Do You Still Support The 2006 Coup ?

[oldsparrow]

oldsparrow มหาลัยพายัพ

No, the one I mean is at one of Chula Institutes. I think his analysis is too much rely on the surface appearance of the movement and may be he is too idealistic to include some natural situation in this country. He had been grown up in the US for more than 15 years and can’t consider the concept of social influence that many be don’t go along well with the international standard of democracy. I don’t’ mean that all influence is evil but it can be some explanation for Thai democracy.

Just small example:

One rich industralist is a well known in the province. His business is 100% legal. He contributes a lot to public charity, when villagers’ kids got sick during the night he send a car to take them to the hospital. People can burrow money from him with no interest. Many times people have difficulty with official on their right or paper processing, the man talk to the officers for them, you see that in Thai society the villagers don’t want to sue the gov officers and cause hard feeling.

One day the man became MP candidate. Of course he got elected, why not? He now can help his people more. The people hope that he don’t only fulfill his elected role as legistrater, the more he secure national resource to the locality the better the man. Of course, life is nothing but prioritisation.

On day the man change political party. No prob, every party has only duty to look after the people. Stop that rubbish that he is bought and paid to vote whatever for the new boss. Even if it is true, what is wrong about that? He should get something back for his hard work. If the new party monopolise the country, what wrong with most Thai people they think, we will never reach that top 1% of wealth anyhow. Some said rubbish like uphold the free race, develop common infrastructure for future of all. Let’s support those few who share TODAY money with us TODAY. The country account book has always be red anyhow. I go to vote. It’s REAL democracy.

So

• The man like Newin, Banharn and Sanoh ALWAYS get positions.
  

• 
  
• Hospital offer 30 Baht treatment with crap quality, almost go bankrupt and in need to open part-time clinic for those who can pay more (thank the past average).
  
• Only the boss close circle have top job. Work for me and you can survive too.
  

• 
  
• Only close circle travel with official envoy to international trade talk. In fact they almost become CEO Ambassador (if there is no Coup)
  

• 
  
• Only close circle became CEO provincial governor, appointed directly from the boss and can control all other agencies in the area
  

• 
  
• Some village kids got scholarship to study abroad. The majority just spend money and in poor prospect of graduation and come back to work for the public. Less position for those good student who really won the exam to get higher education.
  

Etc.

The way it is and the way it is going to be.

And no, I dare not talk of vote buying and organised protesting. I never see the receipt.

Who or whose behavior is to blamed? Almost pointless to talk of the core of this situation, it’s so natural.

Just listen to any one politician THROUGH TIMES and you will see what he really is.

[oldsparrow]

He could have made a deal, stayed out of prison, keep most of his money, and also his Thai diplomatic passport.

King George III made the same offer to George Washington. Maybe he should have accepted.

Do you actually think that is an apt analogy? Sounds even sillier than the Thaksin is Nelson Mandela/Che Gueverra absurdities.

Jingthing,

Follow the retirement of the past PM or Junta who had been kicked out of the posts and you see that they all had quiet and happy holiday abroad and many came back and have respect in the society.

Some had asset confiscated but released thereafter for good and quiet behavior perhaps?

"Game's over, sir! enjoy your retirement (quietly, with whatever you cheat from the country)"

"Fine"

Thaksin is the first case of aftermatch brawl.

I guess they talked after the Coup. But too big ego of the Shin (include his wife) turn down the quiet retirement offer and organised new party and the red, the junta therefore steam up the checking process. However, their appointed government was so incompetent and thought good will to the previous camp's officers is enough to make them turn away from benefit from Thaksin.

Just my guess though.

Howevr, the moment I saw Surayut carbinet, I know the instability will continue for a long time. They were just old bureaucrats, seem to me Surayut just wanted them to retain the routine and do noting with Thaksin installed people.

[oldsparrow]

Thaksin has "All or nothing" mentality.

As a young business man he got sued for issuing a bad cheque of around 100,000+- Baht. That still haunts him.

He won the business and connection gamble to his fortune, now he can't let a bit go except for the next gamble. After the Tsunami he used AIS Co. money to help the unfortunate.

Talking of Warren Buffet "Wow, he makes much more money than me!" Thaksin has a lot of money yet feeling he is still poor.

[Jingthing]

Thaksin is the first case of aftermatch brawl.

Yes, he is not playing the expected game. But that is not the same thing as making him George Washington/Nelson Mandella/Che Gueverra.

[dbrenn]

Please click my name for the previous post. I joined the web last week, not too many posts to look at.

"You accuse me of 'attacking the poster rather than the post' and in doing so you are doing exactly that."

- ํำYes, You put salt into the soup, I put more water, on course into the same pot.

- No I am not in this gov nor any party member, I went to observe both yellow and red gathering, got no ID from both. I like the PAD more, don't say I agree with all their deed though.

- Yes, you can be the 1st person who ignor me. I love the dog-drop theory "If you can't wash it out, leave it to dry under the sun, poke at it and it stinks".

Eh?

[dbrenn]

oldsparrow มหาลัยพายัพ

No, the one I mean is at one of Chula Institutes. I think his analysis is too much rely on the surface appearance of the movement and may be he is too idealistic to include some natural situation in this country. He had been grown up in the US for more than 15 years and can’t consider the concept of social influence that many be don’t go along well with the international standard of democracy. I don’t’ mean that all influence is evil but it can be some explanation for Thai democracy.

Just small example:

One rich industralist is a well known in the province. His business is 100% legal. He contributes a lot to public charity, when villagers’ kids got sick during the night he send a car to take them to the hospital. People can burrow money from him with no interest. Many times people have difficulty with official on their right or paper processing, the man talk to the officers for them, you see that in Thai society the villagers don’t want to sue the gov officers and cause hard feeling.

One day the man became MP candidate. Of course he got elected, why not? He now can help his people more. The people hope that he don’t only fulfill his elected role as legistrater, the more he secure national resource to the locality the better the man. Of course, life is nothing but prioritisation.

On day the man change political party. No prob, every party has only duty to look after the people. Stop that rubbish that he is bought and paid to vote whatever for the new boss. Even if it is true, what is wrong about that? He should get something back for his hard work. If the new party monopolise the country, what wrong with most Thai people they think, we will never reach that top 1% of wealth anyhow. Some said rubbish like uphold the free race, develop common infrastructure for future of all. Let’s support those few who share TODAY money with us TODAY. The country account book has always be red anyhow. I go to vote. It’s REAL democracy.

So

• The man like Newin, Banharn and Sanoh ALWAYS get positions.
  

• 
  
• Hospital offer 30 Baht treatment with crap quality, almost go bankrupt and in need to open part-time clinic for those who can pay more (thank the past average).
  
• Only the boss close circle have top job. Work for me and you can survive too.
  

• 
  
• Only close circle travel with official envoy to international trade talk. In fact they almost become CEO Ambassador (if there is no Coup)
  

• 
  
• Only close circle became CEO provincial governor, appointed directly from the boss and can control all other agencies in the area
  

• 
  
• Some village kids got scholarship to study abroad. The majority just spend money and in poor prospect of graduation and come back to work for the public. Less position for those good student who really won the exam to get higher education.
  

Etc.

The way it is and the way it is going to be.

And no, I dare not talk of vote buying and organised protesting. I never see the receipt.

Who or whose behavior is to blamed? Almost pointless to talk of the core of this situation, it’s so natural.

Just listen to any one politician THROUGH TIMES and you will see what he really is.

Yep - that's politics in a nutshell. Same in Thailand, same the world over. The rich ane powerful end up getting elected, because they can afford the marketing and the indicements necessary to get the rack and file to vote in their favour. But we still need one man = one vote. Even if the votes are influenced by marketing, the people retain the right to choose someone better, as may come along.

There is no better system than democracy that I can see. What worries me is the PAD / yellow lot and their stated aim to dilute the popular vote. That would set THailand on an an irreversible course towards true dictatorship, where people lose the right to kick out any politician who goes too far.

[MJP]

oldsparrow มหาลัยพายัพ

No, the one I mean is at one of Chula Institutes. I think his analysis is too much rely on the surface appearance of the movement and may be he is too idealistic to include some natural situation in this country. He had been grown up in the US for more than 15 years and can't consider the concept of social influence that many be don't go along well with the international standard of democracy. I don't' mean that all influence is evil but it can be some explanation for Thai democracy.

Just small example:

One rich industralist is a well known in the province. His business is 100% legal. He contributes a lot to public charity, when villagers' kids got sick during the night he send a car to take them to the hospital. People can burrow money from him with no interest. Many times people have difficulty with official on their right or paper processing, the man talk to the officers for them, you see that in Thai society the villagers don't want to sue the gov officers and cause hard feeling.

One day the man became MP candidate. Of course he got elected, why not? He now can help his people more. The people hope that he don't only fulfill his elected role as legistrater, the more he secure national resource to the locality the better the man. Of course, life is nothing but prioritisation.

On day the man change political party. No prob, every party has only duty to look after the people. Stop that rubbish that he is bought and paid to vote whatever for the new boss. Even if it is true, what is wrong about that? He should get something back for his hard work. If the new party monopolise the country, what wrong with most Thai people they think, we will never reach that top 1% of wealth anyhow. Some said rubbish like uphold the free race, develop common infrastructure for future of all. Let's support those few who share TODAY money with us TODAY. The country account book has always be red anyhow. I go to vote. It's REAL democracy.

So

• The man like Newin, Banharn and Sanoh ALWAYS get positions.
  

• 
  
• Hospital offer 30 Baht treatment with crap quality, almost go bankrupt and in need to open part-time clinic for those who can pay more (thank the past average).
  
• Only the boss close circle have top job. Work for me and you can survive too.
  

• 
  
• Only close circle travel with official envoy to international trade talk. In fact they almost become CEO Ambassador (if there is no Coup)
  

• 
  
• Only close circle became CEO provincial governor, appointed directly from the boss and can control all other agencies in the area
  

• 
  
• Some village kids got scholarship to study abroad. The majority just spend money and in poor prospect of graduation and come back to work for the public. Less position for those good student who really won the exam to get higher education.
  

Etc.

The way it is and the way it is going to be.

And no, I dare not talk of vote buying and organised protesting. I never see the receipt.

Who or whose behavior is to blamed? Almost pointless to talk of the core of this situation, it's so natural.

Just listen to any one politician THROUGH TIMES and you will see what he really is.

Yep - that's politics in a nutshell. Same in Thailand, same the world over. The rich ane powerful end up getting elected, because they can afford the marketing and the indicements necessary to get the rack and file to vote in their favour. But we still need one man = one vote. Even if the votes are influenced by marketing, the people retain the right to choose someone better, as may come along.

There is no better system than democracy that I can see. What worries me is the PAD / yellow lot and their stated aim to dilute the popular vote. That would set THailand on an an irreversible course towards true dictatorship, where people lose the right to kick out any politician who goes too far.

I will say this to the Thai's credit. If a bunch of people had marched to Downing Street and chased Bliar or Brown out, physically out of the building, the place would be awash with blood and cartridge casings.

Okay, it's happened before here. But it hasn't this time.

[oldsparrow]

I agree, one man one vote. I also don't like PAD's "New Politic" it's even more vulnerable to manipulation than the present system.

[scorecard]

".....Oh no - you are going back to the old 'Thaksin controls the ballot box', vote buying and all that. You had nothing to say in response to all the people who pointed out to you that all pols buy votes in one way or another - look how much Obama spent on getting elected, etc, etc. And here you are dragging that phoney old argument back up again? "

I don't disagree that all politicians in all countries buy votes in some form / at some level. In terms of the American model, it stinks, it takes a very big amount of money to get elected into the white house. where the opportunity for the little but very wise and capable man? ... for the people, by the people... Nice words but the reality.

But I think your glossing over what Taksin (and there's many more before him) and his buddies did in terms of direct monetary payments, and other forms of direct bribery.

I read one article which mentioned in many locations the locals were effectively told 'if you don't put your mark (on the ballot paper) where you have been told, then we (the big boss) will know and you and the village will be punished'.

Aditionally, It's well proven that Taksin had control over (intimidated whole perhaps be better terminology) the Electoral Commissioners. In fact three commisioners were found guilty of malfeanance and did jail terms.

Enough said.

[flying]

But we still need one man = one vote. Even if the votes are influenced by marketing, the people retain the right to choose someone better, as may come along.

That is how it is suppose to be. If however they will for what ever reason allow that to be overturned by a mob or military claiming they know better then all is lost.

Once a reset button like this is used instead it will be the quick fix from now till eternity.

That is what the coup & then the PAD in fact did. That is what I have a problem with. All else aside & there is no legit reason anyone could use to sway that.

Funny thing...... Truth cannot be selective or inconsistent...What is good or true for one is good for all.

So Abhist should not be surprised if eventually........meun gun

[flying]

But I think your glossing over what Taksin (and there's many more before him) and his buddies did in terms of direct monetary payments, and other forms of direct bribery.

I read one article which mentioned in many locations the locals were effectively told 'if you don't put your mark (on the ballot paper) where you have been told, then we (the big boss) will know and you and the village will be punished'.

Aditionally, It's well proven that Taksin had control over (intimidated whole perhaps be better terminology) the Electoral Commissioners. In fact three commisioners were found guilty of malfeanance and did jail terms.

Enough said.

Oh lordy you have no idea how deep it goes here in the US

The FED Reserve? The Politicians & bankers have in reality bankrupted this country & a large part of the world....Thaksin would be but an infant in the level of treachery we have here.

really............

Electoral? How about our (USA) blast from the past civil war weighted electoral college?

Our votes here mean even less than a vote cast in Chiang Mai......really

Not to say at times we have not had folks like you describe....for the people, by the people

But they have a habit of being shot thru the head.

[oldsparrow]

Thaksin is the first case of aftermatch brawl.

Yes, he is not playing the expected game. But that is not the same thing as making him George Washington/Nelson Mandella/Che Gueverra.

No, not the same, to me he is just electioneer greedy tycoon that can be compared to some of the same flock in SEA countries..

Can't compare him to other Thai leaders neither, even the military Marshals. They never applied favoritism nor distort the system for personal interest like Thaksin.

[Jingthing]

No, not the same, to me he is just electioneer greedy tycoon that can be compared to some of the same flock in SEA countries..

Exactly. Marcos?

[rixalex]

Oh no - you are going back to the old 'Thaksin controls the ballot box', vote buying and all that. You had nothing to say in response to all the people who pointed out to you that all pols buy votes in one way or another - look how much Obama spent on getting elected, etc, etc. And here you are dragging that phoney old argument back up again?

Sorry but comparing Thaksin and Obama just doesn't wash - the two names don't belong in the same sentence.

I agree with you however that vote buying is widespread, particularly in Thailand - as you say it usually exists in one form or another, and as much as i hate it, i'm realistic enough to accept it's something we can do little about.

Vote buying however wasn't the most worrying aspect of Thaksin's time in power, and it wasn't vote buying that put the country in danger of being entirely at his mercy for a considerable time; what was, was the depth to which he had infiltrated and interferred with all the bodies, organisations and institutes that are there to keep things in check and in balance. The extent to which he did this was i believe unprecedented, and made it imposible for democracy to function in a clear, healthy and transparent manner, and impossible for him to be held at all accountable for his actions. Is that a phoney argument? No i don't think so. I think it's a very valid argument and i'm baffled as to how someone who claims to love democracy so much seems to dismiss these issues as being unimportant. Or how someone can't see the link between Thaksin's dismantling of democracy and the coup.

And the beer swilling bit? Let me explain. Anyone who denies that the recent chaos and instability has had any effect on tourism and business in Thailand really can't be doing much more than sitting around swilling beer. Even the Nation concedes that chaos is bad for business, and that's saying something.

I don't think that anyone denies that recent chaos and instability has had some affect on tourism, just the level to which it has is in dispute. Those against the coup are obviously keen to play the affects of it up, those for it keen to play it down.

And yes, I can vote and you probably can't, which seems to bug you.

LOL You must be mistaking me for someone who cares about your personal circumstances. I can assure you i have absolutely no interest in your details or stats, or for that matter anyone else's details or stats on this forum, as far as a political discussion goes.

As we have already agreed, anyone can say anything about themselves on the internet, so proudly declaring that you can vote and rushing to assume that others can't is a daft thing to do - not only because there is no way to substaniate any of these details - but also because it has no bearing on contributing to this forum. Having the right to vote doesn't add or take away anything to an argument put forward here. It's irrelevant. You though seem to think of it as some sort of a trump card to flash out to put people in their place. How very sad.

[mc2]

Time to point out the obvious fact that the OP thought the results would be different if he made the focus the COUP instead of THAKSIN. He was strongly fishing for "NOW we think it was a mistake and agree with you the current total mess in Thailand is the fault of the coup makers and NOT Thaksin" majority result.

currently selections 1 and 3 outnumber 2 , the majority of ppl seem to fault the coup for the mess.

[bails]

Thaksin was corrupt and had many different conflicts of interest. But at least he got shit done.

The country was certainly better off under one corrupt, but elected, official than a whole army of unelected corrupt officials.

Spot on!!!!!!!!!!

[oldsparrow]

No, not the same, to me he is just electioneer greedy tycoon that can be compared to some of the same flock in SEA countries..

Exactly. Marcos?

I think so, also Sukarno of Indonesia.

[scorecard]

Thaksin was corrupt and had many different conflicts of interest. But at least he got shit done.

The country was certainly better off under one corrupt, but elected, official than a whole army of unelected corrupt officials.

Spot on!!!!!!!!!!

True, he got thigs done, like:

1. Starting the 30Baht health scheme, which is a great idea, but massively underfunded from day one, and this has never been fixed, the quality of the health care is just awful and lacking in many ways. Try it, I've taken several family members to these hospitals, it's awful. Now the scheme is massively bankrupt. But good vote buyer.

2. 'Taxsin built Suvarnabhum'. True, built to a 35 year old design, and during that 35 years there were many massive learnings about airport design / airport efficiency etc., but none of these learnings incorporated in the design. So why was it built in haste? Easy answer - start up as many large scale mega projects as you can, as quickly as possible, nice big bags of funds to get your sticky greedy fingers into. And the result, an airport which was a total joke on opening day, and still lags in many ways, and Taxsin now on at least 3 corruption charges.

And the stated ideology of the TRT, PPP, Puea Thai - "More mega projects". And of course they continue to belive they have a right get their sticky greedy fingers into the pie, and of course they contionue to believe that the public are stupid.

And, you say "....elected.....". Sure, elected through massive vote buying and intimidation of various agencies including direct intimidation of the Election Commissioners, who eventaully (after the judiciary regained some courage) went to jail for their corrupt actions.

[dbrenn]

Sorry but comparing Thaksin and Obama just doesn't wash - the two names don't belong in the same sentence.

I agree with you however that vote buying is widespread, particularly in Thailand - as you say it usually exists in one form or another, and as much as i hate it, i'm realistic enough to accept it's something we can do little about.

Vote buying however wasn't the most worrying aspect of Thaksin's time in power, and it wasn't vote buying that put the country in danger of being entirely at his mercy for a considerable time; what was, was the depth to which he had infiltrated and interferred with all the bodies, organisations and institutes that are there to keep things in check and in balance. The extent to which he did this was i believe unprecedented, and made it imposible for democracy to function in a clear, healthy and transparent manner, and impossible for him to be held at all accountable for his actions. Is that a phoney argument? No i don't think so. I think it's a very valid argument and i'm baffled as to how someone who claims to love democracy so much seems to dismiss these issues as being unimportant. Or how someone can't see the link between Thaksin's dismantling of democracy and the coup.

And the beer swilling bit? Let me explain. Anyone who denies that the recent chaos and instability has had any effect on tourism and business in Thailand really can't be doing much more than sitting around swilling beer. Even the Nation concedes that chaos is bad for business, and that's saying something.

I don't think that anyone denies that recent chaos and instability has had some affect on tourism, just the level to which it has is in dispute. Those against the coup are obviously keen to play the affects of it up, those for it keen to play it down.

And yes, I can vote and you probably can't, which seems to bug you.

LOL You must be mistaking me for someone who cares about your personal circumstances. I can assure you i have absolutely no interest in your details or stats, or for that matter anyone else's details or stats on this forum, as far as a political discussion goes.

As we have already agreed, anyone can say anything about themselves on the internet, so proudly declaring that you can vote and rushing to assume that others can't is a daft thing to do - not only because there is no way to substaniate any of these details - but also because it has no bearing on contributing to this forum. Having the right to vote doesn't add or take away anything to an argument put forward here. It's irrelevant. You though seem to think of it as some sort of a trump card to flash out to put people in their place. How very sad.

First you say that you accept that people spend money to get elected. Then you say that we can't use Thaksin and Obama in the same sentence and that Thaksin's vote buying is somehow different. Answer me this: How much did Obama spend on his campaign? Would he have got elected if he hadn't spent a nickel? Show me a pol who doesn't spend a fortune getting and staying elected, and I will show you a perfect world, with free beer and unlimited tottie.

You are contradicting yourself again.

And, there you go bringing up the fact that I can vote again. You seem to bitterly resent it, so why do you keep bringing the subject up? .

[myfriendyou]

It will take Thailand 20 years to get back to the position it was in early '06.

Pure folly to out a popularly elected leader who had set the economy straight, was tough on Thailand's debilitating drug problem, did fantastic work in the provinces and upset the elitist slobs in Bangkok.

Yes lets get back to being robbed by a man who purchased power great idea!!

Is purchasing the post of PM any better than taking it by force?

It's not how power is gained for me it is the reasons for gaining it and how that power is used once gained. I for one would rather be here as we are now than still have Mr T, Thailand is evolving and evolution must be natural so that the general populous adapt.

I may have a simple outlook but history shows that quick change does not always have longevity.

I am not a political expert but as a farrang I felt that the coup leaders deliberately tried not to make big changes but to leave it to the next PM to do so.

I would like the current PM to be given a fighting chance for a year or so and if he does not have the confidence of the populous by this time see him call for general elections once Mr T and his funds for vote buying are clearly not going to interfere to the scale they have in the past.

Corruption free elections are a pipe dream I know but it would be nice to see the next ones if and when they are held on a fairly level playing field.

[flying]

Is purchasing the post of PM any better than taking it by force?

It's not how power is gained for me it is the reasons for gaining it and how that power is used once gained.

LOL....So basically if a red or yellow shirt walks up & pops one in the elected one

your ok with that.............As long as after he gains that power he makes good use of it?

[dbrenn]

Is purchasing the post of PM any better than taking it by force?

It's not how power is gained for me it is the reasons for gaining it and how that power is used once gained.

LOL....So basically if a red or yellow shirt walks up & pops one in the elected one

your ok with that.............As long as after he gains that power he makes good use of it?

Well some people here are OK with that idea - turning power over to people who are represented by the 'educated' class, indefinitely, and ignoring the democratic popular vote.

[rixalex]

Then you say that we can't use Thaksin and Obama in the same sentence and that Thaksin's vote buying is somehow different.

It's not somehow different - it is completely different.

Paying large of sums of money to promote yourself and advertise, and paying large sums of money to bribe people to vote for you are not the same. One is undemocratic and the other isn't. For one who claims to be such a lover of democracy, i state again that i'm surprised these matters mean so little to you.

And, there you go bringing up the fact that I can vote again. You seem to bitterly resent it, so why do you keep bringing the subject up? .

Another distinction you seem unaware of is "bringing something up" and responding to something.

On your previous post you explained at some tedious length why you couldn't prove your status on an internet forum, and so i simply wanted to put your mind at rest and assure you that i couldn't be less interested in whatever personal claims you may wish to make. You details just don't interest me, and if you wish interpret disinterest as being "bitter resentment" then do go ahead if it so pleases you.

Rest assured i won't mention your claimed ability to vote again, although i have a sneaking suspicion you will.

[karmacowboy]

Thaksin started dismantling powerstructure that had been built up over almost half a decade and started replacing with his own. Powerful people within this structure could not allow this and the man had to be removed as he was becoming to great a threat to certain groups.

The problem the coupmakers faced after the coup was that they underestimated the resolve of Thaksin's base to carry on the struggle, we can't forget that Thaksin gave a feeling of emancipation to a large group of the population who felt their voices had never been heard within the Thai democratic system. Whether this sense of emacipation was real or not is up for discussion but it was, however, very powerful and remains to this day. This is where we stand now and I don't believe this will blow over the cat is out the bag, so to speak.

[oldsparrow]

Thaksin started dismantling powerstructure that had been built up over almost half a decade and started replacing with his own. Powerful people within this structure could not allow this and the man had to be removed as he was becoming to great a threat to certain groups. The problem the coupmakers faced after the coup was that they underestimated the resolve of Thaksin's base to carry on the struggle, we can't forget that Thaksin gave a feeling of emancipation to a large group of the population who felt their voices had never been heard within the Thai democratic system. Whether this sense of emacipation was real or not is up for discussion but it was, however, very powerful and remains to this day. This is where we stand now and I don't believe this will blow over the cat is out the bag, so to speak.

Talking of the last 50 years, certain groups have really been in power and control the country

Look at the present tycoon families who control infrastructure you will find that they are ALL emerged after the 40s –50s. CP, Bangkok Bank, Central, their empire survived through to the next generation etc. and of course the bureaucrat especially the military and Police. The middleclass can work to improve their conditions. Some top business is still in the first generation like the Red Bull, whose present owner is its founder. Very hard for the poor to join the ride.

Thaksin is very good at getting vote from the poor but what REALLY materialise is the STRENGTHENING of this elite system ie.

• Promote close connection system
  
• Coordinate with big tycoon like CP
  
• Back to state officers to use violent means
  
• Privatise the public infrastructure. You see how much profit the PTT makes. Only the handful riches take the share
  

The same old very elite got much richer while private debt of the poorer people sharply increased.

Finally the elite system got to far and too exclusive

1. The strong connection system pressure the middle class to resist. They could not do big business without Thaksin connection. Look at the big gov project contract for example. The middle class can’t join the elite club
   
2. In the bureaucrat system. Even though some can abuse power more freely but the top jobs are given to Thaksin men only. He even tried to introduce the fast track system that politician can appoint anybody of any back ground to any position. The majority can’t get through the barrier of Thaksin connection. They have to work for his personal interest to get promoted or even survive.
   
3. Then the suppression of mass media freedom. Thaksin bought them outright or close the programme, pressure businesses to stop sponsor any media company who allow programme that critic him. Many went quiet but some went to the park and then the PAD start.
   

In short, I think Thaksin is the champion of elite system that has been in charge for the last 50 years. Too much of it is the reason of resentment. His opposite groups are very few elite who don’t belong to him and the mass middle class who got stuck. They lost prospect of progress. No problem for the elite in Thaksin time, they could exploit more.

[karmacowboy]

Thaksin started dismantling powerstructure that had been built up over almost half a decade and started replacing with his own. Powerful people within this structure could not allow this and the man had to be removed as he was becoming to great a threat to certain groups. The problem the coupmakers faced after the coup was that they underestimated the resolve of Thaksin's base to carry on the struggle, we can't forget that Thaksin gave a feeling of emancipation to a large group of the population who felt their voices had never been heard within the Thai democratic system. Whether this sense of emacipation was real or not is up for discussion but it was, however, very powerful and remains to this day. This is where we stand now and I don't believe this will blow over the cat is out the bag, so to speak.

Talking of the last 50 years, certain groups have really been in power and control the country

Look at the present tycoon families who control infrastructure you will find that they are ALL emerged after the 40s –50s. CP, Bangkok Bank, Central, their empire survived through to the next generation etc. and of course the bureaucrat especially the military and Police. The middleclass can work to improve their conditions. Some top business is still in the first generation like the Red Bull, whose present owner is its founder. Very hard for the poor to join the ride.

Thaksin is very good at getting vote from the poor but what REALLY materialise is the STRENGTHENING of this elite system ie.

• Promote close connection system
  
• Coordinate with big tycoon like CP
  
• Back to state officers to use violent means
  
• Privatise the public infrastructure. You see how much profit the PTT makes. Only the handful riches take the share
  

The same old very elite got much richer while private debt of the poorer people sharply increased.

Finally the elite system got to far and too exclusive

1. The strong connection system pressure the middle class to resist. They could not do big business without Thaksin connection. Look at the big gov project contract for example. The middle class can’t join the elite club
   
2. In the bureaucrat system. Even though some can abuse power more freely but the top jobs are given to Thaksin men only. He even tried to introduce the fast track system that politician can appoint anybody of any back ground to any position. The majority can’t get through the barrier of Thaksin connection. They have to work for his personal interest to get promoted or even survive.
   
3. Then the suppression of mass media freedom. Thaksin bought them outright or close the programme, pressure businesses to stop sponsor any media company who allow programme that critic him. Many went quiet but some went to the park and then the PAD start.
   

In short, I think Thaksin is the champion of elite system that has been in charge for the last 50 years. Too much of it is the reason of resentment. His opposite groups are very few elite who don’t belong to him and the mass middle class who got stuck. They lost prospect of progress. No problem for the elite in Thaksin time, they could exploit more.

I don't see Thaksin as part of the old elites but a part of the new elite emerging in 1980's as a result of massive growth in the economy. His biggest mistake not paying his dues to the old elite, and here I am not so much talking about people in the private sector but the bureacratic elite in the state aparatus and the military. Increasingly Thaksin felt so confident after two elections clearly won, that he could start to take on this bureaucracy and shuffle people around who he felt had loyalties elsewhere and I think underestimating the consequences of this. Coupled with his seemingly more and more autocratic style of leadership and the interpretation by some that he did not pay homage to the advice of a certain person, became his downfall. The Shin Corp deal sealed it, not only was he possibly abusing power he was selling something percieved as matter of national security and thus opening up for the more condemming accusation of Thaksin being "unthai" in his dealings.

[oldsparrow]

I think:

1. There is not not different between the old and the new elite here and they coperate quite smoothly. Thanksin joined the club ans locked the door.

2. Ratherthan after got sure of his election ability, Thaksin has begun to OFFICIALLY personalise the bureaucrat from day 1 in power, follow the shaffle date and it's clear. In fact, rich businessmen here somehow control or try to influence the bureaucrat ALL the times. Apart from outright distortion by some or many, the officials got offered free things from businesses. Afterward, the favor may turn them blind for minor offences or quicker in their official service. For big tycoons, they pay a lt to many different political party.

3. Right up to the coup, most of top civil bureaucrats still support or OK with Thaksin. Being friend with or WORKER for the politicians is the quickest way to get promoted and the common understanding "Politicians come and go but bureaucrats always stay." In Thai system, there is no de-grade or reduction of salary pay level. They think it's worth to take side, get high position and if things go wrong, moved to the same new high status with light responsibility, happy happy. The Coup leader was appointed by Thaksin, one of Thaksin worst pains, he didn't follow Thai FAVOR FACTOR culture rule. The indicisiveness of the Coup and DEAD ENGINE of the bureaucrat system for Surayut governemnt shows that the Coup was a FLUKE success followed by reform failure. If Thaksin was in Thailand and could rally HIS remaining soldiers or broadcast there sure be bloodshed.

4. The Un-Thai campaign and counter campaign is just social tool to rally the protester and explaination to the nevermind parsons. Here, "He earn it, he keep it" (even it's not all clean) is common mentality, but "He earn it but doesn't let most other earn" is serious offence.

[oldsparrow]

4. .....is just social tool.....

Just one of social tools to attract the sentimental some. There are a lot more points and of course, in the protest it might be too funny to shout "Thaksin blocks our way to top job/get rich/richer."

[thaihome]

I agree, one man one vote. I also don't like PAD's "New Politic" it's even more vulnerable to manipulation than the present system.

Name me one developing country where one man one vote system has produced a stable, even relatively corruption free government? Look at the history of western democracy, not a single one started out with that principle.

To expect Thailand to be any different at this point in its political development, with lock on the majority of rural voters by feudal barons, is just not facing the reality of situation.

TH

[toret]

Thailand was on the way to absolute dictatorship ruled by an insane megalomaniac mass murderer. The coup was necessary.