After all these years, Thaksin should have known better

[Baerboxer]

After all these years, Thaksin still doesn't seem to get it.

The military elite are not sharing power with anyone, much less a self-made wealthy commoner.

Actually you know I think Thaksin does get it, as do the majority of the Thai people, and the International community.

You're right about the Thai Military Elite not sharing power, with anybody.

Either they (the military elite) will cling doggedly to power, whilst the economy and society crumble around them ( a la Burma over the last 20 years) or they will be forced to give up power, or forcibly removed from power. Either way Thaksin is positioning himself to be there when it happens.

Thaksin a wealthy commoner - You can't half tell'em.

Thaksin never shared with anyone either. He was grabbing it all for his clan.

Amazing how some still want to make him out as some working class hero made good who wants to look after the poor. Just like "uncle Joe Stalin".

[Solomon]

What a silly article, so many flaws I'm not sure where to begin.

Thaksin did not blame "everyone and everything but himself", he quite clearly pointed the finger at one very small and exclusive group of old men.

Thaksin's rule may have been flawed, but at least it was democratic - a simple virtue that none of those opposed to him can claim for any period that they have ruled Thailand.

The only way for Thailand to achieve a functioning democratic system is for it to at least be a democracy to start off with - for true democracy's are built from below not dictated from above and for this to occur the people must play an active role not be sidelined and censored by a double speaking archaic elite hell bent on maintaining the status quo that has so nicely feathered their own nests.

Thaksin's only source of power is popular support (yes he is rich but there are several in Thailand far more wealthy than he is). The important fact about Thaksin's power base is that as it comes from the people, the people can remove it from him as they see fit - this cannot be said of the Generals and the plutocrats who make up the current regimes power base.

Thaksin is accountable to the people, the Generals are not!

This ridiculous article wastes everyones time pointing out the twig in Thaksin's eye whilst ignoring the forrest in the eye of those opposed to him.

Goebbel himself would be proud to have produced this garbage.

[rubl]

What a silly article, so many flaws I'm not sure where to begin.

Thaksin did not blame "everyone and everything but himself", he quite clearly pointed the finger at one very small and exclusive group of old men.

Thaksin's rule may have been flawed, but at least it was democratic - a simple virtue that none of those opposed to him can claim for any period that they have ruled Thailand.

The only way for Thailand to achieve a functioning democratic system is for it to at least be a democracy to start off with - for true democracy's are built from below not dictated from above and for this to occur the people must play an active role not be sidelined and censored by a double speaking archaic elite hell bent on maintaining the status quo that has so nicely feathered their own nests.

Thaksin's only source of power is popular support (yes he is rich but there are several in Thailand far more wealthy than he is). The important fact about Thaksin's power base is that as it comes from the people, the people can remove it from him as they see fit - this cannot be said of the Generals and the plutocrats who make up the current regimes power base.

Thaksin is accountable to the people, the Generals are not!

This ridiculous article wastes everyones time pointing out the twig in Thaksin's eye whilst ignoring the forrest in the eye of those opposed to him.

Goebbel himself would be proud to have produced this garbage.

Like the people Thaksin is also accountable to the legal system. That's why he jumped bail I guess ?

[JAG]

After all these years, Thaksin still doesn't seem to get it.

The military elite are not sharing power with anyone, much less a self-made wealthy commoner.

Actually you know I think Thaksin does get it, as do the majority of the Thai people, and the International community.

You're right about the Thai Military Elite not sharing power, with anybody.

Either they (the military elite) will cling doggedly to power, whilst the economy and society crumble around them ( a la Burma over the last 20 years) or they will be forced to give up power, or forcibly removed from power. Either way Thaksin is positioning himself to be there when it happens.

Thaksin a wealthy commoner - You can't half tell'em.

Thaksin never shared with anyone either. He was grabbing it all for his clan.

Amazing how some still want to make him out as some working class hero made good who wants to look after the poor. Just like "uncle Joe Stalin".

If you had bothered to read my post, rather than leaping to an erroneous conclusion in your headlong rush to get in a sly jibe about "telling 'em" and a totally pointless attempt to compare Thaksin to Stalin; (North Korea and Zimbabwe out of favour just now are they?) you would have seen that the comment on sharing referred to "The Thai Military Elite", not your bete noir!

[LukKrueng]

Pointless argument. Thaksin was just one in a continuous line of corrupt leaders. He just happens to be the common enemy the elite have rallied against to justify increased exploitation of the populace.

He was also the first to explore the power of the majority and the results had the old guard shaking in their boots.

Democracy cannot prove itself when the conditions for democracy do not exist. (rule of law, media freedom, freedom to tell the truth). And it really cannot prove itself in a country that allows the army to routinely dissolve the government and rewrite the constitution.

These failings are not the fault of Thaksin.

Yes he was corrupt, but we have no evidence or reason to believe that any of the others political contenders would have been less corrupt.

Do you mean that during Thaksin's time in power there were rule of law, media freedom, freedom to tell the truth ?? As far as I remember he had his own TV station - no opposing opinions were allowed there, and whenever anyone tried to write / say anything against him he'd just sue for defamation like the poor BKK Post journalist that wrote about the cracks on the not opened yet Suvarnabhumi airport and was sued for 400 million THB....

And rule of law? Yes, sure there were rules and there were laws, that were changed and re-written to suite his PERSONAL needs. He declared the "open skies" policies just about 2 days before he launched his very own Thai Air Asia... He was about to lower the % of foreign ownership allowed in a telecommunication company to try and block the then very new cellular service Telecom Asia (now True Corp.) - only to realize that he'd have to buy out some of AIS foreign investors to comply with the suggested new rule... Just before selling Shin Corp to the Singaporean Government he DID change the % of foreign ownership allowed in a telecommunication company, so he could make the sale...

Corruption? yes, there was always corruption and will probably always be. So what's the difference? In all other governments, the "unwritten rule" was always "live and let live". Take some, but not all. Allow others to enjoy too. Thaksin just takes it ALL

[mike324]

It is fair to say that when Thaksin had his moment he failed to rise above his own greed and put the nation first. Just like all those who came before him. But it is pointless to point out again and again the specifics of the corruption of his government. The corruption wasn't the problem, the corruption was expected. What Thaksin did that was different and unforgivable was to open the Pandora' box of populist politics; forever changing the political playing field. This is why he is hated by the elite, he gave the majority a peek at power. He opened their eyes to the power of the majority. Which is exactly why Democracy will not return to Thailand any time soon. The dogs have tasted blood and no longer can be trusted in the hen house.

Pointless argument. Thaksin was just one in a continuous line of corrupt leaders. He just happens to be the common enemy the elite have rallied against to justify increased exploitation of the populace.

He was also the first to explore the power of the majority and the results had the old guard shaking in their boots.

Democracy cannot prove itself when the conditions for democracy do not exist. (rule of law, media freedom, freedom to tell the truth). And it really cannot prove itself in a country that allows the army to routinely dissolve the government and rewrite the constitution.

These failings are not the fault of Thaksin.

Yes he was corrupt, but we have no evidence or reason to believe that any of the others political contenders would have been less corrupt.

I agree with some of your points. But after Thaksins two terms in office, when someone finally asks for some accountability for corruption and fail schemes, when did that turn into a Elite vs Thaksin thing? That is the card that the PTP always play, its not as if the accountability and corruption charges were false. I would imagine for a society to progress law enforcement should too.

Under the 1997 Contitution, the government had the power to revoke media licenses. The TRT used that clause to silence many of his critics from radio and tv stations.

Like you said everybody is corrupt not just Thaksin, but people are so afraid of change, the PTP seems to have instilled fear in people about change being bad and how its the rich vs poor etc.

[NickJ]

Democracy can never happen in any country where the millitary and the police forces are political bodies.