The alternative is the wishy-washy suggestion to teach “democracy” in classes, family and so on. But whose democracy is to be taught? And why should this version of democracy be superior to the electoral democracy that the ignorant rural savages and workers have voted for a number of times now?

Remember when the NGO leaders called on their “little people” to join them in PAD demonstrations and were met with incredulity?

Maybe if the conservatives in all arenas, including NGOs and the “people’s sector,” let electoral politics work itself out things might look better? But they won’t do that. Rather they’ll line up to support the sufficiency nonsense and the feudal detritus.

I am very much struck by this statement and such firm faith in representative democracy. My opinion is that making electorial politics the sole channel for resolving conflicts and differences equates accepting the impasse, the vicious circle of “kan mueng nam nao” (polluted politics?) that has characterised Thai politics for a long time. Election after election, it is this parliamentary (macho –kindly follow the news of Karun Hosakul and Somkiat Pongpaiboon’s recent fight) politics that stands firm to protect the interests of the elite (of coures with different faces) and the aspiring (big money/mega-project addicts) middle class politicians.

Let’s not be naive by placeing too much faith in representative (of whose interest?) democracy, especially when vote buying and politicians’ selling themselves for money every election seasons are still the reality of Thai democracy. So long as electoral politics operates according to and under the dictates of capitalist democracy, I cannot be convinced to leave problems and conflicts to be resolved by electoral means.

Lessons for democracy can also be taught and nutured at home, in your communities, in some classrooms, and most importantly in protest politics, when your rights and livelihoods encounter threats and insecuirty imposed by governments. People’s politics should not be overlooked.

http://www.thaienews.blogspot.com/

The original idea was that human shit is eaten by pigs, and a portion of the chicken/pig shit would go directly into the fish pond. The shit would either be eaten directly by the fish or would boost plankton growth in the pond. This would dramatically increase the pond’s fish population, without having to buy store bought fish food. The farmers eat the fish, sell any excess to the market, and the shit goes back to the pigs. Or so the self-sufficiency theory goes.

The problem is that pigs passively carry some variants of influenza (ไข้หวัด – the flu). And chickens passively carry some variants of influenza. And humans passively carry some variants of influenza. Shit in general carries the influenza of the host species. But when shit from one species mixes up with living beings of another species, there is a much greater chance of a cross infection. What is endemic and passively carried by one species can wipe out another species. To make matters worse, when you mix up multiple species and multiple types of shit, the influenza mutates much more easily, since they can borrow chunks of DNA from their relative variants.

This isn’t advanced science – you don’t need to be a genius in biology like Princess Chulabhorn to understand it. Even high school kids are taught this stuff these days.

The result of all of this shit is new virulent types of bird flu and the risk that 1) migratory birds can pass it on to countries thousands of kilometers away, 2) birds can pass it on to humans, and 3) humans can catch it from other humans. 1) and 2) have already happened in Thailand. If 2) occurs, millions will die worldwide. Mortality rates of 50-80%. Last time the world had a big influenza epidemic, about 100 million people died. And that was before integrated farming and international air travel. Scares the shit out of me.

(excuse me for the language used in this post)

The junta has taken some steps to demonize Thaksin’s economic policies by calling for the use of the “sufficiency economy,” a philosophy created by the king that calls for moderation and stability. Although this initially worried foreign investors, many now see it simply as an effort to re-brand many of Thaksin’s initiatives.

Sufficiency economy is just rhetoric which is ironic as such rhetoric was meant to be done away with along with the evils of the Thaksin regime.