Editorial: Don't be fooled by 'Thai-style democracy'

[Christie Paul]

Democracy is Greece resulted in the destruction of the City States.

In the West, it has been the engine of oligarchy, banking monopolies, endless wars and now the greatest wealth inequalities along with economic stagnation. It has been on the whole a disaster.

Usually, we only have the choice to vote for Tweedle Dumb or Tweedle Even Dumber - both owned and controlled by oligarchs.

The United States, was never designed as a democracy - the founding fathers hated democracy - it was an anathema to them. It was designed as a Republic, under the rule of law. A different thing entirely.

Interestingly, most Westerners cheer their democracies as something to be admired, something wonderful, a glorious shining example of superiority. Western democracy in its present form has scored a major PR coup - that of remaining universally popular, whilst systematically disadvantaging the very people who champion it. I think that will change, when our economic system collapses and when we wake up one day and realise we have somehow become fascist dictatorships.

John Adams nailed it, when he said "Democracy while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did commit suicide."

Thailand has always had to negotiate with the great powers in the world - that have and still do threaten its independence. They have to play the game. Agree and then do otherwise, kind of, but not really. It must dance about with one eye on their own affairs, whilst the other eye, must watch the dominant powers, that would think nothing of bombing into the stone age. History shows it has done an extraordinary job. Never been colonised and comparatively missed out on WW1 and WW2. But its a messy and turbulent system, no one quite knows what's going on - but somehow they manage their way through. I hope they are able too keep it up. There's no role model for them to follow and the threat exterior intervention always looms.

[KhnomKhnom]

Any democracy is a place of "open season" for the formation of Political Machines, like Thaksin's. It is a flaw in the democratic system, proven by the Daley machine in Chicago, for example. They, then, are very difficult to root out. For example, votes do not count because the machine is doing the counting and the buying. Then, the machine sets up populist programs (like the rice mess) that also include very easy and sure ways to skim lots of money off of them. Big public works, like an airport or rail line, are others that provide lots of kick backs to the machine and its operators. The public/voters are sold the idea that all this is for their benefit while millions are stolen in the process.

It is important to note that MACHINE POLITICS is ORGANIZED theft, like a Mafia, and is not like DISORGANIZED graft and corruptions of other times and other systems. It is the organized factor that made the Thaksin machine so very dangerous. And, it remains dangerous as long as it funds and arms terrorist goons to try to destabilize the nation in a last gasp effort to hold onto power. Rooting all this out is a huge job.

This is obviously the Army's primary task.... getting rid of Thaksins political machine.

[Snig27]

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

Four of the most powerful countries in Asia - Japan, Indonesia, South Korea and India practise "western style democracy" as do large parts of South America and South Africa. Is it flawed? Yes of course, but it's far and away the best system we have on offer globally, including Thailand.

I'd love some of the dimwits who loudly trumpet the notion that "Western-style democracy" does not work in Asia to wander across to Indonesia and make that claim in modern Jakarta. You wouldn't last long before you were put in your blinkered self-serving place. Suharto made that claim loudly over the years and his place in Indonesian history as a military despot is now secure.

Great editorial in the Nation (sometimes they can do it ...)

Western style democracy is not an option. It relies on uncorrupt and independent institutions. What us dim witted and laughable is imagining that places like india, south america and south africa practice 'western style democracy'. 55555555

You miss the very obvious - democracy is flawed. Are you really making the absurd claim that institutions in the US throughout its history are "uncorrupt and independent"? If so, that's an absurd claim. Heard of Tammany Hall, gerrymandering, vote stacked conventions (how do you think Truman became VP?).

India may be a flawed democracy but it is still a functioning democracy adapted from the Westminster system as are many countries in South America. Same with RSA. TBH, if you don't grasp the broad concepts we are talking about, it really is better not to put pen to post here - as you really are in danger of coming across as dimwitted.

[alex88]

Democracy doesn't exist in the west it's all a big scam.

[alex88]

It is extremely naive for someone to actually believe western democracy exists.

[northernjohn]

Over time the trend in the West has been toward democracy and respect for the rights of the individual, while we in the East seemed to have ended up with greater authoritarianism.

You friend...or both ignorant and blind...the West...especially the US...is more of a police state than a democracy...the police exits to serve the whims of the government...the government which makes laws to enslave its people and exempt themselves from the laws they create...

You need to read more independent journalism...the truth will set you free...

You need to read more independent journalism...the truth will set you free...

And just where are you going to get this independent journalism?

You just think you are free.

[northernjohn]

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

Four of the most powerful countries in Asia - Japan, Indonesia, South Korea and India practise "western style democracy" as do large parts of South America and South Africa. Is it flawed? Yes of course, but it's far and away the best system we have on offer globally, including Thailand.

I'd love some of the dimwits who loudly trumpet the notion that "Western-style democracy" does not work in Asia to wander across to Indonesia and make that claim in modern Jakarta. You wouldn't last long before you were put in your blinkered self-serving place. Suharto made that claim loudly over the years and his place in Indonesian history as a military despot is now secure.

Great editorial in the Nation (sometimes they can do it ...)

Western style democracy is not an option. It relies on uncorrupt and independent institutions. What us dim witted and laughable is imagining that places like india, south america and south africa practice 'western style democracy'. 55555555

You miss the very obvious - democracy is flawed. Are you really making the absurd claim that institutions in the US throughout its history are "uncorrupt and independent"? If so, that's an absurd claim. Heard of Tammany Hall, gerrymandering, vote stacked conventions (how do you think Truman became VP?).

India may be a flawed democracy but it is still a functioning democracy adapted from the Westminster system as are many countries in South America. Same with RSA. TBH, if you don't grasp the broad concepts we are talking about, it really is better not to put pen to post here - as you really are in danger of coming across as dimwitted.

You forgot the Grant administration. They made Thaksin look like a Philanthropist.

[Kalebiran]

Rather a stupid headline. who the hell is going to be "fooled by Thai democracy"? It's a contradictory statement. I guess the only one fooled by it are Thais

[Christie Paul]

The Swiss have done it the right way - Important matters of national interest go to a referendum. The people decide. And that is coming from a British citizen. The government here has a hindrance more than a help for years.

Absolutely.

The Swiss government is firmly under the control of the people.

And the people are heavily armed.

Interesting how a small landlocked country with few resources and surrounded by powerful and often aggressive countries has managed to do so exceptionally well.

Most governments in the West are mere tools of oligarchs, same in the East, but more obvious so.

[NativeSon360]

Your points have been well-made

However, it's that same old Asian-style communitarian ethos, that has nearly bankrupted both the US & UK, with a slow, but steady (vanishing) currency depletion, via HSBC, and is currently impacting the economies of both Australia & New Zealand. It is also the same ethos, that is currently "colonizing" sub-Sahara Africa. Those pricks usually begin by sending boatloads of well-experienced Hong Kong "hookers" into the target country, as a subtle ploy of distraction. I have witnessed it, in person. Unfortunately, ignorant black African government officials, fundamentally from the bush regions, don't even have a clue.

Edited August 20, 2014 by NativeSon360

[NativeSon360]

Over time the trend in the West has been toward democracy and respect for the rights of the individual, while we in the East seemed to have ended up with greater authoritarianism.

You friend...or both ignorant and blind...the West...especially the US...is more of a police state than a democracy...the police exits to serve the whims of the government...the government which makes laws to enslave its people and exempt themselves from the laws they create...

You need to read more independent journalism...the truth will set you free...

You need to read more independent journalism...the truth will set you free...

And just where are you going to get this independent journalism?

You just think you are free.

Re: Asian authoritarianism. They're just more open and honest about it in Asia, than are the western gov'ts. Democracy is akin to Catholicism. Abraham Lincoln said "You can fool some of the people, all of the time. You can even fool all of the people, some of the time. But, you can never fool all of the people, all of the time"

Edited August 20, 2014 by NativeSon360

[NativeSon360]

Over time the trend in the West has been toward democracy and respect for the rights of the individual, while we in the East seemed to have ended up with greater authoritarianism.

You friend...or both ignorant and blind...the West...especially the US...is more of a police state than a democracy...the police exits to serve the whims of the government...the government which makes laws to enslave its people and exempt themselves from the laws they create...

You need to read more independent journalism...the truth will set you free...

You've got to know what the truth is first. Not just believe in what you're told, as being the truth. Be not like "dumb" driven cattle" from a "Psalm of Life" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.

You need to read more independent journalism...the truth will set you free...

And just where are you going to get this independent journalism?

You just think you are free.

Re: Asian authoritarianism. They're just more open and honest about it in Asia, than are the western gov'ts. Democracy is akin to Catholicism. Abraham Lincoln said "You can fool some of the people, all of the time. You can even fool all of the people, some of the time. But, you can never fool all of the people, all of the time"

[longway]

True democracy starts with respecting the ordinary people votes, and trust each other's votes, more importantly people trust and respecting the ruling parties and opposition parties equally. For example in the US the vote difference is only 2-3% between ruling and opposition parties. If a party lost in this election does not mean that they don't have power, they have voice and voting power in the senante and in congress. That comes from right education and learning about democracy and politcal awareness. There is a role for everyone in this, like judiciary, press freedom, parliment and election commission. If one of them does not function correctly, the mistrust will grow in society and we will undermind the votes, and people don't come forward to vote, then all sort of problem starts. If i start pointing out the such good democratic countries, there will be lot of racial hatered comments may come here, i just keep my mouth shut for now.

If you had even the slightest inkling what a true democracy is you would not be fooled into thinking what you have in the west are democracies, you are as indoctrinated as any thai. However they are much better than what thailand has, but coup or no coup that style of governance is not even remotely a realistic option for the forseeable future.

the 'true democracy doesn't exist" line is garbage.

I'm not indoctrinated, I'm informed.

Which makes it easy to recognize garbage.

You are so indoctrinated its hard to know where to even begin. Your mind is filled with garbage, but you don't know it.

People use the word democracy alot, but no-one seems to know what it or even agree on its characteristcs, but that is natural as in modern times (or ever) it has never really existed, people don't realise what they have thought to be democracy is not democracy, has never been democracy, and never will be.

Your challenge will be to name your 'true democracies' once you actually understand what a democracy is.

Democracy is quite a fuzzy concept, but there are 2 defining characteristics that are fundamental and inseparable from anything that calls itself an electoral democracy and in any case the second leads from the first.

1. The people are the sovereign (supreme) power

2. The people vote so the will of the majority can be expressed by those that they consent to represent them.

The problem is that in reality, outside the indoctrination that tells you that it is so, neither of these 2 features are present anywhere in the world.

The reason for this is pretty straight forward, the electoral system does not allow consent to be part of the the electoral process. The model it follows, once you strip it of all its bells and whistles, is lead, follow or get out of the way.

So what you get in reality, is you can choose to a limited extent which group(s) of oligarchs rule you. This is the opposite of a democracy, its not a 'form of democracy' its a form of oligarchy, the western world had progressed from unelected oligarchies to elected ones. Its not elections that make the west 'democratic' its the institutions of law, police, military and a host other independent institutions that make the west anything like democratic as they enhance the power of ordinary people in relation to their elected oligarchs. Do you think an election in your home country would solve anything and make things 'more democratic' if all the institutions were corrupt and controlled by elected oligarchs? Its a garbage notion, but that is one you advocate for Thailand. Obviously its better than military rule, but its not 'democracy' nor will it ever be.

So what does an actual democracy look like?

Its nonsense to say that you can give consent without the ability to withhold it.

If people are the sovereign power, should they not be able consent to who will represent them?

If they if they are not able to consent, can they by any stretch of anyone's imgaination be the sovereign power?

Simply put without our consent, democratically elected representatives cannot exist, only an oligarchy is possible and power consentrates into a few hands. In the UK sovereign power in parliament and the shadowy figues that control those who sit in there..

However our current electoral system does not allow for consent, thus violating a central tenet of electoral democracy and changing it into a completely different beast.

There is no electoral system anywhere in the world that allows people to meaningfully withhold their consent. This can be very easily incorporated by having a 'None of the Above' (NOTA) option. If more than 50% choose this option then the election must be held again.

I am sure its not an uncommon feeling to go into an election booth and look at the list of candidates and think I dont like any of them or the likely winner(s) of the election are not worthy of representing you. At this time you can't meaningfully do anything, except perhaps spoil your ballot, or vote for some 'protest' party, but basically your vote is worthless. We have universal suffrage in the west, but in reality we don't have equal suffrage (every vote has equal value), the ability to withhold your consent brings about equal suffrage, an gives voice many people is supressed or distorted by the votng system.

For NOTA to be truly useful, it must be acknowledged that if an electorate withholds their consent in an election then something is very wrong and those issues needs to be fully understood and steps taken to address them before another election takes place, it allows ensures political stability and prevents voter fatigue.

To allow for this, the second placed candidate could be allowed to take office temporarily for a fixed period, not exceeding 12 months. This period will allow all stakeholders to understand why consent was withheld and the steps required deal with these issues within the context of the election as a whole, as consent may have been withheld on a widespread basis or just in a few electorates.

The introduction of this option represents the biggest transfer of power to the electorate since voting began, and has the potential to complete the transition to a truly democratic system of government.

This is something like what a true democracy will look like.

All you advoacte is handing over power from unlected oligarchs to elected ones, without any meaningful safeguards for ordinary voters and the depth of your indoctrination makes you believe its 'democracy'.

Just another red in lala land.

Edited August 21, 2014 by longway

[tbthailand]

True democracy starts with respecting the ordinary people votes, and trust each other's votes, more importantly people trust and respecting the ruling parties and opposition parties equally. For example in the US the vote difference is only 2-3% between ruling and opposition parties. If a party lost in this election does not mean that they don't have power, they have voice and voting power in the senante and in congress. That comes from right education and learning about democracy and politcal awareness. There is a role for everyone in this, like judiciary, press freedom, parliment and election commission. If one of them does not function correctly, the mistrust will grow in society and we will undermind the votes, and people don't come forward to vote, then all sort of problem starts. If i start pointing out the such good democratic countries, there will be lot of racial hatered comments may come here, i just keep my mouth shut for now.

If you had even the slightest inkling what a true democracy is you would not be fooled into thinking what you have in the west are democracies, you are as indoctrinated as any thai. However they are much better than what thailand has, but coup or no coup that style of governance is not even remotely a realistic option for the forseeable future.

the 'true democracy doesn't exist" line is garbage.

I'm not indoctrinated, I'm informed.

Which makes it easy to recognize garbage.

You are so indoctrinated its hard to know where to even begin. Your mind is filled with garbage, but you don't know it.

People use the word democracy alot, but no-one seems to know what it or even agree on its characteristcs, but that is natural as in modern times (or ever) it has never really existed, people don't realise what they have thought to be democracy is not democracy, has never been democracy, and never will be.

Your challenge will be to name your 'true democracies' once you actually understand what a democracy is.

Democracy is quite a fuzzy concept, but there are 2 defining characteristics that are fundamental and inseparable from anything that calls itself an electoral democracy and in any case the second leads from the first.

1. The people are the sovereign (supreme) power

2. The people vote so the will of the majority can be expressed by those that they consent to represent them.

The problem is that in reality, outside the indoctrination that tells you that it is so, neither of these 2 features are present anywhere in the world.

The reason for this is pretty straight forward, the electoral system does not allow consent to be part of the the electoral process. The model it follows, once you strip it of all its bells and whistles, is lead, follow or get out of the way.

So what you get in reality, is you can choose to a limited extent which group(s) of oligarchs rule you. This is the opposite of a democracy, its not a 'form of democracy' its a form of oligarchy, the western world had progressed from unelected oligarchies to elected ones. Its not elections that make the west 'democratic' its the institutions of law, police, military and a host other independent institutions that make the west anything like democratic as they enhance the power of ordinary people in relation to their elected oligarchs. Do you think an election in your home country would solve anything and make things 'more democratic' if all the institutions were corrupt and controlled by elected oligarchs? Its a garbage notion, but that is one you advocate for Thailand. Obviously its better than military rule, but its not 'democracy' nor will it ever be.

So what does an actual democracy look like?

Its nonsense to say that you can give consent without the ability to withhold it.

If people are the sovereign power, should they not be able consent to who will represent them?

If they if they are not able to consent, can they by any stretch of anyone's imgaination be the sovereign power?

Simply put without our consent, democratically elected representatives cannot exist, only an oligarchy is possible and power consentrates into a few hands. In the UK sovereign power in parliament and the shadowy figues that control those who sit in there..

However our current electoral system does not allow for consent, thus violating a central tenet of electoral democracy and changing it into a completely different beast.

There is no electoral system anywhere in the world that allows people to meaningfully withhold their consent. This can be very easily incorporated by having a 'None of the Above' (NOTA) option. If more than 50% choose this option then the election must be held again.

I am sure its not an uncommon feeling to go into an election booth and look at the list of candidates and think I dont like any of them or the likely winner(s) of the election are not worthy of representing you. At this time you can't meaningfully do anything, except perhaps spoil your ballot, or vote for some 'protest' party, but basically your vote is worthless. We have universal suffrage in the west, but in reality we don't have equal suffrage (every vote has equal value), the ability to withhold your consent brings about equal suffrage, an gives voice many people is supressed or distorted by the votng system.

For NOTA to be truly useful, it must be acknowledged that if an electorate withholds their consent in an election then something is very wrong and those issues needs to be fully understood and steps taken to address them before another election takes place, it allows ensures political stability and prevents voter fatigue.

To allow for this, the second placed candidate could be allowed to take office temporarily for a fixed period, not exceeding 12 months. This period will allow all stakeholders to understand why consent was withheld and the steps required deal with these issues within the context of the election as a whole, as consent may have been withheld on a widespread basis or just in a few electorates.

The introduction of this option represents the biggest transfer of power to the electorate since voting began, and has the potential to complete the transition to a truly democratic system of government.

This is something like what a true democracy will look like.

All you advoacte is handing over power from unlected oligarchs to elected ones, without any meaningful safeguards for ordinary voters and the depth of your indoctrination makes you believe its 'democracy'.

Just another red in lala land.

you write a lot.

your argument is two-fold, democracy doesn't exist because democratic systems don't function (in you opinion) democratically, and

people do not have veto power relative to consent

I'll write less.

Democratic systems function at different levels of performance around the world. Mine is currently being warped by your oligarchs and their billions and billions of dollars. This disfunction shows up in many ways. But it still a democratic system.

Withholding consent via a NOTA veto is your key tenet holding back any country in the world from being a democracy, really? That is just a bit absurd. For one, free societies have veto powers as you would call it and it does exist in different forms in different countries. For another, a practical implementation of NOTA is to present alternatives. NOTA is a void and a system of self-governance functions based on alternatives and choices, not based on voids.

[longway]

^ this is what i mean, you are just too indoctrinated to see it. you cannot even fathom what a democracy is when it is presented to you, you still persist with your delusions. You even come out trying to argue against having NOTA as it is a 'void'. NOTA is not a void, its the choices and alternatives that are present on the ballot are a void if the majority people dont like them.

There are no arguments against nota, its the very concept of democracy that argue against, but you just dont know it. And the irony is that you try to advocate something you dont understand.

The argument rests on a single premise - in a democracy the people are the sovereign power. The rest just follows on from that, a sovereign power must have the ability to give and withhold consent, because if it could nit, then it cannot be the sovereign power.

Everything you say on here is absurd and my low opinion of you is confirmed.

I dont see you listing these free socieies with veto powers.

The power to give and withhold consent is not a 'void' its the most meaningful power of all, the dysfunction as you call is a direct consequence and a natural state of your electoral oligarchy.

Dont let the fact you have elections fool you into thinking you have a form of democracy, it is not and ot will never be until the voter is the sovereign power and has the anility to withhold consent in a fair and meaningful way.

Yes people in western society have power, but it comes from sources other than elections, our electoral system literally robs people of their true power. Its not fit for purpose and should be recognised as such.

Edited August 21, 2014 by longway

[tbthailand]

^ this is what i mean, you are just too indoctrinated to see it. you cannot even fathom what a democracy is when it is presented to you, you still persist with your delusions. You even come out trying to argue against having NOTA as it is a 'void'. NOTA is not a void, its the choices and alternatives that are present on the ballot are a void if the majority people dont like them.

There are no arguments against nota, its the very concept of democracy that argue against, but you just dont know it. And the irony is that you try to advocate something you dont understand.

The argument rests on a single premise - in a democracy the people are the sovereign power. The rest just follows on from that, a sovereign power must have the ability to give and withhold consent, because if it could nit, then it cannot be the sovereign power.

Everything you say on here is absurd and my low opinion of you is confirmed.

I dont see you listing these free socieies with veto powers.

The power to give and withhold consent is not a 'void' its the most meaningful power of all, the dysfunction as you call is a direct consequence and a natural state of your electoral oligarchy.

Dont let the fact you have elections fool you into thinking you have a form of democracy, it is not and ot will never be until the voter is the sovereign power and has the anility to withhold consent in a fair and meaningful way.

Yes people in western society have power, but it comes from sources other than elections, our electoral system literally robs people of their true power. Its not fit for purpose and should be recognised as such.

"Everything you say on here is absurd and my low opinion of you is confirmed."

likewise