All-out Attempt By Red Shirts To Bring Down Government

[caf]

Jingthing said "Its obvious the vast majority of Thais support the deportations. Otherwise, where is the protest from Thais? None really visible."

I often agree with Jingthing but on this I must say that not protesting does not imply not supporting.

In reply to Animatic I said:

"Can't really understand this reply; but I see no source for saying that the Thais support Hmong deportation. Posting a comment does not make it factual. Seems to be an increasingly dishonest tactic on tv."

I give below his reply and my comments.

" The origin's of the Thai educational systems, top down mind set, and political indoctrination methods.

Then visit any basic Thai school with a Thais english speaker, or most any bilingual Thai with kids in a public school.

Or just spend a night with a half drunken Thai and mention hill tribes, Burmese or Khmers.

I have far too many times seen the later learned response about reasonableness,

over whelmed by the earlier indoctrination when guards are let down. "

He is now talking about the Thai educational system and mindsets. And bases his argument not on sources, which I queried, but his own personal views on Thai school systems. He is entitled to his opinions but he is not entitled to claim them as sources.

I am not going to spend a night with a half drunken Thai, but if I did I would certainly not be daft enough to quote what the drunk says as a source or to accept it as reliable information on which to post.

caf

[hammered]

Jingthing said "Its obvious the vast majority of Thais support the deportations. Otherwise, where is the protest from Thais? None really visible."

I often agree with Jingthing but on this I must say that not protesting does not imply not supporting.

In reply to Animatic I said:

"Can't really understand this reply; but I see no source for saying that the Thais support Hmong deportation. Posting a comment does not make it factual. Seems to be an increasingly dishonest tactic on tv."

I give below his reply and my comments.

" The origin's of the Thai educational systems, top down mind set, and political indoctrination methods.

Then visit any basic Thai school with a Thais english speaker, or most any bilingual Thai with kids in a public school.

Or just spend a night with a half drunken Thai and mention hill tribes, Burmese or Khmers.

I have far too many times seen the later learned response about reasonableness,

over whelmed by the earlier indoctrination when guards are let down. "

He is now talking about the Thai educational system and mindsets. And bases his argument not on sources, which I queried, but his own personal views on Thai school systems. He is entitled to his opinions but he is not entitled to claim them as sources.

I am not going to spend a night with a half drunken Thai, but if I did I would certainly not be daft enough to quote what the drunk says as a source or to accept it as reliable information on which to post.

caf

Actually spending time with ordinary rural Thai people or working class urban ones is quite enlightening on opinions and rarely tallies with research academics fit around their preconceived notions usually based on samples that would make an ABAC poll look world beating. Admittedly the opinions may not be enlightened and the people may at times even be course, rough and ill dressed or even inebriated but it is both informative and rewarding to talk to such people in my opinion and certainly more enlightening than reading either the Nation or some Aussie based Thai poltics 101 site or some anonymous blogger selectively choosing what to comment on. Give me talking to the people over any of the sources currently available on Thai politics, but each to their own and I do accept that most foreigners prefer to move in nice society and talk to educated and enlightened people even if they represent a fraction of society and are usually totally out of touch with the grassroots.

Edited January 12, 2010 by hammered

[TAWP]

Given what I have heard people say about people, including their own workers, from Cambodia etc, I have no doubt that most people have very little or no love for the Hmong's plight.

Infact, I think you will find it that it is the people that is worse of (presumably then entranced in the red camp, as some posters here try to paint it as) is often more against 'free loaders' from other nation being able to come and take jobs and space. Just like back home.

[animatic]

Caf if you must quote me, at least quote full paragraphs.

Go read some of the half dozen available books on the Thailand school systems

and how it helped build a mindset that became a nation.

The origin's of the Thai educational systems, top down mind set, and political indoctrination methods.

Then visit any basic Thai school with a Thais english speaker, or most any bilingual Thai with kids in a public school.

Then maybe it is ok to comment on my FULL idea,

not your cherry picked choices to make your points.

You appear to be going back through all my posts

looking for ways to justify your point of view vs mine.

Don't you have better things to do with your life?

Yes, talking to a cross section of rural Thais is a worthwhile exercise.

Edited January 12, 2010 by animatic

[jayboy]

The mandate of the people was towards each individual MP, of which

all segments of Thailand have elected representation at the moment.

The mandate essentially states that the MP's make the best decision

about who is the government based on facts at the time of voting.

And secondarily about voting on or modifying legislation passed to them for approval

by which ever government those same MP's voted to install.

Behind this defensive and actually rather sinister blather is a view belittling or even rejecting the need for a popular mandate through fresh elections.Chang Noi has some pertinent views on this subject and shares my view that the military will seek to thwart the Thai peoples' wishes in the future as it have done in the past.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/01/11...on_30120052.php

[animatic]

The mandate of the people was towards each individual MP, of which

all segments of Thailand have elected representation at the moment.

The mandate essentially states that the MP's make the best decision

about who is the government based on facts at the time of voting.

And secondarily about voting on or modifying legislation passed to them for approval

by which ever government those same MP's voted to install.

Behind this defensive and actually rather sinister blather is a view belittling or even rejecting the need for a popular mandate through fresh elections.Chang Noi has some pertinent views on this subject and shares my view that the military will seek to thwart the Thai peoples' wishes in the future as it have done in the past.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2010/01/11...on_30120052.php

What may seem blather to one man, may well be fact to many millions of citizens.

You are rather out numbered.

Once the people elect a Parliament and it has a full complement of members creating a quorum,

or there's a quorum and by-elections are being held for replacements for above quorum vacancies,

then ALL governments voted in by those Parliamentarians are legitimate governments.

And if one government falls during the time of a duly elected Parliament,

any other governments they vote in are legitimate with the same force as the 1st one.

The mandate is given to the parliamentarians to form the best governments from within their members.

ANY individual Parliamentarian has the right and mandate to run for PM, if he or she can get the votes

in Parliament to carry the day, if not then another member has the right to do so.

The mandate to dissolve a Parliament falls to the PM AFTER he has been chosen by those parliamentarians.

He is under no obligation to dissolve Parliament during the sitting term of a duly elected Parliament

If you find this sinister, then better check your lunch box for tampering,

and screw the windows tighter shut, and don't forget to try those tin foil lined hats too.

Thinking like a deranged George Washington, me thinks,

Cherry pick thoughts to dispute until the whole cherry tree is chopped down?

Peas in a pod no doubt, but the princess can tell through all those mattress',

that it's a rotten pea underneath it all.

Edited January 13, 2010 by animatic

[way2muchcoffee]

The mandate of the people was towards each individual MP, of which

all segments of Thailand have elected representation at the moment.

The mandate essentially states that the MP's make the best decision

about who is the government based on facts at the time of voting.

And secondarily about voting on or modifying legislation passed to them for approval

by which ever government those same MP's voted to install.

Behind this defensive and actually rather sinister blather is a view belittling or even rejecting the need for a popular mandate through fresh elections.Chang Noi has some pertinent views on this subject and shares my view that the military will seek to thwart the Thai peoples' wishes in the future as it have done in the past.

What is sinister about the comment? Democratic governments are formed from elected politicians who 'represent' the people. The people decide on who their representatives are. The representatives legislate and form government. I don't know of any direct democracies.

[jayboy]

What may seem blather to one man, may well be fact to many millions of citizens.

You are rather out numbered.

Another one who speaks for millions!

Did you actually read the Chang Noi article? If so do you have a view on it?

I'm well aware of how the parliamentary system works.I'm well aware that Abhisit leads a legitimate government (though he has no personal mandate).There's a need however, which becomes stronger as time goes by, for the government to submit itself to the verdict of the Thai people.This is particularly important given the circumstances of the Democrats path to power (coups, "directed "court decisions, army pressures etc).I have stressed elsewhere the timing is for Abhisit to decide and his argument the country should be somewhat more settled is very reasonable.But the clock is ticking.

In the UK (the home of parliamentary democracy) where the path to power for a PM with no personal mandate was far less contentious than that of Abhisit, the lack of a personal mandate has become a major political issue.

What's sinister is the refusal of some to admit elections are important at all, and seek every excuse to defer the Thai peoples verdict.

[animatic]

And where exactly do I say i speak for millions?

I didn't say any such thing,

but you still imply some sort of egotistical gradiousness, that I don't aspire to.

Abhisit has the exact same personal mandate as any other MP he was elected.

And where did I ever say elections are not important?

Not once, did I say that,

but you like to twist the wording as you see fit.

Seeing reasons why one is not obligatory now is not the same

as saying one shouldn't occur when the parliaments term expires.

The pundits like to play up conflicts between the Democrats and their coalition allies, and constantly imagine the coalition is at breaking point, but the truth is that the allied parties also have no interest in an early election. Unless their enemies can engineer a crisis, the government will try to last out its term until the end of 2011.

And yes some hypothesizing about the army's intentions.

All of it relative to Thaksin's next moves.

And Thaksin's next moves, coupled with the ongoing world financial crisis,

is exactly why there should not be a dissolving of the parliament at this time.

Thailand needs government stability, not PM Chalerm....

[soapier]

Pro-Thaksin army specialist suspended from duty

BANGKOK, 13 January 2010 (NNT) - Major-General Khattiya Sawasdiphol, a pro-Thaksin army specialist has been suspended from duty for breaching military regulations, according to Army Commander-in-Chief, General Anupong Paochinda.

General Anupong reconfirmed that the suspension of the senior army expert was in accordance with the rule of law and without bias. He stated that whether legal actions will be taken against the officer depends on the result of investigations and related evidence. He declined to elaborate on the necessity to take decisive action against Maj-Gen Khattiya.

Major-General Khattiya, also known as Seh Daeng, is accused of insubordination, attacking Gen Anupong's leadership and spearheading political campaigns against the ruling Democrat government.

Supporters of the anti-government United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) on Wednesday staged their protests at the Defence Ministry and the Army headquarters in response to the action taken against Maj-Gen Khattiya.

-- NNT 2010-01-13

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

Additional information on this subject is an article in yesterday's BP which reported that Khattiya denied being the person in the photographs taken in Cambodia with Thaksin.

[soapier]

A woman sells piggy banks in the shape of former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in Bangkok January 14, 2010. Thailand's "red shirt" movement planned to hold a prolonged protest in Bangkok starting mid-February.

REUTERS

[soapier]

Rogue general has forgotten his foremost duty

The antics of Sae Daeng have embarrassed the military for months; it's time the brass reined him in

By The Nation

Published on January 15, 2010

How outrageous can one be? How many lines can one cross? Ask Major-General Kithiya Sawathipol also known as "Sae Daeng" - a self-proclaimed hardened soldier who continues to milk his heyday fighting the communist insurgents - and he will say the sky's the limit. The military's biggest loose cannon has confirmed that his favourite pastime is to outdo himself and try to draw the fire from one Thaksin Shinawatra.

In the latest string of controversial moves by this enigmatic - some say overrated - general, who apparently has no real position in the armed forces, Sae Daeng has threatened to "stomp" Army chief General Anupong Paochinda. Now we learn how we have overstated the terms "defiant" and "provocative".

Sae Daeng is holding Anupong accountable for his bad run-in with Defence Minister Pravit Wongsuwan, who has handed down a stiff order that effectively suspended his civil servant status. He is accusing Anupong of bowing to the powers-that-be and has vowed to settle the score with the Army chief for unclear reasons.

"How dare he ask the Defence Ministry to suspend me? Such a measure is reserved for people who have committed criminal offences. I have done nothing wrong," Sae Daeng said. Apart from, of course, popping up for fun as Thaksin's inner-circle guest in Cambodia and Dubai.

Kithiya has been "suspended" because, technically, he went to Cambodia without permission from his superior. (No one seems to know who his superior is, by the way.) Pictures of him kissing up to and giggling with the ousted premier and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen are posted everywhere on the Internet. Many believe Kithiya is responsible for the Internet promotion himself.

While sneaking out of the country without permission is in itself a violation of military regulations, we don't even have to go that far when looking for dirt on Sae Daeng. First of all, leaving with permission or not, he used the occasion to meet a convicted criminal wanted in Thailand for corruption. A state official clinking wine glasses with a fugitive from his own country - in most countries that would be a gross legal offence.

The military's initial tolerance beggared belief, and the institution has to share the blame for the Sae Daeng travesty. If he has embarrassed the Thai armed forces, it's largely because they allowed him to.

It was the armed forces that let him go on and on with his shenanigans without intervention - for fear of being accused of meddling in politics. The brass should have stopped him in his tracks on the day he showed his face and mingled with the red-shirt demonstrators who were clashing with yellow shirts on the streets of Bangkok.

Or maybe Kithiya simply represents another dark side of the Thai military, which has been meddling in politics for decades. He has been doing it his own way, with the latest activity involving mobilisation of paramilitary rangers to go up against the Anti-Thaksin yellow-shirt protesters.

While soldiers may not like the fact that, under the constitutional monarchy, they are required to heed the orders of elected civilians, and while it is true that a lot of crummy civilians have been elected into public office, Kithiya represents the natural urge to take matters into one's (the military's) own hands.

As a professional soldier Kithaya should be committed to defending the country. That's an honourable and simple duty. He has overlooked that role. And while most of his actions may not be "illegal", they are dishonourable. As a soldier, he should demonstrate a different and higher standard. It is called "military bearing" - but sadly that's something this soldier has yet to learn.

-- The Nation 2010-01-15

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[animatic]

The person here who said: " There are no Red Soldiers. " was quite clearly off the mark.

As in; couldn't hit the broad sign of a large barn.

About time they reigned in this loose cannon.

He would be better put into 'protective custody',

tell him he is in danger through till spring.

[jayboy]

The person here who said: " There are no Red Soldiers. " was quite clearly off the mark.

As in; couldn't hit the broad sign of a large barn.

About time they reigned in this loose cannon.

He would be better put into 'protective custody',

tell him he is in danger through till spring.

Sae Daeng is a loose cannon as you suggest.The Nation in an editorial suggests this individual has forgotten his duty.A lot of firepower for a single eccentric gadfly.

Of course the Nation editorial is silent on the very large number of military officers in an illegal junta which overthrew a government by force, dishonoured their uniform and sponsored a notoriously incompetent administration.When these louts have been openly disgraced I think one might start worrying about a one off like Sae Daeng.

[IMA_FARANG]

Well, I'm scheduled to arrive on the 26th of January and to leave on the 8th of February.....so we will see how it goes.

Could be an interesting time.

[ratcatcher]

Well, I'm scheduled to arrive on the 26th of January and to leave on the 8th of February.....so we will see how it goes.

Could be an interesting time.

Well you'll just have time to buy some popcorn and a Pepsi and enjoy the show then. Chokdee.

[Davidusaf99]

As their sworn oath and duty is to a higher power then a corrupt petty dictator like Thaksin, I think they won't lose any sleep over their actions. Doesn't mean I agree with it, but they probably feel they were doing exact what they were supposed to do. This is the main problem, but its a problem born out of the reality that most politicians in this country are not worthy of either respect or loyalty. They steal until they get caught and then disappear. Thaksin forgot the disappear part, otherwise his assets case might be looking slightly rosier.

[jayboy]

As their sworn oath and duty is to a higher power then a corrupt petty dictator like Thaksin, I think they won't lose any sleep over their actions. Doesn't mean I agree with it, but they probably feel they were doing exact what they were supposed to do. This is the main problem, but its a problem born out of the reality that most politicians in this country are not worthy of either respect or loyalty. They steal until they get caught and then disappear. Thaksin forgot the disappear part, otherwise his assets case might be looking slightly rosier.

All thuggish generals who grab power think they are doing what they are supposed to do.Of course there should not be motivated by personal loyalty to anybody, certainly not to Thaksin.Their duty is to respect Thailand's constitutional democracy and this they failed to do.They deserve harsh punishment but of course they organised a pardon for their crimes.Politicians are an easy and often deserved target in Thailand but the reality is that only they have any kind of mandate.The current Prime Minister has often made this point.By all means peacefully reform and improve the system but this does not mean carte blanche for criminal military thugs to grab the country pleading allegiance to a higher power.Get real.Their main allegiance is to their bank accounts.And as for not losing sleep, I dare say Hiltler,Stalin and Mao slept like babies.

[ChiangMaiFun]

surely its more a case of fighting to restore democracy, not bring down a government.

especially as the term "government" in this instance is used , wheras military junta dictatorship is more correct.

How can democratic government be born from the barrel of a gun?

Every MP in Parliament today came from the last election.

A few switched parties when they realised the quality and potential of the Democrat politicians compared to the riff raff of Chalerm, etc.

Unethical for their constituents but a whole lot better for Thailand as a whole.

"Every MP in Parliament today came from the last election."

Spot on Siripon.

The people democratically decided WHO will decide on the governing coalition.

The point of having people not have to dissolve the legislature ever time a coalition government fails

is so that those elected MP's can give some sort of continuity to the leadership of the country.

When the MP's fail to create a workable coalition, then that's time to dissolve the legislative.

That is where we are at the moment.

....Democrat politicians compared to the riff raff of Chalerm, etc....

The lack of any real management talent or basic functionality in PTP ranks

makes it even more important to keep them out of office,

via legitimate legislative methods as time goes on.

Every few days PTP lets Jatuporn and a few others represent them,

and this makes this point even bigger.

This is SO funny... so people swapped parties to save their skin and joined an unelected outfit and it's ok dude? haha so funny how you twist and turn the situation to support your own case. The basic, unalterable truth is... until an election is held (and a fair one if possible) there will be no peace in the Kingdom becaue people elected a red government - whichever way you look at it that is the truth and it was 'taken' from them - whether this was 'good' or 'bad' is not the point - I actually like Abhsit - hold an election.

All the tooing and frooing on this farang board doesn't make an iota of difference to the rice growers and hard working class of this country - let them vote for who they want - it hasn't happened and your intellectual turn of phrase in justifying it holds little water (with due respect) - you maybe right - you maybe wrong - it maybe good - it maybe bad - but it ain't democracy as I know it captain.

[animatic]

Hope you don't get pleurisy laughing,

or you may need 30 baht for a hospital visit.

[TAWP]

but it ain't democracy as I know it captain.

What country are you from? It might help us understand why you have no idea how a parliament works.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Hope you don't get pleurisy laughing,

or you may need 30 baht for a hospital visit.

haha... if they allowed such a fantastic visit to a hospital (and I was Thai) then I might avail myself of it (but I believe it has been resinded?) anyhow we can disagree with humour right?

[ChiangMaiFun]

but it ain't democracy as I know it captain.

What country are you from? It might help us understand why you have no idea how a parliament works.

nice to know you are concerned by my lack of political education... now let's get back to the main point... the people (you know... those folk beyond BKK) voted (you know putting a tick in a box?) for a red (that horrible man Thaksin's party) for their government and the elected (yes I give you that point) MP's have (by hook or by crook) formed a new coalition of many hues (none being red).

Forgetting all the humurous and playful debate here let them decide who they want as the political landscape has changed. I bow to your superior knowldege of Parliamentary procedure but.. you would agree? an election? to decide? bring peace? fair and square? (the last point is mute i know).

[steveromagnino]

The basic, unalterable truth is... until an election is held (and a fair one if possible) there will be no peace in the Kingdom becaue people elected a red government - whichever way you look at it that is the truth and it was 'taken' from them - whether this was 'good' or 'bad' is not the point - I actually like Abhsit - hold an election.

Sorry, I forgot.

Can you please list the numbers of seats won by each political party, because for the life of me I cannot recall the most recent election resulting in an elected majority government; in fact the larger party was able to form a coalition by persuading smaller parties to join them (as is normal practise in MMP systems), simliar to what we have now with the 2nd largest party doing the same as the cornerstone. As I recall CT had prior to the election been promising to join the Dems coalition, and changed sides. Don't recall too much debate on that at the time.

BTW 30b has been changed and improved to be basically close to free. It is a much better system now than a few years ago, people in the healthcare industry can tell you that. Not surprising, any system tends to improve over time if it is to remain sustainable.

Similar I suppose to how farmer crop pricing works - minimum price guarantee is a much better system now than the previous crop pledging....

I must be missing something.....because AFAIK the working class DO vote for who they want now. In the last election, some selected PPP/PT/TRT (insert name here); majority of all voters did not. They cannot control the party machine in an MMP environment as voters, hence coalitions are a party led decision, not a voter led decision.

I would not be arrogant enough to presume to know what they do or don't want in a new election; I do agree that at some point we do need another election. If by that time the constitution has not been wound back allowing political criminals to avoid punishment then there will be a guarantee of no peace - some people have too much to lose to allow peace. On the flip side if the constitution has been wound back and this prevents military criminals from avoiding punishment....again there will be a guarantee of no peace.

Edited January 15, 2010 by steveromagnino

[TAWP]

nice to know you are concerned by my lack of political education... now let's get back to the main point... the people (you know... those folk beyond BKK) voted (you know putting a tick in a box?) for a red (that horrible man Thaksin's party) for their government

You are factually wrong, they didn't vote for a red/Thaksin-proxy/PPP government, i.e. they did not receive a majority.

So how about we start to argue using facts now?

[ballpoint]

nice to know you are concerned by my lack of political education... now let's get back to the main point... the people (you know... those folk beyond BKK) voted (you know putting a tick in a box?) for a red (that horrible man Thaksin's party) for their government and the elected (yes I give you that point) MP's have (by hook or by crook) formed a new coalition of many hues (none being red).

Forgetting all the humurous and playful debate here let them decide who they want as the political landscape has changed. I bow to your superior knowldege of Parliamentary procedure but.. you would agree? an election? to decide? bring peace? fair and square? (the last point is mute i know).

Maybe if you did work on your political education you wouldn’t make such simplistic posts. You assume that Thailand follows a party political system similar to the West, in that a candidate will have ideals and will run for the party that best serves these. You broadly know what you are getting when you vote for a Labour candidate, or a Liberal, or Conservative, or Democrat, or Republican, or Monster Raving Loony. In Thailand however, the ideal of the MP is to get into the winning coalition, as this gives a greater chance of quickly getting back the money paid to win the seat.

The vast majority of up country voters will vote for the same candidate each time, without either caring or understanding what party they are currently in, or what the ideals of that party are. Other than those banned by the election commission, you will see the same names in the lists of winning MP’s over and over again, but you will see many different party names. If we trace the single biggest party in 1996, with 125 seats, the NAP, we see that it dropped to 41 in 2001 and zero in 2005. All those poor MP’s voted out of office by a public tired of them? Not a bit of it. The majority, including high level figures like Chalerm Yubamrung, jumped ship to the TRT, then the PPP. Many then moved to the PTP, with the remainder jumping to the BJP.

Your image of the poor Isaan farmer hopefully putting a tick beside “Thaksin’s man” is a compelling one, if not for the fact that the same Isaan farmer placed a tick beside the same name when he was Chavalit’s man, and will continue doing so when he is Newin’s man, or Chalerm’s man. Sure, there are those who do support Thaksin, but I’d say the majority will continue voting for the same dynasties as always, and couldn’t really care less about who is in charge as long as there’s money for the rice and cheap lao khao at the local shop. It is this sad fact that people should be trying to change, through voter education rather than paid protests to bring back a faded criminal.

Calling for an election in this climate is akin to putting another coat of paint over a rotten floor. It looks better, but I guarantee the resultant list of MPs will be very similar to that of today, only the wheeling and dealing and jostling for power will change, and the same rotten substrata is still in place waiting for someone to fall through it. And you know what? There is absolutely nothing that your hero, and his hired help, did to change this in all their years of power.

[scorecard]

nice to know you are concerned by my lack of political education... now let's get back to the main point... the people (you know... those folk beyond BKK) voted (you know putting a tick in a box?) for a red (that horrible man Thaksin's party) for their government and the elected (yes I give you that point) MP's have (by hook or by crook) formed a new coalition of many hues (none being red).

Forgetting all the humurous and playful debate here let them decide who they want as the political landscape has changed. I bow to your superior knowldege of Parliamentary procedure but.. you would agree? an election? to decide? bring peace? fair and square? (the last point is mute i know).

Maybe if you did work on your political education you wouldn’t make such simplistic posts. You assume that Thailand follows a party political system similar to the West, in that a candidate will have ideals and will run for the party that best serves these. You broadly know what you are getting when you vote for a Labour candidate, or a Liberal, or Conservative, or Democrat, or Republican, or Monster Raving Loony. In Thailand however, the ideal of the MP is to get into the winning coalition, as this gives a greater chance of quickly getting back the money paid to win the seat.

The vast majority of up country voters will vote for the same candidate each time, without either caring or understanding what party they are currently in, or what the ideals of that party are. Other than those banned by the election commission, you will see the same names in the lists of winning MP’s over and over again, but you will see many different party names. If we trace the single biggest party in 1996, with 125 seats, the NAP, we see that it dropped to 41 in 2001 and zero in 2005. All those poor MP’s voted out of office by a public tired of them? Not a bit of it. The majority, including high level figures like Chalerm Yubamrung, jumped ship to the TRT, then the PPP. Many then moved to the PTP, with the remainder jumping to the BJP.

Your image of the poor Isaan farmer hopefully putting a tick beside “Thaksin’s man” is a compelling one, if not for the fact that the same Isaan farmer placed a tick beside the same name when he was Chavalit’s man, and will continue doing so when he is Newin’s man, or Chalerm’s man. Sure, there are those who do support Thaksin, but I’d say the majority will continue voting for the same dynasties as always, and couldn’t really care less about who is in charge as long as there’s money for the rice and cheap lao khao at the local shop. It is this sad fact that people should be trying to change, through voter education rather than paid protests to bring back a faded criminal.

Calling for an election in this climate is akin to putting another coat of paint over a rotten floor. It looks better, but I guarantee the resultant list of MPs will be very similar to that of today, only the wheeling and dealing and jostling for power will change, and the same rotten substrata is still in place waiting for someone to fall through it. And you know what? There is absolutely nothing that your hero, and his hired help, did to change this in all their years of power.

Well said!

And until the middle classes get active, get off their lazy bums and do some serious thinking and discussion, and get vocal, and refuse to accept the leeches and thugs we currently call politicians, nothing much will change.

It's a fact of life that basically all deomracies started with the rich and ruthless grabbing the situation and using it to their selfish advantage until the middle classes got active and refused to accept the greddy and ruthless thugs.

When will get the Thai middle classes active? I don't think I know the full answer to this question, but it could be:

- The realisation that surrounding countries are developing fast and Thailand is missing out.

- A new breed of politicians such as Korn who the masses are starting to notice, and the masses are starting to realize that he is highly capable, genuine, sincere, well balanced, and clean and he doesn't hesitate to politely say what needs to be done long term, even if it initially get some voters off side.

[animatic]

BOTH OF YOU WELL SAID.

Democracy is wonderful if you actually have something to choose between...

Edited January 15, 2010 by animatic

[Samuian]

nice to know you are concerned by my lack of political education... now let's get back to the main point... the people (you know... those folk beyond BKK) voted (you know putting a tick in a box?) for a red (that horrible man Thaksin's party) for their government and the elected (yes I give you that point) MP's have (by hook or by crook) formed a new coalition of many hues (none being red).

Forgetting all the humurous and playful debate here let them decide who they want as the political landscape has changed. I bow to your superior knowldege of Parliamentary procedure but.. you would agree? an election? to decide? bring peace? fair and square? (the last point is mute i know).

Maybe if you did work on your political education you wouldn’t make such simplistic posts. You assume that Thailand follows a party political system similar to the West, in that a candidate will have ideals and will run for the party that best serves these. You broadly know what you are getting when you vote for a Labour candidate, or a Liberal, or Conservative, or Democrat, or Republican, or Monster Raving Loony. In Thailand however, the ideal of the MP is to get into the winning coalition, as this gives a greater chance of quickly getting back the money paid to win the seat.

The vast majority of up country voters will vote for the same candidate each time, without either caring or understanding what party they are currently in, or what the ideals of that party are. Other than those banned by the election commission, you will see the same names in the lists of winning MP’s over and over again, but you will see many different party names. If we trace the single biggest party in 1996, with 125 seats, the NAP, we see that it dropped to 41 in 2001 and zero in 2005. All those poor MP’s voted out of office by a public tired of them? Not a bit of it. The majority, including high level figures like Chalerm Yubamrung, jumped ship to the TRT, then the PPP. Many then moved to the PTP, with the remainder jumping to the BJP.

Your image of the poor Isaan farmer hopefully putting a tick beside “Thaksin’s man” is a compelling one, if not for the fact that the same Isaan farmer placed a tick beside the same name when he was Chavalit’s man, and will continue doing so when he is Newin’s man, or Chalerm’s man. Sure, there are those who do support Thaksin, but I’d say the majority will continue voting for the same dynasties as always, and couldn’t really care less about who is in charge as long as there’s money for the rice and cheap lao khao at the local shop. It is this sad fact that people should be trying to change, through voter education rather than paid protests to bring back a faded criminal.

Calling for an election in this climate is akin to putting another coat of paint over a rotten floor. It looks better, but I guarantee the resultant list of MPs will be very similar to that of today, only the wheeling and dealing and jostling for power will change, and the same rotten substrata is still in place waiting for someone to fall through it. And you know what?

Regarding the last sentence of your post: "There is absolutely nothing that your hero, and his hired help, did to change this in all their years of power." - Oh YES, they worked really hard to CONSOLIDATE their power for ever and been dam_n close - that is why the "hero" and his crew got the boot!

Time for changes!

Hope it remains so.... and finally the records set straight, generations of meddlers, of entire family businesses leeching and prospering of the people of this country, simply doing nothing except lobbying and using their influence in this well established Patronage System, they are the ones who don't want any changes, those who try to deceit the people into their "genuine democracy" scheme, are the last ones who have any interest in a well functioning democratic system with a healthy independent judiciary and a controlled check and balances system - cause siphoning off peoples money from the state coffers will be much more difficult!

Just look at the faces of all these "honest" men!

Somewhere else I read " if this country didn't had this entirely corrupt political scene, it's boardwalks would probably be paved with "gold"...

[ChiangMaiFun]

nice to know you are concerned by my lack of political education... now let's get back to the main point... the people (you know... those folk beyond BKK) voted (you know putting a tick in a box?) for a red (that horrible man Thaksin's party) for their government

You are factually wrong, they didn't vote for a red/Thaksin-proxy/PPP government, i.e. they did not receive a majority.

So how about we start to argue using facts now?

Hold an election and find out... who knows? why fears democracy? of course we all know the answer... people do not always vote the ways that pseudo intellectual’s want them to...