Army 'needs martial law to shield itself'

[tbthailand]

No, I was giving a quick reply to a poster who used a simple error in dates as an excuse to not defend foolish posts about Prayuth being elected by the NLA, Yingluck asking for but not receiving military assistance, and other indefensible nonsense.

As far as my demanding something, I demanded nothing. You seem to be one of those posters who like to exaggerate the trivial to ridiculous proportions.

For someone not demanding anything you're demanding in getting answers to your questions. Questions I call less relevant to be friendly. That some of my posts offend you to the point of calling them 'foolish' and 'indefensible' only shows a certain lack of acceptance of free speech. IMHO.

Anyway, maybe I need protection, almost like the army needs the Martial Law, allegedly that is

free speech means that you have the right to make foolish and indefensible statements.

it also means HB can identify your statements as such. I feel reasonably certain that he would himself defend your right to make such statements.

I find your replies to be mostly obtuse & evasive, and usually including a tangential comment to deflect the discussion.

just my opinion, of course. just as it is my opinion that the army will likely keep martial law for a long time in order to effectively silence any opposition. I wonder if they will lift it just before the allow the next elections... if and when that happens.

You should have written "free speech means people have the right to make foolish and indefensible statements" following which you might have added you think my remarks fall in the category. Of course it would help if apart from putting labels on my remarks you would also give reasoning a bit more detailed than just the label 'obtuse, evasive, tangential, deflective'. In a way just putting labels without explanation is disruptive and deflective in itself. IMHO and all that my dear TB.

Your last paragraph is more like it. We believe different things there, but that's no problem.

Hi Rubl, I did not add detail regarding my views of your replies because I have done so many times in the past. Sorry 'bout that.

[englishoak]

Paradoxicracy...... go watch it and learn all about your beloved coups,Thai freedom and elites BS games entwined with the military.

You don't need to listen to your GF or equally clueless average Thai, there are those outside of Thailand that have a far more balanced, non political bias and detailed understanding of things and papers or articles that can't be posted here. Go read something that isnt muzzled and censored, if you dont then you cannot have an understanding of the game being played.

But that would be too hard for some to grasp no doubt as it would lead to the simple obvious conclusion that the intention has never been to allow Thailand or its people a democratic choice of direction for long. Even one they may regret will never be allowed to really appreciate making a mistake because before the people are allowed to reject them at an election and learn, the option is taken away......

Morons you might think but thats the point, keep things stable enough to muddle along but unstable enough to get away with coup after coup... reset, rinse and repeat is all it'll ever be until a proper...............

To be fair, those outside would also understand that the Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments. That's apart from the 'democracy' bit which wasn't really democratic anyway.

Your missing the point, military rule has never enriched a country in governance and the very least it holds the people and nation back developing politically, its not about a bad government and Thailand is nothing special in that regard,from time to time all countries have them. Its the inability and will to allow people to learn from electing these mistakes and move forward, hopefully not repeating the mistake too often. This is how democracies and evolving nations progress no less than people learning from mistakes in life. Some will not learn but most will and thats enough to drive things forward positively. Coups stop that happening and this one is no different to all the rest in that regard.

How can you say military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better ? I'm not going to list the examples because everyone is well aware.

When is comes right down to it you either believe in the right to rule or rule by elect of the people. Oppression and rule by force or freedom with all its flaws. I choose the latter every time, I'm sorry you choose the former.

[rubl]

Now you're talking.

As politicians of any flavour were ruled out as having had their chance and to prevent the usual obstruction which was clearly displayed the last few years, it is clear that there was a preference for reliable people, but still with the necessary qualifications. Politicians excluded are mostly (this being Thailand) not really better qualified people.

Since the aim is to put Thailand through necessary reforms, since the NCPO and NLA will step down to make way for a elected parliament/Senate/government I think it's incorrect to describe the setup of NLA or cabinet as cronyism, more like a necessary choice to get things done rather than continue with the chaos surely no one would like to return to? Nepotism certainly doesn't apply, unless you think PM Prayut's little brother was in need of a job and wouldn't be employable otherwise?

You're right in that for all positions there may have been better qualified people, but that was even true with Ms. Yingluck's handpicked cabinet full of knowledgeble, capable, full of potential and suitable people (terms Ms. Yingluck used explaining 'her' criteria).

BTW at times Ministers have been described as managers who rely on their Ministries Staff for the real work. Some told me manager can manage anything without having to know much about what they manage

We will have to agree to disagree because I do not agree with the two premises of your argument.

1) I don't think the aim is to put Thailand through necessary reforms. Reforms are necessary, but the current reforms being forced through will not solve the long-term problems within Thailand since large portions of the populace are being marginalized in this process.

2) NCPO and NLA are not going anywhere soon. They will always be lurking in the appointed Senate, and some other "Good Person" committee that is given an inordinate amount of power. As well, the unelected PM reforms are paving the way for Prayuth to be around for a long time.

Therefore, cronyism IS applicable, because the militiary members are chosen simply for loyalty, and the ability to say yes (or no) as required, not for their ability to put Thailand through reforms that will actually solve the problems, rather than just suppress them.

Yes it seems so, we agree to disagree, but we had an interesting discussion here.

If you be so kind to grant me to add to the list of my arguments? It may not alter your premises but adds to clarify mine.

Although there may be (non-politician) people around to fill places in the NLA, with the PM having made clear that one's presence in parliament is required AND absence needs to be justified and needs to be asked for and permitted in advance, I doubt many of the real good people will be willing to drop whatever their current job is and rush to get an NLA position. Furthermore even if knowledgeble politicians would be available and willing, the restriction of not being able to stand for office up to three years (or was if five?) after relinquishing an NLA position will deter them.

Now if this would be relaxed then the NLA would become more like a real parliament / Senate and that would get people 'used' to it. One may not want that to happen.

[rubl]

You should have written "free speech means people have the right to make foolish and indefensible statements" following which you might have added you think my remarks fall in the category. Of course it would help if apart from putting labels on my remarks you would also give reasoning a bit more detailed than just the label 'obtuse, evasive, tangential, deflective'. In a way just putting labels without explanation is disruptive and deflective in itself. IMHO and all that my dear TB.

Your last paragraph is more like it. We believe different things there, but that's no problem.

Hi Rubl, I did not add detail regarding my views of your replies because I have done so many times in the past. Sorry 'bout that.

No problem, I'll file it with the "trolling again" remarks you made and other elaborate less than six word one liners.

[rubl]

Paradoxicracy...... go watch it and learn all about your beloved coups,Thai freedom and elites BS games entwined with the military.

You don't need to listen to your GF or equally clueless average Thai, there are those outside of Thailand that have a far more balanced, non political bias and detailed understanding of things and papers or articles that can't be posted here. Go read something that isnt muzzled and censored, if you dont then you cannot have an understanding of the game being played.

But that would be too hard for some to grasp no doubt as it would lead to the simple obvious conclusion that the intention has never been to allow Thailand or its people a democratic choice of direction for long. Even one they may regret will never be allowed to really appreciate making a mistake because before the people are allowed to reject them at an election and learn, the option is taken away......

Morons you might think but thats the point, keep things stable enough to muddle along but unstable enough to get away with coup after coup... reset, rinse and repeat is all it'll ever be until a proper...............

To be fair, those outside would also understand that the Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments. That's apart from the 'democracy' bit which wasn't really democratic anyway.

Your missing the point, military rule has never enriched a country in governance and the very least it holds the people and nation back developing politically, its not about a bad government and Thailand is nothing special in that regard,from time to time all countries have them. Its the inability and will to allow people to learn from electing these mistakes and move forward, hopefully not repeating the mistake too often. This is how democracies and evolving nations progress no less than people learning from mistakes in life. Some will not learn but most will and thats enough to drive things forward positively. Coups stop that happening and this one is no different to all the rest in that regard.

How can you say military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better ? I'm not going to list the examples because everyone is well aware.

When is comes right down to it you either believe in the right to rule or rule by elect of the people. Oppression and rule by force or freedom with all its flaws. I choose the latter every time, I'm sorry you choose the former.

I miss the point? Maybe, but you also I think.

Military government may not have a good name, but there are also lots of so-called 'democratic' governments in the past which didn't have a good name, even in Thailand.

following I like you to check again, I didn't say "military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better", I said "Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments".

This Thai democracy with all it's flaws was getting nowhere and not only because of the Military. Politicians of any colour are in the same league and corrupt. The biggest 'hero of the common people' is a greedy billionair for instance.

I still have hopes the current reform period can cause a leapfrog into the 21st century, but with the parties involved AND the obstruction from vested interest groups including politicians, I'm starting to get the feeling that much more effort is needed from the common people to stand without help of their local elite and powerbrokers. To simply go back to pre-coup is like condemning the Thai people to many more years of chaos, corruption and bloodshed I fear. I don't wish that upon them.

[jayboy]

Anyway, I'm sure Martial Law will be lifted in time for elections to be arranged and conducted under normal law. As history teaches us the Military did that before

Exactly - that part of history seems to be what some people tend to forget, while consistently regurgitating the parts of history that haven't been repeated at this time.

In recent coups, the military has repeatedly and predictably stepped back, to allow another stab at the democratic process. There is no reason to assume it won't do so again, once they have created an even and fair playground in a couple of years.

The usual nonsense.The whole point of the current exercise is to ensure there is NOT an even and level playing field.They want to rig the system to ensure the Thai people are unable to choose a government of their liking.They believe that past coups were not sufficient resets since the Thai people kept making the wrong electoral choices.Hence the current effort.

[rubl]

Anyway, I'm sure Martial Law will be lifted in time for elections to be arranged and conducted under normal law. As history teaches us the Military did that before

Exactly - that part of history seems to be what some people tend to forget, while consistently regurgitating the parts of history that haven't been repeated at this time.

In recent coups, the military has repeatedly and predictably stepped back, to allow another stab at the democratic process. There is no reason to assume it won't do so again, once they have created an even and fair playground in a couple of years.

The usual nonsense.The whole point of the current exercise is to ensure there is NOT an even and level playing field.They want to rig the system to ensure the Thai people are unable to choose a government of their liking.They believe that past coups were not sufficient resets since the Thai people kept making the wrong electoral choices.Hence the current effort.

Should it be obvious that you suggest you speak with an authority which others lack?

The whole point you describe is your opinion, to which you are entitled. I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean I have to describe it as 'nonsense'. I hope you can understand that, my dear boy.

[englishoak]

Paradoxicracy...... go watch it and learn all about your beloved coups,Thai freedom and elites BS games entwined with the military.

You don't need to listen to your GF or equally clueless average Thai, there are those outside of Thailand that have a far more balanced, non political bias and detailed understanding of things and papers or articles that can't be posted here. Go read something that isnt muzzled and censored, if you dont then you cannot have an understanding of the game being played.

But that would be too hard for some to grasp no doubt as it would lead to the simple obvious conclusion that the intention has never been to allow Thailand or its people a democratic choice of direction for long. Even one they may regret will never be allowed to really appreciate making a mistake because before the people are allowed to reject them at an election and learn, the option is taken away......

Morons you might think but thats the point, keep things stable enough to muddle along but unstable enough to get away with coup after coup... reset, rinse and repeat is all it'll ever be until a proper...............

To be fair, those outside would also understand that the Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments. That's apart from the 'democracy' bit which wasn't really democratic anyway.

Your missing the point, military rule has never enriched a country in governance and the very least it holds the people and nation back developing politically, its not about a bad government and Thailand is nothing special in that regard,from time to time all countries have them. Its the inability and will to allow people to learn from electing these mistakes and move forward, hopefully not repeating the mistake too often. This is how democracies and evolving nations progress no less than people learning from mistakes in life. Some will not learn but most will and thats enough to drive things forward positively. Coups stop that happening and this one is no different to all the rest in that regard.

How can you say military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better ? I'm not going to list the examples because everyone is well aware.

When is comes right down to it you either believe in the right to rule or rule by elect of the people. Oppression and rule by force or freedom with all its flaws. I choose the latter every time, I'm sorry you choose the former.

I miss the point? Maybe, but you also I think.

Military government may not have a good name, but there are also lots of so-called 'democratic' governments in the past which didn't have a good name, even in Thailand.

following I like you to check again, I didn't say "military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better", I said "Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments".

This Thai democracy with all it's flaws was getting nowhere and not only because of the Military. Politicians of any colour are in the same league and corrupt. The biggest 'hero of the common people' is a greedy billionair for instance.

I still have hopes the current reform period can cause a leapfrog into the 21st century, but with the parties involved AND the obstruction from vested interest groups including politicians, I'm starting to get the feeling that much more effort is needed from the common people to stand without help of their local elite and powerbrokers. To simply go back to pre-coup is like condemning the Thai people to many more years of chaos, corruption and bloodshed I fear. I don't wish that upon them.

Look, democratic governments fail and come and go because and when the people wake up and decide enough is enough, thats the beauty and lesson. It cannot be learned if its not allowed to happen that way or artificially altered by an outside agent ( regular military intervention )

Its a bit like winding a spring, the tighter its wound the more energy expelled when its released. You dont get far on a half wound spring and things become frustrating. instead of building the energy up its released even sooner in a desperate attempt to push forwards and so the cycle goes on.

However when the spring is allowed to build energy when its released you get your leapfrog forwards, now this can happen in many ways politically, a change of ruling party, a fundamental swing to either left or right, even a whole new type of governance or major real lasting reforms. Sure it could and sometimes does take the form of violence instead as often happens here, but then again all its ever seen is a the ultimate rule of the gun and threat of violence as the example of forcing stability. A very bad example to have as it happens.

I agree the common people need to stand for themselves but how do you do that under a system of either military rule or rule by corrupt elite that simply will not allow it either by way of force, birth privilege or wealth influence ?

There is only one place that can come from to tip the balance and its only with the help of a language that the current status quo understands and fears. Portugal is the only place I know that achieved such a change without bloodshed so its rare for the common people to affect change peacefully and progressively but not unknown even one with decades or more of violent turbulence.

I wish that peaceful change for Thailand and its people too.

Edited January 7, 2015 by englishoak

[MickGC]

Hey rubl. You do realise it's a one sided argument here at the moment. You can say anything you like to protest the activities of the previous administration. Not so for those that disagree with you. That's about as much as I want to say as I live here. Social media is being constantly being monitored by the new regime but don't you worry. You are in the good books.

To quote JFK before he was assassinated “Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed and no republic can survive.”

[rubl]

Hey rubl. You do realise it's a one sided argument here at the moment. You can say anything you like to protest the activities of the previous administration. Not so for those that disagree with you. That's about as much as I want to say as I live here. Social media is being constantly being monitored by the new regime but don't you worry. You are in the good books.

To quote JFK before he was assassinated “Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed and no republic can survive.”

with all the arguments I get I can hardly call it one-sided. Also we can talk about principles without the need to find practical, applicable Thai examples.

Furthermore, social media monitoring was already being done for a while in Thailand, the former Dept. PM Pol. Captain Chalerm got a 460 million Baht or so budget to build a nice new building for his watchdog.

Now regarding the topic of the "armies need for the Martial Law', it would seem that is being discussed rather openly.

BTW like you I'm in Thailand, working and living in Bangkok. Unlike you though I doubt I'm of interest by 'social media' surveillance groups, foreigners have no value remember?

[jayboy]

Anyway, I'm sure Martial Law will be lifted in time for elections to be arranged and conducted under normal law. As history teaches us the Military did that before

Exactly - that part of history seems to be what some people tend to forget, while consistently regurgitating the parts of history that haven't been repeated at this time.

In recent coups, the military has repeatedly and predictably stepped back, to allow another stab at the democratic process. There is no reason to assume it won't do so again, once they have created an even and fair playground in a couple of years.

The usual nonsense.The whole point of the current exercise is to ensure there is NOT an even and level playing field.They want to rig the system to ensure the Thai people are unable to choose a government of their liking.They believe that past coups were not sufficient resets since the Thai people kept making the wrong electoral choices.Hence the current effort.

Should it be obvious that you suggest you speak with an authority which others lack?

The whole point you describe is your opinion, to which you are entitled. I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean I have to describe it as 'nonsense'. I hope you can understand that, my dear boy.

You commit the common error that one man's opinion is as good as another's.It's not.

In any event I was not attempting to silence an opinion, merely to expose its wrongheadedness.The reality of the current government's attempt to ensure that its version of democracy is shaped and manipulated is not even a matter of much controversy.

[rubl]

I miss the point? Maybe, but you also I think.

Military government may not have a good name, but there are also lots of so-called 'democratic' governments in the past which didn't have a good name, even in Thailand.

following I like you to check again, I didn't say "military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better", I said "Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments".

This Thai democracy with all it's flaws was getting nowhere and not only because of the Military. Politicians of any colour are in the same league and corrupt. The biggest 'hero of the common people' is a greedy billionair for instance.

I still have hopes the current reform period can cause a leapfrog into the 21st century, but with the parties involved AND the obstruction from vested interest groups including politicians, I'm starting to get the feeling that much more effort is needed from the common people to stand without help of their local elite and powerbrokers. To simply go back to pre-coup is like condemning the Thai people to many more years of chaos, corruption and bloodshed I fear. I don't wish that upon them.

Look, democratic governments fail and come and go because and when the people wake up and decide enough is enough, thats the beauty and lesson. It cannot be learned if its not allowed to happen that way or artificially altered by an outside agent ( regular military intervention )

Its a bit like winding a spring, the tighter its wound the more energy expelled when its released. You dont get far on a half wound spring and things become frustrating. instead of building the energy up its released even sooner in a desperate attempt to push forwards and so the cycle goes on.

However when the spring is allowed to build energy when its released you get your leapfrog forwards, now this can happen in many ways politically, a change of ruling party, a fundamental swing to either left or right, even a whole new type of governance or major real lasting reforms. Sure it could and sometimes does take the form of violence instead as often happens here, but then again all its ever seen is a the ultimate rule of the gun and threat of violence as the example of forcing stability. A very bad example to have as it happens.

I agree the common people need to stand for themselves but how do you do that under a system of either military rule or rule by corrupt elite that simply will not allow it either by way of force, birth privilege or wealth influence ?

There is only one place that can come from to tip the balance and its only with the help of a language that the current status quo understands and fears. Portugal is the only place I know that achieved such a change without bloodshed so its rare for the common people to affect change peacefully and progressively but not unknown even one with decades or more of violent turbulence.

I wish that peaceful change for Thailand and its people too.

At times I may be a bit of a dreamer, but I can also be pragmatic.

The Thai society is a violent society. Not much is needed for a seemingly normal person to go berserk and kill because of some perceived slight. A few such people under 'protection' of an influencial or just richer fellow can 'eliminate' 'stand-in-the-ways'. Protesters of any flavour can get shot at just because they protest.

I do not believe in a peaceful evolution within a Thai type of democracy as Thailand had it. It also needs to be seen how much the current reforms can or will go. Surely you need one or two generations properly educated in self-reliance, in questioning before you can depend on Thai to perpetuate democracy. Societies tend to be conservative in the sense of resisting change which disturbs their as 'safe' felt world. All this gives us contradicting directions. Only one heartfelt wish in common (I hope) peaceful change without bloodshed.

[rubl]

The usual nonsense.The whole point of the current exercise is to ensure there is NOT an even and level playing field.They want to rig the system to ensure the Thai people are unable to choose a government of their liking.They believe that past coups were not sufficient resets since the Thai people kept making the wrong electoral choices.Hence the current effort.

Should it be obvious that you suggest you speak with an authority which others lack?

The whole point you describe is your opinion, to which you are entitled. I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean I have to describe it as 'nonsense'. I hope you can understand that, my dear boy.

You commit the common error that one man's opinion is as good as another's.It's not.

In any event I was not attempting to silence an opinion, merely to expose its wrongheadedness.The reality of the current government's attempt to ensure that its version of democracy is shaped and manipulated is not even a matter of much controversy.

So, you think your opinion is such that based on your opinion you are perfectly in your right to describe another's opinion as 'nonsense'. That assumes you qualify 'nonsense' at the same level as 'wrongheadedness'. Furthermore you label 'wrongheadedness' based on your idea of what is 'reality'.

Obviously and clearly for all to see, you're just of a different opinion and feel so insecure and to need to denigrate the opinion of others. It seems you like to use your education to (try to) put down others. Next I wouldn't be surprised if you label those who write 'nonsense' as buffaloes. The non-elected elite tends to do that I'm told.

Anyway, the army needs the Martial Law to bolster it's ego the topic says, possibly

Edited January 7, 2015 by rubl

[jayboy]

The usual nonsense.The whole point of the current exercise is to ensure there is NOT an even and level playing field.They want to rig the system to ensure the Thai people are unable to choose a government of their liking.They believe that past coups were not sufficient resets since the Thai people kept making the wrong electoral choices.Hence the current effort.

Should it be obvious that you suggest you speak with an authority which others lack?

The whole point you describe is your opinion, to which you are entitled. I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean I have to describe it as 'nonsense'. I hope you can understand that, my dear boy.

You commit the common error that one man's opinion is as good as another's.It's not.

In any event I was not attempting to silence an opinion, merely to expose its wrongheadedness.The reality of the current government's attempt to ensure that its version of democracy is shaped and manipulated is not even a matter of much controversy.

So, you think your opinion is such that based on your opinion you are perfectly in your right to describe another's opinion as 'nonsense'. That assumes you qualify 'nonsense' at the same level as 'wrongheadedness'. Furthermore you label 'wrongheadedness' based on your idea of what is 'reality'.

Obviously and clearly for all to see, you're just of a different opinion and feel so insecure and to need to denigrate the opinion of others. It seems you like to use your education to (try to) put down others. Next I wouldn't be surprised if you label those who write 'nonsense' as buffaloes. The non-elected elite tends to do that I'm told.

Anyway, the army needs the Martial Law to bolster it's ego the topic says, possibly

You are simply repeating the error of supposing everyone's opinion is of equal value.It isn't especially when as in the instance under discussion it is predicated on ignorance.There is no objection to considering different viewpoints but they must be scrutinised and if necessary exposed for their errors.

In this instance the error was elementary, ie ludicrously suggesting the current government is committed to a level playing field for electoral democracy - whereas in the words of the estimable Nigel Molesworth "as any fule kno" the precise opposite is the case.

[scorecard]

From jayboy:

"You are simply repeating the error of supposing everyone's opinion is of equal value.It isn't especially when as in the instance under discussion it is predicated on ignorance.There is no objection to considering different viewpoints but they must be scrutinised and if necessary exposed for their errors.

So you no doubt mean that your opinion is more important'

In this instance the error was elementary, ie ludicrously suggesting the current government is committed to a level playing field for electoral democracy - whereas in the words of the estimable Nigel Molesworth "as any fule kno" the precise opposite is the case."

As usual your writing style aims to convince that you are totally right when in fact it's just your opinion.

All just your viewpoint / your opinion jayboy and not fact.

And since it is opinion there's always the possibility that it's you who is ultimately ignorant.

By the way, I'd appreciate if you would provide the evidence that Pavin is so respected by the international academic community.

Edited January 7, 2015 by scorecard

[englishoak]

I miss the point? Maybe, but you also I think.

Military government may not have a good name, but there are also lots of so-called 'democratic' governments in the past which didn't have a good name, even in Thailand.

following I like you to check again, I didn't say "military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better", I said "Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments".

This Thai democracy with all it's flaws was getting nowhere and not only because of the Military. Politicians of any colour are in the same league and corrupt. The biggest 'hero of the common people' is a greedy billionair for instance.

I still have hopes the current reform period can cause a leapfrog into the 21st century, but with the parties involved AND the obstruction from vested interest groups including politicians, I'm starting to get the feeling that much more effort is needed from the common people to stand without help of their local elite and powerbrokers. To simply go back to pre-coup is like condemning the Thai people to many more years of chaos, corruption and bloodshed I fear. I don't wish that upon them.

Look, democratic governments fail and come and go because and when the people wake up and decide enough is enough, thats the beauty and lesson. It cannot be learned if its not allowed to happen that way or artificially altered by an outside agent ( regular military intervention )

Its a bit like winding a spring, the tighter its wound the more energy expelled when its released. You dont get far on a half wound spring and things become frustrating. instead of building the energy up its released even sooner in a desperate attempt to push forwards and so the cycle goes on.

However when the spring is allowed to build energy when its released you get your leapfrog forwards, now this can happen in many ways politically, a change of ruling party, a fundamental swing to either left or right, even a whole new type of governance or major real lasting reforms. Sure it could and sometimes does take the form of violence instead as often happens here, but then again all its ever seen is a the ultimate rule of the gun and threat of violence as the example of forcing stability. A very bad example to have as it happens.

I agree the common people need to stand for themselves but how do you do that under a system of either military rule or rule by corrupt elite that simply will not allow it either by way of force, birth privilege or wealth influence ?

There is only one place that can come from to tip the balance and its only with the help of a language that the current status quo understands and fears. Portugal is the only place I know that achieved such a change without bloodshed so its rare for the common people to affect change peacefully and progressively but not unknown even one with decades or more of violent turbulence.

I wish that peaceful change for Thailand and its people too.

At times I may be a bit of a dreamer, but I can also be pragmatic.

The Thai society is a violent society. Not much is needed for a seemingly normal person to go berserk and kill because of some perceived slight. A few such people under 'protection' of an influencial or just richer fellow can 'eliminate' 'stand-in-the-ways'. Protesters of any flavour can get shot at just because they protest.

I do not believe in a peaceful evolution within a Thai type of democracy as Thailand had it. It also needs to be seen how much the current reforms can or will go. Surely you need one or two generations properly educated in self-reliance, in questioning before you can depend on Thai to perpetuate democracy. Societies tend to be conservative in the sense of resisting change which disturbs their as 'safe' felt world. All this gives us contradicting directions. Only one heartfelt wish in common (I hope) peaceful change without bloodshed.

So we are back to the argument of the people are not ready or educated enough ?

Please please please stop right there. Its a false argument Rubi, the people perse are never ready for anything, its the oldest excuse in the book and a false argument, they will go where led and adapt, make terrible mistakes and learn by way of experience and adapt again and through it progress.

You cannot expect the child to become an adult if its not allowed to grow up, it must find its own way to adulthood, education can only aid it. There is no educational reform on the horizon other than altering school books for more dumbed down propaganda, how the hell are kids supposed to learn about mistakes and bad governing if its omitted from history as never happening ?

I despair for those future generations I really do and i hope im wrong but think Thailand currently is going into exactly the place it fears the most without even having the sense to see it. .

Edited January 7, 2015 by englishoak

[sjaak327]

I've been wondering about long stories based on a functioning democracy and non-corrupt politicians. Somehow those don't seem to have much to do with topics here. Here we discuss Thailand.

I guess these folks aren't really familiar with Thailand, or maybe they are talking about some utopian place with the same name. They probably have never been there, is my guess.

Funny you should say that Daffy, I know you haven't got the slightest clue when it comes to Thailand, how else could you possibly believe the current junta is trying to stop corruption. These are people from the military, and no, they aren't this rich because they married a rich wife any more than they got money due to a land sale.

The military has always been one of the most corrupt organizations in Thailand, and they are currently ensuring this will continue for quite some time.

Oh by the way, nice try bringing Thaksin into this discussion, I don't care about him and I certainly don't care his remark about not criticizing the junta, one must believe the bloke cut a deal, which again wouldn't be a huge surprise considering the parties involved and the country concerned.

Together with the deal some say to be cut with the Thaksin clone it would seem that going back to pre-coup times would not be an improvement as it involves some 'we' don't care about, somehow.

Yet another deal ? It keeps getting better.

Going back to pre coup times would be a massive improvement, imagine criticizing the PM without moderators on here being forced to remove posts due to Martial Law restrictions. Cam we go there tomorrow pretty please ?

[sjaak327]

Maybe we should look at the definition of 'nepotism' and 'cronyism' ?

cro·ny·ism

ˈkrōnēˌizəm/

noun

derogatory

noun: cronyism; noun: croneyism

1. the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.

I would say that applies, at a minimum, to the 100+ military members in the NLA, as well as the non-qualified cabinet members, who were chosen because of loyalty rather than qualifications. Also applies to military members appointed to state enterprise boards,

The NLA members qualify as required in the Interim Constitution. The qualifications required are not really different from the qualifications one required of aspiring candidate MPs in the 2007 or even 1997 Constitution.

As for 'non-qualified cabinet members' name some.

Nepotism doesn't apply at all I think, not even with PM Prayut's little brother.

None of this has anything to do with needing Martial Law by the way.

You are forgetting that the MP's in the 2007 constitution were actually elected either through PL or constituency, so no appointment was involved. This is different from the NLA which are all appointed, hence bruce64 is correct.

[rubl]

I miss the point? Maybe, but you also I think.

Military government may not have a good name, but there are also lots of so-called 'democratic' governments in the past which didn't have a good name, even in Thailand.

following I like you to check again, I didn't say "military governance with all the restrictions of free speech or basic rights to speak as they wish or even discuss is better", I said "Military government might not be really worse from previous elected governments".

This Thai democracy with all it's flaws was getting nowhere and not only because of the Military. Politicians of any colour are in the same league and corrupt. The biggest 'hero of the common people' is a greedy billionair for instance.

I still have hopes the current reform period can cause a leapfrog into the 21st century, but with the parties involved AND the obstruction from vested interest groups including politicians, I'm starting to get the feeling that much more effort is needed from the common people to stand without help of their local elite and powerbrokers. To simply go back to pre-coup is like condemning the Thai people to many more years of chaos, corruption and bloodshed I fear. I don't wish that upon them.

Look, democratic governments fail and come and go because and when the people wake up and decide enough is enough, thats the beauty and lesson. It cannot be learned if its not allowed to happen that way or artificially altered by an outside agent ( regular military intervention )

Its a bit like winding a spring, the tighter its wound the more energy expelled when its released. You dont get far on a half wound spring and things become frustrating. instead of building the energy up its released even sooner in a desperate attempt to push forwards and so the cycle goes on.

However when the spring is allowed to build energy when its released you get your leapfrog forwards, now this can happen in many ways politically, a change of ruling party, a fundamental swing to either left or right, even a whole new type of governance or major real lasting reforms. Sure it could and sometimes does take the form of violence instead as often happens here, but then again all its ever seen is a the ultimate rule of the gun and threat of violence as the example of forcing stability. A very bad example to have as it happens.

I agree the common people need to stand for themselves but how do you do that under a system of either military rule or rule by corrupt elite that simply will not allow it either by way of force, birth privilege or wealth influence ?

There is only one place that can come from to tip the balance and its only with the help of a language that the current status quo understands and fears. Portugal is the only place I know that achieved such a change without bloodshed so its rare for the common people to affect change peacefully and progressively but not unknown even one with decades or more of violent turbulence.

I wish that peaceful change for Thailand and its people too.

At times I may be a bit of a dreamer, but I can also be pragmatic.

The Thai society is a violent society. Not much is needed for a seemingly normal person to go berserk and kill because of some perceived slight. A few such people under 'protection' of an influencial or just richer fellow can 'eliminate' 'stand-in-the-ways'. Protesters of any flavour can get shot at just because they protest.

I do not believe in a peaceful evolution within a Thai type of democracy as Thailand had it. It also needs to be seen how much the current reforms can or will go. Surely you need one or two generations properly educated in self-reliance, in questioning before you can depend on Thai to perpetuate democracy. Societies tend to be conservative in the sense of resisting change which disturbs their as 'safe' felt world. All this gives us contradicting directions. Only one heartfelt wish in common (I hope) peaceful change without bloodshed.

So we are back to the argument of the people are not ready or educated enough ?

Please please please stop right there. Its a false argument Rubi, the people perse are never ready for anything, its the oldest excuse in the book and a false argument, they will go where led and adapt, make terrible mistakes and learn by way of experience and adapt again and through it progress.

You cannot expect the child to become an adult if its not allowed to grow up, it must find its own way to adulthood, education can only aid it. There is no educational reform on the horizon other than altering school books for more dumbed down propaganda, how the hell are kids supposed to learn about mistakes and bad governing if its omitted from history as never happening ?

I despair for those future generations I really do and i hope im wrong but think Thailand currently is going into exactly the place it fears the most without even having the sense to see it. .

I have no answer to 'under age criminality' as we see in the Western World. To say "they have to learn" seems not the right answer though. To apply that answer to the Thai situation doesn't seem to be the right answer either.

[rubl]

Together with the deal some say to be cut with the Thaksin clone it would seem that going back to pre-coup times would not be an improvement as it involves some 'we' don't care about, somehow.

Yet another deal ? It keeps getting better.

Going back to pre coup times would be a massive improvement, imagine criticizing the PM without moderators on here being forced to remove posts due to Martial Law restrictions. Cam we go there tomorrow pretty please ?

Pre-coup times here to come. Do you still have enough grenades or do you need to be resupplied ?

[rubl]

Maybe we should look at the definition of 'nepotism' and 'cronyism' ?

cro·ny·ism

ˈkrōnēˌizəm/

noun

derogatory

noun: cronyism; noun: croneyism

1. the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.

I would say that applies, at a minimum, to the 100+ military members in the NLA, as well as the non-qualified cabinet members, who were chosen because of loyalty rather than qualifications. Also applies to military members appointed to state enterprise boards,

The NLA members qualify as required in the Interim Constitution. The qualifications required are not really different from the qualifications one required of aspiring candidate MPs in the 2007 or even 1997 Constitution.

As for 'non-qualified cabinet members' name some.

Nepotism doesn't apply at all I think, not even with PM Prayut's little brother.

None of this has anything to do with needing Martial Law by the way.

You are forgetting that the MP's in the 2007 constitution were actually elected either through PL or constituency, so no appointment was involved. This is different from the NLA which are all appointed, hence bruce64 is correct.

Being able to elect people appointed by a criminal fugitive seems more like nepotism and cronyism than having NLA members appointed to help a program of reform not take too much time in order to make it possible to dissolve the NLA after a year. Furthermore said NLA members are NOT allowed to stand for a political position within three years.

Hence neither you nor bruce64 are correct.

[brucec64]

Maybe we should look at the definition of 'nepotism' and 'cronyism' ?

cro·ny·ism

ˈkrōnēˌizəm/

noun

derogatory

noun: cronyism; noun: croneyism

• the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.

I would say that applies, at a minimum, to the 100+ military members in the NLA, as well as the non-qualified cabinet members, who were chosen because of loyalty rather than qualifications. Also applies to military members appointed to state enterprise boards,

The NLA members qualify as required in the Interim Constitution. The qualifications required are not really different from the qualifications one required of aspiring candidate MPs in the 2007 or even 1997 Constitution.

As for 'non-qualified cabinet members' name some.

Nepotism doesn't apply at all I think, not even with PM Prayut's little brother.

None of this has anything to do with needing Martial Law by the way.

You are forgetting that the MP's in the 2007 constitution were actually elected either through PL or constituency, so no appointment was involved. This is different from the NLA which are all appointed, hence bruce64 is correct.

Being able to elect people appointed by a criminal fugitive seems more like nepotism and cronyism than having NLA members appointed to help a program of reform not take too much time in order to make it possible to dissolve the NLA after a year. Furthermore said NLA members are NOT allowed to stand for a political position within three years.

Hence neither you nor bruce64 are correct.

Rubl, I take back everything I said.

North Korea just acknowledged the legitimacy of the junta government, and if it's good enough for North Korea, that is certainly good enough for me!

"Wisanu also thanked North Korea for understanding Thailand’s political situation and acknowledging the legitimacy of the junta government."

http://bangkok.coconuts.co//2015/01/08/thailand-celebrate-close-relations-north-korea

[rubl]

The NLA members qualify as required in the Interim Constitution. The qualifications required are not really different from the qualifications one required of aspiring candidate MPs in the 2007 or even 1997 Constitution.

As for 'non-qualified cabinet members' name some.

Nepotism doesn't apply at all I think, not even with PM Prayut's little brother.

None of this has anything to do with needing Martial Law by the way.

You are forgetting that the MP's in the 2007 constitution were actually elected either through PL or constituency, so no appointment was involved. This is different from the NLA which are all appointed, hence bruce64 is correct.

Being able to elect people appointed by a criminal fugitive seems more like nepotism and cronyism than having NLA members appointed to help a program of reform not take too much time in order to make it possible to dissolve the NLA after a year. Furthermore said NLA members are NOT allowed to stand for a political position within three years.

Hence neither you nor bruce64 are correct.

Rubl, I take back everything I said.

North Korea just acknowledged the legitimacy of the junta government, and if it's good enough for North Korea, that is certainly good enough for me!

"Wisanu also thanked North Korea for understanding Thailand’s political situation and acknowledging the legitimacy of the junta government."

http://bangkok.coconuts.co//2015/01/08/thailand-celebrate-close-relations-north-korea

Remind me to write a 'thank you' note to my friend there for the prompt action when I asked

The legitimacy of the current PM Prayut led government is implicitly acknowledged by any government doing business with it or it's organisations. Some might be just a bit embarrassed to say so in public. In diplomacy they like "don't ask, don't tell"

[heybruce]

Ok, I got a date messed up. Someone who writes "what history learned some of us." shouldn't criticize.

But you are denying the right of a non-native English speaker the right to criticize. Surely that in itself is not democratic. Hypocrite.

No, I was giving a quick reply to a poster who used a simple error in dates as an excuse to not defend foolish posts about Prayuth being elected by the NLA, Yingluck asking for but not receiving military assistance, and other indefensible nonsense.

As far as my demanding something, I demanded nothing. You seem to be one of those posters who like to exaggerate the trivial to ridiculous proportions.

For someone not demanding anything you're demanding in getting answers to your questions. Questions I call less relevant to be friendly. That some of my posts offend you to the point of calling them 'foolish' and 'indefensible' only shows a certain lack of acceptance of free speech. IMHO.

Anyway, maybe I need protection, almost like the army needs the Martial Law, allegedly that is

Ok rubl, if you must be given examples, a few of your foolish and indefensible posts are:

In post #188, in your continued insistence that it was significant that the PTP government had asked the military for assistance in conducting elections, you wrote:

"The Yingluck remnant government had a fully functioning police force to deploy, didn't they? Why would someone try to drag the Army in an activity so important to 'real' democracy?"

I replied in post #199 with:

"Yingluck's police force was as fully functioning as Abhisit's in 2006. The biggest difference between 2006 and 2014 was that the military bloodily crushed protesters calling for elections in 2006, then toppled the government to accommodate protesters opposing elections in 2014."

I admit I screwed up the date, but you clearly knew I meant the 2010 unrest. Rather than give an intelligent defense you dropped the matter.

In reply to my query in post #177:

"Good point; why does this qualified General/PM need martial law to stay in office?"

You gave the somewhat puzzling reply in post #189:

"You mean apart from being elected by the NLA members and confirmed by H.M. the King?"

Surely you didn't expect to get away with suggesting the NLA election was legitimate. I replied to this foolish post with post #200 with:

"You mean being elected by the NLA members he appointed? You're really getting desperate."

You didn't attempt to defend this post either.

In post #190 you made me question if you had bothered to read the OP by posting:

"It would seem the army needs the Martial Law to protect itself from malicious rumours, 'agent provocateurs' and the like."

I pointed out in post #201:

"You really should read the OP before posting ruble, in this case the first three paragraphs:

"The military is expected to have increased political roles in this new year although there is a unity problem among top commanders in the Army, according to sources familiar with the armed forces.

Observers say martial law - imposed shortly before the coup in May - is likely to be retained for a long time, to help ensure that the military will have the power to deal with unexpected problems when they arise.

"There are uncertainties in the Army. The decision-making is done from many sources of power in the Army. So it is inevitable for martial law to be retained. The military needs some tool to deal with problems that may happen in the future," said one source, a high-ranking officer in the armed forces."

It would seem the junta needs martial law to protect junta from its own military."

Once again, you dropped this issue.

I could go on, but you should get the picture--you seemed to think Prayuth's NLA election was a real election, you think it's significant that Yingluck requested help from the military in conducting elections but don't want to address Abhisit's use of the military to crush protests, and it would seem you posted on the subject of martial law without bothering to read the OP. I consider these foolish and indefensible positions, if you disagree feel free to defend them.

Finally, you accuse me of posting questions that are "less relevant to be friendly." Perhaps you can explain how your questions in post #188 are relevant to the subject of the junta needing martial law to deal with dissent in the army.

[heybruce]

Some are consistently pointing to the past to avoid discussing the present. The OP is all about the present and the future, yet the junta supporters can only discuss the past.

Thailand had a flawed democracy that could have evolved into something better. Every functioning democracy I am aware of started out as a flawed democracy that had to learn from experience to become a functioning democracy. No democracy that I am aware of originated in military rule, unless you count those countries that were so disgusted by military rule the people kicked the generals out in order to bring about democracy.

So complain some only want to discuss the past following which you do so yourself?

Anyway, I'm sure Martial Law will be lifted in time for elections to be arranged and conducted under normal law. As history teaches us the Military did that before

I didn't complain about learning from history, I pointed out that some posters were trying to divert attention from the present with the old "Thaksin the bogeyman" diversion.

But on the subject of history, why is it that Thailand's history of corrupt military rule is not pertinent to the present discussion, but the military's history of eventually lifting martial law is significant?

But you asked why some only want to talk about the past?

As for your question, indeed the subject is not history, but 'the Armies need for the Martial Law'. That's why their handling of the Martial Law and lifting of it in the past is significant. In other topics you may want to discuss other aspects.

Where did I ask why some posters only want to talk about the past?

The OP makes it clear why the army needs martial law, it's to protect it from dissent in the army. Can you give any historical examples pertinent to that situation?

[rubl]

But you asked why some only want to talk about the past?

As for your question, indeed the subject is not history, but 'the Armies need for the Martial Law'. That's why their handling of the Martial Law and lifting of it in the past is significant. In other topics you may want to discuss other aspects.

Where did I ask why some posters only want to talk about the past?

The OP makes it clear why the army needs martial law, it's to protect it from dissent in the army. Can you give any historical examples pertinent to that situation?

If you know why the army needs the Martial Law, why did you ask in #177

'Good point; why does this qualified General/PM need martial law to stay in office?"

Would it not be much more friendly and cooperative to explain if you feel others don't understand?

[tbthailand]

I guess these folks aren't really familiar with Thailand, or maybe they are talking about some utopian place with the same name. They probably have never been there, is my guess.

Funny you should say that Daffy, I know you haven't got the slightest clue when it comes to Thailand, how else could you possibly believe the current junta is trying to stop corruption. These are people from the military, and no, they aren't this rich because they married a rich wife any more than they got money due to a land sale.

The military has always been one of the most corrupt organizations in Thailand, and they are currently ensuring this will continue for quite some time.

Oh by the way, nice try bringing Thaksin into this discussion, I don't care about him and I certainly don't care his remark about not criticizing the junta, one must believe the bloke cut a deal, which again wouldn't be a huge surprise considering the parties involved and the country concerned.

Together with the deal some say to be cut with the Thaksin clone it would seem that going back to pre-coup times would not be an improvement as it involves some 'we' don't care about, somehow.

Yet another deal ? It keeps getting better.

Going back to pre coup times would be a massive improvement, imagine criticizing the PM without moderators on here being forced to remove posts due to Martial Law restrictions. Cam we go there tomorrow pretty please ?

given Thailand's history and current trajectory, with all due respect, we already are in 'pre-coup' times. We just haven't hit the brief pause between military governments yet.

[rubl]

For someone not demanding anything you're demanding in getting answers to your questions. Questions I call less relevant to be friendly. That some of my posts offend you to the point of calling them 'foolish' and 'indefensible' only shows a certain lack of acceptance of free speech. IMHO.

Anyway, maybe I need protection, almost like the army needs the Martial Law, allegedly that is

Ok rubl, if you must be given examples, a few of your foolish and indefensible posts are:

In post #188, in your continued insistence that it was significant that the PTP government had asked the military for assistance in conducting elections, you wrote:

"The Yingluck remnant government had a fully functioning police force to deploy, didn't they? Why would someone try to drag the Army in an activity so important to 'real' democracy?"

I replied in post #199 with:

"Yingluck's police force was as fully functioning as Abhisit's in 2006. The biggest difference between 2006 and 2014 was that the military bloodily crushed protesters calling for elections in 2006, then toppled the government to accommodate protesters opposing elections in 2014."

I admit I screwed up the date, but you clearly knew I meant the 2010 unrest. Rather than give an intelligent defense you dropped the matter.

In reply to my query in post #177:

"Good point; why does this qualified General/PM need martial law to stay in office?"

You gave the somewhat puzzling reply in post #189:

"You mean apart from being elected by the NLA members and confirmed by H.M. the King?"

Surely you didn't expect to get away with suggesting the NLA election was legitimate. I replied to this foolish post with post #200 with:

"You mean being elected by the NLA members he appointed? You're really getting desperate."

You didn't attempt to defend this post either.

In post #190 you made me question if you had bothered to read the OP by posting:

"It would seem the army needs the Martial Law to protect itself from malicious rumours, 'agent provocateurs' and the like."

I pointed out in post #201:

"You really should read the OP before posting ruble, in this case the first three paragraphs:

"The military is expected to have increased political roles in this new year although there is a unity problem among top commanders in the Army, according to sources familiar with the armed forces.

Observers say martial law - imposed shortly before the coup in May - is likely to be retained for a long time, to help ensure that the military will have the power to deal with unexpected problems when they arise.

"There are uncertainties in the Army. The decision-making is done from many sources of power in the Army. So it is inevitable for martial law to be retained. The military needs some tool to deal with problems that may happen in the future," said one source, a high-ranking officer in the armed forces."

It would seem the junta needs martial law to protect junta from its own military."

Once again, you dropped this issue.

I could go on, but you should get the picture--you seemed to think Prayuth's NLA election was a real election, you think it's significant that Yingluck requested help from the military in conducting elections but don't want to address Abhisit's use of the military to crush protests, and it would seem you posted on the subject of martial law without bothering to read the OP. I consider these foolish and indefensible positions, if you disagree feel free to defend them.

Finally, you accuse me of posting questions that are "less relevant to be friendly." Perhaps you can explain how your questions in post #188 are relevant to the subject of the junta needing martial law to deal with dissent in the army.

To go on, you are like Pheu Thai spokesperson Prompong who accused and demanded "prove me wrong". Well, a few dedicated posters can ask more 'interesting' questions than this poor lonely Dutch uncle can find time to answer.

BTW my question in #188 was in relation to the post I replied to, with a few more posts embedded till mine with "you guys are drifting off again"

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/788719-army-needs-martial-law-to-shield-itself/page-8#entry8895271

[rubl]

given Thailand's history and current trajectory, with all due respect, we already are in 'pre-coup' times. We just haven't hit the brief pause between military governments yet.

With all due respect, but that's a stupid remark. It's like saying "we're in pre-rainy season times while being in the rainy season, on the possibility there will be another rainy season after this one"

[heybruce]

But you asked why some only want to talk about the past?

As for your question, indeed the subject is not history, but 'the Armies need for the Martial Law'. That's why their handling of the Martial Law and lifting of it in the past is significant. In other topics you may want to discuss other aspects.

Where did I ask why some posters only want to talk about the past?

The OP makes it clear why the army needs martial law, it's to protect it from dissent in the army. Can you give any historical examples pertinent to that situation?

If you know why the army needs the Martial Law, why did you ask in #177

'Good point; why does this qualified General/PM need martial law to stay in office?"

Would it not be much more friendly and cooperative to explain if you feel others don't understand?

So no historical examples pertinent to the current situation.

My question in post #177 was in response to your statement and question:

"Anyway, Martial Law seems uninteresting. Pity it's part of the topic, isn't it?"

I thought I might elicit an on-topic opinion from you. It didn't work.