If u have an 0n-line petition letter or something like this to plead for urgent Australian Gov’s help for Nicolaides, I , as a Thai, will help sign this petition immediately. The Aus gov will then know that not all Thais agree with this weird law, and many, Thais and Australians alike, feel that he really deserves the help from the Aus gov as soon as possible. Everyone knows how horrible it is to be put in jail in Thailand. Maybe some Australian journalist or Nicolaides’s relative should initiate such a plea. This is really urgent.
Karl, David:
Again thank u so much for yr encouragement. A Thai friend just told me that in Chiangmai, Thailand we have the so-called “Midnight University” whose approach to politics and education is very interesting and innovative. “Midnight Uni” was founded by Aj Nithi Eawsriwong ( I think), and they have their own website. Perhaps I can join them and see if they already have this idea about setting up an alternative political party or movement.
Thanks!!
Given that the Thais have already been actively exercising their right to vote, the crucial issue is not democratization but rather the threat of disenfranchisement.
politics is dirty business; let’s not mince words and pretend otherwise. politics without the rough & tumble is like asking the mechanic to fix-up your 20 year old car without getting grease on his white overall? doesn’t take a highly-educated idiot with a ph.d to know that…
and singapore at that point in time was in dire need of repairs, won’t you agree dr. C? of course, the end does not justify the means. what ever it was, we have come a long way since.
heh, even the australian government apologized to the oborigines recently, didn’t it? let he who is without sin cast the first stone…
let the fruit speak for itself. an evil tree CANNOT bear GOOD FRUIT.
that the average singaporean is living in daily fear is RUBBISH. we had an austrian student-intern 24 years old (studying in frankfurt, germany) who stayed with us for a month (HDB 4 room) and he was simply overwhelmed by what we have – different people groups living in harmony, security and progress (not to mention the bbq sambal stingray we had at bedok hawker center).
by and large, the PAP has indeed kept its word to the electorate – that’s the sole reason why we have returned the present goverment to power for the last 40+ years. can we sincerely say the same for ANY western counterparts? has there been any new initiatives from the west beside legalizing same-sex marriages? and reckless capitalism bringing the whole world down the slippery slope to hell?
we do not need lofty ideals; coming from closet politician(s) out to promote academic ideals from the safety of their adopted countries. here we seek the well-being of every singaporean – not misguided welfarism.
politics is an very important factor in determining what sort of life we lead… the decisions made by a government affect us all, either inirectly or directly
the government decides we will have traffic rules or not, it decides if we will pay tax or not it decides whetehr its oK to kill out neaighbours or not, it decides whether we go to war or not….
and, being human each with our own free will, we will agree on some things and disagree on others. sometimes we will “violently” disagree…. if we are civilised we will strongly express ourselves in words, if we are not then we may come to blows, and bloodshed
depending on our choice of society, the government can introduce rules like… protests are aright, but only if peaceful and unarmed and do not unreasonably affect the right of others
the Thai government did this and even the (trained to violence) military CNS kept these rules in the law and the constitution
so, our government introduced some civilised rules but we wait to see if the rules are enforced… another test of how determined the society is to be civilised!
I don’t think this post requires any “careful response”. The correct response is, what an absurd rant. A rant against “democracy”, a rant against journalists, a rant against the US, a rant against England, a rant against Australians, a rant both for against and for Thailand.
Give me a break — if you want to pose as a thinker about big ideas like democracy and monarchy, what does that have to do with whether Australians know anything or whether the IHT made a mistake about Thaksin’s rank (and who is to say he didn’t secretly promote himself while PM!).
The post does not really merit a response, but here is one anyway:
1. If the Thai system as it is works well, then why have there been so many coups and coup attempts, and why has society been on edge for a coup for three years? And why have coups not led to better overnment?
2. If the Thai system works acceptably well, then why is society on the edge of violent conflict just because no one knows how succession will turn out? Why can one group shut down the airports imperviously causing untold economic damage, setting a good example for any other groups numbering in the thousands which has a beef with the political system or political figures? Some places call that anarchy, and I challenge Mr Commins to argue that anarchy is better than whatever.
3. To defend my friends in academia and the media, for decades up until today they have reported and detailed “how ‘influence’ reaches to the village level in Thailand and how this is manipulated at the top.” Otherwise, Mr Commins, how do YOU know about it — only from thorough personal experience across the whole of Thailand?
(n.b. NM lowers its standards with a post like this)
I am Thai and still live in Bangkok. I know what’s going on and what’s wrong with PAD’s action. I just can’t deny that the-past-month action should have great effect to the monarch in long run. It seems that the monarch institue has put impropriate intervene in the situation which will lead to internationally issue not just local issue any more.
I feel very sorry for the fool of people to shut down the airport and much more trouble in my feeling that government CANNOT DO any thing to end the trouble. Can’t imagine how bad it’s if PAD not come out for another week.
HOWEVER, I think the root of problem are
1. Politician’s behave. Things would not be very serious if they have just little good heart to rule their countries.
2. Thai people has very very lack of responsibility on democracy. Most of them in sub urban area sell their vote for just couple hundred buck. Then, we have bad and greedy politicians in government.
So, to cure this political crisis, not only who will become the Prime Minister but the education of rights and effect of picking up wrong guys is the must also. This process should take long time 5, 7, or even 10 years to educate people to know their rights but it worth in long run.
Whist, the Monarch is still very important for Thai social system. In the trouble time, when we can’t find the way out, the Monarch still be the last answer. it’s like A FATHER oand the SPIRIT of Nation which we should protect at all cost.
This post demands a careful response. To push democracy on a highly stratified society, by trying to elevate the weak in the face of opposition from the strong, is a sure way to cause violence. The US learned this when they arranged for an elected, Shiite majority govenment in Iraq. The dominant minority Sunnis would not tolerate it, and tore the country apart.
The unequal system of patronage/monarchy derives from the animal world to which we belong. To preserve the peace in such a system, you need to feed the top dog first. The only path to stable democracy is to persuade the elite of its benefits. They may need to be pricked at times, but not so hard as to antagonise them. Historically, taming the elite has been easier if they have absorbed the Christian New Testament first, in particular the Sermon on the Mount; but respect for the poor is part of Buddhist teaching as well. The rational argument for democracy is that no other system has been shown to provide a better basis for the peace and prosperity of a very large community. Equal suffrage and equality under the law have an ideological, not a genetic basis like patronage/monarchy in social animals. Legal equality simplifies and strengthens the effectiveness of laws. On the roads in Australia, which car has the right of way is determined by their spatial relationship, not the status of the driver. In undemocratic Thailand, the judges see to it, subject to certain considerations, that a Toyota gives way to a Mercedes: equals are left to play a game of bluff. Such feed-the-top-dog-first judgements are acceptable to people who regard themselves as inferior. The Thai education (subjugation?) system has helped to turn out people with this outlook. Favouring the top dogs can help to keep the peace in the short term, but it builds up resentment against the elite and the legal system which is manifested in sporadic violence and anarchy, especially when the position of top dog is up for grabs.
There have been some spectacularly successful (though by no means peaceful) systems of patronage/monarchy in history. The absolutist regime of Louis XIV is the best example in Europe. But who can forget the king’s words uttered in 1715, with the succession falling to his infant great-grandson, “Après moi le déluge” ? The series of deluges caused by various forms of absolutism ended in Europe only with the establishment of democracy in 1945.
The present unrest in Thailand appears to me to have two linked causes. (i) The refusal of the elite to submit to democracy, as in Iraq. (ii) A succession-related deluge aggravated by the unfortunate fact that a strong leader thrown up by the democratic institution of Parliament is inevitably regarded by vast numbers of Thais as a kind of alternative monarch. So far the unrest is not very serious. This is because Thailand today is a more civilised place than Europe was, even a few decades ago. Thailand will probably revert to its old undemocratic ways for a while at least. The next few years will be miserable for Thais. Who knows whether the elite will yearn for the boom days of Thaksin, or blame democracy and the cowboy banking system of the English-speaking world?
do not despise humble beginnings. let the change begin with me. take personal responsibility and shoulder the weak; pay it forward. be that agent of change where you are!
what we do don’t have to be earth- shaking, just look around you and help those who are in need. pull them out of the pit.
that was the original agenda of thai rak thai? on a national scale…
Also, you may want to check with your stock broker or sign up with one – I am assuming that you do not invest in the Thai stock market, otherwise you will have known about the non-tax.
BTW while you are at it, please check your exalted leader Sondhi tax record.
everyone that feels disenfranchised because there is noone that represents there interests should investigate forming a new party
in most countries I know there are 2 or 3 major parties and several (sometimes many) so-called minor parties
the minor parties are typically environmentally activist “greens” who are more or less strong in many countries, plus there are religious or small business or other more way out types, then there are usually some independents who try to go it alone
often one or more of the minor parties can get themselves in a position of power where they may hold casting votes in parliament where say 2 major parties have very nearly the same numbers… nearly “hung” parliaments give the minors a chance to be influential, negotiating for their own interests
good luck … hope you can lead the away from money politics…
Obama has done something amazing in the US where he was funded through millions of small donations over the Internet, this has broken a pattern of large corporate donations in the US… do the same in Thailand please!
Of course, but trying telling that to any Thai politician. There are almost zero committed politicians out there. PAD has admitted it wants to hobble democracy. PPP/PT/TRT/UDD/DAAD wants to do the same by dishonest means.
I was glad to hear Duncan McCargo on BBC World Service radio this morning saying words to the effect that there are no real honest groupings in Thai politics . Many of those who are tacitly accepting Thaksin here haven’t really had to actually live with the divisive results of his continual dishonesty and deviousness. There are of course Thaksin policies worth keeping, but I don’t think that justifies buying the full package uncritically. But in fairness, the worst thing is that Thaksin’s detractors are totally incapable of getting the message behind his rise to power. They have been handed a 2 year respite and have totally failed to make any policy capital of it to make themselves more acceptable to the less affluent electorate.
As for UDD/DAAD (what the f* are you called, do you actually believe anything concrete?), you will have to be far more honest than just saying Thaksin had a few flaws. But that’s all we ever get from Jakkrapob & co. (I know you read this site.) You are incapable of forming a real political group/party without relying on someone else’s money. Thus, you TOO will always have to dance to the rich man’s tunes.
David (There are a lot of us). I think your questions are rather retorical.
Although , like you, I would prefer a system of government where the constitution was not changed at the whim of each incoming government. It should be as difficult to change as is the Australian constitution i.e. virtually set in stone.
Unfortunatley in Thailand, it is treated like just another piece of legislation. I also agree that the desire to have elections should also be more regulated, than say in 2006, when Thaksin held a general elction just to prove his popularity.
As for the appointing of a government without regard to the desire of most Thais, I think in this case, the problem is the system.
Thai law allows cabinet – in fact it makes it manditory (if I am correct) – to be made up of appointed members. If someone is appoin ted to cabinet they must resign from their electorate. I know appointed cabinet members are quite common in many democracies (inlcuding the US). In the Thai context, where corruption is such a big issue, I think it only encourages more corruption.
Further, I would ask you a question in return : during Thaksin’s time in power, Cabinet, rather than parliment was the source of power and debate (what little of it he would allow). So, what’s the difference between cabinet ruling by decree (as happened so much bewteeen 2001-06) and/or an “appointed” government ?
As for my inlaws and neighbours, as long as they get some of the spoils, these “hi falootin” ideals are just that.
Personally, I think that is a pity, but they are not alone in the “democratic” world in making food on the table, or a cheap visit to the doctor, seem more importnt than what a bunch of “city elites” or local pu-yis get up to.
A fair comment Alvin. History shows that the “form” of government chosen by the people, for the people, etc. is often the result of some revolutionary action. Thailand is yet to have such a revolution.
If you were to discover some magical means by which to poll the masses fairly on their preference for a political system, assuredly they would choose the present monarchy. Such preference could however, soon change and the major issue facing Thailand today is succession, not democracy – an issue the Thais are prevented from openly discussing.
Need democracy? What Thailand needs is the freeing up of democratic processes at the highest levels in this society.
With something like 19 coups since the Depression, isn’t it time that the elite stepped down? It has demonstrated over and over again that it will not accompany (radical?) change, nor dissent, and the all too common backlash against change usually ends up with grassroots activists found floating in klongs , or ‘disappeared’ and the army on the streets of the capital.
Democracy within the ‘patronage’ system cannot develop any further; organisations such as the Assembly of the Poor must become the political parties of the future and their representatives take their rightful places in the parliament, otherwise the wheeling and dealing between those connected to the elites will ensure that democracy will remain ‘hamstrung’ and ineffective.
Hi Joy, the capitalists have a party (actually they have many – they all sit in parliament), the right-wing ‘old elites’ do have an informal party but the middleclass, the workers and farmers do not have parties. They always need somebody else to ‘talk and act’ for them. It is high time that they do have parties and actively participate in politics. Then we can start to talk about democracy, now it is only a facade.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Does Thailand need democracy?
^ Or not honoring the trust the electorate have placed in you.
Nicolaides pleads not guilty
If u have an 0n-line petition letter or something like this to plead for urgent Australian Gov’s help for Nicolaides, I , as a Thai, will help sign this petition immediately. The Aus gov will then know that not all Thais agree with this weird law, and many, Thais and Australians alike, feel that he really deserves the help from the Aus gov as soon as possible. Everyone knows how horrible it is to be put in jail in Thailand. Maybe some Australian journalist or Nicolaides’s relative should initiate such a plea. This is really urgent.
New Mandala in The Age
Karl, David:
Again thank u so much for yr encouragement. A Thai friend just told me that in Chiangmai, Thailand we have the so-called “Midnight University” whose approach to politics and education is very interesting and innovative. “Midnight Uni” was founded by Aj Nithi Eawsriwong ( I think), and they have their own website. Perhaps I can join them and see if they already have this idea about setting up an alternative political party or movement.
Thanks!!
Does Thailand need democracy?
Given that the Thais have already been actively exercising their right to vote, the crucial issue is not democratization but rather the threat of disenfranchisement.
ANU honours Lee Kuan Yew. Why?
politics is dirty business; let’s not mince words and pretend otherwise. politics without the rough & tumble is like asking the mechanic to fix-up your 20 year old car without getting grease on his white overall? doesn’t take a highly-educated idiot with a ph.d to know that…
and singapore at that point in time was in dire need of repairs, won’t you agree dr. C? of course, the end does not justify the means. what ever it was, we have come a long way since.
heh, even the australian government apologized to the oborigines recently, didn’t it? let he who is without sin cast the first stone…
let the fruit speak for itself. an evil tree CANNOT bear GOOD FRUIT.
that the average singaporean is living in daily fear is RUBBISH. we had an austrian student-intern 24 years old (studying in frankfurt, germany) who stayed with us for a month (HDB 4 room) and he was simply overwhelmed by what we have – different people groups living in harmony, security and progress (not to mention the bbq sambal stingray we had at bedok hawker center).
by and large, the PAP has indeed kept its word to the electorate – that’s the sole reason why we have returned the present goverment to power for the last 40+ years. can we sincerely say the same for ANY western counterparts? has there been any new initiatives from the west beside legalizing same-sex marriages? and reckless capitalism bringing the whole world down the slippery slope to hell?
we do not need lofty ideals; coming from closet politician(s) out to promote academic ideals from the safety of their adopted countries. here we seek the well-being of every singaporean – not misguided welfarism.
majullah singapura!
Violence and politics
hmmm… “violence is intrinsic to politics”
this is like saying we are all cavemen
politics is an very important factor in determining what sort of life we lead… the decisions made by a government affect us all, either inirectly or directly
the government decides we will have traffic rules or not, it decides if we will pay tax or not it decides whetehr its oK to kill out neaighbours or not, it decides whether we go to war or not….
and, being human each with our own free will, we will agree on some things and disagree on others. sometimes we will “violently” disagree…. if we are civilised we will strongly express ourselves in words, if we are not then we may come to blows, and bloodshed
depending on our choice of society, the government can introduce rules like… protests are aright, but only if peaceful and unarmed and do not unreasonably affect the right of others
the Thai government did this and even the (trained to violence) military CNS kept these rules in the law and the constitution
so, our government introduced some civilised rules but we wait to see if the rules are enforced… another test of how determined the society is to be civilised!
Does Thailand need democracy?
I don’t think this post requires any “careful response”. The correct response is, what an absurd rant. A rant against “democracy”, a rant against journalists, a rant against the US, a rant against England, a rant against Australians, a rant both for against and for Thailand.
Give me a break — if you want to pose as a thinker about big ideas like democracy and monarchy, what does that have to do with whether Australians know anything or whether the IHT made a mistake about Thaksin’s rank (and who is to say he didn’t secretly promote himself while PM!).
The post does not really merit a response, but here is one anyway:
1. If the Thai system as it is works well, then why have there been so many coups and coup attempts, and why has society been on edge for a coup for three years? And why have coups not led to better overnment?
2. If the Thai system works acceptably well, then why is society on the edge of violent conflict just because no one knows how succession will turn out? Why can one group shut down the airports imperviously causing untold economic damage, setting a good example for any other groups numbering in the thousands which has a beef with the political system or political figures? Some places call that anarchy, and I challenge Mr Commins to argue that anarchy is better than whatever.
3. To defend my friends in academia and the media, for decades up until today they have reported and detailed “how ‘influence’ reaches to the village level in Thailand and how this is manipulated at the top.” Otherwise, Mr Commins, how do YOU know about it — only from thorough personal experience across the whole of Thailand?
(n.b. NM lowers its standards with a post like this)
End of the royal taboo?
I am Thai and still live in Bangkok. I know what’s going on and what’s wrong with PAD’s action. I just can’t deny that the-past-month action should have great effect to the monarch in long run. It seems that the monarch institue has put impropriate intervene in the situation which will lead to internationally issue not just local issue any more.
I feel very sorry for the fool of people to shut down the airport and much more trouble in my feeling that government CANNOT DO any thing to end the trouble. Can’t imagine how bad it’s if PAD not come out for another week.
HOWEVER, I think the root of problem are
1. Politician’s behave. Things would not be very serious if they have just little good heart to rule their countries.
2. Thai people has very very lack of responsibility on democracy. Most of them in sub urban area sell their vote for just couple hundred buck. Then, we have bad and greedy politicians in government.
So, to cure this political crisis, not only who will become the Prime Minister but the education of rights and effect of picking up wrong guys is the must also. This process should take long time 5, 7, or even 10 years to educate people to know their rights but it worth in long run.
Whist, the Monarch is still very important for Thai social system. In the trouble time, when we can’t find the way out, the Monarch still be the last answer. it’s like A FATHER oand the SPIRIT of Nation which we should protect at all cost.
BR for all comments
Does Thailand need democracy?
This post demands a careful response. To push democracy on a highly stratified society, by trying to elevate the weak in the face of opposition from the strong, is a sure way to cause violence. The US learned this when they arranged for an elected, Shiite majority govenment in Iraq. The dominant minority Sunnis would not tolerate it, and tore the country apart.
The unequal system of patronage/monarchy derives from the animal world to which we belong. To preserve the peace in such a system, you need to feed the top dog first. The only path to stable democracy is to persuade the elite of its benefits. They may need to be pricked at times, but not so hard as to antagonise them. Historically, taming the elite has been easier if they have absorbed the Christian New Testament first, in particular the Sermon on the Mount; but respect for the poor is part of Buddhist teaching as well. The rational argument for democracy is that no other system has been shown to provide a better basis for the peace and prosperity of a very large community. Equal suffrage and equality under the law have an ideological, not a genetic basis like patronage/monarchy in social animals. Legal equality simplifies and strengthens the effectiveness of laws. On the roads in Australia, which car has the right of way is determined by their spatial relationship, not the status of the driver. In undemocratic Thailand, the judges see to it, subject to certain considerations, that a Toyota gives way to a Mercedes: equals are left to play a game of bluff. Such feed-the-top-dog-first judgements are acceptable to people who regard themselves as inferior. The Thai education (subjugation?) system has helped to turn out people with this outlook. Favouring the top dogs can help to keep the peace in the short term, but it builds up resentment against the elite and the legal system which is manifested in sporadic violence and anarchy, especially when the position of top dog is up for grabs.
There have been some spectacularly successful (though by no means peaceful) systems of patronage/monarchy in history. The absolutist regime of Louis XIV is the best example in Europe. But who can forget the king’s words uttered in 1715, with the succession falling to his infant great-grandson, “Après moi le déluge” ? The series of deluges caused by various forms of absolutism ended in Europe only with the establishment of democracy in 1945.
The present unrest in Thailand appears to me to have two linked causes. (i) The refusal of the elite to submit to democracy, as in Iraq. (ii) A succession-related deluge aggravated by the unfortunate fact that a strong leader thrown up by the democratic institution of Parliament is inevitably regarded by vast numbers of Thais as a kind of alternative monarch. So far the unrest is not very serious. This is because Thailand today is a more civilised place than Europe was, even a few decades ago. Thailand will probably revert to its old undemocratic ways for a while at least. The next few years will be miserable for Thais. Who knows whether the elite will yearn for the boom days of Thaksin, or blame democracy and the cowboy banking system of the English-speaking world?
New Mandala in The Age
hear hear david,
do not despise humble beginnings. let the change begin with me. take personal responsibility and shoulder the weak; pay it forward. be that agent of change where you are!
what we do don’t have to be earth- shaking, just look around you and help those who are in need. pull them out of the pit.
that was the original agenda of thai rak thai? on a national scale…
PAD’s by-election poison
Stephan, please not sweenwalker comment.
Also, you may want to check with your stock broker or sign up with one – I am assuming that you do not invest in the Thai stock market, otherwise you will have known about the non-tax.
BTW while you are at it, please check your exalted leader Sondhi tax record.
New Mandala in The Age
Karl, Joy…. I agree, go for it
everyone that feels disenfranchised because there is noone that represents there interests should investigate forming a new party
in most countries I know there are 2 or 3 major parties and several (sometimes many) so-called minor parties
the minor parties are typically environmentally activist “greens” who are more or less strong in many countries, plus there are religious or small business or other more way out types, then there are usually some independents who try to go it alone
often one or more of the minor parties can get themselves in a position of power where they may hold casting votes in parliament where say 2 major parties have very nearly the same numbers… nearly “hung” parliaments give the minors a chance to be influential, negotiating for their own interests
good luck … hope you can lead the away from money politics…
Obama has done something amazing in the US where he was funded through millions of small donations over the Internet, this has broken a pattern of large corporate donations in the US… do the same in Thailand please!
Does Thailand need democracy?
Of course, but trying telling that to any Thai politician. There are almost zero committed politicians out there. PAD has admitted it wants to hobble democracy. PPP/PT/TRT/UDD/DAAD wants to do the same by dishonest means.
I was glad to hear Duncan McCargo on BBC World Service radio this morning saying words to the effect that there are no real honest groupings in Thai politics . Many of those who are tacitly accepting Thaksin here haven’t really had to actually live with the divisive results of his continual dishonesty and deviousness. There are of course Thaksin policies worth keeping, but I don’t think that justifies buying the full package uncritically. But in fairness, the worst thing is that Thaksin’s detractors are totally incapable of getting the message behind his rise to power. They have been handed a 2 year respite and have totally failed to make any policy capital of it to make themselves more acceptable to the less affluent electorate.
As for UDD/DAAD (what the f* are you called, do you actually believe anything concrete?), you will have to be far more honest than just saying Thaksin had a few flaws. But that’s all we ever get from Jakkrapob & co. (I know you read this site.) You are incapable of forming a real political group/party without relying on someone else’s money. Thus, you TOO will always have to dance to the rich man’s tunes.
Australian on the PAD stage
David (There are a lot of us). I think your questions are rather retorical.
Although , like you, I would prefer a system of government where the constitution was not changed at the whim of each incoming government. It should be as difficult to change as is the Australian constitution i.e. virtually set in stone.
Unfortunatley in Thailand, it is treated like just another piece of legislation. I also agree that the desire to have elections should also be more regulated, than say in 2006, when Thaksin held a general elction just to prove his popularity.
As for the appointing of a government without regard to the desire of most Thais, I think in this case, the problem is the system.
Thai law allows cabinet – in fact it makes it manditory (if I am correct) – to be made up of appointed members. If someone is appoin ted to cabinet they must resign from their electorate. I know appointed cabinet members are quite common in many democracies (inlcuding the US). In the Thai context, where corruption is such a big issue, I think it only encourages more corruption.
Further, I would ask you a question in return : during Thaksin’s time in power, Cabinet, rather than parliment was the source of power and debate (what little of it he would allow). So, what’s the difference between cabinet ruling by decree (as happened so much bewteeen 2001-06) and/or an “appointed” government ?
As for my inlaws and neighbours, as long as they get some of the spoils, these “hi falootin” ideals are just that.
Personally, I think that is a pity, but they are not alone in the “democratic” world in making food on the table, or a cheap visit to the doctor, seem more importnt than what a bunch of “city elites” or local pu-yis get up to.
Does Thailand need democracy?
A fair comment Alvin. History shows that the “form” of government chosen by the people, for the people, etc. is often the result of some revolutionary action. Thailand is yet to have such a revolution.
If you were to discover some magical means by which to poll the masses fairly on their preference for a political system, assuredly they would choose the present monarchy. Such preference could however, soon change and the major issue facing Thailand today is succession, not democracy – an issue the Thais are prevented from openly discussing.
Does Thailand need democracy?
Need democracy? What Thailand needs is the freeing up of democratic processes at the highest levels in this society.
With something like 19 coups since the Depression, isn’t it time that the elite stepped down? It has demonstrated over and over again that it will not accompany (radical?) change, nor dissent, and the all too common backlash against change usually ends up with grassroots activists found floating in klongs , or ‘disappeared’ and the army on the streets of the capital.
Democracy within the ‘patronage’ system cannot develop any further; organisations such as the Assembly of the Poor must become the political parties of the future and their representatives take their rightful places in the parliament, otherwise the wheeling and dealing between those connected to the elites will ensure that democracy will remain ‘hamstrung’ and ineffective.
New Mandala in The Age
Hi Joy, the capitalists have a party (actually they have many – they all sit in parliament), the right-wing ‘old elites’ do have an informal party but the middleclass, the workers and farmers do not have parties. They always need somebody else to ‘talk and act’ for them. It is high time that they do have parties and actively participate in politics. Then we can start to talk about democracy, now it is only a facade.
Australian on the PAD stage
hi Another David
sorry i took the name first….
meanwhile,
do you and your folks believe Thailand should be governed by a parliament and government that is elected by vote of all the people?
with a consistent democratic Constitution that is not completely rewritten by every new government?
and regular elections to validate and reset the government?
or
do you prefer a government that is somehow appointed without regard to the votes of most Thais?
that changes the Constitution to secure its own power?
and allows elections only when it feels it needs to exit gracefully for non-performance or some other pressures?
Does Thailand need democracy?
Shouldn’t the desirability of democracy in Thailand be a question for the Thai masses – rather than say, the Thai elite, or foreigners – to decide?
Volunteering to fight in Burma
It can’t be too confidential if YOU know about it.