Lessons in Democracy from the streets of Bangkok

[hellodolly]

A very well written article.

It went right to the cause of the problem.

The urban and rural divide has been an Achilles heel of Thai politics all along. And the general impression of the Bangkok middle class is that the politicos in charge of the country now are full of country bumpkins and inferior than themselves.

This has been a problem brought on and supported by all previous governments.

It is not that country bumpkins are running the country it is that the politicians are using them to achieve their positions knowing full well they will not see how their money is going into the politicians pocket rather than helping them.

To a large degree it is true. There was over 2,000 schools with out electricity. All of these schools were in urban areas. School's in urban areas receiving to few teachers. In general there schooling standards being very low and no government wanting to bring it up to the point where the students can make intelligent decisions on who to vote for. Just what is the difference so and so is paying more so I will vote for them.

In many areas the people were and are so poor they can not afford the school uniform so the child does not go to school and grows up uneducated. Willing to listen to dumb things and believing them.

Thailand needs a universal well run school system that is geared up to teach all students what is needed to know to survive in a changing world.

That in my opinion is the main problem in Thailand and all other problems are a result of it.

[mojorison]

I am confused am I.

Please could someone help me out with understanding Thai style politics as I’m not very learned in the subject and maybe have not quite grasped it properly.

My current take on the system is that an election is called and the majority of the voting populace (under the generally agreed fairest of democratic principals which is one-person-one-vote) elect Party A over Party B (let’s give them colours to make it easier. So Party A are now “White” and party B are now “Blue”).

Party A (the White party) is duly and verifiably elected by a majority of the voting public.

Party B (the Blue party) and its supporters are not happy that they didn’t win though and continually protest and behave restlessly on the streets of the Capital city and it all culminates in them employing the top echelons of the national Army to organise a military coup which ousts the democratically elected government and exiles its leader.

After a short period of military rule the Blue party is handed the seat of government, without being elected to it.

Some unrest is (not unsurprisingly) forthcoming by supporters of the formerly elected White party which is quelled when the military start shooting, maiming and killing them on the streets.

After the Blue party has held power for the maximum period of time allowed there is another General Election and the people again show their unhappiness with the Blue party’s running of the country (and possibly the methods they had employed in forcibly wresting power from the properly elected government). This results in the White party being voted in (again) under the one-person-one-vote system.

The Blue party are unhappy again and take to the streets (again – and with no-one being killed by the authorities as had happened to the White party supporters when they did likewise).

Eventually and despite now having been voted in twice in succession but never having been allowed to serve even one full term in office, the leadership of the White party offers an immediate new General Election to the leaders of the Blue party (barely more than half way through their own term of office) which appears still not quite good enough for the Blue party who believe the White party should just resign and allow them (the Blue party) back into power, unelected.

So all votes are measured equally. But some votes are measured more equally than others.

Is that about right?

Wrong overall.

Where were the Blue party handed the seat of power? Another Thaksin proxy party won the next election after the last Army intervention.

Why can very few on this site in spite of some excellent articles appearing today not get it through their heads that this is not about the winning or losing of elections but about abuse of power.

Abuse of power as in financial power?

Paying army generals to swing the power pendulum in your favour, for instance?

Your opening article says you are not well versed on Thai politics and may not have grasped it properly.

You are correct. The part you seem to have grasped is take the money the PTP offer and make up inane statements like what about when Abhist is on the phone to his paymaster. Care to name his paymaster. I will name the paymaster for all the PTPredshirt Thaksin. Or how about the Abhist government being the third party elected after the coup but the only one not owned by Thaksin so you choose to say the Generals were behind it. Was there a general standing behind every voters head with a gun held to it telling him or her how to vote. If so why was the election so close.

They have more generals than the voters who voted Abhist into power?

Abhisit's paymasters are the BKK urban elite (and Thailand's burgeoning "middle class"... all of what, 10-15% of the total?), the southern peninsular land-owners, the judiciary, the constabulary, the military, the bureaucracy and the

Add that all up and it evidently is still just not quite enough...

Edited December 9, 2013 by mojorison

[jinners]

I am confused am I.

Please could someone help me out with understanding Thai style politics as I’m not very learned in the subject and maybe have not quite grasped it properly.

My current take on the system is that an election is called and the majority of the voting populace (under the generally agreed fairest of democratic principals which is one-person-one-vote) elect Party A over Party B (let’s give them colours to make it easier. So Party A are now “White” and party B are now “Blue”).

Party A (the White party) is duly and verifiably elected by a majority of the voting public.

Party B (the Blue party) and its supporters are not happy that they didn’t win though and continually protest and behave restlessly on the streets of the Capital city and it all culminates in them employing the top echelons of the national Army to organise a military coup which ousts the democratically elected government and exiles its leader.

After a short period of military rule the Blue party is handed the seat of government, without being elected to it.

Some unrest is (not unsurprisingly) forthcoming by supporters of the formerly elected White party which is quelled when the military start shooting, maiming and killing them on the streets.

After the Blue party has held power for the maximum period of time allowed there is another General Election and the people again show their unhappiness with the Blue party’s running of the country (and possibly the methods they had employed in forcibly wresting power from the properly elected government). This results in the White party being voted in (again) under the one-person-one-vote system.

The Blue party are unhappy again and take to the streets (again – and with no-one being killed by the authorities as had happened to the White party supporters when they did likewise).

Eventually and despite now having been voted in twice in succession but never having been allowed to serve even one full term in office, the leadership of the White party offers an immediate new General Election to the leaders of the Blue party (barely more than half way through their own term of office) which appears still not quite good enough for the Blue party who believe the White party should just resign and allow them (the Blue party) back into power, unelected.

So all votes are measured equally. But some votes are measured more equally than others.

Is that about right?

About right if not a little simplistic. Far from an expert, as I understand things, the white's as you call them, are voted in by vote rigging (or purchasing in the poorer regions) which the more educated, politically motivated blue's dislike. Corruption once again shown as being the enemy of the people, but for once there might be an opportunity to reign this beast in by disposing of what is a proxy government and making an honest serious effort to stop a lot of actions currently known of but ignored.

[anon210]

For those harboring any illusions about "democracy" in Thailand, this is what awaits us, foreigners willing to take sides:

Richard Barrow ‏@RichardBarrow 3m

Foreigners warned they could be deported from #Thailand if they take part in political protests (Via @sweatyinbkk) pic.twitter.com/ncttMOjwn7

Nice example of "democracy". Although, they would be closer to the true Athenian ideal, where civic rights were reserved to citizens and denied to foreigners and slaves.

I guess we are no better than slaves to this retarded country.

[mca]

For those harboring any illusions about "democracy" in Thailand, this is what awaits us, foreigners willing to take sides:

Richard Barrow ‏@RichardBarrow 3m

Foreigners warned they could be deported from #Thailand if they take part in political protests (Via @sweatyinbkk) pic.twitter.com/ncttMOjwn7

I'd be too busy trying to figure out what Hi Park meant to attend a rally. Hyde Park perhaps? I dunno. Or maybe that's their intention. Baffle us so we don't go and stir the shit.

[pisico]

LESSONS ON DEMOCRACY? IN THAILAND?

Even if 1 million people gathered in Bangkok harangued by agitators: Bangkok IS NOT THAILAND.

Democracy: YL was elected by the voting majority. Suthep and co. were booted out of government.

There is big, big money behind the stirring of the mob in Bangkok. I invite a guess: all that money comes from individual donations or the deep pockets of the elite?

Democrats in Thailand are no different from Dems in other countries: cry babies. When they do not get their way, they stop breathing, turn blue and claim to be close to dying to blame the other side.

Thais behave in politics the way they drive, the way the motorcycles run up and down in foot-paths, crashing lines in supermarkets, double pricing system, etc.

Except:, this is a power grab lead by an old politico who does not care what happens to the other 62 million people not present in Bangkok's Democracy Monument.

Obama struck a cord with his catchy slogan: Hope and change. 6 years later the country has lost its AAA+ credit rating, unemployment exploded, government grew 40% bigger and taxing of income has risen, health insurance and coverage (government run) more expensive than before and fewer choices, etc..

Suthep's catchy slogan is to "uproot the Thaksin regime!" which appeals to young students , the Yellows (who occupied the airport) and the elites.

Democracy? He wants to appoint a "peoples' council" and seize power. Where did I hear those similar phrases before?

The right to revolt? Whose right? and, For what purpose?

[DocN]

The moment, Thailand can teach anyone a lesson on democracy, is the moment, pigs will grow beautiful wings.

[PaullyW]

LESSONS ON DEMOCRACY? IN THAILAND?

Even if 1 million people gathered in Bangkok harangued by agitators: Bangkok IS NOT THAILAND.

Democracy: YL was elected by the voting majority. Suthep and co. were booted out of government.

There is big, big money behind the stirring of the mob in Bangkok. I invite a guess: all that money comes from individual donations or the deep pockets of the elite?

Democrats in Thailand are no different from Dems in other countries: cry babies. When they do not get their way, they stop breathing, turn blue and claim to be close to dying to blame the other side.

Thais behave in politics the way they drive, the way the motorcycles run up and down in foot-paths, crashing lines in supermarkets, double pricing system, etc.

Except:, this is a power grab lead by an old politico who does not care what happens to the other 62 million people not present in Bangkok's Democracy Monument.

Obama struck a cord with his catchy slogan: Hope and change. 6 years later the country has lost its AAA+ credit rating, unemployment exploded, government grew 40% bigger and taxing of income has risen, health insurance and coverage (government run) more expensive than before and fewer choices, etc..

Suthep's catchy slogan is to "uproot the Thaksin regime!" which appeals to young students , the Yellows (who occupied the airport) and the elites.

Democracy? He wants to appoint a "peoples' council" and seize power. Where did I hear those similar phrases before?

The right to revolt? Whose right? and, For what purpose?

I was with you until you started with your poor comparisons to the Obama administration. Why must people persist with these pathetic attempts to equate the two countries? Not many things more ridiculous.

[Commander Tamson]

I am certainly no supporter of YL, or her government's policies, but when a tiny proportion of country's population can take to the streets of the capital and force a government resignation, then that can hardly be called democracy.

And for apologists - no matter what you guys, in your bubble, believe - what the international community thinks of this, does and will, matter!

[firestar]

Haha...

You got to love The Nation for hiding behind these "opinion" articles to mask the mouth piece quality of their publication.

[rogerdee123]

'mai bpen rai' PTP will win again and the Dems will be viewed as a "sour grape party" who can't take a democratic defeat (again)

There may not even be a PTP or Democrat party ... whose to say they won't reshuffle the deck for the next round?

[hellodolly]

I am confused am I.

Please could someone help me out with understanding Thai style politics as I’m not very learned in the subject and maybe have not quite grasped it properly.

My current take on the system is that an election is called and the majority of the voting populace (under the generally agreed fairest of democratic principals which is one-person-one-vote) elect Party A over Party B (let’s give them colours to make it easier. So Party A are now “White” and party B are now “Blue”).

Party A (the White party) is duly and verifiably elected by a majority of the voting public.

Party B (the Blue party) and its supporters are not happy that they didn’t win though and continually protest and behave restlessly on the streets of the Capital city and it all culminates in them employing the top echelons of the national Army to organise a military coup which ousts the democratically elected government and exiles its leader.

After a short period of military rule the Blue party is handed the seat of government, without being elected to it.

Some unrest is (not unsurprisingly) forthcoming by supporters of the formerly elected White party which is quelled when the military start shooting, maiming and killing them on the streets.

After the Blue party has held power for the maximum period of time allowed there is another General Election and the people again show their unhappiness with the Blue party’s running of the country (and possibly the methods they had employed in forcibly wresting power from the properly elected government). This results in the White party being voted in (again) under the one-person-one-vote system.

The Blue party are unhappy again and take to the streets (again – and with no-one being killed by the authorities as had happened to the White party supporters when they did likewise).

Eventually and despite now having been voted in twice in succession but never having been allowed to serve even one full term in office, the leadership of the White party offers an immediate new General Election to the leaders of the Blue party (barely more than half way through their own term of office) which appears still not quite good enough for the Blue party who believe the White party should just resign and allow them (the Blue party) back into power, unelected.

So all votes are measured equally. But some votes are measured more equally than others.

Is that about right?

Abuse of power as in financial power?

Paying army generals to swing the power pendulum in your favour, for instance?

Your opening article says you are not well versed on Thai politics and may not have grasped it properly.

You are correct. The part you seem to have grasped is take the money the PTP offer and make up inane statements like what about when Abhist is on the phone to his paymaster. Care to name his paymaster. I will name the paymaster for all the PTPredshirt Thaksin. Or how about the Abhist government being the third party elected after the coup but the only one not owned by Thaksin so you choose to say the Generals were behind it. Was there a general standing behind every voters head with a gun held to it telling him or her how to vote. If so why was the election so close.

They have more generals than the voters who voted Abhist into power?

Abhisit's paymasters are the BKK urban elite (and Thailand's burgeoning "middle class"... all of what, 10-15% of the total?), the southern peninsular land-owners, the judiciary, the constabulary, the military, the bureaucracy and the

Add that all up and it evidently is still just not quite enough...

In other words the people

The PTPredshirt paymaster is in one word Thaksin.

Take your pick who do you want to live under one responsible to only one convicted living in self imposed exile to avoid a jail sentence and countless other charges of criminality. Or one serving the people of the country.

just love you people living in a world of conspiracies. No names just mysterious people. Do you worry about your neighbor being a member of a secret conspiracy to get rid of Foreigners through nameless nefarious methods?

sorry roadman I had to leave your excellent reply out to an inane question.

[pisico]

LESSONS ON DEMOCRACY? IN THAILAND?

Even if 1 million people gathered in Bangkok harangued by agitators: Bangkok IS NOT THAILAND.

Democracy: YL was elected by the voting majority. Suthep and co. were booted out of government.

There is big, big money behind the stirring of the mob in Bangkok. I invite a guess: all that money comes from individual donations or the deep pockets of the elite?

Democrats in Thailand are no different from Dems in other countries: cry babies. When they do not get their way, they stop breathing, turn blue and claim to be close to dying to blame the other side.

Thais behave in politics the way they drive, the way the motorcycles run up and down in foot-paths, crashing lines in supermarkets, double pricing system, etc.

Except:, this is a power grab lead by an old politico who does not care what happens to the other 62 million people not present in Bangkok's Democracy Monument.

Obama struck a cord with his catchy slogan: Hope and change. 6 years later the country has lost its AAA+ credit rating, unemployment exploded, government grew 40% bigger and taxing of income has risen, health insurance and coverage (government run) more expensive than before and fewer choices, etc..

Suthep's catchy slogan is to "uproot the Thaksin regime!" which appeals to young students , the Yellows (who occupied the airport) and the elites.

Democracy? He wants to appoint a "peoples' council" and seize power. Where did I hear those similar phrases before?

The right to revolt? Whose right? and, For what purpose?

I was with you until you started with your poor comparisons to the Obama administration. Why must people persist with these pathetic attempts to equate the two countries? Not many things more ridiculous.

You cannot see that the comparison is the tactic used by 2 individuals in different countries that have the same effect on the masses. Remember that Hitler was elected to office in Germany by the most educated and cultured country in Europe and perhaps the world using ad hoc slogans of the time.

I know that in Canada and in Europe Obama is regarded as an exceptional man. Easy to feel that way when neither Europe or Canada have to suffer the consequences of his ineptitude and left wing agenda. Never mind that the Libs in Scandinavia awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize based on what he said he was going to do. He is also in the company of 2 than less distinguished recipients: a terrorist (Arafat), a shyster (Al Gore) To still hold Obama in high regard is truly ridiculous. Again, I was comparing the tactics used by the silver tongue agitators of the world. Not the countries.

In my comment, countries are not being compared. The tactics to appeal to the rawness of the masses is the issue.

[firestar]

In other words the people:wai2:

The PTPredshirt paymaster is in one word Thaksin.

Take your pick who do you want to live under one responsible to only one convicted living in self imposed exile to avoid a jail sentence and countless other charges of criminality. Or serving the people of the country.

just love you people living in a world of conspiracies. No names just mysterious people. Do you worry about your neighbor being a member of a secret conspiracy to get rid of Foreigners through nameless nefarious methods?

sorry roadman I had to leave your excellent reply out to an inane question.

Serving like they were serving the people before Thaksin?

Had they made any sort of effort to serve Thailand wouldn't be in this mess. As for corruption the bullk of Thaksin's fortune comes from the sale of AIS to Temasek, where does the fortune of Thai Generals comes from? It sure isn't from their army salaries :: 2 cents ::

[Emdog]

The dems had their chance. To hear them complain about country bumpkins..... ignorant and all.... why don't the powerful ever want to see Thais truly educated, able to think for themselves, reason, know history? We know the answer to that. Taksin may be rich, but he is new rich, smart enough to outflank the "Ripoffs as usual" gang that traditionally runs the country. I would love to see a comparison of wealth of top 100 red shirts vs top 100 dem backers. I think it would be no contest. The Bangkok elite don't give a toss for those outside of Bangkok and never have. Taksin gave them something, probably first ever to consider anyone more than 100 miles from Bangkok. OF course the reds fatten their own wallets, but they toss enough to the masses to stay popular. The dems and other outs among the elite have found out that the neglect and abuse from Bangkok is coming back with power of ballot box to keep them out of power. So the dems et al do not want democracy: they can't win. Vote buying? Sure. Been happening long before Taksin came along. It is part of the "Thai way".

[123thaibourbon]

Be Careful What One Wish-tles For:

First of all, to quasi-quote TJ is an affront to every form of sensibility. All the great sages of Western thought aside, America was conceived in a world of great unfairness. As far- flung as possible, the once British colony shed the Articles of Confederation with a concise Constitution. Soon followed by vast land acquisitions, military expansionism and a brutal Civil War. Americans are still disrobing the pretenses of hypocrisy, inequality and corruption. Today, not perfect by any means, yet the US has set the gold standard for inclusiveness, citizenship and civility. At the global level, this has evolved into more transparency and free flow of technologies to the ordinary/ average person.

Next, the notion of Thaksin being 'corrupt'. Please take a deep breathe and look into the backgrounds of all the Robber Barons and European magnates. The royal infighting of Europe plunged the penninsula~continent into the World Wars. The Rockefellers, Dulles & Koch brothers and many of the economic elite reaped the benefits of SE Asia oil reserves. Meanwhile in Asia, Uncle Joe Stalin & Chairman Mao stoked the coals of Cold War with even worse atrocities against their own peoples! TS was elected twice by land-slide majorities all very legit. Granted the Red Shirts are a little more than miffed about the amnesty for those responsible for their slain comrades from current & previous protests. Dr. Surin has written a good article, but not a great synopsis of this travesty in Thailand.

Finally, reflect upon the vast biological progeny of past Monarchs in Thailand. Personally, I have never met a Thai that was 'anti-Monarchy'. The main heir wife of Rama V The Great was from Laos. The minority Yellow-shirt movement is fraught by 'Oriental' not elective despotism. Their resistance is futile as PM YLS will easily win the snap election and push the elitists further from the Populist center. I say remove the earplugs and start listening to your fellow countrymen. They are not country bumpkins and no longer have this inferiority complex. end

Edited December 9, 2013 by 123thaibourbon

[123thaibourbon]

Be Careful What One Wish-tles For:

First of all, to quasi-quote TJ is an affront to every form of sensibility. All the great sages of Western thought aside, America was conceived in a world of great unfairness. As far- flung as possible, the once British colony shed the Articles of Confederation with a concise Constitution. Soon followed by vast land acquisitions, military expansionism and a brutal Civil War. Americans are still disrobing the pretenses of hypocrisy, inequality and corruption. Today, not perfect by any means, yet the US has set the gold standard for inclusiveness, citizenship and civility. At the global level, this has evolved into more transparency and free flow of technologies to the ordinary/ average person.

Next, the notion of Thaksin being 'corrupt'. Please take a deep breathe and look into the backgrounds of all the Robber Barons and European magnates. The royal infighting of Europe plunged the penninsula~continent into the World Wars. The Rockefellers, Dulles & Koch brothers and many of the economic elite reaped the benefits of SE Asia oil reserves. Meanwhile in Asia, Uncle Joe Stalin & Chairman Mao stoked the coals of Cold War with even worse atrocities against their own peoples! TS was elected twice by land-slide majorities all very legit. Granted the Red Shirts are a little more than miffed about the amnesty for those responsible for their slain comrades from current & previous protests. Dr. Surin has written a good article, but not a great synopsis of this travesty in Thailand.

Finally, reflect upon the vast biological progeny of past Monarchs in Thailand. Personally, I have never met a Thai that was 'anti-Monarchy'. The main heir wife of Rama V The Great was from Laos. The minority Yellow-shirt movement is fraught by 'Oriental' not elective despotism. Their resistance is futile as PM YLS will easily win the snap election and push the elitists further from the Populist center. I say remove the earplugs and start listening to your fellow countrymen. They are not country bumpkins and no longer have this inferiority complex. end

must do further research of Laos connection to half-sister and 92nd consort to Rama 5 and her mother, wife of Rama 4.

Edited December 9, 2013 by 123thaibourbon

[Furbie]

LESSONS ON DEMOCRACY? IN THAILAND?

Even if 1 million people gathered in Bangkok harangued by agitators: Bangkok IS NOT THAILAND.

Democracy: YL was elected by the voting majority. Suthep and co. were booted out of government.

There is big, big money behind the stirring of the mob in Bangkok. I invite a guess: all that money comes from individual donations or the deep pockets of the elite?

Democrats in Thailand are no different from Dems in other countries: cry babies. When they do not get their way, they stop breathing, turn blue and claim to be close to dying to blame the other side.

Thais behave in politics the way they drive, the way the motorcycles run up and down in foot-paths, crashing lines in supermarkets, double pricing system, etc.

Except:, this is a power grab lead by an old politico who does not care what happens to the other 62 million people not present in Bangkok's Democracy Monument.

Obama struck a cord with his catchy slogan: Hope and change. 6 years later the country has lost its AAA+ credit rating, unemployment exploded, government grew 40% bigger and taxing of income has risen, health insurance and coverage (government run) more expensive than before and fewer choices, etc..

Suthep's catchy slogan is to "uproot the Thaksin regime!" which appeals to young students , the Yellows (who occupied the airport) and the elites.

Democracy? He wants to appoint a "peoples' council" and seize power. Where did I hear those similar phrases before?

The right to revolt? Whose right? and, For what purpose?

Imagine my shock to learn the US government has grown 40% is six years despite the sequester. I can happily blow holes in a few other things you've stated, but I'll just do the most obvious example since this is a Thai political discussion.

[JCauto]

Such a load of disingenuous <deleted>. And of course, no mention in the attribution that the author was formerly a Democratic politician and Minister, as if that isn't relevant.

A single paragraph acknowledging how the "amaart" look upon the rest of the country (a.k.a. the majority of citizens) as ignorant buffaloes, but no serious analysis of how they resent being disenfranchised repeatedly by a political party who haven't been able to win an election in how many years? If they're the "silent majority" then please explain that, smart guy. Oh right, the "votes are bought" canard. Thoroughly disproven already; try again Doctor Pitsuwan. Pretty poor research in my opinion but what do you expect in an education system that the elite were quite pleased to use to inculcate the buffaloes when they were easily led, but now find inadequate since they've started voting for their interests.

If you seriously think that the Democrats or any other party don't reward their supporters with patronage when elected, then you know nothing of Thai politics.

So, Yingluck is willing to dissolve parliament and call new elections, yet the protesters aren't satisfied and demand basically to take over the government. And there have been many scholarly articles and opinion pieces supporting the right and voice of the street as a genuine democratic response that is worthy of comparison to elections in this regard. So let me ask those supporting this view, including Dr. Pitsuwan, how would you feel about the army returning to barracks and setting a date for the Reds to come visiting and settle it in the street? How do you think that would go? Who do you think would win? I think you know the answer.

Fact is, Bangkok happens to be their home stadium, and they can buy all the tickets so guess which team makes the most noise in this event? Their view is that the other team has too many supporters and a rich owner, hence shouldn't be allowed to play at home. Not only that, they should play with 10 men right from the start, because they work in the fields and are therefore naturally stronger and more athletic than the urban people who don't have this advantage.

The Democrats made a timid but somewhat successful attempt to establish themselves in the Northeast in the 1990s and gained a foothold. However they soon found it too tough to maintain, especially since it was in those awful boondocks where there are hardly any decent high end restaurants and wine bars for them to patronize and retreated back to their familiar grounds. Now they whine that they can't have elections since they can't win them due to "vote buying". In fact, they tried vote buying too, but soon realized that they were paying money but getting no return on the investment since the rural folk can see quite well who acts in their interests and who does not. Hence the latest attempt to subvert democracy altogether. Sad that this is what passes for the "elite".

[Commander Tamson]

Be Careful What One Wish-tles For:

 

First of all, to quasi-quote TJ is an affront to every form of sensibility.  All the great sages of Western thought aside, America was conceived in a world of great unfairness.  As far- flung as possible, the once British colony shed the Articles of Confederation with a concise Constitution.  Soon followed by vast land acquisitions, military expansionism and a brutal Civil War.  Americans are still disrobing the pretenses of hypocrisy, inequality and corruption.  Today, not perfect by any means, yet the US has set the gold standard for inclusiveness, citizenship and civility.  At the global level, this has evolved into more transparency and free flow of technologies to the ordinary/ average person. 

 

Next, the notion of Thaksin being 'corrupt'.  Please take a deep breathe and look into the backgrounds of all the Robber Barons and European magnates.  The royal infighting of Europe plunged the penninsula~continent into the World Wars.  The Rockefellers, Dulles & Koch brothers and many of the economic elite reaped the benefits of SE Asia oil reserves.  Meanwhile in Asia, Uncle Joe Stalin & Chairman Mao stoked the coals of Cold War with even worse atrocities against their own peoples!  TS was elected twice by land-slide majorities all very legit.  Granted the Red Shirts are a little more than miffed about the amnesty for those responsible for their slain comrades from current & previous protests.  Dr. Surin has written a good article, but not a great synopsis of this travesty in Thailand.

 

Finally, reflect upon the vast biological progeny of past Monarchs in Thailand.  Personally, I have never met a Thai that was 'anti-Monarchy'.  The main heir wife of Rama V The Great was from Laos.  The minority Yellow-shirt movement is fraught by 'Oriental'  not elective despotism.  Their resistance is futile as PM YLS will  easily win the snap election and push the elitists further from the Populist center.  I say remove the earplugs and start listening to your fellow countrymen.  They are not country bumpkins and no longer have this inferiority complex.  end       

So let me get this right. Because Stalin, Moa & a few others did it mid last century and beyond, it's okay for the Shinawat clan & their cronies to do it now. Strange Logic!

I don't agree with the method used to bring this government down but if the 'Thai country bumpkins' now vote YL & her government back in come this next election - they are well named

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[DocN]

Most people in Thailand, including most journalists, would not know democracy, if it had its bare a$$ in their face!

[newcomer71]

Talking about Democracy and how nice some of "these" people are...

A nice chat just saw on my Facebook:

(undisclosed foreigner): You have to come to terms with, that, we are living in a dysfunctional country where one party wants power because they are not as corrupt as the other one. Those @$%^#* are very corrupt and shouldn't be in power because we are only a little corrupt, so we should ruin...er I mean...run the country.

(undisclosed thai name): if you have better plan you should just run for the country.

(undisclosed foreigner): A plan? No one has a plan. Read the true, unadulterated, banned history of this country.

(undisclosed thai name): Zip up then.

(undisclosed foreigner): Come on FB and zip up? Sounds like the Democrats are here.

(undisclosed thai name): Sounds like you should leave our country or mind your own business.

Edited December 9, 2013 by newcomer71

[nisakiman]

I remain more or less neutral in terms of the political aspirations of the two parties concerned, since I don't know enough about their policies to make comment. There does, however, seem to be the assumption among the Thaksin-haters that anything and everything to do with Thaksin and his family is corrupt, and the protests are a result of wanting to address that corruption. Well, fair enough, but the reality is that removing this government and replacing it with the Democrats would do nothing more than swap one bunch of corrupt politicians for another bunch of corrupt politicians, but this time it would be a bunch of corrupt politicians who would look after their hi-so mates in the metropolis rather than the other lot who favour the great unwashed in rural Thailand.

If the Democrats want to govern, they need to tailor their policies to appeal to the people who voted for YL last time around and take those policies to the polls, not have temper tantrums because they didn't win and try to bully the winners out of power.

And they must surely realise that even if they do succeed in this power grab, they will never hold on to it, or if they do, it will be over the corpses of their countrymen. The riots that would ensue would make the current situation look like a playground spat by comparison.

Of course, then the army would step in, which is perhaps the long term plan, given that it's no secret that the army favours the Bangkok elite, and unlike in the west, is not loyal to the sitting government.

[lineofentry]

Rent-a-Mob egged on by slime ball attention seeking puppets forces elected government to step down while the institutions of state follow their managements own little agendas. Brilliant lesson in democracy, happy that the bloke from the islamic whatever pointed it out to us all.

[hellodolly]

In other words the people:wai2:

The PTPredshirt paymaster is in one word Thaksin.

Take your pick who do you want to live under one responsible to only one convicted living in self imposed exile to avoid a jail sentence and countless other charges of criminality. Or serving the people of the country.

just love you people living in a world of conspiracies. No names just mysterious people. Do you worry about your neighbor being a member of a secret conspiracy to get rid of Foreigners through nameless nefarious methods?

sorry roadman I had to leave your excellent reply out to an inane question.

Serving like they were serving the people before Thaksin?

Had they made any sort of effort to serve Thailand wouldn't be in this mess. As for corruption the bullk of Thaksin's fortune comes from the sale of AIS to Temasek, where does the fortune of Thai Generals comes from? It sure isn't from their army salaries :: 2 cents ::

Had they made any sort of effort to serve Thailand wouldn't be in this mess.

I agree had the PTP made some effort to serve Thailand we would not be in this mess now.

Are you Thaksins accountant or just posting to pass the time of day?

I suspect the generals got it from a variety of sources. Corruption drugs theft. Look at who is the minister of defense and you will see where all these things are possible.

[hellodolly]

I remain more or less neutral in terms of the political aspirations of the two parties concerned, since I don't know enough about their policies to make comment. There does, however, seem to be the assumption among the Thaksin-haters that anything and everything to do with Thaksin and his family is corrupt, and the protests are a result of wanting to address that corruption. Well, fair enough, but the reality is that removing this government and replacing it with the Democrats would do nothing more than swap one bunch of corrupt politicians for another bunch of corrupt politicians, but this time it would be a bunch of corrupt politicians who would look after their hi-so mates in the metropolis rather than the other lot who favour the great unwashed in rural Thailand.

If the Democrats want to govern, they need to tailor their policies to appeal to the people who voted for YL last time around and take those policies to the polls, not have temper tantrums because they didn't win and try to bully the winners out of power.

And they must surely realise that even if they do succeed in this power grab, they will never hold on to it, or if they do, it will be over the corpses of their countrymen. The riots that would ensue would make the current situation look like a playground spat by comparison.

Of course, then the army would step in, which is perhaps the long term plan, given that it's no secret that the army favours the Bangkok elite, and unlike in the west, is not loyal to the sitting government.

You say

I remain more or less neutral in terms of the political aspirations of the two parties concerned, since I don't know enough about their policies to make comment

You then proceed to act as if you know every thing about both parties.

[MW72]

I'm no expert on Thai politics. I just think the whole thing is damaging for the country. I don't think there is any doubt that there has been massive corruption but at the same time I am uncomfortable with the other side trying to depose a democratically elected government. I mean they are talking about doing away with democracy and having an unelected peoples council. Sounds a bit like China to me.

As far as the red side bribing the poor to vote for them, I was visiting my friend a few weeks back and his wife told me that both parties offered her 500 Baht to vote for them. She took the money from both and didn't vote.

[Tedhead]

What gives with the cut-and-pasting of 'The Nation' press releases? Just because sections of the Thai press are mindlessly simplistic and partisan doesn't mean ThaiVisa has to be.

The article argues that black is white, up is down and the rule of the mob is democracy and the result(s) of free and fair elections aren't. Only in Thailand could you have a political hack advocating the suspension of democracy (because in every election for over 2 decades the party he supports has lost), calling for an unelected chamber to replace democratic government and then arguing that it's all bringing real democracy back. In the same way Pinochet brought democracy back to Chile I presume.

Roping in poetry and ancient philosophers to place lipstick on this pig of an argument doesn't make the argument itself any less unattractive or stupid.

How dense do you have to be not to understand that you either abide by the results of the ballot box or you don't. Thailand either operates as a democracy or abolishes elections completely and drops the pretense.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Tedhead

[firestar]

I agree had the PTP made some effort to serve Thailand we would not be in this mess now.

Are you Thaksins accountant or just posting to pass the time of day?

I suspect the generals got it from a variety of sources. Corruption drugs theft. Look at who is the minister of defense and you will see where all these things are possible.

You completely missed my point that if those that preceded him had done a better job there would've never been a Thaksin, a PPP or a PTP in the first place.

But since you seem incapable of posting without put-downs, calling posters "apologist", "Thaksin's accountant", etc. I'll do the same. You, HelloDolly, are the perfect embodiment of what is wrong with both sides. Devoid of any criticism towards your own side and reducing any discussion to us against them. If you want to know why this Yellow shirt Red shirt nonsense will never end Dolly, have a look in the mirror.

Edited December 9, 2013 by firestar

[nisakiman]

I remain more or less neutral in terms of the political aspirations of the two parties concerned, since I don't know enough about their policies to make comment. There does, however, seem to be the assumption among the Thaksin-haters that anything and everything to do with Thaksin and his family is corrupt, and the protests are a result of wanting to address that corruption. Well, fair enough, but the reality is that removing this government and replacing it with the Democrats would do nothing more than swap one bunch of corrupt politicians for another bunch of corrupt politicians, but this time it would be a bunch of corrupt politicians who would look after their hi-so mates in the metropolis rather than the other lot who favour the great unwashed in rural Thailand.

If the Democrats want to govern, they need to tailor their policies to appeal to the people who voted for YL last time around and take those policies to the polls, not have temper tantrums because they didn't win and try to bully the winners out of power.

And they must surely realise that even if they do succeed in this power grab, they will never hold on to it, or if they do, it will be over the corpses of their countrymen. The riots that would ensue would make the current situation look like a playground spat by comparison.

Of course, then the army would step in, which is perhaps the long term plan, given that it's no secret that the army favours the Bangkok elite, and unlike in the west, is not loyal to the sitting government.

You say

I remain more or less neutral in terms of the political aspirations of the two parties concerned, since I don't know enough about their policies to make comment

You then proceed to act as if you know every thing about both parties .

Not at all. I made no comment on the actual politics of the parties concerned, because as I said, I don't know enough about them. So I am non-partisan on that level.

What I do see as an outside observer is a party throwing their toys out of the pram because they didn't get their own way. What they are doing will solve nothing and gain them nothing. If they want to rule, and rule legitimately, then they will have to address the concerns of ALL the voters, not just their chums in Bangkok. When they do that, then just maybe they will actually get voted into power. Until that time, they can only hope to be usurpers. And short-term usurpers, at that. Bully-boy tactics don't sit well with an electorate.