Populist Policies Boomerang On Yingluck Govt

[nurofiend]

Populist promises have almost always been the springboard for dictatorships. Part of the problem is the PTP policies are only window-dressing & nobody actually knows what their long-term agenda and policies are.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great. everything will be okay when Thaksin gets back, or maybe in the time of his son's rule, or his grandson, great-grandson.

PTP run the country on a skeleton-crew basis, ticking only the mandatory boxes and avoiding everything else. IMO their energies are devoted behind the scenes to installing a permanent familial oligarchy.

I would guess the next step will be to give all poor people a free colour TV, & by coincidence people will be watching red-government propaganda on the free TVs along with brain-meltingly bad soap operas and game shows. That wouldn't be so bad if the Govt actually made people's lives better (as promised).

The mistakes made pre-flood & post-flood which were shockingly inept, were brushed aside by the regime as unimportant, but the flood exposed the government-level complete lack of robust quick-thinking which are the trademarks of competent leadership. It also raised the question of what they consider important. Even the request to have a state of emergency during the worst floods for over 50 years, was rebuffed by Yingluck along partisan and control-freak lines.

All the meaningful pre-election promises by PTP have failed to appear even in start-up phase, except for a few stragglers that emerged blinking into the light & feeling all alone.

People in the opposition are very concerned that the country they love is being hijacked, and in the worst case scenario the groundwork for a dynastic oligarchy is being laid-out. The feeling among many international observers is that the worst is yet to come & Thai peoples future is one of being industrially-fleeced & exploited & deceived.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great.

you could say this about a lot of politicial parties world wide, you could say it about obama, cameron (who are both using that kind of rhetoric in the current economic climate)... it's certainly not confined to dictatorships.

what's 'dictatorship' about the current government?

Let's not compare the leaders of two great countries with a populist moron. There is a difference between populist policies and popular policies. No matter what the state of politics is back home, it's certainly above the gutter level nonsense going on here!

i wasn't, i was showing that what he said doesn't just describe a dictatorship.

[nurofiend]

That is the point

Thaksin dictates to PTP,

they win partly from his cult of personality

partly from populist promises tied to his cult of personality.

He is having government ministers coming to him for talks,

and giving him public blessings and bowing the knee in fealty,

He is 'advisor' to the government,

and control of the Shin clan members in the government.

speaks in it's name on foreign countries while just maintaining the charade of not doing so.

All this while he is still officially on the run from the justice system.

The last part of Thailands governance he has NOT been able to buy control of.

Not that he hasn't tried several times/

Thaksin Speaks PTP Does: He Dictates and they jump and ask;

Is that high enough master?'

This is a dictatorship, the defacto Dictator just is too worried about

being assassinated to come back right now, but he will.

It seems the inmates are already running the asylum.

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

[indyuk]

Governments usually execute the policies of their mandate during the course of their full term of office. For Abhisit to continuously snipe at our democratically elected government is counter productive. Such childish sniping is disturbing to the electorate most of which has trust and respect for their Prime Minister. Her (Yingluck) determination to improve the lives of the majority of the Thai people is recognized at home and abroad by politicians that understand the complexity and enormity of the task that she has undertaken with good will and tenacity.

[letitbe]

you could say this about a lot of politicial parties world wide, you could say it about obama, cameron (who are both using that kind of rhetoric in the current economic climate)... it's certainly not confined to dictatorships.

what's 'dictatorship' about the current government?

I don't hold up Cameron or Obama as poster-boys for good governance. But if they had recieved a prison term of two years from the highest court in the land for financial crimes while in office, they would have been jailed & no longer working in politics & would have a hard time getting normal jobs too. If their elder brother was an on-the-run fugitive, there would be an obvious "conflict of interest" and so they would not be allowed to hold aministrative control.

Currently as you point out the govt here is not a dictatorship. This Govt run by a family as an oligarchy which is prey to the same dangers as a one-man show. If Thaksin returns, his multiple crimes are literally forgiven & the custodial sentence handed down on him is ignored entirely, the Govt becomes a self-regulating & legally-unaccountable family business. This is no different to dictatorship except it is in plural. I was pointing out that this is a possible risk.

My point was really that democratic policies should be formed based on reform & repair agendas, not on eye-candy & untruths & populism ie. insincere window-dressing to lure customers into the shop. And those genuine policies should be tirelessly & transparently worked-through for the interests of the voters. This has not happened under Yingluck. It is desireable for politicians to have had careers & activities outside politics and have agendas of reform based on those facets of society, be that medicine, transport, agriculture etc. PTP doesn't bring those reform agendas, the party is just a void waiting to be filled.

I don't hold up Cameron or Obama as poster-boys for good governance

i don't either, they're just well known.

re about thaksin - i agree that would be a risk but i genuinely don't think their agenda is as sinister as some people believe, do they want to make a lot of money.. oh most definitely.

would they actually act as dictators do and committ atrocities on their people, no i don't think so personally.

again i think your point in the last paragraph could be blanketed on the failings of democratic systems and the insincerity of politicians worldwide tbf.

dictators never do the dirty work that is left to their thugs and anyone who thinks Taksins red thugs arent quite capable of acting just like Mugabwie, Hitlers, and rest is naive to say least. Taksin does not care as long as he gets to be totally in control. Poor Thailand.

[heiwa]

Governments usually execute the policies of their mandate during the course of their full term of office. For Abhisit to continuously snipe at our democratically elected government is counter productive. Such childish sniping is disturbing to the electorate most of which has trust and respect for their Prime Minister. Her (Yingluck) determination to improve the lives of the majority of the Thai people is recognized at home and abroad by politicians that understand the complexity and enormity of the task that she has undertaken with good will and tenacity.

the complexity and enormity of the task - this is true. execute the policies - as long as they stop executing people

[whybother]

Governments usually execute the policies of their mandate during the course of their full term of office. For Abhisit to continuously snipe at our democratically elected government is counter productive. Such childish sniping is disturbing to the electorate most of which has trust and respect for their Prime Minister. Her (Yingluck) determination to improve the lives of the majority of the Thai people is recognized at home and abroad by politicians that understand the complexity and enormity of the task that she has undertaken with good will and tenacity.

[heiwa]

Governments usually execute the policies of their mandate during the course of their full term of office. For Abhisit to continuously snipe at our democratically elected government is counter productive. Such childish sniping is disturbing to the electorate most of which has trust and respect for their Prime Minister. Her (Yingluck) determination to improve the lives of the majority of the Thai people is recognized at home and abroad by politicians that understand the complexity and enormity of the task that she has undertaken with good will and tenacity.

Sir In the west they call that checks and balances. Why have prices risen so rapidly. You speak so eloquently but high prices of food does not put food in the baby's mouth. Where is your humanity? Edited April 19, 2012 by heiwa

[indyuk]

Thank you, Jerry, but re-posted to comply with thaivisa rules on posting news articles:

Thai rice exports drop, surge in Vietnamese shipment

BANGKOK: Thai rice exports have halved from a year ago due to unrealistically lofty prices caused by government intervention, and prices are likely to stay high until the end of the second quarter which will cause exports to slump, according to traders.

From January to April 17, Thailand exported 1.8 million tonnes, down 47% from the same period of last year, when it sold 3.4 million tonnes.

“That was definitely due to government intervention that pegged Thai prices at uncompetitively high levels,” said Chookiat Ophaswongse, an honorary president of the Thai Rice Exporters Association.

Continues:

http://biz.thestar.c...84&sec=business

Reuters - April 19, 2012

.

I understand your anxiety in respect to falling export volumes exacted by Thailand's rice industry. However your analysis is incomplete. Exports were encouraging last year because we were selling into a seller's market. This year the World rice market is a buyers market with the consequential downward thrust on prices. This fact is exacerbated by Thailand's woefully poor productivity at rice growing. This productivity problem has needed attention for many years . Meanwhile paddy rice productivity has been soaring in some other rice growing nations, giving them the pricing flexibility to squeeze Thailand's margins to the point that she (Thailand) has had to surrender market share. The warning signs of impending calamity in Thailand's rice market were clear for all to see last year when we withheld rice from the market in order to reinforce our store in order to be able meet demand for rice at home. In other words when the market lies in the palm of our hand even at our high prices we cannot meet the challenge without hurting the home market.

[hellodolly]

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Actually they had a honest leader Abhist His problem was no one wanted honesty they just wanted to fill their own pockets. Witness the fact that 40 Thaksin trained supporters saw the writing on the wall so they switched to the Dems to continue on with their Thaksin trained corruption. He just did not have a lot of support.

What evidence do have that he was honest? He definitely had the face of honesty and yes I guess you may be right. He "was" Thailand's best bet. Yingluck is feeling a bit like the Sex Pistols line, "Have you ever felt like you have been cheated" Rock'h'Roll Swindle. However I did not like his last bastion of the scoundrel is patriotism attitude. However, yes, it is quite possible the increase in inflation is "partly due" to rampant corruption. However there will always be some ministers on the take. You have to chose the best evil I guess - which from Taksin's past peformance must be the Yellows. Yep, Taksin - I guess they call him Peter Piper in England. However in all honesty I don't believe Thailand will ever retain its former economic power due to wold wide recession, floods, education and many others like Burma and Vietnam catching up. I am of the opinion the yellows were the best evil. However until bank books of politicians and associated people can be checked on a daily basis and their homes its economic performance will always be held to ransom until someone is found who loves his people and wishes for them to better their lives. Perhaps Abhisit was that man.

I have no proof it is just my opinion but if Abhist had been given the support the PT get and no armed protestors we would see a munch better Thailand today. And yes there would still be crooked politicians. That is a fact the world over no matter how clean they are there is always the scum.

I agree that Thailand will never regain its former economic power. As you say other third world nations are catching up to them and there is not the demand for product there was in the world when Thailand had a higher standing.

[Thaddeus]

That is the point

Thaksin dictates to PTP,

they win partly from his cult of personality

partly from populist promises tied to his cult of personality.

He is having government ministers coming to him for talks,

and giving him public blessings and bowing the knee in fealty,

He is 'advisor' to the government,

and control of the Shin clan members in the government.

speaks in it's name on foreign countries while just maintaining the charade of not doing so.

All this while he is still officially on the run from the justice system.

The last part of Thailands governance he has NOT been able to buy control of.

Not that he hasn't tried several times/

Thaksin Speaks PTP Does: He Dictates and they jump and ask;

Is that high enough master?'

This is a dictatorship, the defacto Dictator just is too worried about

being assassinated to come back right now, but he will.

It seems the inmates are already running the asylum.

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

Ok, we'll take your word for that, it isn't a dictatorship then, what word would you use when describing one man holding absolute power?

[nurofiend]

That is the point

Thaksin dictates to PTP,

they win partly from his cult of personality

partly from populist promises tied to his cult of personality.

He is having government ministers coming to him for talks,

and giving him public blessings and bowing the knee in fealty,

He is 'advisor' to the government,

and control of the Shin clan members in the government.

speaks in it's name on foreign countries while just maintaining the charade of not doing so.

All this while he is still officially on the run from the justice system.

The last part of Thailands governance he has NOT been able to buy control of.

Not that he hasn't tried several times/

Thaksin Speaks PTP Does: He Dictates and they jump and ask;

Is that high enough master?'

This is a dictatorship, the defacto Dictator just is too worried about

being assassinated to come back right now, but he will.

It seems the inmates are already running the asylum.

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

Ok, we'll take your word for that, it isn't a dictatorship then, what word would you use when describing one man holding absolute power?

oh please, if he held absolute power then why the hell is he not in thailand?

[Ricardo]

Governments usually execute the policies of their mandate during the course of their full term of office. For Abhisit to continuously snipe at our democratically elected government is counter productive. Such childish sniping is disturbing to the electorate most of which has trust and respect for their Prime Minister. Her (Yingluck) determination to improve the lives of the majority of the Thai people is recognized at home and abroad by politicians that understand the complexity and enormity of the task that she has undertaken with good will and tenacity.

But this is Thailand, where very few governments have ever run their full term of office, I'm afraid.

And the Leader of the Opposition has a duty, in a normal democratic system, to help keep the government-in-power honest, by pointing-out potential problems or failures, this is not continuously sniping just normal checks-and-balances.

Lastly, along with good will and tenacity, competence would also be nice. And a little less interference from overseas.

[Buchholz]

And the Leader of the Opposition has a duty, in a normal democratic system, to help keep the government-in-power honest, by pointing-out potential problems or failures, this is not continuously sniping just normal checks-and-balances.

Let's amend the constitution so that crap about checks and balances is removed.

.

[Ricardo]

And the Leader of the Opposition has a duty, in a normal democratic system, to help keep the government-in-power honest, by pointing-out potential problems or failures, this is not continuously sniping just normal checks-and-balances.

Let's amend the constitution so that crap about checks and balances is removed.

.

I believe that may already be in-hand ?

Perhaps some permanent committee might be mandated, in the new Charter, to examine cases of unusual wealth amongst politicians & senior civil-servants, in every outgoing government. But that would cause cries of political vengeance once again, better perhaps to continue as now, and let lying dogs sleep !

[Thaddeus]

That is the point

Thaksin dictates to PTP,

they win partly from his cult of personality

partly from populist promises tied to his cult of personality.

He is having government ministers coming to him for talks,

and giving him public blessings and bowing the knee in fealty,

He is 'advisor' to the government,

and control of the Shin clan members in the government.

speaks in it's name on foreign countries while just maintaining the charade of not doing so.

All this while he is still officially on the run from the justice system.

The last part of Thailands governance he has NOT been able to buy control of.

Not that he hasn't tried several times/

Thaksin Speaks PTP Does: He Dictates and they jump and ask;

Is that high enough master?'

This is a dictatorship, the defacto Dictator just is too worried about

being assassinated to come back right now, but he will.

It seems the inmates are already running the asylum.

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

Ok, we'll take your word for that, it isn't a dictatorship then, what word would you use when describing one man holding absolute power?

oh please, if he held absolute power then why the hell is he not in thailand?

Because he doesn't need to be.

[hyperdimension]

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

Not yet.

[AleG]

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

Not yet.

If one wants to know what Thailand would be under unrestricted Thaksin control, look at Cambodia.

[rixalex]

Every time there is a discussion on the war on drugs, and that as you know is many times, there is not an occasion when you haven't continually brought up the popularity thing. If you aren't bringing it up to in some way lessen the gravity of what happened and spread the blame, that is certainly how it appears, because as i say, i can't see how whether a government policy has no public support or total public support, makes any difference whatsoever to the rights and the wrongs. No doubt you'll say you agree, but then along you'll trot whenever this topic comes up next with the ubiquitous, "ah yes, that was terrible wasn't it..... but a lot of people did support it, didn't they..."

typical bs, what are you talking about? show me examples of this everytime there's a discussion on the war on drugs me defending it!

For one, calm yourself down.

For two, anyone with the inclination and with the time can look back at the history of posts made on this subject and see who said what. My belief is they would see you, not out and out defending the war on drugs, but continually raising the issue of the level of public support there was at the time. As i say, for me, public support is a complete irrelevance. The fact that you bring it into the debate, suggests you feel otherwise. What relevance you feel it has is not clear to me. On this occasion you are saying the relevance is to identify the difference in a regime that is a dictatorship and one that is not. Well, i think there are plenty of examples of dictatorships that started off with the general support of the public, to make this one a complete non-starter... an irrelevance.

again, you've taking what i've said out of context, it's just ridiculous.

i'm NOT saying that popular support justifies it, got it? obviously you haven't.

I'll get it when you stop bringing it into the discussion for no good reason.

[phiphidon]

And the Leader of the Opposition has a duty, in a normal democratic system, to help keep the government-in-power honest, by pointing-out potential problems or failures, this is not continuously sniping just normal checks-and-balances.

Let's amend the constitution so that crap about checks and balances is removed.

.

I believe that may already be in-hand ?

Perhaps some permanent committee might be mandated, in the new Charter, to examine cases of unusual wealth amongst politicians & senior civil-servants, in every outgoing government. But that would cause cries of political vengeance once again, better perhaps to continue as now, and let lying dogs sleep !

You can believe all you want but at this stage a bill hasn't yet been passed to amend the constitution to allow the formation of a Constitution Drafting Assembly. Once that has been passed and a CDA set up, then discussions about the content of ammendments to the constitution can take place.

I think you've been listening too much to the rhetoric of Abhisit and the Nation.

[Buchholz]

And the Leader of the Opposition has a duty, in a normal democratic system, to help keep the government-in-power honest, by pointing-out potential problems or failures, this is not continuously sniping just normal checks-and-balances.

Let's amend the constitution so that crap about checks and balances is removed.

.

I believe that may already be in-hand ?

Perhaps some permanent committee might be mandated, in the new Charter, to examine cases of unusual wealth amongst politicians & senior civil-servants, in every outgoing government. But that would cause cries of political vengeance once again, better perhaps to continue as now, and let lying dogs sleep !

You can believe all you want but at this stage a bill hasn't yet been passed to amend the constitution to allow the formation of a Constitution Drafting Assembly. Once that has been passed and a CDA set up, then discussions about the content of ammendments to the constitution can take place.

I think you've been listening too much to the rhetoric of Abhisit and the Nation.

More likely due to the confusing ever-changing double-talk the government spews out as to amending the current constitution, re-writing a new one, reconciliation bills by 3 entities, etc. etc. etc.

.

[ianf]

Populist promises have almost always been the springboard for dictatorships. Part of the problem is the PTP policies are only window-dressing & nobody actually knows what their long-term agenda and policies are.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great. everything will be okay when Thaksin gets back, or maybe in the time of his son's rule, or his grandson, great-grandson.

PTP run the country on a skeleton-crew basis, ticking only the mandatory boxes and avoiding everything else. IMO their energies are devoted behind the scenes to installing a permanent familial oligarchy.

I would guess the next step will be to give all poor people a free colour TV, & by coincidence people will be watching red-government propaganda on the free TVs along with brain-meltingly bad soap operas and game shows. That wouldn't be so bad if the Govt actually made people's lives better (as promised).

The mistakes made pre-flood & post-flood which were shockingly inept, were brushed aside by the regime as unimportant, but the flood exposed the government-level complete lack of robust quick-thinking which are the trademarks of competent leadership. It also raised the question of what they consider important. Even the request to have a state of emergency during the worst floods for over 50 years, was rebuffed by Yingluck along partisan and control-freak lines.

All the meaningful pre-election promises by PTP have failed to appear even in start-up phase, except for a few stragglers that emerged blinking into the light & feeling all alone.

People in the opposition are very concerned that the country they love is being hijacked, and in the worst case scenario the groundwork for a dynastic oligarchy is being laid-out. The feeling among many international observers is that the worst is yet to come & Thai peoples future is one of being industrially-fleeced & exploited & deceived.

What a superb post by someone who truly understands the issues.

Edited April 20, 2012 by ianf

[ianf]

i don't agree that it's a dictatorship, because it's not.

Not yet.

Thaksin was removed because as an anti-democrat he was slowly moving towards a dictatorship. Nothing has changed because Thaksin's need for involvement in politics comes from his personal craving for power and the need he has to be 'loved' and in control. He has shown in the past that he will brook no opposition and that he has a monopoly on truth and nobody else has a voice. When he was Prime Minister I used to listen to his speeches (or should I say 'ramblings') and I was astounded that someone who could speak with such stupidity and ignorance could weald the power that he did. And off course he managed that through his manipulation, and, dare I say it, his understanding of mass psychology. Populist policies, which he was so good at, often lead to fascist dictatorships as history has shown time and time again. Sadly, I believe that Thaksin is so full of himself, that he believes that he is omnipresent and that he is the most important person in Thailand (bar none) that it will unwittingly lead to the formation of a fascist state with his acolytes fawning all over him. You only have to look at the example of Chairman Mao to see what damage this can do to a country (Read the history of the famine in China and you'll get the idea). This is a very dangerous time for Thailand because his control over those red shirts is total. Again we can learn from history how this situation can lead to civil war, dictatorships with their attendant brutality and at the end of the day who suffers? Off course those that suffer are the poor and dispossessed which includes a majority of the red shirts.

[animatic]

"Only one populism policy could be deemed as progressing and that is the women's development fund. More than 10 million women have joined the fund since it was launched on Women's Day on March 8."

I hadn't heard about that one before. Can someone explain what it is?

Thanks, Terry.

Yes a lot of women wanting the cash... but

HOW MANY HAVE GOTTEN ANY????

Signing up is not the same as actually making it

DO SOMETHING...

[phiphidon]

You can believe all you want but at this stage a bill hasn't yet been passed to amend the constitution to allow the formation of a Constitution Drafting Assembly. Once that has been passed and a CDA set up, then discussions about the content of ammendments to the constitution can take place.

I think you've been listening too much to the rhetoric of Abhisit and the Nation.

More likely due to the confusing ever-changing double-talk the government spews out as to amending the current constitution, re-writing a new one, reconciliation bills by 3 entities, etc. etc. etc.

.

I disagree, every day it seems that Abhisit or one of his party has been stating what they think the government is doing with regard to the constitution and the government has to respond. BUT nothing has been discussed about the ammendments. The democrat party will be part of the CDA along with other parties, scholars, etc. so why can they not save their breath for discussion when it is relevant.

Why, because they wish to undermine the process of ammending the constitution in the hope it will either be abandoned or gets a no vote in the referendum. This allows them to keep the old referendum which suits them well (and has done in the past) with the over reliance of the powers of the judicial system.

Surely even you can see the dangers of a judicial system where it is not permissible to criticise the courts for fear of being prosecuted. Who watches the watchmen?

Abhisit has not been slow in the past to amend the constitution, no public involved. Some people have short memories but may remember when they amended the constitution with regard to the party list, upping it to 125 people to benefit themselves before the last election. Didn't convince the voters though as they still ended up 17 seats adrift on the "party list".

BP: Actually, the Democrats will benefit from the change to 125 party list MPs as they received almost the same number of votes as PPP in 2007 (whereas they received 7 percent less than Puea Thai on the electorate vote) so it is not surprising the proposal to increase the number of party list MPs from 80 to 125.........

.........‘These amendments are no good for the people. They are just good for the politicians,’ Sonthi said.

http://asiancorrespo...urn-on-abhisit/

So why the fuss now when there are no actual facts of the ammendments to argue about.

Any way we're going off topic.

Edited April 20, 2012 by phiphidon

[louse1953]

Lies and/or violence is the way to come to power. What ever it takes. Power equals money and money equals respect. I feel we are about to hear the rage of the forsaken and this will spark a civil war and/or rampant crime. Some say the rampant crime has already started. If I was a red I would feel a little more than cheated. I have moved to Laos as I have no wish to get caught up in this AGAIN. Saw the black balaclava militia in Romklao Road, Romklao, Bangkok armed to the teeth, hijacked airports. No thank-you, not again. There will be no reconciliation until this stops being about leaders - and starts being about the economic welfare of the common people. Ideally the leaders of the PAD and reds should be jailed and some-one decent should be found to run the government.

Yeh,we get it,you've moved to Laos,that well known bastion of democracy and free speech.

[nurofiend]

Every time there is a discussion on the war on drugs, and that as you know is many times, there is not an occasion when you haven't continually brought up the popularity thing. If you aren't bringing it up to in some way lessen the gravity of what happened and spread the blame, that is certainly how it appears, because as i say, i can't see how whether a government policy has no public support or total public support, makes any difference whatsoever to the rights and the wrongs. No doubt you'll say you agree, but then along you'll trot whenever this topic comes up next with the ubiquitous, "ah yes, that was terrible wasn't it..... but a lot of people did support it, didn't they..."

typical bs, what are you talking about? show me examples of this everytime there's a discussion on the war on drugs me defending it!

For one, calm yourself down.

For two, anyone with the inclination and with the time can look back at the history of posts made on this subject and see who said what. My belief is they would see you, not out and out defending the war on drugs, but continually raising the issue of the level of public support there was at the time. As i say, for me, public support is a complete irrelevance. The fact that you bring it into the debate, suggests you feel otherwise. What relevance you feel it has is not clear to me. On this occasion you are saying the relevance is to identify the difference in a regime that is a dictatorship and one that is not. Well, i think there are plenty of examples of dictatorships that started off with the general support of the public, to make this one a complete non-starter... an irrelevance.

again, you've taking what i've said out of context, it's just ridiculous.

i'm NOT saying that popular support justifies it, got it? obviously you haven't.

I'll get it when you stop bringing it into the discussion for no good reason.

first of all, i'm calm

i've explained very, very clearly the reason why i brought it up, and it has got absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with defending or excusing it on any level... you obviously still don't understand that there is a difference between the war on drugs and the atrocities committed on people that we would associate with dictators, and that's the only relevance that public support has in this discussion... because in a dictatorship public support is entirely irrelevant... and that's the relevance.

if it was during a dictatorship, you wouldn't know what the public think, the public wouldn't be allowed to say what they think.

that's the only relevance of bring up public support, so stop the spinning and bs to say that i'm defending it in any way because it's slanderous.

the only things i've ever wondered about the war on drugs, is the numbers killed by police and some claims that the majority were criminally innocent, wondering how people can factually know this and from what sources.. that's it, because i don't think anyone knows the answers to those questions.

my stance on the war on drugs in general and not just thaksins is pretty clear from past posting.

so finally, please show me one post outside of this thread where i have mentioned anything about public support for it before this.. or else stop lying about it and admit you were completely wrong to accuse me of it.

Edited April 20, 2012 by nurofiend

[Ricardo]

You can believe all you want but

Thank-you !

I disagree, every day it seems that Abhisit or one of his party has been stating what they think the government is doing with regard to the constitution and the government has to respond. BUT nothing has been discussed about the ammendments. The democrat party will be part of the CDA along with other parties, scholars, etc. so why can they not save their breath for discussion when it is relevant.

Why, because they wish to undermine the process of ammending the constitution in the hope it will either be abandoned or gets a no vote in the referendum. This allows them to keep the old referendum which suits them well (and has done in the past) with the over reliance of the powers of the judicial system.

Surely even you can see the dangers of a judicial system where it is not permissible to criticise the courts for fear of being prosecuted. Who watches the watchmen?

Abhisit has not been slow in the past to amend the constitution, no public involved. Some people have short memories but may remember when they amended the constitution with regard to the party list, upping it to 125 people to benefit themselves before the last election. Didn't convince the voters though as they still ended up 17 seats adrift on the "party list".

BP: Actually, the Democrats will benefit from the change to 125 party list MPs as they received almost the same number of votes as PPP in 2007 (whereas they received 7 percent less than Puea Thai on the electorate vote) so it is not surprising the proposal to increase the number of party list MPs from 80 to 125.........

.........‘These amendments are no good for the people. They are just good for the politicians,’ Sonthi said.

http://asiancorrespo...urn-on-abhisit/

So why the fuss now when there are no actual facts of the ammendments to argue about.

Any way we're going off topic.

It certainly seems to be a hot-topic amongst PTP/Red-Shirt circles, who are encouraged to believe that Thaksin may return shortly, as a consequence of Charter-change, and amnesty for political-crimes.

So perhaps it's not too early after-all, to discuss what positive changes might be discussed, by the CDA when formed ?

[phiphidon]

You can believe all you want but

Thank-you !

I disagree, every day it seems that Abhisit or one of his party has been stating what they think the government is doing with regard to the constitution and the government has to respond. BUT nothing has been discussed about the ammendments. The democrat party will be part of the CDA along with other parties, scholars, etc. so why can they not save their breath for discussion when it is relevant.

Why, because they wish to undermine the process of ammending the constitution in the hope it will either be abandoned or gets a no vote in the referendum. This allows them to keep the old referendum which suits them well (and has done in the past) with the over reliance of the powers of the judicial system.

Surely even you can see the dangers of a judicial system where it is not permissible to criticise the courts for fear of being prosecuted. Who watches the watchmen?

Abhisit has not been slow in the past to amend the constitution, no public involved. Some people have short memories but may remember when they amended the constitution with regard to the party list, upping it to 125 people to benefit themselves before the last election. Didn't convince the voters though as they still ended up 17 seats adrift on the "party list".

BP: Actually, the Democrats will benefit from the change to 125 party list MPs as they received almost the same number of votes as PPP in 2007 (whereas they received 7 percent less than Puea Thai on the electorate vote) so it is not surprising the proposal to increase the number of party list MPs from 80 to 125.........

.........‘These amendments are no good for the people. They are just good for the politicians,’ Sonthi said.

http://asiancorrespo...urn-on-abhisit/

So why the fuss now when there are no actual facts of the ammendments to argue about.

Any way we're going off topic.

It certainly seems to be a hot-topic amongst PTP/Red-Shirt circles, who are encouraged to believe that Thaksin may return shortly, as a consequence of Charter-change, and amnesty for political-crimes.

So perhaps it's not too early after-all, to discuss what positive changes might be discussed, by the CDA when formed ?

Yes but in the right thread otherwise certain people will be along to remind you where to discuss things................

[rixalex]

i've explained very, very clearly the reason why i brought it up, and it has got absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with defending or excusing it on any level... you obviously still don't understand that there is a difference between the war on drugs and the atrocities committed on people that we would associate with dictators, and that's the only relevance that public support has in this discussion... because in a dictatorship public support is entirely irrelevant... and that's the relevance.

because in a dictatorship public support is entirely irrelevant

Not at all true. Dictatorships are often born out of radical populist ideas that win broad public support, and without this support, at least to begin with, many dictators would not have been able to achieve what they did. It enables all that follows.

so finally, please show me one post outside of this thread where i have mentioned anything about public support for it before this.. or else stop lying about it and admit you were completely wrong to accuse me of it.

I haven't lied. My memory of our past discussions and your position on this matter is very clear. Am i going to spend my Saturday morning searching back through hundreds of old threads and pages to prove my point? Sorry, no. This isn't a court of law. People can chose to believe who they like.

[silsburyhill]

Populist promises have almost always been the springboard for dictatorships. Part of the problem is the PTP policies are only window-dressing & nobody actually knows what their long-term agenda and policies are.

They are the living emodiment of the English "jam tomorrow" folk-saying ; "well kids, you know its just dry bread today but there'll be jam tomorrow". This is also the type of 'faith in the future' message has been used by many dictators through the centuries. Stick with us, even though your lives are going down the drain, we promise the future will be great. everything will be okay when Thaksin gets back, or maybe in the time of his son's rule, or his grandson, great-grandson.

PTP run the country on a skeleton-crew basis, ticking only the mandatory boxes and avoiding everything else. IMO their energies are devoted behind the scenes to installing a permanent familial oligarchy.

I would guess the next step will be to give all poor people a free colour TV, & by coincidence people will be watching red-government propaganda on the free TVs along with brain-meltingly bad soap operas and game shows. That wouldn't be so bad if the Govt actually made people's lives better (as promised).

The mistakes made pre-flood & post-flood which were shockingly inept, were brushed aside by the regime as unimportant, but the flood exposed the government-level complete lack of robust quick-thinking which are the trademarks of competent leadership. It also raised the question of what they consider important. Even the request to have a state of emergency during the worst floods for over 50 years, was rebuffed by Yingluck along partisan and control-freak lines.

All the meaningful pre-election promises by PTP have failed to appear even in start-up phase, except for a few stragglers that emerged blinking into the light & feeling all alone.

People in the opposition are very concerned that the country they love is being hijacked, and in the worst case scenario the groundwork for a dynastic oligarchy is being laid-out. The feeling among many international observers is that the worst is yet to come & Thai peoples future is one of being industrially-fleeced & exploited & deceived.

And the points raised in this hysterical rant differ how, exactly, from former administrations of whichsoever hue, including the point that would the Abbhisit government have handled the flood crisis any better? Given his laisez faire handling of the 'red shirt' demos, I think not. and I am not alone in this view.

I am no Taksin/Yingluk fan, I personally couldn't give a flying one about any politician, anywhere, but particularly here, and am getting a tad tired of the incessant knee jerk anti red line on this forum amongst posters who firstly have no say, and secondly appear to suffer from amnesia/remember how the average Thai fared under any and all previous 'governments'.

Edited April 21, 2012 by silsburyhill