trying to pretend they are comparable and thinking you can take the best bits of Northern European government and insert them into Thailand or any other South East Asian is a concept doomed to failure from the start.

Total hypocrisy ! Europe is pretty corrupt like most other countries and when it comes to serving the law, I can name a few in particular that shelve the law. For example: the last stock market crash, how many bankers, lawyers and other affiliates responsible were arrested and thrown in jail ? With the exception of Iceland, most were above the law. 

 

The EU and it's so-called democratic constitution, where there is the audit for each year to account for all the money that is spent?

 

With regards to morals, you only have to look at most of Africa and Asia in particular and even the USA where Europeans ravaged, pillaged, raped, murdered and enslaved the locals, and they are still paying the price today for this violation.

 

You can talk about South-east Asia, but does nothing compares to what the west had done !

11 hours ago, the guest said:

You can talk about South-east Asia, but does nothing compares to what the west had done !

The difference being that, generally speaking, the West has learned and changed. And please refresh my memory about what was real bad (French occupation aside) that the West inflicted in Asia? The Asians were quite adept at inflicting "bad" on their own region!

 

As far as Africa is concerned, once the "colonialists" left, too often the locals degenerated back to tribal fighting (now to include religion) to see who will control their countries. One evil replaced by another? That, does not represent 'progress'.

 

I'm not excusing what the Europeans have done, just trying to bring about some balance to claims being made.

 

Edited November 13, 20187 yr by lvr181
Additional comment

 
Actually they weren't.
 
They only got 230 out of the 608 seats in the Reichstag and did not come to power until the DNVP (Conservative Party) decided to support them in a coalition.
 
 

I stand corrected, by an astute historian. My point was, however, they didn't come to power via military coup.