Given the uneasy state of relationships between the politicians, the career bureaucrats and the military, what is the best way for Thailand to see its democracy move forward and progress from the admittedly non-functional state its in now?

I'd be interested in hearing others opinions on this dilemma Thailand faces.

You are of course presuming a democracy already exists. I don't think it does, or ever has in which case I believe the fix is a little longer term - Education is one issue, others views I have would break the rules I signed up to, so I'll leave you guessing on those.

You are of course presuming a democracy already exists. I don't think it does, or ever has in which case I believe the fix is a little longer term - Education is one issue, others views I have would break the rules I signed up to, so I'll leave you guessing on those.

So, is Great Britain a democracy...?

Given the uneasy state of relationships between the politicians, the career bureaucrats and the military, what is the best way for Thailand to see its democracy move forward and progress from the admittedly non-functional state its in now?

I'd be interested in hearing others opinions on this dilemma Thailand faces.

Democracy IS the problem with Thailand.

Thailand is suited to an absolute monarchy , all today's vestiges of society, social structure,social hierarchies, power, control, importance, cultural dynamics etc... are relics of an absolute monarchy. All attempts to retro-fit democracy since 1973 have resulted in coups, what an exemplary and unequivocal display of utter failure .Square pegs dont fit in round holes.

The great American religion of Democracy may well suit their young immigrant culture , but it is not the silver bullet for all the world's cultures, especially those much older and ancient.

Edited May 1, 200917 yr by kiakaha

You are of course presuming a democracy already exists. I don't think it does, or ever has in which case I believe the fix is a little longer term - Education is one issue, others views I have would break the rules I signed up to, so I'll leave you guessing on those.

So, is Great Britain a democracy...?

Great Britain is a good example but I think it would be instructive to make a comparison from a slightly different view point. Not so much is Great Britain a democracy (not actually Thailand related) rather how does the Development of Democracy in Thailand compare with that in the UK (against time).

Putting a peg in the ground on when British Democracy started is difficult, one can pick any number of dates or events. I rather like Jan 30 1649, but that might be a tad contentious, so let's instead choose 1689 and the signing of the Bill of Rights.

I reckon that more or less ties up nicely with the Thai events of 1932.

So how was British Democracy getting along 77 years after the bill of rights and how does what is happening in Thailand today compare with what was happening in England in 1766?

Discussing some of the key points would undoubtedly break a few rules - so perhaps rhetorical questions.

---------

Another comparison to make (and not against a democracy) is the rise of popularism from the Gracci, through the fall of the Roman Republic to the rise of Augustus - The usurping of the Power of the Senate, the polarization of the citizens, deification of the emperor, the promulgation of a law to protect the dignity of the much worshiped Deity and the abuse of that law by Delators for personal, business and political ends.

Thailand related - yes, because that is where that particular law came from (though it was a two edged weapon, only one edge of which has been brought onto the Thai statute books).

Edited May 2, 200917 yr by GuestHouse

Money talks. bullshit walks

Money talks. bullshit walks

There are several long term solutions (e.g., education), but there is no longer time to wait. Change must happen rapidly.

The only way I can see that happening is for a charasmatic, respected figure to bring the reds and yellows together........get them to stop fighting each other and work together to bring democracy and the rule of law (and some stability and sanity) to the Kingdom.

This would result in rapid change.......maybe the status quo would actually change if they worked together.

One strategy might be to focus on what the reds and yellows have in common.........what they can accomplish together.

Given the uneasy state of relationships between the politicians, the career bureaucrats and the military, what is the best way for Thailand to see its democracy move forward and progress from the admittedly non-functional state its in now?

I'd be interested in hearing others opinions on this dilemma Thailand faces.

the only way is that a strong politician comes and clean up the mess/reform everything.

I can't see that Abhisit is the person.

I can't see that Chamlong or Sondhi win an election (if they even try).

Slow evolution may need 50 years, I don't think Thailand has that much time.

A coup with a honest dictator who resigns after he reformed everything would be a solution, but I don't think that there is any honest person who want to do it for the good of the country. And I don't think it would be appreciated by anyone.

Establishment of a functioning, NOT self serving legislative process.

Following this, a healthy NOT self serving Judicature System.

Complete review of penalties regarding interference with court decisions

or attempts to bribe the judges !

And a functioning executive...the police - and here we go....

spin, spin, spin..'round, and round we go...!

Thailand has been my home for five years now. Like many of us, I have a Thai wife and support her and her children from a previous marriage. It saddens me to see her home in turmoil with little hope of anything resembling a lasting peace in the offing.

There are so many issues that we from the west simply cannot understand but must tolerate to live here.

Democrocy is not a working solution for this country at this time. When the PM is English born and Educated at Eaton and Oxford, you would think he would have some grasp of a parlimentry systym. He has the degrees, and the resume of wealth and elitism, but not a clue of common sense. I think the best solution is to abolish the parlimentry systym via constitutional ammendment and replace it with a direct election Rebublic with the elected president as the undisputed Chief of the military. Take that enormous power away from the military hacks that prepetuate the coups. At present , this PM is unelected and inept. He has not used his education to solve any problems. There are so many that could be solved easily with common sense and an open mind. For now, it looks bleak. I soon will give up and depart with my retirement check to a more sane place.

Most of the who doesn't see thrugh the Thai politic seems very undemocratic but let me tell the true ( not from red shirt)

1) Thailand have very good KIng and militraty who look after the country from corrupted leaders like Thanksin.

Thaksin buying rular parts Issan and northern parts of Thailand with money and again he wins election many times with this dirty matters.

Coup taken place to get this voted buying out of seat, this clever but corrupted leader will do harm more then good to this country.

2) Courts are not unfair but to get rid of this corrupted party of power but dissolved the parties.

ONe day in Thai history will know the true of what happen today that this was not un-democratic society but have to fight with corrupted power leader.

Given the uneasy state of relationships between the politicians, the career bureaucrats and the military, what is the best way for Thailand to see its democracy move forward and progress from the admittedly non-functional state its in now?

Thailand is not a democracy -- never has been. Their constitution isn't worth the paper it's printed on. The revolving door that fills the position of prime minister is a wobbly three-legged stool (military-businessmen-politicians) and is kept purposefully in a constant state of imbalance such that the ultimate force that guides this rudderless ship remains in highest regard. If and when any mortal displays the deftness and cunning required to steer this vessel on his own, the resultant and inevitable denouement puts all things right again. The sense of catharsis is restored. As long as nobody's dying and the problems don't get solved too quickly, all is as intended.

Edited May 9, 200917 yr by Texpat

The problem is not democracy, per se, but the strength of the institutions on which a gov't is built. In Thailand these institutions are very weak and easily influenced or interefered with by politicians. The country needs to have institutions that are strong enough to survive democracy. Voters, regardless of the level of education, aren't always very smart or very right. People are emotional and often vote with their heart rather than their mind.

As for dictators, they are seldom benevolent and they seldom give up power.

Some where along the line, the military needs to start defending the borders and outside threats and serve the gov't instead of itself. The police have to start enforcing the laws as they exist and not making them up as they go. And the bureaucracy needs to start serving the people rather than the other way around.

Once this happens or progresses to a reasonable level, then democracy can develop.

Interesting posts.

Its interesting to see people advocating what is essentially a dictatorship, I am not sure that would be a solution either since most dictators, once in power, tend to not like to give it up. And while Singapore is a successful picture of a benevolent dictatorship (one cannot really call it a democracy) it does seem rather a soulless place because of it. I am not sure that Thai people would be so easily molded into shape.

Democracy IS the problem with Thailand.

Thailand is suited to an absolute monarchy

The great American religion of Democracy may well suit their young immigrant culture , but it is not the silver bullet for all the world's cultures, especially those much older and ancient.

Agreed

Thais should be united by common goals, then they'd start listening to eachother, then democracy can start developing - they'd respect eachother's opinions, respect differences of opinions, and find ways to select their leaders acceptable to everyone.

Right now half the country's goal is to serve interests of Thaksin. The other half puts interests of the country first. They would never be reconciled.

Politicians are mostly self serving, and they are in a position to influence the public - that's another force pulling in a different direction.

... then democracy can start developing - they'd respect eachother's opinions, respect differences of opinions, and find ways to select their leaders acceptable to everyone.

Right now half the country's goal is to serve interests of Thaksin. The other half puts interests of the country first. They would never be reconciled.

Thais have a very difficult time respecting anything. They don't respect laws, leaders, or themselves. They've grown up believing there is only one pinnicle of respect. As long as you commit fully to that institution, any other form of respect is optional.

The poor appreciate Thaksin because he was the first Thai politician to pay attention to them -- building roads, hospitals, schools... and not make them feel worthless and irrevelant. That's why rural poor like Thaksin. What's wrong with that? I'd say its good politics because real democracy gives an equal vote to all.

The Thai elite in Bangkok fear this more than anything. How can one be hiso without hundreds of slaves to look down on?

Edited May 10, 200917 yr by Texpat

Given the uneasy state of relationships between the politicians, the career bureaucrats and the military, what is the best way for Thailand to see its democracy move forward and progress from the admittedly non-functional state its in now?

I'd be interested in hearing others opinions on this dilemma Thailand faces.

Democracy IS the problem with Thailand.

Thailand is suited to an absolute monarchy , all today's vestiges of society, social structure,social hierarchies, power, control, importance, cultural dynamics etc... are relics of an absolute monarchy. All attempts to retro-fit democracy since 1973 have resulted in coups, what an exemplary and unequivocal display of utter failure .Square pegs dont fit in round holes.

The great American religion of Democracy may well suit their young immigrant culture , but it is not the silver bullet for all the world's cultures, especially those much older and ancient.

Dictatorship may be suited for your personal interests but Thailand was a model democracy in SE Asia until the coup in 2006.

You're talking about a young immigrant culture . Forget about immigrant, young is the operative word here. It's all about old farts who don't want to give way to the young generation.

You don't fit in the modern world, sorry for you, please step aside when Thailand is moving forward.

Edited May 10, 200917 yr by Pierrot

Thailand is suited to an absolute monarchy ,

By the way, as per forum rules, and more generally as a matter of respect, do not involve His Majesty in your petty discussion.

Thailand was a model democracy in SE Asia until the coup in 2006.

It was much more democratic then -- but a far cry from model.

Thailand is suited to an absolute monarchy ,

By the way, as per forum rules, and more generally as a matter of respect, do not involve His Majesty in your petty discussion.

monarchy =a nation or state having a monarchical government

Absolute monarchy is a monarchical form of government

A post and a reply to it have been deleted.

Please keep it civil.

Any discussion of democracy is futile when extra judicial, extra governmental influences weigh so heavily.

Sorta like arguing about the best way to treat a hangnail after the arm has been amputated.

Either vote them out of ban them out, I know banning them don't work. Just look at all the one that are suppose to be ban, you see them in the headlines often enough. Vote, best bet but they buy it, hmmmmmm!! I give up over to you all.

Thailand was a model democracy in SE Asia until the coup in 2006.

ya,and Mugabe is a philanthropist...

Thailand was a model democracy in SE Asia until the coup in 2006.

ya,and Mugabe is a philanthropist...

Edited May 10, 200917 yr by Pierrot