Democracy is not just about elections: Thai editorial

[kikoman]

The Point is that, the tyranny of the minority can not be allowed by the majority, that a hand full of terrorist (simply by intimidating those voters in those provinces from casting their vote) can not keep the country from having an election .

Regardless of the fact, that the outcome might be affected, if it is affected it would be up to the court to deal with that scenario,

A vote would indicate what the majority of the voters want, even if the Democrats boycott the election, the majority of the votes would indicate what the nation desires, will show if the rich in Bangkok and the deep south boycott expresses the will of the majority (if more than 17 million 500 thousand voters vote in the upcoming election would prove it is the will of the majority!

Cheers

Your last point was pointless, if they cannot meet the rice subsidy payments how are they going to "BUY" an election!

Cheers again!

Actually you are wrong, he point is that the system doesn't work here because it has been perverted by bad people and those you call 'terrorists' want it changed for the better. Seems you are against reforms, I wonder why...?

No point in an election before reforms as the same crap will all happen again. The country needs cleaning up. Enough of the country do not want the same crap. They may be a minority, but they are right. Just because you are in a majority, it doesn't mean you are right. Once the system has been reformed and some kinks ironed out, then it may be worth trying an election.

It should be clear to all that reform is needed in Thailand, the avenue that reform will be undertaken is what is the question before the country at this moment in time, Reform should be considered under the democratic process that is already in place in Thailand.

As many are attempting to say that corruption started in Thailand in 2001 with the election of Thaksin Shinawatra to office, that at best could only be labeled a lie, Thailand has been the victim of corruption for decades.

For the future well being of Thailand, "all forms of political corruption" must be addressed, including the corruption of the rich and affluent for decades! Suthep as a 34 year career politician in those previous governments that were running roughshod over Thailand, and did nothing about fighting corruption as a 34 year member of those governments.

The military is a prime example of that type of institutional corruption, Thailand is paying the salaries of as many General officers as the active American military has, which is by far larger than Thailand's, in contrast Australia army pays only 17 general officers (Even though it is much smaller that Thailand's) That is the type of corruption that also must be eliminated.

Your name fits you well, if you truly believe that the constitution of Thailand should be.suspended, go back and read post #16. The Thai constitution protects the rights of it citizens and the treatment of all within it borders, Yes, you included!

Cheers

[dunque]

In Bangkok, 167 constituency candidates have registered from 23 parties! The (68) other provinces in Thailand all favor holding an election, including the other (6) provinces in the South,

Democracy is the "Majority" voters votes dictate who is to lead Thailand after the next election.

This is based on the "one person one-vote", which is the basic principle of "Political Equality" recognized in the international community of democracies.

Should an election be rejected for the 35 million Thai's that cast votes in the 2011 Election because * (8) Southern provinces are forcefully interfering with the citizens to intimidate those voters from exercising their right to vote?

If Suthep count of (6) Million person protester attended his rally in Bangkok, not the few 100,000 estimated by the media, and he has a huge backing in the other provinces, if Thai's are in fact upset with "corruption" and corruption has been a problem in Thailand decades prior to the 2001 election of Thaksin Shinawatra. Any and all forms of corruption must be included in these reforms, including corruption and nepotism in the country that favor the rich.

It is very important to the continuation of Democracy in Thailand that the vote must be held despite the objections of the (8) provinces, because if Suthep and the Democrats are successful in stopping the wish of the majority of the country from holding an election based on the Royal decree and the Thai constitution it would spell the end of participatory democracy in Thailand, if they can do it any other group will be able to repeat the process!

Cheers

A rather naive version of democracy. Makes you laugh really.

So, what version do you subscribe to then? Please enlighten us with your sophisticated insight.

[dukebowling]

Here is a novel idea…let the elected officials finish their term...

The only way to have a mature democracy is to stop the coup d'état mentality.

The only way to stop criminals is to arrest them. Please take a look at the topic.

What criminal offenses? Proposing change is not a criminal offense.

[kikoman]

In Bangkok, 167 constituency candidates have registered from 23 parties! The (68) other provinces in Thailand all favor holding an election, including the other (6) provinces in the South,

Democracy is the "Majority" voters votes dictate who is to lead Thailand after the next election.

This is based on the "one person one-vote", which is the basic principle of "Political Equality" recognized in the international community of democracies.

Should an election be rejected for the 35 million Thai's that cast votes in the 2011 Election because * (8) Southern provinces are forcefully interfering with the citizens to intimidate those voters from exercising their right to vote?

If Suthep count of (6) Million person protester attended his rally in Bangkok, not the few 100,000 estimated by the media, and he has a huge backing in the other provinces, if Thai's are in fact upset with "corruption" and corruption has been a problem in Thailand decades prior to the 2001 election of Thaksin Shinawatra. Any and all forms of corruption must be included in these reforms, including corruption and nepotism in the country that favor the rich.

It is very important to the continuation of Democracy in Thailand that the vote must be held despite the objections of the (8) provinces, because if Suthep and the Democrats are successful in stopping the wish of the majority of the country from holding an election based on the Royal decree and the Thai constitution it would spell the end of participatory democracy in Thailand, if they can do it any other group will be able to repeat the process!

Cheers

one person one-vote"

So what does that mean 52% of the voters said they did not want Thaksin. So what good was one person one vote.?

It is time for all the Constitutional and Democracy be put on hold and a look taken at what Thailand has and what it needs. An election with no reform will just continue to prolong the problem.

As it is now to push for a vote with no reform is to just say that every thing is OK in Thailand.

It is only natural for the various parties to say they can best lead the country but when the people say what is being done is wrong it is time to listen to them. Make no mistake about it. This was started by people with no political association. It was started by people who were tired of the corruption in the government. It was well on it's way when it received the approval of the Democrats.

They tried to help the government to avoid this crisis but the house would not listen they insisted on White washing Thaksin. They set up a council to stop corruption and under it's leadership corruption increased from 65% corrupt to 67% corrupt. http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/

The people of Thailand deserve better. They deserve to be told the truth how much money is going into the politicians pockets billions of baht. They deserve to be given an education so they can understand that. The Education issue is one all past governments have been guilty of not providing. Most of them think of corruption as giving the BIB 200 baht to avoid a 400 baht fine. They have no idea of what is really going on at the government level.

It is time for a change like him or not Suthep is calling for what is best for Thailand. If he benefits from it so what Thailand will still be a better country. If he gets nothing for it so what Thailand will still be a better country.

Keep your eye on the ball. The ball is being a country that has a government working for all Thais no matter what their social or financial status is.

You do not clearly indicate what your assumption is of my post,

(so what does this mean 52% of the voters said they do not want Thaksin, So what good was one person, one vote!} I can only answer to what I think you meant, there was a election and 52% of the people voted they did not want Thaksin, what does that scenario have to do with one person one vote?

What do you not under stand about the "Majority rules" based the results of an election? It means who ever received the majority of the votes cast win the election, simple enough for you.

You seem to forget Suthep is a 34 year veteran of the governments that ruled Thailand for 3 1/2 decades and never in his official capacity championed reform,"He is a part of the problem, and he is not a part of the solution"!

Cheers

Edited January 2, 2014 by kikoman

[kikoman]

In Bangkok, 167 constituency candidates have registered from 23 parties! The (68) other provinces in Thailand all favor holding an election, including the other (6) provinces in the South,

Democracy is the "Majority" voters votes dictate who is to lead Thailand after the next election.

This is based on the "one person one-vote", which is the basic principle of "Political Equality" recognized in the international community of democracies.

Should an election be rejected for the 35 million Thai's that cast votes in the 2011 Election because * (8) Southern provinces are forcefully interfering with the citizens to intimidate those voters from exercising their right to vote?

If Suthep count of (6) Million person protester attended his rally in Bangkok, not the few 100,000 estimated by the media, and he has a huge backing in the other provinces, if Thai's are in fact upset with "corruption" and corruption has been a problem in Thailand decades prior to the 2001 election of Thaksin Shinawatra. Any and all forms of corruption must be included in these reforms, including corruption and nepotism in the country that favor the rich.

It is very important to the continuation of Democracy in Thailand that the vote must be held despite the objections of the (8) provinces, because if Suthep and the Democrats are successful in stopping the wish of the majority of the country from holding an election based on the Royal decree and the Thai constitution it would spell the end of participatory democracy in Thailand, if they can do it any other group will be able to repeat the process!

Cheers

A rather naive version of democracy. Makes you laugh really.

So, what version do you subscribe to then? Please enlighten us with your sophisticated insight.

If you care to read my Post #4 and the response of his post #17, that is what I stated!

After reading it ,then post and indicate what part your sophisticated insight disagrees with and then post an equally sophisticated response, based on what I stated, not what you assumed I stated, to which I will gladly respond,

I usually do not respond to one line vague responses!

Cheers

[soi41]

The Point is that, the tyranny of the minority can not be allowed by the majority, that a hand full of terrorist (simply by intimidating those voters in those provinces from casting their vote) can not keep the country from having an election .

Regardless of the fact, that the outcome might be affected, if it is affected it would be up to the court to deal with that scenario,

A vote would indicate what the majority of the voters want, even if the Democrats boycott the election, the majority of the votes would indicate what the nation desires, will show if the rich in Bangkok and the deep south boycott expresses the will of the majority (if more than 17 million 500 thousand voters vote in the upcoming election would prove it is the will of the majority!

Cheers

Your last point was pointless, if they cannot meet the rice subsidy payments how are they going to "BUY" an election!

Cheers again!

.

.. They may be a minority, but they are right. Just because you are in a majority, it doesn't mean you are right. Once the system has been reformed and some kinks ironed out, then it may be worth trying an election.

What a load of <deleted>! A country run by a non-elected minority is normally known as a dictatorship!

So when are the Thai people "mature" enough for an election? This century or next?

The whole Suthep-show is all about keeping the feudal system in place!

For decades the powers have denied people a good education, and now those people should be punished by having their voting-rights taken away??

If PTP (not a supporter) should win the next election, so be it! Then Thailand has got the government they deserve!

Hopefully in the future with better education and internet-access the voters themselves will start to hold their politicians responsible!

We will probably have a few more crises before we get there, but remember the democracies in our countries wasn't created overnight!

[ikbenhet]

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

Winston Churchill

Edited January 2, 2014 by ikbenhet

[craigt3365]

Here is a novel idea…let the elected officials finish their term...

The only way to have a mature democracy is to stop the coup d'état mentality.

The only way to stop criminals is to arrest them. Please take a look at the topic.

What criminal offenses? Proposing change is not a criminal offense.

No. But pushing them through without following the laws is a criminal offense. Quite a few members of the government are up on charges for this very thing.

[dukebowling]

Here is a novel idea…let the elected officials finish their term...

The only way to have a mature democracy is to stop the coup d'état mentality.

The only way to stop criminals is to arrest them. Please take a look at the topic.

What criminal offenses? Proposing change is not a criminal offense.

No. But pushing them through without following the laws is a criminal offense. Quite a few members of the government are up on charges for this very thing.

There are no teeth in those charges. Proposing amendments to the constitution is not a criminal offense, nor is lobbying for them. All government procedures were legally followed to make these changes. The changes were then appropriately voted on and passed. Once passed the amendment becomes part of the constitution.

Changes to the constitution were made by the previous government (under Abhisit) and were not subject to the scrutiny of the Constitutional Court.

The responsibility of the Constitutional Court does not include approving Constitutional amendments. Their responsibility is to interpret laws and apply the constitution and it's amendments to determine validity.

Edited January 2, 2014 by dukebowling

[craigt3365]

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/683004-constitutional-court-says-charter-amendments-unconstitutional/

[kimamey]

Wasn't it about voting directly for legislation rather than for people or some such? I don't recall exactly and am loathe to research but I believe the assembly was all citizens who chose to attend a session and was restricted by definition of citizenship.

Well you were born a citizen or a slave. And died as such. Rule was by oligarchs. It was not a "nice" situation at all. But the actual Democracy part, was the belief that all citizens had a solemn duty to attend public Debates, and to voice their opinions. To not attend public Debates made you an "idot" which is our word descended from the Ancient Greek word idiōtēs ("person lacking professional skill", "a private citizen", "individual") which was a terrible insult because you were a private citizen, rather than a citizen who was very active in the public sphere, especially public Debate.

Debate is the essence and backbone of true democracy. You can judge a failed democracy by how little Debate is held, on a public and state level. Everything else is just trimmings and frills.

I think the fact that so many senseless laws get passed in thailand shows there is no debate.

We live with the no booze between 1 and 4 every day. I mean honestly, how does such a stupid law get written? Or how about the rider must have a helmet but not the passenger law?

The quality of laws being passed says a lot about the quality of democracy. I love to read the stories whenever there is a proposal to change the law about land ownership in thailand.

Someone says "selling the country". And that's it. Finished.

One of the problems here is that Thais are insecure, although they won't admit it they are totally and completely reliant on foreigners, for everything they do,

How many cars - motorbikes - electronics - or other products have they actually designed and put into manufacturing of any significance ....ZERO, we all know that Toyota is a Japanese brand, how many brands are in existence that Thais actually own ....ZERO

Their construction - power - communications - military - aviation etc would be nowhere without foreigners. They can do nothing for themselves except mess stuff up

They have been living off sex tourism for many years yet it's illegal here, ....ahem, at least a 3rd of the money they make from tourism should be going back in to improve things, instead all I see are things getting steadily worse.

Do they understand the concept of never cut off the hand that is feeding you - seems they don't

Why have S. Korea Japan Malaysia Singapore HK and soon to be perhaps Burma thrived yet Thailand has stagnated stuck in a corrupt faulty political vacuum, I believe part of it was to allow outside investment to flourish - maybe there is also a colonial history too

Thailand needs change on a massive scale

Just from memory there are the patents taken out by HM the king regarding cloud seeding. Of course it has to be said he wasn't born here (even some Thais don't know that) and he wasn't educated here either. If it wasn't for him it would be just Red Bull although of course it took someone else to make it international.

Maybe there are more but I can't think of them.

I realise it takes time for a democracy to evolve as it has in many western countries but there's no reason why what has been learnt by others can't be applied here as well. Politicians seem to be able to cope with current models of Mercedes and BMW OK. they don't seem to need time to adjust. Other foreign things like computers and smartphones seem to be taken up pretty quickly.

The parliamentary system seems to be based on the Westminster system as are many others but for some reason they've decided that some people should be able to avoid election by being party list MPs. This is particularly odd at this time considering the move to make the senate fully elected for supposedly democratic reasons. I think the setting up of what are in the UK called cross party committees to oversee the work of the government would be a good idea as well.

[ThaiEire]

Ladies & Gentlemen and any man of the cloth who may be out there, I'm afraid you are gravely mistaken.

DICTHAIOCRACY that's it.

It's the Thai version of controlling the masses (sometimes).

[stiggy]

If you wish to get jiggy, it's a must

[fish fingers]

Hang on.. democratically what? Isn't the country currently run by a non elected fugitive?

[JRSoul]

The PTP does not recognize the courts and the party is controlled by a terrorist/criminal from overseas

Mr Suthep, is worse - take my word for it. He does not want an election - he wants to be appointed and his first act would be to bring about laws prohibiting exactly what it is he is doing right now!!!! This man is worse than Hitler because Hitler won an election.

I think you will find with over 95% of the parliament that a quorum exists and the parliament is valid.

So winning an election is more important than genocide. I guess it would be futile to mention mere human rights abuses and massive corruption by your little tin god.

[kikoman]

The Point is that, the tyranny of the minority can not be allowed by the majority, that a hand full of terrorist (simply by intimidating those voters in those provinces from casting their vote) can not keep the country from having an election .

Regardless of the fact, that the outcome might be affected, if it is affected it would be up to the court to deal with that scenario,

A vote would indicate what the majority of the voters want, even if the Democrats boycott the election, the majority of the votes would indicate what the nation desires, will show if the rich in Bangkok and the deep south boycott expresses the will of the majority (if more than 17 million 500 thousand voters vote in the upcoming election would prove it is the will of the majority!

Cheers

Your last point was pointless, if they cannot meet the rice subsidy payments how are they going to "BUY" an election!

Cheers again!

Actually you are wrong, he point is that the system doesn't work here because it has been perverted by bad people and those you call 'terrorists' want it changed for the better. Seems you are against reforms, I wonder why...?

No point in an election before reforms as the same crap will all happen again. The country needs cleaning up. Enough of the country do not want the same crap. They may be a minority, but they are right. Just because you are in a majority, it doesn't mean you are right. Once the system has been reformed and some kinks ironed out, then it may be worth trying an election.

Response to your statement RE; "Those you call Terrorists' want it changed for the better"

Based on the facts that many expats are from the U.S. and the European Union, I will post the definition of Terrorist as per the official version of what is legally considered a "Terrorist !

18 U.S. Code s 2331, The term Domestic Terrorist, means activities that-

(A) Involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State.

(2) Appear to be intended-

1. to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.

2. to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion or

3. to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

(3 ) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

Terrorist in the European Union-

Counsel Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002.

Its concept of terrorism is a combination of two elements:

*An objective element, as it refers to a list of instances of serious criminal conduct (murder, bodily injuries, hostage taking, extortion, fabrication of weapons, committing attacks, threatening to commit any of the above. etc.);

* A subjective element, as these acts are deemed to be terrorist offences when committed with the aim of seriously intimidating a population, unduly compelling a government or international organization to perform or abstain from performing any act, or seriously destabilizing or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organization.

So the response I chose to call those "terrorist", are terrorist by Thai, U.S. and E.U. official definition!

Would you define why you do not perceive their actions to not to be deemed terrorism!

(seems like you favor terrorism in Thailand, I wonder why....)

Cheers

Edited January 3, 2014 by kikoman