Post-Election Scenarios Do Not Auger Well For Peace

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Post-election scenarios do not auger well for peace

By Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

Will the upcoming election bring an end to the prevailing conflict that has divided the country in more ways than you could imagine?

The answer, unfortunately, is in the negative.

Most of the post-election scenarios point to a continuation of political discord and worse. The reason is clear: No political party or grouping will get a decisive mandate. Voters will be split, and the so-called "public opinion" will be nothing but a cacophony of angry and frustrated voices.

The election campaigns due to start in the next few weeks will open up old wounds. It's not going to be a free and fair competition for ideas to pull this country out of the vicious circle of conflict and animosity. It's all about how to get votes by all means, at any cost. Character assassination, mud-slinging and all kinds of shenanigans will be the name of the game.

Conspicuously absent from the campaigns will be the highly crucial informed debate and the public's access to discussions on issues that might benefit the country. In fact, you will find it extremely difficult to see candidates from the main rival parties ready to sit down to face relevant questions from voters.

One would have thought that, under the circumstances, the most important theme in the election campaign should be how each party proposes to put the country back on track through genuine and effective national reconciliation policies. But that, for all intents and purposes, simply isn't the case.

In fact, if you examine the statements from all the main political parties over the past year or so, politicians and movers and shakers at the national level appear to have given up on the hope of achieving sufficient harmony to convince the people that we can agree to disagree without resorting to political machinations and violence.

Instead of pooling ideas to avoid further conflicts that deepen Thai society's divisiveness, politicians and power-holders have chosen to employ raw political influence - legitimate or otherwise - to drive the other side into a corner with harsh hyperbole and venomous rhetoric, rather than substantiated arguments that should form the main thread of a democratic system.

As a result, a highly deplorable "gutter" political culture - in which only crude, outrageous and mostly irresponsible verbal assaults are used - has become the order of the day.

The quality of politics - which never enjoyed a very high regard in Thai society before - has plunged to the point where the private sector, academics and business entrepreneurs have started to discuss ways and means to "decouple" politics from the economy so that the country doesn't come to a halt every time politicians and their activists decide to stage a show to augment their own political stand.

The most likely post-election scenario is that neither Abhisit Vejjajiva's Democrat Party nor Thaksin Shinawatra's Pheu Thai can win a simple majority to form a one-party government. That means they will both have to woo the "SMPs" (small and medium-sized parties) to join them in setting up the next administration. That would inevitably mean the allocation of Cabinet seats and other political largesse among politicians - which means corruption will again be rampant and the public's disillusionment with politics will continue to rise.

Even in the unlikely event of either party achieving a landslide victory and forming a government with a staggering majority, peace and harmony aren't guaranteed either. In fact, if such a scenario should come to pass, the party that wins such a mandate would come under all sorts of lawsuits, threats and harassment, including public rallies instigated by the losers, the likes of which have already crippled the country in the past few years.

That doesn't mean I am in favour of the proposal for voters to cast a "none of the above" ballot. A "Vote No" campaign won't resolve the country's root problem either.

Despite the generally pessimistic atmosphere, I believe that we should all go out to vote to send a clear and strong message that the majority of Thais don't want to be stuck with the old red-yellow conflict. We want to be free from ugly confrontation. And we want to vote"Yes" for national reconciliation, no matter how illusory it may appear now.

Surrendering to confrontational and divisive politics just isn't an option.

-- The Nation 2011-04-14

[stepenwolf1958]

Intellectuals of Thailand are too optimistic in their view on things.

They are acting too amateurish in the whole situation.

The fact is that in every country the intellectual elite, academics have a responsibility for the fate of the country.

They are the ones who are obliged to create a community perspective.

Politicians are implemented into practice.

Natural order.

Therefore, their lamenting about the ideal outcome of the elections is not just ignoring the facts but is also irresponsible. Ridiculous.

Small parties, not even the middle, as they already defined their positions left or right and made a stalemate that way, small parties will be scale tab.

They will be the decision maker, but considering all the circumstances, same time they will be engine of confusion in the post election period.

So, as soon as possible intellectuals of Thailand should to wake up and take a part in process, according to their obligation and responsibility. before too late.

[Chang_paarp]

After watching the political process in Thailand for a while, I am increasingly convinced they are not ready for democracy as it is known in the west. Unfortunately, the alternative has shown not to up to the task.

Maybe they should declare war on the US or NATO and accept the training that will come with capitulation.

[Oberkommando]

They haven't got any leaders with integrity, honesty and determination enough to make Democracy succeed. The vast majority are only in it to feather their own nests. The military are also too powerful politically and would not serve the will of the electorate.

Those that try to challenge the status quo in earnest are usually bullied out of politics or forced to flee the country.

[stepenwolf1958]

I still like the current PM. I saw his appearance in politic life of Thailand as a light, wind of change.

As he is young and highly educated man, sophisticated and erudite which is good base to start reforms in a positive direction.

He is a very good transitional solution, for deep transformation of the community, as needed.

Subsequent events have shaken me in that belief.

He, as a man schooled in the West, could see some certain values while his living in England, which is undoubtedly easy to get there so I believed that he has built into his character those values, even if he did not want to.

In his political activities he must much more to rely on the wise people in the country, the intellectuals and above all members of the Academy of Sciences.

I'm not sure how much of real power the Academy of Sciences in Thailand really has and what is the status and position of that institution but I think that cooperation with such people was inevitable, and even imperative for him as a man who promised, during the election campaign of Democrats, change.

If that was done on time, no doubt Democrats would have a better rating and reputation, even regardless of the bloodshed in Bangkok.

If that was done on time, Democrats would not be now in panic and fear of the opposition, making simultaneous mistakes.

There would not be fear of the mass of non-response to the elections as an indicator of the disappointment by current government but also for the lack of alternatives.

A few years of ruling by Democrats seem as waste of precious time.

Especially as such an understanding of the power and ruling as they showed, opened the door to some very dark things and mannerism in the political life that was a trademark of Goebbels.

[whybother]

I still like the current PM. I saw his appearance in politic life of Thailand as a light, wind of change.

As he is young and highly educated man, sophisticated and erudite which is good base to start reforms in a positive direction.

He is a very good transitional solution, for deep transformation of the community, as needed.

Subsequent events have shaken me in that belief.

He, as a man schooled in the West, could see some certain values while his living in England, which is undoubtedly easy to get there so I believed that he has built into his character those values, even if he did not want to.

In his political activities he must much more to rely on the wise people in the country, the intellectuals and above all members of the Academy of Sciences.

I'm not sure how much of real power the Academy of Sciences in Thailand really has and what is the status and position of that institution but I think that cooperation with such people was inevitable, and even imperative for him as a man who promised, during the election campaign of Democrats, change.

If that was done on time, no doubt Democrats would have a better rating and reputation, even regardless of the bloodshed in Bangkok.

If that was done on time, Democrats would not be now in panic and fear of the opposition, making simultaneous mistakes.

There would not be fear of the mass of non-response to the elections as an indicator of the disappointment by current government but also for the lack of alternatives.

A few years of ruling by Democrats seem as waste of precious time.

Especially as such an understanding of the power and ruling as they showed, opened the door to some very dark things and mannerism in the political life that was a trademark of Goebbels.

Are you comparing the Democrats to the Nazis?

[jdinasia]

Are you comparing the Democrats to the Nazis?

LOL

The argument that academics and intellectuals need to in some way lead the country is as laughable as a Dems=Nazis argument.

Intellectuals and academics (the pundits) should absolutely float ideas, and try and open discourse, but not only is there no obligation for them to lead the way, there is a moral imperative for them not to! An academic or intellectual elite making changes to the country makes no sense at all other than opening avenues of discussion. They don't represent the electorate in any fashion. If they ran for office in Thailand what party would they do so under?

Democracies function (in theory) as the will of the people. Democracy can obviously be subverted by money politics just as easily as it can be by propaganda, but if Thailand is going to remain a democracy at all (as flawed as it is) it is the people that should be making the decisions. This does not mean that whatever a group of the electorate want they should get. It must be tempered by the checks and balances that democracies need to survive. It is obvious to me that the only way forward is to strengthen the anti-corruption laws and give them enough teeth to make it too painful to cheat and steal.

[stepenwolf1958]

I still like the current PM. I saw his appearance in politic life of Thailand as a light, wind of change.

As he is young and highly educated man, sophisticated and erudite which is good base to start reforms in a positive direction.

He is a very good transitional solution, for deep transformation of the community, as needed.

Subsequent events have shaken me in that belief.

He, as a man schooled in the West, could see some certain values while his living in England, which is undoubtedly easy to get there so I believed that he has built into his character those values, even if he did not want to.

In his political activities he must much more to rely on the wise people in the country, the intellectuals and above all members of the Academy of Sciences.

I'm not sure how much of real power the Academy of Sciences in Thailand really has and what is the status and position of that institution but I think that cooperation with such people was inevitable, and even imperative for him as a man who promised, during the election campaign of Democrats, change.

If that was done on time, no doubt Democrats would have a better rating and reputation, even regardless of the bloodshed in Bangkok.

If that was done on time, Democrats would not be now in panic and fear of the opposition, making simultaneous mistakes.

There would not be fear of the mass of non-response to the elections as an indicator of the disappointment by current government but also for the lack of alternatives.

A few years of ruling by Democrats seem as waste of precious time.

Especially as such an understanding of the power and ruling as they showed, opened the door to some very dark things and mannerism in the political life that was a trademark of Goebbels.

Are you comparing the Democrats to the Nazis?

Do you think any political party in this world is immune in politic struggles of dirtiness and manners of Goebbels, from time to time?

In other words, do you expect that will not be a manner, more-less, in political campaigns today?

And again, do you think it would be surprise, if see, in some of developing countries?

Give me a brake, will you?

next, that was an expression, figuratively speaking.

Oh no, i don't compare Democrats with Nazis.

Oh yes, i have on my mind ONE of them, read my lips, one of them miss the decade by his birth. Should to be born in time of Adolf.

Whatever he do-have strong connotations and identifiable influence and manner of Goebbels but just from time to time and from statement to statement.

You tell me who is it.

[stepenwolf1958]

Are you comparing the Democrats to the Nazis?

LOL

The argument that academics and intellectuals need to in some way lead the country is as laughable as a Dems=Nazis argument.

Intellectuals and academics (the pundits) should absolutely float ideas, and try and open discourse, but not only is there no obligation for them to lead the way, there is a moral imperative for them not to! An academic or intellectual elite making changes to the country makes no sense at all other than opening avenues of discussion. They don't represent the electorate in any fashion. If they ran for office in Thailand what party would they do so under?

Democracies function (in theory) as the will of the people. Democracy can obviously be subverted by money politics just as easily as it can be by propaganda, but if Thailand is going to remain a democracy at all (as flawed as it is) it is the people that should be making the decisions. This does not mean that whatever a group of the electorate want they should get. It must be tempered by the checks and balances that democracies need to survive. It is obvious to me that the only way forward is to strengthen the anti-corruption laws and give them enough teeth to make it too painful to cheat and steal.

Hey boyse JD

Again, your twisted imagination, is doing things to you?

I didn't say intelectuals should to lead the country as i didn't compare Democrats and Nazis. Could be insult for Nazis. (Joking a bit) but...

I said intelectuals, academics should to create, in global meaning, perspective, future of any country.

Create is the key word there so don't try to play with words with me or again you will say something bad about Democrats as you did it once.

Academics, intelectual potential of any country, that is one of few elementary columns, pillars in any society. There are many books of philosophy written about it.

However you should read the books man, not comics, or newspapers which are guided by ruling politicians(mostly)so might wash your brain as well. "Wag the dog"

I am sorry, if you want to use the word REMAIN about democracy in Thailand, i have to say word ESTABLISH would be more appropriate.

They are young democracy and they just have to establish solid democracy what they are trying to now.

Unfortunatelly, that will not be possible with this political garniture on power but definetelly that time is close. Perhaps after next 2-3 mandates in correct way, we will be able to see democracy such we can see on the West. I hope so.

I agreed with your words about priority here, anti corruption laws.

[rubl]

...

I am sorry, if you want to use the word REMAIN about democracy in Thailand, i have to say word ESTABLISH would be more appropriate.

They are young democracy and they just have to establish solid democracy what they are trying to now.

...

A solid democracy is never established, but grows from a young democracy into one over time, given the chance

[stepenwolf1958]

To make more clear to Whybother and JDinAsia, twin brothers, same time.

Especially as such an understanding of the power and ruling as they showed, opened the door to some very dark things and mannerism in the political life that was a trademark of Goebbels.

Pay attention, please, on words i bold for you.

[stepenwolf1958]

...

I am sorry, if you want to use the word REMAIN about democracy in Thailand, i have to say word ESTABLISH would be more appropriate.

They are young democracy and they just have to establish solid democracy what they are trying to now.

...

A solid democracy is never established, but grows from a young democracy into one over time, given the chance

Agrred Rubl.

Thanks for the precise formulation. Yes, it all depends on the given chances.

The only question remains for to analyze here, how many of actual politicians and elites, really want to give a chance for Western-style democracy.

In other words, we should predict how much of their own power, money earned from politics, they are willing to give up for the arrival of democracy, in a fuller sense of the word than they have now.

That is the question.

[rubl]

...

I am sorry, if you want to use the word REMAIN about democracy in Thailand, i have to say word ESTABLISH would be more appropriate.

They are young democracy and they just have to establish solid democracy what they are trying to now. ...

A solid democracy is never established, but grows from a young democracy into one over time, given the chance

Agrred Rubl.

Thanks for the precise formulation. Yes, it all depends on the given chances.

The only question remains for to analyze here, how many of actual politicians and elites, really want to give a chance for Western-style democracy.

In other words, we should predict how much of their own power, money earned from politics, they are willing to give up for the arrival of democracy, in a fuller sense of the word than they have now.

That is the question.

For a lighter tone (it's Songkhran festival remember), this just in, dated 10th of April:

"Exporting Democracy Has Led to Shortages of it in U.S., Experts Say

Wisconsin, Florida Hardest Hit

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) – The U.S. policy of exporting democracy abroad has meant that there is very little of it left at home."

http://www.borowitzreport.com/

[stepenwolf1958]

For a lighter tone (it's Songkhran festival remember), this just in, dated 10th of April:

"Exporting Democracy Has Led to Shortages of it in U.S., Experts Say

Wisconsin, Florida Hardest Hit

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) – The U.S. policy of exporting democracy abroad has meant that there is very little of it left at home."

http://www.borowitzreport.com/

So, this is what i was always thinking about US best seller and brand, DEMOCRACY.

As we had a few models of communism (Tito's was most reasonable) it is same with democracy. We have several types of democracy and if you ask me-i never accepted American way of democracy.

I have on my mind some European countries as a good model.

However, American friends told me exactly THIS words.

The U.S. policy of exporting democracy abroad has meant that there is very little of it left at home

Good joke, thanks for light themes(if)

Songkharn festival, 116 already died of happiness in celebrating.

DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE OR EVEN BETTER - DON'T DRIVE AT ALL.

[yoshiwara]

They haven't got any leaders with integrity, honesty and determination enough to make Democracy succeed. The vast majority are only in it to feather their own nests. The military are also too powerful politically and would not serve the will of the electorate.

Those that try to challenge the status quo in earnest are usually bullied out of politics or forced to flee the country.

The idea that crook Thaksin is there to lead the challenge on the status quo is completely lame, like some Dear Leader North Korean propaganda leaflet.

[yoshiwara]

Are you comparing the Democrats to the Nazis?

LOL

The argument that academics and intellectuals need to in some way lead the country is as laughable as a Dems=Nazis argument.

Intellectuals and academics (the pundits) should absolutely float ideas, and try and open discourse, but not only is there no obligation for them to lead the way, there is a moral imperative for them not to! An academic or intellectual elite making changes to the country makes no sense at all other than opening avenues of discussion. They don't represent the electorate in any fashion. If they ran for office in Thailand what party would they do so under?

Democracies function (in theory) as the will of the people. Democracy can obviously be subverted by money politics just as easily as it can be by propaganda, but if Thailand is going to remain a democracy at all (as flawed as it is) it is the people that should be making the decisions. This does not mean that whatever a group of the electorate want they should get. It must be tempered by the checks and balances that democracies need to survive. It is obvious to me that the only way forward is to strengthen the anti-corruption laws and give them enough teeth to make it too painful to cheat and steal.

Hey boyse JD

Again, your twisted imagination, is doing things to you?

I didn't say intelectuals should to lead the country as i didn't compare Democrats and Nazis. Could be insult for Nazis. (Joking a bit) but...

I said intelectuals, academics should to create, in global meaning, perspective, future of any country.

Create is the key word there so don't try to play with words with me or again you will say something bad about Democrats as you did it once.

Academics, intelectual potential of any country, that is one of few elementary columns, pillars in any society. There are many books of philosophy written about it.

However you should read the books man, not comics, or newspapers which are guided by ruling politicians(mostly)so might wash your brain as well. "Wag the dog"

I am sorry, if you want to use the word REMAIN about democracy in Thailand, i have to say word ESTABLISH would be more appropriate.

They are young democracy and they just have to establish solid democracy what they are trying to now.

Unfortunatelly, that will not be possible with this political garniture on power but definetelly that time is close. Perhaps after next 2-3 mandates in correct way, we will be able to see democracy such we can see on the West. I hope so.

I agreed with your words about priority here, anti corruption laws.

Intellectuals and academics (not necessarily the same thing) are not a separate class with definable class interests, so to suggest that they should do this or that, is a waste of time.

[jdinasia]

Intellectuals and academics (not necessarily the same thing) are not a separate class with definable class interests, so to suggest that they should do this or that, is a waste of time.

Speaking of wasting time

Really, can you imagine a world where academics attempted governing on a grand scale? To take it even further, a world governed by intellectuals?

Where the "idea" of something had more value than the results, and the ivory tower rules all? EEEEeeeeeeek!

[whybother]

Hey boyse JD

Again, your twisted imagination, is doing things to you?

I didn't say intelectuals should to lead the country as i didn't compare Democrats and Nazis.

<snip>

A few years of ruling by Democrats seem as waste of precious time.

Especially as such an understanding of the power and ruling as they [the Democrats?? wb] showed, opened the door to some very dark things and mannerism in the political life that was a trademark of Goebbels.

OK. You compared the Democrats to Goebbels, then.

Do you think any political party in this world is immune in politic struggles of dirtiness and manners of Goebbels, from time to time?

Then you compared any (all?) political parties to Goebbels.

[jdinasia]

LOL whybother, I decided to use that special feature again ... when people bring up Nazis etc it just becomes time for them to go away (again)

edited for clarity

Edited April 14, 2011 by jdinasia

[Beetlejuice]

Peace on all of them and may the best man win.

[jhwest]

Well not really in to politics, though people are involved in politics everyday, whether it is at work or even the Family.

It appears that in the West the so called originators of democracy, well look at the state of affairs in the whole of Europe and indeed the USA, not to mention the Middle East.

People used to look up to England and she what a real mess they are in.

Did you know that the England has the most densley populated per mile than anyone in Europe, and was aware of this and you look at the land mass it is a very very small Country indeed

Yes I am afraid corruption is just about everywhere and just a thought in that it seems regardless of the outcome of this election the other side will immiediately come out in the streets AGAIN and just will not listen to the views of others. It seems we can never get rid of reds versus yellows and I am neither, but folks in the Western World the reds are either the Labour Party or Communist and the blue colour mainly Conservative.

Indeed if you look at the General Elections in the Western World, I believe it is less than 35 or 40 per cent of the population that do vote and indeed this percentage probably a lot lower.

The point I am making is why oh why can they not ban these continuing rallies from all colours be made illegal and yes people will say it is the right of individuals to protest.

The trouble is that people will not listen to the different views from the other side and yes really have no real time of day for Politicians and yes in it for what they can get out of it.

Correct me if I am wrong thought the Constitution was being redrafted and yeah the right to rally is in the existing one!!!.

May be just maybe there might be a clear winner, but it seems everything will be neck and neck, but regardless of the result will people accept the outcome.!!!

[jhwest]

Well not really in to politics, though people are involved in politics everyday, whether it is at work or even the Family.

It appears that in the West the so called originators of democracy, well look at the state of affairs in the whole of Europe and indeed the USA, not to mention the Middle East.

People used to look up to England and she what a real mess they are in.

Did you know that the England has the most densley populated per mile than anyone in Europe, and was aware of this and you look at the land mass it is a very very small Country indeed

Yes I am afraid corruption is just about everywhere and just a thought in that it seems regardless of the outcome of this election the other side will immiediately come out in the streets AGAIN and just will not listen to the views of others. It seems we can never get rid of reds versus yellows and I am neither, but folks in the Western World the reds are either the Labour Party or Communist and the blue colour mainly Conservative.

Indeed if you look at the General Elections in the Western World, I believe it is less than 35 or 40 per cent of the population that do vote and indeed this percentage probably a lot lower.

The point I am making is why oh why can they not ban these continuing rallies from all colours be made illegal and yes people will say it is the right of individuals to protest.

The trouble is that people will not listen to the different views from the other side and yes really have no real time of day for Politicians and yes in it for what they can get out of it.

Correct me if I am wrong thought the Constitution was being redrafted and yeah the right to rally is in the existing one!!!.

May be just maybe there might be a clear winner, but it seems everything will be neck and neck, but regardless of the result will people accept the outcome.!!!

Well in the Western World people do accept the decision, but also moan about it as well, but nothing they do sems to bring down Governments, until recently!!!

[rogerdee123]

This headline certainly appears to be an understatement!

[stepenwolf1958]

Hey boyse JD

Again, your twisted imagination, is doing things to you?

I didn't say intelectuals should to lead the country as i didn't compare Democrats and Nazis.

<snip>

A few years of ruling by Democrats seem as waste of precious time.

Especially as such an understanding of the power and ruling as they [the Democrats?? wb] showed, opened the door to some very dark things and mannerism in the political life that was a trademark of Goebbels.

OK. You compared the Democrats to Goebbels, then.

Do you think any political party in this world is immune in politic struggles of dirtiness and manners of Goebbels, from time to time?

Then you compared any (all?) political parties to Goebbels.

Man this must be a joke, right?

I was very clear and make it bold to understand easier.

It is not about comparing Democrats with Nazis or even Goebbels. Way of understanding ruling and be on power, their way, opened door for SOME dark things which was manner of Goebbels.

I think it is clear and easy to understand. Don't twist my words or to try to put the words in my mouth as i was very clear.

If you can't understand, i can't help you.

[gregb]

...

I am sorry, if you want to use the word REMAIN about democracy in Thailand, i have to say word ESTABLISH would be more appropriate.

They are young democracy and they just have to establish solid democracy what they are trying to now.

...

A solid democracy is never established, but grows from a young democracy into one over time, given the chance

Agrred Rubl.

Thanks for the precise formulation. Yes, it all depends on the given chances.

The only question remains for to analyze here, how many of actual politicians and elites, really want to give a chance for Western-style democracy.

In other words, we should predict how much of their own power, money earned from politics, they are willing to give up for the arrival of democracy, in a fuller sense of the word than they have now.

That is the question.

Democracy only works in cultures that have evolved a strong sense of responsibility towards protecting the rights of the minority. Democracy is not voting. That is a very small part of it, and is limited to the mechanics of how to select the governing bodies.

Thailand is not currently a democracy, nor is it on the path towards becoming a democracy. In fact, I would guess the number of Thai people that actually want democracy is somewhat less than 5%. Thailand has a strong history of patronage. That is what Thais want. They understand this system. There is very little priority given to protecting those who are less fortunate, which is a cornerstone of what makes a democracy possible.

There may be shards of that ideal which have been present historically, but I do not see any evidence that this is a predominant feature of the Thai culture today. Democracy is not practical in Thailand at the present time. It is trying to put a square peg in a round hole. Some people have some kind of religious devotion towards democracy, as if it is the ideal to be sought after at all costs.

In reality, democracy only works as a system of government in very limited circumstances. Thailand does not currently possess the circumstances which make it an effective form of government.

Any efforts towards that end are doomed to failure. Fix the cultural imperative first. Then democracy can follow if people want.