Referendum will send clear signal to NCPO: rights advocate

[Jon Wetherall]

If you put your low grade rant on hold, it might dawn on you that in fact the whole issue is about Thais deciding what form of democratic government they want.A minority of Thais however want to bludgeon and silence the majority.That is the problem.

If you read this and many other threads there are so many farang who want to decide what the Thai people ought to do when in reality very few of us farangs on TVF including me actually have NO voice in Thailand. We cannot vote, we have no voice and at best we MAY be able to change the vote of our wives and Thai families but that is by no means certain either.

Jayboy you are correct. It IS a Thai problem and unless you are Thai it isn't your problem either and NO it wasn't a low grade rant at all. The whole issue is what Thais want, not you or me or ANY other farang wants, so let the Thai people decide. It makes NO difference what you, I or any other farang think is good for Thais, let THEM decide and NOT you. It makes NO difference what any farang wants for the Thai people. If you haven't managed to work that out yet, then that is your problem, not theirs.

Of course it is a matter for Thais and not for foreigners.Was anybody suggesting it should be otherwise?The problem is that establishment Thais buttressed by the Sino Thai middle class refuse to accept that they cannot hold a permanent veto over the wishes of the majority.It's not a particularly unusual dilemma but the Thai governing class has behaved with unusual stupidity.With a better developed sense of enlightened self interest it could have managed the transition to popular democracy and still kept more or less at the top of the heap.

But if as you say the Establishment Thais and the middle class Thais refuse to accept the changes that will come, again they are Thai people and we are not. WE do not have the right to tell the Thais whether THEY are right or wrong as it is THEIR country and not ours. Change IS coming but of necessity it is slow.

You mention once again "popular democracy" but which "popular democracy" is right for Thailand at the present? It is not our place to tell the Thais "this is popular democracy the............... way, and this is the way you should go".

What is your version of "popular democracy"?

One where elected governments are not tipped out by army grunts on behalf of the moneyed class would be a pretty good start.

One has to ask why the moneyed classes like to remain in the shadows and manipulate from the shadows so much. Perhaps because they don't want everyone to know?

It didn't work very well.

[rubl]

Now if only Thailand managed to get those who work FOR the people

well we actually agree but it can never happen if the army keeps stepping in (is it 22 times?) the 'people' have to decide even if that is painful to watch and it IS their choice. Freedom to vote, even if we hate the choice, is a basic human right

doesn't matter if we like or dislike a choice. As long as the electorate is still controlled to 'elect' a party which afterwards has the attitude of "We value your vote till it's counted, we have a mandate, please go home now" there will not be democracy and liberty either. The army under control of elected criminals is not a step forward.

YOU may think that but it's the citizens of Thailand's CHOICE (or it should be) and therefore you are STILL saying the Army have the right to step in if they don't like the CHOICE. I hate Republicans and Tories but I would not agree with the Army stepping in when they were elected even though they sent 1000s people to their deaths in wars built on lies - PTP never DID THAT!!!

You lost the plot somehow. The Thai army never sent out 1000s of people to their death in a war built on lies.

BTW I think you're right when you say "(or it should be)", about the choice.

[LannaGuy]

You lost the plot somehow. The Thai army never sent out 1000s of people to their death in a war built on lies.

BTW I think you're right when you say "(or it should be)", about the choice.

hmmm 'Republicans'? (USA) 'Tories'? (UK) the CLUE is in the brackets which I thought was obvious think 'Iraq War' etc.

My post is about that although I loath Republicans' (USA) and Tories (UK) I would not support a Military coup (in the USA or UK) and the PTP did nothing like send 1000s to their deaths on the basis of lies (i.e. WOMD)

hope that clears up your confusion and keep taking the med's Uncle Rubl!

[rubl]

Now if only Thailand managed to get those who work FOR the people

well we actually agree but it can never happen if the army keeps stepping in (is it 22 times?) the 'people' have to decide even if that is painful to watch and it IS their choice. Freedom to vote, even if we hate the choice, is a basic human right

doesn't matter if we like or dislike a choice. As long as the electorate is still controlled to 'elect' a party which afterwards has the attitude of "We value your vote till it's counted, we have a mandate, please go home now" there will not be democracy and liberty either. The army under control of elected criminals is not a step forward.

My recollection is that the last government was constantly checked and blocked by court decisions, street protests, military pressure and parliamentary opposition.It did certainly have an electoral mandate but that hardly gave it unrestrained freedom of action.

The trouble with some is that they deny the importance of elections at all because they don't trust the people and prefer control by "self appointed "good people".Your reference in inverted commas to "elect" and suggestion to "control" betrays your mindset.To be fair its also the view of many Thai middle class urbanites.

I don't think the last government lost contact with its supporters after the general election.Even now the Junta and its supporters are terrified of the outcome should the Thai people be consulted in a free and democratic general election.Whatever the lies about the weakness of elections (vote buying, feudal lords, stupid electors - all disproven now of course) seeking the mandate of the Thai people is the best way to proceed.

Military forces should be under civilian control.If you have a penchant for the army to be under the control of unelected criminals that's your choice.Whatever the weaknesses of civilian governments they can be voted out.But to turf out a government is the preogative of the Thai people not the business of coupsters (and their sponsors) and other gangsters.

Absolutely. The previous government was continuously trying to get rid of those pesky checks and balances. Especially their abroad sponsor was bothered by them. He felt restricted in his rights.

Of course the previous government was also keeping contact with their 'useful' people. Why do you think those UDD leaders were offered a party list position guaranteed to give them parliamentary immunity as MP?

BTW 'other gangsters' include our former police Lieutenant-Colonel I assume ?

[rubl]

You lost the plot somehow. The Thai army never sent out 1000s of people to their death in a war built on lies.

BTW I think you're right when you say "(or it should be)", about the choice.

hmmm 'Republicans'? (USA) 'Tories'? (UK) the CLUE is in the brackets which I thought was obvious think 'Iraq War' etc.

My post is about that although I loath Republicans' (USA) and Tories (UK) I would not support a Military coup (in the USA or UK) and the PTP did nothing like send 1000s to their deaths on the basis of lies (i.e. WOMD)

hope that clears up your confusion and keep taking the med's Uncle Rubl!

Terribly sorry old chap, my misunderstanding.

Clearly my attempt to correlate your remark with the topic was doomed to fail as you were not referring to the topic at all. I should have realised that.

[Jon Wetherall]

doesn't matter if we like or dislike a choice. As long as the electorate is still controlled to 'elect' a party which afterwards has the attitude of "We value your vote till it's counted, we have a mandate, please go home now" there will not be democracy and liberty either. The army under control of elected criminals is not a step forward.

My recollection is that the last government was constantly checked and blocked by court decisions, street protests, military pressure and parliamentary opposition.It did certainly have an electoral mandate but that hardly gave it unrestrained freedom of action.

The trouble with some is that they deny the importance of elections at all because they don't trust the people and prefer control by "self appointed "good people".Your reference in inverted commas to "elect" and suggestion to "control" betrays your mindset.To be fair its also the view of many Thai middle class urbanites.

I don't think the last government lost contact with its supporters after the general election.Even now the Junta and its supporters are terrified of the outcome should the Thai people be consulted in a free and democratic general election.Whatever the lies about the weakness of elections (vote buying, feudal lords, stupid electors - all disproven now of course) seeking the mandate of the Thai people is the best way to proceed.

Military forces should be under civilian control.If you have a penchant for the army to be under the control of unelected criminals that's your choice.Whatever the weaknesses of civilian governments they can be voted out.But to turf out a government is the preogative of the Thai people not the business of coupsters (and their sponsors) and other gangsters.

Absolutely. The previous government was continuously trying to get rid of those pesky checks and balances. Especially their abroad sponsor was bothered by them. He felt restricted in his rights.

Of course the previous government was also keeping contact with their 'useful' people. Why do you think those UDD leaders were offered a party list position guaranteed to give them parliamentary immunity as MP?

BTW 'other gangsters' include our former police Lieutenant-Colonel I assume ?

I'm tempted to ask if you have any evidence for any of the allegations you made. But then I don't really need to ask.

[rubl]

doesn't matter if we like or dislike a choice. As long as the electorate is still controlled to 'elect' a party which afterwards has the attitude of "We value your vote till it's counted, we have a mandate, please go home now" there will not be democracy and liberty either. The army under control of elected criminals is not a step forward.

My recollection is that the last government was constantly checked and blocked by court decisions, street protests, military pressure and parliamentary opposition.It did certainly have an electoral mandate but that hardly gave it unrestrained freedom of action.

The trouble with some is that they deny the importance of elections at all because they don't trust the people and prefer control by "self appointed "good people".Your reference in inverted commas to "elect" and suggestion to "control" betrays your mindset.To be fair its also the view of many Thai middle class urbanites.

I don't think the last government lost contact with its supporters after the general election.Even now the Junta and its supporters are terrified of the outcome should the Thai people be consulted in a free and democratic general election.Whatever the lies about the weakness of elections (vote buying, feudal lords, stupid electors - all disproven now of course) seeking the mandate of the Thai people is the best way to proceed.

Military forces should be under civilian control.If you have a penchant for the army to be under the control of unelected criminals that's your choice.Whatever the weaknesses of civilian governments they can be voted out.But to turf out a government is the preogative of the Thai people not the business of coupsters (and their sponsors) and other gangsters.

Absolutely. The previous government was continuously trying to get rid of those pesky checks and balances. Especially their abroad sponsor was bothered by them. He felt restricted in his rights.

Of course the previous government was also keeping contact with their 'useful' people. Why do you think those UDD leaders were offered a party list position guaranteed to give them parliamentary immunity as MP?

BTW 'other gangsters' include our former police Lieutenant-Colonel I assume ?

I'm tempted to ask if you have any evidence for any of the allegations you made. But then I don't really need to ask.

I'm not tempted to answer as I value my time. You might want to check with jayboy though. He mentioned the constant blocking by courts.

[LannaGuy]

You lost the plot somehow. The Thai army never sent out 1000s of people to their death in a war built on lies.

BTW I think you're right when you say "(or it should be)", about the choice.

hmmm 'Republicans'? (USA) 'Tories'? (UK) the CLUE is in the brackets which I thought was obvious think 'Iraq War' etc.

My post is about that although I loath Republicans' (USA) and Tories (UK) I would not support a Military coup (in the USA or UK) and the PTP did nothing like send 1000s to their deaths on the basis of lies (i.e. WOMD)

hope that clears up your confusion and keep taking the med's Uncle Rubl!

Terribly sorry old chap, my misunderstanding.

Clearly my attempt to correlate your remark with the topic was doomed to fail as you were not referring to the topic at all. I should have realised that.

well that was a mildly amusing reply so I'll refrain from pursuing the obvious advantage I had dear fellow

[metisdead]

Posts with messed up quoted posts have been removed.