Ko Tee hunt is what corruption wants: Thai opinion

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME
Ko Tee hunt is what corruption wants
Tulsathit Taptim



BANGKOK: -- The Ko Tee video has spread like wildfire through the cyber-sphere, but it wasn't born of a single, isolated spark or by accident. His outrageous remarks are a "consequence" rather than a "cause".

Any other nation would, by now, be exhausted dealing with the outgrowth of that political ill called corruption, but not Thailand. We have become experts in spinning, politicising and amplifying the consequences, while ignoring the root.

Corruption breeds individuals like Ko Tee. He is just like the street blockades. He's the same as the burning of luxury malls. The hatred spewed in the widely shared clip of his speech and in many other political statements have one thing in common: they are all consequences, not causes.

Ko Tee took his cue and the nation predictably entered knee-jerk mode. He has provoked intense anger and the caretaker government, which he supports, has vowed to take action against him. The red shirts are distancing themselves from his "personal opinions". The Democrats are doing their best to associate him with the Pheu Thai Party.

Once again, some are on the front foot while others desperately pedal backwards. Again, the country is obsessed - but at the same time fascinated perhaps. Certainly, another fire has broken out amid the political crisis, accompanied by the familiar wailing sirens of a moralising bandwagon. But this is just the latest flare-up.

We have avoided tackling the root of the problem - corruption - and as a result have to keep dealing, awkwardly, with its consequences and repercussions. We try to be righteous when people get killed, or when politically incorrect comments are made against, for example, the prime minister. How can we escape hypocrisy under these circumstances? How can we preach ethical behaviour if we are simultaneously side-stepping one of the most immoral aspects of society?

Let's imagine a Thailand without corruption. How easy would it be to take care of street mobs hell-bent on overthrowing a democratically elected administration? In other words, how difficult would it be to muster anti-government mass rallies if the taxes had been paid, the Ratchadapisek land had not been bought, the rice scheme had been clean, and charter amendments had not been so contradictory (promoting a "People's Parliament" with one hand and taking away its power to counter-balance the government with the other)?

Corruption-free politics would have taken the military out of the equation. You can claim that it was the 2006 coup that kick-started Thailand's slide down the slippery slope, but then you must ask what "pretext" the armed forces used in ousting Thaksin Shinawatra. In other words: Was the coup really a cause, or was it just a consequence?

Should Thailand "get over" Thaksin?

Yes and No.

Yes, because it's a huge mistake to assume that putting him away would equal eradication of graft, and because singling him out is corrupt in itself. No, because he spawns the popular idea that corruption might be acceptable under some circumstances, such as when it involves someone who repeatedly wins "democratic" elections.

As long as we refuse confront the root cause, the rearguard battles against Ko Tee and the likes will continue. Corruption begins as a small seed with limitless potential for growth. Allow it to become a big tree and it is extremely tricky to cut down or even contain. The tree may flourish and bear "innocent" leaves. It may serve as a sanctuary for many living creatures, who come to depend on it for shelter and food.

If that small seed is allowed to grow, a big mess is almost guaranteed. We can't fault the protesters out on the streets. We can't point an accusing finger at the military for causing our misery. It's true that two wrongs never make a right, but it's also true that one wrong can lead to many more wrongs.

Ko Tee is controversial, but take away corruption and he would be a lot easier to deal with. Blocking a democratic election is controversial, but how come something so scandalous is supported by millions? Is Thai democracy in tatters? If so, what has caused the setback? It's too simplistic to say a large proportion of the Thai population are authoritarian sour-losers rejecting a previously agreed system at the expense of the country's long-term future.

People say democracy can handle corruption. The truth is, it's the other way round. And that may even be an understatement. Corruption can consume democracy, starting by bending a few rules here and writing new ones there. It doesn't make people "cross the line" consciously, but moves the line far behind them while they are asleep.

The greatest trick corruption has ever pulled, though, is making the people who defend it believe they are doing the right thing. This sleight of hand is achieved by getting everyone to focus on the "consequences", and convincing them that a genuine debate on the cause will get them nowhere.


-- The Nation 2014-04-16

[AryanicAristocrat]

Stupid article....what is really needed in this country is a complete eradication of all corrupted politicians(from all camps ie Democrats, Pheu Thai, Chartpattana, Bhumijathai, etc), senior governemnet officials and businesses and also the ammart. The assets of these elites should be confisticated and redistributed back to the masses.

Thais should also be instilled with a sense of national pride and culture.....not workshipping Korean Shit or Japanese Shit or Chinese Shit (the latter.....enough of their colonisation of Thailand.....get rid of them!)

[ChrisY1]

Dreadful article....it's just more drivel of the evils of corruption.....these journalists are plain awful!

Now Thailand has a new National hero almost...Ko Tee! A load of trash.

"Should Thailand "get over" Thaksin?".......Of course not......bring him back and throw the book at him with all the cases pending against him......then forget him!

[somjitr]

An article arguing that corruption is the root of all evil... How novel!

[Costas2008]

Mr Taptim, giving a lecture about corruption.

A poor attempt, but enough to justify his salary as a journalist.

[kurtgruen]

Actually, I think the article addresses corruption and it's results pretty good, but the headline could have been more appropriate.

[WhizBang]

"Should Thailand "get over" Thaksin?".......Of course not......bring him back and throw the book at him with all the cases pending against him......then forget him!

Agreed. Let Thaksin waste away in prison for the rest of his life, accompanied by many of the PTP, and his sister.

[chainarong]

Ko Tee in some Western countries would be behind bars long ago , matter of fact Ko Tee would not exist in a democracy, for he's type are not brought up or allowed to mature into the kind of person to which he has became , your own society has spored people like Ko Tee, you have lots of Ko Tee's running about and you want tourists to come and visit while these people run free.

[renaissanc]

We certainly have some people on ThaiVisa today who are very unhappy and angry at the world. The journalist is just doing his job and has written an article with a valid point about corruption. By writing your angry posts you are just making the readers feel a little less happy today. Go and hug an old tree and you'll soon feel better.

[Scamper]

The headline of this article is unfortunate and misleading, but it is actually one of the best articles that The Nation has published. Because what this article does - that very few other articles manage to tackle - is the whole question of cause versus consequence, or cause and effect.

Indeed, this article asks a very salient question - if there was no rice scheme, no amnesty bill, no parliamentary abuses of power, no cabinet meetings directed through sykpe - none of that - would there be the political conflict there is now ? It's highly unlikely, and that is the point that is being made. The other point is this -

" People say democracy can handle corruption. The truth is, it's the other way round. "

This is a wonderful observation. Pheu Thai maintains that democracy can handle corruption. They believe that a simple vote will bring in those who are deeply and sincerely committed to eradicating corruption, to strengthening the checks and balances, to observing all the rigorous parliamentary procedures, and to transparency in government in all aspects in the formulation of policies and fiscal accountability. Those who disagree maintain that none of those things have happened. In fact, they maintain that the converse has happened - that there has been a push towards less accountability, less transparency, less oversight, less checks and balances and less legal consequences.

Some believe that a vote give a party the right to any such path. Others however believe that democracy isn't just expressed on a single day every four years. They believe that democracy is a daily espression, with a public that holds its politicians accountable, and who believe that democracy is served by a strong judiciary and a rigorous system of checks and balances.

[fab4]

"Blocking a democratic election is controversial, but how come something so scandalous is supported by millions?"

Was it, tulsahit, really, just how many millions supported blocking a democratic election? Not 20 million was it? No matter whether they voted or didn't vote, by expressing their opinion in an election, 20 Million Thai voters supported the holding of a democratic election, not to mention those who would have voted by were prevented from doing so, apparently another 6 million. I think their views count more than those supporting a self described "scandalous" action, don't you, tulsahit?

[Thai at Heart]

Ko Tee said something pretty serious.

I don't understand what that has to do with corruption.

[Thai at Heart]

"Blocking a democratic election is controversial, but how come something so scandalous is supported by millions?"

Was it, tulsahit, really, just how many millions supported blocking a democratic election? Not 20 million was it? No matter whether they voted or didn't vote, by expressing their opinion in an election, 20 Million Thai voters supported the holding of a democratic election, not to mention those who would have voted by were prevented from doing so, apparently another 6 million. I think their views count more than those supporting a self described "scandalous" action, don't you, tulsahit?

Absolutely correct.

There is little or no proof of a majority of Thais supporting blocking of elections. Millions? Maybe, but does it rank to 20% of the voting population? Doubt it.

[Thai at Heart]

The headline of this article is unfortunate and misleading, but it is actually one of the best articles that The Nation has published. Because what this article does - that very few other articles manage to tackle - is the whole question of cause versus consequence, or cause and effect.

Indeed, this article asks a very salient question - if there was no rice scheme, no amnesty bill, no parliamentary abuses of power, no cabinet meetings directed through sykpe - none of that - would there be the political conflict there is now ? It's highly unlikely, and that is the point that is being made. The other point is this -

" People say democracy can handle corruption. The truth is, it's the other way round. "

This is a wonderful observation. Pheu Thai maintains that democracy can handle corruption. They believe that a simple vote will bring in those who are deeply and sincerely committed to eradicating corruption, to strengthening the checks and balances, to observing all the rigorous parliamentary procedures, and to transparency in government in all aspects in the formulation of policies and fiscal accountability. Those who disagree maintain that none of those things have happened. In fact, they maintain that the converse has happened - that there has been a push towards less accountability, less transparency, less oversight, less checks and balances and less legal consequences.

Some believe that a vote give a party the right to any such path. Others however believe that democracy isn't just expressed on a single day every four years. They believe that democracy is a daily espression, with a public that holds its politicians accountable, and who believe that democracy is served by a strong judiciary and a rigorous system of checks and balances.

If Judges and courts did their job properly, impartially and without even the hint of bias, there would have been none of these issues.

A flexible judiciary with nonsense sentencing is the real root of the problem

[Morch]

"Blocking a democratic election is controversial, but how come something so scandalous is supported by millions?"

Was it, tulsahit, really, just how many millions supported blocking a democratic election? Not 20 million was it? No matter whether they voted or didn't vote, by expressing their opinion in an election, 20 Million Thai voters supported the holding of a democratic election, not to mention those who would have voted by were prevented from doing so, apparently another 6 million. I think their views count more than those supporting a self described "scandalous" action, don't you, tulsahit?

You consider the no-votes and invalid votes as expressing support for holding an election?

And 6 millions prevented from voting? Not disputing this, just wondering if based on anything.

[rickirs]

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

Ko Tee in some Western countries would be behind bars long ago , matter of fact Ko Tee would not exist in a democracy, for he's type are not brought up or allowed to mature into the kind of person to which he has became , your own society has spored people like Ko Tee, you have lots of Ko Tee's running about and you want tourists to come and visit while these people run free. width=19 alt=bah.gif>

There is an almost universal objection to Thailand's Lese Majeste Laws, even by some of the Constitutional Monarchies.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/66982/international-pressure-against-thailands-lese-majeste-law-growing/

In the more complete democracies such as the US, Ko Tee would probably have his own show to pontificate his views to millions of listeners. Democracy does not fear people expressing their opinions.

[metisdead]

A reminder that there is to be No Discussion Of The Monarchy In Political Context which includes :

- Do not discuss succession or speculate on the future of The Monarchy.

Posts and replies in violation of this have been removed.

[chotthee]

Khun John Lenon: Just imagine a Thailand without corruption.

Or maybe Ko Tee is the Nelson Mandela of Thailand? A terrorist that later become President after jail.

Ko Tee is a paid thug of Thaksin. We all know that.

He is a very typical Red shirt leader.

Edited April 16, 2014 by chotthee

[Thaddeus]

In the more complete democracies such as the US, Ko Tee would probably have his own show to pontificate his views to millions of listeners. Democracy does not fear people expressing their opinions.

Correct, and proves that Thailand may have elections, but has never had a functioning democracy.

[3NUMBAS]

backward and stuck in the past country that cant move into the future as its hamstrung by ridiculous ideas

[djjamie]

The headline of this article is unfortunate and misleading, but it is actually one of the best articles that The Nation has published. Because what this article does - that very few other articles manage to tackle - is the whole question of cause versus consequence, or cause and effect.

Indeed, this article asks a very salient question - if there was no rice scheme, no amnesty bill, no parliamentary abuses of power, no cabinet meetings directed through sykpe - none of that - would there be the political conflict there is now ? It's highly unlikely, and that is the point that is being made. The other point is this -

" People say democracy can handle corruption. The truth is, it's the other way round. "

This is a wonderful observation. Pheu Thai maintains that democracy can handle corruption. They believe that a simple vote will bring in those who are deeply and sincerely committed to eradicating corruption, to strengthening the checks and balances, to observing all the rigorous parliamentary procedures, and to transparency in government in all aspects in the formulation of policies and fiscal accountability. Those who disagree maintain that none of those things have happened. In fact, they maintain that the converse has happened - that there has been a push towards less accountability, less transparency, less oversight, less checks and balances and less legal consequences.

Some believe that a vote give a party the right to any such path. Others however believe that democracy isn't just expressed on a single day every four years. They believe that democracy is a daily espression, with a public that holds its politicians accountable, and who believe that democracy is served by a strong judiciary and a rigorous system of checks and balances.

If Judges and courts did their job properly, impartially and without even the hint of bias, there would have been none of these issues.

A flexible judiciary with nonsense sentencing is the real root of the problem

When the EC found faults with the BKK governor dealing with election law and showed they were not biased apparently it was a huge plot (that word again the PTP love) by the DEM's to make the EC seem nonpartisan. That the BKK governor was a pawn that was expendable. Can't seem to win. When the EC pick on the PTP it is a biased system. Pick on the DEM's it is a DEM plot. How convenient.

So what your really saying is when the courts are in the PTP pockets like the police and the DSI then they will be no issues. When they uphold the law it is all a plot against them.

That is PTP logic right there.

What is interesting is that even when the evidence is proven beyond reasonable doubt and is absolutely irrefutable like that thaksin granted a tax fee loan in his capacity as the PM to allow Myanmar to buy products from thaksins own company. So thaksin essentially gave tax money to someone to give back to thaksin. So with that evidence they still claim the courts are biased. I agree though. They are biased. They are biased in ensuring criminals pay for there misdeeds.

[manstr23]

"Blocking a democratic election is controversial, but how come something so scandalous is supported by millions?"

Was it, tulsahit, really, just how many millions supported blocking a democratic election? Not 20 million was it? No matter whether they voted or didn't vote, by expressing their opinion in an election, 20 Million Thai voters supported the holding of a democratic election, not to mention those who would have voted by were prevented from doing so, apparently another 6 million. I think their views count more than those supporting a self described "scandalous" action, don't you, tulsahit?

You have to change your play book it is seriously outdated. How many times do we have hear this crap. I do not know how many Thais voted for or against the caretaker Government and you don't know either. One thing is for sure there are perhaps more against these Government thief's then for.

[Crushdepth]

You can put me in the nation haters camp today. Someone got paid for writing this garbage?

[yooper2001]

Thailand should look at Ukraine. This is your future. Corruption was rampant in Ukraine. I lived in Ukraine and I could not even get a water meter installed unless I paid extra. You must pay under the table too get any document from any government facility. There was a superior judge that had $1,000,000 USD in cash in his desk and tried to say it was gift money after he built a house. ( as is custom in Ukraine to throw money into a new home ) He escaped from jail after faking a heart attack and police found him hiding in his mother in laws attic six months later.