Jeru: P.S. > The government is about to adopt the Thaksin-initiated new bureaucratic system. According to Khun Thippawan, this is supposed to at least make nepotism in personnel administration more visible (So, in the future, I guess, people who buy their positions also have to be qualified, be it as administrators, school directors, associate/full professors, or generals.). However, this will not affect the huge bureaucratic corruption routinely associated with all sorts of procurement at all levels.
Jeru, from my experience, bureaucratic corruption is more serious and widespread than political corruption. However, usually, the blame is put on the politicians–often by those who are themselves corrupt but shielded from public eye. It would be nice if we could trust, for example, that people on the CDA are clean. But…
“There are a lot of debates surrounding forest resources in Laos. An interesting trend is how these issues are coming out in the mass media, thus revealing the ambiguities of state policies and practice.”
Maybe they aren’t “ambiguities” but real conflicts of economic interests of different factions within the government or maybe its just a lack of coordination. The Mass Media coverage is only going to be as good as the information they have access to and they could be getting their numbers from people who either: 1. want to intentionally misrepresent the facts, or 2. simply don’t know. I would place my bet on economic interests driving the whole thing. That complex diagram for Cambodia at New Mandala a little while ago certainly showed in bold relief interlocking family economic interests and their positions of power within government.
Tosakan you are morre naive than you realize. Constitutions per se would NOT by itself prevent a determined disgused or undisguised dictator from usurping powers. The world is awash with democratic constitutions quickly ended as scrap papers by a Marcos, or a Fujimori or a Thaksin in countries with fierce free presses but lots of hungry venal masses.
Taxi Driver said: “…of course getting re-elected does not mean that Thaksin’s alleged crimes are free from investigation. I don’t think anyone in Thailand seriously thought that to be the case.”
It that is what Thaksin thought, then what was the point in him dissolving the parliament ?
Bangkok Pundit wrote at the time that he had 3 choices:
1. Dissolve Parliament
2. Carry On
3. Resign
This current mess could have been avoided if he chose Option 3, but it looks like his plan was to keep having elections to avoid proper investigations.
All the yellow shirts were screaming “Thaksin, get out!”
But how many were screaming “Senate, Impeach!”
How many were organizing for a recall?
How many were reporting Thaksin’s crimes to the corruption commission or the ombudsman or the numerous other bodies that were available to us under the 97 Constitution?
And what about the worthless news media? How many investigative reports did they do to educate the masses?
If Thai history has taught us anything it is that dictators will keep coming, regardless if they are from the military or the political pool, but if the constitutional institutions and the free press that keep potential dictators in check are not utilized, then constitutions and coups will continue to come and go.
ThaiDude, we can’t turn back the clock, but we don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past. The next test for us is the referendum. Will a ‘yes’ vote or a ‘no’ vote deliver a better long-term outcome for the development democracy & sanctity of the law and constitution in Thailand? We have all indeed collectively arrived at a difficult crossroads.
Whoops. The reasoning above might not be clear. I bet if you compared city dwellers with rural dwellers, city dwellers are a lot more fossil fuel dependent, because they ***need an automobile to go literally anywhere***. Even I, a committed pedestrian, would buy a car rather than brave the chicken poop puddles in Klong Toey market on the sidewalk to the subway station, or no sidewalks, or motorcycle taxi guys on sidewalks, carrying a child, for instance, or Morchit Bus Station, the only way back to the provinces for those without a car. In the provinces putting around on a small motorcycle is a national past time that makes life in a rural place like Chiang Rai a lot more pleasant than Bangkok, for instance.
Thailand already has the solution to its energy problems and its not becoming a Detroit for Southeast Asia or some token nuclear capability.
It’s relocating what already works out in Bangkok to less congested rural locations where the quality of life is a lot better and the stimulation of the local economy would do a lot of good for rural folk. At the university that I worked at in rural Thailand I think the mixture of rural and city kids was one of the most productive and healthy things I’ve seen.
I know the Sufficiency Economy idea probably doesn’t include this idea of decentralisation so I’m not going to call it “Sufficiency Economy” but it seems like something that it should include.
Srithanonchai if what you said in #45 is predominantly true, and you seem to express a certain glee that Thai corruption could be already endemic (to give credence to Thaksin’s declaration that ‘corruption is normal’), then it becomes more urgent that elected leaders must be seen as embodying integrity cap-to-toe. And elected leaders and prominent ministers who break their contract with the electorate by their corruption must be seen as being judicially punished without mercy! Otherwise the cycle of corruption will indeed poison the whole Kingdom to a moral rot of unberable stench.
In fact, and you may understand, the right of the King on House dissolution is not true…He acts / MUST approve it after the premier suggests.
Of course we cannot deny that the coup is unlawful.
It’s OK for denouncing and opposing it. There are so many ways too to show opinion.
But if we cannot turn back, we should have other choice.
IF we could turn back really, i mean, if we can make a wish…
Thaksin was still there, and also the demonstration.
I’d like to see what would happen eventually….
But sorry, it’s just a dream…however you could make this kind of ‘alternative history’.
After reports that he used a trip to Europe as an opportunity to visit his wife, who is a Thai ambassador to an European country, Dr. Chirmsak is now in the news again for opposing the inclusion of Buddhism as state religion. Can anyone here enlighten me if that particular trip was morally correct or opportunistic in nature?
Yeah, I saw that too, when it appeard in the breaking news of the nation. I was gonna send it to my friends, but then I thought it’s just all hot air. It’s a big step from producing tuk tuks to nuclear reactors and bombs.
On the other side with the help of the chinese, it could become possible. I am sure that Thailand because if its immense inferiority complex likes to show all the world what it ‘can or could’ do. Peaceful Buddhists, yeah my ass. Unpredictable dangerous kids is more like it.
Thank you very much for this link. It makes my day.
I think of Leach’s work continually when reading historical sources (c. 1250-1350) a time when Mongol influence in mainland Southeast Asia was paramount and everything was in a flux. For example, Luce’s two papers from the late 1950s extracting from the Yuan Shi.
The influence of cultural contact on social organisation seems to difficult difficult to prove though.
ThaiDude #14: of course getting re-elected does not mean that Thaksin’s alleged crimes are free from investigation. I don’t think anyone in Thailand seriously thought that to be the case. The issue was rather that it was difficult to have an independent investigation into Thaksin’s alleged wrongdoings, because Thaksin manipulated the system as far as he could to protect his own skin.
The yellowshirts, and many on this blogsite such as Jeru/Vichai, Ngarn, etc. supported the coup because they saw no other way of getting rid of Thaksin (not electorally, and not via the judicial process). I share their concern that Thaksin was corrupt, but I disagree with the method of his removal.
By enthusiastically inviting the military back in, the yellowshirts have not only replaced one corrupt regime for another, but in fact replaced a regime that could have been voted out electorally, or could have been impeached after an investigation, with another regime that cold not be voted out, or impeached, and one which has a much worse track record for corruption, human rights abuses, and an undemocratic tradition.
It is absurd to believe that a coup d’etat can promote democracy. One only has to look at the CNS’s efforts with the new draft constitution to see the evidence that the ‘restarted’ democracy we’re about to be given is a clayton’s democracy. It is equally short-sighted to cheer the coup because the coup leaders were ‘khon dee’. Khon dee are not necessarily competent leaders, nor do we have a say in who succeeds these nice people when they retire. And I challenge anyone to justifywhy Thailand deserves a quasi democracy rather than a full-fledged one.
The yellowshirts should have fought for the rule of law (in fact this is what HMK argued for as well initially), but instead they supported an illegal coup that took away their only source of power. It showed once again that the Thai constitution is not worth the paper its written on, because even the people for whom it was supposedly written for don’t treasure it (or, to use adopt an elitist viewpoint, the yellowshirts were too ignorant to understand the implications what they were cheering on!).
The constitution of 1997 does not specify any conditions based on which the House might be dissolved. In fact, it is the King who has the sole right to dissolve it.
I can’t answer on behalf of Dr Chirmsak or what he really thinks about when he decided to involve with this drafting process. Someone will have to do it.
But the news originally posted by the Nation (and Andrew in this website) suggests that he walkout showing disagreement with some details of the CDC draft.
Now I would think that if the CDC wants to have this part about the Senate included in the draft, perhaps it may allows “someone” who are closely related to the Janta to take control the Senate in the future. This could happen.
Anyone has more information please share with us. Thanks.
Jeru: Whether or not Thaksin should worry is of no concern to me. Generally speaking, “people of integrity” have little space to stay in Thailand, be it at the national, provincial, or district levels. Or where will integrity lead you to if you happened to be a civil servant in the ministries of interior, public health, education, communication, agriculture…?
There still has been very controversial on the house dissolution by Thaksin in March 2006. According to his speech, likely, the election is a kind of ‘personal approval’, which likely means that he would be free from any review if he wins.
Some critics argue that even according to the Constitution of 1997, this kind of ‘approval ‘is unconstitutional. The house dissolution should be the premier’s right when parliamentary trouble occurs…it’s all about parliamentary affair. Some said this could be seen as the abuse of democratic spirit of the Constitution, the first time in recent history of Thai parliamentary history.
But, according to Thaksin, election or voting was the resolution for all he had got from demonstrations.
What did he really mean? Did he mean that when he won, all opposition or demonstration should stop?
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
Jeru: P.S. > The government is about to adopt the Thaksin-initiated new bureaucratic system. According to Khun Thippawan, this is supposed to at least make nepotism in personnel administration more visible (So, in the future, I guess, people who buy their positions also have to be qualified, be it as administrators, school directors, associate/full professors, or generals.). However, this will not affect the huge bureaucratic corruption routinely associated with all sorts of procurement at all levels.
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
Jeru, from my experience, bureaucratic corruption is more serious and widespread than political corruption. However, usually, the blame is put on the politicians–often by those who are themselves corrupt but shielded from public eye. It would be nice if we could trust, for example, that people on the CDA are clean. But…
If you go down to the woods today …
“There are a lot of debates surrounding forest resources in Laos. An interesting trend is how these issues are coming out in the mass media, thus revealing the ambiguities of state policies and practice.”
Maybe they aren’t “ambiguities” but real conflicts of economic interests of different factions within the government or maybe its just a lack of coordination. The Mass Media coverage is only going to be as good as the information they have access to and they could be getting their numbers from people who either: 1. want to intentionally misrepresent the facts, or 2. simply don’t know. I would place my bet on economic interests driving the whole thing. That complex diagram for Cambodia at New Mandala a little while ago certainly showed in bold relief interlocking family economic interests and their positions of power within government.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
Tosakan you are morre naive than you realize. Constitutions per se would NOT by itself prevent a determined disgused or undisguised dictator from usurping powers. The world is awash with democratic constitutions quickly ended as scrap papers by a Marcos, or a Fujimori or a Thaksin in countries with fierce free presses but lots of hungry venal masses.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
Taxi Driver said: “…of course getting re-elected does not mean that Thaksin’s alleged crimes are free from investigation. I don’t think anyone in Thailand seriously thought that to be the case.”
It that is what Thaksin thought, then what was the point in him dissolving the parliament ?
Bangkok Pundit wrote at the time that he had 3 choices:
1. Dissolve Parliament
2. Carry On
3. Resign
This current mess could have been avoided if he chose Option 3, but it looks like his plan was to keep having elections to avoid proper investigations.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
Taxi Driver-
I agree with you, of course.
All the yellow shirts were screaming “Thaksin, get out!”
But how many were screaming “Senate, Impeach!”
How many were organizing for a recall?
How many were reporting Thaksin’s crimes to the corruption commission or the ombudsman or the numerous other bodies that were available to us under the 97 Constitution?
And what about the worthless news media? How many investigative reports did they do to educate the masses?
If Thai history has taught us anything it is that dictators will keep coming, regardless if they are from the military or the political pool, but if the constitutional institutions and the free press that keep potential dictators in check are not utilized, then constitutions and coups will continue to come and go.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
ThaiDude, we can’t turn back the clock, but we don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the past. The next test for us is the referendum. Will a ‘yes’ vote or a ‘no’ vote deliver a better long-term outcome for the development democracy & sanctity of the law and constitution in Thailand? We have all indeed collectively arrived at a difficult crossroads.
Nuclear sufficiency
Whoops. The reasoning above might not be clear. I bet if you compared city dwellers with rural dwellers, city dwellers are a lot more fossil fuel dependent, because they ***need an automobile to go literally anywhere***. Even I, a committed pedestrian, would buy a car rather than brave the chicken poop puddles in Klong Toey market on the sidewalk to the subway station, or no sidewalks, or motorcycle taxi guys on sidewalks, carrying a child, for instance, or Morchit Bus Station, the only way back to the provinces for those without a car. In the provinces putting around on a small motorcycle is a national past time that makes life in a rural place like Chiang Rai a lot more pleasant than Bangkok, for instance.
Nuclear sufficiency
Thailand already has the solution to its energy problems and its not becoming a Detroit for Southeast Asia or some token nuclear capability.
It’s relocating what already works out in Bangkok to less congested rural locations where the quality of life is a lot better and the stimulation of the local economy would do a lot of good for rural folk. At the university that I worked at in rural Thailand I think the mixture of rural and city kids was one of the most productive and healthy things I’ve seen.
I know the Sufficiency Economy idea probably doesn’t include this idea of decentralisation so I’m not going to call it “Sufficiency Economy” but it seems like something that it should include.
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
Srithanonchai if what you said in #45 is predominantly true, and you seem to express a certain glee that Thai corruption could be already endemic (to give credence to Thaksin’s declaration that ‘corruption is normal’), then it becomes more urgent that elected leaders must be seen as embodying integrity cap-to-toe. And elected leaders and prominent ministers who break their contract with the electorate by their corruption must be seen as being judicially punished without mercy! Otherwise the cycle of corruption will indeed poison the whole Kingdom to a moral rot of unberable stench.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
Taxi Driver
In fact, and you may understand, the right of the King on House dissolution is not true…He acts / MUST approve it after the premier suggests.
Of course we cannot deny that the coup is unlawful.
It’s OK for denouncing and opposing it. There are so many ways too to show opinion.
But if we cannot turn back, we should have other choice.
IF we could turn back really, i mean, if we can make a wish…
Thaksin was still there, and also the demonstration.
I’d like to see what would happen eventually….
But sorry, it’s just a dream…however you could make this kind of ‘alternative history’.
Does Thailand need a senate?
р╕Фр╕▓р╕зр╕Щр╣Мр╣Вр╕лр╕ер╕Ф р╕Др╕╣р╣Ир╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Кр╕Щ р╣Вр╕лр╕зр╕Хр╕ер╣Йр╕бр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Шр╕гр╕гр╕бр╕Щр╕╣р╕Нр╕Др╕Ур╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕▓р╕г
(people-guide-book.pdf, 1MB)
http://www.wevoteno.net/web/archives/32
Does Thailand need a senate?
After reports that he used a trip to Europe as an opportunity to visit his wife, who is a Thai ambassador to an European country, Dr. Chirmsak is now in the news again for opposing the inclusion of Buddhism as state religion. Can anyone here enlighten me if that particular trip was morally correct or opportunistic in nature?
Nuclear sufficiency
Yeah, I saw that too, when it appeard in the breaking news of the nation. I was gonna send it to my friends, but then I thought it’s just all hot air. It’s a big step from producing tuk tuks to nuclear reactors and bombs.
On the other side with the help of the chinese, it could become possible. I am sure that Thailand because if its immense inferiority complex likes to show all the world what it ‘can or could’ do. Peaceful Buddhists, yeah my ass. Unpredictable dangerous kids is more like it.
Leach revisited
Thank you very much for this link. It makes my day.
I think of Leach’s work continually when reading historical sources (c. 1250-1350) a time when Mongol influence in mainland Southeast Asia was paramount and everything was in a flux. For example, Luce’s two papers from the late 1950s extracting from the Yuan Shi.
The influence of cultural contact on social organisation seems to difficult difficult to prove though.
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
ThaiDude #14: of course getting re-elected does not mean that Thaksin’s alleged crimes are free from investigation. I don’t think anyone in Thailand seriously thought that to be the case. The issue was rather that it was difficult to have an independent investigation into Thaksin’s alleged wrongdoings, because Thaksin manipulated the system as far as he could to protect his own skin.
The yellowshirts, and many on this blogsite such as Jeru/Vichai, Ngarn, etc. supported the coup because they saw no other way of getting rid of Thaksin (not electorally, and not via the judicial process). I share their concern that Thaksin was corrupt, but I disagree with the method of his removal.
By enthusiastically inviting the military back in, the yellowshirts have not only replaced one corrupt regime for another, but in fact replaced a regime that could have been voted out electorally, or could have been impeached after an investigation, with another regime that cold not be voted out, or impeached, and one which has a much worse track record for corruption, human rights abuses, and an undemocratic tradition.
It is absurd to believe that a coup d’etat can promote democracy. One only has to look at the CNS’s efforts with the new draft constitution to see the evidence that the ‘restarted’ democracy we’re about to be given is a clayton’s democracy. It is equally short-sighted to cheer the coup because the coup leaders were ‘khon dee’. Khon dee are not necessarily competent leaders, nor do we have a say in who succeeds these nice people when they retire. And I challenge anyone to justifywhy Thailand deserves a quasi democracy rather than a full-fledged one.
The yellowshirts should have fought for the rule of law (in fact this is what HMK argued for as well initially), but instead they supported an illegal coup that took away their only source of power. It showed once again that the Thai constitution is not worth the paper its written on, because even the people for whom it was supposedly written for don’t treasure it (or, to use adopt an elitist viewpoint, the yellowshirts were too ignorant to understand the implications what they were cheering on!).
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
The constitution of 1997 does not specify any conditions based on which the House might be dissolved. In fact, it is the King who has the sole right to dissolve it.
Does Thailand need a senate?
Dear Obbserver,
I can’t answer on behalf of Dr Chirmsak or what he really thinks about when he decided to involve with this drafting process. Someone will have to do it.
But the news originally posted by the Nation (and Andrew in this website) suggests that he walkout showing disagreement with some details of the CDC draft.
Now I would think that if the CDC wants to have this part about the Senate included in the draft, perhaps it may allows “someone” who are closely related to the Janta to take control the Senate in the future. This could happen.
Anyone has more information please share with us. Thanks.
Will rural voters be “confused to death”?
Jeru: Whether or not Thaksin should worry is of no concern to me. Generally speaking, “people of integrity” have little space to stay in Thailand, be it at the national, provincial, or district levels. Or where will integrity lead you to if you happened to be a civil servant in the ministries of interior, public health, education, communication, agriculture…?
Mapping the post-coup academic landscape
There still has been very controversial on the house dissolution by Thaksin in March 2006. According to his speech, likely, the election is a kind of ‘personal approval’, which likely means that he would be free from any review if he wins.
Some critics argue that even according to the Constitution of 1997, this kind of ‘approval ‘is unconstitutional. The house dissolution should be the premier’s right when parliamentary trouble occurs…it’s all about parliamentary affair. Some said this could be seen as the abuse of democratic spirit of the Constitution, the first time in recent history of Thai parliamentary history.
But, according to Thaksin, election or voting was the resolution for all he had got from demonstrations.
What did he really mean? Did he mean that when he won, all opposition or demonstration should stop?