‘Democracy leads to inequality,’ says government textbook, sparking public outrage over potential propaganda

[Pedrogaz]

Well democracy does lead to inequality. It is because it gets corrupted by bad actors that buy the democracy and steal. Just look at the US.

[jak2002003]

12 minutes ago, Pedrogaz said:

Well democracy does lead to inequality. It is because it gets corrupted by bad actors that buy the democracy and steal. Just look at the US.

And the UK. 

 

Democracy would be the ideal thing if people were not corrupt, selfish and power hungry.  

 

Also, a lot of people are too stupid or prejudiced to understand implications of what they are voting for, always voting for the same party out of tradition, ideology or like a religion. 

 

Those that want to get elected also pass laws or do things to make them popular with the voting public...things that night not be good for society. 

 

They are also reluctant to pass laws or suggest things that will make them unpopular or loose voter support....things that would be good for the country and society. 

 

Kind of like 2 parents fighting over the love of their spoilt child... Each promising the child sweets and treats and not making them take the nasty tasting medicine or making them study or exercise.

 

Same as the communist ideal...also very good in theory...but they also are corrupted. 

 

I think we need a different system now....maybe a mix of democracy and communism.....? 

 

It would help if leaders were only allowed a normal salary, had to have the correct qualifications and experience for the job, and had no criminal history.  They should also be middle aged and not approaching or past retirement age (as most leaders seem to be), and not religious. 

 

 

 

 

[Burma Bill]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

Democracy leads to income and social inequality,

Oh really!! Not in my book - true democracy eventually brings about the fall of military Juntas, authoritarian rule and "establishment" living in the Dark Ages!!

[brianthainess]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

“Democratic elections are highlighted as a big financial burden on the country.”

I feel so sorry for the UK monarch not being the richest in the world compared to ....oops nearly.

[Nsp64]

9 hours ago, NanaSomchai said:

I'm exhausted of being right every single time;

 

If you've read me on several other topics across these forums, I made it very clear that Thai pupils attending schools were being brainwashed by very selective training at hating foreigners by creating a false sense of superiority, denouncing human rights, rejecting democracy, promoting nepotism again and again.

 

If you all still needed a proof, there you have it.

 

I'd hate to say it again, yet here we are again; "Told you so".

 

Thailand brainwashing it's children, one generation at a time.

 

This Kingdom is going backwards.

That's exactly the point. 

Change the name of Bangkok, then the country. Next its an absolute monarchy. 

Need to get the kids compliant first.

[Nickelbeer]

Yeah, military governments and kingdoms NEVER produce inequality. ????

[herfiehandbag]

5 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

Pondering … I am thinking that on reflection there is an appeal for far too many in being supplied with a government which provides peace and security … steadiness, known societal rules. I made the observation, not too long age, concerning the outlook of John Locke versus Thomas Hobbes. In a nut shell … Hobbes thought that mankind, living in a state of nature must have found life to be short, nasty and brutish. Thus, mankind gave up their “natural rights” in return for a government supplying the peace and security (as long as this was provided you had no right to rebel). Locke on the other hand felt life in the original state of nature was probably OK, because people are good at base level. Still, humankind found that their natural rights could be better extended through working together through a government form (we kept our natural rights and had the right to institute new government). I maintain the argument is very much still with us. China’s government model holds a certain appeal in peace and security (for most westerners, at too great a cost to individual freedoms). On the other hand the current US model is most certainly coming up short in providing a societal balance for its citizens … I hasten to point out that the western model is more successfully in evidence where a better societal balance is observed. The other concern I have is the increasing government control over the individual even in many western “democracies” … again, perhaps a pointing toward the Chinese model appeal for the future. Never happen in the US? Does not need to be a Chinese one party system … could be the corporate model. Your thoughts?

Hmm. Italy's Fascist government under Benito Mussolini featured a single party state, trumpeting amongst other things it's efforts to reduce inequality and uphold "traditional values" Very much part of it's modus operandi was "corporatism", including companies, corporations and unions in the machinery of government. 

 

It has to be said it didn't end well, either for Italy or Mussolini!

 

 Constitutional monarchy, with a freely elected parliamentary government is probably the fairest and most effective way of managing a country's affairs. At it's best it has a non elected head of state with little or no executive power, and a government which relies on an electoral mandate from a parliament which has to be regularly renewed.

 

Other systems either show themselves to be vulnerable to effective dictatorship ( one party state) or too open to both the elected executive and elected legislative branches being driven by the need of support from, and support for, "big money interests",

(USA perhaps).

 

Ironically Thailand has, in theory, a constitutional monarchy, with a freely elected parliamentary government. All the agencies and bodies exist to support that. However the whole structure, from top to bottom has been infiltrated and is perverted by corruption, cronyism and nepotism.

 

The solution, to my mind, is to essentially clean up that system and allow it to work properly; interestingly I think that was the basic premise under which "Future Forward" campaigned, and which enjoyed significant support from younger people particularly in urban areas. If those ideas are able to gain traction, then in the medium turn it is probably the best hope for improving the governance and the lot of the population.

 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2022 by herfiehandbag

[NanaSomchai]

1 hour ago, Nsp64 said:

That's exactly the point. 

Change the name of Bangkok, then the country. Next its an absolute monarchy. 

Need to get the kids compliant first.

Of course, why make it simple and straightforward when you can make it over complicated?

 

Bangkok was named, well... Bangkok for the rest of the entire World.

 

Let's rename it something harder to memorize for the rest of the World while we're at it!

 

Idiots.

[Zozod]

Welcome to Thailand.  You’re better off ignoring or not knowing this and everything else officials say here.  Or accepting it for what it is.  Ugh.  

[connda]

“Human beings are born with different capacities.
If they are free, they are not equal.
And if they are equal, they are not free.”
-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Edited February 19, 2022 by connda

[herfiehandbag]

5 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

And the UK. 

 

Democracy would be the ideal thing if people were not corrupt, selfish and power hungry.  

 

Also, a lot of people are too stupid or prejudiced to understand implications of what they are voting for, always voting for the same party out of tradition, ideology or like a religion. 

 

Those that want to get elected also pass laws or do things to make them popular with the voting public...things that night not be good for society. 

 

They are also reluctant to pass laws or suggest things that will make them unpopular or loose voter support....things that would be good for the country and society. 

 

Kind of like 2 parents fighting over the love of their spoilt child... Each promising the child sweets and treats and not making them take the nasty tasting medicine or making them study or exercise.

 

Same as the communist ideal...also very good in theory...but they also are corrupted. 

 

I think we need a different system now....maybe a mix of democracy and communism.....? 

 

It would help if leaders were only allowed a normal salary, had to have the correct qualifications and experience for the job, and had no criminal history.  They should also be middle aged and not approaching or past retirement age (as most leaders seem to be), and not religious. 

 

 

 

 

You see, the trouble is that you are "qualifying democracy", only allowing candidates who are approved, candidates who fulfill certain criteria. Then we have to face the question how do we establish the criteria? Control of those criteria, put crudely, allows manipulation of democracy. We saw that in the way in which Future Forward were forced out after the last "election".

 

I'm sorry but the only way out of this enduring mess here is simple democracy. The person/party who wins the election gets to govern, and face re-election at the end of a specified and immutable term. The only basic debarring criteria to standing should be genuine criminal convictions (and I am not convinced about that), not ones engineered by political opponents. Age, wealth, political experience and religious conviction are only relevant in as much that they may attract support from some voters.

 

Now of course, inevitably that will result in people one does not like getting elected, but that is the nature of democratic politics. "The people decide - the bastards!"

 

The alternative fakes and fudges, especially when as allied to corruption, nepotism and cronyism as they are here, will simply continue to increasingly alienate and frustrate the people until the bubble bursts.

 

If you look at the regimes which do manage to hold their people in thrall, they are almost certainly countries which have never had freedom, and have managed to deny/control their populations access to the outside world - North Korea for example. Even authoritarian sophisticated one party states such as China are struggling with that.

Edited February 19, 2022 by herfiehandbag

[jak2002003]

13 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

You see, the trouble is that you are "qualifying democracy", only allowing candidates who are approved, candidates who fulfill certain criteria. Then we have to face the question how do we establish the criteria? Control of those criteria, put crudely, allows manipulation of democracy. We saw that in the way in which Future Forward were forced out after the last "election".

 

I'm sorry but the only way out of this enduring mess here is simple democracy. The person/party who wins the election gets to govern, and face re-election at the end of a specified and immutable term. The only basic debarring criteria to standing should be genuine criminal convictions (and I am not convinced about that), not ones engineered by political opponents. Age, wealth, political experience and religious conviction are only relevant in as much that they may attract support from some voters.

 

Now of course, inevitably that will result in people one does not like getting elected, but that is the nature of democratic politics. "The people decide - the bastards!"

 

The alternative fakes and fudges, especially when as allied to corruption, nepotism and cronyism as they are here, will simply continue to increasingly alienate and frustrate the people until the bubble bursts.

 

If you look at the regimes which do manage to hold their people in thrall, they are almost certainly countries which have never had freedom, and have managed to deny/control their populations access to the outside world - North Korea for example. Even authoritarian sophisticated one party states such as China are struggling with that.

That would work with a population of well educated and free thinking people.  

 

But the reality is most of the population in most countries are I'll educated and dumb, being easily manipulated by social media and the media..which are often linked to the government.

 

I don't know what the answer is. 

 

[RobU]

A very large country like China would break up if it became democratic. The only reason it has survived as one country for Thousands of years is because it isn't a democracy and never has been. The Communist party is just the new version of the ruling class of China. Thailand appears to be trying to follow China. In a democracy money talks, the poor have to gather many followers to afford to run in elections and get justice, the rich merely buy them. So there is an element of truth in the statement however unelected governments which give preferential treatment to the wealthy are no better. At least China prosecutes the wealthy which is what scares some of the so called democracies in the west.

Edited February 19, 2022 by RobU

[zzaa09]

Oligarchical and Corporatism forms of Democracy. 

All of which, is practiced the world over - for ages - by way of varying forms. 

 

Most apparent in the free and independent West.

[StayinThailand2much]

14 hours ago, ChaiyaTH said:

That's why the current administration wants to make it for at least 20 years, that is enough to brainwash a generation. The previous one became awake and modern, or was on the way at least, so was Thailand.

One can easily see that when talking or interacting with Thais of different age:

 

over 50 yrs. old: can speak some English, more often than not polite to foreigners, may have travelled abroad

 

10-50 yrs. old: lots of prejudices towards 'outsiders', like to crack jokes about 'dirty falang' or 'thieving Burmese', programmed to be nationalistic and subservient to government authority, lack of foreign language skills, and 'outside world' mostly seen through lens of Thai TV

 

under 10 yrs. old: afraid of foreigners thanks to indoctrination by school and parents (famous topic in school books: '(French) foreigners stole part of our country'), unaware of outside world

 

 

Edited February 19, 2022 by StayinThailand2much

[Bkk Brian]

16 hours ago, webfact said:

Thai government should drive education forward instead of using propaganda in textbooks for children.

Hardly surprising, its been known for years that Prayut wants a Chinese style governance. This from back in 2016

 

PRAYUTH: READ CHINESE GOVERNANCE BOOK BECAUSE IT SUITS THAILAND

 

BANGKOK — To get a glimpse of the future of governance of Thailand under junta-leader-cum-prime-minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, see what Prayuth recommends his cabinet to read.

At yesterday’s cabinet meeting, Prayuth recommended that ministers, who include many generals, read Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s book “The Governance of China”.

Prayuth was quoted as saying that the book should be read because it is suited to the governing situation of Thailand as the kingdom is also undergoing reform.

https://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2016/04/13/1460541191/

 

There was a thread on it here:

https://aseannow.com/topic/910111-prayut-read-chinese-governance-book-because-it-suits-thailand/

 

 

[metisdead]

A post with unattributed content has been removed as well as a reply. 

[internationalism]

telling this in a country on a verge of an absolute monarchy is rich

[BangkokReady]

2 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

The alternative fakes and fudges, especially when as allied to corruption, nepotism and cronyism as they are here, will simply continue to increasingly alienate and frustrate the people until the bubble bursts.

Sounds a lot like democracy when it has been tried in Thailand.

[BangkokReady]

2 hours ago, RobU said:

The Communist party is just the new version of the ruling class of China.

This is essentially what communism is. A group of people using Marxist ideology to shift power from the current ruling elite to themselves.

Edited February 19, 2022 by BangkokReady

[internationalism]

16 hours ago, NanaSomchai said:

I'm exhausted of being right every single time;

 

If you've read me on several other topics across these forums, I made it very clear that Thai pupils attending schools were being brainwashed by very selective training at hating foreigners by creating a false sense of superiority, denouncing human rights, rejecting democracy, promoting nepotism again and again.

 

If you all still needed a proof, there you have it.

 

I'd hate to say it again, yet here we are again; "Told you so".

 

Thailand brainwashing it's children, one generation at a time.

 

This Kingdom is going backwards.

why don't you run for the scotish supreme court chef lawyer?

[NanaSomchai]

2 hours ago, StayinThailand2much said:

One can easily see that when talking or interacting with Thais of different age:

 

over 50 yrs. old: can speak some English, more often than not polite to foreigners, may have travelled abroad

 

10-50 yrs. old: lots of prejudices towards 'outsiders', like to crack jokes about 'dirty falang' or 'thieving Burmese', programmed to be nationalistic and subservient to government authority, lack of foreign language skills, and 'outside world' mostly seen through lens of Thai TV

 

under 10 yrs. old: afraid of foreigners thanks to indoctrination by school and parents (famous topic in school books: '(French) foreigners stole part of our country'), unaware of outside world

 

 

I wish I could "upvote" and "like" your post more than just once.

[NanaSomchai]

2 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Hardly surprising, its been known for years that Prayut wants a Chinese style governance. This from back in 2016

 

PRAYUTH: READ CHINESE GOVERNANCE BOOK BECAUSE IT SUITS THAILAND

 

BANGKOK — To get a glimpse of the future of governance of Thailand under junta-leader-cum-prime-minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, see what Prayuth recommends his cabinet to read.

At yesterday’s cabinet meeting, Prayuth recommended that ministers, who include many generals, read Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s book “The Governance of China”.

Prayuth was quoted as saying that the book should be read because it is suited to the governing situation of Thailand as the kingdom is also undergoing reform.

https://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2016/04/13/1460541191/

 

There was a thread on it here:

https://aseannow.com/topic/910111-prayut-read-chinese-governance-book-because-it-suits-thailand/

 

 

Scary indeed, very scary.

 

Welcome to Chailand!

[RobU]

2 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

This is essentially what communism is. A group of people using Marxist ideology to shift power from the current ruling elite to themselves.

Yes they become the ruling elite and are no different to the ruling elite they usurped. In fact the old elite usually just pledge allegiance to the new order and business carries on as usual. This new China elite claim to be communists in fact they have now morphed into old style imperialists. It's the only way to manage the largest single population in the world.

[Walker88]

Thailand, which is hardly a democracy, is 'blessed' with 75% of all wealth owned by 1% of the population. THAT is inequality.

 

For all its faults, democracy provides the greatest number of people with opportunity. Yes, wealth still tends to accumulate in few hands, but that is a function of random chance or god or whatever one believes created a Universe that is the farthest thing from equal. The cream is ALWAYS going to rise, which is to say the smartest or most aggressive or most beautiful are going to do better in life than the short, fat, dumb, uncoordinated and ugly.

 

The above is true in any system (Darwin always wins), but in a democracy, somebody like Bill Clinton (even if one hates him) can rise from nowhere and become the most powerful person on Earth. Similarly, Barack Obama wasn't exactly born on Easy Street, but democracy allowed him to rise up. In theory, Democracy is based on merit: convince people you can lead, and you might get voted in. That concept of merit filters through other aspects of a democratic society, particularly in the US. Steven Jobs was an orphan whose biological father was a Syrian immigrant. Had he been born in Thailand or China or a host of other countries, nobody would ever have known his name nor would we have had the products we have today. That's in business. The same can happen in the arts or entertainment. A funny looking guy who mumbles his speech ends up writing a script and finding a way to get it produced into a series of feature films (Rocky) because his work had merit, and in a democracy merit becomes championed (at least some of the time).

[Andycoops]

20 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Sobering to read that states designed their education system to curtail, cancel or influence young minds to suit their political agenda. 

And to continue in plundering the country because of the greedy lust for piling money into their offshore bank accounts at the expensive of ordinary citizens.

[JimGant]

On 2/19/2022 at 2:25 AM, webfact said:

“Democracy leads to income and social inequality,”

Yep. Those who 'can,' get ahead. Those who 'can't,' are just relegated to 'getting by.' Marxism's attempt to equal things out, taking from the capable and giving to the incapable -- didn't quite work out: Having such a disincentive to succeed financially was the downfall of the Soviet Union. China learned from this flaw in Marxism -- and changed course.

 

The imperfections of democracy need to be managed. Singapore does this -- with great success. The US, when established, did this by trying to limit voting to the educated, i.e., white, male, land and business owners. This evaporated when the 'left' successfully argued for universal suffrage. Thus, every  tom, dick, harry, and mary got the vote. Now, white, chubby, balding uneducated males, with red caps, and leopard skinned females, with double chins -- drive how America approaches democracy today.

 

Thailand? With the added factor of the Monarchy, Thailand needs to also have a managed democracy that encompasses the full package of Thai society. Take the best from the West -- and from the Chinese model of incentivizing its entrepreneurs -- to get a unique Thai model of government.

[Nickelbeer]

I am beginning to feel that Thailand should simply accept permanent military rule. As long as there is a military, you will have coups. Costa Rica solved this problem many years ago by abolishing a standing military. When none of the neighboring countries wants to invade you, it just makes sense. It is pointless to keep electing governments only to have them tossed out of office the moment one of the "elite" is dissatisfied. Have local elections but let the military run the government. Democracy can never be understood by Thai people.

[Knocker33]

On 2/19/2022 at 6:02 AM, candide said:

The good side of it is that, the Thai education system being inefficient, pupils will likely not learn that either.

And add that they have not been in school for nearly two years with most of them just playing games or lazing around. Not much chance of them being able to read anyway

[Nsp64]

2 hours ago, Nickelbeer said:

I am beginning to feel that Thailand should simply accept permanent military rule. As long as there is a military, you will have coups. Costa Rica solved this problem many years ago by abolishing a standing military. When none of the neighboring countries wants to invade you, it just makes sense. It is pointless to keep electing governments only to have them tossed out of office the moment one of the "elite" is dissatisfied. Have local elections but let the military run the government. Democracy can never be understood by Thai people.

They dont understand mu h about anything really.

Apart from how superior they are and how the world envies them.