Only A Major Overhaul Can Save The Democrat Party; Thai Talk

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Only a major overhaul can save the Democrat Party

By Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

Abhisit Vejjajiva is back as the Democrat leader, with perhaps the most difficult mission in his political life: how to win back the trust of the majority of Thais who have somehow been convinced that the country's oldest political party isn't fit to run the nation, at least for the immediate future.

The Democrats haven't won a general election in 19 years. The reasons are clear and simple: The electorate simply doesn't trust that the Democrats can get things done. They have proved incapable of crisis management. And they aren't particularly good at managing during peacetime, either.

Once they were elected because of their stand against dictatorship and corruption. Now, after two years running the country with Abhisit at the helm, that positive image has also been badly eroded. Now, opponents say the Democrats were hiding behind the military shield to run the business of governing the country - with results that are far from convincing.

The party that once stood for liberalism and freedom of expression has turned conservative and defensive. When Abhisit declared his "Nine Iron-Clad Rules" for his Cabinet to underline his policy against corruption and conflicts of interest among his ministers, he appeared to try to revive the party's attempt to make integrity the priority of governance. But he failed miserably to live up to his pledge of keeping his Cabinet honest and accountable when some of his coalition partners were blatantly breaking the rules.

It was a clear miscalculation on Abhisit's part when he decided to lead his party to form a coalition with Bhum Jai Thai and Chart Thai Pattana. He thought he could rein them in with his public stand on political ethics. But when he could not build up popular support and failed to connect directly with the grass-roots populace, Abhisit painted himself into a corner - a corner that forced him to compromise with unsavoury elements among his coalition partners and an uncomfortable alliance with the Army.

Abhisit and his No 2, Suthep Thaugsuban, the party's secretary-general and the most visible "kingmaker" of the previous government, were never a happy pair to begin with. Their contrast in character was undeniable: Abhisit the rule-of-law, calm, considerate guy; Suthep the end-justifies-the-means fighter. But they were operating together on the public understanding that the prime minister somehow must be able to keep his deputy in check. Somewhere during the crisis of April-May, 2010, Suthep, together with the top brass, obviously took charge, with or without the prime minister's full consent, and certain aspects of the operations to prevent the red-shirt protest getting violent got badly out of control.

Once again, the Democrat Party, without a clear majority of its own, had to rely on other parties and the Army to muddle through.

On the home front, Abhisit may have tried to expand the popular base of the Democrat Party by going "populist" in a number of ways to fend off the Pheu Thai Party's much more aggressive promises of popular platform. But he also faced criticism for not consulting enough party executives, especially the senior advisers who considered the party's youngest leader's self-confidence bordering at times on hubris and arrogance.

Bhichai Rattakul, one of the former party leaders, made no secret of his attitude towards Abhisit when he told us: "Abhisit is smart, intelligent and honest. But he did not know how to use people. He was surrounded by a small group of people who gave him the wrong kind of information. He did not consult enough with senior advisers of the party. And even when the senior people offered him advice, he didn't seem to heed it."

The Democrat Party is due for a major overhaul if it is to regain sufficient public trust to prove that it isn't "the best opposition party in Thai politics ... and nothing else". The Democrat Party's long-held rules for promotion based of seniority of party executives doesn't fit the new political environment that badly needs new blood, new ideas and innovation that will break out of the current national malaise.

The country badly needs a new political model based on a renewed sense of public service of the new generation and sacrifice by the privileged to help lift the disadvantaged to a new level that will counter the growing chasm between the high and the low, the rich and the poor, the complacent privileged class and the frustrated working class.

The top priority of Abhisit's new term as the Democrat leader is perhaps to launch a full-scale, thorough investigation on why the party has never won the hearts of the people in the Northeast, the poorest electorate. The traditional, simplistic conclusion that vote-buying was the only reason for this state of affairs just isn't good enough any more. The red-shirt phenomenon underlines more serious problems than just money politics.

If the Democrats think they can hold sway in the South for a long time, that could be another serious miscalculation. The margin of victory in many Southern constituencies in the latest election has narrowed to the point that any party with a more convincing platform for the South could defeat the Democrat incumbents without too much difficulty.

Close scrutiny of the overall scheme of things would lead to the inevitable conclusion that the country badly needs a new kind of politics that doesn't rely simply on populist policies that attract votes but can't really solve serious deep-rooted problems of income disparity, corruption and subjugation of the poor and helpless to political dependency.

The new Democrat executive committee elected last week doesn't promise any substantial departure from the old path. If the Democrats can't turn over a new leaf to achieve this new challenge, it will certainly be destined for a prolonged winter of lost hope and betrayal for those who are desperately seeking an alternative to the current brand of politics.

-- The Nation 2011-08-11

[geriatrickid]

And that is why Mr. Abhisit needed to resign and go and get some work experience in the real world. He's been a politican since the age of 26 and never worked outside of the political world. He has never been exposed to a different way of thinking or in getting things done.

[OzMick]

"..... the country badly needs a new kind of politics that doesn't rely simply on populist policies that attract votes but can't really solve serious deep-rooted problems..........."

CORRECT ! The big question is, how do you get that message across to the voters.

[OzMick]

And that is why Mr. Abhisit needed to resign and go and get some work experience in the real world. He's been a politican since the age of 26 and never worked outside of the political world. He has never been exposed to a different way of thinking or in getting things done.

As opposed to the current PM who entered the rough and tumble of business, working her way from advertising salesperson to company president in a little over a month.

[Thai at Heart]

And that is why Mr. Abhisit needed to resign and go and get some work experience in the real world. He's been a politican since the age of 26 and never worked outside of the political world. He has never been exposed to a different way of thinking or in getting things done.

As opposed to the current PM who entered the rough and tumble of business, working her way from advertising salesperson to company president in a little over a month.

And I wouldn't see Abhisit as an entry level candidate anyway. He would probably get a lot of experience in how to finangle government contracts for a fee at board level of a large agri-business. Hardly the most wholesome of experiences should he wish to return to politics afterwards.

[DP25]

If the Democrats think they can hold sway in the South for a long time, that could be another serious miscalculation. The margin of victory in many Southern constituencies in the latest election has narrowed to the point that any party with a more convincing platform for the South could defeat the Democrat incumbents without too much difficulty.

That's not true at all, from looking at the results the Dem's margin was overwhelming in the South. Where it was close, it wasn't because it was close from PTP, it was from other parties. They literally were getting about 10 times as many votes as PTP in many Southern areas.

PTP has a big problem with that though, winning a bunch of seats with way less than 50% due to the strong turnout of Dems and the other smaller parties, even in parts of Isaan. Many of their margins were very, very small and well under 50%. If not for vote split PTP could not have won a majority in the last election. The attempted expansion of minor parties won PTP seats by splitting up their opponents.

[Sydebolle]

A dean of the polticial science faculty at a wellknown Bangkok university once told me more than 25 years ago, that nothing will work in this country unless you close the gap between the countryside and the city. As a youngster at that time I did not quite follow his statement. Well, today I know that you get voted into office in the countryside (possibly with a little financial help as far as the directions are concerned) and you govern in the capital. I also realized that the gap widened. Government is either a Democracy, a Dictatorshop or an Anarchy and every country has the government it deserves.

The interpretation of what is going on here for ages is an individual affair though!

[geriatrickid]

And that is why Mr. Abhisit needed to resign and go and get some work experience in the real world. He's been a politican since the age of 26 and never worked outside of the political world. He has never been exposed to a different way of thinking or in getting things done.

As opposed to the current PM who entered the rough and tumble of business, working her way from advertising salesperson to company president in a little over a month.

At least she had a job. You have no idea what her job entailed do you? And yet you criticize. PM Yingluck has a far better grasp of what work and work related stress than most politicians. If you despise her so much, go over to her office and tell her what you think.

[hammered]

Good article and assessment albeit maybe a little mild and stilted in both criticism of the Dems and opinion on how far they need to change

[h5kaf]

Abhisit and his No 2, Suthep Thaugsuban, the party's secretary-general and the most visible "kingmaker" of the previous government, were never a happy pair to begin with. Their contrast in character was undeniable: Abhisit the rule-of-law, calm, considerate guy; Suthep the end-justifies-the-means fighter. But they were operating together on the public understanding that the prime minister somehow must be able to keep his deputy in check. Somewhere during the crisis of April-May, 2010, Suthep, together with the top brass, obviously took charge, with or without the prime minister's full consent, and certain aspects of the operations to prevent the red-shirt protest getting violent got badly out of control.

This paragraph underlines an important consideration. It seems to me that if the PM (whoever it may be) is well educated and internationally respected, an advocate of the rule-of-law, calm and considerate, then that person will inevitably be viewed with suspicion by the vast majority of the rural population. Care and consideration is not part of the make-up of many Thais, whilst corruption is woven into the very fabric of Thai society. So many of the so called 'Bangkok elite' were educated in the Western cultures and thus are aware of the importance of the many maxims that govern democratic civilised societies. The vast majority without the benefit of this exposure are unaware and thus understandably suspicious.

I see no solution in sight. Education may be the key, but this is an expensive very long term solution if one considers the logistics of teaching, schools, colleges in rural Thailand. Corruption must undoubtedly come under the spotlight - eventually. But to start with the police will mean paying them a decent wage commensurate with their responsibility in society. There will need to be decent pay and benefits so that tea money becomes irrelevant; also decent training so they can be trusted in society. These are but two of many problems facing any government.

I have tried to be constructive in my comments but the sheer complexity and impossibility of the task in the near future, probably paints my comments with a a dark depressive hue. I wish the new PM all the luck in the world.

[JurgenG]

A very good editorial.

The problem and its roots are clearly identified, solution are offered.

From there you can start building a road map to a victory at the next election with a reasonable chance of success.

If I were the democrats, I would offer a job to the person who wrote this article.

But here we have the traditional democrats supporters

"..... the country badly needs a new kind of politics that doesn't rely simply on populist policies that attract votes but can't really solve serious deep-rooted problems..........."

CORRECT ! The big question is, how do you get that message across to the voters.

If the Democrats think they can hold sway in the South for a long time, that could be another serious miscalculation. The margin of victory in many Southern constituencies in the latest election has narrowed to the point that any party with a more convincing platform for the South could defeat the Democrat incumbents without too much difficulty.

That's not true at all, from looking at the results the Dem's margin was overwhelming in the South. Where it was close, it wasn't because it was close from PTP, it was from other parties. They literally were getting about 10 times as many votes as PTP in many Southern areas.

PTP has a big problem with that though, winning a bunch of seats with way less than 50% due to the strong turnout of Dems and the other smaller parties, even in parts of Isaan. Many of their margins were very, very small and well under 50%. If not for vote split PTP could not have won a majority in the last election. The attempted expansion of minor parties won PTP seats by splitting up their opponents.

As usual in total denial of the reality.

We are right, the voters are wrong.

The PTP has a big problem ? ... come one, they won, you lost, how can they be the one with the big problem ????

It's time for the democrats to grow up and face their responsibilities. Or we better get used to the Shinawatra family because it's not with this kind of attitude that the democrats will win an election any time soon

Edited August 11, 2011 by JurgenG

[DP25]

As usual in total denial of the reality.

We are right, the voters are wrong.

The PTP has a big problem ? ... come one, they won, you lost, how can they be the one with the big problem ????

It's time for the democrats to grow up and face their responsibilities. Or we better get used to the Shinawatra family because it's not with this kind of attitude that the democrats will win an election any time soon

Maybe you should try reading the quote I was responding too. The article said the democrats were in trouble with a tenuous grip on the south due to close results, which is not the case, they had a huge margin of victory and only lost seats to minor parties, PTP was smashed in almost every district. PTP victory on many of their seats was very small, and could easily have gone to other parties if the vote wasn't split so much, they were quite fortunate to win over 50% of the seats. This can be trouble for them if they don't fulfill their election promises, or if other parties stop running against each other in certain districts. The Democrats have problems but the South flipping to their opponents isn't one of them.

[OzMick]

A very good editorial.

The problem and its roots are clearly identified, solution are offered.

From there you can start building a road map to a victory at the next election with a reasonable chance of success.

If I were the democrats, I would offer a job to the person who wrote this article.

But here we have the traditional democrats supporters

"..... the country badly needs a new kind of politics that doesn't rely simply on populist policies that attract votes but can't really solve serious deep-rooted problems..........."

CORRECT ! The big question is, how do you get that message across to the voters.

If the Democrats think they can hold sway in the South for a long time, that could be another serious miscalculation. The margin of victory in many Southern constituencies in the latest election has narrowed to the point that any party with a more convincing platform for the South could defeat the Democrat incumbents without too much difficulty.

That's not true at all, from looking at the results the Dem's margin was overwhelming in the South. Where it was close, it wasn't because it was close from PTP, it was from other parties. They literally were getting about 10 times as many votes as PTP in many Southern areas.

PTP has a big problem with that though, winning a bunch of seats with way less than 50% due to the strong turnout of Dems and the other smaller parties, even in parts of Isaan. Many of their margins were very, very small and well under 50%. If not for vote split PTP could not have won a majority in the last election. The attempted expansion of minor parties won PTP seats by splitting up their opponents.

As usual in total denial of the reality.

We are right, the voters are wrong.

The PTP has a big problem ? ... come one, they won, you lost, how can they be the one with the big problem ????

It's time for the democrats to grow up and face their responsibilities. Or we better get used to the Shinawatra family because it's not with this kind of attitude that the democrats will win an election any time soon

Jug, do you really have a serious problem with statement? Based on the fact that PTP only offered populist policies, but they must be good because they won? And you can't see that this country has deep-seated problems that will require UNPOPULAR policies to solve? If that is the case, welcome to Thailand, you will fit in very well. In Isaan anyway.

[OzMick]

And that is why Mr. Abhisit needed to resign and go and get some work experience in the real world. He's been a politican since the age of 26 and never worked outside of the political world. He has never been exposed to a different way of thinking or in getting things done.

As opposed to the current PM who entered the rough and tumble of business, working her way from advertising salesperson to company president in a little over a month.

At least she had a job. You have no idea what her job entailed do you? And yet you criticize. PM Yingluck has a far better grasp of what work and work related stress than most politicians. If you despise her so much, go over to her office and tell her what you think.

I know her ONLY work, until now, was at family companies where sycophancy was the order of the day if you want to keep your job. Why would I despise a perjurer and fraudster - even if I did I couldn't tell her because she is so Hi-So that I couldn't even get a whiff of her, as your red mate so nicely put it.

Do you really think that her prior position had more work-related stress than Abhisit and co were facing May last year? Has terminal sycophancy sent you blind?

But she has a mandate, and is welcome to her new job. May she experience interesting times!

Edited August 11, 2011 by OzMick

[RedNIvar]

If the Democrats think they can hold sway in the South for a long time, that could be another serious miscalculation. The margin of victory in many Southern constituencies in the latest election has narrowed to the point that any party with a more convincing platform for the South could defeat the Democrat incumbents without too much difficulty.

That's not true at all, from looking at the results the Dem's margin was overwhelming in the South. Where it was close, it wasn't because it was close from PTP, it was from other parties. They literally were getting about 10 times as many votes as PTP in many Southern areas.

PTP has a big problem with that though, winning a bunch of seats with way less than 50% due to the strong turnout of Dems and the other smaller parties, even in parts of Isaan. Many of their margins were very, very small and well under 50%. If not for vote split PTP could not have won a majority in the last election. The attempted expansion of minor parties won PTP seats by splitting up their opponents.

PTP was not mentioned. You made an assumption and kept going with with it. This is not a PTP thread.