Is Reaching Agreement In Thai Politics Impossible?

[webfact]

Is reaching agreement in Thai politics impossible?

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- There is virtually no hope that the two sides of Thailand's political divide can ever reconcile or hold meaningful public deliberations on their differences while supporters of either side are consumed by hatred and their leaders manipulate feelings for their own benefits, according to Chaiwat Thirapanthu, a leading advocate of deliberative dialogue.

Chaiwat said he has given up on any idea of resolution.

"I no longer pay attention to the [political] divide," he told The Nation, adding that a few leading figures in the political divide were manipulating their supporters by perpetuating a sense of hatred that ensures no meaningful dialogue will ever take place.

Chaiwat said there seemed to be no other alternative but to wait until leaders from both sides leave the scene, perhaps when they die. Chaiwat said time was better spent concentrating on promoting public deliberation on other issues such as the environment, community revitalisation and other things.

Political "hate speech" has become common and is practised by the media and many people on both sides of the political divide. Despite that, some attempts have been made by others to hold some forms of public deliberation, such as a recently-concluded series of dialogues held over the past six-months by Mahidol University's Institute for Human Rights and Peace Studies.

Ekaphan Pinthawanij, a lecturer in peace studies at the institute, recently wrote an article which was handed to participants at the dialogue, detailing what is needed for successful public deliberation. He said a map entailing the root cause of the political conflict was needed and various players in the conflict must be identified.

What's more, the dynamics of the conflict must be understood, Ekaphan wrote.

Despite the series of deliberative dialogues by the institute, there was no immediate agreement on what to do aboutthe political division and related issues such as the lese majeste law. The institute last month vowed to continue to hold another series of deliberations in the near future.

In the book 'Politics for People' by David Mathews, president of the Ohio-based Charles F Kettering Foundation, which was translated into Thai by Chaiwat, Matthews wrote in the introduction about the need to nurture active and competent citizens. "A few good leaders won't be enough. Our communities have to become "leaderful"; leadership and citizenship must become synonymous."

Chaiwat said he felt people on both sides [in the US] have become too dependent on their political leaders, however.

-- The Nation 2012-11-17

[asiawatcher]

Two party systems are doomed for failure. I watched it in my own country and how pathetic it all became, constant bickering he says she says and the ridiculous spats on the speakers floor. Then of course the hugs amount of corruption, not only here, yet there is nothing being done about it. Politics has sunk into a crevice with high sides. Handing any politician the right to govern or direct the countries we live in, is now almost a commercial and social disgrace. Bring on anarchy, at least we can get on with our own devices.

[hanuman2543]

Politics is a mirror of the society. How many times you agree on a compromise or an agreement with Thai people? Sooner or later they will try to break the conditions and will not stick to what they agree on in the first place. This is not only a Thai/Foreign thing but also (and many times even more bad) when they deal with each other. How many times have you seen a Thai doing the honorable thing even if that means loosing financial advantages? Not many times, I guess. In which country apart from Thailand can it be a crime to tell the truth? Not many, I guess. The whole concept of "Thainess" is one big excuse to keep the medeival mindset and the cast system alive. If you are a member of the right cast there will be no questions, people will do what you told them to do. Asking no questions, not thinking for themselves and following the big majority is taught in all schools from early age. Sad to say, but the concept of "truth" has no value in Thailand. Ideal conditions for hate-speech and other forms of indoctrination.

[Moruya]

Move all the egos out the way and things might work

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[jpinx]

Thailand is not much worse than many western countries. Republicans and democrats are not a good example of political co-operation - are they ? Try looking at Northern Ireland politics, take a look in Bosnia, Hungary, the list is endless. A lot of the conflict is based on ethnicity or religion, nothing to do with the real job of running a country. One could wax lyrical about the human condition, but the only certainty is that it's not going to change anytime soon - neither here nor there (where-ever your "there" is )

[ridkun]

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

[Moruya]

Thailand is not much worse than many western countries. Republicans and democrats are not a good example of political co-operation - are they ? Try looking at Northern Ireland politics, take a look in Bosnia, Hungary, the list is endless. A lot of the conflict is based on ethnicity or religion, nothing to do with the real job of running a country. One could wax lyrical about the human condition, but the only certainty is that it's not going to change anytime soon - neither here nor there (where-ever your "there" is )

The very big difference is that this conflict is new and has no roots in history.

In fact its roots are not based on anything worth a fart to most of the sane world.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[jpinx]

Two true-isms spring to mind .....

Those who do not learn from the mistakes in history are doomed to repeat them.

History is (re)written by the conquering invaders.

Truth is an elusive concept, but truth in history is almost absent.

[farangme]

Too much money to be made. The effect on the country seems inconsequential. Much the same as many places in the world.

Sent from my PC36100 using Thaivisa Connect App

[robblok]

Too much money to be made. The effect on the country seems inconsequential. Much the same as many places in the world.

Sent from my PC36100 using Thaivisa Connect App

Taksin might be part of the problem but even without him its all about making money. They all want to skim / steal from the public funds. There are very few honest politicians around and they cant go against the corrupt ones even if they wanted.

Red or yellow (prefer yellow), both have mostly their own interest at heart.

[1bbcd5]

Really good thread!

[lensta]

Politics is a mirror of the society. How many times you agree on a compromise or an agreement with Thai people? Sooner or later they will try to break the conditions and will not stick to what they agree on in the first place. This is not only a Thai/Foreign thing but also (and many times even more bad) when they deal with each other. How many times have you seen a Thai doing the honorable thing even if that means loosing financial advantages? Not many times, I guess. In which country apart from Thailand can it be a crime to tell the truth? Not many, I guess. The whole concept of "Thainess" is one big excuse to keep the medeival mindset and the cast system alive. If you are a member of the right cast there will be no questions, people will do what you told them to do. Asking no questions, not thinking for themselves and following the big majority is taught in all schools from early age. Sad to say, but the concept of "truth" has no value in Thailand. Ideal conditions for hate-speech and other forms of indoctrination.

Good post, this is so true.

[lensta]

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

Congratulations Ridkun, you managed to be the first and so far only person to bring Thaksin into this thread. Maybe if you take a look at post #3, it will help you understand how things are in Thailand a little better. This divide has been around a lot longer than Thaksin, How many coups has Thailand had? Thaksin did not create this problem but he certainly doesn't help it either.

Edited November 17, 2012 by lensta

[whybother]

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

Congratulations Ridkun, you managed to be the first and so far only person to bring Thaksin into this thread. Maybe if you take a look at post #3, it will help you understand how things are in Thailand a little better. This divide has been around a lot longer than Thaksin, How many coups has Thailand had? Thaksin did not create this problem but he certainly doesn't help it either.

The current political divide IS ALL ABOUT Thaksin.

There has been a financial divide in Thailand (as is everywhere) for eternity, but the political divide hasn't had anything to do with the financial divide until more recently.

[coma]

No. Not ever. Look at the history of politics in Thailand since the Khana Ratsadon group's bloodless revolution in 1932 which changed the country from Absolute Monarchy to a Constitutional Monarchy. The democratic model has been an epic failure in Thailand with an average of approximately 1 Coup de Tat every 4 years since 1932. And I see no hope of change due to the Thai's huge hunger for power, greed and wealth. End of story.

Edited November 17, 2012 by coma

[ridkun]

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

Congratulations Ridkun, you managed to be the first and so far only person to bring Thaksin into this thread. Maybe if you take a look at post #3, it will help you understand how things are in Thailand a little better. This divide has been around a lot longer than Thaksin, How many coups has Thailand had? Thaksin did not create this problem but he certainly doesn't help it either.

The current political divide IS ALL ABOUT Thaksin.

There has been a financial divide in Thailand (as is everywhere) for eternity, but the political divide hasn't had anything to do with the financial divide until more recently.

Thank you for support of my view, and I still want to elaborate. It's true like WhyBother said that there are many 'divide's already before Thaksin -- financially, socially, unequal opportunities... you name it.

However, the division like that never became a conflict. If you look back 20-30 years before Thaksin era, you would see that there was no such real conflict about the division, even the social was highly divided than today.

As I stated earlier, I'm not putting the whole blame on Thaksin. It is very true and I agree that Thaksin did not create "the problem" nor help it, though it is also undeniable that he is the one who took advantage of it and turns the problem into political conflict and, eventually, the confrontation of the divided people, and he is still actively maintaining the schema he has created, solely for his own interest.

Digging for the root of the problem like #3 did is constructive and quite reflect the true Thais, though sadly it doesn't help much to resolve the conflict because we cannot change how we people behave, and the current conflict is merely conflict of the illusion. The one real conflict is that some people wants Thaksin back, and some people don't. That's why you heard that this would end if he were 'ended'.

[Hugo6]

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

Congratulations Ridkun, you managed to be the first and so far only person to bring Thaksin into this thread. Maybe if you take a look at post #3, it will help you understand how things are in Thailand a little better. This divide has been around a lot longer than Thaksin, How many coups has Thailand had? Thaksin did not create this problem but he certainly doesn't help it either.

The current political divide IS ALL ABOUT Thaksin.

There has been a financial divide in Thailand (as is everywhere) for eternity, but the political divide hasn't had anything to do with the financial divide until more recently.

thaksin might think that its all about him

really, he's just the poster child for the conflict

[Noistar]

Two party systems are doomed for failure. I watched it in my own country and how pathetic it all became, constant bickering he says she says and the ridiculous spats on the speakers floor. Then of course the hugs amount of corruption, not only here, yet there is nothing being done about it. Politics has sunk into a crevice with high sides. Handing any politician the right to govern or direct the countries we live in, is now almost a commercial and social disgrace. Bring on anarchy, at least we can get on with our own devices.

Is there much in the way of "ridiculous spats on the speakers floor" with this Thai Government?

[farangme]

It is quite clear that Thaksin is the center of the conflict and he has never tried to resolve the conflict, and has been keeping making it worse intentionally. Nobody really hates or loves Yingluck. Nobody really hates or loves Chalerm. It is one single person who Thais really hate or love, and it's him Thaksin and the rest of feelings toward his employees are, in large proportion, derived from that. This is not the conflict of the policy or ideology, we Thais are too uneducated and are really far from the point we would really fight for that. Everyone claims to be fighting for democracy, yet it's not quite clear what kind of 'democracy' it is as the claimers never act democratically, at least in my point of view. Of course my point is not to blame Thaksin to remove the guilt from we unsophisticated Thais, but it is what happening now. You don't go Red if you don't love Thaksin, and you don't go Yellow or Pitak Siam if you don't hate Thaksin. Yet every groups still claim they fight for the country and democracy.

Congratulations Ridkun, you managed to be the first and so far only person to bring Thaksin into this thread. Maybe if you take a look at post #3, it will help you understand how things are in Thailand a little better. This divide has been around a lot longer than Thaksin, How many coups has Thailand had? Thaksin did not create this problem but he certainly doesn't help it either.

The current political divide IS ALL ABOUT Thaksin.

There has been a financial divide in Thailand (as is everywhere) for eternity, but the political divide hasn't had anything to do with the financial divide until more recently.

Thank you for support of my view, and I still want to elaborate. It's true like WhyBother said that there are many 'divide's already before Thaksin -- financially, socially, unequal opportunities... you name it.

However, the division like that never became a conflict. If you look back 20-30 years before Thaksin era, you would see that there was no such real conflict about the division, even the social was highly divided than today.

As I stated earlier, I'm not putting the whole blame on Thaksin. It is very true and I agree that Thaksin did not create "the problem" nor help it, though it is also undeniable that he is the one who took advantage of it and turns the problem into political conflict and, eventually, the confrontation of the divided people, and he is still actively maintaining the schema he has created, solely for his own interest.

Digging for the root of the problem like #3 did is constructive and quite reflect the true Thais, though sadly it doesn't help much to resolve the conflict because we cannot change how we people behave, and the current conflict is merely conflict of the illusion. The one real conflict is that some people wants Thaksin back, and some people don't. That's why you heard that this would end if he were 'ended'.

I'd have to agree that things would settle down if he wasn't around. He is the primary divisive influence on the country.

Sent from my PC36100 using Thaivisa Connect App