Accusing Thaksin of vote buying when he’d got himself into a position where he no longer needed to buy votes to win, because he’d done what western political parties do: build a strong brand and engage people. As we know, in the south many people have no idea why they’re voting for the democrats, apart from tradition, or because the headman says so, or because of loyalty to Chuan (don’t see anyone complaining about that). Vote buying and corruption are made way too much of in order to justify giving people less democracy. The way to eventually rid the country of endemic corruption is to widen participation in the democratic process, not continually erode what little democracy there is. Someone actually said to me they wished they had a system like Chinese have, because it’s a strong government with zero corruption hahahaha.
Of course, worse than his actual vote buying; Thaksin also “bribed” the villagers with “cheap loans” & health care. Hmmm, most political parties around the world win votes because of what they’ve done or can do for the voter, don’t they? Whether it’s tax cuts, health care, better education etc. I think it’s the whole belief in this sufficiency ideology (for the poor, of course, not for those who promote it) that produces these facile arguments.
The last election was rigged against PPP and they still won. Coalition partner Puea Pandin outspent them 3-1 (by their own admission) and lost. Meanwhile, Newin’s BJT are well respected coalition partners – need I say more? Seems like the only person from PAD – who were supposed to be principled and against corruption – speaking out about the Dems/BJT corruption is Sondhi. If they were truly principled they’d still be at the airport…
Problem is that corruption is still seen as a moral problem rather than a structural one. It’s not something that any individual can do anything about, this flaw can only be solved by collective democratic agency. An appointed government, installing someone with ‘better’ morals as PM never works, it almost always increases corruption – they’ve had appointed governments (self appointed or otherwise) for most of their modern history… not sure why they keep wanting to repeat past mistakes?
why do you say “A does not do that (attain public office) for the salary involved, which is usually a pittance”
How much do you think those in public office should be paid? Without the facts in front of me I believe MPs and Ministers in Thailand are paid at rates at least commensurate with higher paid employees in public and private industry. And this is more or less in line with the rationale for remuneration of those in parliament in other countries.
I would believe that traditions of corruption keeps rates for other public servants lower than they should be, the police, etc. But these traditions are perpetuated by those higher in the food chain for their own benefit and not under control of the lower ranks.
Anyway, I dispute your thesis that corruption is required to motivate MPs either in Thailand or other countries where this discussion does also occur.
The reasons why corruption occurs is simple greed in an environment where the individuals involved can feel secure that they can escape accountability.
In Thailand, where MPs and Ministers have been selected by people of power with military enforcement and judicial compliance, atrocious behaviour has rarely been brought to account. So the behaviour is “traditional”.
The argument for democracy with regular full franchise elections is that MPs and Ministers are regularly called to account by the people whether they like it or not.
Always they must be aware that they are in “power” temporarily and their tenure is by grace of the people that they must regularly plead for.
Government under this threat does not have much time or scope to engage in underhand activity, it must concentrate on performing to a standard approved by the people.
Maybe this is why democracy is the preferred model for government despite the attraction of feudal hierarchical patronage systems so beloved by those at the peak of the pyramid.
The military in Thailand and the Royalty that they are symbiotic with are the force that allow the unscrupulous to perpetuate the feudal model. They must be removed from interference in the political and business structures of Thailand to allow control of government by the people.
No, Andrew. Your argument is based on a false analogy. Suppose X and Y are adults and enter into a personal relationship voluntarily. Their arrangement has no direct effect on anyone else and its details are therefore none of others’ business. The genders and nationalities of X and Y have no particular bearing on this basic point and neither does the existence or otherwise of transfers of money as part of their arrangement. So far, we agree.
Vote buying is different. Suppose A buys the vote of B to attain public office. A does not do that for the salary involved, which is usually a pittance, but because acquiring public office makes it possible for A to make money through corrupt behaviour. This involves stealing from others by misusing the public procurement and regulatory powers that come with being in government. For the vote buying to be profitable for A the amount of that illegal income has to exceed the cost of the votes. That corruption hurts others, who were not part of the voluntary arrangement between A and B that put A into office. There is a legitimate case for prohibiting the vote-buying transaction between A and B because it leads to the infringement of the rights of others. The more important point is that everyone (except A and possibly B) has an interest in preventing the corrupt behaviour of public officials that makes vote buying profitable.
Considering the above, this all reminds me a lot of what happened with the Theun-Hinboun Dam back in the 1990s. At first the ADB and the developers were adamant that everything was going fine. Then, over time, it became clear, as a result of non-project investigations, that people in the project area, including downstream areas along the Hinboun River and Nam Kading River (lower Theun River), were suffering badly as a result of water being diverted into the Hinboun.
Now what we see happening for the Nam Theun 2 is virtually the same, except the scale of the project impact area is larger, and the reservoir is bigger and therefore more subject to water quality problems. Clearly the NTPC people have a lot of explaining to do, as do the World Bank and the ADB. I wonder if the ‘Panel of Experts’ for the project will have much to say? The PR people working for the project have a lot of work ahead of them!
The Nam Theun 2 dam may well be the most studied dam in the region. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the basic design of the project is fundamentally prone to serious environmental and social impacts. First, NT2 is not just a dam, it is a diversion dam that takes water from the Theun River and sends it down to the Xe Bang Fai River, via a large reservoir. Second, NT2 has a big reservoir, one that was not fully cleared, as recommended, before the project went ahead. Thus, serious water quality issues can be expected in the Xe Bang Fai, and severe hydrological impacts can be foreseen for both the Xe Bang Fai and Theun Rivers.
how about a little perspective….
“(He can still outspend the democrats on any occasion.)”
even before the state froze and confiscated his money Thaksin is/was far from the richest individual/family in or out of Thailand
the Democrat supporters include the Royal family (richer than the next 10 or something) plus most of the bankers, the CP, PTI, etc, etc plus most of the military generals with their legal and illegal businesses
and the “free” use of public military resources on tap for whatever they wabt to do (“under the guise of protecting the monarchy”)
how do you think the PAD was funded in all its glory of weapons, razor wire, vehicles, logistics af all sorts, for how long….
just because Sondhi has hyped Thaksin doesnt mean you should ignore some basic facts
My order is being mailed today and I am reasonably certain the US censors will let it through.
Crisis seems to be misunderstood by those who precipitated it. Abhisit, for example, recently was reported…”As the country walks the path of reconciliation, the Prime Minister underlined the fact that the Government is not ignoring the prevailing disparities and the fact that many provinces have yet to enjoy the prosperity, the pace of development, and the economic opportunity that exist in the city of Bangkok. Likewise, he said, it recognizes that many people have been led to believe that they are disenfranchised and that the parliamentary system somehow does not offer them sufficient representation. He emphasized that he would work hard to dispel this notion and to ensure an equal voice for all.”
Use of phrases and words like “the fact,” and “led to believe” and “dispel this notion” kind of discolor any impression that this leader has an objective overview at hand on Thailand’s real crisis. It becomes easier and easier as time goes on to understand why they are trying to shoulder Thaksin with all the blame. It is simple if one person ‘did it.’
I’m not going to bother with the myth that votebuying is only a myth. It has always existed here, in some form. Indeed, the next election will probably see it at its worst ever.
You can play with stereotypes as much as you like, but it is an inescapable fact that this is the way politics works here. Indeed, it might well be that we should accept it as the Thai way of choosing who gets the largest slice of the cake. (Note, I didn’t say ‘representation’.) Let’s just not hear any more loose farang and self-interested local talk about it being ‘Democracy’. Thai-style democracy perhaps. That way we can figure that it is likely to break down about one week after purchase. But, hey, if the price is right, it’s quite easy to just go out and just buy another one.
The aspirations of people like Thaksin Shinawatra have gone way beyond running third-rate microwave factories. He inevitably has to fund massive election campaigns. And that inevitably means votebuying, as with all the parties. (He can still outspend the democrats on any occasion.) But having realised that other military-capitalist factions can also cheat (with a coup), he is in a real tiswas how to recoup his massive outlay. This is the point at which his total distain for farang NGOs and outside reporters does a complete flip, as he now begins to see them as capable of providing the necessary ‘democratic’ leverage to get his investment portfolio back on track. Well, that’s how he would like it to turn out. And sometimes he seems to be gaining the upper hand. And sometimes, he looks like he is losing his grip. The only thing we can really be sure about is that his residual wealth will be able to cushion him and his family from the turmoil that seems more likely here with every passing day.
As we prepare ourselves for yet more terrorism, he still thinks he is preparing himself for a triumphal return. The man probably doesn’t have the intellect to realize he may well be presiding over a pile of ashes. But hell, there are numerous examples of countries where despots still find it highly lucrative to continue to preside over failed states.
I visited seven downstream Xe Bang Fai River villages (Upper stream: Ban Mahaxai, Ban Pha Nang; Middle stream: Ban Veun Sananh, Ban Kaeng Kasy, Ban Beung Xe; Lower stream: Ban Navang Gnai; and Hinterland: Ban Kham Pae Dong) on May 20-25, 2010.
All the villages we visited along the Xe Bang Fai River had problem of skin diseases after villagers take bath or fish in the Xe Bang Fai River. The Social Development Plan of the company, NTPC, makes it clear that “the water in the areas downstream the power station might not be suitable for human consumption, or even domestic use, during the first years of operation” (SDP Vol.13, Chapter 5: 15). However, villagers along the Xe Bang Fai River did not consistently inform about this risk. NTPC said it is investigating cause of skin diseases; however, there is no emergency support or awareness raising about water contamination of the river to the villagers. I asked NTPC about the result of investigation on June 23, but NTPC simply said they don’t disclose result of investigation.
Many villagers do not have any other choice and need to keep using water from Xe Bang Fai River since boreholes developed by NTPC broken or water from boreholes are not suitable for drinking.
The villagers fishing along the Xe Bang Fai River repeatedly told us that fish catch in the Xe Bang Fai River dramatically decreased due to the higher level of water in the river. Usually villagers can cross the Xe Bang Fai River around this season, late May, but since the water level is 2-3 meter higher than usual, they claimed that they could not use the same fish net as they used to use and river water is muddy and could not see fish.
Hun Sen was elected, and has created greater prosperity and stability in Cambodia than for many decades – Chris Beale
Is this a first? support for Hun Sen! So no-one else could have brought stability? a strong autocrat was needed? Does Cambodia have a legitimate democracy? the opposition has been in exile a lot of the time, murders have occurred, the population not well informed, legitimate maybe but …
And this justifies arresting peasants, of course, who may have had good cause, but doubtful I suppose… The peasants of Thailand had good cause – to bring back their cherished leader! but otherwise known as an autocrat, a dictator, manipulating democracy and sanctioning the killing of peasants (drug users).
I want to raise a point about the non-violence cause discussed by Professor Peter Warr. One is that it took very long time for non-violent cause to gain traction in India, Ghandi first introduced that in mid 1900s protest and turn out wasn’t very successful, not until after World War II that the non-violence concept became more prominent for many popular struggle.
Using non-violence concept is not easy since you cannot simply control every people in the protest, one mishap can cause the whole non-violence claim to collapse. Furthermore the political opposition to the non-violence protest also knew this weakness so it is very easy for the political opposition to stage a set-up to show that the protest was violence. One point to keep in mind that Indian was fighting the British to get their independent while in Thailand it was Thais against Thais, its not very easy to tell who is who like in India case.
The first 2 interviews here IMO were very interesting.
Andrew,
I still find this hard to digest for a number of reasons.
1) Agricultural GDP in Thailand has dropped to below 12% of Thai GDP According to the IMF. Which means that those in Agriculture industries really only have that much influence, as the other graphs also show the dropping of employment in this area, just to back that up.
2) In your last video you showed charts of how much Thaksin contributed to agriculture and it was flat with a slight peak at the end. You said that the agri sector was moving to the private sector so there was less support from the government. If the farmers were so concerned about politics why did they choose Thaksin when he really did nothing for them?
3) In this video, you actually show that the credit dropped off substantially in his era. Abhisit introduced cheap loans and farming stimulus, maybe even spending more than Thaksin on the rural poor in the NE and North.
4) what about the farmers and fishermen in the South? What is so different about the poor in the North and the poor in the south? Why do they choose democrat? I dont think you have really nailed this one, in fact, I think the 4th and 5th videos are actually contradicting each other.
It may be easy for me to take apart your video, so I look forward to you filling in the gaps for me.
Which does also make me wonder why the reds did not take the November offer
September is the month where the old general will retired and will be replaced by a new one, if the Dem don’t go by September then Gen. Prayuth Chan-O-Cha (a hard-line royalist democrat party supporter) be will promoted to the Chief of Army. After Prayuth get the position who knows whether Nov election will be possible, that’s why many of the Red were not too sure about accepting the offer.
This is not a fight for democracy, it is a fight for control.
Democracy doesn’t mean jack of the power is not came from the majority. For example, a teacher is about to let the class choose a representative. 2 candidates were selected, one is very unpopular because of his mundane policy and boring speech, other one is well received for his modern thinking and hip-hop like personality. After the voting the hip-hop student got the land slide majority of the vote. However, the teacher stop short the process and claimed that the hip-hop boy was not suitable for his role and instead pick a 3rd boy who never had to prove himself.
This is my personal experience when I was studying in grade 6 in a traditional Thai school. Now the force that controlling the power in Thailand doesn’t respect democracy, so what do the people have to fight for “first” ? the power or democracy. Should the student fight among themselves to get the hip-hop kid be the representative, or should they go up against the teacher and demand for what they really wanted?
You are talking as if Yongyudh didn’t bribe those state officials in 2007.
Now you are saying he didn’t have to as if you know better than him how to win Thai elections.
There’s has never been a “yellow team” in the elections here and Democrat war chest has always been a lot smaller than TRT.
After the coup some pro-military parties tried to emulate TRT tactics and, reportedly, spent quite a lot but they had no idea how to shop for votes properly. Simply handing out the money, as I said earlier, is probably the least effective way.
Sanoh, who was running with them at the time described them as being at the “kindergarten level”.
What you have to buy is allegiance and loyalty, not a promise, often even unspoken, to tick the correct box on the ballot.
Human relationships are the basis of decision making in partnering and in politics.
Short and long term financial security, physical and mental well-being, approval of peers are all factors in relationships.
It is the relativities and timing that matter, where there is significant disparity and a reasonable balance of other factors at the time then people respond.
In partnering, money, sex, friendship, family environment all play their part. Often money, sex perhaps companionship are immediately assessable and other factors become apparent over time, decisions in haste may be regretted later.
Unfortunately in partnering there is often no formal process for evaluation and re-choice and the informal methods are usually messy.
In politics, money, security, personal and community support and national emotional factors are relevant. Short term money may be interesting if no other benefits are expected. In working democracies there are always some that are cynical and disengaged from the political process. Giving of gifts is discouraged because even though the ballot is secret some politicians in close contests may think the risks are worth the chance of a few extra votes.
In practice it is believed that this activity is more likely to awaken peoples interest in more important issues such as health, education, business, agricultural income than actually blind voting as directed.
It is only when people see no prospect of an MP or government supporting them on a personal, community or national level that vote buying is an interesting option.
In a dictatorship, where the government is not chosen by the people, the MPs and government will act to please the ones that do appoint them and buy peoples votes is they have to.
Democracy means MPs and governments are chosen by and are accountable to the people. The MPs must offer something useful for the people to balance because in a democracy everyone has the opportunity to reassess and choose their representatives on a regular basis.
Democratic governments complain about not having enough time to implement their policies but this is balanced by forcing them to submit to the people’s judgement of their performance. The people decide if the government will be permitted more time or a change is needed.
StanG, be honest please.
You know if it were simply a matter of handing over cash to win votes then the yellow team would win every time (the money they have is something the reds could only dream about).
You also know that ‘vote buying’ is kept a convenient excuse for why the ‘wrong’ team keeps winning – take away that excuse, and what will they be left with?
My guess is they would then say ‘lack of education’, but that’s not as convenient an excuse, because it can be pointed out that they have had plenty of opportunities to improve the education system.
Thailand has very strict laws against “Calling a spade a spade”.
Just ask Suthachai Yimpresert (several days detention at army base, finaly released after going on a hunger strike), Jakrapob Penkair (charged with LM, in exile), Giles Ji Ungpakorn (charged with LM, in exile) & Darunee Charnchoensilpakul (also known as Da Torpedo – 18 years jail after a closed trial)
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Sex, love and vote-buying
Accusing Thaksin of vote buying when he’d got himself into a position where he no longer needed to buy votes to win, because he’d done what western political parties do: build a strong brand and engage people. As we know, in the south many people have no idea why they’re voting for the democrats, apart from tradition, or because the headman says so, or because of loyalty to Chuan (don’t see anyone complaining about that). Vote buying and corruption are made way too much of in order to justify giving people less democracy. The way to eventually rid the country of endemic corruption is to widen participation in the democratic process, not continually erode what little democracy there is. Someone actually said to me they wished they had a system like Chinese have, because it’s a strong government with zero corruption hahahaha.
Of course, worse than his actual vote buying; Thaksin also “bribed” the villagers with “cheap loans” & health care. Hmmm, most political parties around the world win votes because of what they’ve done or can do for the voter, don’t they? Whether it’s tax cuts, health care, better education etc. I think it’s the whole belief in this sufficiency ideology (for the poor, of course, not for those who promote it) that produces these facile arguments.
The last election was rigged against PPP and they still won. Coalition partner Puea Pandin outspent them 3-1 (by their own admission) and lost. Meanwhile, Newin’s BJT are well respected coalition partners – need I say more? Seems like the only person from PAD – who were supposed to be principled and against corruption – speaking out about the Dems/BJT corruption is Sondhi. If they were truly principled they’d still be at the airport…
Problem is that corruption is still seen as a moral problem rather than a structural one. It’s not something that any individual can do anything about, this flaw can only be solved by collective democratic agency. An appointed government, installing someone with ‘better’ morals as PM never works, it almost always increases corruption – they’ve had appointed governments (self appointed or otherwise) for most of their modern history… not sure why they keep wanting to repeat past mistakes?
Sex, love and vote-buying
Peter Warr #20
why do you say “A does not do that (attain public office) for the salary involved, which is usually a pittance”
How much do you think those in public office should be paid? Without the facts in front of me I believe MPs and Ministers in Thailand are paid at rates at least commensurate with higher paid employees in public and private industry. And this is more or less in line with the rationale for remuneration of those in parliament in other countries.
I would believe that traditions of corruption keeps rates for other public servants lower than they should be, the police, etc. But these traditions are perpetuated by those higher in the food chain for their own benefit and not under control of the lower ranks.
Anyway, I dispute your thesis that corruption is required to motivate MPs either in Thailand or other countries where this discussion does also occur.
The reasons why corruption occurs is simple greed in an environment where the individuals involved can feel secure that they can escape accountability.
In Thailand, where MPs and Ministers have been selected by people of power with military enforcement and judicial compliance, atrocious behaviour has rarely been brought to account. So the behaviour is “traditional”.
The argument for democracy with regular full franchise elections is that MPs and Ministers are regularly called to account by the people whether they like it or not.
Always they must be aware that they are in “power” temporarily and their tenure is by grace of the people that they must regularly plead for.
Government under this threat does not have much time or scope to engage in underhand activity, it must concentrate on performing to a standard approved by the people.
Maybe this is why democracy is the preferred model for government despite the attraction of feudal hierarchical patronage systems so beloved by those at the peak of the pyramid.
The military in Thailand and the Royalty that they are symbiotic with are the force that allow the unscrupulous to perpetuate the feudal model. They must be removed from interference in the political and business structures of Thailand to allow control of government by the people.
Sex, love and vote-buying
No, Andrew. Your argument is based on a false analogy. Suppose X and Y are adults and enter into a personal relationship voluntarily. Their arrangement has no direct effect on anyone else and its details are therefore none of others’ business. The genders and nationalities of X and Y have no particular bearing on this basic point and neither does the existence or otherwise of transfers of money as part of their arrangement. So far, we agree.
Vote buying is different. Suppose A buys the vote of B to attain public office. A does not do that for the salary involved, which is usually a pittance, but because acquiring public office makes it possible for A to make money through corrupt behaviour. This involves stealing from others by misusing the public procurement and regulatory powers that come with being in government. For the vote buying to be profitable for A the amount of that illegal income has to exceed the cost of the votes. That corruption hurts others, who were not part of the voluntary arrangement between A and B that put A into office. There is a legitimate case for prohibiting the vote-buying transaction between A and B because it leads to the infringement of the rights of others. The more important point is that everyone (except A and possibly B) has an interest in preventing the corrupt behaviour of public officials that makes vote buying profitable.
Nam Theun 2: what about the Xe Bang Fai?
Considering the above, this all reminds me a lot of what happened with the Theun-Hinboun Dam back in the 1990s. At first the ADB and the developers were adamant that everything was going fine. Then, over time, it became clear, as a result of non-project investigations, that people in the project area, including downstream areas along the Hinboun River and Nam Kading River (lower Theun River), were suffering badly as a result of water being diverted into the Hinboun.
Now what we see happening for the Nam Theun 2 is virtually the same, except the scale of the project impact area is larger, and the reservoir is bigger and therefore more subject to water quality problems. Clearly the NTPC people have a lot of explaining to do, as do the World Bank and the ADB. I wonder if the ‘Panel of Experts’ for the project will have much to say? The PR people working for the project have a lot of work ahead of them!
The Nam Theun 2 dam may well be the most studied dam in the region. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the basic design of the project is fundamentally prone to serious environmental and social impacts. First, NT2 is not just a dam, it is a diversion dam that takes water from the Theun River and sends it down to the Xe Bang Fai River, via a large reservoir. Second, NT2 has a big reservoir, one that was not fully cleared, as recommended, before the project went ahead. Thus, serious water quality issues can be expected in the Xe Bang Fai, and severe hydrological impacts can be foreseen for both the Xe Bang Fai and Theun Rivers.
Sex, love and vote-buying
Fred Korat #
how about a little perspective….
“(He can still outspend the democrats on any occasion.)”
even before the state froze and confiscated his money Thaksin is/was far from the richest individual/family in or out of Thailand
the Democrat supporters include the Royal family (richer than the next 10 or something) plus most of the bankers, the CP, PTI, etc, etc plus most of the military generals with their legal and illegal businesses
and the “free” use of public military resources on tap for whatever they wabt to do (“under the guise of protecting the monarchy”)
how do you think the PAD was funded in all its glory of weapons, razor wire, vehicles, logistics af all sorts, for how long….
just because Sondhi has hyped Thaksin doesnt mean you should ignore some basic facts
Launch of Ji Ungpakorn’s new book
My order is being mailed today and I am reasonably certain the US censors will let it through.
Crisis seems to be misunderstood by those who precipitated it. Abhisit, for example, recently was reported…”As the country walks the path of reconciliation, the Prime Minister underlined the fact that the Government is not ignoring the prevailing disparities and the fact that many provinces have yet to enjoy the prosperity, the pace of development, and the economic opportunity that exist in the city of Bangkok. Likewise, he said, it recognizes that many people have been led to believe that they are disenfranchised and that the parliamentary system somehow does not offer them sufficient representation. He emphasized that he would work hard to dispel this notion and to ensure an equal voice for all.”
Use of phrases and words like “the fact,” and “led to believe” and “dispel this notion” kind of discolor any impression that this leader has an objective overview at hand on Thailand’s real crisis. It becomes easier and easier as time goes on to understand why they are trying to shoulder Thaksin with all the blame. It is simple if one person ‘did it.’
Sex, love and vote-buying
I’m not going to bother with the myth that votebuying is only a myth. It has always existed here, in some form. Indeed, the next election will probably see it at its worst ever.
You can play with stereotypes as much as you like, but it is an inescapable fact that this is the way politics works here. Indeed, it might well be that we should accept it as the Thai way of choosing who gets the largest slice of the cake. (Note, I didn’t say ‘representation’.) Let’s just not hear any more loose farang and self-interested local talk about it being ‘Democracy’. Thai-style democracy perhaps. That way we can figure that it is likely to break down about one week after purchase. But, hey, if the price is right, it’s quite easy to just go out and just buy another one.
The aspirations of people like Thaksin Shinawatra have gone way beyond running third-rate microwave factories. He inevitably has to fund massive election campaigns. And that inevitably means votebuying, as with all the parties. (He can still outspend the democrats on any occasion.) But having realised that other military-capitalist factions can also cheat (with a coup), he is in a real tiswas how to recoup his massive outlay. This is the point at which his total distain for farang NGOs and outside reporters does a complete flip, as he now begins to see them as capable of providing the necessary ‘democratic’ leverage to get his investment portfolio back on track. Well, that’s how he would like it to turn out. And sometimes he seems to be gaining the upper hand. And sometimes, he looks like he is losing his grip. The only thing we can really be sure about is that his residual wealth will be able to cushion him and his family from the turmoil that seems more likely here with every passing day.
As we prepare ourselves for yet more terrorism, he still thinks he is preparing himself for a triumphal return. The man probably doesn’t have the intellect to realize he may well be presiding over a pile of ashes. But hell, there are numerous examples of countries where despots still find it highly lucrative to continue to preside over failed states.
Nam Theun 2: what about the Xe Bang Fai?
I visited seven downstream Xe Bang Fai River villages (Upper stream: Ban Mahaxai, Ban Pha Nang; Middle stream: Ban Veun Sananh, Ban Kaeng Kasy, Ban Beung Xe; Lower stream: Ban Navang Gnai; and Hinterland: Ban Kham Pae Dong) on May 20-25, 2010.
All the villages we visited along the Xe Bang Fai River had problem of skin diseases after villagers take bath or fish in the Xe Bang Fai River. The Social Development Plan of the company, NTPC, makes it clear that “the water in the areas downstream the power station might not be suitable for human consumption, or even domestic use, during the first years of operation” (SDP Vol.13, Chapter 5: 15). However, villagers along the Xe Bang Fai River did not consistently inform about this risk. NTPC said it is investigating cause of skin diseases; however, there is no emergency support or awareness raising about water contamination of the river to the villagers. I asked NTPC about the result of investigation on June 23, but NTPC simply said they don’t disclose result of investigation.
Many villagers do not have any other choice and need to keep using water from Xe Bang Fai River since boreholes developed by NTPC broken or water from boreholes are not suitable for drinking.
The villagers fishing along the Xe Bang Fai River repeatedly told us that fish catch in the Xe Bang Fai River dramatically decreased due to the higher level of water in the river. Usually villagers can cross the Xe Bang Fai River around this season, late May, but since the water level is 2-3 meter higher than usual, they claimed that they could not use the same fish net as they used to use and river water is muddy and could not see fish.
Launch of Ji Ungpakorn’s new book
The cover is part of the Wat Phumin murals from Wat Phumin in Nan Province. Maybe there is some specific significance?
Reds’ fatal flaw: Thailand’s fatal flaw
Hun Sen was elected, and has created greater prosperity and stability in Cambodia than for many decades – Chris Beale
Is this a first? support for Hun Sen! So no-one else could have brought stability? a strong autocrat was needed? Does Cambodia have a legitimate democracy? the opposition has been in exile a lot of the time, murders have occurred, the population not well informed, legitimate maybe but …
And this justifies arresting peasants, of course, who may have had good cause, but doubtful I suppose… The peasants of Thailand had good cause – to bring back their cherished leader! but otherwise known as an autocrat, a dictator, manipulating democracy and sanctioning the killing of peasants (drug users).
Launch of Ji Ungpakorn’s new book
I think this book will be one in taboo book series for Thailand.
Thailand in Crisis – Episode 5
I want to raise a point about the non-violence cause discussed by Professor Peter Warr. One is that it took very long time for non-violent cause to gain traction in India, Ghandi first introduced that in mid 1900s protest and turn out wasn’t very successful, not until after World War II that the non-violence concept became more prominent for many popular struggle.
Using non-violence concept is not easy since you cannot simply control every people in the protest, one mishap can cause the whole non-violence claim to collapse. Furthermore the political opposition to the non-violence protest also knew this weakness so it is very easy for the political opposition to stage a set-up to show that the protest was violence. One point to keep in mind that Indian was fighting the British to get their independent while in Thailand it was Thais against Thais, its not very easy to tell who is who like in India case.
Thailand in Crisis – Episode 5
The first 2 interviews here IMO were very interesting.
Andrew,
I still find this hard to digest for a number of reasons.
1) Agricultural GDP in Thailand has dropped to below 12% of Thai GDP According to the IMF. Which means that those in Agriculture industries really only have that much influence, as the other graphs also show the dropping of employment in this area, just to back that up.
2) In your last video you showed charts of how much Thaksin contributed to agriculture and it was flat with a slight peak at the end. You said that the agri sector was moving to the private sector so there was less support from the government. If the farmers were so concerned about politics why did they choose Thaksin when he really did nothing for them?
3) In this video, you actually show that the credit dropped off substantially in his era. Abhisit introduced cheap loans and farming stimulus, maybe even spending more than Thaksin on the rural poor in the NE and North.
4) what about the farmers and fishermen in the South? What is so different about the poor in the North and the poor in the south? Why do they choose democrat? I dont think you have really nailed this one, in fact, I think the 4th and 5th videos are actually contradicting each other.
It may be easy for me to take apart your video, so I look forward to you filling in the gaps for me.
Thailand in Crisis – Episode 5
Best so far and well balanced in viewpoints too.
Reds’ fatal flaw: Thailand’s fatal flaw
Fisherman – 39
Which does also make me wonder why the reds did not take the November offer
September is the month where the old general will retired and will be replaced by a new one, if the Dem don’t go by September then Gen. Prayuth Chan-O-Cha (a hard-line royalist democrat party supporter) be will promoted to the Chief of Army. After Prayuth get the position who knows whether Nov election will be possible, that’s why many of the Red were not too sure about accepting the offer.
This is not a fight for democracy, it is a fight for control.
Democracy doesn’t mean jack of the power is not came from the majority. For example, a teacher is about to let the class choose a representative. 2 candidates were selected, one is very unpopular because of his mundane policy and boring speech, other one is well received for his modern thinking and hip-hop like personality. After the voting the hip-hop student got the land slide majority of the vote. However, the teacher stop short the process and claimed that the hip-hop boy was not suitable for his role and instead pick a 3rd boy who never had to prove himself.
This is my personal experience when I was studying in grade 6 in a traditional Thai school. Now the force that controlling the power in Thailand doesn’t respect democracy, so what do the people have to fight for “first” ? the power or democracy. Should the student fight among themselves to get the hip-hop kid be the representative, or should they go up against the teacher and demand for what they really wanted?
Thailand in crisis: Episode 4
Nganadeeleg,
You are talking as if Yongyudh didn’t bribe those state officials in 2007.
Now you are saying he didn’t have to as if you know better than him how to win Thai elections.
There’s has never been a “yellow team” in the elections here and Democrat war chest has always been a lot smaller than TRT.
After the coup some pro-military parties tried to emulate TRT tactics and, reportedly, spent quite a lot but they had no idea how to shop for votes properly. Simply handing out the money, as I said earlier, is probably the least effective way.
Sanoh, who was running with them at the time described them as being at the “kindergarten level”.
What you have to buy is allegiance and loyalty, not a promise, often even unspoken, to tick the correct box on the ballot.
Sex, love and vote-buying
mmm… interesting hornets nest…
Human relationships are the basis of decision making in partnering and in politics.
Short and long term financial security, physical and mental well-being, approval of peers are all factors in relationships.
It is the relativities and timing that matter, where there is significant disparity and a reasonable balance of other factors at the time then people respond.
In partnering, money, sex, friendship, family environment all play their part. Often money, sex perhaps companionship are immediately assessable and other factors become apparent over time, decisions in haste may be regretted later.
Unfortunately in partnering there is often no formal process for evaluation and re-choice and the informal methods are usually messy.
In politics, money, security, personal and community support and national emotional factors are relevant. Short term money may be interesting if no other benefits are expected. In working democracies there are always some that are cynical and disengaged from the political process. Giving of gifts is discouraged because even though the ballot is secret some politicians in close contests may think the risks are worth the chance of a few extra votes.
In practice it is believed that this activity is more likely to awaken peoples interest in more important issues such as health, education, business, agricultural income than actually blind voting as directed.
It is only when people see no prospect of an MP or government supporting them on a personal, community or national level that vote buying is an interesting option.
In a dictatorship, where the government is not chosen by the people, the MPs and government will act to please the ones that do appoint them and buy peoples votes is they have to.
Democracy means MPs and governments are chosen by and are accountable to the people. The MPs must offer something useful for the people to balance because in a democracy everyone has the opportunity to reassess and choose their representatives on a regular basis.
Democratic governments complain about not having enough time to implement their policies but this is balanced by forcing them to submit to the people’s judgement of their performance. The people decide if the government will be permitted more time or a change is needed.
Thailand in crisis: Episode 4
StanG, be honest please.
You know if it were simply a matter of handing over cash to win votes then the yellow team would win every time (the money they have is something the reds could only dream about).
You also know that ‘vote buying’ is kept a convenient excuse for why the ‘wrong’ team keeps winning – take away that excuse, and what will they be left with?
My guess is they would then say ‘lack of education’, but that’s not as convenient an excuse, because it can be pointed out that they have had plenty of opportunities to improve the education system.
Sex, love and vote-buying
Thailand has very strict laws against “Calling a spade a spade”.
Just ask Suthachai Yimpresert (several days detention at army base, finaly released after going on a hunger strike), Jakrapob Penkair (charged with LM, in exile), Giles Ji Ungpakorn (charged with LM, in exile) & Darunee Charnchoensilpakul (also known as Da Torpedo – 18 years jail after a closed trial)
Launch of Ji Ungpakorn’s new book
I think you can order it at Amazon also. Check out http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/0956514502/ref=dp_olp_new?ie=UTF8&condition=new
Giles also said in his blog, that you can order from him directly. http://wdpress.blog.co.uk/2010/06/10/my-new-book-on-thai-politics-out-now-8775519/