chownah Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 So, how did Thailand get into a situation where even the appearance to do something for the poor is powerful politically....could it be that politics before Toxin completely ingnored the poor and did not even create a false appearance of helping them?...I think so. Not only did Toxin make the appearance....he actually created programs to help. Not all of the programs were successful and money did get siphoned off by local officials but some of it actually got to farmers and some even to poor farmers. There was alot of talk about programs similar to the 30 baht health care program before Toxin....and most of the talk was at election time....but no one actually created the program...until Toxin..... You say that my post is not quite true and then you post alot alot alot of stuff but it never really indicates that what I posted is not quite true....and....you failed to address the main point of my post which is "how did Thailand get into a situation where even the appearance to do something for the poor is powerful politically". I suggest an answer: "could it be that politics before Toxin completely ingnored the poor and did not even create a false appearance of helping them?..." Now I know that you will probably be able to come up with some example of some politician at some time having done something for a poor person somewhere in Thailand.....perhaps this is what your reference to Dr. Arthit is all about....I don't know as I am not familiar with Dr. Arthit or his program which you say was taken away (as opposed to "was replaced" perhaps?). I'll pose the question again: "How did Thailand get into a situation where even the appearance to do something for the poor is powerful politically?" I think it is because previous to Toxin the poor have mostly only been an issue at election time and mostly forgotten when it came to allocating resources for social programs. The not quite true part I was referring to is the part where you claim Thaksin created programs to help. Low cost housing, non sustainable healthcare (insert repeat from last post) -to me prove they didn't help at all. In fact, if anything, I would say other than govt giving free money (debt forgiveness, land handouts etc) the rural economy is no stronger now than it was before him, and probably weaker. I agree with your first comment though; that Thaksin was able to mobilise the rural poor in a way no politician has been able to in the past, by appealing to their wants. Appearance of being 'one of them', appearance of giving out his own wealth (as he is so wealthy he doesn't need to be corrupt), appearance of kit mai tum mai - and just 3 policies: - debt forgiveness - 30b healthcare - TAMC It wasn't even about appealing to the rural poor; it is political marketing 101 - never before had Thailand had a PR/marketing astute politician, and Thaksin knows exactly how to run things. You think that wikipedia entry doesn't involve a PR agency in USA helping to edit and write his entry? You think that the Taxi drivers all support Thaksin randomly? Far from it, he understands the concept of opinion leaders, and spent more money, actually invested more money, to ensure teachers, media, taxi drivers, or bor dtor/local govt, academics would be on his side. Any oppostion were threatened using the AIS marketing budget, taken to court, or if in the govt/civil service just moved out or sideways. One thing people don't know about TRT (and I know a little, because I gave some advice on it) - they do massive amounts of market research, exactly like a company. They are constantly polling 'people on the street' about how things are perceived. Exactly like the strategists in the UK, USA and developed democracies, TRT had the ability to present themselves, measure the result, and adjust what they were saying. That's why they had 3 simple policies - 3 key ideas that were easy to communicate and captured them not just the rural vote, but the BKK vote as well. I don't think we should mistake appealing to the poor as the only thing TRT revolutionised. However, he proved that bravado, attitude and appearing to care could beat vote buying (2nd election he didn't really need to invest nearly as much as he did first time around in illegal vote buying). BTW I don't believe for a second that other politicians didn't care about the poor; you have roading telephones crop buying schemes, debt forgiveness etc etc and that didn't all happen under TRT; what he did was create the appearance that only he cared about the rural poor and then marketing himself as their saviour; you would be shocked at who the most respected man is in Thailand these days in some rural communities because as I said, they think all these schemes are coming from his own pocket. To add to my previous list, even the low cost housing project is dead in the water; some of the schemes like deisel subsidy and discounted tolls out that side of BKK were blatant vote grabs pre election just like the tactics people claim were the typical way in the past. I just don't believe he really did care, as none of his programs created anything sustainable other than a massive value add to his party members and his family. They ran the country as their own business with the hand in the till taking our money (our as in tax payers) and not a single check and balance; they were even out to eliminate the last military check and balance with the reshuffle, and were sure they would be able to eliminate/make irrelevant the ultimate check and balance - there is a reason why one of the directors of one of the new Temasak entities after the sale was Thai beyond reproach and yet ended up having to turn down the position; we cannot discuss more here obviously but the relationship is widely known to almost everyone I can think of. but perception wise? I totally agree - he has proved that marketing yourself as a man of the rural people is the way forward to seize power and screw everyone over/do good (choose one). Thanks for the reply. We all view what happens from our own perspectives and make sense of what happens relative to what our experiences have been. Where you say that Toxin is "appealing to their want" others would say that he is "working to address the concerns of his consituency".....where you say "they do massive amounts of market research" others say the they work hard to find what the voters real concerns are so that they can be better met"....where you say "marketing yourself as a man of the rural people is the way forward to seize power" others might say "letting rural people know that you understand their concerns helps in being chosen as the one who is most capable of satisfying their needs". Politics is a strange game where an action can be vilified or santified depending on which aspect of the game one calls up when considering the action. You say "Low cost housing, non sustainable healthcare (insert repeat from last post) -to me prove they didn't help at all. In fact, if anything, I would say other than govt giving free money (debt forgiveness, land handouts etc) the rural economy is no stronger now than it was before him, and probably weaker." My view is that it doesn't really matter if you or I think Toxin's policies "helped" them....what matters is whether they think he helped them. Whether an action "helps" someone is a subjective matter...I think the most you are saying is the he did not "help" them in the way you would "help" them if you were in position. Sustainabililty....I have not seen that anything is sustainable in Thailand....might you be looking for another adjective here? I think you might have meant to say "self sustainilng" which in eco/politic speak often means "can pay for themselves"....in the US it is the conservatives who think that activities should "pay for themselves" while the liberals see the proper place for gov't as sponsoring just those activities which in their view benefit society as a whole but can not because of their nature "pay for themselves". Seem like as long as the gov't keeps funding a program it is "sustainable" so maybe you mean something different. You say you think that the rural poor think the money comes from Toxin's own pocket.....this makes me think that you are not in touch with the rural poor. I'm sure some people are so out of touch with reality that they would think this or just about anything else but I live in a small rural village and I know that I can not necessarily extrapolate my experience the general rural population but the people here are certainly aware that the money for the programs Toxin brought came from the gov't....that's why they voted for him...to keep him in office so the programs can keep coming. Maybe I live in a village of political geniuses and the rural poor in other villages vote for him for no reason at all...I don't know. You say you don't believe that Toxin cares about the rural poor....I personally have no idea whether he cares or not. I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt and think that they at least care some of the time.....Toxin...like the rest of us...if cut will bleed...... ....but, Toxin is no angel. Chownah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveromagnino Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 After all of this I think we are mostly in agreement ;-) it's all about means and ends i think; at the end of the day the biggest effect TRT will have as a legacy is modernising the way politicians should communicate with the voters who choose them. And that's a really good thing. My attitude right now is one of hope; I don't think leopards change their spots, but who knows? We don't have much choice. Thaksin of the first year showed great promise; I think that's why so many people feel betrayed; the first guy who actually had the skills and the mandate to get things done and he screwed it up for himself and for Thailand. I never liked him, but I would have even been willing to put up with his initial 20% graft if he could have got things done. There are lots of people I don't like. Some of my best friends are people I don't like Sadly, the figure towards the end was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay higher than that, and paying/being part of the clicque wasn't even enough to protect against being backstabbed. The vindictive punishment of non TRT companies and people was crazy towards the end as well, the country isn't strong enough to sustain that level of thought process. He may not go to jail, he may not be fined. I feel his kids will be his punishment for the lifestyle he has chosen, same as Chalerm in that respect; another member of our 'dream team' LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chownah Posted February 1, 2008 Share Posted February 1, 2008 He may not go to jail, he may not be fined. I feel his kids will be his punishment for the lifestyle he has chosen, same as Chalerm in that respect; another member of our 'dream team' LOL Total agreement. chownah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jai Dee Posted February 1, 2008 Author Share Posted February 1, 2008 US ambassador congratulates PM Samak Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej opened his home on Friday to welcome well wishers congratulating him on taking office. Seen arriving at Samak's residence was US Ambassador Eric G John, who told reporters that he congratulated the prime minister about his election victory and the restoration of democratic rule. "The US looks forward to working with the new Thai government as Thailand is the oldest US ally in Asia and this year will mark the 175th anniversary of bilateral ties," Ambassador John said. He said he was working to restore the US military assistance previously suspended because of the September 19 coup. Classmates from St Gabriel School Class FC 49 presented Samak with a basket of gifts made from coconut oil. Many prominent figures sent flowers as a gesture of support. Samak granted interviews to foreign news agencies, including CNN. Source: The Nation - 01 February 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) Cabinet Team C takes shape Incoming prime minister Samak Sundaravej admitted yesterday he was not completely satisfied with his Cabinet, portraying the line-up as an "ugly duckling". Samak said coalition demands and strict rules on ministerial credentials had limited his options. "I don't know what to do with the government's image - it is unavoidable that it's a little ugly, because only the daredevils are willing to join the Cabinet," he said. He had tried, but failed, to recruit competent outsiders to fill about 10 to 20 per cent of ministerial portfolios; restrictions designed to keep former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra out of power had impacted on capable individuals. "The rules are too strict and have scared many individuals out of the public service," he said, pointing to conflict of interest provisions which apply to office holders as well as their relatives. The new PM insisted that he has "full power as the Party Leader" in preparing his Party's Cabinet line-up although he admitted to have talked to ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra on the phone "four or five times" since the December election. Samak, giving an interview to a Japanese news agency, said he had made changes to the original Cabinet list. He said that the final Cabinet list would be submitted for Royal endorsement in a few days and he expected the Cabinet to have its first meeting next Tuesday. The veteran politician confirmed that he would double as the Defence Minister, adding that it was unnecessary for Defence Minister to be a military man as the knowledge about managing military affairs should be sufficient for the job. He said that past Defence Ministers from the armed forces often were at odds with the generals in power who graduated from different classes. Samak also confirmed that Surapong Suebwonglee would become Chief of his government's Economic Team, Noppadon Pattama would be Foreign Minister, and Jakrapob Penkair a PM's Office Minister. He suggested that his government would attempt to amend the Constitution, on provisions involving multiple-MP constituencies and ones that allow MPs to vote independently on certain matters. Samak admitted he was obliged to allocate seats in accordance with lists of candidates submitted by six coalition parties, although he personally wanted to change some names for the sake of the government's reputation. "To maintain friendly ties and coalition protocols, I have to comply with requests from my coalition partners." In spite of some shortcomings, the Cabinet is ready to work and be scrutinised by the opposition, he said. He shrugged off the Democrats' plan to form a shadow cabinet, saying he saw the move as an attempt to grab publicity. - The Nation ============================================ Jakrapob Penkair a PM's Office Minister Criminal thug rally coordinator arrest... Wire-tapping investigations... Revival of the Suvarnabhumi Province mega-scam... "Free cow" scam program promoter... Thaksin mouthpiece and Apologist Extraordinaire... These are but of few items of Jakob The Liar's checkered past: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?ac...lite=%2BPenkair Between him and some of the other prospective Cabinet ministers, a lot of Cabinet meetings will fail to meet quorum requirements due to criminal court appearances. Edited February 2, 2008 by sriracha john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Personally I think there is a very simple solution to Thailand's political and economic problems that everyone seems to be overlooking: Isaan should become an independent state headed up by a coalition between Samak and Thaksin. Then the rest of Thailand apply to join the European Union (well Turkey and Morocco almost got in so I am sure TH are in with a chance).Jeez I'd better some smileys in here in case I get arrested Hey, the peasant class up in the North East have already been isolated over the decades by the central government in Bangkok. Thwe majority live in poverty, even by Thai standards. But they do provide a stream of cheap labour for the factories and brothels run by the elite class down in Bangkok. Thaksin was the first politician to offer hope to the Northern peasants of integrating into the development of greater Thai society and gaining a fair share in the countries wealth. And since the peasants of the North East represent about half the countries voters, Thaksin of course was seen as their saviour. Whatever the debates about vote buying and lack of education among the poor in the North East, any country which fails to develop half their human resources through education and other infrastructure is destined to markedly slow their own economic progress. While it certainly benefits the educated ruling class elite to have a very large pool of poor uneducated cheap labour, it is certainly not in the countries overall interests long term. Excellent points The Bangkok elite and advantaged can smirk and say the uneducated peasants in the north east etc a fools for voting for TRT or PPP but while they leave them under-developed and do not educate them now they are getting what they sowed in the first place. The North East now know their political power at the ballot box and will and should rightly demand their share of the countries wealth and development - unless of course you do not beleive in the ballot box like some of our members when it comes to Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Actually TRT circa 2006 was a very different animal from TRT 1999 edition. Back then TRT was a very interesting proposition they promised to revolutionise the country - "think new, act new", bureaucracy reform, crackdown on corruption. They had a core of very forward looking individuals. In 2000 I even cheered Sudarat to win Bangkok governor elections, mostly to see what TRT would do when in power. Later that year there was Alpine scandal and share concealment scandal and takeover of ITV. My goodwill towards TRT, and that of many many others evaporated. After the elections, when they happily absorbed all the dinosaur parties and politicians, they embarked on the way to what they finally became. Whatever ideals TRT founders had in the beginning couldn't withstand the allure of absolute power. Takeover of ITV! - an inflated price paid to get a certain company out of a big hole - 60 million USD was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Thailand's Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej speaks during a news conference in front of his wife and daughter during a ceremony at his house in Bangkok January 29, 2008. Reuters Thai PM Samak says new cabinet ready BANGKOK - Newly elected Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej said on Friday he had completed the formation of his 36-minister cabinet and sources in his party said it would be announced this weekend. Samak, who described himself in the campaign for the December election that returned the country to elected government as a proxy for ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, declined to name his ministers. "There have been swaps of positions, but it's all done now," the 72-year-old Samak told reporters, referring to negotiations between his People Power Party and five coalition partners. Trusted supporters of Thaksin, who has lived in exile in London and Hong Kong since his ouster, were expected to hold the most powerful economic and political ministries. Surapong Suebwonglee, a doctor whose family owns a network of weight-loss clinics, was tipped to become Finance Minister and Thaksin's lawyer-cum-spokesman, British-educated Noppadon Pattama, was expected to be Foreign Minister. Thaksin's brother-in-law, Somchai Wongsawat, was expected to be the most senior of six Deputy Prime Ministers Samak said he would appoint. Mingkwan Sangsuwan, a senior marketing executive at Toyota's Thai operations, was expected to be Commerce Minister and Deputy Prime Minister in charge of overall economic policy. Samak's coalition commands 316 of 480 seats in the House of Representatives, leaving the Democrats alone on the opposition benches. Samak has said a top priority is to bring Thaksin back from exile, although several parties made non-interference in corruption cases against the former leader a condition of joining the coalition. Thaksin has given various target dates for his return, the latest being May. His wife has already returned and appeared in court on one corruption charge which includes Thaksin. - Reuters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plus Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 The Bangkok elite and advantaged can smirk and say the uneducated peasants in the north east etc a fools for voting for TRT or PPP but while they leave them under-developed and do not educate them now they are getting what they sowed in the first place. Yes, the elites should have addressed that problem and lock the door, it is their fault that they left peasants vulnerable to exploitation. That doesn't excuse the thieves, however - Thaksin took criminal advantage of the sutuation. He was given the mandate initially but he cheated everyone. That's why Stevero says people feel betrayed. Make no mistake - Bangkok elites know that the country depends on millions of peasants who are wasting their lives in poverty and ignorance. Look at 1997 Constitution and the direction it was taking the country. It was conceived, written and pushed through by the elites themselves. Than came Thaskin to reversed the trend. The opposition to peasant improvement doesn't come from Bangkok. People standing firmly against it are the local "elites", local feudal lords, not Bangkokians (who have little power outside the capital, btw). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John K Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Talk about appearance, from outside Thailand the people who really had no clue as to what was going on reacted negatively to the word ‘junta.’ Take a look at things now, and you could easily picture yourself walking down a cell block of any prison. Over here on the right is our Prime Minister, in the next cell we have one of the cabinet members, over here on the left this is our........ A very impressive display for the face of Thailand. I can’t help but wonder what countries may opt out of deals with Thailand because of the guilt by association thing. I can easily visualize any member of another western government being scrutinized and perhaps investigated for wanting to deal with this bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Talk about appearance, from outside Thailand the people who really had no clue as to what was going on reacted negatively to the word 'junta.'Take a look at things now, and you could easily picture yourself walking down a cell block of any prison. Over here on the right is our Prime Minister, in the next cell we have one of the cabinet members, over here on the left this is our........ A very impressive display for the face of Thailand. I can't help but wonder what countries may opt out of deals with Thailand because of the guilt by association thing. I can easily visualize any member of another western government being scrutinized and perhaps investigated for wanting to deal with this bunch. Well the Economist is pretty influential among the business class decision makers who also share their ideology. Economist loved Thaksin and applauded the return to Democracy. Thaksin et al is pretty mild compared to other Godfather Tycoons in South East Asia - nobody minds or stops dealing with them - see Joe Studwells book for reference! I am not going to stick up for corruption etc and agree with others that it feels worse because of the sense of betrayal but on the corruption scale Thaksin was way down when compared to the venal evil dictators Thailand has had in the very recent past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Others in a position to know describe it differently: Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments? Thailand’s Auditor-General Khunying Jaruwan stated that corruption of every sort exists at unprecedented levels under the present administration. - The Nation / Nov 14, 2004 (said whilst Thaksin was the "present administration" and before he really took it up several notches to even higher "unprecedented" levels). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 The Bangkok elite and advantaged can smirk and say the uneducated peasants in the north east etc a fools for voting for TRT or PPP but while they leave them under-developed and do not educate them now they are getting what they sowed in the first place. Yes, the elites should have addressed that problem and lock the door, it is their fault that they left peasants vulnerable to exploitation. That doesn't excuse the thieves, however - Thaksin took criminal advantage of the sutuation. He was given the mandate initially but he cheated everyone. That's why Stevero says people feel betrayed. Make no mistake - Bangkok elites know that the country depends on millions of peasants who are wasting their lives in poverty and ignorance. Look at 1997 Constitution and the direction it was taking the country. It was conceived, written and pushed through by the elites themselves. Than came Thaskin to reversed the trend. The opposition to peasant improvement doesn't come from Bangkok. People standing firmly against it are the local "elites", local feudal lords, not Bangkokians (who have little power outside the capital, btw). Yeah its all the local godfather to blame and the Bangkok elite and politicians have nothing to do with it - absolute rubbish and you know it. Yes there are the provincial godfathers but look at who has run the country and needed the uneducated masses to exploit. Thailand is a classic among the SE Asian economies and was leader in many ways as it all started in 1932 and did not wait for the end of colonies like most of the others had to. Import substitution Inustrialisation follwed by Export lead industrialisation was the way the rich Chinese, Indian and Persian Thai's got their big breaks following the tax farming by working hand in hand with the Thai political and military rulers. This south east Asian model of growth is a failure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Others in a position to know describe it differently: Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments? Thailand's Auditor-General Khunying Jaruwan stated that corruption of every sort exists at unprecedented levels under the present administration. - The Nation / Nov 14, 2004 (said whilst Thaksin was the "present administration" and before he really took it up several notches to even higher "unprecedented" levels). Well I for one would take an outside independent organisation before someone with an economic agency interest!!! So you are saying Thaksin was worse than a Sarit or Phayo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
younghusband Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 from outside Thailand the people who really had no clue as to what was going on ... It's a useful rule of thumb that when one reads the words above or their equivalent, a barrage of misleading statements will follow. Of course there are distinguishing characteristics in Thai culture, politics, history and economic structure.However the same fundamental rules apply as in any other society.Thailand is not Mars and Thais are not Martians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John K Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Talk about appearance, from outside Thailand the people who really had no clue as to what was going on reacted negatively to the word 'junta.'Take a look at things now, and you could easily picture yourself walking down a cell block of any prison. Over here on the right is our Prime Minister, in the next cell we have one of the cabinet members, over here on the left this is our........ A very impressive display for the face of Thailand. I can't help but wonder what countries may opt out of deals with Thailand because of the guilt by association thing. I can easily visualize any member of another western government being scrutinized and perhaps investigated for wanting to deal with this bunch. Well the Economist is pretty influential among the business class decision makers who also share their ideology. Economist loved Thaksin and applauded the return to Democracy. Thaksin et al is pretty mild compared to other Godfather Tycoons in South East Asia - nobody minds or stops dealing with them - see Joe Studwells book for reference! I am not going to stick up for corruption etc and agree with others that it feels worse because of the sense of betrayal but on the corruption scale Thaksin was way down when compared to the venal evil dictators Thailand has had in the very recent past. Well another interesting point is this bunch has not a clue what to do. They are the same bunch as before Thaksin and they showed their worth back then. Ideas are nice if you can pull them off. Many of the concepts in “Star Trek” are based on extrapolations of today’s technology and where it would be in 400 years, but simply we don’t know how to do that yet. Neither does the newly elected Thai government. They have not a clue on how to do any of the things needed to get Thailand moving again. Even Thaksin ran out of steam at the end because he created a huge NASDAQ type bubble that could no longer support itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 from outside Thailand the people who really had no clue as to what was going on ... It's a useful rule of thumb that when one reads the words above or their equivalent, a barrage of misleading statements will follow. Of course there are distinguishing characteristics in Thai culture, politics, history and economic structure.However the same fundamental rules apply as in any other society.Thailand is not Mars and Thais are not Martians. You do not realise you must live in Thailand to really know what is going on - even if you can not speak and read Thai! I reckon 3 years should do it - then all those economists. political scientist's, reporters etc are just plain wrong! Do you not know that Soi Nana bar stool observers know much more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John K Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Well there is one addition I can add, the NASDAQ type bubble that Thaksin created may have been sustainable of the parasitic corruption did not eat all the internal support. However seeing that never happened it can only be a speculation. The parasites are back so you can expect the typical performance of any host that is infected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
younghusband Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 The Bangkok elite and advantaged can smirk and say the uneducated peasants in the north east etc a fools for voting for TRT or PPP but while they leave them under-developed and do not educate them now they are getting what they sowed in the first place. Yes, the elites should have addressed that problem and lock the door, it is their fault that they left peasants vulnerable to exploitation. That doesn't excuse the thieves, however - Thaksin took criminal advantage of the sutuation. He was given the mandate initially but he cheated everyone. That's why Stevero says people feel betrayed. Make no mistake - Bangkok elites know that the country depends on millions of peasants who are wasting their lives in poverty and ignorance. Look at 1997 Constitution and the direction it was taking the country. It was conceived, written and pushed through by the elites themselves. Than came Thaskin to reversed the trend. The opposition to peasant improvement doesn't come from Bangkok. People standing firmly against it are the local "elites", local feudal lords, not Bangkokians (who have little power outside the capital, btw). This is getting very close to Orwell's "doublespeak", brazenly denying obvious evidence or simply reversing what is undeniable fact.What this school of thought seems to rage and foam at above all else is that Thaksin's policy actually benefited the rural majority, again very difficult for the fairminded to deny.What this urban group really can't stand is the thought of ordinary Thais having an equal stake in the political process as themselves, and the inevitable corollary of a fairer distribution of resources.If the elite is so concerned with the rural masses welfare why the hysterical promotion of the "self sufficiency" economy designed to keep the great unwashed firmly in their bucolic primitive state (while the elite's snout is gobbling at the trough)? Actually there's a more complex process at work here.The economy of Thailand has been transformed over the last thirty years and although obviously inequity still exists, there's much greater wealth and education in the rural areas than before.The politicisation of the Thai majority, Thaksin's policies being an important catalyst, is a trend very much following long term social and economic development.There's a certain historical inevitabilty about this and to use a phrase the juntophiles hate, the genie can't be put back into the bottle.It's not too fanciful to say that although the junta strained to strangle the PPP movement at birth (black propaganda campaigns, footling technical legal challenges, arm twisting courts etc) it failed partly because the elite finally recognised the adverse consequences of doing so.Whether the military crazies and their feudal paymasters will try again is another story:hopefully in that event there will be a Juan Carlos type response telling them to sod off. Incidentally on the doublespeak front, I'm getting tired of hearing that the great majority of Thais welcomed the coup.It's a lie.Even the assumption that the Thai middle class loathed Thaksin and were in favour of military intervention I think is simplistic I have been surprised talking to Thai lawyers, doctors and businessmen how many admired Thaksin's approach (at least initially before his meglomania took him off the rails).Of course there is a certain amount of ex post facto wisdom here.Nobody could have predicted the incompetence, stupidity, corruption, torpor and shortsightedness of the junta and its puppet government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prakanong Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Talk about appearance, from outside Thailand the people who really had no clue as to what was going on reacted negatively to the word 'junta.'Take a look at things now, and you could easily picture yourself walking down a cell block of any prison. Over here on the right is our Prime Minister, in the next cell we have one of the cabinet members, over here on the left this is our........ A very impressive display for the face of Thailand. I can't help but wonder what countries may opt out of deals with Thailand because of the guilt by association thing. I can easily visualize any member of another western government being scrutinized and perhaps investigated for wanting to deal with this bunch. Well the Economist is pretty influential among the business class decision makers who also share their ideology. Economist loved Thaksin and applauded the return to Democracy. Thaksin et al is pretty mild compared to other Godfather Tycoons in South East Asia - nobody minds or stops dealing with them - see Joe Studwells book for reference! I am not going to stick up for corruption etc and agree with others that it feels worse because of the sense of betrayal but on the corruption scale Thaksin was way down when compared to the venal evil dictators Thailand has had in the very recent past. Well another interesting point is this bunch has not a clue what to do. They are the same bunch as before Thaksin and they showed their worth back then. Ideas are nice if you can pull them off. Many of the concepts in "Star Trek" are based on extrapolations of today's technology and where it would be in 400 years, but simply we don't know how to do that yet. Neither does the newly elected Thai government. They have not a clue on how to do any of the things needed to get Thailand moving again. Even Thaksin ran out of steam at the end because he created a huge NASDAQ type bubble that could no longer support itself. Never mind the mindless blather about Star Trek or meaningless refferences the irrational exhuberance. What is your view on Thaksinomics giving examples related to economics, growth and the south east asian model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chownah Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Bangkok elites know that the country depends on millions of peasants who are wasting their lives in poverty and ignorance. I'm sure that this is the attitude of the Bangkok elites.....the "peasants" however don't really think that their lives have been wasted.....and frankly I agree with them....the life of an "ignorant" poor rural Thai "peasant" is a good one....not a waste as the self absorbed Bangkok elite would want you to think. Rural Thailand is the basis for Thai culture.....the Bangkok elite won't be happy until the rural Thai peasants are toiling in miserable factory conditions in the city and the only place where authentic Thai culture can be seen is in theatres in Bangkok. Chownah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Others in a position to know describe it differently: Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments? Thailand's Auditor-General Khunying Jaruwan stated that corruption of every sort exists at unprecedented levels under the present administration. - The Nation / Nov 14, 2004 (said whilst Thaksin was the "present administration" and before he really took it up several notches to even higher "unprecedented" levels). Well I for one would take an outside independent organisation before someone with an economic agency interest!!! So you are saying Thaksin was worse than a Sarit or Phayo? I would take the word of an extremely well-respected person who has direct access to knowing how the "books were kept" during the Thaksin regime over the self-interests of a subjective and opinionated big-business-supporting outsider which has a laundry list of critics and detractors. Regarding Khunying Jaruwan, it's no small wonder Thaksin tried to keep her locked out from her own office. In terms of baht value and longevity of his corruption, Thaksin wins, however I do concede that Sarit had a few more mistresses than Thaksin does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 sorry to intrude on the flaming with a bit of on-topic posting... SAMAK JUST A PUPPET PM Major PPP factions calling the shots Ever-changing alterations to the new cabinet line-up is ample proof of how powerless the new PM is in putting the right man in the right job in the new coalition. Earlier, PM Samak Sundaravej had called for some cabinet portfolios to be revised before the list's submission for royal endorsement, and seemed he would not allow himself to become a puppet. One might be forgiven for thinking that Samak was very much his own man and would succeed in shaking off an image of a proxy acting on behalf of someone else. How wrong we were. The latest changes in the likely cabinet list show how little say this new PM has over the make-up of the line-up. All Samak has succeeded in doing so far is push for his close aide Sahas Bunditkul to fill the post of Prime Minister's Office Minister. The sharing of other cabinet posts is again being determined by a certain de facto leader of the People Power Party and heads of factions within the PPP. The make-up of the new cabinet reflects the fact that favours have been returned to people loyal to ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra, regardless of public criticism. Noppadon Pattama, Thaksin's lawyer, and Jakraphob Penkair are two of the finest examples of how steadfast one should remain in support of one's boss if one wants to prosper politically. Experience is meaningless in Thai politics. Continued here: http://www.bangkokpost.net/News/02Feb2008_news07.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Samak asked to review status of government member Conflicts in coalition party a test for new PM The caretaker leader of the Matchima Thipataya Party yesterday sent an urgent letter to PM Samak Sundaravej, asking him to review the legitimacy of the party joining the coalition government led by the PPP. In the letter, Pramual Leophairatana sought to block the nominations of Matchima Thipataya Secretary-General Anongwan Thepsuthin and her associates as cabinet ministers. The membership and leadership of Matchima Thipataya was thrown into disarray after Prachai Leophairatana resigned as Party Leader in early December last year. As a result Pramual, a younger brother of Prachai and Matchima Thipataya's First Deputy Leader, became the Party's caretaker Leader. But in reality, Anongwan has taken control of the party since Prachai handed in his resignation letter. She then brought the party into the PPP-led coalition. Anongwan is the wife of Somsak Thepsuthin, one of the banned 111 former TRT Party executives. Pramual claimed that Anongwan's decision to take the Matchima Thipataya party to join the PPP-led coalition, and the nomination of herself and associates as cabinet members, were in violation of Party regulations. Continued here: http://www.bangkokpost.net/News/02Feb2008_news08.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plus Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 This is getting very close to Orwell's "doublespeak", brazenly denying obvious evidence or simply reversing what is undeniable fact.What this school of thought seems to rage and foam at above all else is that Thaksin's policy actually benefited the rural majority, again very difficult for the fairminded to deny.What this urban group really can't stand is the thought of ordinary Thais having an equal stake in the political process as themselves, and the inevitable corollary of a fairer distribution of resources.If the elite is so concerned with the rural masses welfare why the hysterical promotion of the "self sufficiency" economy designed to keep the great unwashed firmly in their bucolic primitive state (while the elite's snout is gobbling at the trough)? You obviously have no clue what I'm talking about. When elites pushed through 1997 constution they wanted the rural majority to develop themselves into a strong civil and economic force. They wanted to decentralise decision making process, do away with top down approach where bureaucrats and politicians in Bangkok are put in charge of areas they have never been themselves, the process that encourages spending and corruption rather than actual development. Elites wanted the "ignorant" farmers to learn to take charge of their own communities, over the crops they should grow, over roads and infrastructure they need, over investments that would be beneficial to them, over who gets these contracts, over their own local government, possibly even leading to elected governors/federal system. Thaksin has completely reversed this idea. Look at the results - what you call "politicised" farmers now demand central government in Bangkok to improve their lives in Nakhon Nowhere. They do not demand freedom, they do not demand power, they demand money. You can't call that being "political". It benefits them in the short term but this is not sustainable, this is not a responsible approach to country's development. This resembles Soviets "rob the rich" solution to poverty more than anything else. These Thaksin's policies were rejected by "elites" because they ultimately lead to ruin. Current demands for "better income distribution" were predicted back in 2000. Eight years ago it was clear that farmers will be addicted to government handouts and demand more and more and more. Now politicians jumped on the wagon, too. They are full to the brim with plans to spend the money on farmers while no one has any plan how to make the money in the first place. This is NOT how you create wealth, this is not how you solve the problem of 50% contributing 10% to GDP. And the more they get, the worse it becomes. They see solutions not in working smarter, not in investing in better production techniques, they see solutions in making more demands. They even feel they must be paid for their votes. Thailand is not rich enough to lift them out of poverty simply by redistributing its precious resources. They must become productive members of 21st century economy, there's no other way. There's a certain historical inevitabilty about this and to use a phrase the juntophiles hate, the genie can't be put back into the bottle. You mean Soviet style redistribution is inevitable? Maybe so, it was stopped back in the 70es at a great price, maybe we are seeing round two. Of course they don't call it communism anymore, but the essense is the same, and people developing this strategy are former communists, too, and biggest Thaksin's cheerleaders are the lefties. Actually we are in the area where difference between "national socialism" and "communism" is blurred when it comes to reality on the ground (is it why Samak was accepted as PPP leader?). Western countries managed to avoid their "inevitable" revolutions peacefully, though. Of course it helps that French or US farmers are a rather small force that can be subsudised without much damage to the economy. Thailand simply doesn't have enough money. Incidentally on the doublespeak front, I'm getting tired of hearing that the great majority of Thais welcomed the coup. That was the observation in the coup aftermath shared by all the media and supported by opinion polls. No one invented it, and no one disputed it. We don't know how Thaksin supporters in the provinces felt, they were not given any public space to make themselves heard, but everyone else was out there in public view, and no one denied that the coup enjoyed public support. Anti-coup activists found themselves isolated and blamed everyone else for deserting democracy. Eventually they ended up in Thaksin's fanclubs, not because they loved Thaksin, because no one else would listen to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) So much for Samak's appeal to the previously-prevalent-Thaksin-appeal in the Northeast... Isaan MPs in a huff over cabinet line-up A group of MPs representing the northeastern region, or the Isaan region, have made it clear before PM Samak Sundaravej that they are not happy with the new cabinet line-up. Some 40 MPs went to the People Power Party headquarters, demanding to speak to the PPP Leader and new PM. Leading the group was Somsak Kiartisuranond, the Second Deputy House Speaker who called on Samak to explain why some northeastern MPs failed to win a cabinet seat. After holding talks with Samak for over an hour, they made it clear that they were unhappy about the small Isaan representation in the cabinet. Samak vowed to find other positions for them, but insisted the cabinet list cannot be Continued here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=125653 Edited February 2, 2008 by sriracha john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbk Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Off-topic and inflammatory posts have been deleted. Please try to keep your personal arguments out of the thread, thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chownah Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 After reading some of the news articles about all the tortured ins and outs of the politics among and between various factions, parties, and overblown egos I have started wondering if Thai soap operas are based on Thai politics or if Thai politics is based on Thai soap operas. Chownah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plus Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Bangkok elites know that the country depends on millions of peasants who are wasting their lives in poverty and ignorance. I'm sure that this is the attitude of the Bangkok elites.....the "peasants" however don't really think that their lives have been wasted.....and frankly I agree with them....the life of an "ignorant" poor rural Thai "peasant" is a good one....not a waste as the self absorbed Bangkok elite would want you to think. Rural Thailand is the basis for Thai culture.....the Bangkok elite won't be happy until the rural Thai peasants are toiling in miserable factory conditions in the city and the only place where authentic Thai culture can be seen is in theatres in Bangkok. Chownah I wasn't the first one to say that farmers are a waste of country's human resources. Thaksin saw it that way, too, btw. He wanted them to be full participants in capitalist economy. Some say that "authentic" Thai culture is already restricted to Bangkok theaters only. >>> To continue on my previous post - people who originally designed things like Village Fund might have had very noble motives. Bangladesh Gramin got a Nobel Prize for a similar scheme. It's the implementation here that ruined everything. Once the votes have been harvested, TRT lost all interest in nurturing the scheme. They didn't even bother to formally evaluate it's success (or kept their findings from public, which is even worse). Wouldn't it be nice if village communities jointly managed the fund to invest in improving their production techiniques, inviting experts, buying necessary equipment, seeds, fertilizers, helping their families through difficult days, helping to cushion them from unexpected disasters, ruined crops, substandard rubber seedlings etc. When all decisions are made with a view of prosperity of the whole village, with applying knowledge and minimising risks, it would be a perfect example of "sufficiency economy" at work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted February 2, 2008 Share Posted February 2, 2008 Samak apparently didn't know that Japanese can be bilingual... Samak apologises Thai reporters for confirming his Cabinet list to Japanese reporters Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej Saturday apologised to Thai reporters for giving details of his Cabinet lists to Japanese reporters without telling the Thai reporters. Samak said he thought the Japanese reporters would report the list in Japanese in Japan instead of publishing it in English in wire services available worldwide. In his interview with the Japanese reporters, Samak confirmed he would hold the post of defence minister. He said he would have luncheon meeting with Thai reporters at 11 am on Sunday. "I deserve the anger of Thai reporters. Please forgive me. I didn't expect the news will come out so soon," Samak said. - The Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now