Lessons on democracy to be taught shortly

[airconsult]

...

Regarding whether Thaksin's quote was interesting, I can't say if it's interesting without knowing what the quote is. Why won't you share it with us?

...

Only the first few lines. follow this link for the PDF file http://www.sathukit.com/edu-policy-en.pdf

"Policies of Ministry of Education

Prof. Dr. Suchart Thada-Thamrongvech

Minister of Education

25 January 2012

Philosophy

Police Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra has said about ... ..."

As I wrote the interesting part is that the quote is from a well known criminal fugitive and comes from an MoE handpicked by PM Yingluck.

why not include the actual quote which - maybe - the Minister found to be applicable to education?

“Education will lead to the building of people’s vigour.

Vigorous and knowledgeable people are powerful capital to fight

with poverty.” “Emphases must be on distribution of benefits with equity,

and on regards of people with difficulties, in order to provide quality

education for everyone.” “Education is an important key, a starting

element that is necessary in making poverty become past.”

Instead of even looking into the ravings of a criminal fugitive, let's consider the situation where a Minister of Education in his policy statements write to base that policy on education on the philosophy provided (in whole or part) by a criminal fugitive.

What next? Maybe you telling me history teaches us to listen to criminals ? Democratically of course.

Galileo?

Nelson Mandela?

Ghandhi?

Not that I'm comparing Thaksin to them - just idly thinking about your generalisation on philosophy/ideas by a criminal fugitive?

Exceptions perhaps?

Thinking about it - George Washington fits in there too from the English point of view at the time.

I guess that's the rub - it all depends on point of view.

[Dogmatix]

Thai public education is already notable for turning out the worst quality graduates in the region, including former and current communist countries. It needs a complete overhaul to get rid the corrupt wasters in the Education Ministry. It doesn't need to be burdened with more useless rote learning subjects.

[rubl]

Instead of even looking into the ravings of a criminal fugitive, let's consider the situation where a Minister of Education in his policy statements write to base that policy on education on the philosophy provided (in whole or part) by a criminal fugitive.

What next? Maybe you telling me history teaches us to listen to criminals ? Democratically of course.

Galileo?

Nelson Mandela?

Ghandhi?

Not that I'm comparing Thaksin to them - just idly thinking about your generalisation on philosophy/ideas by a criminal fugitive?

Exceptions perhaps?

Thinking about it - George Washington fits in there too from the English point of view at the time.

I guess that's the rub - it all depends on point of view.

I'm also not comparing Thaksin to them as I see a difference between simple criminals and politically or philosophically declared criminals.

Of course, if you think that a common criminal should be quoted by a MoE who start his philosophy on the new policy of Education for Thailand with a quote from such common criminal, you may want to redo your lessons in democracy. Also read a bit on the 'soft loan' to Myanmar he arranged as PM, just to allow their government to buy stuff from his company. Case not progressing, our favorite criminal needs to return first.

PS don't bother to try the 'Thaksin political conviction' ploy. He's just a greedy business man who as PM couldn't help himself even though he had said something like 'being too rice to need to be corrupt'. Well, he was right in one thing, he didn't need it.

[rubl]

He understood how to get elected and did highly-visible, high-touch programs that people liked. This made him more and more popular. He played it up, too.

He never had a significant problem with the electorate during his time in office, but he did have a problem with his fellow elites. hence, the boot.

Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

people often refer to a 'cult of personality' and Thaksin was clearly developing that.

so is the current 'PM'

Absolutely.

Thaksin understood that buying a few political parties through promises of sharing would fool the masses into believing he would save them from the dangers of democracy, IMF and others. Having televised tours of the great man in humble environments and handing out 1,000 Baht bills anyone could see he took out of his own pocket before giving to a few poor, really strengthened the image of selfless Billionair.

So tell me, how much does this criminal reminds you of the Italian one ?

[metisdead]

Have now removed some posts that I or another mod would have had to remove later anyway so as to save the grief later of beating one's head against the wall after the fact.

[fab4]

He understood how to get elected and did highly-visible, high-touch programs that people liked. This made him more and more popular. He played it up, too.

He never had a significant problem with the electorate during his time in office, but he did have a problem with his fellow elites. hence, the boot.

Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

people often refer to a 'cult of personality' and Thaksin was clearly developing that.

so is the current 'PM'

Absolutely.

Thaksin understood that buying a few political parties through promises of sharing would fool the masses into believing he would save them from the dangers of democracy, IMF and others. Having televised tours of the great man in humble environments and handing out 1,000 Baht bills anyone could see he took out of his own pocket before giving to a few poor, really strengthened the image of selfless Billionair.

So tell me, how much does this criminal reminds you of the Italian one ?

Which criminal are you referring to? What do anecdotes about Thaksin and 1000 baht notes have to do with the thread? What Italian criminal?

Are you doing your best to obfuscate and derail this thread, rubl?

[retsdon]

A culture of kreng jai and a properly functioning democracy are pretty much incompatible. That's just how it is.

[Fred Flinstone]

Actually the Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses, record stock market, low unemployment, health care, slashing poverty. Things were booming.

Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

The ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a disaster.

You sure your name isn't Archie Bunker?

Anyway that criminal genius also managed to bring forward a wordwide, a real global economic boom of a lustre we hadn't seen since the Hoover years.

The ten tears probably refer to the tearful Thaksin telling a court he made an honest mistake. Further more the eight years, which according to some would start on the 19th of September 2006, seem to include even the three and a half years of Thaksin surrogates Samak, Somchai and Yingluck.

Truly amazing

Like I said, the ten tears prior to Thaksin and the 8 years after have been a total disaster.

The Thaksin years were some of the best in Thailand.

Budget surpluses.

Record stock market

Low unemployment.

Health care.

Slashing poverty.

Things were booming. Even the busses were even running on time.

That's why the invisible hand got rid of him.

They didnt want someone that competent and talented in charge of the country with the inevitable power vacuum they are soon to experience.

They couldn't win at the polls so they create chaos, a manufactures crisis so the Army could "rescue' them.

Those facts *(i just checked) are surprisingly all very true-

Yes it seems the polls reflected this too-

But let Thailand go down this road-

It has a long history of elites inflicting their will on the people -

Its insidious to most westerners .

Australia even bans the junta from its soil.

But Thais until they grow up

stop bowing down -

Deserve what they get sorry-

I have no pity on them being dictated to by some General -

Wait until some things Pass.

Then perhaps matters and attitudes might change ?

And as for wasting your time here with the pathetic fools who defend the hijackers - its silly.

Edited October 11, 2014 by Fred Flinstone

[rubl]

He understood how to get elected and did highly-visible, high-touch programs that people liked. This made him more and more popular. He played it up, too.

He never had a significant problem with the electorate during his time in office, but he did have a problem with his fellow elites. hence, the boot.

Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

people often refer to a 'cult of personality' and Thaksin was clearly developing that.

so is the current 'PM'

Absolutely.

Thaksin understood that buying a few political parties through promises of sharing would fool the masses into believing he would save them from the dangers of democracy, IMF and others. Having televised tours of the great man in humble environments and handing out 1,000 Baht bills anyone could see he took out of his own pocket before giving to a few poor, really strengthened the image of selfless Billionair.

So tell me, how much does this criminal reminds you of the Italian one ?

Which criminal are you referring to? What do anecdotes about Thaksin and 1000 baht notes have to do with the thread? What Italian criminal?

Are you doing your best to obfuscate and derail this thread, rubl?

It would seem its you who wants to derail and obfuscate by fainting ignorance of any and all posts which have gone before here.

Still as Dutch uncle I have no problem to repeat the bits you seem to have a problem with.

A Minister of Education in his new policy on 'Education for Thailand' quoted from a criminal fugitive in his philosophy on which the policy was based. It would seem some posters have no problem with that in principle and even try to distract by diving into the contents rather than the fact that it happened.

Somehow we wandered of more and tbthailand gave us an interesting lesson in democracy with

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections."

Now to finish this lesson on democracy, let's recite the 'pledge of allegiance'. Mind you, the Supreme Court has ruled a few times that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, nor can they be punished for not doing so.

Edited October 12, 2014 by rubl

[fab4]

He understood how to get elected and did highly-visible, high-touch programs that people liked. This made him more and more popular. He played it up, too.

He never had a significant problem with the electorate during his time in office, but he did have a problem with his fellow elites. hence, the boot.

Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

people often refer to a 'cult of personality' and Thaksin was clearly developing that.

so is the current 'PM'

Absolutely.

Thaksin understood that buying a few political parties through promises of sharing would fool the masses into believing he would save them from the dangers of democracy, IMF and others. Having televised tours of the great man in humble environments and handing out 1,000 Baht bills anyone could see he took out of his own pocket before giving to a few poor, really strengthened the image of selfless Billionair.

So tell me, how much does this criminal reminds you of the Italian one ?

Which criminal are you referring to? What do anecdotes about Thaksin and 1000 baht notes have to do with the thread? What Italian criminal?

Are you doing your best to obfuscate and derail this thread, rubl?

It would seem its you who wants to derail and obfuscate by suggestion ignorance of any and all posts which have gone before here.

Still as Dutch uncle I have no problem to repeat the bits you seem to have a problem with.

A Minister of Education in his new policy on 'Education for Thailand' quoted from a criminal fugitive in his philosophy on which the policy was based. It would seem some posters have no problem with that in principle and even try to distract by diving into the contents rather than the fact that it happened.

Somehow we wandered of more and tbthailand gave us an interesting lesson in democracy with

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections."

Now to finish this lesson on democracy, let's recite the 'pledge of allegiance'. Mind you, the Supreme Court has ruled a few times that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, nor can they be punished for not doing so.

[tbthailand]

He understood how to get elected and did highly-visible, high-touch programs that people liked. This made him more and more popular. He played it up, too.

He never had a significant problem with the electorate during his time in office, but he did have a problem with his fellow elites. hence, the boot.

Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

people often refer to a 'cult of personality' and Thaksin was clearly developing that.

so is the current 'PM'

Absolutely.

Thaksin understood that buying a few political parties through promises of sharing would fool the masses into believing he would save them from the dangers of democracy, IMF and others. Having televised tours of the great man in humble environments and handing out 1,000 Baht bills anyone could see he took out of his own pocket before giving to a few poor, really strengthened the image of selfless Billionair.

So tell me, how much does this criminal reminds you of the Italian one ?

Which criminal are you referring to? What do anecdotes about Thaksin and 1000 baht notes have to do with the thread? What Italian criminal?

Are you doing your best to obfuscate and derail this thread, rubl?

It would seem its you who wants to derail and obfuscate by fainting ignorance of any and all posts which have gone before here.

Still as Dutch uncle I have no problem to repeat the bits you seem to have a problem with.

A Minister of Education in his new policy on 'Education for Thailand' quoted from a criminal fugitive in his philosophy on which the policy was based. It would seem some posters have no problem with that in principle and even try to distract by diving into the contents rather than the fact that it happened.

Somehow we wandered of more and tbthailand gave us an interesting lesson in democracy with

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections."

Now to finish this lesson on democracy, let's recite the 'pledge of allegiance'. Mind you, the Supreme Court has ruled a few times that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, nor can they be punished for not doing so.

if you want to see how the 'wandering' started, it was your reply which you can find in the quoted part of this this post

And if you want to quote me, go ahead and use the full comparison which is: Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

That, was a reply to KJJ comments, and not to yours.

In contrast to the pledge of allegiance, children in Thailand are required to learn the 12 points of Thai-ness written by the current 'PM'.

As for the criminal, you never did acknowledge, did you, that being criminal depends on the perspective. Call Thaksin a criminal if you want, but some people don't think that monkeys in a military kangaroo court deliver judgements which are legitimate. That was then, this is now, and the same things are happening today. That should refresh your memory of what it was like 7 years ago.

As for the quote, quoting a former PM is hardly an issue when the quote is applicable to the situation. Make hay out of it if you will - it's just a non-issue for anyone who is not a Junta-

enjoy your trolling posting

[rubl]

It would seem its you who wants to derail and obfuscate by fainting ignorance of any and all posts which have gone before here.

Still as Dutch uncle I have no problem to repeat the bits you seem to have a problem with.

A Minister of Education in his new policy on 'Education for Thailand' quoted from a criminal fugitive in his philosophy on which the policy was based. It would seem some posters have no problem with that in principle and even try to distract by diving into the contents rather than the fact that it happened.

Somehow we wandered of more and tbthailand gave us an interesting lesson in democracy with

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections."

Now to finish this lesson on democracy, let's recite the 'pledge of allegiance'. Mind you, the Supreme Court has ruled a few times that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, nor can they be punished for not doing so.

if you want to see how the 'wandering' started, it was your reply which you can find in the quoted part of this this post

And if you want to quote me, go ahead and use the full comparison which is: Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

That, was a reply to KJJ comments, and not to yours.

In contrast to the pledge of allegiance, children in Thailand are required to learn the 12 points of Thai-ness written by the current 'PM'.

As for the criminal, you never did acknowledge, did you, that being criminal depends on the perspective. Call Thaksin a criminal if you want, but some people don't think that monkeys in a military kangaroo court deliver judgements which are legitimate. That was then, this is now, and the same things are happening today. That should refresh your memory of what it was like 7 years ago.

As for the quote, quoting a former PM is hardly an issue when the quote is applicable to the situation. Make hay out of it if you will - it's just a non-issue for anyone who is not a Junta-

enjoy your trolling posting

OK TB, if you insist.

Let me 'expand' a bit on that sentence

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals."

The last part is either just stating the obvious, or ignoring that Thaksin himself had served as Minister of Interior under PM General Chavalit. In 2006 Thaksin went on holiday for a moment and chose Police General Chitchai as interim PM. Thaksin entered politics through Gen. Chamlong.

Anyway the lesson is in the hilarious suggestion that Thaksin only liked democracy because he knew how to manipulate the system in order to get what he wanted, even if he had to shed a tear or ten.

As for quoting a former PM who just happens to be a criminal fugitive, well if you fail to see that is not proper and might even suggest a 'conflict of interest' I'm afraid you failed your lessons in democracy and should consider taking them again. Maybe ask some Italians on how their version of democracy works and if their MoE would survive having a philosophy based on Silvio B., publishing such and stating to have based his education policy on said person Silvio B.

[tbthailand]

It would seem its you who wants to derail and obfuscate by fainting ignorance of any and all posts which have gone before here.

Still as Dutch uncle I have no problem to repeat the bits you seem to have a problem with.

A Minister of Education in his new policy on 'Education for Thailand' quoted from a criminal fugitive in his philosophy on which the policy was based. It would seem some posters have no problem with that in principle and even try to distract by diving into the contents rather than the fact that it happened.

Somehow we wandered of more and tbthailand gave us an interesting lesson in democracy with

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections."

Now to finish this lesson on democracy, let's recite the 'pledge of allegiance'. Mind you, the Supreme Court has ruled a few times that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, nor can they be punished for not doing so.

if you want to see how the 'wandering' started, it was your reply which you can find in the quoted part of this this post

And if you want to quote me, go ahead and use the full comparison which is: Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals.

That, was a reply to KJJ comments, and not to yours.

In contrast to the pledge of allegiance, children in Thailand are required to learn the 12 points of Thai-ness written by the current 'PM'.

As for the criminal, you never did acknowledge, did you, that being criminal depends on the perspective. Call Thaksin a criminal if you want, but some people don't think that monkeys in a military kangaroo court deliver judgements which are legitimate. That was then, this is now, and the same things are happening today. That should refresh your memory of what it was like 7 years ago.

As for the quote, quoting a former PM is hardly an issue when the quote is applicable to the situation. Make hay out of it if you will - it's just a non-issue for anyone who is not a Junta-

enjoy your trolling posting

OK TB, if you insist.

Let me 'expand' a bit on that sentence

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals."

The last part is either just stating the obvious, or ignoring that Thaksin himself had served as Minister of Interior under PM General Chavalit. In 2006 Thaksin went on holiday for a moment and chose Police General Chitchai as interim PM. Thaksin entered politics through Gen. Chamlong.

Anyway the lesson is in the hilarious suggestion that Thaksin only liked democracy because he knew how to manipulate the system in order to get what he wanted, even if he had to shed a tear or ten.

As for quoting a former PM who just happens to be a criminal fugitive, well if you fail to see that is not proper and might even suggest a 'conflict of interest' I'm afraid you failed your lessons in democracy and should consider taking them again. Maybe ask some Italians on how their version of democracy works and if their MoE would survive having a philosophy based on Silvio B., publishing such and stating to have based his education policy on said person Silvio B.

yes, I think that Thaksin 'likes' democracy because he knows how to win elections. It may also be the only reason. I do not think that he is a true democrat at heart and this IMHO (just for you) can be seen from time to time in the little riffs that come between Thaksin and parts of the UDD. (oh, and just to be complete on this point, it is equally evident that Thaksin's opponents do not give a hoot about democracy at all.............)

Just my opinion.

As for your ridiculing of the quote, go ahead. Thaksin was - for all of the things that he did which were actually wrong if not illegal, is officially a criminal because he was convicted by a kangaroo court. You pretend that there is some legitimacy behind his conviction, but the facts say otherwise. (btw, you are hardly alone on this forum).

So, IMVHO (just for you) your ridiculing of a quote which is itself quite appropriate in its context, just because the person being quoted, a former PM, has a politically motivated conviction is ridiculous.

Edited October 12, 2014 by tbthailand

[rubl]

OK TB, if you insist.

Let me 'expand' a bit on that sentence

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals."

The last part is either just stating the obvious, or ignoring that Thaksin himself had served as Minister of Interior under PM General Chavalit. In 2006 Thaksin went on holiday for a moment and chose Police General Chitchai as interim PM. Thaksin entered politics through Gen. Chamlong.

Anyway the lesson is in the hilarious suggestion that Thaksin only liked democracy because he knew how to manipulate the system in order to get what he wanted, even if he had to shed a tear or ten.

As for quoting a former PM who just happens to be a criminal fugitive, well if you fail to see that is not proper and might even suggest a 'conflict of interest' I'm afraid you failed your lessons in democracy and should consider taking them again. Maybe ask some Italians on how their version of democracy works and if their MoE would survive having a philosophy based on Silvio B., publishing such and stating to have based his education policy on said person Silvio B.

yes, I think that Thaksin 'likes' democracy because he knows how to win elections. It may also be the only reason. I do not think that he is a true democrat at heart and this IMHO (just for you) can be seen from time to time in the little riffs that come between Thaksin and parts of the UDD. (oh, and just to be complete on this point, it is equally evident that Thaksin's opponents do not give a hoot about democracy at all.............)

Just my opinion.

As for your ridiculing of the quote, go ahead. Thaksin was - for all of the things that he did which were actually wrong if not illegal, is officially a criminal because he was convicted by a kangaroo court. You pretend that there is some legitimacy behind his conviction, but the facts say otherwise. (btw, you are hardly alone on this forum).

So, IMVHO (just for you) your ridiculing of a quote which is itself quite appropriate in its context, just because the person being quoted, a former PM, has a politically motivated conviction is ridiculous.

Well, your still trying to walk around the issue you brought up. You only repeat 'Thaksin likes democracy because he knows how to win'. No exclamation of moral indignity, but the suggestion he might not be a true democrat, almost as if he's somewhat of a democrat. Following you simply state that Thaksin's opponents don't give a hoot about democracy.

Of course the suggestion of 'others are/knew' completely forgotten as even to you it might be clear it to be an unusable 'argument' against 'the other' after I provided some info.

As for 'kangaroo court', well that's your opinion. Even his sister the ex-PM didn't try to annul such conviction. She only tried to sneakily use a blanket amnesty bill without explicitly naming Thaksin.

So, a criminal fugitive is being quoted by a Minister of Education in the criminal fugitive's sister's cabinet. A new bright future for Thailand with a education policy which starts with a philosophy with as first sentence "... Thaksin Shinawatra said". tbthailand thinks that's OK as he and others 'state as fact' a conviction was 'political'.

Maybe I have to do some reading on Democracy in the USA and how common Americans like to interpret it. Knowing a few Americans I get the impression you're a bit of an exception though.

Oh by the way, I like your cheerleader pictures. I assume you like to watch College Football ?

Edited October 12, 2014 by rubl

[tbthailand]

OK TB, if you insist.

Let me 'expand' a bit on that sentence

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals."

The last part is either just stating the obvious, or ignoring that Thaksin himself had served as Minister of Interior under PM General Chavalit. In 2006 Thaksin went on holiday for a moment and chose Police General Chitchai as interim PM. Thaksin entered politics through Gen. Chamlong.

Anyway the lesson is in the hilarious suggestion that Thaksin only liked democracy because he knew how to manipulate the system in order to get what he wanted, even if he had to shed a tear or ten.

As for quoting a former PM who just happens to be a criminal fugitive, well if you fail to see that is not proper and might even suggest a 'conflict of interest' I'm afraid you failed your lessons in democracy and should consider taking them again. Maybe ask some Italians on how their version of democracy works and if their MoE would survive having a philosophy based on Silvio B., publishing such and stating to have based his education policy on said person Silvio B.

yes, I think that Thaksin 'likes' democracy because he knows how to win elections. It may also be the only reason. I do not think that he is a true democrat at heart and this IMHO (just for you) can be seen from time to time in the little riffs that come between Thaksin and parts of the UDD. (oh, and just to be complete on this point, it is equally evident that Thaksin's opponents do not give a hoot about democracy at all.............)

Just my opinion.

As for your ridiculing of the quote, go ahead. Thaksin was - for all of the things that he did which were actually wrong if not illegal, is officially a criminal because he was convicted by a kangaroo court. You pretend that there is some legitimacy behind his conviction, but the facts say otherwise. (btw, you are hardly alone on this forum).

So, IMVHO (just for you) your ridiculing of a quote which is itself quite appropriate in its context, just because the person being quoted, a former PM, has a politically motivated conviction is ridiculous.

Well, your still trying to walk around the issue you brought up. You only repeat 'Thaksin likes democracy because he knows how to win'. No exclamation of moral indignity, but the suggestion he might not be a true democrat, almost as if he's somewhat of a democrat. Following you simply state that Thaksin's opponents don't give a hoot about democracy.

Of course the suggestion of 'others are/knew' completely forgotten as even to you it might be clear it to be an unusable 'argument' against 'the other' after I provided some info.

As for 'kangaroo court', well that's your opinion. Even his sister the ex-PM didn't try to annul such conviction. She only tried to sneakily use a blanket amnesty bill without explicitly naming Thaksin.

So, a criminal fugitive is being quoted by a Minister of Education in the criminal fugitive's sister's cabinet. A new bright future for Thailand with a education policy which starts with a philosophy with as first sentence "... Thaksin Shinawatra said". tbthailand thinks that's OK as he and others 'state as fact' a conviction was 'political'.

Maybe I have to do some reading on Democracy in the USA and how common Americans like to interpret it. Knowing a few Americans I get the impression you're a bit of an exception though.

Oh by the way, I like your cheerleader pictures. I assume you like to watch College Football ?

you are trolling again, rubl.

blah blah blah,

yes, I did explain (briefly) my opinion about Thaksin vis-a-vis democracy - is there anything that you don't understand about my opinion?

Point 2 : it has always been the case that the rich elites, royalists, and their aligned generals do not like democracy and say that openly - it has been that way in Thailand for decades. If you disagree, please feel free to explain why.

Ditto for the conviction. The junta's AEC and the junta's court with royalist judges convicted him of abuse of power in a case that was 10 times more laughable than the current non-starter against Yingluck. If you want to call that justice, then, ... whatever. And don't ignore that fact that I did not give Thaksin a clean bill of health. He did implement some policies which benefited many Thai people and he had policies which did not. In addition, he clearly looked out for his own interests and leveraged his power and influence. But that is hardly a valid reason to single out Thaksin - show me a rich Thai who does not.

[rubl]

OK TB, if you insist.

Let me 'expand' a bit on that sentence

"Lessons in democracy: Thaksin liked democracy because he knew how to win elections. His opponents knew / were generals."

The last part is either just stating the obvious, or ignoring that Thaksin himself had served as Minister of Interior under PM General Chavalit. In 2006 Thaksin went on holiday for a moment and chose Police General Chitchai as interim PM. Thaksin entered politics through Gen. Chamlong.

Anyway the lesson is in the hilarious suggestion that Thaksin only liked democracy because he knew how to manipulate the system in order to get what he wanted, even if he had to shed a tear or ten.

As for quoting a former PM who just happens to be a criminal fugitive, well if you fail to see that is not proper and might even suggest a 'conflict of interest' I'm afraid you failed your lessons in democracy and should consider taking them again. Maybe ask some Italians on how their version of democracy works and if their MoE would survive having a philosophy based on Silvio B., publishing such and stating to have based his education policy on said person Silvio B.

yes, I think that Thaksin 'likes' democracy because he knows how to win elections. It may also be the only reason. I do not think that he is a true democrat at heart and this IMHO (just for you) can be seen from time to time in the little riffs that come between Thaksin and parts of the UDD. (oh, and just to be complete on this point, it is equally evident that Thaksin's opponents do not give a hoot about democracy at all.............)

Just my opinion.

As for your ridiculing of the quote, go ahead. Thaksin was - for all of the things that he did which were actually wrong if not illegal, is officially a criminal because he was convicted by a kangaroo court. You pretend that there is some legitimacy behind his conviction, but the facts say otherwise. (btw, you are hardly alone on this forum).

So, IMVHO (just for you) your ridiculing of a quote which is itself quite appropriate in its context, just because the person being quoted, a former PM, has a politically motivated conviction is ridiculous.

Well, your still trying to walk around the issue you brought up. You only repeat 'Thaksin likes democracy because he knows how to win'. No exclamation of moral indignity, but the suggestion he might not be a true democrat, almost as if he's somewhat of a democrat. Following you simply state that Thaksin's opponents don't give a hoot about democracy.

Of course the suggestion of 'others are/knew' completely forgotten as even to you it might be clear it to be an unusable 'argument' against 'the other' after I provided some info.

As for 'kangaroo court', well that's your opinion. Even his sister the ex-PM didn't try to annul such conviction. She only tried to sneakily use a blanket amnesty bill without explicitly naming Thaksin.

So, a criminal fugitive is being quoted by a Minister of Education in the criminal fugitive's sister's cabinet. A new bright future for Thailand with a education policy which starts with a philosophy with as first sentence "... Thaksin Shinawatra said". tbthailand thinks that's OK as he and others 'state as fact' a conviction was 'political'.

Maybe I have to do some reading on Democracy in the USA and how common Americans like to interpret it. Knowing a few Americans I get the impression you're a bit of an exception though.

Oh by the way, I like your cheerleader pictures. I assume you like to watch College Football ?

you are trolling again, rubl.

blah blah blah,

yes, I did explain (briefly) my opinion about Thaksin vis-a-vis democracy - is there anything that you don't understand about my opinion?

Point 2 : it has always been the case that the rich elites, royalists, and their aligned generals do not like democracy and say that openly - it has been that way in Thailand for decades. If you disagree, please feel free to explain why.

Ditto for the conviction. The junta's AEC and the junta's court with royalist judges convicted him of abuse of power in a case that was 10 times more laughable than the current non-starter against Yingluck. If you want to call that justice, then, ... whatever. And don't ignore that fact that I did not give Thaksin a clean bill of health. He did implement some policies which benefited many Thai people and he had policies which did not. In addition, he clearly looked out for his own interests and leveraged his power and influence. But that is hardly a valid reason to single out Thaksin - show me a rich Thai who does not.

You like to state as fact what seems to be your uninformed opinion combined with a tendency to ignore all that doesn't fit your views.

You inserted "others are/knew generals" to suggest unfair play ignoring that Thaksin himself knows an awful lot of generals. Upon having this pointed out, you continue obfuscation.

You stated your lesson on democracy as fact and now upon being pressured to explain or correct, it suddenly becomes at least in part your stated 'opinion only'. Next you dwell of in directions you think you might use, blissfully unaware of the dangers that brings to those who like to ignore what they don't like.

Thaksin is a criminal fugitive, he was found guilty of 'conflict of interest'. He as billionair just couldn't help himself, 'too rich to be corrupt', but not too rich to not wanting to do private business. His bail jumping didn't really improve his standing either.

Lastly I only singled out Thaksin as he's the only criminal fugitive I know of who has been quoted in the philosophy a Minister of Education based his education policy on. Now there's a lesson in democracy for you, and why even the UDD started their 'red-shirt school for democracy' as also adults like the MoE seem to have the wrong ideas

Edited October 12, 2014 by rubl

[heybruce]

"An election is not the only solution for democracy, which needs to have the standardised rule of law..."

The people who have toppled the government, suspended the constitution, suspended basic human rights (freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of association, etc.) and granted themselves amnesty for their actions are going to teach 'standardized rule of law'?

They could also explain "conflicts of interest" and "insider trading" pointing out that these are actually illegal and should not be why politicians seek the job. Then they could move on to "nepotism and cronyism", emphasis being made that they are NOT desirable in a democracy, even if your retarded cousin needs a job.

I admit the concept of altruism is going to be a hard sell, but it really wouldn't hurt to let people know that it exists.

That doesn't really address my post, but your reply is interesting in one sense; if you replace the word 'politicians' with 'generals' you'll see some of the reasons why Thailand's military is in need of reform.