Double Standard In Thailand

[Tango7]

There is a discussion on whether Abhisit is actually in charge, and to answer this question we should perhaps take a look at the glaring double standard that exists in Thailand.

When the PAD causes chaos and enormous financial loss by shutting down the country's international airport, shooting and fighting in the streets, the army did nothing. When the Reds cause chaos, the army intervenes. Corrupt politicians in the yellow camp, and there are many, are ignored by the judiciary, whereas corrupt politicians in Thaksin's camp who are the elected government of the day are hounded for infractions as small as appearing on a TV cooking program, and expelled from office.

How undemocratic. There is a school of thought that says that Thailand is not ready for a democracy, that the poor majority is too stupid to vote sensibly and should therefore have its representation diluted by the elite. That is what the PAD has said publicly, but who trusts them or the old guard generals and elite who sponsor them and who have never really done anything to improve the lot of the average Thai.

Thaksin's lot are highly unpalatable, but they were an elected civilian government, marking the first time in Thailand's recent history that worn out and corrupt generals and career bureaucrats were not calling all the shots, bickering amongst themselves, and getting nothing done. The PAD tore down a fledgling democracy that was an example to other countries in SE Asia, and replaced it with mob rule. What they should have done was show how much support they really had by beating Thaksin at the ballot box, peacefully. They seemed unable to do that, and now we are in an unending cycle of street violence and Myanmaresque military intervention.

I notice that a lot of foreigners seem to miss this obvious double standard, automatically vilifying Thaksin as the devil incarnate, while holding up Abhisit and his lot as clean and democratic. Looking at the Bangkok Post or the Nation, which most foreigners depend on for political insight, I can see why. They are clearly biased toward the PAD, and have been since its inception.

Abhisit is a nice guy in a party just as rotten as the rest of them. In charge of Thailand he is not.

I personally don't think Samak was ousted because he was on a TV cooking show. I think they looked for a way out in order to save him face. He had to go and rather than kick him out, they looked for a way to justify it and the only thing they could come up with that everyone knew about was because of his cooking show.

Now he can say Ï wasn't kicked out, I had to go because of that show. I didn't know I wasn't allowed to be on a TV show...blah blah". The average Thai would probably believe that. Even some here do.

Edited April 27, 2009 by Tango7

[Heng]

Vote buying is fine as long as it's heavily dressed up as marketing. This "cash" approach the locals use is so distasteful.

Distasteful? Haha. Surely you jest.

The "cash" approach, as you call it, IS marketing. This marketing style is distasteful to you because in your world marketing is so much more modernized to the point that you aren't even aware you're being brainwashed.

Stop comparing apples to oranges.

It's called sarcasm.

[Heng]

Both sides have their elite, but the current side on top has the better elite. The other side is just a tricked out Isaan tour bus: neon colors, disco ball, and packed with fuglies.

That's a non-biased opinion by the way. I don't support either side.

Using your argument, it is just as easy to say that the other side 'just tricked' factions of the army, the judiciary, the bureacrats, the Bangkokians and southerners. So what are you saying? The fact is, the current side is a minority. The majority vote, even though it comprises the Isan tour bus working class social group that you clearly do not identify with, has been ignored. By what measure do you call the current lot a 'better elite', when we know that they are just the same bunch of crooks, many of whom served in Thaksin's equally corrupt party?

If Thailand wants to run a political system of minority rule, where democratically elected governments are kicked out of office on a pretext, why does it call itself a democracy? By any standard, it isn't one. The PAD seems to have set the scene for mob rule politics and double standards, which are no longer accepted by even the most uneducated peasant. The upshot is a divided nation, with the rural majority bitterly resenting the fact that their democratic voice was ignored, and a descending cycle of violence.

That "tricked out isaan bus" comment could be taken as funny or insulting, depending on who you are.

I think some of the things they do in Isaan are a bit strange, but I try to equate it to what the poor do back inmy country. I am actually quite impressed at how they manage to get so many things accomplished with so little. They can improvise just about anything necessary. I've never see people create so many uses for used tires, old CD/DVDs, rubber bands, and other assorted junk.

If you are a snob, you can look down at these oppressed people and make fun of the few opportunities they have to enjoy life and have fun (neon colored tour buses). Given their same background and budget, how would you do better?

But what if someone looked down at you and made fun of what you do? I could just as easily make fun of all the Bangkok superstars and all the cheesy things they do on television.

These people have been oppressed for a long time. If I recall correctly, the Central Thai government banned Isaan-language writing sometime during the late 50s. Is this true?

Jeff

Just because one group is being laughed at doesn't mean they are being looked down upon. In fact, someone is being looked down upon, the party looking down might just be looking down in that particular direction without any consideration for that (looked down upon) party whatsoever.

[bertlamar]

.....whereas corrupt politicians in Thaksin's camp who are the elected government of the day are hounded for infractions as small as appearing on a TV cooking program, and expelled from office.

How undemocratic.

I personally don't think Samak was ousted because he was on a TV cooking show.

Just to be clear, the constitution was very clear; the PM has an important job, and therefore should not take other paid employment; it invites the opportunity for bribes, corruption etc.

All politicians including Samak were quite aware of this when taking office.

IF you spoke Thai, you would be perfectly aware that the former PM aside from trying to look after Thailand's economy during the start of one of the largest financial crises in the last 100 years, somehow still managed to find time to be paid to host what seems to be a political show with a sub theme of cooking, weekly, in order to talk rubbish about this and that.

He received a major docuemented pay check for his time in complete breach of the constitution, and as EVERY media savvy person is well aware, since getting airtime on public television is very difficult, he probably used his connections to also receive further payments non documented in return for various favours for that media company.

he did not 'appear' on a cooking show; to suggest that shows you either are deliberately trying to misrepresent the crime on the same lines as every woman 'wants it' according to a rapist or that you really don't know the reason why he lost his job.

As for referencing TRT apologist K Pleum, the guy is a twit, he has offered nothing useful to anyone for years other than his claims of being mates with everyone. Mai pleum 100%.

Since you admit that the officials in Samak's government were elected, why is it so hard for you to see that the current same individuals in power now are the same elected officials in a different coalition?

Edited April 27, 2009 by bertlamar