Rushing democracy is anything but 'wise'

[lvr181]

It always surprises me how Thailand appears terrified of freedom of thought and choices for the people.

All over the world people rejoiced at being given increased freedoms. Thais however appear petrified at the possibility of anything other than the "right" result.

Whatever the may be.

Pink Floyd's, Comfortably Numb comes to mind Sadly.

[Briggsy]

The myth that the country was in an ungovernable state rears its head again. The protests were organised by and facilitated by the military in order to justify the coup.

The military (and those in the Democrat Party - judiciary - senior civil service - business tycoon patronage nexus) cannot restore any form of democracy because it needs to maintain its traditional control over power in this country and the resources of the nation and if the voters choose, they will not choose them.

[bangrak]

Poor timing, not ready for democracy, vote buying, Thai style democracy etc etc. Real cop out excused 18 times over. Always work as reasons when a coup is needed. Repeating this over and over again is insanity and still hope for an answer. Ludicrous and the yellow buying all these reasons whole sale. Allow democracy to flourish and mature and voters will learn the power in their hands to kick out the corrupt governments and bad policies. Look no further than Indonesia which thankfully have their last coup in the '60s and a dictator kicked out by people revolution and now basking in a people choice President, political stability and economic growth. What Thailand need is for the establishment to take their greedy hands off the state affairs, accept that coups are outdated and subscribed to the people mandate.

Aah, 'What Thailand needs is for the establishment to take their greedy hands off the state affairs...' for sure that is true Mr Eric, and for sure you know very well too that would mean no 'power brokers', no 'political dynasties', no more 'DP' and 'yellows' indeed, nor 'blues' of course, but also no more 'PPP-TRT-PTP', 'UDD' nor 'reds' as a matter of fact, because all these parties and movements single reason of existence is to serve the interests of a certain group ('clique') within that 'establishment', made of the interlaced old and new 'elites'...

As for '...democracy to flourish and mature...' it should first be given the chance to earth and grow on this soil, what you know too well it never had, and for that to happen, outside of the violent way of revolution, whose deep wounds always take generations to heal, there is only the education of the masses. As long as the masses don't have critical(!) knowledge, how could they analyse and relativate, to form valid opinions of their own, and decide of their choices for their future and that of their children, and express themselves as such in electing the ones to represent them at the head of the country?

(Let's leave those masses' primary needs: food, a roof, healthcare, which must been taken care of in priority, outside the debate here)

Could there be a Thai way, like you seem to allude to? But then could it realistically be anything else than an 'assisted democracy', for a few generations long, with the question of who will be able to 'assist' it without abusing it for its personal interest... Or were all the previous elections held in this country in any way 'acceptable' for you, from local to general, werent these all an insanity which did not bring any answer? Is there no need for you to make as sure as can be, in this corrupted to the core country, that all next elections will be 'fair and honest', not rigged, not bought off, massively, anymore? In what could any new election make anything any better in Thailand, when it would happen in the same way as all the previous ones? Do you truly believe in a kind of 'self-clean' function, which could take 40, 60 years, is there time for that anyway? And how do you make 'your' (in so many of your older posts) ballot-box-only way of changing things rime with your 'kick out the corrupt governments and bad policies' from today? And isn't that exactly what happened in 2013 and 2014 with the Shins-Thaksin-Yingluck-PTP-UDD 'government'? So, honestly, what next for you? Not a next episode of the same story is it?

[fobuff]

For who... the only winners so far are the great leader and his bunch of cronies

[rubl]

It always surprises me how Thailand appears terrified of freedom of thought and choices for the people.

All over the world people rejoiced at being given increased freedoms. Thais however appear petrified at the possibility of anything other than the "right" result.

Whatever the may be.

Pink Floyd's, Comfortably Numb comes to mind Sadly.

More like "we don't need no education", I think.

BTW I am a bit puzzled when people write "Thailand appears" when talking about it's people or some of it people. The way T@H wrote it, seems to suggest Thais really like "freedom of thought and choices" to be restricted.

[rubl]

For who... the only winners so far are the great leader and his bunch of cronies

Pray tell

- which great leader and cronies, PM Prayut and his cabinet or Thaksin and his Pheu Thai?

- independent of which of the two, describe what you mean with 'winning'

Thanks,

uncle rubl

[whybother]

Wonder why this editorial is anonymous. Maybe someone was just taking dictation?

It's not anonymous. It was written by (or for) the newspapers editor.

[bangrak]

One could also suggest that yingluck in her capacity of defense minister knowing full well she would get decimated at the polls (which was shown through the votes that were counted and the no votes and the non voter turn out in the north where there were no protests) did not instruct her army to protect the polling stations. She sent out 10 000 police in Bangkok yet a protest leader was shot and killed by a red shirt 5 minutes from a police station and no police turned up conveniently until the red shirts escaped.

Trust me if under yingluck's watch the PTP could pass a an amnesty bill at 4am allowing her corrupt brother to return to Thailand she would have no problems holding an election on the 2nd of February if she really wanted to. She didn't want to because she knew she would get decimated and she was right.

And in fact your argument inadvertently highlights that rushing elections will bring violence. Had the elections in February been delayed until all issues had been resolved as all independent organizations requested and the EC advised then maybe, just maybe we would have a functioning elected government now. But no, as you said above the voting was blocked. No police anywhere in hot spots and the army sitting around doing nothing because the defense minister did not order them out.

So now some want to do exactly the same thing again and again and again without actually learning from the past. If people love violence that is only stopped by coups then by all means have an election tomorrow. The majority don't like violence though and these people that you said will only tolerate until the next poll was also the same people that some said would not tolerate it after the failed 2nd Feb election and the same people that would not tolerate another coup. Well guess what? They have and they will continue to. Because this majority like all majorities around the world love stability and peace because they have families and all they want to do is put bread rice on the table and live their lives.

Thank you for highlighting that rushing elections is not a good idea.

I am right in thinking you really dont know anything.

Your inability to articulate a constructive rebuttal only strengthens my argument.

Thank you.

Frankly mate your preposterous drivel is not worthy of a rebuttal. It's got more holes in it than a Swiss cheese. Talk about standing reality on its head.

When it comes to re-writing history with unsupported assertions you really are in a class of your own.

Tell us, "Why does a 25 year old Aussie spend his days singing the praises of an authoritarian military junta whose only legitimacy is the control of lethal force?"

Well 'mate'(?!), visibly an expert in 'prepostrous drivel', allow me, it might have escaped you that in a (kind of) Swiss cheese, called Emmenthal, there are indeed a lot of holes, air, and still a lot of substance, cheese I mean, and there you have my 'appreciation' about that Swiss cheese, wherein djamie would be the, tasty, substance, and you the, foul, air... I would have let it all for what it's worth, when I would have read one, single, constructive reaction from you on TV. You know the saying about what a..eholes and opinions have in common, is that everybody has one, well, 'mate'(?!) till now we only saw the first from you...

Edited December 27, 2014 by bangrak

[bangrak]

The myth that the country was in an ungovernable state rears its head again. The protests were organised by and facilitated by the military in order to justify the coup.

The military (and those in the Democrat Party - judiciary - senior civil service - business tycoon patronage nexus) cannot restore any form of democracy because it needs to maintain its traditional control over power in this country and the resources of the nation and if the voters choose, they will not choose them.

Interesting. To balance it, could we please have your opinion in a nutshell about the Shins, the 'Thaksin regime' with its PPP, TRT and PTP parties and governments, plus the more recent offshoots UDD and red shirts? Thank you!

[bangrak]

Soon as I read the headline I knew it was from The Nation.

Anti democracy, just like the army and pathetic Thai elite class.

Or...

Soon as I read the headline I knew it was from Khao Sod.

Pro democracy, just like the UDD and predatory Thai new elite class.

[nong38]

The same stalwarts taking the same positions ( TV posters ).

The world is not a perfect place and never will be. The US and the west should not think their type of democracy should be rolled out across the world, the world is different place wherever you go, accept it.

In times past there has been no effective opposition to the elected government and the last one signed up a lot of the smaller parties to make sure of it! That did not serve democracy or the country at all. If it takes a bit longer to devise a system where the country have a suitable democratic system I dont think the country will bother to much about that, from what I see the country is going along the same as normal every day, I hear no one clamoring for an election soon. It is important to get things in place that everyone can abide by before we go to elections, then abide by the results.

From what Prayuth has been saying today he is having problems from the Ministries, not wanting to get along with each other and putting themselves before the country's needs, I hope he can bang a few heads together, there has been to much me me me, when it should be us us us.

[dcutman]

God how <deleted> boring is this conversation that has taken place so many times before.

Thailand has rewritten their constitution 13 times, if they haven't figured it by now its never going to happen.

[lvr181]

Thailand has rewritten their constitution 13 times, if they haven't figured it by now its never going to happen.

How true. It would be great if the Constitution could be written for the good of all Thai peoples instead of being written for the benefit of the "writers" each time!

But, we should remember that the psyche of Asian nations is different from those of the West. Perhaps us farangs are wanting unrealistic expectations of them? What is democratically "good" in our eyes is not necessarily what Asian peoples want. At the end of the day, as long as Thailand can stay ahead of its neighbours, economically, hopefully the flow/distribution of wealth will benefit all.

[Thai at Heart]

It always surprises me how Thailand appears terrified of freedom of thought and choices for the people.

All over the world people rejoiced at being given increased freedoms. Thais however appear petrified at the possibility of anything other than the "right" result.

Whatever the may be.

Pink Floyd's, Comfortably Numb comes to mind Sadly.

More like "we don't need no education", I think.

BTW I am a bit puzzled when people write "Thailand appears" when talking about it's people or some of it people. The way T@H wrote it, seems to suggest Thais really like "freedom of thought and choices" to be restricted.

How many times have so called Thai "academics" talked about the problems with democracy. The need for unity. The need for conformity. The need for peace to break out before they can have democracy.

Why are they so terrified of dissent, discussion, or different opinion. Why must everything be conformist.

Many Thais as yet don't know what they want, I feel. They are told they are free, yet are told what they can and cannot say or discuss. They are fed plenty of propaganda about their history and their place in the world and how to behave. Most appear happy enough to accept this.

If I was told I was the envy of the world, probably I would be fairly content with the status quo.

It is not that the "Thais" as in a majority don't want freedom. Most don't know that they are being controlled or limited in their voice or opinion. Some obviously want something to change, and the political system has been having indigestion dealing with this issue for a decade.

It isn't that Thaksin was corrupt. They are all corrupt. It isn't that thaksin was powerful. Prayuth is powerful. It is that the game was going to change for politicians and the army and society if thaksin hung around.

This control is of course not limited to Thailand. All of us must be wary of being limiter by government.

Why is the pooyai so petrified of the common man learning and expressing himself more in Thailand? The only constant is change. Just look what happens when a country refuses to accept that things change. Burpppp! For a decade

Edited December 27, 2014 by Thai at Heart

[Thai at Heart]

Thailand has rewritten their constitution 13 times, if they haven't figured it by now its never going to happen.

How true. It would be great if the Constitution could be written for the good of all Thai peoples instead of being written for the benefit of the "writers" each time!

But, we should remember that the psyche of Asian nations is different from those of the West. Perhaps us farangs are wanting unrealistic expectations of them? What is democratically "good" in our eyes is not necessarily what Asian peoples want. At the end of the day, as long as Thailand can stay ahead of its neighbours, economically, hopefully the flow/distribution of wealth will benefit all.

There is no single Asian model for success in that the economies are all different points in their development.

Some are.coming out of communist revolution, some out of civil war, some out of world war all at differing points.

It isn't however a solely western ideal that a man should be free to read and learn what he likes. This is a universal freedom and one would think that eventually governments cannot survive if they impinge on a fundamental human right.

Freedom to thought, and freedom of speech is not a western ideal. It is to many (including myself) a simple human right. Govts that supress it either change or will eventually face the wrath of the people.

[sirineou]

The US is concerned about the democratic process in Thailand, I wonder how they would feel about it if such process democratically elected a communist government, would they feel about it the same way they feel when the Palestinian democratic process elected Hamas or the Egyptian process elected the Muslim brotherhood?

The only democracy the US is interested in is one that produced results conducive to US interests

[Christie Paul]

The US is concerned about the democratic process in Thailand, I wonder how they would feel about it if such process democratically elected a communist government, would they feel about it the same way they feel when the Palestinian democratic process elected Hamas or the Egyptian process elected the Muslim brotherhood?

The only democracy the US is interested in is one that produced results conducive to US interests

You are right, but failed to mention that the US also supports monarchies, fascist dictators, islamic terrorists and presumably any kind of a system that is conducive to US interests.

[Thai at Heart]

The US is concerned about the democratic process in Thailand, I wonder how they would feel about it if such process democratically elected a communist government, would they feel about it the same way they feel when the Palestinian democratic process elected Hamas or the Egyptian process elected the Muslim brotherhood?

The only democracy the US is interested in is one that produced results conducive to US interests

You are right, but failed to mention that the US also supports monarchies, fascist dictators, islamic terrorists and presumably any kind of a system that is conducive to US interests.

I think it is fair to say though that whilst they are willing to deal with any structure of sitting govt in the short term, planning to change to democracy is never far off the agenda, voluntarily or forced.

[yellowboat]

Thailand's "democracy" is heavily influecend by a priviledged few. When it no longer serves their interest, the entire country no longer enjoys representatio, but rather proclimations about happiness.

[MaxLee]

What democracy??? Thailand never had democracy, only brain damage-iocracy

[lvr181]

Thailand has rewritten their constitution 13 times, if they haven't figured it by now its never going to happen.

How true. It would be great if the Constitution could be written for the good of all Thai peoples instead of being written for the benefit of the "writers" each time!

But, we should remember that the psyche of Asian nations is different from those of the West. Perhaps us farangs are wanting unrealistic expectations of them? What is democratically "good" in our eyes is not necessarily what Asian peoples want. At the end of the day, as long as Thailand can stay ahead of its neighbours, economically, hopefully the flow/distribution of wealth will benefit all.

There is no single Asian model for success in that the economies are all different points in their development.

Some are.coming out of communist revolution, some out of civil war, some out of world war all at differing points.

It isn't however a solely western ideal that a man should be free to read and learn what he likes. This is a universal freedom and one would think that eventually governments cannot survive if they impinge on a fundamental human right.

Freedom to thought, and freedom of speech is not a western ideal. It is to many (including myself) a simple human right. Govts that supress it either change or will eventually face the wrath of the people.

Utopia awaits in the mists of future time, unfortunately

[ABCer]

OP <quote> " Make no mistake: Thailand needs democracy. It’s the only way to go."

Dear 'The Nation', may I disagree with you?

Not in details of that nicely worded article but in the basic foundation it has been built on.

Could it be that you make a mistake?

Who knows what Thailand needs?

What kind, type or form of Democracy are you talking about?

May I suggest even a possibility that Kingdom of Thailand one day ask you to do a bit of soul search?

IMHO Thailand is a good country.

It has good laws, good people, good climate, good soil, plenty of water - enough of good basics for a potentially good life.

There are some serious problems with Management, though.

Well, let us say that every country has its problems. The so called 'Democratic' countries have them too.

Now, look back at your axiom - is it a valid one?

[yellowboat]

Yes, Asia has it issues with governance. But look at Taiwan and Japan. Both have had their problems, but they solve their problems without military intervention.

2600 years ago in China lived the legendary Lao Tzu. Legendary as they are not sure he actually existed:

"If any one desires to take the Empire in hand and govern it, I see that he will not succeed. The Empire is a divine utensil which may not be roughly handled. He who meddles, mars. He who holds it by force, loses it."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/tao/salt/salt08.htm

Most of the Chinese living in Thailand, Taiwan, Malaysia and Singapore come from the same place in China

[Briggsy]

The military will be gunning down protestors in Central Bangkok in order to protect the wealth and privileges of a few families. Just as they have done over and over. Medals and honours will be handed out along with lucrative board positions on state enterprises. Just as before.

This is the cycle of Thais killing Thais that has repeated itself and is a cycle that the country cannot free itself from.

[ThaiUser]

The beauty about democracy is that people have a right to decide about the direction they want to move in personal life or for a country which direction it should move by majority consensus.

It was and is a misfortune that the majority in Thailand never was given the chance to find out what democracy was and is all about. Minorities that haven’t been happy with the outcome of elections decided to show the people their understanding of democracy. The author of the editorial in the Nation writes that “Everyone here agrees that democracy deserves a chance” and in doing so is blurring the view and doesn’t understand that democracy in a free society is the only rightful form of government and anything else is in one form or another some kind of dictatorship.

Democracy requires excepting the outcome of elections and if dissatisfied to drum up enough support that will enable one to change the result the next time.

Over the last few weeks I had to listen to comments that suggested implementing procedures to ensure that only qualified people can be elected members of parliament. The question is, what are the qualifications required in a democracy to be able to stand for an election? Is it the fact that one has served in the military or that one is accepted by an appointed commission; or is it that fact that one is old enough to be elected (what ever that age might be and the majority has agreed on); that one is willing to obey the constitution and the laws the majority have agreed on and that one is willing to defend the rights and duties that constitution and the law expect one to uphold?

By starting to talk disqualifying people from elections because they are not skilled enough or their education background not good enough one already has left the road of democracy into the one way road of autocracy with a single leader ruling surrounded by his paladins.

[jpeg]

The beauty about democracy is that people have a right to decide about the direction they want to move in personal life or for a country which direction it should move by majority consensus.

It was and is a misfortune that the majority in Thailand never was given the chance to find out what democracy was and is all about. Minorities that haven’t been happy with the outcome of elections decided to show the people their understanding of democracy. The author of the editorial in the Nation writes that “Everyone here agrees that democracy deserves a chance” and in doing so is blurring the view and doesn’t understand that democracy in a free society is the only rightful form of government and anything else is in one form or another some kind of dictatorship.

Democracy requires excepting the outcome of elections and if dissatisfied to drum up enough support that will enable one to change the result the next time.

Over the last few weeks I had to listen to comments that suggested implementing procedures to ensure that only qualified people can be elected members of parliament. The question is, what are the qualifications required in a democracy to be able to stand for an election? Is it the fact that one has served in the military or that one is accepted by an appointed commission; or is it that fact that one is old enough to be elected (what ever that age might be and the majority has agreed on); that one is willing to obey the constitution and the laws the majority have agreed on and that one is willing to defend the rights and duties that constitution and the law expect one to uphold?

By starting to talk disqualifying people from elections because they are not skilled enough or their education background not good enough one already has left the road of democracy into the one way road of autocracy with a single leader ruling surrounded by his paladins.

Good post raising the very salient point that many posters/Thai demagogues fail to acknowledge when trumpeting 'The Thais cannot rule themselves/are too immature for democracy'. They've never been allowed to fight for one as those of us in the West did.

[ThaiUser]

OP <quote> " Make no mistake: Thailand needs democracy. It’s the only way to go."

Dear 'The Nation', may I disagree with you?

Not in details of that nicely worded article but in the basic foundation it has been built on.

Could it be that you make a mistake?

Who knows what Thailand needs?

What kind, type or form of Democracy are you talking about?

May I suggest even a possibility that Kingdom of Thailand one day ask you to do a bit of soul search?

IMHO Thailand is a good country.

It has good laws, good people, good climate, good soil, plenty of water - enough of good basics for a potentially good life.

There are some serious problems with Management, though.

Well, let us say that every country has its problems. The so called 'Democratic' countries have them too.

Now, look back at your axiom - is it a valid one?

I am a bit confused reading your comment. What do you mean by “What kind, type or form of Democracy are you talking about?”

Are there different forms of democracy or are there different forms of government? Democracy as I understand it is based on two Greek words, one meaning power the other meaning people suggesting that the power a government wields are handed to it by the people.

Another aspect of your comment I fail to understand is the phrase that “It has good laws” referring to Thailand. What laws are you trying to mention – the Constitution – the two previous ones, the not existing current one or the not written yet future one?

The problem is that we don’t have laws as so called ‘democracies’ using your phrase and that our laws always seem to be in flux depending what political colour is just in power.

[whybother]

... Snip...

By starting to talk disqualifying people from elections because they are not skilled enough or their education background not good enough one already has left the road of democracy into the one way road of autocracy with a single leader ruling surrounded by his paladins.

Who is talking about disqualifying people from elections at the moment?

[ThaiUser]

... Snip...

By starting to talk disqualifying people from elections because they are not skilled enough or their education background not good enough one already has left the road of democracy into the one way road of autocracy with a single leader ruling surrounded by his paladins.

Who is talking about disqualifying people from elections at the moment?

Maybe if you would speak Thai and listen to the weekly announcements made by our current PM you would have noticed that he mentioned it too when referring to unqualified people being in parliament in western democracies. I noticed it and so might have others.

[whybother]

... Snip...

By starting to talk disqualifying people from elections because they are not skilled enough or their education background not good enough one already has left the road of democracy into the one way road of autocracy with a single leader ruling surrounded by his paladins.

Who is talking about disqualifying people from elections at the moment?

Maybe if you would speak Thai and listen to the weekly announcements made by our current PM you would have noticed that he mentioned it too when referring to unqualified people being in parliament in western democracies. I noticed it and so might have others.

Oh, you're talking about standing for election. I thought you were talking about voting.

It makes sense to have a certain level of education to be an MP or a minister. The junta took that requirement out of the 2007 constitution, but realistically, I doubt many MPs that got elected in the last couple of elections didn't have a reasonable education.