Thaksin Holding Thailand Hostage: Abhisit

[MAJIC]

Here we go again, the same old arguments from both sides. the fact is Abhisit is a useless milksop and Thaksin is a corrupt egomaniac. Take your choice, ignore the fact that it is out of your hands, you don't even get to vote, you are just a noisy spectator. The Thais have their own way of doing things, it's not democratic, never has been. The poor country folk may be uneducated but they are not stupid, they understand corruption, they are part of it, they see through Abhisit's pretty face and nice speeches, just as they understand Thaksin's ego and corruption. This is not Europe or America or Australia, this is Asia where most countries are ruled by strong egomaniacs, from China to Cambodia. If I had to choose between a useless milksop and a corrupt egomaniac, I would chose the corrupt maniac every time, and it would seem that most Thais feel the same.

Interesting to see, your post and supporters are not claiming any moral high ground,just good old fashioned greed! the rights and wrongs of it,do not seem to be of any concern. Merely a position of strength is all important, sorry,but for most genuine people,it's the Politics of the Lunatic Asylum.

I will back the "Milksop",at least they can be trusted not to knife you in the back,when they don't get their own way.

Edited April 12, 2012 by MAJIC

[rubl]

You lost me, dear chap. You put some words together to form a sentence, but it neither reflects what k. Abhisit, nor what I said.

The current government is reasonably legitimate with some doubt in how far a criminal on the run can be allowed to control what that government does. K. Abhist said k. Thaksin is holding the country hostage, seems a reasonable description.

I see let's get this right:

This criminal is holding the country to ransom because......

His crime was:

oh yes his wife bought some land at auction. Nothing wrong with that except that her husband was the prime minister.

His CRIME:

being married to his wife.

being the prime minister.

Further he sold his company and as a consequence of running a successful financial regime he was able to :

sell his shareholding (aquired before he became prime minister since he started said company)

at a profit of 117%.

(Although the Thai SET had risen by 133% in the same period he was condemned and had 1 billion dollars deducted from his frozen accounts).

Part and parcel of this fine was the fact that when prime minister he had reduced the duty payable to CAT and TOT(the National carriers)

set at 25% for mobile phone bills paid monthly in arrears to 20% for the new Pay as you go rates that enabled the poor to own phones.

Increased revenues followed substantially and additionally his government demanded that the fees were paid diredtly to government as excise duty and the part privatised TOT and CAT received in return due owed to them from the government as there was a problem with leakage of funds owed to government.

This reply reminds me of the saying about the fool and the wise men.

k. Thaksin's crime (or the only case which could proceed because he was still here) is none of what you write. He's not convicted because his wife bought some land, he's not convicted because he was married to the wife (at that time), he was not convicted because he was the PM. He was convicted because he had violated a conflict-of-interest law while in office and was sentenced to two years in prison.

The rest of the post is equally incorrect, but I'm not going to bother with finding all the details to correct a post which might have taken a foolmember two minites to write down.

Have fun and try a bit harder to stick to the truth.

Edited April 12, 2012 by rubl

[overherebc]

Is it just me? or has any other Members,noticed an abundance of novices,with no idea of Thai Politics,and spouting nonsense,on this and other threads at the moment?

Hmm, quite strange,the depth of feeling they put into their political posts!

+1

Just maybe there are many who realise that spouting forth on politics is just a complete waste of effort and time, I have a lot more important things to worry about.

However I do some times have a wee giggle at some of the posts.

If you can't change it then ignore it and do something more benificial or interesting to yourself.

Sawadee Pee Mai

[scorecard]

Look at the large picture in retrospect,

Thakskin was good for Thailand, the coup was not good for Thailand,

I think there is some truth here. Most Thais love him so that should be enough. Majority rules.

Yeh,that's what Adolp said

"Adolp" never said anything of the sort, nor did "Adolp" ever win a majority in an open election.

Democracy is precisely that, a majority rule. Check other countries and you won't find any other minority ruled democracy except maybe Thailand where elected gov'ts keep getting sidelined.

............. where bought election 'victories' keep geting sidelined is probably more truthful.

[visionchaser45]

Look at the large picture in retrospect,

Thakskin was good for Thailand, the coup was not good for Thailand,

Or why not look at the large picture without the tinted glasses.

If Thaksin had been good there wouldn't have been a coup.

Nonsense. The coup had to do with much more than Thaksin. He was the excuse...not the reason.

[Jingthing]

Look at the large picture in retrospect,

Thakskin was good for Thailand, the coup was not good for Thailand,

Or why not look at the large picture without the tinted glasses.

If Thaksin had been good there wouldn't have been a coup.

Nonsense. The coup had to do with much more than Thaksin. He was the excuse...not the reason.

What do YOU think the reason was, then?

[visionchaser45]

Abhisit is a bigger criminal than Thaksin ever was. Who cares what he says? He is nothing more than a smug elitist liar.

You are just so wrong.

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. Opinions are neither right nor wrong; they are simply shared or not shared.

[Thai at Heart]

Look at the large picture in retrospect,

Thakskin was good for Thailand, the coup was not good for Thailand,

Or why not look at the large picture without the tinted glasses.

If Thaksin had been good there wouldn't have been a coup.

Nonsense. The coup had to do with much more than Thaksin. He was the excuse...not the reason.

Thaksin was about to open up the banking, insurance and agriculture sectors to foreign investment. He got the thin end of the wedge post 97 when the Dems caved to the IMF and allowed foreign companies into telecoms, and he was about to give those industries (and their none too well connected players) the biggest shake up of their lives. How much does it take to buy a coup "in the national interest"? A lot less than if you had 30 massive multinationals eating your business I am sure.

[GentlemanJim]

Abhisit is a bigger criminal than Thaksin ever was. Who cares what he says? He is nothing more than a smug elitist liar.

You are just so wrong.

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. Opinions are neither right nor wrong; they are simply shared or not shared.

So explain why then? Why is KhunNene wrong for calling you wrong?

[visionchaser45]

Here we go again, the same old arguments from both sides. the fact is Abhisit is a useless milksop and Thaksin is a corrupt egomaniac. Take your choice, ignore the fact that it is out of your hands, you don't even get to vote, you are just a noisy spectator. The Thais have their own way of doing things, it's not democratic, never has been. The poor country folk may be uneducated but they are not stupid, they understand corruption, they are part of it, they see through Abhisit's pretty face and nice speeches, just as they understand Thaksin's ego and corruption. This is not Europe or America or Australia, this is Asia where most countries are ruled by strong egomaniacs, from China to Cambodia. If I had to choose between a useless milksop and a corrupt egomaniac, I would chose the corrupt maniac every time, and it would seem that most Thais feel the same.

A red-shirt wife? From Udorn or Khon Kaen or Nonkhai? Time will heal your opinion!

Great, you don't agree with someone so you go after his family. What a class act.

[MAJIC]

10 green bottles and if one green bottle should accidently fall there'll be:

"Abhisit said all political troubles had Thaksin as the root cause because society had to sustain the collateral damage stemmed from efforts to solve Thaksin's legal wrangling."

"Thaksin regime?" Give me a break.

In the courts and concerning not the electorate right mate.

Cake and eat it or cake box and eat cake box and eat it (if it ever existed).

Only the Nation there to go on for that story like the fake story about the defects at Swampy airport also highlighted by the Nation.

Thaksin's lawyers banged up for 6 months without charge. (Never charged).

and then struck off by lawyers council of thailand (affiliated to PAD).

1% failure rate measured at airport in fact.

British Airways (world's largest airline, thought airport was very good).

Airport opening postponed for 1 year until after coup.

Second runway due to have been opened by now.

This is their way.

All I want to say is this to anyone out there bewildered by what you read here that 2 years ago:

I read that there was a redshirt gathering to occur in Silom and posters on here trolled and scoffed that redshirts would all be drunk and unpopular.causing trouble.

Living there as I did in the afluent part of town that it is I went to visit and saw a large number of people, not one beer can amongst about 6-700 people listening intently to public speeches and making way for Pat pong tourists going about their business.

And I suppose you didn't see any violence,and Bangkok Burning,or Red Shirts holding the Country to Ransom,as Thaksin is doing now?

[rubl]

I think there is some truth here. Most Thais love him so that should be enough. Majority rules.

Yeh,that's what Adolp said

"Adolp" never said anything of the sort, nor did "Adolp" ever win a majority in an open election.

Democracy is precisely that, a majority rule. Check other countries and you won't find any other minority ruled democracy except maybe Thailand where elected gov'ts keep getting sidelined.

A bit off topic, but to put some in the correct historical perspective:

1. In the last 'free' elections, 6 March 1933, the NSDAP's share of the vote increased to 43.9%, and the party acquired the largest number of seats in parliament. However, Hitler's party failed to secure an absolute majority, necessitating another coalition with the DNVP.

2. Every once in a while European countries will see a government with a minority in parliament. This may be when a coalition partner withdraws or even when there's an agreement within political parties to 'condone' a minority government. This mostly doesn't last long, but may cover a period before new elections are called.

Edited April 12, 2012 by rubl

[visionchaser45]

Is it just me? or has any other Members,noticed an abundance of novices,with no idea of Thai Politics,and spouting nonsense,on this and other threads at the moment?

Hmm, quite strange,the depth of feeling they put into their political posts!

Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand. You're not one of those "I know more about Thailand than you because I've been a Pattaya punter for 15 years" types are you?

[visionchaser45]

Abhisit is a bigger criminal than Thaksin ever was. Who cares what he says? He is nothing more than a smug elitist liar.

You are just so wrong.

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. Opinions are neither right nor wrong; they are simply shared or not shared.

So explain why then? Why is KhunNene wrong for calling you wrong?

Because it is an opinion, which can be neither right nor wrong. One should reply with, "I disagree because..." This is the way of civilized discourse.

[rubl]

Is it just me? or has any other Members,noticed an abundance of novices,with no idea of Thai Politics,and spouting nonsense,on this and other threads at the moment?

Hmm, quite strange,the depth of feeling they put into their political posts!

Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand. You're not one of those "I know more about Thailand than you because I've been a Pattaya punter for 15 years" types are you?

Welcome, novice member. You're absolutely correct in saying "Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand."

Mind you with some novice posters (present company excluded of course) I tend to wonder which member has passed away recently and been re-incarnated.

With two post I'm willing to consider you neutral, open-minded, interested in truthful discussions.

Have fun and enjoy the show

edit: add: 13 posts already?

Edited April 12, 2012 by rubl

[rubl]

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. Opinions are neither right nor wrong; they are simply shared or not shared.

So explain why then? Why is KhunNene wrong for calling you wrong?

Because it is an opinion, which can be neither right nor wrong. One should reply with, "I disagree because..." This is the way of civilized discourse.

Some opinions don't seem to be based on facts, or even possible truths. That tends to p_ss off some other posters. Your simple sentence "Abhisit is a bigger criminal than Thaksin ever was. Who cares what he says? He is nothing more than a smug elitist liar." provokes that type of replies.

[Thai at Heart]

Is it just me? or has any other Members,noticed an abundance of novices,with no idea of Thai Politics,and spouting nonsense,on this and other threads at the moment?

Hmm, quite strange,the depth of feeling they put into their political posts!

Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand. You're not one of those "I know more about Thailand than you because I've been a Pattaya punter for 15 years" types are you?

Welcome, novice member. You're absolutely correct in saying "Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand."

Mind you with some novice posters (present company excluded of course) I tend to wonder which member has passed away recently and been re-incarnated.

With two post I'm willing to consider you neutral, open-minded, interested in truthful discussions.

Have fun and enjoy the show

edit: add: 13 posts already?

Interesting proposition, because there is another very verbose new member who never fails to pop up on the boards these days. I say bring on the debate, it isn't as though the table was only laid for a private dinner.

[hellodolly]

Looks like things will heat up now. Every one with IQ above room temperature knows it.

Now it is being brought right out into the open,

Come on, people with IQ above room temperature should know it since 2007-2009 latest.....

Just most don't care......

And when you look what Abhisit did when he was in power, he is also at that mentioned IQ.

It is complete known where the money comes from, how it is distributed. Just by stick to existing money laundry laws and busting corrupt officials (which are also known since years) much of the problems would have been solved by now. PAD wouldn't have called for No-Vote. Democrats would have won some more seats. By enforcing existing laws against vote buying PTP would have removed half of their MPs immediately.

So Abhisit is part of the problem, not the solution

I don't agree. Go more in-depth and you will see

His is a typical answer from people who just see results.

If they ever bothered to find out what Abhist had to overcome they would be amazed that he got any thing done.

He was good for a laugh with this statement.

"Just by stick to existing money laundry laws and busting corrupt officials (which are also known since years) much of the problems would have been solved by now."

He likes to pretend that every thing was OK prior to Abhist it was all his fault. As usual he forgets that 40 of Abhist supporters were Thaksin trained and any steps to stop corruption would have seen them withdrawing their support.

[hellodolly]

Thaksin is holding Thailand hostage ?

yeah, right... First of all, how is Thailand being held hostage? A ludicrous statement itself.

Then, this man dares to talk about white-washing when he and Suthep have dodged all responsibility for 2009/2010. This is the man who promised to bring Thailand together at the end of 2008 and then created the Blue Shirts as an "anonymous counter-protest group" from the military and PAD guards. He and Suthep calling protestors "terrorists" before the first one gathered in BKK. This from the man who before becoming PM said such brave things as

For the people, just one person or a hundred thousand, to come out to make demands of the government is not against the principles of democracy, especially when there are suspicions that the administration of the country has violated the law and the rights of the people, or is corrupt. In developed countries, these issues do not need to be dealt with by the law, but by a political sense of responsibility.

For all that has happened, the PM cannot deny his responsibility, either by negligence or intention.

What is even worse than laying the blame on the authorities is vilifying the people.

I have never thought that we would have a state which has the people killed and seriously injured, and then accuses the people of the crimes. This is unacceptable.

If he has any integrity at all, he checks it at his own front door before leaving for work in the morning.

Let's see him stand trial before he talks about the white-washing of others.

The reason they are not talking about their successful campaign against terrorists is because they are humble men.

Please tell me you were joking when you asked how Thaksin was holding Thailand hostage,

[rubl]

Is it just me? or has any other Members,noticed an abundance of novices,with no idea of Thai Politics,and spouting nonsense,on this and other threads at the moment?

Hmm, quite strange,the depth of feeling they put into their political posts!

Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand. You're not one of those "I know more about Thailand than you because I've been a Pattaya punter for 15 years" types are you?

Welcome, novice member. You're absolutely correct in saying "Simply because one is a novice user on these forums, one cannot infer that to mean that he/she is a novice to Thailand."

Mind you with some novice posters (present company excluded of course) I tend to wonder which member has passed away recently and been re-incarnated.

With two post I'm willing to consider you neutral, open-minded, interested in truthful discussions.

Have fun and enjoy the show

edit: add: 13 posts already?

Interesting proposition, because there is another very verbose new member who never fails to pop up on the boards these days. I say bring on the debate, it isn't as though the table was only laid for a private dinner.

I wrote "neutral, open-minded, interested in truthful discussions", although I should skip the 'neutral', that''s not necessary.

[Thai at Heart]

Looks like things will heat up now. Every one with IQ above room temperature knows it.

Now it is being brought right out into the open,

Come on, people with IQ above room temperature should know it since 2007-2009 latest.....

Just most don't care......

And when you look what Abhisit did when he was in power, he is also at that mentioned IQ.

It is complete known where the money comes from, how it is distributed. Just by stick to existing money laundry laws and busting corrupt officials (which are also known since years) much of the problems would have been solved by now. PAD wouldn't have called for No-Vote. Democrats would have won some more seats. By enforcing existing laws against vote buying PTP would have removed half of their MPs immediately.

So Abhisit is part of the problem, not the solution

I don't agree. Go more in-depth and you will see

His is a typical answer from people who just see results.

If they ever bothered to find out what Abhist had to overcome they would be amazed that he got any thing done.

He was good for a laugh with this statement.

"Just by stick to existing money laundry laws and busting corrupt officials (which are also known since years) much of the problems would have been solved by now."

He likes to pretend that every thing was OK prior to Abhist it was all his fault. As usual he forgets that 40 of Abhist supporters were Thaksin trained and any steps to stop corruption would have seen them withdrawing their support.

Dolly, you have to understand that they are all connected one way or another to various parts of the Thai economy.

Dems in, a little push on agriculture pricing, tiny touch with ATM fees, Thaksin/Yingluck in, guaranteed rice prices, 300 baht a day, TrueMove bitching about DTAC. They are taking care of where the interests of their backers lie, it is as pure and simple as that.

You think CP pays Abhisits old mans pension for nothing, or Korn declines to really mess with the banks in the interest of the country, or Yingluck comes up with the soft loans for housing (owning SC Asset?)

Big business in this country is Yellow or Red, not on political lines but cashflow.

[heiwa]

As long as Thai politicians/government employees (hospital drug dealers) bank accounts and those of their friends and family and associates can not be monitored and judges can be bought Thailand will always be held to ransom for by Thaksin and any elite - whether that be the Red or Yellow elite. Just a difference in colour - not rank - and the rank of privilege$$$. Thai rak Thai - myth. Every pig first to the troth gets the lions share of the pizza. That's the culture around here. They could also start banning those secret meetings (or not so secret) in hotels with billionaire businessmen. This red revolution, although I feel the supporters hearts were in the right place, as we all probably know is a lost cause. It's a case of who-ever is new will be the clone of Taksin - a red clone or a yellow clone - it don't make any difference.

Edited April 12, 2012 by heiwa

[hellodolly]

Look at the large picture in retrospect,

Thakskin was good for Thailand, the coup was not good for Thailand,

I think there is some truth here. Most Thais love him so that should be enough. Majority rules.

Yeh,that's what Adolp said

"Adolp" never said anything of the sort, nor did "Adolp" ever win a majority in an open election.

Democracy is precisely that, a majority rule. Check other countries and you won't find any other minority ruled democracy except maybe Thailand where elected gov'ts keep getting sidelined.

The states had Bush with a minority.

But then again they don't claim to be a democracy they claim to be a Republic.

Thailand is ruled by a minority Government they only got 48% of the vote.

Where I went to school in the west that was called a minority.

[Thai at Heart]

I wrote "neutral, open-minded, interested in truthful discussions", although I should skip the 'neutral', that''s not necessary.

What is the point in being completely neutral? If by neutral you mean pointing out how screwed up the system is in general, I go for that position. Red/Yellow/Dem/PTP. When the situation is so illogical or fraught in Thailand, believe that money, face and position is the answer.

However, pure opinion never becomes fact. I fortunately have a job where I tend to hear and see a little bit of what is going on, so that adds a little spice to my opinion.

[hellodolly]

Then, this man dares to talk about white-washing when he and Suthep have dodged all responsibility for 2009/2010.

This week mister Abhisit proposed himself and Suthep together with Thaksin to be abstained from any amnesty law , or reconciliation law as you wish. Maybe you missed it?

Let's see the two of them give up their amnesty after they have been investigated, tried and found guilty.

Are you by any chance related to Calgaryll?

You think along the same lines as him.

What would the punishment be for stopping a terrorist organization that stooped low enough to invade hospitals?

[MaiChai]

Whichever way you look at it you cannot get away from the fact that when he was thrown out he had been chosen by the electorate time after time,and was in all probability about to be chosen again. That is why they moved when they did.

You also cannot avoid the fact that every time the Thai electorate has been asked for their opinion since the coup, they have elected Thaksins proxy's in the full knowledge of what/who they represent.

I know that I keep saying this, and am probably regarded as a redshirt moron or worse, but it does need to be said every time we go into collective Thaksin / Yingluk / Pheu Thai slagging off mode!

It is the elephant in the corner of the room. It will not go away.

Thats why in America you cannot be president more than twice... Thailand is an example of how the whole system can be corrupted by someone with alot of money. Thankfully there are Thais who see through this and don't want Taksin and his family constantly in power. Constantly in power means they get even more wealthy and then it becomes impossible to democratically elect a decent government. Democratic means NOT bought votes.

Edited April 12, 2012 by MaiChai

[walterego]

This is laughable. I am a farang... I think many forget that.

How many of you have the power to vote in Thailand?... perhaps... perhaps a handful at best.

How many of us are in such a position of power that may influence Thai politics?... Given there are some... but they are very few indeed.

I also have my opinion but causing a biased (and often but not always uninformed) raucus is just a waste of every ones time.

Does anyone know the 'Serenity Prayer' ?

Lord grant me the things to accept the things I cannot change,

The power to change the things I can,

and the wisdom to know the difference.

Im not suggesting you sit on your hands to acheive whatever ends your beliefs lead you... however for the most of us ... just wear the outcomes ... this is not the west.

[Thai at Heart]

Whichever way you look at it you cannot get away from the fact that when he was thrown out he had been chosen by the electorate time after time,and was in all probability about to be chosen again. That is why they moved when they did.

You also cannot avoid the fact that every time the Thai electorate has been asked for their opinion since the coup, they have elected Thaksins proxy's in the full knowledge of what/who they represent.

I know that I keep saying this, and am probably regarded as a redshirt moron or worse, but it does need to be said every time we go into collective Thaksin / Yingluk / Pheu Thai slagging off mode!

It is the elephant in the corner of the room. It will not go away.

Thats why in America you cannot be president more than twice... Thailand is an example of how the whole system can be corrupted by someone with alot of money. Thankfully there are Thais who see through this and don't want Taksin and his family constantly in power. Constantly in power means they get even more wealthy and then it becomes impossible to democratically elect a decent government. Democratic means NOT bought votes.

Thailand is the ultimate example of an anointed political system that values the wealth of company owners and land owners over the people. The Democrat party after 80 years, has virtually no presence in half of the country. The similarities to China pre-Cultural Revolution are so obvious that I can't believe people can see them. A fractured autocracy, with an overarching untouchable judiciary, constant restrictions on freedom of press and an overwhelming desire for conformity.

The moment a politician realised that he could garner the votes of the little guy, he cleaned up, and this got the attention of the "old" money very very fast. Meanwhile the rice and sugar barons in the North East drive away in their Mercs pleading poverty.

Of course it isn't lost on anyone with one eye to realise who has the wealth in the country, and that is why, if this situation doesn't get sorted out very fast, bad times will inevitably come. Lets hope it doesn't get as bad as Indonesia 15 years ago.

What is going on here is a Thai/Chinese business war with the man on 178 (rising to 300 in the near future) baht a day in the middle.

Edited April 12, 2012 by Thai at Heart

[heiwa]

business turf war in a nutshell - that about sums it up. But on a far grander scale than how they vie for the stalls outside the 711s all over Thailand. The Reds or Yellows are not mere amateurs. Yep, the 300 baht wage promise is like the election bribe to secure the turf. Only the 300 baht offer is legal. The Yellows will offer 400 baht at the next election. Nice to be able to pin-point a structure of a society and how it works. Sounds scary and ominous. Let's hope Thailand does not disintergrate in a mad lustful greed punch up for the business turf (well that's already happened - with the 100 odd dead) And its far from over. Have seen this get very nasty in Klong Toey when they moved the turf holders out - guys in black masks visited the stall holders and what they did wasn't pretty. I guess the Red and Yellows is just the alleged hi so civilised way of doing the same thing.

[tlansford]

I think there is some truth here. Most Thais love him so that should be enough. Majority rules.

Yeh,that's what Adolp said

"Adolp" never said anything of the sort, nor did "Adolp" ever win a majority in an open election.

Democracy is precisely that, a majority rule. Check other countries and you won't find any other minority ruled democracy except maybe Thailand where elected gov'ts keep getting sidelined.

A bit off topic, but to put some in the correct historical perspective:

1. In the last 'free' elections, 6 March 1933, the NSDAP's share of the vote increased to 43.9%, and the party acquired the largest number of seats in parliament. However, Hitler's party failed to secure an absolute majority, necessitating another coalition with the DNVP.

2. Every once in a while European countries will see a government with a minority in parliament. This may be when a coalition partner withdraws or even when there's an agreement within political parties to 'condone' a minority government. This mostly doesn't last long, but may cover a period before new elections are called.

what you leave out is that Hitler was never, never elected chancellor. He was appointed to that position through backroom deals. You also leave out that 1932 were the last elections that had any semblance to "free" and the nazi's had 33 % of the vote and could not form a government.

Finally, this somewhat off-topic tangent hardly means that democracy is not majority rule.