New constitution a recipe for more problems, red shirts say

[sjaak327]

3 minutes ago, halloween said:

Of course you think they are right, even when they are raising a completely unlikely last ditch solution as a straw argument.

I don't believe what they paint is unlikely, time will tell I guess...

[smedly]

4 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

Might be true, however they are right in this case. And that is what this topic handles, shooting the messenger doesn't deflect from the fact that in this instance they are right. I personally could care less about their motives.

The motives are not the primary issue - the methods are

 

I think there is general agreement that Thailand has major issues, the top ones being - corruption - law enforcement - Justice system that servers all the people equally, were we disagree is how it gets fixed and by who, no attempt by any elected government has been made to address any of these issues - in fact quite the opposite, the redshirts aren't going to fix it because they use violence and murder of innocent people to progress what they call a fight for democracy (everybody knows who and what they really represent), so what does that leave - well it leaves someone to come along with power and influence with good intention and motives that can complete the task  - is Prayuth Chan O Cha the man that can complete that task - he ticks most of the boxes, the final result is yet to be seen, there are lots of things that he is doing that I strongly disagree with and have said so many times but what alternative is there.

 

Democracies in the west have been born after serious internal and external conflict - civil wars etc, they could just as easily have become communist dictatorships depending on who won - would we still have slavery in the USA if things had turned out differently....who knows but the development of the USA would have been entirely different very possibly even split in two, anyway the point is - Thailand needs a strong capable guiding hand to fix the many problems, only time will tell if the current PM can achieve that

[smedly]

In fact I would go as far as saying that democracies are just a result of pure chance at the outcome of conflict and it is pure luck that they actually succeed, a few good men manage to steer things in the right direction - again the USA being a fine example - there are many existing examples of how that didn't happen in the world today

 

The problem with many here and probably most of the Thai people is that they think democracy is an election, the act of an election might in itself be described as democratic but what they actually vote for and what happens after (as in Thailand) is far from a democracy - and there is the problem right there, simply put - the structures Laws and institutions are simply not there to support a democracy - self serving greed corruption and power is what they get with no resemblance to democracy at all so it all falls flat on its face every time resulting in mostly conflict and then the army steps in and puts an end to the violence,

 

The solution is that some right thinking people make sure that the Structures Laws and institutions are in place before an election is held so that when a government is elected they are forced to work within those very rigid rules checks balances and transparency

[George Graham]

On 29/01/2017 at 2:32 PM, smedly said:

and that is total outdated nonsense

 

it is your opinion backed by nothing of substance

As I said - evidenced by the FACT...

Read the bloody post again. It is not my opinion it is historical fact,which you wilfully choose to ignore.

[Becker]

7 hours ago, halloween said:

The point is that is that not being elected, but claiming to be a champion of democracy, is hypocritical at best, and more likely, simply a lie.

So , if we follow your reasoning then people like Ghandi, Mandela and a thousand other dissidents were hypocrites and/or liars? And just to be clear; I am not comparing anyone in Thailand with those, just trying to follow your "logic".

What is it with some of the junta supporters obsession with anyone from the "wrong" side not being elected?? I mean, you readily accept a non-elected junta but get all bent out of shape if anyone from the Red shirt movement says anything at all.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

 

[debate101]

All of this analysis is fine and dandy, but it completely skirts the major issue here and what is actually going on, if you look at the long-term historical view.

 

The birth of the red-shirt movement in opposition to the 2006 coup became a national emergency in the eyes of some because it was seen as a rejection of divine right. The ossified power structure that many had spent their lives climbing was crumbling to modern pressures.

 

This second takeover had been long prepared to keep it afloat on a society that would just as soon see it replaced. The day to day bungling is all superfluous to the main event, which requires indefinite control of information and unchecked, absolute powers.

[robblok]

1 hour ago, Becker said:

So , if we follow your reasoning then people like Ghandi, Mandela and a thousand other dissidents were hypocrites and/or liars? And just to be clear; I am not comparing anyone in Thailand with those, just trying to follow your "logic".

What is it with some of the junta supporters obsession with anyone from the "wrong" side not being elected?? I mean, you readily accept a non-elected junta but get all bent out of shape if anyone from the Red shirt movement says anything at all.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

 

No we are just pointing out that your side its obsession with being elected is a bit naive given that you got organisations as the red shirts who are far from democratic, while you hammer on on others having to be elected to be good. 

 

 

[rubl]

The major issue? Grassroots having been duped by some rich people and their lackeys in believing that those would fight for their "fill in whatever". Years lost because of demagogues, selfish people. Plus of course the other side not really much better at times.

 

The people suffer, especially when a billionair stands up and convinces some to speak 'for the people',  'in the peoples voice'. Nothing new, not even specific Thai.

[Becker]

Just now, robblok said:

No we are just pointing out that your side its obsession with being elected is a bit naive given that you got organisations as the red shirts who are far from democratic, while you hammer on on others having to be elected to be good. 

 

 

Naive about what, exactly? And why should the "Red Shirts" (however you want to define them) be elected? Correct me if I'm wrong but only politicians competing for national office need to be elected in nationwide elections. Unless you're Thai general and just take power, of course.

Let me ask you this: In Holland there are unelected people and organizations who make statements regarding politics all the time. Are you against this?

And to correct you; I have never "hammered on about others having to be elected to be good", just pointing out that juntas can never be legitimate and that they have never solved/are not solving any of Thailand's deep rooted problems.

Quite frankly I find it amusing to be accused of being naive by someone who still believes the current junta are doing anything else than securing their own narrow and selfish interests.

[candide]

1 hour ago, rubl said:

The major issue? Grassroots having been duped by some rich people and their lackeys in believing that those would fight for their "fill in whatever". Years lost because of demagogues, selfish people. Plus of course the other side not really much better at times.

 

The people suffer, especially when a billionair stands up and convinces some to speak 'for the people',  'in the peoples voice'. Nothing new, not even specific Thai.

You mean speak for the "people", like Suthep or the Junta?

As far as I remember, how influenced they may well be by the person you indicate, the red shirts always campaigned for elections in order to find out who is allowed to talk in the name of the people.The other side usurped this right without any legitimacy drawn from the people's vote.

[baboon]

2 hours ago, rubl said:

The major issue? Grassroots having been duped by some rich people and their lackeys in believing that those would fight for their "fill in whatever". Years lost because of demagogues, selfish people. Plus of course the other side not really much better at times.

 

The people suffer, especially when a billionair stands up and convinces some to speak 'for the people',  'in the peoples voice'. Nothing new, not even specific Thai.

Donald Trump joins us! It's great, folks. It's true. Really!

[halloween]

13 hours ago, Becker said:

So , if we follow your reasoning then people like Ghandi, Mandela and a thousand other dissidents were hypocrites and/or liars? And just to be clear; I am not comparing anyone in Thailand with those, just trying to follow your "logic".

What is it with some of the junta supporters obsession with anyone from the "wrong" side not being elected?? I mean, you readily accept a non-elected junta but get all bent out of shape if anyone from the Red shirt movement says anything at all.

The hypocrisy is astounding.

 

The hypocrisy is certainly astounding, yours. Accepting the UDD as some form of champions of democracy when all evidence points to them being the mercenary mouthpieces for an absconded criminal is nothing less than hypocrisy. When put to the test, the vote for an amnesty for Thaksin AND Abhisit, which way did they vote - the way the movement called for or in their paymaster's interest. But ignore that, accept the pretense and drink the Kool-aid.

[Eric Loh]

54 minutes ago, halloween said:

The hypocrisy is certainly astounding, yours. Accepting the UDD as some form of champions of democracy when all evidence points to them being the mercenary mouthpieces for an absconded criminal is nothing less than hypocrisy. When put to the test, the vote for an amnesty for Thaksin AND Abhisit, which way did they vote - the way the movement called for or in their paymaster's interest. But ignore that, accept the pretense and drink the Kool-aid.

Let's see. Among the various pressure groups the last 10 odd years like the PAD, Siam Pitak and PDRC, the UDD does stand out as the only group that wanted an election and democracy. That seem reasonable to call them the champion of democracy. Rest of the pressure groups are just conduit for the military to stage a coup.   

[halloween]

34 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Let's see. Among the various pressure groups the last 10 odd years like the PAD, Siam Pitak and PDRC, the UDD does stand out as the only group that wanted an election and democracy. That seem reasonable to call them the champion of democracy. Rest of the pressure groups are just conduit for the military to stage a coup.   

It seems to me that those groups were calling for a better version of democracy than they were getting, without the corrupt billionaire calling the shots. UDD OTOH are quite happy with the Thaksin version of democracy, and the regular payments. As is reflected in their attitude to the anti-corruption agencies.

[GarryP]

34 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Let's see. Among the various pressure groups the last 10 odd years like the PAD, Siam Pitak and PDRC, the UDD does stand out as the only group that wanted an election and democracy. That seem reasonable to call them the champion of democracy. Rest of the pressure groups are just conduit for the military to stage a coup.   

The champion of democracy that won't allow others into their districts to present their political position to the voters. Noooooo, if you are from any other political party you are not welcome. Launching far from peaceful protests  and running any one from the other side of the divide out of town, lest the voters listen to them.

 

Luckily, things seem to have calmed down quite a bit and there are various shades of red, many of whom are not Thaksinites. However, it is now used as a label by the "elite" to deliberately create a divide. If you are from the north or northeast and vote any way but Democrat you are labelled a redshirt. That the disenfranchised now know that their vote counts and are prepared to cast it is a great advance for this country. The cat is out of the bag and you are not going to put it back in. What you now need to do is edcate the voting public.

 

Representatives of parties of all political peruasions should be allowed to freely move in the provinces, hold meetings, put over their position to the people, etc. This freedom of movement must be protected and anyone physically preventing it should be arrested. That does not mean peaceful protests should be banned.

 

For sure, parties like the Dems need to get their fingers out of their <deleted> and start representing the people of all walks of life in all districts of Thailand if they want to win an election. Alongkorn Polabutr was right, the party needs total reorganizing, a massive shakeup. 

 

Enuff.   

[Eric Loh]

50 minutes ago, halloween said:

It seems to me that those groups were calling for a better version of democracy than they were getting, without the corrupt billionaire calling the shots. UDD OTOH are quite happy with the Thaksin version of democracy, and the regular payments. As is reflected in their attitude to the anti-corruption agencies.

 

So you are saying that those groups who invited coups against elected government who then shredded the 1997 People's charter and armtwisted the people to accept revised constitution that reduced their rights for choosing their leaders were calling for better democracy. Got it. 

[Eric Loh]

47 minutes ago, GarryP said:

The champion of democracy that won't allow others into their districts to present their political position to the voters. Noooooo, if you are from any other political party you are not welcome. Launching far from peaceful protests  and running any one from the other side of the divide out of town, lest the voters listen to them.

 

Luckily, things seem to have calmed down quite a bit and there are various shades of red, many of whom are not Thaksinites. However, it is now used as a label by the "elite" to deliberately create a divide. If you are from the north or northeast and vote any way but Democrat you are labelled a redshirt. That the disenfranchised now know that their vote counts and are prepared to cast it is a great advance for this country. The cat is out of the bag and you are not going to put it back in. What you now need to do is edcate the voting public.

 

Representatives of parties of all political peruasions should be allowed to freely move in the provinces, hold meetings, put over their position to the people, etc. This freedom of movement must be protected and anyone physically preventing it should be arrested. That does not mean peaceful protests should be banned.

 

For sure, parties like the Dems need to get their fingers out of their <deleted> and start representing the people of all walks of life in all districts of Thailand if they want to win an election. Alongkorn Polabutr was right, the party needs total reorganizing, a massive shakeup. 

 

Enuff.   

We got to accept that hecklers when opposition parties campaigned are a very normal in any countries. In Thailand both colours have displayed despicable act of violence in preventing rivals campaigning. This is the job of the law to ensure fair campaigning and the job of the police. Unfortunately we have a disfunctional RTP who can be bought. We look forward to the correct use of the law and enforcement to allow freedom to campaign. 

 

Agreed with you that not all red shirts are Thaksin loyal but are collectively in wanting their voices and votes to be respected. They want a piece of the prosperity that Thailand enjoy but held back by the scheming elites. Thats what they fighting for - equality.

 

I see no hope in the Dem Party and also from Thaksin. I also dont see anyone stepping out to be a credible leader as long as the politics remained control by influential powerful people. 

[halloween]

5 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

 

So you are saying that those groups who invited coups against elected government who then shredded the 1997 People's charter and armtwisted the people to accept revised constitution that reduced their rights for choosing their leaders were calling for better democracy. Got it. 

About bloody time.

[Becker]

12 hours ago, halloween said:

The hypocrisy is certainly astounding, yours. Accepting the UDD as some form of champions of democracy when all evidence points to them being the mercenary mouthpieces for an absconded criminal is nothing less than hypocrisy. When put to the test, the vote for an amnesty for Thaksin AND Abhisit, which way did they vote - the way the movement called for or in their paymaster's interest. But ignore that, accept the pretense and drink the Kool-aid.

Accepting the UDD as some form of champions of democracy??? Have you been drinking? I question the obsession you guys have with anyone from the red side not being elected (and you never manage to explain what it is you mean by that), something you display every time one of them says anything remotely critical about your beloved junta and that makes you throw a fissy fit every time. Equal parts entertaining and sad.

And what on earth does this sentence even mean?

When put to the test, the vote for an amnesty for Thaksin AND Abhisit, which way did they vote - the way the movement called for or in their paymaster's interest.

[candide]

17 hours ago, halloween said:

The hypocrisy is certainly astounding, yours. Accepting the UDD as some form of champions of democracy when all evidence points to them being the mercenary mouthpieces for an absconded criminal is nothing less than hypocrisy. When put to the test, the vote for an amnesty for Thaksin AND Abhisit, which way did they vote - the way the movement called for or in their paymaster's interest. But ignore that, accept the pretense and drink the Kool-aid.

As noticed before, it is a bit confused. On the one hand red shirts are depicted as always obeying Thaksin. But on the other hand the case of the amnesty bill proposed by her sister is cited, a bill which met opposition from a significant share of red shirt organisations. 

[halloween]

On 02/02/2017 at 5:06 AM, candide said:

As noticed before, it is a bit confused. On the one hand red shirts are depicted as always obeying Thaksin. But on the other hand the case of the amnesty bill proposed by her sister is cited, a bill which met opposition from a significant share of red shirt organisations. 

Yes, and those UDD "leaders" who "happened" to be MPs voted FOR the bill, with only one having the balls to abstain.

"Happened" because nobody voted for them then either, they were party list appointed as a reward for their part in the 2010 insurrection.

[candide]

43 minutes ago, halloween said:

Yes, and those UDD "leaders" who "happened" to be MPs voted FOR the bill, with only one having the balls to abstain.

"Happened" because nobody voted for them then either, they were party list appointed as a reward for their part in the 2010 insurrection.

Well 1/3 who don't obey is still a significant share.I have been told many times that the red shirts constitute an homogenous group whose members always obey the man now in Dubai.

 

I am also happy to find out that we seem to share the same disapproval of appointment of politicians, and when elected, a preference for direct choice rather than party list. However I still see a problem of coherence between your various posts, as you also seem to support the Junta and its institutions which are fully appointed. Same for the Junta's constitution which increases the number and power of appointed politicians, and does not eliminate the party list system either. 

Edited February 2, 2017 by candide

[wakeupplease]

I would like to say something but best not with certain people around

Hope you all had a good day is the best I can do

Good Night Sweet Dreams

[halloween]

23 hours ago, candide said:

Well 1/3 who don't obey is still a significant share.I have been told many times that the red shirts constitute an homogenous group whose members always obey the man now in Dubai.

 

I am also happy to find out that we seem to share the same disapproval of appointment of politicians, and when elected, a preference for direct choice rather than party list. However I still see a problem of coherence between your various posts, as you also seem to support the Junta and its institutions which are fully appointed. Same for the Junta's constitution which increases the number and power of appointed politicians, and does not eliminate the party list system either. 

I count 9 UDD MPs, with one abstention, and none voting against party line. Which strongly supports my claim they are far more paid stooges than representatives of any democratic movement.  http://www.pattayamail.com/thailandnews/house-disapproves-udd-leaders-request-to-give-up-mp-immunity-6170

 

I accept the junta as a temporary measure to achieve change, even if not some of the changes I would prefer.

[candide]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

 

My mistake,  so it's only 11% of red shirt MPS. 

 

1 hour ago, halloween said:

I count 9 UDD MPs, with one abstention, and none voting against party line. Which strongly supports my claim they are far more paid stooges than representatives of any democratic movement.  http://www.pattayamail.com/thailandnews/house-disapproves-udd-leaders-request-to-give-up-mp-immunity-6170

 

I accept the junta as a temporary measure to achieve change, even if not some of the changes I would prefer.

 

Edited February 3, 2017 by candide

[IMA_FARANG]

It really doesn't matter what party is in power does it?

The political parties in Thailand were created by the wealthy elite  to continue their domination of Thai politics by the same elite clique of wealthy individuals

The new constitution will be written by that group to maintain there dominance.

The situation will always remain that way, the play is the sane no matter which of the actors star in the lead role in the stage play.

No matter who plays the lead role, the script they fallow will still be the same.

 

 

 

 

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, IMA_FARANG said:

It really doesn't matter what party is in power does it?

The political parties in Thailand were created by the wealthy elite  to continue their domination of Thai politics by the same elite clique of wealthy individuals

The new constitution will be written by that group to maintain there dominance.

The situation will always remain that way, the play is the sane no matter which of the actors star in the lead role in the stage play.

No matter who plays the lead role, the script they fallow will still be the same.

 

"It really doesn't matter what party is in power does it?"

 

No, provided it is a party chosen in a fair election.  It doesn't appear Thailand will have one of those for the foreseeable future.

[smedly]

 

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

 

"It really doesn't matter what party is in power does it?"

 

No, provided it is a party chosen in a fair election.  It doesn't appear Thailand will have one of those for the foreseeable future.

yes it would be a first for Thailand, perhaps when the proper Structures - Justice System - Laws - Constitution - Law Enforcement - Independent Agencies etc are in place supporting Democracy and those that prefer to arm themselves and intimidate/murder people to further their cause decide that that is not the way to do things then there might just be a chance

Edited February 4, 2017 by smedly

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

"It really doesn't matter what party is in power does it?"

 

No, provided it is a party chosen in a fair election.  It doesn't appear Thailand will have one of those for the foreseeable future.

 

1 hour ago, smedly said:

 

yes it would be a first for Thailand, perhaps when the proper Structures - Justice System - Laws - Constitution - Law Enforcement - Independent Agencies etc are in place supporting Democracy and those that prefer to arm themselves and intimidate/murder people to further their cause decide that that is not the way to do things then there might just be a chance

Most reasonable people would agree that an internationally monitored election in which irregularities are noted but the results deemed legitimate is good enough. 

 

Of course some people will insist on perfection in order to prevent democracy from establishing a foothold.

[candide]

11 hours ago, halloween said:

I count 9 UDD MPs, with one abstention, and none voting against party line. Which strongly supports my claim they are far more paid stooges than representatives of any democratic movement.  http://www.pattayamail.com/thailandnews/house-disapproves-udd-leaders-request-to-give-up-mp-immunity-6170

 

I accept the junta as a temporary measure to achieve change, even if not some of the changes I would prefer.

Apparently there is a problem with your count 

"Red-shirt MP Nattawut Saikur, also deputy commerce minister, said this morning that he was ready to accept consequences from the voting of the revised amnesty bill which he and three other red-shirt abstained."

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/nattawut-ready-accept-consequences/