What makes 'Thai-style democracy' globally palatable?

[tbthailand]

if that is your definition of idiot, then call me 'stu-peey'

and proud of it.

I'll take democracy over the alternative any day of the week.

You've never lived in a democracy.

What is the proof of your assertion? Or is this just a meaningless or idiotic statement comment?

It's a statement of fact - tell which democracy you have lived in.

The democracy lie is the greatest lie told to the masses.

Be careful of not making an idiot of yourself by replying something like the UK, or the USA - which are not democracies, and never have been.

"Be careful of not making an idiot of yourself"

Are you sure you want to say that?

I disagree with your assertion, but we might have some common ground. If you look at the definition of democracy and you look at the system of government in the USA, then it is clearly a democratic system.

But democratic systems like the one is the US do not always produce results that reflect the will / desires of the voters. There was an academic report recently that objectively shows this to be the case in the US - the research covered the last 40 years of US government. You may already be familiar with it.

When a country has a system of government that matches the definition of democracy, then I call it a democracy. The results of that system are not perfect. But as I said earlier, I would rather live in a democracy than the alternative.

[rubl]

Throwing up diversions and dodging the post. Run rubl run. Here's the part of the post you are running from:

"I see two probably outcomes to this situation. I think the most likely outcome is that the junta will continue to buy popularity by continuing or implementing populace programs--subsidies for rice and rubber growers, loan forgiveness, continued tax cuts, big spending projects, etc. Before the bills for these policies and programs become due they will allow elections. Of course the elected officials will have little real power, but they will take the brunt of criticism when programs have to be scaled back and/or taxes raised. The military will stay behind the scenes ready to stage another coup if they are displeased. And if this leads to the continuance of the cycle of elections and coups, no doubt there will be people who will maintain that the problem is that the military didn't stay in power long enough.

A second, and much worse outcome, is that the military will decide to stay in power until everything 'fixed'. When spending becomes unsustainable the head man will buy support from powerful backers; either by giving them monopoly rights over critical segments of the economy (telecoms, electricity, cement, etc.) as was done in Pakistan and Egypt, or by simply allowing military commanders to run certain parts of the country for their benefit, as was done in the old Roman Empire and modern Myanmar. This is the road to ruin for Thailand, the more entrenched the military becomes in the economy the harder it will be to displace it, and the longer the military runs things the less prepared the Thai people will be for democracy when the military is finally displaced.

The first option is bad, the second option worse. I think the best solution for Thailand is to keep military rule as short as possible, which means the Thai people must achieve a balancing act of not giving the military an excuse for a crackdown and prolonged rule, but not giving them the impression that they are welcome to stay in charge as long as they like. I also believe, unlike many posters here, that freedom of speech, press, and assembly are essential to preparing the Thai people for real democracy, and to keep the military from becoming comfortable in their current position."

Explain what is wrong. Explain why you are running.

My dear Brucy, you 'see' two probable outcomes and with what you see you expect me to seriously try to fathom why you see what you see AND react on it? You simply 'dare' me?

You start to sound like Pheu Thai spokesperson Prompong who accuses and than challenges the one he accuse to prove it isn't true.

Edited August 26, 2014 by rubl

[rubl]

The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written.

... ...

Which reminds me

"“Besides,” continued Tully, as if he had not heard her last remark, “I don’t like Communism. I don’t like to think that anyone’s my equal. Nobody is. I’m superior to a great number of people and inferior to others, and for that reason I’m not at all sure that I’m in favour of democracy either. It’s nonsense to have the vote of someone who only after enormous struggle achieves the ability to read, be the equal of the vote of another who can read in twenty-four languages, though reading is no criterion. I merely cite it as an example""

The Wrath of Grapes (aka The Mouse that Roared) - 1955 Leonard Wibberly

Is this an argument for only allowing the 'educated' to vote?

I have a Thai friend who is finishing her Masters Degree in Chemistry and is considering options for a PhD abroad, she is the daughter of a barely literate northern Thai woman who worked hard to put all three of her daughters through university. Do you think this woman should not be allowed to vote?

None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?

Are you presenting an argument for elitism that is both arrogant and ignorant?

My dear chap, you ask if this is an argument for and follow with assuming it is.

BTW I am not a member of high IQ societies, I don't have three university degrees, but I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO

[rubl]

Issue is, that the politicians themselves are so universally scaly that they will never propose anything that rains on their parade.

No one in Thailand enters politics to serve the country.

I guess that's one reason why the NCPO selected the NLA to make sure there would be no political bickering in the day-to-day activities. Also anyone involved in the reforms may not run for office for three or five years. That may explain the luckwarm applications for an NRC seat.

The ncpo thing might just work to be honest. All I know is that is these guys really wanted to serve the country. They would take a public oath, no elections for 5 years. And we are cleaning everyone's house. Ours and yours.

Even if the members of the NCPO were willing to get into that, I doubt you'd be able to find much support for such suggestion. If I'm to believe what is written here, Thailand should immediately return to the situation before the coup.

[rubl]

Is this an argument for only allowing the 'educated' to vote?

I have a Thai friend who is finishing her Masters Degree in Chemistry and is considering options for a PhD abroad, she is the daughter of a barely literate northern Thai woman who worked hard to put all three of her daughters through university. Do you think this woman should not be allowed to vote?

None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?

Are you presenting an argument for elitism that is both arrogant and ignorant?

The worst type of elitism is the one that is based on inheritance and descent.

Closely followed, by or equal to elitism based on wealth.

Mind you, you should first define 'elitism'. May be something like 'three university degrees and member of a high IQ society' and mentioning that as a simple by-the-way as if that should be reason enough not to question any further?

Edited August 26, 2014 by rubl

[rubl]

if that is your definition of idiot, then call me 'stu-peey'

and proud of it.

I'll take democracy over the alternative any day of the week.

You've never lived in a democracy.

What is the proof of your assertion? Or is this just a meaningless or idiotic statement comment?

Well, to be honest, we only know TB comes from the USA, but he may have lived in democracies as well.

[boomerangutang]

It's a statement of fact - tell which democracy you have lived in.

The democracy lie is the greatest lie told to the masses.

Be careful of not making an idiot of yourself by replying something like the UK, or the USA - which are not democracies, and never have been.

I don't like the tone of your recent posts here. It's ok to assert yourself, but assertions can get overdone, and then a person can sound strident and shrill.

I doubt there's such a thing as a perfect democracy any more than there's a perfect house or a perfect career. The US and UK are beacons to the world in the democracy dept. They're not perfect, but they're hell's bells better than most other countries. Perhaps better then those two, are NZ or Scandinavian countries.

[heybruce]

Throwing up diversions and dodging the post. Run rubl run. Here's the part of the post you are running from:

"I see two probably outcomes to this situation. I think the most likely outcome is that the junta will continue to buy popularity by continuing or implementing populace programs--subsidies for rice and rubber growers, loan forgiveness, continued tax cuts, big spending projects, etc. Before the bills for these policies and programs become due they will allow elections. Of course the elected officials will have little real power, but they will take the brunt of criticism when programs have to be scaled back and/or taxes raised. The military will stay behind the scenes ready to stage another coup if they are displeased. And if this leads to the continuance of the cycle of elections and coups, no doubt there will be people who will maintain that the problem is that the military didn't stay in power long enough.

A second, and much worse outcome, is that the military will decide to stay in power until everything 'fixed'. When spending becomes unsustainable the head man will buy support from powerful backers; either by giving them monopoly rights over critical segments of the economy (telecoms, electricity, cement, etc.) as was done in Pakistan and Egypt, or by simply allowing military commanders to run certain parts of the country for their benefit, as was done in the old Roman Empire and modern Myanmar. This is the road to ruin for Thailand, the more entrenched the military becomes in the economy the harder it will be to displace it, and the longer the military runs things the less prepared the Thai people will be for democracy when the military is finally displaced.

The first option is bad, the second option worse. I think the best solution for Thailand is to keep military rule as short as possible, which means the Thai people must achieve a balancing act of not giving the military an excuse for a crackdown and prolonged rule, but not giving them the impression that they are welcome to stay in charge as long as they like. I also believe, unlike many posters here, that freedom of speech, press, and assembly are essential to preparing the Thai people for real democracy, and to keep the military from becoming comfortable in their current position."

Explain what is wrong. Explain why you are running.

My dear Brucy, you 'see' two probable outcomes and with what you see you expect me to seriously try to fathom why you see what you see AND react on it? You simply 'dare' me?

You start to sound like Pheu Thai spokesperson Prompong who accuses and than challenges the one he accuse to prove it isn't true.

I think your point is that you don't want to reply to my post. Fine, don't.

You replied to my original post with irrelevant critiquing of my choice of words and facts, without disputing anything. You have chosen to omit your irrelevant reply. If you do choose to reply to my posts, please explain why you agree or disagree.

[heybruce]

The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written.

... ...

Which reminds me

"“Besides,” continued Tully, as if he had not heard her last remark, “I don’t like Communism. I don’t like to think that anyone’s my equal. Nobody is. I’m superior to a great number of people and inferior to others, and for that reason I’m not at all sure that I’m in favour of democracy either. It’s nonsense to have the vote of someone who only after enormous struggle achieves the ability to read, be the equal of the vote of another who can read in twenty-four languages, though reading is no criterion. I merely cite it as an example""

The Wrath of Grapes (aka The Mouse that Roared) - 1955 Leonard Wibberly

Is this an argument for only allowing the 'educated' to vote?

I have a Thai friend who is finishing her Masters Degree in Chemistry and is considering options for a PhD abroad, she is the daughter of a barely literate northern Thai woman who worked hard to put all three of her daughters through university. Do you think this woman should not be allowed to vote?

None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?

Are you presenting an argument for elitism that is both arrogant and ignorant?

My dear chap, you ask if this is an argument for and follow with assuming it is.

BTW I am not a member of high IQ societies, I don't have three university degrees, but I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO

"I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO"

Yeah, in your humble opinion. But you don't dispute my facts and logic in a true and straight manner (prove me wrong with past posts if you can). If fact your posts seem to be largely unsubstantiated opinions, and not obviously humble ones. Finally, and once again, you have not directly addressed any of the points I raised. Do you confuse diversion and obfuscation with 'true and straight'?

However let's cut to the key point: Which Thai's do you think should be denied the right to vote, and why? Or were you using that Wibberly post just to increase your post count?

[heybruce]

Is this an argument for only allowing the 'educated' to vote?

I have a Thai friend who is finishing her Masters Degree in Chemistry and is considering options for a PhD abroad, she is the daughter of a barely literate northern Thai woman who worked hard to put all three of her daughters through university. Do you think this woman should not be allowed to vote?

None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?

Are you presenting an argument for elitism that is both arrogant and ignorant?

The worst type of elitism is the one that is based on inheritance and descent.

Closely followed, by or equal to elitism based on wealth.

Mind you, you should first define 'elitism'. May be something like 'three university degrees and member of a high IQ society' and mentioning that as a simple by-the-way as if that should be reason enough not to question any further?

"None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?"

My words, based on the reality of my life, as a counter to your post that suggests that uneducated people should not be allowed to vote.

You struck a nerve. I would never deny the people who raised me the right to vote, or my friend's mother the right to vote, just because they didn't have the same opportunities I've had. Who would you deny the right to vote?

[SteveFong]

Is this an argument for only allowing the 'educated' to vote?

I have a Thai friend who is finishing her Masters Degree in Chemistry and is considering options for a PhD abroad, she is the daughter of a barely literate northern Thai woman who worked hard to put all three of her daughters through university. Do you think this woman should not be allowed to vote?

None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?

Are you presenting an argument for elitism that is both arrogant and ignorant?

The worst type of elitism is the one that is based on inheritance and descent.

Closely followed, by or equal to elitism based on wealth.

Mind you, you should first define 'elitism'. May be something like 'three university degrees and member of a high IQ society' and mentioning that as a simple by-the-way as if that should be reason enough not to question any further?

"None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?"

My words, based on the reality of my life, as a counter to your post that suggests that uneducated people should not be allowed to vote.

You struck a nerve. I would never deny the people who raised me the right to vote, or my friend's mother the right to vote, just because they didn't have the same opportunities I've had. Who would you deny the right to vote?

Who equates intelligence with IQ?

[heybruce]

The worst type of elitism is the one that is based on inheritance and descent.

Closely followed, by or equal to elitism based on wealth.

Mind you, you should first define 'elitism'. May be something like 'three university degrees and member of a high IQ society' and mentioning that as a simple by-the-way as if that should be reason enough not to question any further?

"None of my grandparents finished high school, I have three university degrees and belong to two high IQ societies, and do not consider myself the equal of my grandparents who were denied opportunities they made available to me. Do you think my grandparents should have been denied the right to vote?"

My words, based on the reality of my life, as a counter to your post that suggests that uneducated people should not be allowed to vote.

You struck a nerve. I would never deny the people who raised me the right to vote, or my friend's mother the right to vote, just because they didn't have the same opportunities I've had. Who would you deny the right to vote?

Who equates intelligence with IQ?

A valid, if somewhat irrelevant and diversionary, point. One can not provide an objective measure of a subjective concept such as intelligence without making subjective judgments as to what to measure. However society has long sought an objective measure of intelligence, and by standards accepted by Mensa and Integra I qualify for membership. I take greater pride in my accomplishments as an engineer, but perhaps it would make you feel better if I told you that I have cleaned more toilets, shoveled more dirt, and done more stoop labor in tobacco fields than most posters in the TV Forum.

As I wrote, somewhat diversionary. Do you have any opinions on Thai style democracy or who should be denied the right to vote?

Edited August 26, 2014 by heybruce

[Thai at Heart]

Issue is, that the politicians themselves are so universally scaly that they will never propose anything that rains on their parade.

No one in Thailand enters politics to serve the country.

I guess that's one reason why the NCPO selected the NLA to make sure there would be no political bickering in the day-to-day activities. Also anyone involved in the reforms may not run for office for three or five years. That may explain the luckwarm applications for an NRC seat.

The ncpo thing might just work to be honest. All I know is that is these guys really wanted to serve the country. They would take a public oath, no elections for 5 years. And we are cleaning everyone's house. Ours and yours.

Even if the members of the NCPO were willing to get into that, I doubt you'd be able to find much support for such suggestion. If I'm to believe what is written here, Thailand should immediately return to the situation before the coup.

Well, the problem with Thailand is the essential hypocrisy of all sides.

My corruption is not as harmful as your corruption, therefore you are bad and I am good.

Until someone wallops everyone's corruption the cycle will continue.

[Aree Wongwanlee]

Is a democratic government a government of the people, by the people, for the people?

And is the US is a good example of a democratic government? Can somebody please explain how that computes?

[rubl]

My dear chap, you ask if this is an argument for and follow with assuming it is.

BTW I am not a member of high IQ societies, I don't have three university degrees, but I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO

"I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO"

Yeah, in your humble opinion. But you don't dispute my facts and logic in a true and straight manner (prove me wrong with past posts if you can). If fact your posts seem to be largely unsubstantiated opinions, and not obviously humble ones. Finally, and once again, you have not directly addressed any of the points I raised. Do you confuse diversion and obfuscation with 'true and straight'?

However let's cut to the key point: Which Thai's do you think should be denied the right to vote, and why? Or were you using that Wibberly post just to increase your post count?

Are you the three university degrees high IQ member who wrote

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. "

If you generalise like that and bend the truth a 'wee' bit you should not expect people to take you serious. IMHO and all that.

Comrade rubl

[heybruce]

My dear chap, you ask if this is an argument for and follow with assuming it is.

BTW I am not a member of high IQ societies, I don't have three university degrees, but I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO

"I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO"

Yeah, in your humble opinion. But you don't dispute my facts and logic in a true and straight manner (prove me wrong with past posts if you can). If fact your posts seem to be largely unsubstantiated opinions, and not obviously humble ones. Finally, and once again, you have not directly addressed any of the points I raised. Do you confuse diversion and obfuscation with 'true and straight'?

However let's cut to the key point: Which Thai's do you think should be denied the right to vote, and why? Or were you using that Wibberly post just to increase your post count?

Are you the three university degrees high IQ member who wrote

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. "

If you generalise like that and bend the truth a 'wee' bit you should not expect people to take you serious. IMHO and all that.

Comrade rubl

tbthailand ended a post with:

"If and when there is a new constitution, and if and when there are new elections, the elections will be the least fair elections that Thailand has seen in over 20 years."

The first paragraph of my reply was:

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written."

Your response is to once again edit and take my post out of context, and then suggest this hurts my credibility. Just as a reminder, you're the one who wrote, and never retracted:

"Well, nice for you, but those of us in Thailand cannot see all news sources outside Thailand. Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41

Not a true statement about VPN use, was it? Thanks for worrying about my credibility, but....

[spidermike007]

Thai style democracy means reversing all the political reforms and human rights of the common people and giving complete power back to the ruling elites.Simple really

Are you somehow making a claim that the elites did not have great power, amass extraordinary wealth, and wield immense influence during the last three "democratically" elected administrations? Not sure how an argument like that can be made. I am no fan of military style leadership, but it is possible the elites will have less influence now. And that would be a very, very good thing for this nation.

[rubl]

My dear chap, you ask if this is an argument for and follow with assuming it is.

BTW I am not a member of high IQ societies, I don't have three university degrees, but I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO

"I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO"

Yeah, in your humble opinion. But you don't dispute my facts and logic in a true and straight manner (prove me wrong with past posts if you can). If fact your posts seem to be largely unsubstantiated opinions, and not obviously humble ones. Finally, and once again, you have not directly addressed any of the points I raised. Do you confuse diversion and obfuscation with 'true and straight'?

However let's cut to the key point: Which Thai's do you think should be denied the right to vote, and why? Or were you using that Wibberly post just to increase your post count?

Are you the three university degrees high IQ member who wrote

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. "

If you generalise like that and bend the truth a 'wee' bit you should not expect people to take you serious. IMHO and all that.

Comrade rubl

tbthailand ended a post with:

"If and when there is a new constitution, and if and when there are new elections, the elections will be the least fair elections that Thailand has seen in over 20 years."

The first paragraph of my reply was:

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written."

Your response is to once again edit and take my post out of context, and then suggest this hurts my credibility. Just as a reminder, you're the one who wrote, and never retracted:

"Well, nice for you, but those of us in Thailand cannot see all news sources outside Thailand. Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41

Not a true statement about VPN use, was it? Thanks for worrying about my credibility, but....

Oh come on Brucy. On a prediction from TB you make a statement which is not true. In a way you two seem to indicate to work in tandem, interesting.

Anyway, as far as VPN goes, read again. Maybe use that high intellect. 'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'. Even here on TVF we have forum rule #4

"4) You will not not discuss methods of bypassing blocking of websites, or circumventing any censorship of the internet or other communications by lawful authorities."

[heybruce]

"I seem to be a bit more true and straight than you are. IMHO"

Yeah, in your humble opinion. But you don't dispute my facts and logic in a true and straight manner (prove me wrong with past posts if you can). If fact your posts seem to be largely unsubstantiated opinions, and not obviously humble ones. Finally, and once again, you have not directly addressed any of the points I raised. Do you confuse diversion and obfuscation with 'true and straight'?

However let's cut to the key point: Which Thai's do you think should be denied the right to vote, and why? Or were you using that Wibberly post just to increase your post count?

Are you the three university degrees high IQ member who wrote

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. "

If you generalise like that and bend the truth a 'wee' bit you should not expect people to take you serious. IMHO and all that.

Comrade rubl

tbthailand ended a post with:

"If and when there is a new constitution, and if and when there are new elections, the elections will be the least fair elections that Thailand has seen in over 20 years."

The first paragraph of my reply was:

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written."

Your response is to once again edit and take my post out of context, and then suggest this hurts my credibility. Just as a reminder, you're the one who wrote, and never retracted:

"Well, nice for you, but those of us in Thailand cannot see all news sources outside Thailand. Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41

Not a true statement about VPN use, was it? Thanks for worrying about my credibility, but....

Oh come on Brucy. On a prediction from TB you make a statement which is not true. In a way you two seem to indicate to work in tandem, interesting.

Anyway, as far as VPN goes, read again. Maybe use that high intellect. 'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'. Even here on TVF we have forum rule #4

"4) You will not not discuss methods of bypassing blocking of websites, or circumventing any censorship of the internet or other communications by lawful authorities."

Actually it was you who indicated that VPN's can be used to bypass censorship, I wasn't aware of that until you posted. That makes you the one violating forum rule #4. Also, you wrote nothing about using a VPN in an illegal manner, you just made the incorrect statement that "using VPN is forbidden".

As to the truth of my statement; the Democrat's leadership choose their words carefully when they are speaking to the media, but their rank and file are not so careful. My statement was based on interviews of Democrats I've seen on television, but seems to be supported by the Democrats past hostility to elections. But as I stated before, it was a minor point barely related to the rest of my post, a post that you edited to take out of context. You do that a lot.

Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable.

[rubl]

Are you the three university degrees high IQ member who wrote

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. "

If you generalise like that and bend the truth a 'wee' bit you should not expect people to take you serious. IMHO and all that.

Comrade rubl

tbthailand ended a post with:

"If and when there is a new constitution, and if and when there are new elections, the elections will be the least fair elections that Thailand has seen in over 20 years."

The first paragraph of my reply was:

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written."

Your response is to once again edit and take my post out of context, and then suggest this hurts my credibility. Just as a reminder, you're the one who wrote, and never retracted:

"Well, nice for you, but those of us in Thailand cannot see all news sources outside Thailand. Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41

Not a true statement about VPN use, was it? Thanks for worrying about my credibility, but....

Oh come on Brucy. On a prediction from TB you make a statement which is not true. In a way you two seem to indicate to work in tandem, interesting.

Anyway, as far as VPN goes, read again. Maybe use that high intellect. 'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'. Even here on TVF we have forum rule #4

"4) You will not not discuss methods of bypassing blocking of websites, or circumventing any censorship of the internet or other communications by lawful authorities."

Actually it was you who indicated that VPN's can be used to bypass censorship, I wasn't aware of that until you posted. That makes you the one violating forum rule #4. Also, you wrote nothing about using a VPN in an illegal manner, you just made the incorrect statement that "using VPN is forbidden".

As to the truth of my statement; the Democrat's leadership choose their words carefully when they are speaking to the media, but their rank and file are not so careful. My statement was based on interviews of Democrats I've seen on television, but seems to be supported by the Democrats past hostility to elections. But as I stated before, it was a minor point barely related to the rest of my post, a post that you edited to take out of context. You do that a lot.

Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable.

For a self-proclaimed three university degree member of a high IQ society you do seem to be a bit dense at times, my dear Brucy.

So, tell me is "'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'" a discussion or a simple warning? My statement is correct it is forbidden to use VPN to reach all those news sources you seem to like.

As for "The Democrats have made no secret of the fact ..." you use that as some seem to like to use "Pheu Thai has made no secret of advocating an independent Lanna State". Neither is/are correct. With your 'high' intellect IQ you should understand that.

Back to the topic, we had various Thai style democracies and indeed it predates Thaksin. Interesting you mention that as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy. BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy. Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable.

Edited August 29, 2014 by rubl

[heybruce]

tbthailand ended a post with:

"If and when there is a new constitution, and if and when there are new elections, the elections will be the least fair elections that Thailand has seen in over 20 years."

The first paragraph of my reply was:

"The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that they'd like to disenfranchise those they don't think are qualified to vote, meaning a great many of the Thai voters. I don't think the election will be that blatantly fixed. I think it will probably be a reasonably fair election, but the elected offices will have little real power under the constitution that is being written."

Your response is to once again edit and take my post out of context, and then suggest this hurts my credibility. Just as a reminder, you're the one who wrote, and never retracted:

"Well, nice for you, but those of us in Thailand cannot see all news sources outside Thailand. Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41

Not a true statement about VPN use, was it? Thanks for worrying about my credibility, but....

Oh come on Brucy. On a prediction from TB you make a statement which is not true. In a way you two seem to indicate to work in tandem, interesting.

Anyway, as far as VPN goes, read again. Maybe use that high intellect. 'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'. Even here on TVF we have forum rule #4

"4) You will not not discuss methods of bypassing blocking of websites, or circumventing any censorship of the internet or other communications by lawful authorities."

Actually it was you who indicated that VPN's can be used to bypass censorship, I wasn't aware of that until you posted. That makes you the one violating forum rule #4. Also, you wrote nothing about using a VPN in an illegal manner, you just made the incorrect statement that "using VPN is forbidden".

As to the truth of my statement; the Democrat's leadership choose their words carefully when they are speaking to the media, but their rank and file are not so careful. My statement was based on interviews of Democrats I've seen on television, but seems to be supported by the Democrats past hostility to elections. But as I stated before, it was a minor point barely related to the rest of my post, a post that you edited to take out of context. You do that a lot.

Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable.

For a self-proclaimed three university degree member of a high IQ society you do seem to be a bit dense at times, my dear Brucy.

So, tell me is "'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'" a discussion or a simple warning? My statement is correct it is forbidden to use VPN to reach all those news sources you seem to like.

As for "The Democrats have made no secret of the fact ..." you use that as some seem to like to use "Pheu Thai has made no secret of advocating an independent Lanna State". Neither is/are correct. With your 'high' intellect IQ you should understand that.

Back to the topic, we had various Thai style democracies and indeed it predates Thaksin. Interesting you mention that as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy. BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy.Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable.

"Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much."

This was not a warning, just a blatantly incorrect statement, one you won't acknowledge. VPN's are commonly used in Thailand and are legal.

:...as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy."

Also incorrect, I just believe the elected government was preferable to a coup, and would have led to a better democracy if more elections had been allowed. You know that, but you can't argue against it so you misstate my position to something you can argue against. My statement, which you did not address, was:

"Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable."

Your irrelevant reply was first:

"BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy."

Since Thailand doesn't have democracy now, we have to discuss the past democracies to discuss the topic How these democracies repeatedly end is within scope of the topic.

You then stated:

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed by the last military coup, so you approve of another coup. It seems you don't think the people should be allowed to choose their government. Apparently democracy in Thailand is not palatable to you.

[rubl]

For a self-proclaimed three university degree member of a high IQ society you do seem to be a bit dense at times, my dear Brucy.

So, tell me is "'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'" a discussion or a simple warning? My statement is correct it is forbidden to use VPN to reach all those news sources you seem to like.

As for "The Democrats have made no secret of the fact ..." you use that as some seem to like to use "Pheu Thai has made no secret of advocating an independent Lanna State". Neither is/are correct. With your 'high' intellect IQ you should understand that.

Back to the topic, we had various Thai style democracies and indeed it predates Thaksin. Interesting you mention that as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy. BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy.Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable.

"Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much."

This was not a warning, just a blatantly incorrect statement, one you won't acknowledge. VPN's are commonly used in Thailand and are legal.

:...as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy."

Also incorrect, I just believe the elected government was preferable to a coup, and would have led to a better democracy if more elections had been allowed. You know that, but you can't argue against it so you misstate my position to something you can argue against. My statement, which you did not address, was:

"Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable."

Your irrelevant reply was first:

"BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy."

Since Thailand doesn't have democracy now, we have to discuss the past democracies to discuss the topic How these democracies repeatedly end is within scope of the topic.

You then stated:

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed by the last military coup, so you approve of another coup. It seems you don't think the people should be allowed to choose their government. Apparently democracy in Thailand is not palatable to you.

For a self-professed high IQ person you are somewhat dense. You also seem to have a problem with being able to differentiate between what people state, describe or think.

You wrote

"Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable."

Under that assumption, trying to follow your line of thought I write

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

and then you just write "Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed ..."

I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand what your 'palatible' means.

As for VPN, in the context of the discussion using VPN to try to read all those interesting news items you think we should read is forbidden. Didn't you try to tell me context is all important?

Anyway, globally the World continues running around the Sun and only some TVF posters seem to have difficulties with Thai style democracy whether in its old style or in its still to be formulated new style. In the mean time Thais wonder what's the problem, allegedly that is.

[heybruce]

For a self-proclaimed three university degree member of a high IQ society you do seem to be a bit dense at times, my dear Brucy.

So, tell me is "'cannot see all news sources' and 'even using VPN is forbidden'" a discussion or a simple warning? My statement is correct it is forbidden to use VPN to reach all those news sources you seem to like.

As for "The Democrats have made no secret of the fact ..." you use that as some seem to like to use "Pheu Thai has made no secret of advocating an independent Lanna State". Neither is/are correct. With your 'high' intellect IQ you should understand that.

Back to the topic, we had various Thai style democracies and indeed it predates Thaksin. Interesting you mention that as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy. BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy.Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable.

"Even using VPN is forbidden and was already mentioned in the Criminal Computer Act the Yingluck government liked so much."

This was not a warning, just a blatantly incorrect statement, one you won't acknowledge. VPN's are commonly used in Thailand and are legal.

:...as staunch supporter of the back to before the coup type of Thai style failed democracy."

Also incorrect, I just believe the elected government was preferable to a coup, and would have led to a better democracy if more elections had been allowed. You know that, but you can't argue against it so you misstate my position to something you can argue against. My statement, which you did not address, was:

"Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable."

Your irrelevant reply was first:

"BTW the topic is not about coups, but about Thai style democracy."

Since Thailand doesn't have democracy now, we have to discuss the past democracies to discuss the topic How these democracies repeatedly end is within scope of the topic.

You then stated:

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed by the last military coup, so you approve of another coup. It seems you don't think the people should be allowed to choose their government. Apparently democracy in Thailand is not palatable to you.

For a self-professed high IQ person you are somewhat dense. You also seem to have a problem with being able to differentiate between what people state, describe or think.

You wrote

"Getting back to the topic at hand, what makes Thai-style democracy different is that a minority with the support of the military repeatedly topples elected governments. This is a characteristic that predates Thaksin. I don't think it should be globally palatable."

Under that assumption, trying to follow your line of thought I write

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

and then you just write "Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed ..."

I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand what your 'palatible' means.

As for VPN, in the context of the discussion using VPN to try to read all those interesting news items you think we should read is forbidden. Didn't you try to tell me context is all important?

Anyway, globally the World continues running around the Sun and only some TVF posters seem to have difficulties with Thai style democracy whether in its old style or in its still to be formulated new style. In the mean time Thais wonder what's the problem, allegedly that is.

"Under that assumption, trying to follow your line of thought I write

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

and then you just write "Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed ..."

I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand what your 'palatible' means."

Previously you've been critical of the government that preceded the coup. Have you done a U-turn? Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?

Go back to your statement #1012 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41 and review the posts leading to it. I advocated reading news from sources outside of Thailand, the uncensored news. I never suggested using a VPN to do so, and was unaware that a VPN could be used by-pass censorship. Your response was to first, incorrectly, claim that using a VPN is illegal then, in later posts, to explain that a VPN can be used to by-pass censorship. First you gave false information then you gave information in violation of forum rules. You should be more careful about what you post.

The world has other issues to consider now, but when foreign press does pay attention to what is going on with the junta it is generally critical if not outright condemnation. You should check some news sources from outside Thailand--you don't need a VPN, they're not all blocked.

[rubl]

"Under that assumption, trying to follow your line of thought I write

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

and then you just write "Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed ..."

I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand what your 'palatible' means."

Previously you've been critical of the government that preceded the coup. Have you done a U-turn? Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?

Go back to your statement #1012 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41 and review the posts leading to it. I advocated reading news from sources outside of Thailand, the uncensored news. I never suggested using a VPN to do so, and was unaware that a VPN could be used by-pass censorship. Your response was to first, incorrectly, claim that using a VPN is illegal then, in later posts, to explain that a VPN can be used to by-pass censorship. First you gave false information then you gave information in violation of forum rules. You should be more careful about what you post.

The world has other issues to consider now, but when foreign press does pay attention to what is going on with the junta it is generally critical if not outright condemnation. You should check some news sources from outside Thailand--you don't need a VPN, they're not all blocked.

... and on and on he goes.

My "I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand" answered with "Have you done a U-turn?" and "Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?" not only shows poor debating tactics, you also go into baiting questions. Almost as if that IQ of yours don't translate well into 'useful intellect'.

As for context on VPN and outside sources, well you wrote very suggestive "you don't want news from uncensored sources". I read what is accessable from my Thai Internet connection. No need for special actions to do such.

Anyway, the World today seems more concerned with the Ukranian situation, ISIS and ebola. Thailand is safe for a while. Now for a start of the NRC to see what Thai can come up with in terms of reforms.

[heybruce]

"Under that assumption, trying to follow your line of thought I write

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

and then you just write "Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed ..."

I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand what your 'palatible' means."

Previously you've been critical of the government that preceded the coup. Have you done a U-turn? Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?

Go back to your statement #1012 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41 and review the posts leading to it. I advocated reading news from sources outside of Thailand, the uncensored news. I never suggested using a VPN to do so, and was unaware that a VPN could be used by-pass censorship. Your response was to first, incorrectly, claim that using a VPN is illegal then, in later posts, to explain that a VPN can be used to by-pass censorship. First you gave false information then you gave information in violation of forum rules. You should be more careful about what you post.

The world has other issues to consider now, but when foreign press does pay attention to what is going on with the junta it is generally critical if not outright condemnation. You should check some news sources from outside Thailand--you don't need a VPN, they're not all blocked.

... and on and on he goes.

My "I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand" answered with "Have you done a U-turn?" and "Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?" not only shows poor debating tactics, you also go into baiting questions. Almost as if that IQ of yours don't translate well into 'useful intellect'.

As for context on VPN and outside sources, well you wrote very suggestive "you don't want news from uncensored sources". I read what is accessable from my Thai Internet connection. No need for special actions to do such.

Anyway, the World today seems more concerned with the Ukranian situation, ISIS and ebola. Thailand is safe for a while. Now for a start of the NRC to see what Thai can come up with in terms of reforms.

You have repeatedly expressed unhappiness with the government before the coup (to use your own words; "you wrote very suggestive"), now you are waffling on the subject. Do you think you are displaying good debating skills?

I suggested reading uncensored news sources from outside Thailand, I never advocated using a VPN to access them. You responded by first stating, incorrectly, that use of VPN's is illegal in Thailand, then later explained they can be used to by-pass censorship, then explained that giving instructions on by-passing censorship violates forum rules. As you commonly do, you fired random shots at my post without addressing the issues head-on, and as a consequence shot yourself in the foot. Admit it and move on.

Your final paragraph implies ("you wrote very suggestive") that the world doesn't care what happens in Thailand. If that's what you think, why are you replying to the topic?

[ginjag]

"Under that assumption, trying to follow your line of thought I write

"Of course the Yingluck Administration was operating under the military coup induced democracy, seems a characteristic which shouldn't be globally palatable."

and then you just write "Interesting, you didn't like the democracy imposed ..."

I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand what your 'palatible' means."

Previously you've been critical of the government that preceded the coup. Have you done a U-turn? Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?

Go back to your statement #1012 here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/728548-international-alarm-mounts-over-thai-coup/page-41 and review the posts leading to it. I advocated reading news from sources outside of Thailand, the uncensored news. I never suggested using a VPN to do so, and was unaware that a VPN could be used by-pass censorship. Your response was to first, incorrectly, claim that using a VPN is illegal then, in later posts, to explain that a VPN can be used to by-pass censorship. First you gave false information then you gave information in violation of forum rules. You should be more careful about what you post.

The world has other issues to consider now, but when foreign press does pay attention to what is going on with the junta it is generally critical if not outright condemnation. You should check some news sources from outside Thailand--you don't need a VPN, they're not all blocked.

... and on and on he goes.

My "I didn't write I didn't like neither that I did like. Just try to understand" answered with "Have you done a U-turn?" and "Are you saying you now like the democracy that preceded the coup?" not only shows poor debating tactics, you also go into baiting questions. Almost as if that IQ of yours don't translate well into 'useful intellect'.

As for context on VPN and outside sources, well you wrote very suggestive "you don't want news from uncensored sources". I read what is accessable from my Thai Internet connection. No need for special actions to do such.

Anyway, the World today seems more concerned with the Ukranian situation, ISIS and ebola. Thailand is safe for a while. Now for a start of the NRC to see what Thai can come up with in terms of reforms.

You have repeatedly expressed unhappiness with the government before the coup (to use your own words; "you wrote very suggestive"), now you are waffling on the subject. Do you think you are displaying good debating skills?

I suggested reading uncensored news sources from outside Thailand, I never advocated using a VPN to access them. You responded by first stating, incorrectly, that use of VPN's is illegal in Thailand, then later explained they can be used to by-pass censorship, then explained that giving instructions on by-passing censorship violates forum rules. As you commonly do, you fired random shots at my post without addressing the issues head-on, and as a consequence shot yourself in the foot. Admit it and move on.

Your final paragraph implies ("you wrote very suggestive") that the world doesn't care what happens in Thailand. If that's what you think, why are you replying to the topic?

Because this is TVF and he is allowed and if rube didn't reply, you would have few to talk to-think yourself lucky he will debate.

[wilcopops]

"Government of the people by the people for the people"

There is no such thing as "Thai-style democracy" only Thai style government.

There area certain basic tenets for a democracy to earn that name......top-down government, which all movements have a tendency to slide towards is not within that remit.

A proper separation of powers is required........since 1932 Thailand has not achieved this. So long as they continue to accept top-down decisions then democracy can be little more than a frail shadow of what it is meant to be.

Palatable? - Well countries don't care who or how a country is run so long as it is aligned with them. - as attributed to Franklin D. Roosevelt about Nicaraguan dictator, Anastasio Somoza Garcia, “He may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch.”

Edited August 30, 2014 by wilcopops

[rubl]

...

I suggested reading uncensored news sources from outside Thailand

...

Better hurry.

For your general information.

"The pace of technological change and rise of social media "may make it inevitable" that UK privacy laws need to be revised and updated, the country's most senior judge has said.

...

In particular, "the ease with which words and scenes can be clandestinely recorded, and the ease with which information can be misrepresented or doctored" created particular difficulties for judges, he said."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/28/social_media_might_change_uk_privacy_law_says_supreme_court_president/

[wilcopops]

...

I suggested reading uncensored news sources from outside Thailand

...

Better hurry.

For your general information.

"The pace of technological change and rise of social media "may make it inevitable" that UK privacy laws need to be revised and updated, the country's most senior judge has said.

...

In particular, "the ease with which words and scenes can be clandestinely recorded, and the ease with which information can be misrepresented or doctored" created particular difficulties for judges, he said."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/28/social_media_might_change_uk_privacy_law_says_supreme_court_president/

nothing to do with getting the news...unless you think that getting the dirt on celebs is news.

[rubl]

...

I suggested reading uncensored news sources from outside Thailand

...

Better hurry.

For your general information.

"The pace of technological change and rise of social media "may make it inevitable" that UK privacy laws need to be revised and updated, the country's most senior judge has said.

...

In particular, "the ease with which words and scenes can be clandestinely recorded, and the ease with which information can be misrepresented or doctored" created particular difficulties for judges, he said."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/28/social_media_might_change_uk_privacy_law_says_supreme_court_president/

nothing to do with getting the news...unless you think that getting the dirt on celebs is news.

May be replace "celebs" by "politicians", "opponents", "junta" ?