I got to thinking (a rare & momentus moment ) & I am of the belief farangs can have a say in Thai politics. Not directly of course, but through the families we are married to & people we associate with.

For example. In the referendum held recently, many Thai people asked me if I had read the proposed constitution, understood it & which way I thought they should vote. Many of these people had not read it, & really didn't care one way or another.

I gave my two baht's worth & surprise, surprise many of my staff & family members voted the way I said I would if I was a Thai citizen.

Now lets consider this on a larger scale. If 20,000 serious expats in Thailand could influence 10 people each into which way to vote it is becoming noticeable. For arguments sake, if the number of expats living in Thailand ballooned to say 300,000 who could influence 5 people each, there would be a reason for the politicians to be a) scared of the farang & try to expell them with nationalistic rhetoric, or actually play to the farang to win their hypothetical vote.

Since Bedlam has been accused of going soft lately.... Let us....

Open up here and state your position and / or views on the impact of a surge of farang on Thai politics.

Cheers guys.

F=MA

Im interested to hear which way you would have cast your vote? and in essence which way did you sway the votes of these colleagues and family.......

curious me

That would involve getting a group of people to say similar things to be noticed. THAT would be a big ask in the most orgainised of places.

We are talking of folk who have moved from many structured and organised places to one that is a little less so. Many liking the less structured feeling of LOS.

It would have to be a very big issue to get the needed unification and motivation.

Any suggestions as to what would motivate the laid back expat community?

I wouldn't have thought many farangs give it too much tought or really care!

However, if farangs did take a view and care, yes, I think we could influence Thai politics. That's what happens in other countries.

F=MA

That's true, but I think most of we farang tend to decelerate when we get here.

Farangs such as yourself are not a political force in Thailand at all, or to an extremely small degree. Some of the ideas for government in Thailand of course came from abroad in the past, as this has happened all over the world.

Could farangs be a force? Probably not, at least not realistically.

a Major force no ,

an influence definitely

cite the obvious , Esaan mixed race marriages and the numbers are growing

so , is the increased mass compensating for the Thai deceleration ??

I got to thinking (a rare & momentus moment ) & I am of the belief farangs can have a say in Thai politics. Not directly of course, but through the families we are married to & people we associate with.

For example. In the referendum held recently, many Thai people asked me if I had read the proposed constitution, understood it & which way I thought they should vote. Many of these people had not read it, & really didn't care one way or another.

There are inconsistencies in this paragraph. It is surprising that so many Thai would ask a foreigner's opinion on a political issue and more so that they would go so far as to ask which way they should vote. Much more so that those who "had not read it, & really didn't care one way or another" should do so.

I gave my two baht's worth & surprise, surprise many of my staff & family members voted the way I said I would if I was a Thai citizen.

Hope you realise that the "exit poll" is a reserved occupation.

Now lets consider this on a larger scale. If 20,000 serious expats in Thailand could influence 10 people each into which way to vote it is becoming noticeable. For arguments sake, if the number of expats living in Thailand ballooned to say 300,000 who could influence 5 people each, there would be a reason for the politicians to be a) scared of the farang & try to expell them with nationalistic rhetoric, or actually play to the farang to win their hypothetical vote.

I will resist the temptation to comment on the possibility of finding 20,000 "serious expats" in Thailand , let alone Thai attitudes to immigration ever allowing that number to "balloon" , but I doubt if whatever number there are have a single and consistent viewpoint on Thai political issues. I have noticed , on this forum , the anti-Toxin squad debating with the anti-military democracy-is-dead squad for instance. Most countries do not warm to foreign interests meddling in domestic politics. Any such activity in Thailand would , I think , raise visa problems rapidly unless it was so below the radar it was invisible to the naked eye.

,

Since Bedlam has been accused of going soft lately.... Let us....

When I used to visa-run through Ranong a couple of years ago the locals were trying to sell me kamagra for 200b a pack.

Recently the price seems to have dropped to around 80b so , despite the exchange rate , there is no excuse for this.

Open up here and state your position and / or views on the impact of a surge of farang on Thai politics.

Cheers guys.

Can't sign off without remembering an American who answered a question about decision making in his family by saying "My wife deals with the everyday stuff like what we eat , where we live and where the kids go to school but I make the important decisions , like whether we vote Republican or Democrat".

Im interested to hear which way you would have cast your vote? and in essence which way did you sway the votes of these colleagues and family.......

curious me

I would have voted "No". You know my views on the whole thing...

But yes, Farang are in some ways a political force, in some areas.

If you have ever been at a politician's speech in an area in Isaarn with a high density of Mia Farang, then these Farang and their wifes are particularly addressed. Politicians do appear at many such marriages between Farang and local Thai women. Politicians of those areas know very well the economical force those mixed relationships represent.

Extensively involved in the family discussion that resulted in nine "Yes" votes on the approved Constitution referendum signed into effect by His Majesty the King today...

so yes, I thing farang can play an active role in how Thai political voting goes.

Farangs A Political Force In Thailand...

:D

Extensively involved in the family discussion that resulted in nine "Yes" votes on the approved Constitution referendum signed into effect by His Majesty the King today...

so yes, I thing farang can play an active role in how Thai political voting goes.

Good on you SRJ.

I did my bit too...

Im interested to hear which way you would have cast your vote? and in essence which way did you sway the votes of these colleagues and family.......

curious me

I would have voted "No". You know my views on the whole thing...

But yes, Farang are in some ways a political force, in some areas.

If you have ever been at a politician's speech in an area in Isaarn with a high density of Mia Farang, then these Farang and their wifes are particularly addressed. Politicians do appear at many such marriages between Farang and local Thai women. Politicians of those areas know very well the economical force those mixed relationships represent.

In a perfect world, with all the time up our sleeves, I would hypothetically speaking vote no to this constitution. IMO it is does not represent all Thai citizens fairly.

In the real world the country is stagnating. A no vote to this constitution would just drag it out more while an approriate old constitution is chosen. Better to get the country moving again, even with an imperfect set of rules, rather than sitting back watching it slide back into the stone age.

Influencing staff & family members is not hard at all. The staff see the boss as the one who knows all (whether he knows jack shit is another story ). He is also the one providing the weekly pay cheque & there is influence on it's own. My wife was going to hand in a blank card at the booth - simply because, like myself when in my twenties - she believed that her vote doesn't make one iota of difference to the outcome. I outlined my arguments for voting "hen chorp" & "mai hen chorp" and she (according to her ) voted accordingly.

As far as getting all expats in Thailand to address political issues in unity - impossible. Unless, at the next elections, one party is going to the polls on a platform of "kick the farang out ". That could create some fire works.

Cheers.

those like SRJ or Jaidee that seem to favour to approve the constitution, would you care to say why? is there any other reason apart from what soundman already mentioned in his post?

to soundman -- my question is -- do you think democracy is a readymade software that can be installed and all problems fixed like an anti-virus software?

or do you think its a process, where you need to do slight modifications and adjustments as you go along.....

my opinion

i never supported the coup, from day one. I dont believe any and every mean needed to be used as long as thailand can get rid of Thaksin (the sentiment of many who say they dont like military intervention)

but lets say I have to accept it, not like they were gonna listen to me anyway LOL

so we have a coup, we have a military installed government. they want to deal with Thaksin and his corruption...set up all these tribunals, and agencies etc. they probe his assets sales, probe the land deal, probe the airport deal...all well and good.

but they do not have the mandate to change the constitution. its not their place to do so. what they should have done is facilitate a fair elections (remember they had gotten rid of TRT already...so they cant exactly say 'he' would return)

constitution is a pretty permanent thing, i dont believe people who are not representing people should make decisions on our behalf. and sure some will say they took input from people and yes some adjustment were made to the first draft of the constitution. but adjustment or compromises that made things slightly better compared to the first draft...but on the whole is it really better for the country? even better than the previous flawed 1997 version?

the way i see it, there will always be loopholes and flaws in man-made rules. no matter how hard they try to close the holes that Thaksin used, there will still be others that will be found. in that regard, the military know full well, as all of us should, there cant be a 'perfect' constitution. but why did they still want to amend it?

what i see from this constitution is...weaker political parties. this means it takes thailand back to the 80s where small power negotiate, shuffle around whos going to link and form alliance with who...and they spend most of their terms doing that. and theres always room for some military guy whos well connected or even controlling certain group to step in, directly or indirectly

i think the military stepped in last september was a pre-calculated move. what i think is...they saw that people power was getting strong. and they didnt like that. just the same as they dont like the country to have a strong charismatic leader that people support and have faith in. (it doesnt have to be thaksin, can be anyone and the military wont be happy. they like to talk about institutions, but ofcourse their institutions really mean the core few at the top) i dont believe the reason of trying to curb violence or disharmony amongst 2 sides is a justified reason. if we are to talk about democracy, isnt part of the feature mean that people can disagree and can have differing opinions and views? the military and police can provide security, but they cant force people to have harmony. the aim of democracy should NOT be harmony, or groups and institutions, or things like for the good of the country....that reminds me of socialist talks.....but its about liberty and freedom and choices. individual liberties.

alright.....Im beginning to rant and go off topic...so Im just gonna stop here

those like SRJ or Jaidee that seem to favour to approve the constitution, would you care to say why? is there any other reason apart from what soundman already mentioned in his post?

to soundman -- my question is -- do you think democracy is a readymade software that can be installed and all problems fixed like an anti-virus software?

or do you think its a process, where you need to do slight modifications and adjustments as you go along.....

my opinion

i never supported the coup, from day one. I dont believe any and every mean needed to be used as long as thailand can get rid of Thaksin (the sentiment of many who say they dont like military intervention)

but lets say I have to accept it, not like they were gonna listen to me anyway LOL

so we have a coup, we have a military installed government. they want to deal with Thaksin and his corruption...set up all these tribunals, and agencies etc. they probe his assets sales, probe the land deal, probe the airport deal...all well and good.

but they do not have the mandate to change the constitution. its not their place to do so. what they should have done is facilitate a fair elections (remember they had gotten rid of TRT already...so they cant exactly say 'he' would return)

constitution is a pretty permanent thing, i dont believe people who are not representing people should make decisions on our behalf. and sure some will say they took input from people and yes some adjustment were made to the first draft of the constitution. but adjustment or compromises that made things slightly better compared to the first draft...but on the whole is it really better for the country? even better than the previous flawed 1997 version?

the way i see it, there will always be loopholes and flaws in man-made rules. no matter how hard they try to close the holes that Thaksin used, there will still be others that will be found. in that regard, the military know full well, as all of us should, there cant be a 'perfect' constitution. but why did they still want to amend it?

what i see from this constitution is...weaker political parties. this means it takes thailand back to the 80s where small power negotiate, shuffle around whos going to link and form alliance with who...and they spend most of their terms doing that. and theres always room for some military guy whos well connected or even controlling certain group to step in, directly or indirectly

i think the military stepped in last september was a pre-calculated move. what i think is...they saw that people power was getting strong. and they didnt like that. just the same as they dont like the country to have a strong charismatic leader that people support and have faith in. (it doesnt have to be thaksin, can be anyone and the military wont be happy. they like to talk about institutions, but ofcourse their institutions really mean the core few at the top) i dont believe the reason of trying to curb violence or disharmony amongst 2 sides is a justified reason. if we are to talk about democracy, isnt part of the feature mean that people can disagree and can have differing opinions and views? the military and police can provide security, but they cant force people to have harmony. the aim of democracy should NOT be harmony, or groups and institutions, or things like for the good of the country....that reminds me of socialist talks.....but its about liberty and freedom and choices. individual liberties.

alright.....Im beginning to rant and go off topic...so Im just gonna stop here

Good post MiG.

I have to say that in essence I agree with what you are saying, however, reality is a totally different kettle of fish.

I don't support the coup. Taksin had to be removed. There was no-way that was going to happen going down the democracy route because he owned the electorate. The coup was the only way to remove him. Do two wrongs equal a right?

As to an un-elected body drafting a "new set of rules" for the country which can be fine tuned in the future, however with great difficulty. Not acceptable either, however.....

A quote (I can't recall where I read it) -

There is no justification for making war on a sovereign nation - unless you win.

I think that is applicable with the coup - because - well frankly - Who is going to stop them?

So at the end of the day - voting even for a set of rules that leads to weaker political parties is acceptable when the alternative is to having this great country <deleted>$$ed up by a military junta that may understand national security & logistics but has no idea how to run the economy, infrastructure & conduct themselves in the world political arena.

This is preferable to letting them stay in power through all sorts of excuses & re-labeling of position & departments.

Whether the elections will actually happen as promised - we can only wait and see.

Remember they are in power, & if they don't want to give it back to the people, the only way to take it back is at the dangerous end of an M16 assault rifle. This is here and now so whatever is "the right way to do something" is totally dictated to the populous by those in charge.

Cheers.

Taksin had to be removed. There was no-way that was going to happen going down the democracy route because he owned the electorate. The coup was the only way to remove him. Do two wrongs equal a right?

I disagree. if you recall, the prevvious election commission had been removed PRIOR to the coup. and the new set installed would have been more fair. all concerned were under a lot of pressure from the strong citizen power i mentioned earlier. the court was under pressure to remove those that were seen to to be acting in Thaksin's favour or his influence.

would TRT have won the elections? very likely. BUT with a stronger opposition since many had been swayed against them...atleast the middle class. the poor would still vote for him.....why? cos he truly adopted policies that made their life better. call it populist? isnt that what politics is about though? Democrats say the 30baht health scheme bankrupted the country, but propose a 0 baht scheme, without any explanation as to how they would finance it. hows that not only a populist but also a contradiction of their own cry against TRT policy?

anyhow before I stray....yes TRT would win, but more power in opposition...to me thats a step towards the check and balance thats needed in a democracy. the way i see it, democrats cried foul and boycotted election cos they knew they couldnt win...and prolly thought its time they are back in government. they were no longer content to remain in opposition (no pie gets to opposition..well only a smalllll tiny piece from those big businesses who always have to fill the pockets of both sides..opposition and government).

So at the end of the day - voting even for a set of rules that leads to weaker political parties is acceptable when the alternative is to having this great country <deleted>$$ed up by a military junta that may understand national security & logistics but has no idea how to run the economy, infrastructure & conduct themselves in the world political arena.

This is preferable to letting them stay in power through all sorts of excuses & re-labeling of position & departments.

Cheers.

disagree with that too. I think thailand has come a long way from the days where people with guns can simply say and do what they want, and the people will just sit quietly, or walk with heads bowed and do as told. plus the military are also very reluctant to use full force (and Im thankful for that!)

the military, and the democrats, have misled the people to think that if the constitution is not accepted, an election cannot take place. this is not the case. and if the military is really going to stay true to their words, they would still be obliged to have an elections take place, despite the constitution being voted no. ofcourse that leaves room for them to manipulate the scene even more if they chose some constitution from yesteryears. which they also know they dont dare to do. not without bearing the brunt of many criticism, not including if that happens, more pressure from international community.

if they try to stay in power way beyond the one year that they mentioned, especially if they dont let an elections take place, then there would be quite some chaos to follow I believe. they know it too.

but they took advantage of their veiled and not so veiled threat saying that they can adopt ANY constitution if the 2007 one fails. and yes many believe or are under the impression that if there is no constitution adopted, an election will not, or more so, CANNOT take place. the military, the junta installed government, and worst of all, the political parties did NOTHING to inform the public this notion is a misrepresentation.

To answer the OP's question - NO.

Some you folk that live out in Issan seem to have grown an air of self importance (medium size fish very small pond syndrome?). In Thailand, you are foreigners and are less than Thai, you know that.

If you made a difference politically, you would be kicked out or killed. But you don't, so you'll be ok.

Could a forigner make a big difference anywhere? Say, three of four teachers at major Unis in Bangkok got thousands of students together at pro democracy rallies... You'd be charged as a paedophile to discredit you, and / or killed.

Keep out of Thai politics.

To answer the OP's question - NO.

Some you folk that live out in Issan seem to have grown an air of self importance (medium size fish very small pond syndrome?). In Thailand, you are foreigners and are less than Thai, you know that.

If you made a difference politically, you would be kicked out or killed. But you don't, so you'll be ok.

Could a forigner make a big difference anywhere? Say, three of four teachers at major Unis in Bangkok got thousands of students together at pro democracy rallies... You'd be charged as a paedophile to discredit you, and / or killed.

Keep out of Thai politics.

So, if at the next election, one of the parties is going in on the platform to "kick all farang out of Thailand" you would not pipe up to those closest to you and try to make sure they didn't vote for that particular party?

It's great to see a good political debate without the usual flaming and attempts at devaluing your opponents.

Good reading.

It's great to see a good political debate without the usual flaming and attempts at devaluing your opponents.

Good reading.

PS Thanx for editing that stalker.

To answer the OP's question - NO.

Some you folk that live out in Issan seem to have grown an air of self importance (medium size fish very small pond syndrome?). In Thailand, you are foreigners and are less than Thai, you know that.

If you made a difference politically, you would be kicked out or killed. But you don't, so you'll be ok.

Could a forigner make a big difference anywhere? Say, three of four teachers at major Unis in Bangkok got thousands of students together at pro democracy rallies... You'd be charged as a paedophile to discredit you, and / or killed.

Keep out of Thai politics.

So, if at the next election, one of the parties is going in on the platform to "kick all farang out of Thailand" you would not pipe up to those closest to you and try to make sure they didn't vote for that particular party?

I didn't say, and don't think, that what you did was wrong or bad.

I simply believe it to be of very limited value because we have no power here. Have you listened to the national anthem lately? etc.

It's great to see a good political debate without the usual flaming and attempts at devaluing your opponents.

Good reading.

I don't often have the ability to raise my argument, thus I must try to get other posters down to my level. When done, I always appreciate their kindness to help me out.

(As Kayo cruely pointed out - I'm compost )

My opinion - we, as farangs, will not directly influence Thai politics or Thai thinking in the next few years.

But our children (those of us who are privileged to have them) will be influenced by us - will think more independently - will question more deeply - will, in general become more socially and politically concious than their forbears.

And that may be our hope for the future.

It's great to see a good political debate without the usual flaming and attempts at devaluing your opponents.

Good reading.

I agree, it IS nice to see. Shame it doesn't have any bearing on reality, as commenting on the royal family is verboten.

edit: I should add, I fully understand the need for TV's policy. and support it's right to admimister it here. It would otherwise be br YouTubed, I'n sure.

My opinion - we, as farangs, will not directly influence Thai politics or Thai thinking in the next few years.

But our children (those of us who are privileged to have them) will be influenced by us - will think more independently - will question more deeply - will, in general become more socially and politically concious than their forbears.

And that may be our hope for the future.

I hope so, and it seems a reasonable point.

But (small but),I worry that Thailand is out of sync with reality and thus it may not happen... Amazing Thailand.

But our children (those of us who are privileged to have them) will be influenced by us - will think more independently - will question more deeply - will, in general become more socially and politically concious than their forbears.

thats a good point.

and yes I think also in other ways farangs CAN influence thais. its a question of who. influencing your immediate family and friends will ofcourse have less of an impact (unless you are married to Sonthi's daughter or something like that)

but on the other hand there are farangs (or atleast farang institutes/organisations) that are in a position to influence or expose newer generation thai to more open and critical thinking.

But our children (those of us who are privileged to have them) will be influenced by us - will think more independently - will question more deeply - will, in general become more socially and politically concious than their forbears.

thats a good point.

and yes I think also in other ways farangs CAN influence thais. its a question of who. influencing your immediate family and friends will ofcourse have less of an impact (unless you are married to Sonthi's daughter or something like that)

but on the other hand there are farangs (or atleast farang institutes/organisations) that are in a position to influence or expose newer generation thai to more open and critical thinking.

So here is the point.

Farang can maybe only influence a zero to a few Thai's to vote individually, however, if there are many individual farang doing the influencing (and teaching the young to think instead of just remember ), I for one think that they can influence an election, much the same way minority groups have major influence in Western democracies.

Remains to be seen whether Thai power brokers will see this as just part of business in a Global market or get xenophobic & try to kick all the farang out like they did with the Chinese many years ago. Maybe they learn't a few lessons from that failed manouver. Maybe they didn't.

Remains to be seen whether Thai power brokers will see this as just part of business in a Global market or get xenophobic & try to kick all the farang out like they did with the Chinese many years ago. Maybe they learn't a few lessons from that failed manouver. Maybe they didn't.

By the time they do see it, it may be too late.

I have had two major career paths in my life, one was IT the other was Geology..... in the IT arena I expect rapid change, I expect updates and I expect to be able to change things I don't like at the push of a button (maybe two, and the odd email complaint )

People don't change that fast en masse, even if they are willing it still takes time...... if they are unwilling or working against a force that is opposed to them, it takes even longer. I view the farang influence like grains of sand in the stream, we are nothing compared to the stream itself for power and strength, but we erode the bedrock little by little. As long as we have a presence here, we will change Thailand, but I don't expect it to happen overnight.

those like SRJ or Jaidee that seem to favour to approve the constitution, would you care to say why? is there any other reason apart from what soundman already mentioned in his post?

I didn't say that I approved of the constitution.

I said I did my bit... meaning that I encouraged family discussion on an issue that otherwise would have been ignored.

Because they didn't understand it, my wife's family were not going to bother to vote at all.

At my insistence, they learnt what they could about the proposed constitution.

We had many discussions of the possibilities of the outcome of the referendum... all eventually agreed that a "no" vote would do nothing to resolve the political quandry Thailand is in at the moment... and if you agreed with everything in the constitution or not, a "yes" vote would at least get the country moving again.

Do they understand the constitution? I doubt it. But they understand more about it now.

So yes, I encouraged a small group of people to speak out and vote... who would have otherwise remained silent and ignorant.

A significant political force no... merely a minor influence to a few voters.