Thai politics: 'reforms' may herald a return to older ways

[Brian Corrigan]

A well written article.

[kkerry]

Effectively disenfranchising a large chunk of the population is a risky way to go about reforming things. Yes, things were way out of hand, and yes, it's a good thing all the rabble rousing from both sides no longer dominates our tv screens and disrupts daily life like before, but...

[Eric Loh]

The author seems to be under the sad delusion that the Shin regimes were democratic because they won elections. The only major difference I see is who is giving the orders, a general or a career criminal. In fact, any person red/green colour blind might even fail to notice that distinction, the intimidation having only varying levels of violence.

The corollary to that is the amount the criminal needs to divert from state funds to buy those votes and to line his own pockets, and the political violence he is prepared to generate and fund to maintain his position. The PTP was as democratic as the UDD, where the only votes counted are from the chosen leaders, who all take their orders, with their cheques, from one person.

The author accuses the NRC of failing to see have "imagination far beyond a quasi-democracy and a quasi-authoritarian regime" while giving the impression that he found that quite acceptable in the near past.

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

It will be easier to understand what you talking if you compare the "authoritarian" with current regime. I think also you should go easy on the hyperbole.

[Roadman]

What a pathetic written item. It's whole substance is built on the foundation that reforms are excluding Thaksin's goons when the whole time prior to and during selection for positions within the reform teams Thaksin's goons have made it very clear that they are not interested in being part of the process.

[aaacorp]

The author seems to be under the sad delusion that the Shin regimes were democratic because they won elections. The only major difference I see is who is giving the orders, a general or a career criminal. In fact, any person red/green colour blind might even fail to notice that distinction, the intimidation having only varying levels of violence.

The corollary to that is the amount the criminal needs to divert from state funds to buy those votes and to line his own pockets, and the political violence he is prepared to generate and fund to maintain his position. The PTP was as democratic as the UDD, where the only votes counted are from the chosen leaders, who all take their orders, with their cheques, from one person.

The author accuses the NRC of failing to see have "imagination far beyond a quasi-democracy and a quasi-authoritarian regime" while giving the impression that he found that quite acceptable in the near past.

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

You should seriously cool down, your comment is useless and agressive

Edited October 15, 2014 by aaacorp

[aaacorp]

What a pathetic written item. It's whole substance is built on the foundation that reforms are excluding Thaksin's goons when the whole time prior to and during selection for positions within the reform teams Thaksin's goons have made it very clear that they are not interested in being part of the process.

Like it or not thaksin was a part of the game and was even really appreciated for a while by the wealthiest traditionnal thai community. The fact that this article mention thaksin is not so surprising as this political situation results from Thaksin himself and his proxies. However you should read it with a more neutral mind i think...

[Bluespunk]

deleted.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Bluespunk

[JOC]

Old men with old ideas longing for the good old days when the populace was compliant and knew place. Sorry chaps, that ship has sailed.

Sadly you are wrong! Wave a yellow flag (not the yellowshirts, but the other one) and 99% of all Thais will fall back in line again!!

As for political activism amongst the young and educated, it is limited to a little namecalling on social media.

[Thanet]

The coup, the NLA, the NRC (with instructions to follow the advice of the Military). All these structures are a mere façade.

The only reform that they have in mind is winding back the clock to the good old days when the army ruled everything, and the peasants grovelled down below with no hope of bettering themselves.

[fab4]

The author seems to be under the sad delusion that the Shin regimes were democratic because they won elections. The only major difference I see is who is giving the orders, a general or a career criminal. In fact, any person red/green colour blind might even fail to notice that distinction, the intimidation having only varying levels of violence.

The corollary to that is the amount the criminal needs to divert from state funds to buy those votes and to line his own pockets, and the political violence he is prepared to generate and fund to maintain his position. The PTP was as democratic as the UDD, where the only votes counted are from the chosen leaders, who all take their orders, with their cheques, from one person.

The author accuses the NRC of failing to see have "imagination far beyond a quasi-democracy and a quasi-authoritarian regime" while giving the impression that he found that quite acceptable in the near past.

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Well, why don't you provide examples of said "authoritarian nature of Shin* democracy, along with its political violence" particularly the political violence sanctioned by the Yingluck administration as you imply, instead of mouthing platitudes designed to appeal to the hard of thinking?

* do you have a problem with spelling Shinawatra?

[gyrosman]

Law was something the Greeks and Romans developed and is still the normal language of the land called :Common Law which most modern societies follow. if anyone on this web who is a lawyer or has studied international law AKA : Warsaw pact 1949 etc... and more would understand the foundation was to progress with the changes of society but not wavied on pricinples of the history of law. I think Thai's have never learnt about older societies.

[Eric Loh]

While I am sick of all the "arm chair freedom fighters" typing on Internet, I see the deeply endemic cultural accepted practice of patronage. The royal model (before constitutional monarchy) governs in any nation via patronage. That practice is very old here. The slight change from that model to Machine Politics patronage is easily accomplished. This was the Thaksins genius, to see that the adoption of a political machine within a fledgling democracy would be easy given patronage being already the Thai way. Political machines operate on "gifts" of money and plum govt jobs to their cronies. Soon, the cronies get cronies and the machine power grows and democracy slides away.

In Thailand, the Thaksins' political machine, almost as good as Richard Daley's in Chicago, was very near to full control--with tentacles in police, Ministries, and public works bureaucracies--that insured continued flow of money and plum jobs to the cronies. The Thaksins took off the top at a new extreme level and passed the crumbs to the cronies. The Thaksins invented schemes that made it look good to the poor and those also were mostly designed for maximum skimming or return to their machine. An example is the loan of Thai tax money to Burma and then Burma bought stuff from Thaksins' companies with that money. Unfortunately, many of those invented schemes were not thought through to their longer term consequences (attempt to corner rice market via only Thailand is good example of dumb thinking). The schemes did produce short term popularity.

The Thaksins were reported to be on the brink of filling the place of an expiring royal personage or, if that did not develop, could have had a personal cadre of a paid, armed goon army that could move to destabilize the nation. This situation, if reported correctly, could have had very dire results for all of us in Thailand, citizen and guest alike. Then, thanks to the Army for stopping that reported possibility.

Reform--toward democracy-- after the demise of the Thaksins Political Machine, now being dismantled, is very difficult in Thailand because it sorely lacks a well-paid, well-educated, honest and dedicated bureaucrats corp. A student of modern America knows that politicians come and go of both Parties, but the govt keeps running much like a democracy because of on-the-line bureaucrats continuing to turn the govt wheels deep inside the govt. Good bureaucrats mean that an American can go to a govt office (like SS), get professional courteous and correct service, and no Black Labels change hands. Sure, there is corruption and patronage in USA, too, but there is a difference and that difference is the USA bureaucrats.

Given a Thailand where the ACCEPTED AND EXPECTED system is patronage, from cookies to the postman to billions to PMs, exists, it is probably impossible to do anything except corral in the exaggerated political skimmer levels and get a lid on the size of political machines. That effort will not please "arm chair self-appointed foreign 'freedom fighters'" here and abroad, but it looks like the only choice. If the ruling families here can keep that lid on, Thailand will lurch along for twenty more years....... until the effects of AESAN become very real and very clear to everyone. Then, who knows!!??!!

"billions to PMs". That's a good closing. Unknown built up of weath is not exclusive to Thaksin. Hope the law gets to the NRC and independent agency heads to have their assets declared.

[halloween]

The author seems to be under the sad delusion that the Shin regimes were democratic because they won elections. The only major difference I see is who is giving the orders, a general or a career criminal. In fact, any person red/green colour blind might even fail to notice that distinction, the intimidation having only varying levels of violence.

The corollary to that is the amount the criminal needs to divert from state funds to buy those votes and to line his own pockets, and the political violence he is prepared to generate and fund to maintain his position. The PTP was as democratic as the UDD, where the only votes counted are from the chosen leaders, who all take their orders, with their cheques, from one person.

The author accuses the NRC of failing to see have "imagination far beyond a quasi-democracy and a quasi-authoritarian regime" while giving the impression that he found that quite acceptable in the near past.

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

You should seriously cool down, your comment is useless and agressive

Yes, I get that way when people reply to my posts, but have nothing to say about the content.

[halloween]

The author seems to be under the sad delusion that the Shin regimes were democratic because they won elections. The only major difference I see is who is giving the orders, a general or a career criminal. In fact, any person red/green colour blind might even fail to notice that distinction, the intimidation having only varying levels of violence.

The corollary to that is the amount the criminal needs to divert from state funds to buy those votes and to line his own pockets, and the political violence he is prepared to generate and fund to maintain his position. The PTP was as democratic as the UDD, where the only votes counted are from the chosen leaders, who all take their orders, with their cheques, from one person.

The author accuses the NRC of failing to see have "imagination far beyond a quasi-democracy and a quasi-authoritarian regime" while giving the impression that he found that quite acceptable in the near past.

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Well, why don't you provide examples of said "authoritarian nature of Shin* democracy, along with its political violence" particularly the political violence sanctioned by the Yingluck administration as you imply, instead of mouthing platitudes designed to appeal to the hard of thinking?

* do you have a problem with spelling Shinawatra?

Last things first, I find Shin a convenient abbreviation. Is it hard for you to understand?

You dispute that "Thaksin thinks, PTP acts", or that "Yingluk is my clone"? Weng's claim that PTP MPs are paid? That a fugitive criminal was allowed access to cabinet meetings? One man pays the pipers and calls the tunes, and makes no pretence that it isn't so.

The regular attacks on the anti-government protesters were obviously carried out by PTP/Yingluk supporters. Did we hear demands from Yingluk for them to stop? Where were the RTP arrests - non existent until her regime was replaced.

[belg]

history is good at repeating itself

only the names have changed

[cocopops]

Law was something the Greeks and Romans developed and is still the normal language of the land called :Common Law which most modern societies follow. if anyone on this web who is a lawyer or has studied international law AKA : Warsaw pact 1949 etc... and more would understand the foundation was to progress with the changes of society but not wavied on pricinples of the history of law. I think Thai's have never learnt about older societies.

Speaking of older societies, the Sumerians had written laws long before the Greeks came along:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Ur-Nammu

[englishoak]

The honeymoon period is coming to an end I see.

[fab4]

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Well, why don't you provide examples of said "authoritarian nature of Shin* democracy, along with its political violence" particularly the political violence sanctioned by the Yingluck administration as you imply, instead of mouthing platitudes designed to appeal to the hard of thinking?

* do you have a problem with spelling Shinawatra?

Last things first, I find Shin a convenient abbreviation. Is it hard for you to understand?

You dispute that "Thaksin thinks, PTP acts", or that "Yingluk is my clone"? Weng's claim that PTP MPs are paid? That a fugitive criminal was allowed access to cabinet meetings? One man pays the pipers and calls the tunes, and makes no pretence that it isn't so.

The regular attacks on the anti-government protesters were obviously carried out by PTP/Yingluk supporters. Did we hear demands from Yingluk for them to stop? Where were the RTP arrests - non existent until her regime was replaced.

That's it?

[maxme]

The author seems to be under the sad delusion that the Shin regimes were democratic because they won elections. The only major difference I see is who is giving the orders, a general or a career criminal. In fact, any person red/green colour blind might even fail to notice that distinction, the intimidation having only varying levels of violence.

The corollary to that is the amount the criminal needs to divert from state funds to buy those votes and to line his own pockets, and the political violence he is prepared to generate and fund to maintain his position. The PTP was as democratic as the UDD, where the only votes counted are from the chosen leaders, who all take their orders, with their cheques, from one person.

The author accuses the NRC of failing to see have "imagination far beyond a quasi-democracy and a quasi-authoritarian regime" while giving the impression that he found that quite acceptable in the near past.

Not at all convincing due to excessive hyperbolizing. Easy to understand article and not at all contradicting that it's still the same old struggle between the military back establishment who refused to relinquish power wants status quo.

Of course it was easy to understand, it was written for red Kool-aid drinkers like you. Difficult is when you have to discuss the authoritarian nature of Shin democracy, along with its political violence.

Hmm... You really are a lost cause. My sympathies...

[tbthailand]

Throughout modern history, Thailand's reform has gone back and forth between an authoritarian elite and democracy. The more reforming it does, the less democratic it gets.

Maybe the best point he makes.

btw, for those posters amazed that this come from the nation, he has been periodically pointing out this line of development over the last few months.

for those worried about his next week-long vacation destination, I think it might be 'undisclosed'

[tbthailand]

his article makes a lot of sense if you have read thai history other than the sanitized official versions. he obviously remembers what actually happened and also understands how the moving-parts in thailand fit together.

[northernjohn]

A good and, perhaps, a brave piece of journalism.

I wouldn't say that. Good journalism is not biased. Giving Thaksin credit for turning every thing around is ludicrous. When he assumed the office the world economy was on a roll even fabby couldn't have blown it.

It like any other piece of garbage gives no real facts it sees some thing it doesn't like and refers to nameless people as being the ones responsible. When you see an article that names instead of airy farie groups you will know you have the real McCoy. Every thing else is just sore losers whining. Nothing was promised to the people today and Thailand finally has a Prime Minister who is honest. He makers a mistake he admits it. He does not say it will be done just like that he admits it is a long road. One year and an election and the new Parliament will still have a lot of work to do. No pie in the sky promise. He has an office in Thailand he works out of not one in an airplane in between shopping malls. He says he will pay and he does. Ask the rice farmers.

From where I sit it looks to me like he is hugely successful. If he wasn't the Thaksin fans wouldn't be complaining. Or the people or organizations that were making money off the corruption.

First Thaksin tried to seize the government in 2010 with hired terrorists. That failed him so now he is trying with the news papers. In the mean time the author walks the streets with out fear of being killed thanks to the people he is trying to get rid of. Such is the news paper business. Reality only counts when it sells news papers.

The article gives no credit what so ever to the government just alludes to the authors (I can't really say journalist that would be a false statement) dream that it is doing no good.

[northernjohn]

While I am sick of all the "arm chair freedom fighters" typing on Internet, I see the deeply endemic cultural accepted practice of patronage. The royal model (before constitutional monarchy) governs in any nation via patronage. That practice is very old here. The slight change from that model to Machine Politics patronage is easily accomplished. This was the Thaksins genius, to see that the adoption of a political machine within a fledgling democracy would be easy given patronage being already the Thai way. Political machines operate on "gifts" of money and plum govt jobs to their cronies. Soon, the cronies get cronies and the machine power grows and democracy slides away.

In Thailand, the Thaksins' political machine, almost as good as Richard Daley's in Chicago, was very near to full control--with tentacles in police, Ministries, and public works bureaucracies--that insured continued flow of money and plum jobs to the cronies. The Thaksins took off the top at a new extreme level and passed the crumbs to the cronies. The Thaksins invented schemes that made it look good to the poor and those also were mostly designed for maximum skimming or return to their machine. An example is the loan of Thai tax money to Burma and then Burma bought stuff from Thaksins' companies with that money. Unfortunately, many of those invented schemes were not thought through to their longer term consequences (attempt to corner rice market via only Thailand is good example of dumb thinking). The schemes did produce short term popularity.

The Thaksins were reported to be on the brink of filling the place of an expiring royal personage or, if that did not develop, could have had a personal cadre of a paid, armed goon army that could move to destabilize the nation. This situation, if reported correctly, could have had very dire results for all of us in Thailand, citizen and guest alike. Then, thanks to the Army for stopping that reported possibility.

Reform--toward democracy-- after the demise of the Thaksins Political Machine, now being dismantled, is very difficult in Thailand because it sorely lacks a well-paid, well-educated, honest and dedicated bureaucrats corp. A student of modern America knows that politicians come and go of both Parties, but the govt keeps running much like a democracy because of on-the-line bureaucrats continuing to turn the govt wheels deep inside the govt. Good bureaucrats mean that an American can go to a govt office (like SS), get professional courteous and correct service, and no Black Labels change hands. Sure, there is corruption and patronage in USA, too, but there is a difference and that difference is the USA bureaucrats.

Given a Thailand where the ACCEPTED AND EXPECTED system is patronage, from cookies to the postman to billions to PMs, exists, it is probably impossible to do anything except corral in the exaggerated political skimmer levels and get a lid on the size of political machines. That effort will not please "arm chair self-appointed foreign 'freedom fighters'" here and abroad, but it looks like the only choice. If the ruling families here can keep that lid on, Thailand will lurch along for twenty more years....... until the effects of AESAN become very real and very clear to everyone. Then, who knows!!??!!

Well I wasn't going to post again on this thread as I have said the article was and is garbage.

But I decided your article was so well laid out and factual that it deserved posting again.