Do Thais Understand Democracy?

[lannarebirth]

Do Thai elementary and secondary schools have "Civics" classes, which describe how their government functions and what the individual citizen's responsibility in a democracy is?

[manarak]

Do Thai elementary and secondary schools have "Civics" classes, which describe how their government functions and what the individual citizen's responsibility in a democracy is?

has been tried in the west, didn't work.

[lannarebirth]

Do Thai elementary and secondary schools have "Civics" classes, which describe how their government functions and what the individual citizen's responsibility in a democracy is?

has been tried in the west, didn't work.

I don't know. I had it in school and understand the workings of government, balance of powers and how legislation is proposed and passed from it. Seems to me it should be a required part of the curriculum.

Edited March 16, 2010 by lannarebirth

[vicco]

Demoracy is:

In USA: ...like it's freedom man, liberty...so ya can buy a gun, go huntin or to the ball game without gettin hassled....stuff like that.

In UK. Oh dear....I'm not really sure...would you like more tea, Coronation street is just starting....

In China: Ah..something we don't want here...we are doing fine...look what it's doing for America and UK.....

InThailand: It's getting to go to Bankok in a pickup truck and camp in the street for a few days....they have concerts, men shout a lot and make jokes...we go visit the army

and police...then we go home and wait for the next demoracy....

[manarak]

Do Thai elementary and secondary schools have "Civics" classes, which describe how their government functions and what the individual citizen's responsibility in a democracy is?

has been tried in the west, didn't work.

I don't know. I had it in school and understand the workings of government, balance of powers and how legislation is proposed and passed from it. Seems to me it should be a required part of the curriculum.

Didn't work.

How do you explain all those politicians lacking a vision and who are only caretakers instead of being leaders?

They are all busy passing laws to be allowed to spy on their own citizens, instead of figuring out what would benefit the nation and how to promote the feeling of freedom??

[gregb]

The only way democracy would work in Thailand is if all Thais voting had to write an essay explaining exactly why they chose the candidate they did. Then, they could be graded by the judiciary, and any answers such as "because everyone else says my life was better with Thaksin and I like demagogues" could be given an F and discarded.

I don't necessarily think that not having an education means you aren't entitled to an opinion. However, democracy requires that people think independently. When you have a cult like the red shirts the whole concept of democracy simply becomes a sham. There needs to be some mechanism of qualifying the vote, and those who don't have the capability of understanding the consequences of their actions should be silently disregarded.

Some people seem fond of saying that letting the wealthy Bangkokians decide isn't fair to the poor, but they have no better options. Treating the vote of someone who is easily manipulated equivalent to someone who understands the consequences of what they are doing is far from fair also. Democracy only works in very limited circumstances. Those circumstances simply do not exist in Thailand. An absolute monarchy would be much more appropriate for this country.

[Spee]

An absolute monarchy would be much more appropriate for this country.

And how is that different from a benevolent dictatorship?

Edited March 16, 2010 by Spee

[Spee]

Last week sometime, I think, someone wrote a good letter to the BP saying the single biggest barrier to democracy in Thailand is the requirement that you must have a degree in order to become an MP.

Blatant discrimination and clearly not representative government. More importantly, it's not a limited government, as the educated have the power to enact laws to prevent equal opportunity of education to the uneducated. I would hope the Thai people could overcome this shortcoming as so many other democratic nations have.

[samuibeachcomber]

the biggest stumbling block to a true democracy as i see it is party political donations made by business.The party that gainds power is already hamstrung.Elections should only be funded equally through taxpayers money.

[PhilHarries]

the biggest stumbling block to a true democracy as i see it is party political donations made by business.The party that gainds power is already hamstrung.Elections should only be funded equally through taxpayers money.

and Trades Unions.

If the tax payers had to fund elections, which of course they do but by an indirect roundabout route, I think everybody would vote for a single party state.

[yabaaaa]

In the UK we're turning out kids who don't know where milk and eggs come from.

FWIW

C'mon we all know that .............. Tesco's and Sainsbury's

[Spee]

the biggest stumbling block to a true democracy as i see it is party political donations made by business.The party that gainds power is already hamstrung.Elections should only be funded equally through taxpayers money.

and Trades Unions.

If the tax payers had to fund elections, which of course they do but by an indirect roundabout route, I think everybody would vote for a single party state.

While I can understand both of these sentiments, unfortunately I cannot agree with them because it goes deeply into restricting freedom of speech. We have these kinds of problems with undue influence from unions and businesses because of corruption. We have corruption because the power and authority of government is not limited and there is something to be gained by corrupting it. For example, in the US, there are numerous examples of non-profit, tax-exempt organizations using funds for political causes, which is against the law (Acorn is a high visibility example).

The solution is to allow individuals, groups and businesses to fund elections as they see fit, but to enforce laws that are in place to deter corruption and to limit government authority so there is little or nothing to be gained by corruption, and government serves the people rather than the other way around.

Related examples of these problems can be seen everywhere through Thailand's struggling democratic process. Democracy starts with the individual, specifically with unalienable rights, personal freedoms and economic liberty. It doesn't matter if someone is a poor uneducated rice farmer or a business tycoon from society elite or anywhere in between.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

And how is that different from a benevolent dictatorship?

And how is a benevolent dictatorship different from what we have now?

[gregb]

An absolute monarchy would be much more appropriate for this country.

And how is that different from a benevolent dictatorship?

Who says it has to be?

You seem to have an unreasonable bias against benevolent dictatorships. The truth is that there are always good and bad rulers. Picking out Burma and North Korea, two essentially pariah states, and saying that non elected rulers are bad because look what they did here, is extremely unwise.

How about singling out Hitler and using that as an example of why democracy is bad? It isn't the mechanism chosen to select the ruler, it is the ruler himself which is the litmus test. I say you can get the optimum ratio of good vs. bad rulers in Thailand through the simple, age old practice of selecting rulers via blood line.

Democracy can not improve on that in this country. Offering people "rights" they don't value can not fix the problem. It's not that I disagree with your sentiment that people want "rights", it is that Westerner's have an unavoidable cultural bias as to what those "rights" should be. Thailand has a rich cultural history with a series of excellent monarchs, and some bad ones too.

I think the best option here is to leverage that rich tradition. Democracy is not a practical form of government here. You can never eliminate bad and evil rulers. You can only maximize the good ones.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

You seem to have an unreasonable bias against benevolent dictatorships.

This has GOT to be the

Post Of The Day Award!!!

[Spee]

An absolute monarchy would be much more appropriate for this country.

And how is that different from a benevolent dictatorship?

Who says it has to be?

You seem to have an unreasonable bias against benevolent dictatorships.

What did I say that was unreasonable? A bias? Heck yeah. I'll take democracy over dictatorship every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Ok. Your turn. How 'bout describing a dictatorship in recent memory, benevolent or otherwise, that has served to the benefit of the vast majority of its citizens.

And don't go trying to imply that Thailand is one. That dog won't hunt.

[mark45y]

An absolute monarchy would be much more appropriate for this country.

And how is that different from a benevolent dictatorship?

Who says it has to be?

You seem to have an unreasonable bias against benevolent dictatorships.

What did I say that was unreasonable? A bias? Heck yeah. I'll take democracy over dictatorship every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Ok. Your turn. How 'bout describing a dictatorship in recent memory, benevolent or otherwise, that has served to the benefit of the vast majority of its citizens.

And don't go trying to imply that Thailand is one. That dog won't hunt.

Monaco, Vatican, Singapore, Bhutan.

[TAWP]

Last week sometime, I think, someone wrote a good letter to the BP saying the single biggest barrier to democracy in Thailand is the requirement that you must have a degree in order to become an MP.

Blatant discrimination and clearly not representative government. More importantly, it's not a limited government, as the educated have the power to enact laws to prevent equal opportunity of education to the uneducated. I would hope the Thai people could overcome this shortcoming as so many other democratic nations have.

Actually, I think the requirement was one of those things they removed in the new constitution. But the Red Shirts want the 1997-version back...

[lannarebirth]

<br />The only way democracy would work in Thailand is if all Thais voting had to write an essay explaining exactly why they chose the candidate they did. Then, they could be graded by the judiciary, and any answers such as "because everyone else says my life was better with Thaksin and I like demagogues" could be given an F and discarded. <br /><br />I don't necessarily think that not having an education means you aren't entitled to an opinion. However, democracy requires that people think independently. When you have a cult like the red shirts the whole concept of democracy simply becomes a sham. There needs to be some mechanism of qualifying the vote, and those who don't have the capability of understanding the consequences of their actions should be silently disregarded.<br /><br />Some people seem fond of saying that letting the wealthy Bangkokians decide isn't fair to the poor, but they have no better options. Treating the vote of someone who is easily manipulated equivalent to someone who understands the consequences of what they are doing is far from fair also. Democracy only works in very limited circumstances. Those circumstances simply do not exist in Thailand. An absolute monarchy would be much more appropriate for this country.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Presumably, those who would suffer from the votes of those you describe should be motivated to change their outlook, through education and action on their behalf. That would be the smartest thing to do don't you think?

[Spee]

How 'bout describing a dictatorship in recent memory, benevolent or otherwise, that has served to the benefit of the vast majority of its citizens.

Monaco, Vatican, Singapore, Bhutan.

You must have flunked World Government in school. Or at the very least, Internet Search 101.

Monaco - constitutional monarchy

Vatican - the Pope is a dictator ??

Singapore - parliamentary republic

Bhutan - constitutional democratic monarchy

Better re-load and next time, try aiming at the target.

[Briggsy]

"Do Thais understand democracy?"

Try growing up and living the whole of your life where your access to the justice system is limited to the arbitrary whim of the local police colonel/kamnan/dark influence at best and see if you believe in democracy then.

[thaibeachlovers]

Most people in the world want few things, ....

A simplistic and inaccurate understanding of human psychology.

Start with Maslow's 'hierarchy of needs' as an entry point into the complexity of human needs, consider that once basic sufficiency is met the majority of people want not just to survive but also to thrive, that it is a basic human emotion to long for that which you do not have and, if most people want few things, perhaps you could explain the global phenomenon of consumerism?

Perhaps because many people are stupid and greedy.

How else would you explain people thinking that there would be no repercussions to buying houses when there was no chance that they could repay the loans, just because a bank was willing to lend them the money, no questions asked?

The only thing that I enjoyed about the recent economic catastrophe, was the Bernie Maidoff ( ? spelling ) ponzie scheme, which confirmed to me that just because you are rich, it doesn't mean that you are intelligent.

[thaibebop]

Hello,

I feel that Thais have to find their own political system, and define for themselves what democracy or socialism is to them. This seems to be the norm that each nation, culture, what have you must go through this process. China is a example that can be used. They took on communism but certainly made a Chinese communism, not a direct Soviet import. What they might be considered now is another topic.

Thailand has had many opportunities for development but most focused on economic. I think it can be argued that because of American interests in containing communism in the mid-20th century Thailand's political develop was stunted, by America supporting strongman leaders like Sarit just because they said that they would be anti-communist. Anyone who disagreed with him was labeled communist and an enemy of the state. American money funded the development of the Thai primary school system but the school system was used by Sarit for nationalistic propaganda more then anything.

The point I am trying to get at is Thailand has only recently, within the last few decades, really began looking at itself politically. Before economics was the focus for most people, and now there is a stronger middle class and more connection between people because if technology, so more people now know that if others hold the same views that they do and are more comfortable being political active as in protesting, for example.

Maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that the political development of Thailand was halted because of World War II and interfered with by America during the Cold War. So, only the last few decades have Thai people been able to really decide for themselves what they should be politically.

[OZEMADE]

Americans obviously don't. I was watching a show today where one of the congressmen admitted that during the Presidential Election only 50% of Americans voted. And they winge about Obama being elected. He also stated that when they have local elections that only about 20% on average vote for their local candidate.

[thaibebop]

Americans obviously don't. I was watching a show today where one of the congressmen admitted that during the Presidential Election only 50% of Americans voted. And they winge about Obama being elected. He also stated that when they have local elections that only about 20% on average vote for their local candidate.

I agree with you some what. There are problems in the election system here that convince many people that voting is a waste of time. One is the electoral college, which is a system of voting that determines how the entire state votes. Example, I live in Kansas which is mostly populated by conservative right wing Christians. Because of that the state will always vote for the Republican running. If voted Democrat it would wiped out by my neighbors and the state would go to the Republican candidate. This is the same for a person voting Republican in a mostly left wing state. So, an individuals vote only counts, in the national election, at the state level. It is not one vote, one person. This is also true for state level elections as well, only the vote counts at the county level.

So, you see many times depending on who you live next to, your vote doesn't mean anything. If you live in a state that votes the way you want, one less person voting isn't going to matter much either. So, why bother? There are other problems as well that Americans need to address before we can fix our government. I tell you now though, our government is not working as it should for the people. The system has been geared to favor the political parties and not the voters. So, until something like campaign reform takes place, many Americans will have no faith in the voting system.

[monkfish]

Thailand is just going through some democratic teething problems as most western countries also have.

The difficult bit always seems to be the shifting of power from the wealthy to the poor.

Accepting the results from a General Election would be a step in the right direction.

Making sure military coupes cannot happen in the future will save hel_l of a lot of time.

The most important issue is of course having a solid and fair legal system which I am not sure is possible.

Until then I guess we gotta make do with what we got.

[OZEMADE]

Americans obviously don't. I was watching a show today where one of the congressmen admitted that during the Presidential Election only 50% of Americans voted. And they winge about Obama being elected. He also stated that when they have local elections that only about 20% on average vote for their local candidate.

I agree with you some what. There are problems in the election system here that convince many people that voting is a waste of time. One is the electoral college, which is a system of voting that determines how the entire state votes. Example, I live in Kansas which is mostly populated by conservative right wing Christians. Because of that the state will always vote for the Republican running. If voted Democrat it would wiped out by my neighbors and the state would go to the Republican candidate. This is the same for a person voting Republican in a mostly left wing state. So, an individuals vote only counts, in the national election, at the state level. It is not one vote, one person. This is also true for state level elections as well, only the vote counts at the county level.

So, you see many times depending on who you live next to, your vote doesn't mean anything. If you live in a state that votes the way you want, one less person voting isn't going to matter much either. So, why bother? There are other problems as well that Americans need to address before we can fix our government. I tell you now though, our government is not working as it should for the people. The system has been geared to favor the political parties and not the voters. So, until something like campaign reform takes place, many Americans will have no faith in the voting system.

All Australian citizens on reaching 18 YOA must vote. I repeat ALL. If they don't vote and don't have a good excuse they are fined and that is in Commonwealth and State elections.

[Oldvisitor]

I think we have to ask ourselves, does a " Western Democracy " work for Asian people....

[thaifkrlim]

this is an uprising from the people who want a democratic republic of thaisland

[monkfish]

Direct democracy could work in Thailand as there would not be one man in charge i.e. no PM with all the power.

This would mean no need for a coup.