Jump to content



Suthep displays ideas of supreme sovereignty


webfact

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

This struck me as odd, as well. He seems to think that a military coup is acceptable based on historical precedent, but a "people's coup" has no precedent, and therefore unacceptable. I happen to agree with most everything he writes here regarding Suthep's speech folly (geez man, you weren't supposed to actually come out and SAY it!), but it does unintentionally shed light on the role of the military in Thai politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

even you could be right

Sutheop has made it clean he does not want this

so the Red shirt government fans need to tell lies and make him look bad

and they call this a democratic government

post-13618-0-25955300-1397005249.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

The difference is that the government are in a huge position of trust by the people to serve the people. The army are in a position to serve the people also.

The people have the ultimate power and sovereignty in the nation.

So the people have the right to topple a government if it fails to deliver on its promises and this government has failed on every single front.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

Well the gist of Suthep's argument is that since sovereignty belongs to the people and because he is a "medium" of the people, all he's really doing is returning sovereignty to its proper place, i.e. the hands of the people. But the military have also previously argued they're acting on behalf of the people and the nation. Suthep could counter that he has the real people - the mob on the street - with him whereas a military does not. However, since those people on the street only represent a small fraction of "the people", what it amounts to in practice is a takeover by a few against the sovereignty of the abstract "people" that the writer discusses. So I'm not sure there's much of a difference.

Edited by Emptyset
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

If he has millions of supporters then surely he can win an election, no?

Well they got 11.5 votes while they were at their weakest in 2011 during an election where they were not allowed to campaign for 80% of the votes due to campaign intimidation from the red shirts hired by Thaksin. Also the vast amount of voters intimidated by red thugs and village chiefs forcing them to vote PTP against threat of violence and harm...

In the past 3 years, they would have picked up even more due to the ineptitude of the PTP government and the shambles they have made of ALL their populist policies.

So yes..... The Dems can get many votes.

In fact, in a FREE and FAIR election, they would almost certainly take PTP to the cleaners.

But getting FREE and FAIR elections is impossible while Thaksin wields influence in Thailand and holds the north in his tyrannical grip through fear.

Yes, I did mean after this lot has been bunged out. Which does look to be not so far away maybe.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

This struck me as odd, as well. He seems to think that a military coup is acceptable based on historical precedent, but a "people's coup" has no precedent, and therefore unacceptable. I happen to agree with most everything he writes here regarding Suthep's speech folly (geez man, you weren't supposed to actually come out and SAY it!), but it does unintentionally shed light on the role of the military in Thai politics.

I'm not sure he was suggesting that he thought a military takeover was acceptable. He said that a military coup makes the military effectively sovereign (i.e. they hold state power), but not legitimately sovereign, as legitimacy can only be bestowed by the people and, in his view, the only way the people can confer legitimacy is through an election. So it seems, linking it to John's post, he doesn't really distinguish between what Suthep is doing and a military coup. Neither are routes to legitimately held sovereignty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody can say, like Suthep did last Saturday, that "I have the sovereign power now, so I can install anybody to be the prime minister."

I'm a firm believer in the collective wisdom of Thaivisa, so despite having read otherwise in Khao Sod, the BKK Post and according to translations given by the Nation staff on Twitter, I still believe that Suthep didn't claim anything like sovereign power for himself or the PDRC. Sadly, I can only presume that this writer is just yet another credulous victim of the red propaganda served up by the above publications.

In fact I was so disappointed after having read this - thinking of all the lies out there and how people believe them - I had to go over to the website goodreads.com and look for inspiring quotes about truth to make myself feel better about the world. Here's one by someone called Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj who I confess I'd never heard of before about five minutes ago. This quote is quite correctly tagged with the words "inspirational" and "spiritual" and those two adjectives certainly describe something of the feeling that one has after reading the quote and trying to absorb such a profound and hopeful message all in one go.

“It is always the false that makes you suffer, the false desires and fears, the false values and ideas, the false relationships between people. Abandon the false and you are free of pain; truth makes happy, truth liberates.”

There you have it. So in light of that, I believe those of us who stand for happiness and liberation must act to rectify this travesty of an article. I think we should send a group letter to The Nation, letting them know they've been lied to and that Suthep in fact said nothing of the sort about assuming sovereignty and using that same sovereignty to legitimize the unilateral selection of a ''neutral PM'' and a ''People's Council''. All complete claptrap and hokum. Nothing, in fact, could be further from Suthep's mind. I actually feel sorry for those taken in by Khao Sod. But also better about myself for having reiterated the truth here.

Anyway, if anyone does write such a letter, feel free to put my name "Emptyset" as one of the signatorys to it. In the meantime, I shall be bathing in the wisdom of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj.

I don't know. But I think one has to acknowledge that some have interpreted his words as stepping over the line.

If you read the article carefully, it's more like a warning to shut up and don't forget who you represent.

It's my opinion that Suthep is little more than a bulldog on a leash. I can imaging a newspaper being rolled

up and smacking Suthep over the head several times as the master pulls his leash tight.

I certainly do not see the article in any way as support for PTP, and the evil one.

Does anyone have a link to a video of his presentation on Saturday?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

Personally i think you are wrong here. In my view it would be better to say there are millions who support the cause that Suthep represents, not Suthep himself.

Almost all the Thais who have shared their opinion with me (and I ask many) are fully aware of Suthep's own shortcomings, but he has gained their respect for the good he has created (i.e raising awareness and giving people a forum to voice their opinion against the Shin-driven madness).

People [have to] put trust in him, because it is the only viable force for that cause right now, but they do know he is a means to an end only and do not want him to have any sovereignty whatsoever, and actually I believe Suthep himself knows this, and agrees and respects this.

It is a difficult choice and very hard to place trust in him, as he makes some (shocking and) contradicting statements himself, even if you discount the evil spin added by Khaosod and others.

Perhaps his recent speech is more aimed at increasing the pressure and try force a reaction - bear in mind the key in his speech was that the action points lined up were conditional to PTP refusing to accept court judgements (should they go against them).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

If he has millions of supporters then surely he can win an election, no?

Well they got 11.5 votes while they were at their weakest in 2011 during an election where they were not allowed to campaign for 80% of the votes due to campaign intimidation from the red shirts hired by Thaksin. Also the vast amount of voters intimidated by red thugs and village chiefs forcing them to vote PTP against threat of violence and harm...

In the past 3 years, they would have picked up even more due to the ineptitude of the PTP government and the shambles they have made of ALL their populist policies.

So yes..... The Dems can get many votes.

In fact, in a FREE and FAIR election, they would almost certainly take PTP to the cleaners.

But getting FREE and FAIR elections is impossible while Thaksin wields influence in Thailand and holds the north in his tyrannical grip through fear.

Have the UN come in as observers , ensure that no intimidation from villages heads, red shirts etc , just one whisper of intimidation and the UN tells the world about Thailand and its freely fought elections ,you make some very valid points, good to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

even you could be right

Sutheop has made it clean he does not want this

so the Red shirt government fans need to tell lies and make him look bad

and they call this a democratic government

You mean all the newspaper, including Nation and Bangkok post tell lies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The military has a long and less than illustrious history of coups in Thailand.

And while I'm no Thai historian, I don't get the impression that all of them were necessarily done at the behest of some kind of popular mandate from the Thai people at large. Lots of other reasons, circumstances, motivations have come into play.

So I guess my point was, unless it's to protect the nation from foreign intervention/forces, I don't see the military having any different/superior right to engage in coups vs. the Thai people at large.

Coups are, I believe by definition, an extra-legal form of taking control of a government -- no matter who's doing the deed. That's not to say, though, that it can be necessary or the best course for a country at times -- if the normal so-called democratic process isn't working. The problem, of course, is just who gets to decide that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

Represents a refinement of the technique. In the 2006 military coup no shots were fired. It wasn't necessary since the tanks were out on the street and soldiers all around. Everyone understood that should it be necessary shots would indeed be fired. In the current situation it is understood by all participants that the army stands behind Suthep's mob. Prayuth even announced that the army is out to protect the protesters. He never mentioned protecting the right of the citizens to cast ballots in a national election and indeed took no steps for that purpose. The alignment of the parties has not changed since the shooting of 100 people in 2010, but by not acting openly the army can claim to be neutral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suterp has actually done a lot of damage to his former party by splitting up their supporters. Both shared the same voters base. Come election and it will happen sooner or later, there will be those who support Suterp and will probably not vote or vote no and some who is just feed-up with the Dem antics and cross over. This happen in the 2010 election causing a landslide loss to the Dem and will benefit PT and more possibly the fringe parties to gain on the Dem strongholds. As for Suterp, really a dead end for him and he will fade away like Chamlong or Sonthi.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

cheesy.gif have you been drinking Chang?

say after me:

ELECTIONS

DEMOCRACY

if he has "millions" who want him to be PM stand for election

get it?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, with Suthep's latest comments this thing just went from tiring to downright weird and worrying. The guy is talking about some sort of civilian dictatorship with him in the role of dictator. Do his supporters start to see a whiff of danger here, or are they so blinded by fear of the man who can't be named that they are willing to continue to back this nutter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

Back again are we? Nice hols in La La Land? A full on Looney Elitist's view of Thai politics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.