Comments on: A season for stunts

By: JA

JA — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:48:00 +0000

In the opinion of this non-expert, I think the last two paragraphs are spot on – couldn’t agree more.

Two anecdotes:
One of my in-laws is the hua kenang for his village in the Northeast, so there is vote buying – apparently the going rate is 300 baht per head. I asked him over the weekend, if there was no money involved who would he and most of the village vote for? Without question, the TRT/PPP because not only did they promise improvements for the viallges in his area, they followed through on their promises. The money might be a little incentive to go to the polls, but most would vote PPP anyway. He calls the Democrat party the ‘No Party’ because of what he sees as their contrarian attitude towards all that the PPP/TRT wants to accomplish.

On the other side, my neighbor is a supporter of the PAD and consistently votes Democrat. He is frustrated that the the people in the North and Northeast aren’t ‘educated’ enough to understand how the current government is hurting the country.

Say what you will about the rural poor, but they are not stupid. I think they understand the realities of Thai politics but it’s an abstraction, the corruption doesn’t really impact their daily lives. They are willing to overlook a lot, as along as they believe that their interests are being looked after. What my neighbor and others of similar mindsets are missing is that it’s not enough to ‘educate’ the poor as to the evils of the PPP, they have to convince people outside of Bangkok, through their actions and policy proposals, that their side is good for not only the well being of the country, but for the people as well.

By: Observer

Observer — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:09:57 +0000

Change did come about in 1997 in the form of a popular and progressive constitution that handed power from an unelected elite to the people. In practice it seemed to have some minor flaws that could have been adjusted, but the PAD and their supporters haven’t once pursued the “fix it” route, instead opting for “throw it out”.

It seems clear that their strategy has resulted in three more lost years for the people of Thailand. Nothing the PAD or their ex-junta allies has dome in any small way has addressed the core issues they claim to be obsessed with.

Thailand has weak institutions and poor law enforcement. A group of elite tearing down institutions and breaking laws hardly seems like a cure.

By: ratisee rumruay

ratisee rumruay — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 05:01:37 +0000

Jumlong would do a lot more good applying his vast experience in government service to more constructive purposes, instead of rendering disservice to the country.

By: Srithanonchai

Srithanonchai — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:30:29 +0000

Sounds all quite nice, except that you are asking the PAD to act contrary to its raison d’etre, and its core strategies. They have already rejected all suggestions about entering the parliamentary mainstream (although, of course, they can change their minds), because they think that it is rotten to the core (they have waited since the early 1990s that change would come about by regular means). That’s why they have targeted the very top of the political system and systematically built up their bargaining power. The PAD has come to the point where they hold all the trump cards in their hands–a huge amount of political capital for negotiations. The PAD has taken great risks, and spent huge amount of money, to get into this position. Why then should they leave the scene empty-handed?