Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, webfact said:

is the Senate, as it currently stands, serving the people, or has it become an obstacle to genuine democratic governance?

 

Yes yes and yes.

But the more mfp stir the sh11te pot the more the ec is gonna try to pull strings to get them dissolved. For me, this shows a lack of strategical depth to this party. They are just handing the rope their enemies will use to hang them

  • Like 2
  • Confused 3
  • Sad 1
Posted
3 hours ago, webfact said:

Parit's remarks reflect a broader concern about the transparency and integrity of Thailand’s legislative processes. The allegations speculate that certain "puppet" candidates, believed to be manipulated by undisclosed influential figures, were directly involved in undermining the electoral process.

Tell me it ain't true...

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

They are just handing the rope their enemies will use to hang them

When the abyss of authoritarism lies beneath, a long rope is the only thing that keeps MVP alive.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
4 hours ago, webfact said:

In the heart of Thailand's democratic process

Maybe more accurate to start with 'In the bowels of Thailand's democratic process'

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Debate Ramps Up: Is the Thai Senate Still Necessary?

 

Wrong question. Was it ever necessary in the first place? Thailand isn't a federal republic. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, bradiston said:

The UK has an upper house, and it's a constitutional monarchy like Thailand, although I hasten to add, that's where the similarity ends. No lèse majesté there. You can say whatever you want about the monarchy. And everybody does if they so care. There is a movement to disband the House of Lords. On the face of it it's even more corrupt than the Thai senate, being partially inherited seats and partially appointed by successive governments. But it somehow does it's job. It doesn't interfere with parliament but does have a say in legislation, in as much as all bills are passed to it for review. If they want the lords can send a bill back with recommendations for revision, but the Commons doesn't have to take any notice. There are many highly respected , highly knowledgeable members who are definitely not corrupt. I think that's what Thailand was aiming for. But, TIT, and it all went pear shaped. A great shame really. Probably 90% of Thailand's problems stem from the position of .... End of transmission. They're at the door.

Agree.  Thailand:

"Feudal Patronage Society Masquerading as a Constitutional Monarchy".

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Pouatchee said:

 

Yes yes and yes.

But the more mfp stir the sh11te pot the more the ec is gonna try to pull strings to get them dissolved. For me, this shows a lack of strategical depth to this party. They are just handing the rope their enemies will use to hang them

I disagree. MF know dissolution is very much on the cards and possible life time bans for the 40 plus MPs who backed the proposed changes to the 112 law. 

But they have a back up party, to be led by Parit ( Abhisit's nephew if I recall right.).

So, imo, they are telling the public, these are our proposals, this is what we stand for, reform of Thailand. If you, the public feel the same way, vote for us the next time.

Posted
Just now, bannork said:

So, imo, they are telling the public, these are our proposals, this is what we stand for, reform of Thailand. If you, the public feel the same way, vote for us the next time.

 

in my post on the topic i might have been misleading to my actual thought by how i wrote. i am 100% in agreement that mfp do this. i just wonder about the timing. just like the 112 thing, they should have waited to clinch the premiership before going public. i know it was a campaign promise but sometimes it is better not to show all your cards.

 

if they join the other party, i hope the jackarse ec doesnt do what they do best... collude with whoever is willing to team up with them to destroy any opposition. in this case tony taxin.

the ec is a corrupt bunch of arses so is the senate... politics was born in greece... or sumeria... who know for sure, but it certainly did not evolve here it rather devolved

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted

A senate elected by the people in a national election is what's needed. Not a selection of individuals. The Senate has it's place in democracies to keep the House of Reps in check.

Posted
On 7/10/2024 at 9:51 AM, retarius said:

Other than reduce democracy the Senate doesn't seem to do anything at all. I have read but don't know if it is true, that attendance is very poor. I would say ditch the whole Senate and it's extremely stupid elections.

Is this Senate anything to do with soldiers? If so the answer is obvious.

Posted
19 hours ago, Caldera said:

Debate Ramps Up: Is the Thai Senate Still Necessary?

 

Wrong question. Was it ever necessary in the first place? Thailand isn't a federal republic. 

No Thailand is a Banana Republic, that's why they need 200 odd monkeys they call a Senate.

Posted
On 7/11/2024 at 10:20 AM, NoshowJones said:

No Thailand is a Banana Republic, that's why they need 200 odd monkeys they call a Senate.

That's pretty insulting to all Thai people. It's also totally untrue.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 hours ago, bradiston said:

That's pretty insulting to all Thai people. It's also totally untrue.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, bradiston said:

That's pretty insulting to all Thai people. It's also totally untrue.

If I am wrong I stand to be corrected, but are the senate not unelected generals who stopped the guy Pita from being PM on technicalities as he had the most votes in the last general election?

Posted
16 minutes ago, NoshowJones said:

If I am wrong I stand to be corrected, but are the senate not unelected generals who stopped the guy Pita from being PM on technicalities as he had the most votes in the last general election?

That is what it essentially boils down to, yes.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, NoshowJones said:

If I am wrong I stand to be corrected, but are the senate not unelected generals who stopped the guy Pita from being PM on technicalities as he had the most votes in the last general election?

The last one, consisting of 250 appointed senators, was. Their term is almost over with the newly "elected" Senate of 200 senators about to be installed, if they get past the various complaints lodged with the EC. We have yet to see if they will be an improvement. They won't have a say in the appointment of a new PM.

  • Thanks 1
Posted

There are a number of other factors in play. Traditional politics in Thailand was, for many years dominated by a number of political clans, each wielding immense influence, and each working to advance it's own influence, the access to the states coffers and the powers of patronage and wealth distribution that brought with it. Each clan had it's supporters within the military. Neither the politicians nor the military were remotely interested in serving the country or it's people.

That rather changed with Pheu Thai, which formed a movement which had pretensions to represent a relatively broad front of political views. That movement was changed into a more traditional "clan", partly by the intervention of the military (at no doubt the bidding of political influence), and partly by the hubris of it's leaders. MFP is another, more popular such movement.

The thing about these movements is that whilst their parties can be banned and dissolved, the movements themselves do not go away.

The Senate is an attempt to re-establish the primacy of these clans, a chamber where influence and peddling of loyalties can continue as before, ultimately calling the shots in government.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...