New Mandala

59 responses so far ↓

• 1 nganadeeleg // Nov 28, 2008 at 9:32 am

  Not too bad, but for balance perhaps you could have gone into the main priorities/objectives of the government and how this was a major factor in why PAD re-activated some time after the elections.

  btw, Whilst I do not support the actions of the PAD and I particularly dislike Sondhi’s rhetoric, I can understand the frustration felt by many of the PAD rank and file at the governments unwavering singleminded efforts to whitewash Thaksin.

  Likewise, I can understand the frustration felt by the PPP supporters at the way PAD has been allowed to get away with being unlawful.

  What’s needed to alleviate the tension is for the PAD to acknowledge the rural masses right to an equal vote, and at the same time the rural masses need to understand that right comes with a responsibilty to not continually reward corrupt political practices.

  The rural masses have an overwhelming electoral superiority – I still think it is in their power to end this mess, but only if they become more discerning in their electoral choices and acknowledge the many legitimate concerns of the PAD.

• 2 nganadeeleg // Nov 28, 2008 at 9:57 am

  addendum: The PAD also need to acknowledge the aspirations of the poor masses.

  But what’s logic got to do with any of this, when greed, fear and ignorance are easier substitutes?????

• 3 amberwaves // Nov 28, 2008 at 10:57 am

  nganadeeleg-

  And the fuss the PAD kicked up over Preah Vihear — also an appeal to people’s better instincts?

  If greed is what Thaksin about, fear (the “sky” is falling) and ignorance (we have only plastic clappers, we are totally non-violent, guns?- I see no guns, the media is unfair to us, only ASTV tells the truth) is what the PAD is about, yes?

• 4 Joy // Nov 28, 2008 at 11:28 am

  I was about to write something but I when I saw ‘nganadeeleg’s posts above, i realize that most of what I want to say have already been put forward impressively by her (or him?). .. so I will just add a bit more.. it would be great if u elaborate more and put more stress on this current government’s close link with Thaksin, and that it is perhaps not that loyal to democratic principles. Of course, the PAD leaders are so wrong in pursuing their political goals this way. Those leaders have been following contemptuous political strategies , using ‘higher’ institutions and ideals (e.g non-violence) to mask self-serving pursuits shamelessly. Nevertheless, a bit more emphasis on Taksin’s faults and some (or many?) of the Red-shirts’ blind worshipping of him would be nice. I know I will probably get a lot of flak from those who claim that there’s no other way to fight against the PAD but to join force with the Red Shirts. I beg to differ here. I think there are still a lot of Thais who dislike Taksin and refuse to go along with PAD’s craze for authoritarianism. Of course there’s nothing wrong with being Taksin’s fan– people have every right to choose their own leader(s), but don’t impose yr belief or ideology on others and label those who disagree with u as being pro-PAD, royalist or pro-military. Many foreigners perhaps feel that Thai people are indifferent to what’s going on in our country as long as it doesn’t affect their lives or money, this maybe true with some Thais but certainly CANNOT apply to all Thais.. Please be a bit be careful of branding all Thais as indifferent, passive and couldn’t care less abt the plight of the underdog, minorities, or disadvantaged groups… Well, I know no one says this here and Andrew Walker didn’t say anything like this in his article, I can just can’t help mentioning this here because I ‘ve seen it somewhere else and i think this stereotype of Thai people being passive and indifferent should be destabilized.. Of course, being a ’stereotype’ does not mean it has nothing to do with reality, but it’s dangerous when it’s use to judge All Thais. ( I don’t deny that many Thais are now very violent, but I will not allow this stereotype of Thai being violent to be imposed on me and others who are not).

• 5 Ralph Kramden // Nov 28, 2008 at 11:58 am

  The gap in your analysis – and I realise it is just a newspaper opinion piece – is to explain why PAD can do what they are doing with apparent impunity. It is evident that they continue to be supported in the highest places. You hint at that, but with police, army, navy and air force apparently refusing to act against an illegal occupation of numerous sites, the implication is clear.

• 6 nganadeeleg // Nov 28, 2008 at 1:16 pm

  Amber Waves: I agree the PAD actions regarding Preah Vihear were disgraceful, but again, I can understand why the topic was taken up – not very smart of the government to have Thaksin’s lawyer negotiating the deal at the same time as the master is doing business deals with them.

  I don’t intend to re-enter the fray and be dragged into picking sides – IMO there is much at fault on both (all) sides, but perhaps this crisis is a necessary step in bringing about a better Thailand for all Thai’s and in future there will be more compassion, tolerance & compromise.

  Joy: Thanks

  IMO, even with third hands and invisible forces, the PAD has no chance of winning in the long run – I just hope that their inevitable demise does not mean that a Thaksin is as good as it gets.

• 7 HC lau // Nov 28, 2008 at 2:01 pm

  Nga,

  Disagree with everything that the PAD and its backers do. The PAD is simply a tool (pack of dogs) being used by people behind the scene. The target is not achieving democracy, it is getting rid of Thaksin.

  The route taken is to impose itself on the majority of Thais. It is sad to see, in this day and age, that the feudal lords still have so much power in Thailand.

  By the way, the people behind the street level PAD do not really care who or how many get hurt, they are always insulated from the damage, unless there is a real revolution.

  The rich stay rich the poor stay poor and every now and then a rich may go bankrupt and a poor may luck out and become rich.

  p.s. also a victim of PAD actions

• 8 Bill Robinson // Nov 28, 2008 at 2:12 pm

  I am a long term resident of T,Land.,in Isarn.No doubt Thaksin is corrupt, but corruption is endemic here,. Many on the P.A.D. are probably corrupt.This idiocy is about power. The people in P.A.D., historically have run the country, politically and economically from time immemorial.Now, they have lost their political power, and they are furious. Who are they? .They are Chinese Thais, who control over 90% of the non-agricultural economy, who detest and loath Isarn people, and have repressed them for years. They see Isarn people as having no intelligence, not worthy of being allowed to vote. They also see them as cannon fodder for industry, to be used and abused to advance their own wealth.Why do Isarn people love Thaksin?. Very simply, he was the first P.M. ever to seriously improve the lives of Isarn. Prior to Thaksin,the ruling elite in Bkk. ,refused to help the poor, peasant farmers, happy to ignore them.Thaksin did so much for them, like ,the village loan scheme, which angered the Chinese-Thai LOAN SHARKS, who were instantly wiped out of business, he built bitumen roads,set up the B30 health scheme, so that people who had never been able to afford to go a doctor, now could, saving so many lives . I could go on ,suffice to say Isarn people will forever remain indebted to Thaksin and any party he endorses, will automatically, become the Government of the day.This is why the P.A.D. hate democracy.And racially, the darker skin of Isarn

• 9 nganadeeleg // Nov 28, 2008 at 2:26 pm

  “suffice to say Isarn people will forever remain indebted to Thaksin and any party he endorses”

  Looks like decades of fun – just what the country needs – another ‘He who can do no wrong’ father figure.

• 10 Joy // Nov 28, 2008 at 2:42 pm

  I’m Thai.Well, it’s fine if Isaan people choose Taskin and if next time he becomes a PM through democractic means, I will certainly accept the result ( in fact, this time I accept the legitimacy of the current gov as well although I will not refrain from pointing out its flaws or jump in to cheer it alongside the Red shirts)..Bill Robinson, you raise good points about the Chinese in Thailand, but u also run the risk of labelling all Chinese as being greedy and self-serving.. Your representation of the Chinese bears so much resemblance to the way Pira Sudham depicts the Chinese in his fiction.. and I find this somewhat simplistic and overgeneralizing.. and not (adequately)taking into account the history of opression that early Chinese immigrants suffered from the Thai ruling class i.e. the explicit anti-Chinese policies endorsed in the early Bangkok era. Somehow this reminds me of the antagonism between the Chinese-Indonesians and the ‘indigenous’ Indonesians… I hope we stop condoning racial stereotypes and seek friendship,compromise and negotiation between people from different races .. Of course right now, the Chinese in Thailand occupy a relative high social and economic status, and we cannot disregard this unequal power relations between Isaan people and rich Chinese. This is certainly something that the government needs to address–allowing more income distribution and equal opportunities etc. Still I hope no one stirs the hatred between local Issarn people and urban Chinese until it could lead to tragedy like the one took place in Indonesia years ago.

• 11 HC lau // Nov 28, 2008 at 3:58 pm

  Totally agree with Bill Robinson. Thaksin and party winning election after election has nothing to do with vote buying but everything to do with “doing something for people”

  Corruption?? Please name me one member of the political leadership that is not corrupt. name one member of the upper echelon of the police or military that is not corrupt. If you do, please explain how an uncorrupt police / military / politician can afford the palacial homes, children overseas education etc on their income. (Thaksin was pol lt col)

  Nganadeeleg hasn’t got a leg to stand on, Nobody here has said Thaksin did no wrong (we leave that ‘do no wrong’ stuff to PAD supporters) We simply said Thaksin did wrong like everyone else in the military / polical complex that is Thailand, but Thaksin did a lot of “RIGHT” that the previous govt and the PAD refused to do.

  REASON – those dirty smelly farmers shouldn’t have any rights, otherwise they will get ahead of themselves and demand to eat at the same restaurants as us and who will wash our dishes after dinner for a pitance a month -

  Please get that through the gooblegook that is clouding your mind

• 12 Robert Bates // Nov 28, 2008 at 4:19 pm

  I take issue with the articles imbalance in relation to the role of the PAD. In the all democracies have relied on the voice of the vocal minority to overcome entrenched corruption or simply bad government. We have many examples of this in the political kaleidoscope in Australia. It is unfortunate that in our western culture vocal or demonstrable anti-government activity is loosely placed in the “terrorist” portfolio. So much for our swing to the right. The end result being that issues such as the “Tampa and refugees” was not exposed for what it was: a morally corrupt treatment of refugees. Your article concludes”Whatever its faults the Thai Government was democratically elected and deserves Australia’s support.” What a conclusion!! The article does not address the significant level of corruption at government level that has taken place under the present and past leader’s. Only now the level of corruption under the Thaksin’s is being revealed. His cronies remain. Democracy does not exist when those in power blatantly abuse what are the democratic processes. The Australian government needs to be far more pro-active in demanding and requiring transparency in the election processes of Thailand. The army of Thailand is not the ideal watchdog for your so-called democratic processes.

• 13 obno1 // Nov 28, 2008 at 4:54 pm

  I agree that the fundamental issue is the old elite vs the democratic majority. Removing Thaksin, as the current rural hero is the first step. Secondly I would suggest that those behind the PAD want to stop one person, one vote.

  While I understand the hero worship and unconditional support he receives from the poor, it may serve their interests better to move on and find someone new. It is unfortunate they can’t vote for one of their own. My understanding is a farmer still needs a university degree to stand for parliament. Another barrier against the poor. Although, hopefully as more of the children of today’s rural folk attend university, some will rise up and take on the old elite powers, rather than relying on representation via one of the richest people in the country (not the richest by far).

  The superiority complex of the elite is taught and reinforced by many hierarchical concepts and structures, and is a useful for rationalisatising behaviours that go against the ideal of equality. It may be one of the basest forms of human nature, but who wants to give up power, wealth, and privilege.

  The fact that the PAD have been able to carry out all these take over protests, have armed guards, and now the power to authorise flights in and out of the currently, reflects very badly on the powers that be. Shame on them for allowing this travesty for their own purposes. I hope Thaksin names them, although we can probably guess half of them

  However, having a had a taste of a slightly big crumb from the pie, the rural poor will not give up easily. Suppression may one day lead to revolution.

  I sense this time, if there is another coup, the downtrodden masses are not in the mood to let it go without some resistance.

• 14 Joy // Nov 28, 2008 at 5:16 pm

  Couldn’t agree more with Robet Bates. Thanks for yr insights, and I do hope the Australian and other foreign governments put more pressure on Thailand to make sure that the election process is transparent and that certain very oppressive laws be abolished permanently ( so that there is more room for (constructive) freedom of speech and discussion, and no one could use these laws for political and personal gain in a very disgusting way).

• 15 Karl Reichstetter // Nov 28, 2008 at 5:52 pm

  Thaksin never did something for the people. He bought them with taxpayer’s money to gain power to enrich himself even more. The really angry people in Bangkok are not an elite but normal middle-class people who have as little voice as the so-called poor.

  In Europe democracy was developing very different to Thailand today. The ‘poor’ – labour and farmers – were led by people who wanted a ‘fair’ share of the national ‘cake’ for their clientele. And this concern with fairness also included the understanding that the workers and farmers had to contribute to the national cake with ever increasing efficiency and that also other groups in the society deserve their share. This is a very different picture to the situation in Thailand today. The 3% who own 60% of the nation’s wealth (Thaksin etc.) want to get 70%. For this they let the middleclass bleed. Hello Argentina!!!

  I am afraid many Europeans are midguided in their judgement of the situation when they think it is a conflict between the poor and the elites. To the contrary, an elite is paying off the ‘poor’ with the money of the middleclass to also disenfrenchize the middleclass.

  It is complex but socio-political contexts are complex and not nicely black and white. (In my short analysis I did not even enter the interests of some other very important people yet which makes things even more complicated.)

• 16 Joy // Nov 28, 2008 at 6:18 pm

  This discussion is becoming more and more interesing..Karl Reichstetter , I wonder if u can write a bit more?(esp. the last part when u comment on how very important people in Thailand are involved in this fight)

• 17 ian // Nov 28, 2008 at 7:18 pm

  Disagree totally with Robert Bates. The election while containing some bribery is generally seen by outsiders as representing the will of the majority of Thais – and the bribery was transparent. If there is a ‘tyranny of the majority’ then there should be (as in Australia) constitutional mechanisms for correcting them. The Thaksin Government did not behave well – so it was a failure of political/constitutional mechanisms that should protect individual rights that is the problem (the Tampa situation arose because those people were deliberately kept outside Australian constitutional/legal protection). The solution is to make sure these protections are real. The PAD could have argued for better legal etc protections to protect minorities. Instead, they resort to minority mob rule. Until both sides agree that the ‘rule of law’ is the only way to go then Thailand is doomed to long-term political failure. This means an acceptance of political competition not street competition. It seems that some unspeakable people do not believe in political competition. This includes the Rector of Thammasat University – a law professor. Australia should keep its nose out of Thai affairs except to encourage institutional reform that Thais want.

• 18 HC lau // Nov 28, 2008 at 7:24 pm

  Perhaps karl should define ‘bought” and “tax payers money”. I do not believe members of the European govt have use their personal money to subsidise the ‘european” farmers. neither did any member of the European govt use their own money to build roads, rail or mass transit system?? Its all tax payer’s money.

  Any social service or infrastructure that a govt build is tax payer’s money. It is what a govt should do. Bought??? Do you mean building a university in Bangkok is development and building a hospital in a rural district is “buying” the farmers’s vote.????

  I can go on and on, but please everyone, differentiate between bringing some social service and infrastructure and “buying” Just becoause the previous govt in Thailand wouldn’t give a shit to the rural community, they start screaming “vote buying” when TRT started the trend and got the votes.

  Perhaps karl should advice the “Democratic” (quotes delibrate) party and the PAD to start doing something good instead of destroying the country.

  BTW – in another blog I asked a writer to just name ONE Thai politician / military/ or policeman who is not corrupt. I ask karl the same question. If you can’t, please stop harping about ‘vote buying” Same question goes to everyone

• 19 Ralph Kramden // Nov 28, 2008 at 11:30 pm

  Karl, you are right Europeans are misguided. For example, the only figures you present – on wealth – are wildly misguided.

  Much of the rest of your statement have been made before, not the least by the Manager newspaper back in 2005-6 when they argued that the middle class was funding Thaksin to be elected by the poor and this meant that taxpayer’s funds (their funds) were going to the poor. Part of the reason for this argument was that Thaksin’s government tightened tax collection. That action scared the middle class more than anything else and prompted protective actions such as supporting PAD.

  The use of term “so called poor” suggests that you don’t think these groups exist in Thailand? If that were true, the current events would not be as complex as they are now.

• 20 Karl Reichstetter // Nov 29, 2008 at 1:57 pm

  We all can not talk about some specific interest groups who are also involved.

  Rural hospitals were also built before Thaksin. There is and was an huge social infrastructure in Thailand before Thaksin entered the scene. You just have to travel to all the other ASEAN countries to see how far Thailand have come – again without and before Thaksin. His spin doctors – the American PR-company he employed since 2 years before his first election success – now make everybody believe that there were no social policies before him. And they are obviously very successfull.

  To build hospitals and schools is ok but to pour out money whereever you go is buying political favour. His famous dual track policies were actually not invented to help the poor but to save the asses of his industrial cronies who would have lost their companies if not an huge increase of demand would jacked up demand for their products. If he would be a champion of the poor he would have made sure their incomes increase (the minimum wage – a good indicator for the average wage level – increased about 4% in 10 years). His cronies pocketed the profits on the back of the work of labour force which he then makes happy with handouts. They not get their fair share but handouts. That is the main problem.

  Maybe I am oldfashioned, but I do trust labour and farm leaders who work and fight for their companinons. With them you can search for policies for a fairer sharing of economic resources – very often that also includes also a more intense contribution of the working and farming classes. I do not trust a very rich leader who spreads some money, gets the votes, and then turns around and screws everything in site to vastly enrich himself even more.

  It is quite healthy to have dreams and visions. I dream of a Thai society – I am leaving here since decades and feel kind of part of the society – in which a participatory middle-class and well-established labour and farmers movements are determining our economy and social and political life. That this is possible, many European countries – especially Scandinavian and middle-European – are showing quite convincingly. Acutally in these countries labour and farmers are already middleclass. There woudl be no place in these countries for Thaksins.

  You can look up the economic statistics for OECD counties and studies of many leading economic univeristies. About 3-5% of the populations have 60-65% of the assests. If somebody has other figures, I am very willing to investigate and accept.

  The tax volume increased 4-fold in 5 years under Thaksin (just read the national statistics). Yes, the middleclass is upset about it as the rich are basically not paying any taxes. Yes, I am personally upset that Thaksin made a 1.7 billion Euro profit and was not willing to pay a single Baht on taxes. And I think I am very right so.

  I am aware that there is poverty. But it is a relative concept. Poverty in Africa or India looks different then in Thailand where many people who consider themselves poor do have a motorcycle, a fridge, a TV, a DVD station, handies etc and certainly enough to eat, decent clothes and a roof over their heads. Yes compared with the rich in the Thai soapoperas they are poor but it stays a relative concept.

  I am aware that there are always a lot of people around who like to have a free lunch. If you cater to these people to gain power and enrich yourself you are certainly not a democratic hero but an egoist who is doing great damage to your society.

• 21 David Brown // Nov 29, 2008 at 4:12 pm

  Karl

  thanks for sharing your views on Thaksins governments

  meanwhile we are faced with a choice now….

  between the chance for the Thai people to choose to be governed by an all elected parliament and executive government by voting in one-person one-vote election

  or

  for the bulk of the parliament and government to be selected by some elite group

  I think you were just describing this latter option along the lines of a “participatory middle-class and well-established labour and farmers movements”

  I think you mean that the government would be selected by the “participatory middle-class” and the rest of the people by the “well-established labour and farmers movements”

  I presume “well-established” means “controlled” (by whom?)

  If so your dream is anti-democratic and, I suggest respectfully, well established as an old, discredited, even feudal approach to running a country and based on historical movements around the world doomed to be replaced by real one-person one-vote non-discriminatory democracy… not if but when!

• 22 HC lau // Nov 29, 2008 at 9:33 pm

  karl

  Thanks for the enlightenment about the differences of the poor between Thailan and Africa. I’ll be sure to let my poor cousins in southern Thailand know.

  BTW, their is no capital gains tax in Thailand for shares sale – I have said this before – and by the way I hope Sondhi is not your hero, otherwise I would like to ask you to explain the 1+ billion baht loans and stuff that was forgiven and other inter-company funds transfers that he practised. (of course, you can always give the standard PAD answers that would absolve Sondhi of all crimes – THAKSIN BAD, GOVT PUPPET

  let’s face it, politicians in Thailand / military / police are all corrupt. That being a given – It is a matter who can do a better job and benefit the most people. In this respect TRT / PPP or what ever incarnation comes back, will do better than the democratic / pad bunch. We have just seen the level of bloody mindedness that the PAD (democratic) bunch is capable of.

  How long do you think it will take Thailand to recover after this airport crap? I am already writing cheques to my relatives in Thailand, so you can imagine how totally cheesed off I am with the PAD. Worse so, because half my relatives lives in the south and are anti-Thaksin. have half a mind to tell them go shove it, but I can’t (stupid asian mindset)

  Support the democratic /pad appointed govt – you got to be kidding me, haven’t they done enough damage??

• 23 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 1, 2008 at 1:37 pm

  The human brain seems to work best in black-and-white alternatives. Then everything seems sooo clear. But maybe there are all kind of shades.

  I am astounded how many people think that democracy is about voting and then the majority dictating to the minority. True democracy means in my view that no group is excluded and that a system is set up which can be accepted by everybody. Without this basic understanding, voting becomes meaningless. Democracy is not about the majority deciding who is paying for lunch. Why the majority is not paying for their own lunch?

  I am for an economic system which distributes the proceeds and resources in a fair way. Therefore I am very strongly against the greed capitalism. But in my opinion the economic system should be changed in the first place. Does anyone really believe that Thaksin would like to do that. I do not think so.

  And if we do not know how to solve a problem – for instance finding a fair economic system which transcends capitalism and socialism, then maybe we should spend some resources and time to study these questions in earnest.

  Of course we have to go on with our daily lifes. Therefore we may have to find some temporary solutions to the mess we are in in Thailand and also internationally (financial system crisis). But also these should not be black-and-white hammer solutions.

• 24 David Brown // Dec 1, 2008 at 3:14 pm

  hi Karl,

  fundamentally democracy is all about the numbers, in any vote, election or committee or cabinet, etc… if a vote is called the majority win

  of course, yes, we hope that people do try to work with each other and arrive at compromises but in the interests of efficiency (time) or in the event of black and white decisions and a vote is called… the winner gets it, the loser has to hold his fire for another battle…

  like… should we invade Iraq… 100 for, 99 against… ok lets go and do it!

  sort of brutal but how else do you do it?

  Thaksin did make changes in the economic changes… but only in terms of redistribution of wealth…

  There is a lot of discussion about the death of capitalism and adoption of at least semi-socialism, in South America and now especially at this time of crisis… I side note the pouring of tax money to bailout of financial institutions in the US is not at all like free market capitalism… but it doesnt meet socialist criteria either…

  The economic system is really important but I think not as fundamental as:

  rule by the people
  vs
  rule by the families

  battle that is going on in Thailand.

• 25 Joy // Dec 1, 2008 at 3:50 pm

  David Brown: Quote “like… should we invade Iraq… 100 for, 99 against… ok lets go and do it!

  sort of brutal but how else do you do it?”

  Well, the following may not be so relevant to this thread but I really want to say something abt what u said above.
  This is not a good example at all . This is not democracy but tyranny of the majority. And u are talking abt war , about invasion of another country.. and if democracy leads to such a simplistic resolution, I’d better not have it.

• 26 Noi // Dec 1, 2008 at 10:18 pm

  Thank you for an excellent article, particularly the chronology of the events. I had not been paying attention to Thai politics until in the last 4-5 years. I usually read and get information almost exclusively from the internet, such as Prachathai, Thaienews, and New Mandala. As I try to sort out all those information and pinpoint the root cause of political turmoil in Thailand, I came to my own conclusion that what is seriously wrong with Thai politics is the (in) justice system in Thailand.

  We often hear from the “enlightened elites” mantra that most poor and uneducated rural voters are not ready for democracy and should not be allowed to vote. Even if most of us who embrace democracy go along with this absurd notion the one thing nobody can deny that all of us know what justice or injustice is. And we know the (in) justice system in Thailand is the best money can buy or as best as your patron agents.

  If liberty is to live on our own terms and slavery is to live by other’s terms, then to live on our terms means that we have a choice of actions (good or bad). If we are forced to act our ability to choose has been pre-empted. From this we can safely conclude that only free people can be just people!

  JUSTICE must be the foundation and objective principle (not opinion as we witnessed in PM Samak case) for a free society to exist. Because the purpose of a society is make sure that our life and property is protected! Without justice as rule and foundation the society disintegrates into barbarism (as we are witnessing PAD in actions).

  Noi

• 27 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 2, 2008 at 1:15 pm

  I very strongly feel that democracy is not about numbers but about consensus and participation. There might be cultural differences. There are societies which admire competition and winner takes all, and there are societies which do put more emphasis on togetherness. I do not think that the latter are worse off, I rather think the opposite.

  I am coming out of a consensus system. I would say for 70% of the policies you do not need any voting at all – sometimes quite long discussions allow to arrive at solutions which are accepted by all -, for the rest voting may be necessary. And then there are cases in which votes are being taken and some members absolutely and fundamentally disagree. In these cases, things are being thought through again and not simply pushed through. No group and society can survive peacefully in the long term when parts of it are being pushed out of the participation.

  The alternative in Thailand is not ‘rule by the people’ versus ‘rule by some families’ but ‘rule by one person’ versus ‘rule by oligarchies’. I do not like the latter neither but it is far better then rule by a very ruthless, greedy and megalomaniac ‘one person’. Does anyone really believe in the spin that Thaksin rule is rule by the people? I am really stunned.

• 28 Joy // Dec 2, 2008 at 2:07 pm

  Karl, I do like your idea about democracy. I do not major in political science and I appreciate your insights very much. I agree with most of what u said above. However, i think the crisis within Thailand right now is the result of the the elistist/royalist class ’s struggle to hold on to power at all costs. Taksin, despite his wealth, is merely a politician and no matter how authoritarian or corrupt he used to be or has been, he is no longer the major player in Thai politics right now. I maybe wrong but… I see the elistist class (whose wealth is immense but pretends to preach ’sufficiency economy’) that has ruled Thailand for an age and imposed oppressive laws on Thai people’s freedom of expression (and inhibited)our (Thais’) critical thinking as more destructive to Thailand’s progress. I look forward to more of yr post, especially for yr arguments that differ or contradict mine , because I believe I can gain more from different than similar opinion.

• 29 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 2, 2008 at 3:22 pm

  Dear Joy, I completely agree with you about what you say about ‘elitist classes’. In the future the Thai people will have to think about how to get out of this stranglehood. At the moment I only see Thaksin as being more dangerous.

  This is what I believe in – if people listen to each other we will find common ground even if we disagree about all kind of things. And based on this common ground we can build a future.

  There must be participation by all in society, and all who contribute should get a fair share (but I am not for free lunches).

• 30 David Brown // Dec 2, 2008 at 6:00 pm

  hi Karl,

  i am happy that you and Joy seem to are coming to a concensus that probably is not too far from my point of view…

  perhaps I have been a bit strong about the numbers… because we have just come out of a right-wing government in Australia that voted to help in the Iraq war against strong protests by me and a heap of other Australians on the streets… the two things I admire about the past PM is … his statement and actions that he accepted the numbers (both for the war and when he was beaten and even lost his seat after 10 years in power… and he responded to a massacre by a rogue individual by banning guns on the streets of Australia, and buying back heaps of hidden weapons under an amnesty.

  also, just in case you are from germany… I seem to remeber the Greens objected to the vote that sent German troops to assist the Iraq war.

  anyway, enough… at least we all believe in everyone getting to vote and choose their government!

  thanks for corresponding

• 31 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 3, 2008 at 1:25 pm

  Hi David, I am actually coming from Austria. I do believe in democracy but the representative form does have some strong disadvantages (negative selection of politician etc. – seen in an European context) therefore it is not really bad to think about improvements – which does not mean nominated parliaments.

  In the Thai case I feel that the ‘interests of the people’ have been hijacked by Thaksin and his group for their own interests. As much as the interests of the middle class have been hijacked by a very undemocratic group. Therefore we find ourselves between a ‘rock and an hard place’. I am wishing for a third alternative even it is not really visible yet but it may evolve. Therefore I am also not for quick solutions by force.

  As to the ‘poor’, I really want to remind everyone that the group who is basically now owning the economy came two, three generations ago as rice coolies with nothing then there rugged clothes on and worked themselves up without any help from any governments – actually quite the opposite. With all love I feel for the Thai people I must say that they – ‘in a statistical average’ – are not extremly ambitious and a good day is one in which they were sitting around all day long. I am all for a fair distribution of economic resources but based on contributions and not on handouts. This is not fair to the ones who work day in, day out.

• 32 Noi // Dec 4, 2008 at 4:10 pm

  Karl (post #27),

  First, you made many statements without facts supporting them, not only that some of them are outright lies. For example, your statement insinuated that Thailand is rule by “ruthless, greedy and … one person” (aka Thaksin), is an outright lies. Like it or not, the fact remain that the majority of Thai people were overwhelmingly elected Thaksin twice. Furthermore, if Thaksin were to run again today, he would win again by a landslide margin! How many more time must the will of the majority of Thai people be desecrated?

  Second, any democratic system depends first and foremost on the willingness of the participants to accept verdicts other than what they want. Democracy, after all, is the rule of the majority. This often means accepting a status20quo that, from one’s personal perspective, may be undesirable, but nevertheless be defended at all costs if one’s motivation is to see the SYSTEM, rather than one’s own selfish motives, succeed. The democratic process, even to its most devoted participants, can be a frustrating, infuriating process, and in many cases seems to certain individuals to diametrically oppose the “good” of the nation.

  Democracy, in the final analysis, is a PROCESS rather than a state of being. And like all processes it develops and evolves over time. When the elitists intervene because THEY “know better”, the system is subverted and the faith of the majority is destroyed. Thailand will never be a democracy unless and until the lowliest Isaan farmer has as much say at the polls as does the most “enlightened” resident of Bangkok.

  Finally, it is the faith in the eventual good outcome, regardless of the twists and turns in the process that makes Democracy the on ly true, legitimate means of representing the PEOPLE of a nation.

• 33 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 4, 2008 at 7:14 pm

  It is very unfortunate that so many people believe in the rule of majorities as the only model of democracy. In Switzerland – one of the oldest democracies – every elected party is by constitution part of the government. They are forced to compromise and I think the country is doing well on all counts – economically, social peace, freedoms.

  Also in my birthcountry – Austria – provincial governments are run by the same system (participation of every elected party of a certain size). There is vigorous political debate but at the end of the day they all have to compromise.

  Again and again, I do believe in compromise and not in majorities running their agenda through by force. I do not consider latter as democracy.

  And exactly this ramming through of one own’s agenda was the root cause of the ‘uprising’ against Thaksin with all the damages following suit. Do people every learn???

• 34 Joy // Dec 4, 2008 at 9:41 pm

  My view maybe seen as unprofessional or naive by political scientists but Karl’s view of democracies does appeal to me. Whenever I read something about democracy being determined by numbers, i can’t help feeling that it’s just isn’t right and somewhat brutal because it neglects certain groups of people who are also part of societies.. especially if that society is ‘multicutural’ with one big mainstream group (or two), and a number of minority groups who occupy lower power positions and are smaller in numbers. it’s just isn’t right if the voices of these minority groups have to be neglected always during the so-called ‘deveopment of democracy’ because they can’t constute the highest number. When Noi talking about the need to accept ’status quo’ for the sake of democracy, I can’t help feeling that she is suggesting that hegemony is something inevitable if democracy is to be allowed its ‘complete or full development’. While I agree with her that the elite ’s intervention in the Thai democratic process is unacceptable, I also question and challenge her assertion that Taksin’s goverment is the “Government of the people’ and that some of Karl’s statements are ‘outright lies’.I think Karl has been fair enough in his arguments. .. Thai people are indeed caught in ‘a rock and hard place’ and I don;t think either Taskin or the PAD represent a lot of Thai’s interests or ideology. I have been hoping that we, as the young Thais(and old, of course), can join force to form our own political party that can truly represent us so that we don’t have to choose between “Red Shirts’ or “Yellow Shirts”. I am really hoping that those Thais who refuse both the imposition of PAD conservatism and Taksin-style ‘democracy’ can have a channel to exert our political will and stance publicly and powerfully (instead of having to be part of the ‘red shirts’, especially those who see him as Thailand’s saviour )

• 35 krid // Dec 4, 2008 at 9:59 pm

  @Karl: The majority don’t run their agenda through “by force”, but because they have an electoral mandate. That’s the whole point of electoral democracy, and in this sense, it’s by definition a dictatorship by the majority.
  Thailand had these ineffectual “compromising” governments for many years, running the country via backroom deals and entrenching a corrupt bureaucracy and executive branch where everyone shared the spoils including the military and the huge shadow economy.
  This worked when growth was strong and the status quo could be preserved as it was because incomes of the whole population were rising.
  Things changed after the economic collapse of 1997 and the subsequent ineffectual, backroom-dealing Chuan government. This gave Thaksin his chance and his election plan was copied verbatim from an American textbook on the matter: If you promise the poor masses a certain amount of benefits they will give you votes in return. Very crude, astute and ugly. However, unlike in the backroom-dealing compromising governments, the poor actually received real benefit and Thaksin actually made good on his promises, which was unheard of before. Things were working so well that Thaksin became a megalomaniac, thinking he needed a strong, dictator-like concentration of power to push through vital reforms, especially regarding the shadow economy (smuggling, drugs, underground lottery, racketeering, extortion and loan sharking). Still, his dark side and grave personality flaws would have cost him the premiership sooner or later, in that sense I don’t agree that those who voted for him were stupid and unable to change their opinion about him. Had democracy run its course, i.e. had there been no coup and subsequent events, Thaksin might have lost the next election or the one after that. Instead the country is staring at the abyss, with the vaunted compromise more remote than ever.

• 36 David Brown // Dec 5, 2008 at 12:01 am

  Joy,

  please form your own political party….

  they all start off perfect… lets see if you can keep yours that way

  and I agree.. the focus on Thaksin is unproductive and unnecessary

  mostly people focus on Thaksin as a reaction to the PAD…

  because Sondhi needed a symbol to hate because he was destroying the rich families grip on power

  so Sondhi kept him famous

• 37 nganadeeleg // Dec 5, 2008 at 8:53 am

  David Brown said: “I agree.. the focus on Thaksin is unproductive and unnecessary”

  Please tell that to the procession of PPP hacks who have a hotline to London, Hong Kong or wherever the master currently is

  Why did they allow him to keep his diplomatic passport?
  - to make it easier to keep coincidentally running into him on their overseas trips?

• 38 Joy // Dec 5, 2008 at 9:16 am

  David Brown, thank you so much for your encouragement!! The idea is to have a party like the Green Party (of Germany??). I know this may sound very like a wishful thinking, and not so practical, but I have just posted my proposal in a Thai forum with about 15,000 members to see if anyone is interested.That forum is nothing to do with politics but they have so many active participants .. about 2,000 or so on line per day. Hopefull I can get some positive responses from those who feel that neither the PPP or the DP represent them.:-)People there may even come up with more interesting ways (than my ideal green party) to tackle with this current political tension.

• 39 David // Dec 5, 2008 at 4:44 pm

  Hat’s off to Krid. To me, his comments are consistently spot on, viz:

  “Thailand had these ineffectual “compromising” governments for many years, running the country via backroom deals and entrenching a corrupt bureaucracy and executive branch where everyone shared the spoils including the military and the huge shadow economy.”

  Personally, I think the whole current mess has nothing to do with democracy, or even Thaksin per se, but condenses down to this: there are two competing interest groups, both with significant financial, political and social clout, who are vying for the right to determine just how future governments are constituted and managed, and what benefits accrue to them as a result.

  The coalition system to which Krid refers meant that the spoils were, to put it crudely, shared fairly evenly amongst the members of these groups. By forming a government that did not depend entirely on the support of various interest groups, Thaksin created divisions at the very top. Basically, “play the game my way and you still get the same opportunities as before. On the other hand, if you don’t want to play my way …” Hence there are many influential folk who’d welcome a return to the good ‘ol pre-Thaksin days.

  Thailand is still a hugely hierarchic society, with many people obsessed with outward signs of status. Just look at philanthropy in Thailand – people want to be seen to be doing good, hence all those appalling charity fashion shows with Khunying This That and the Other as ‘guest models’. Ever heard of making an anonymous donation? Similarly, many Thais I know would happily donate to a temple, but find the idea of helping a stranger in need an alien concept.

  Finally – and if Krid reads this maybe he can answer – there’s a question I have about the UDD and their choice of red as their colour. Several Thai friends (including one educated overseas since the age of 14) have said to me that this shows their antipathy to the monarchy, since red is the ‘kalakinee’ colour for Monday. As you may know, days of the week are associated with different colours: HM being born on a Monday, and yellow being the colour for Monday. Red is ‘kalakinee’ (I guess you could say unauspicious) for Monday. So, since you shouldn’t wear red on a Monday, my Thai friends say that the choice of red by the UDD in effect reveals their true colours. It all seems a bit far fetched to me, but I think it’s instructive in that it shows how, to some people, even something as seemingly trivial as a choice of colour can have some hidden and inflammatory meaning.

• 40 Joy // Dec 5, 2008 at 5:46 pm

  I enjoy reading Nganadeeleg and David Brown’s comments. I think reading both does help balance one’s political view, and somehow I feel both are right in their own way. I didn’t know about red and its hidden implication before.. well, the thing is so many of the red shirts explicitly show their devotion to Taksin (nothing wrong with that, they have a right to choose anyone as prospective saviour). However, for those who dislike this reliance on an individual (with highly questionable crime/corruption records)as a way out for the political dilemma or economic breakthrough, ‘red shirts’ seem not to represent us.Sorry for being repetitive here…I know I have said this before. BTW I can’t help adding that ‘red’’s hidden leftist agenda kinda help draw support from left-wingers (who don’t care abt Taksin)… especially if one is so sick of the oppression and hypocrisy of the on-going image-making….Of course it is crucial to respect people’s right to be pro-xxx, yet the problem in Thailand is that those who don’t pro-xxx are highly vulnerable to being put to jail, publicly condemned and thus left no space to articulate their difference in a non-violent way.

• 41 bosunj // Dec 5, 2008 at 9:55 pm

  Democracy is nothing more than a tyranny of the majority.

  Democracy like capitalism is inherently flawed.

  Farang demanding that Thais adopt their inherently flawed system of governance and economics as superior to “consensus” governance are revealing their racisism and paternalistic sense of superiority.

  Those posting here and elsewhere that the only true measure of success are Baht and Satang are the most flawed as people and the best example of how corrupt their western ideas truly are.

• 42 clement // Dec 5, 2008 at 10:10 pm

  i applaud HC Lau’s totally coherent, articulate take on the current situation in thailand. let’s not be sidestepped by the thin veneer of geo-politics; but rather be focussed on the “real” every day issues facing the man in the soi… every man; rich or poor, has a God-given right to live in dignity!

• 43 Noi // Dec 6, 2008 at 12:58 pm

  Joy (post #34):

  You can question and challenge my so called “assertion” that Thaksin’s government is the government of the people, all you want. However, I derived my conclusion from the facts, not from biased opinion. And the fact remains that Thaksin was elected by a landslide margin TWICE! Thaksin had the mandate from the majority of Thai people, regardless of what you or Karl may think.

  Your comment regarding the minority in Thailand will be left behind if democracy were to ALLOWED in Thailand. Contrary to your belief, look no further than the last election cycle in America (the melting pot), for a good example. Obama, a member of a minority group was elected to the highest office in the Nation! This historical moment for America is possible because of her extraordinary devotion to equality in liberty and to provide opportunity for individuals to achieve a better life.

• 44 Noi // Dec 6, 2008 at 1:06 pm

  bosunj (post # 40):
  <>

  Yes, “inherently flawed” indeed for having the audacity to UNEQUALLY share our BLESSINGS! While the opposing view has the inherent virtue for EQUALLY sharing of their MISERIES!

  <>

  “Revealing racism” indeed, so racist that we just elected a minority to the highest office in the Nation!

  Speaking from my personal experience of how I was treated as a poor little girl (part Thai part Chinese) in my motherland, the “pure” Thai never missed a chance to make fun of my “Chinese eyes”, called me “Loog Jegg” instead of addressing by my name. Please spare me the pontification on your notion of racism, I, as a long time U.S. resident (over 30 years) encountered racism in my own motherland more than I encountered in the U.S. Moreover, most of my friends in Thailand (of Chinese decent) had changed their Chinese last name to Thai last name, so that they could attend public school or work in the government sector.

  I could never have accomplished what I have today had I still lived in Thailand. As a very poor little girl that divorced parents left with a grandmother, a snowball in hell had better odds than I did compared to what I am accomplishing today if I still living in Thailand!
  I could give you a long list of very successful Asian people living in America that their motherland discarded them from the main society. Why? Because of American extraordinary devotion to equality in liberty and to provide opportunity for individuals to achieve a better life.

• 45 Charles F. // Dec 6, 2008 at 5:01 pm

  Thank you, Noi.

• 46 clement // Dec 6, 2008 at 5:14 pm

  hear hear nong noi, the usa is a great country today because its leadership aspired to greatness in respecting basic human rights (that has since been perverted somewhat by extreme liberalism).

  there really is nothing holding back progress in every sense of the word for the beautiful country that is thailand; only for want of moral courage on the part of the thai government to uplift the quality of life for every thai citizen through politic, economic, & social reforms.

  and so this is a call to thai policy makers (& PAD elitists) to understand their God-given mandate and to act responsibly; and exercise their power for the good of the people who voted them in for that very purpose?

  anything less is to short-change your own country & fellow countrymen…

• 47 bosunj // Dec 6, 2008 at 10:19 pm

  the fact remains that Thaksin was elected by a landslide margin TWICE!

  The FACT remains that Thaksin, after being repeatedly rebuffed by the political establishment because they rightly feared his sociopathy, used his billions to form and promote his own party with the monomaniacal purpose of insuring he become Premier and have a clear majority of boot lickers.

  A healthy distrust of the improbable idea that a billionaire is a populist was in order then. That distrust was verified when Thaksin sold his mobile business to Tamasek AND had his crony boot lickers provide a law that exempted that sale from being taxed. Populist my my sticky rice!

  This historical moment for America is possible because of her extraordinary devotion to equality in liberty and to provide opportunity for individuals to achieve a better life.

  Go to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, Tennessee, or Arkansas and ask black people living there their opinion of your statement.

  Yes, “inherently flawed” indeed for having the audacity to UNEQUALLY share our BLESSINGS! While the opposing view has the inherent virtue for EQUALLY sharing of their MISERIES!

  Those paragons of virtue, the Wall Street Banksters are a glaring example of your idea that unequally sharing the “blessings” is a good and just thing. Those same Banksters who preach greedy extremist-capitalist dogma are hell bent that the whole bloody world will equally share in the miseries they have created.

  “Revealing racism” indeed, so racist that we just elected a minority to the highest office in the Nation!

  Obama’s election was indeed a watershed event.

  That event does not however erase all the sins of the past.

  As a very poor little girl that divorced parents left with a grandmother, a snowball in hell had better odds than I did compared to what I am accomplishing today

  I have empathy for the suffering you experienced as a child. Children are often brutal to each other and that brutality can sear itself into ones soul.

  I once chatted for several hours with the managing Abbot of Wat Thai in Los Angeles. One of the things took away from that conversation was the Abbot’s rueful realization that Thai people who live in America tend to become more American than Americans. This after I witnessed a Thai woman speaking rudely to the Abbot about the Wat’s education program and her son’s progress in it.

  K. Noi, I am happy that you have found a place that works well for you. It will be interesting see whether your view of America remains as strong in the coming months.

  Chok dee.

• 48 amberwaves // Dec 7, 2008 at 5:39 am

  bosunj said this:
  “Go to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, Tennessee, or Arkansas and ask black people living there their opinion of your statement.”
  -in reply to this:
  “This historical moment for America is possible because of her extraordinary devotion to equality in liberty and to provide opportunity for individuals to achieve a better life.”

  I think you are a bit stereotype-mired rather than fact-based in your assertion. African-Americans are most strongly represented in political office in the southern states of the US. (Here’s the first thing at hand I could find with some statistics, and at any rate it’s pretty intuitive for anyone who knows anything about US politics: http://www.blackcommentator.com/9_nul.html).

  I can’t say I have looked into it, but I don’t think they are unhappy about that situation. It was achieved, of course, by a courageous and honestly non-violent struggle for one-man, one-vote electoral politics by legions of volunteers for civil rights.

  Their battles of the 1950s and 60s were fought within the framework of the law, even when the decks were stacked against them. Doing jail time was another way of bearing moral witness.

  I saw countless PAD supporters quoted as saying they were willing to die for their cause. But I don’t know anyone who was asking for that. I think they simply have a social obligation to be held accountable to law.

• 49 Lleij Samuel Schwartz // Dec 7, 2008 at 6:30 am

  re: bosunj

  Go to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, Tennessee, or Arkansas and ask black people living there their opinion of your statement.

  Why don’t you? Perhaps instead of presuming to speak for us minorities, you could support your assertion with some statistics? That would make your argument stronger than just appealing to some people’s ignorance that the American South is still living under Jim Crow.

  I once chatted for several hours with the managing Abbot of Wat Thai in Los Angeles. One of the things took away from that conversation was the Abbot’s rueful realization that Thai people who live in America tend to become more American than Americans. This after I witnessed a Thai woman speaking rudely to the Abbot about the Wat’s education program and her son’s progress in it.

  And if said abbot truly believes that a member of the Sangha is free from criticism merely because he is a member of the Sangha, it would seem that Thai Americans are also more Buddhist than their native counterparts as well. (Let’s not even get into the Thai Sangha’s disgusting repression of bhikkhuni.)

  As for everything else you wrote, it stinks of the logical fallacy that I happen to call argumentum ad turpem americensis. Indeed, I find it telling that the theme of your blog is that you chose to leave a democratic country with a quasi-market economy to reside in the paradise of a neo-corporatist raubwirtschaft.

  And I wish you good luck in the future as well, sir.

• 50 Noi // Dec 8, 2008 at 3:30 am

  Re: bosunj:
  Quote: “Go to Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, Tennessee, or Arkansas and ask black people living there their opinion of your statement.”

  Sadly, you haven’t a clue when I talk about equality in liberty, it does not mean the equality of outcome. Otherwise, as an avid tennis player, I should be able to demand the same results as Roger Federer on every match I played. Sounds absurd, doesn’t it?

  Quote: “I have empathy for the suffering you experienced as a child. Children are often brutal to each other and that brutality can sear itself into ones soul.”

  Actually, the “pure’ Thais who made those racist remarks against me not the children–but adults.

  Quote: “I once chatted for several hours with the managing Abbot of Wat Thai in Los Angeles. One of the things took away from that conversation was the Abbot’s rueful realization that Thai people who live in America tend to become more American than Americans. This after I witnessed a Thai woman speaking rudely to the Abbot about the Wat’s education program and her son’s progress in it. ”

  Correct me if I am wrong but I sense that you are once again confused, just because Thai women in America may have not been afraid of expressing their opinion, it doesn’t mean they are rude or “become more American”. This is the same as saying “American women are rude” and could be construed as a sexist remark on your part.

  Quote:” K. Noi, I am happy that you have found a place that works well for you. It will be interesting see whether your view of America remains as strong in the coming months. ”

  I am very disappointed with the last election cycle in the U.S. of the lack in quality of the candidates, but nevertheless, I respect the voice of the majority!

• 51 bosunj // Dec 8, 2008 at 7:37 am

  some people’s ignorance that the American South is still living under Jim Crow

  Some peoples ignorance indeed:

  http://rawstory.com/news/2008/In_whitesonly_neighborhood_residents_worried_Bush_1206.html

  I’ve been to the south. I worked in the south. I sailed with southerners. I listened to the hateful spew from green teeth mouths of good ol’ boys. I also watched these same good ol’ boys treat black crewmen exactly opposite of the things they said when he wasn’t around. Time and again. Day in and day out.

  I earned that research by living it not reading it from some book that an egghead from some ivory tower wrote in an effort to publish or perish.

  My degrees don’t make me better than other people doctor. Save that for your dissertation committee.

  Chok dee.

• 52 clement // Dec 8, 2008 at 12:00 pm

  haha, every egghead knows that no system is perfect. in every society there would be the “poor” who will pick on the poor – that’s the fallen nature of man; so let’s get real.

  change has to come from within. outward, cosmetic humanism can only go so far in making the earth a better place.

  and education is one important way to uplift the quality of life anywhere; especially in thailand – where democracy is skin deep and feudalism subtle & pervasive.

• 53 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 8, 2008 at 1:21 pm

  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.

• 54 David Brown // Dec 8, 2008 at 1:51 pm

  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!

• 55 clement // Dec 8, 2008 at 2:56 pm

  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…

• 56 Joy // Dec 8, 2008 at 5:05 pm

  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!!

• 57 David Brown // Dec 8, 2008 at 5:45 pm

  the Midnight guys have had some good references in many places

  because I dont read Thai I havent been able to understand their rather amazing/tantalising website…

  they sound like a good group to associate with

• 58 Karl Reichstetter // Dec 9, 2008 at 1:21 pm

  We now see in action how a ‘democratically elected government’ is being formed. Very ‘funny’ indeed!

  Things get forgotten. ‘Influental people’ win the elections in their constituencies – a sure-fire way is to buy the village headmen. Thaksin was not the first one but the most successfull in buying MP’s and complete parties wholesale. Here come his stunning election wins.

  Now there seems to occur the possibility that a new government might be elected in parliament by ‘democratically elected’ members of parliament. Now they are being tried to be lured back into the fold of the ‘beloved and majority-supported superman’ by billions of Baht. Democracy in action indeed!!!

• 59 Lleij Samuel Schwartz // Dec 17, 2008 at 2:23 am

  re:bosunj

  I would like to respond to your comments, but you seem hell-bent on turning any discussion here into a mess of tu quoque. Therefore, I shall endeavor to turn this conversation back to Thailand, as to earn the Walker/Farrelly imprimatur.

  I earned that research by living it not reading it from some book that an egghead from some ivory tower wrote in an effort to publish or perish.

  Well, if you’re talking about the School of Hard Knocks, I think that, in this case, my “credentials” from growing up non-White in America outweigh yours, no? Make no mistake, personally-mediated racism does exist in America; however, my point was that in 2008, the institutionalized racism present is no longer strong enough to severely inhibit the American dream of social equity and social mobility.

  Now, can we say the same thing about Thailand in 2551 B.E.? Of course not. Indeed, one could go as far to say that most of the racism present in Thailand is institutional and systemic; from the propiska-like ทะเบียนบ้าน, to the assumptions behind the various proclamations of culture-warrior Ladda Tangsupachai, to the attitudes and atmospherics of the PAD and Sonthi Limthongkul’s media empire.

Leave a Comment