'Democracy is more than polls'

[nidieunimaitre]

'Democracy is more than polls'

OK.

So let's have polls and more.

[joemisko36]

Go General, keep up the good work. Maybe one day you will be democratically elected by the Thai people.

[Plutojames88]

this thread apart from the OP is mixture of -

1. Trolls

2. Those that have an interest apart from their own

3. Absolute stupidity

4. Those that have a genuine interest in Thailand - the future and it's people.

5. Those that are smart enough to see the filthy people here that have extorted and abused and want it to end

6. Those that support violence as a means to an end - some one is paying them

7. Those that support corruption and have of late seen their income shrink

In any civilised country there must be a structure of rules and laws that apply to everyone - no exceptions

Governments/individuals cannot be allowed to abuse their office - rules and laws must be in place and agencies to enforce them.

This country was at the brink last year, demonstrations went on for 6 months people were murdered on the streets including children because of the way a certain criminal was manipulating and abusing to feed his own agenda and ego, well the people said no, they said the cheating and abuse must stop, someone eventually stepped in and got them all round the table

The abuse has stopped - criminals are being rounded up - assets are being seized and returned to the people of Thailand

Well some will say that shutting certain people up is a violation of their civil liberties, on the other hand there are some people that deserve to be silenced, churning out hatred and opposition to anything that will cut off the money stream in to their greedy pockets, every country in the west now monitors and regulates what people can and cannot say and as time goes on the constrains are increasing - hate will no longer be tolerated - those that propagate violence, insight hatred and abuse free speech will be routed out and silenced, remember Egypt just sentenced an elected ex (so called) democratic premier to death, Thailand will make it eventually without the need for civil wars or anything else, all they need is a good set of rules to enforce good governance and the rest will be ...................... a better history

An amusing , but dogmatic rant.

Dramatic if not neurotic in its scope and discourse.

Number 4 no doubt suffices in our writers eyes to be the righteous pro coup camp?

I preferred the Mexican slang for the General written in a prior post.

It's no cosmic secret he isn't the brightest spark.

The guy above writing this seems just as unable to fathom reality .

And though his camp isn't in question , we should look at his audacious points.

Of course the argument that you must be pro - coup if you care about Thailand is non sensical .

To pander to the neurosis of examples of violence that awaits the ""great red terror ""alternative is to buy into low intelligence .

Conditioning over time is the reason many westerners here buy into silly elitist dogma - (along with a disposition to being perhaps in denial about things,) and poorly informed logic ....but it still is what it is......

The irony in some comments about hate speech , with no mindfulness to the General making references to "" human trash"" and the writer himself calling people here "" filthy"" and claiming some ""people deserve to be silenced"" ....is comical .

That kind of terminology might attract closeted bigoted types to set up a camp with their regal attires of marching Thailand forward with these tough talking directives.

But in reality they like the military are away with the fairies if they think its either believed or practical.

Close mindedness is one thing, and oppression and ruthlessness another.

The stage is being set in Thailand and the players are gathering on stage.

Make no mistake the real drama hasn't begun yet.

The elitists have in their dying days mistaken the calm before the storm to be the stillness ahead.

When in fact it will be a raging sea .

All this is just grand theatre and a production in the 21st that is past it's use by date.

Time will rid Thailand of its insidious structures.

The panderers can sit and watch .

Edited May 17, 2015 by Plutojames88

[Skywalker69]

Doesn't the country have a PM who described himself as a democratic soldier but sees democracy as a trap ?

Is what he is saying worse that Thaksin saying, "Democracy is not my goal"?

Thaksin wanted to be like his buddy, the thug, Hun Sen, and did everything possible to become 'President for Life' of Thailand.

General Prayut is doing everything possible to bury the influence of Thaksin and to set up conditions in Thailand where democracy, if not thrive, at least can grow. That is my opinion.

And some asked if I wore a Tin Foil hat?

Thaksin suggests he'll block any move for amendments to rein in his power Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra yesterday revealed for the first time the value he places on democracy, saying it was not the foremost thing Thailand needed.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/PMS-DECLARATIONDemocracy-is-not-my-goal-90316.html

[jjablonsky]

To slightly paraphrase a quote from the movie "American President"
"Democracy/Freedom isn't easy. Democracy/Freedom is advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, 'You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.' and still defend his right to say it"
Read the whole thing here

[exalll]

Democracy may be corrupt or not. It has nothing to do with the fact that some governments are democratic. Democracy just means polls nothing else. It is a form of government whereby the people choose the government they want. That choice may be corrupt or not it's up to the people who vote. Do you see the point? Democracy is neither good or bad it is simply a system of government that involves elections.

By this reasoning, you believe North Korea is a democracy.

[KarenBravo]

If citizens from democratic counties are arguing on here about what a democracy actually is, what hope for the Thais?

[PilotEd]

I can tell you that as long as Prayuth and his cronies in the elite (yellow shirts) control the conditions of the election and how many of the seats must automatically go to certain segments of the society as well as who may or may not sit then there is no chance of a true democratic election. As an outside observer with very little effect on me one way or the other, my prediction is that this will not stand for the five years Prayuth is asking for.

[glenmohr]

Thaksin was corrupt and nepotistic.

Prayut is dishonest, corrupt, clumsy and nepotistic ( as soon as he took over he voted himself and his cronies a pay rise and promoted his younger brother to a powerful position.) This behaviour would have been a crime before Prayut took power.

It was always possible to remove Thaksin by peaceful voting. ( he was a master at vote buying but that option in Thailand is available to all, just that he was better at that art). Vote buying is practiced in all societies in various forms. There are countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate and then voting for the opponent.

.

It is not possible to remove General Prayut except by violence.

Which is the better system?

[exalll]

Thaksin was corrupt and nepotistic.

Prayut is dishonest, corrupt, clumsy and nepotistic ( as soon as he took over he voted himself and his cronies a pay rise and promoted his younger brother to a powerful position.) This behaviour would have been a crime before Prayut took power.

It was always possible to remove Thaksin by peaceful voting. ( he was a master at vote buying but that option in Thailand is available to all, just that he was better at that art). Vote buying is practiced in all societies in various forms. There are countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate and then voting for the opponent.

.

It is not possible to remove General Prayut except by violence.

Which is the better system?

The two additional adjectives that you ascribe to Prayut also apply to Taksin, and others besides ... vicious, vengeful ...

There may be countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate but then voting for another - however, that doesn't work in Thailand.

At the moment, one way of removing Prayut is not to vote for him in the next election. If, at some point, he decides that there will be no election then violence may become the only option, but you should not jump to conclusions.

Having lived under both regimes, I currently feel more secure and feel that there is greater prospect for real progress in Thailand under Prayut than under Taksin.

[lostoday]

Democracy may be corrupt or not. It has nothing to do with the fact that some governments are democratic. Democracy just means polls nothing else. It is a form of government whereby the people choose the government they want. That choice may be corrupt or not it's up to the people who vote. Do you see the point? Democracy is neither good or bad it is simply a system of government that involves elections.

By this reasoning, you believe North Korea is a democracy.

No of course not. They don't have elections.

[exalll]

Democracy may be corrupt or not. It has nothing to do with the fact that some governments are democratic. Democracy just means polls nothing else. It is a form of government whereby the people choose the government they want. That choice may be corrupt or not it's up to the people who vote. Do you see the point? Democracy is neither good or bad it is simply a system of government that involves elections.

By this reasoning, you believe North Korea is a democracy.

No of course not. They don't have elections.

Umm ... they do!

[brewsterbudgen]

By this reasoning, you believe North Korea is a democracy.

No of course not. They don't have elections.

Umm ... they do!

Indeed they do. And I wouldn't be surprised if they are used as a model for the new Thai "democracy"!

[lostoday]

Democracy may be corrupt or not. It has nothing to do with the fact that some governments are democratic. Democracy just means polls nothing else. It is a form of government whereby the people choose the government they want. That choice may be corrupt or not it's up to the people who vote. Do you see the point? Democracy is neither good or bad it is simply a system of government that involves elections.

By this reasoning, you believe North Korea is a democracy.

No of course not. They don't have elections.

Umm ... they do!

See, you are being silly now. That is the curse of Thai Visa. Everything someone says they must qualify to the enth degree or some pedantic will come on and debate it. What did you want me to say? Free and fair elections so you could pedantically debate the meaning of free and fair?

In the sense of any rational person North Korea does not have elections. You know it and I know it. Why don't you save three more pages of semantic debate on what makes a free election.

A free election is both sides have the same opportunity to buy votes either with cash or marketing or colored tee shirts.

Edited May 18, 2015 by lostoday

[ThaiUser]

If citizens from democratic counties are arguing on here about what a democracy actually is, what hope for the Thais?

It shows us Thai how democracy is functioning by arguing and making sure that the argument will win and not the party that uses violence to enhance their argumentative points.

[Muirton]

"1 Thai, 1 vote". Gets his knickers all bunched up if he hears someone say that still in the LOS.

[exalll]

By this reasoning, you believe North Korea is a democracy.

No of course not. They don't have elections.

Umm ... they do!

See, you are being silly now. That is the curse of Thai Visa. Everything someone says they must qualify to the enth degree or some pedantic will come on and debate it. What did you want me to say? Free and fair elections so you could pedantically debate the meaning of free and fair?

In the sense of any rational person North Korea does not have elections. You know it and I know it. Why don't you save three more pages of semantic debate on what makes a free election.

A free election is both sides have the same opportunity to buy votes either with cash or marketing or colored tee shirts.

So I'm being pedantic? It was you who said "democracy just means polls, nothing else". North Korea has polls ... but now I'm being silly. So, you suggest ... when someone makes a statement, no-one should debate it. Sounds pointless, not to mention boring. Meanwhile ... thanks for educating me ... a free election is one where all sides can buy votes. Your version of democracy gets curiouser and curiouser.

[lostoday]

No of course not. They don't have elections.

Umm ... they do!

See, you are being silly now. That is the curse of Thai Visa. Everything someone says they must qualify to the enth degree or some pedantic will come on and debate it. What did you want me to say? Free and fair elections so you could pedantically debate the meaning of free and fair?

In the sense of any rational person North Korea does not have elections. You know it and I know it. Why don't you save three more pages of semantic debate on what makes a free election.

A free election is both sides have the same opportunity to buy votes either with cash or marketing or colored tee shirts.

So I'm being pedantic? It was you who said "democracy just means polls, nothing else". North Korea has polls ... but now I'm being silly. So, you suggest ... when someone makes a statement, no-one should debate it. Sounds pointless, not to mention boring. Meanwhile ... thanks for educating me ... a free election is one where all sides can buy votes. Your version of democracy gets curiouser and curiouser.

1. Are you trying to say North Korea has free elections? 2. Why would a reasonable person have to say free elections instead of just elections? 3. If you are having an election it is assumed that it is free. 4. So you want to debate free? 5. That is the curse of Thai Visa. Pedanticism.

Of course both sides or 20 sides have the choice to spend as much money on electioneering as they want or the law allows. You can call it buying votes or you can call it trying to influence votes. You can call popular legislation trying to buy votes, who cares.

The party in power will try and stay in power by giving it's supporters what they want be it rice subsidies or a vote on staying in the European Union or free health care.

The US and UK have elections; North Korea has sham elections. Got it?

[exalll]

A free election is both sides have the same opportunity to buy votes either with cash or marketing or colored tee shirts.

So I'm being pedantic? It was you who said "democracy just means polls, nothing else". North Korea has polls ... but now I'm being silly. So, you suggest ... when someone makes a statement, no-one should debate it. Sounds pointless, not to mention boring. Meanwhile ... thanks for educating me ... a free election is one where all sides can buy votes. Your version of democracy gets curiouser and curiouser.

1. Are you trying to say North Korea has free elections? 2. Why would a reasonable person have to say free elections instead of just elections? 3. If you are having an election it is assumed that it is free. 4. So you want to debate free? 5. That is the curse of Thai Visa. Pedanticism.

Of course both sides or 20 sides have the choice to spend as much money on electioneering as they want or the law allows. You can call it buying votes or you can call it trying to influence votes. You can call popular legislation trying to buy votes, who cares.

The party in power will try and stay in power by giving it's supporters what they want be it rice subsidies or a vote on staying in the European Union or free health care.

The US and UK have elections; North Korea has sham elections. Got it?

OK, I give up. If you wish, you may conclude that I have been crushed by your indomitable logic. An alternative interpretation may be that I despair of detecting any logic in your argument.

[glenmohr]

Thaksin was corrupt and nepotistic.

Prayut is dishonest, corrupt, clumsy and nepotistic ( as soon as he took over he voted himself and his cronies a pay rise and promoted his younger brother to a powerful position.) This behaviour would have been a crime before Prayut took power.

It was always possible to remove Thaksin by peaceful voting. ( he was a master at vote buying but that option in Thailand is available to all, just that he was better at that art). Vote buying is practiced in all societies in various forms. There are countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate and then voting for the opponent.

.

It is not possible to remove General Prayut except by violence.

Which is the better system?

The two additional adjectives that you ascribe to Prayut also apply to Taksin, and others besides ... vicious, vengeful ...

There may be countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate but then voting for another - however, that doesn't work in Thailand.

At the moment, one way of removing Prayut is not to vote for him in the next election. If, at some point, he decides that there will be no election then violence may become the only option, but you should not jump to conclusions.

Having lived under both regimes, I currently feel more secure and feel that there is greater prospect for real progress in Thailand under Prayut than under Taksin.

To Mr Exalll,

Numerous studies have been done on vote buying in Thailand. It is a country with numerous provinces and the findings experienced are not always uniform. What happens in your village or my village is not the point. It is Thailand and the country should belong to the Thais.

Because Pasuk Phongpaichet and Chris Baker are widely considered the pre eminent historians of Thai politics, the Bangkok Post featured prominently their findings on 6th Dec 2013. They describe the history of vote buying in Thailand and state " People soon learnt they could take money from every candidate and still vote for whoever they liked" Now you will state that that does not apply to your village but let me remind you there are tens of thousands of villages and you and your wife's brother's village next door are only a total of two and may well be an exception.

In 2010 a visiting professor from USA made a very sophisticated study of voting in Thailand and found that the pattern of voting was inconsistent with vote buying.

After the last election Mr Alongkorn Punlabot was quoted as saying " We outspent the Puea Thai Party." This man is a very prominent member of the Democrat Party of Thailand.

There is substantial anecdotal evidence compiled by a Bangkok University of voters consistently voting for Puea Thai who had received money from the Democrat Party of Thailand. This is particuarly evident in some of the urban Bangkok constituencies

However the overwhelming statistic is that when you add up the number of Thai voters who identify themselves as either Thai Isaan, Thai Lanna or Thai Malay you will be very close to the last election result. If there was no vote buying at all, the result will still be the same. It is always down to the Bangkok elite versus the rest.

As for your suggestion that the general will hold an election. that is impossible. he is not completely stupid. He will have to removed by force. My question remains is it better to somewhat peacefully remove a leader using elections or remove them with violence? Whatever the result there will still be corruption and nepotism because that is the nature of Thai society.

[meltingpot2015]

Its not all about elections. Everything that is done between elections is equally important.

[lostoday]

Its not all about elections. Everything that is done between elections is equally important.

Depends if you want to your country a democracy or not. If you want to call it a democracy then elections are necessary at regular intervals.

If you don't want to call your country a democracy then elections are not important at all.

Castro 1959 to 2008. Kim Jong Il 1994 - 2011. Mao 1949 - 1976.

[KarenBravo]

The strength of democracy isn't that you can vote people in, it's that you can vote people out.

Change without bloodshed.

Let's face it. Once the politicians are in, they break their promises, pledges and don't listen to the people, or, enact popular laws.

It becomes a four year dictatorship.

This happens in all Western democratic countries.

Two rather telling quotes from Winston Churchill.

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest".

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter".

[trogers]

Thaksin was corrupt and nepotistic.

Prayut is dishonest, corrupt, clumsy and nepotistic ( as soon as he took over he voted himself and his cronies a pay rise and promoted his younger brother to a powerful position.) This behaviour would have been a crime before Prayut took power.

It was always possible to remove Thaksin by peaceful voting. ( he was a master at vote buying but that option in Thailand is available to all, just that he was better at that art). Vote buying is practiced in all societies in various forms. There are countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate and then voting for the opponent.

.

It is not possible to remove General Prayut except by violence.

Which is the better system?

The two additional adjectives that you ascribe to Prayut also apply to Taksin, and others besides ... vicious, vengeful ...

There may be countless incidents from around the world of voters taking money from one candidate but then voting for another - however, that doesn't work in Thailand.

At the moment, one way of removing Prayut is not to vote for him in the next election. If, at some point, he decides that there will be no election then violence may become the only option, but you should not jump to conclusions.

Having lived under both regimes, I currently feel more secure and feel that there is greater prospect for real progress in Thailand under Prayut than under Taksin.

To Mr Exalll,

Numerous studies have been done on vote buying in Thailand. It is a country with numerous provinces and the findings experienced are not always uniform. What happens in your village or my village is not the point. It is Thailand and the country should belong to the Thais.

Because Pasuk Phongpaichet and Chris Baker are widely considered the pre eminent historians of Thai politics, the Bangkok Post featured prominently their findings on 6th Dec 2013. They describe the history of vote buying in Thailand and state " People soon learnt they could take money from every candidate and still vote for whoever they liked" Now you will state that that does not apply to your village but let me remind you there are tens of thousands of villages and you and your wife's brother's village next door are only a total of two and may well be an exception.

In 2010 a visiting professor from USA made a very sophisticated study of voting in Thailand and found that the pattern of voting was inconsistent with vote buying.

After the last election Mr Alongkorn Punlabot was quoted as saying " We outspent the Puea Thai Party." This man is a very prominent member of the Democrat Party of Thailand.

There is substantial anecdotal evidence compiled by a Bangkok University of voters consistently voting for Puea Thai who had received money from the Democrat Party of Thailand. This is particuarly evident in some of the urban Bangkok constituencies

However the overwhelming statistic is that when you add up the number of Thai voters who identify themselves as either Thai Isaan, Thai Lanna or Thai Malay you will be very close to the last election result. If there was no vote buying at all, the result will still be the same. It is always down to the Bangkok elite versus the rest.

As for your suggestion that the general will hold an election. that is impossible. he is not completely stupid. He will have to removed by force. My question remains is it better to somewhat peacefully remove a leader using elections or remove them with violence? Whatever the result there will still be corruption and nepotism because that is the nature of Thai society.

Superb studies on vote selling, the mind of the people.

We now wait for an equally superb study of why politicians buy votes...

Perhaps to attain a post in order to sacrifice their lives for the betterment of their country and the people?

[KarenBravo]

Because politicians constantly underestimate the intelligence of the voters?

After all, the Bangkok elite have quite publicly stated that people from Esaarn are too stupid to be given a vote.

Edited May 18, 2015 by KarenBravo

[AlQaholic]

uhm, the four principles are usually listed in the reverse order from what PM is doing with the representation coming first and most important.

[meltingpot2015]

If citizens from democratic counties are arguing on here about what a democracy actually is, what hope for the Thais?

It shows us Thai how democracy is functioning by arguing and making sure that the argument will win and not the party that uses violence to enhance their argumentative points.

Yes, the strongest argument wins, not the strongest gang.

[lostoday]

If citizens from democratic counties are arguing on here about what a democracy actually is, what hope for the Thais?

It shows us Thai how democracy is functioning by arguing and making sure that the argument will win and not the party that uses violence to enhance their argumentative points.

Yes, the strongest argument wins, not the strongest gang.

Normally the party with the largest amount of popular support wins. Not speaking of Thailand here but in the normal course of events in most countries.

[MaeJoMTB]

"True democracy, he said, was actually based on four principles: justice, equality, freedom and representation"

0 out of 4 ain't bad!

[MaeJoMTB]

Superb studies on vote selling, the mind of the people.

I don't have a problem with vote selling.

A persons vote, should be his to do with as he wants. (or she)