Jump to content

Thaksin planning new party "Pheu Dharma", says source


webfact

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, gamini said:

Quite true. He was the most corrupt politician in Thailands history

Obviously just your opinion,one thing he didn't do was to corrupt people's democrat right to elect there own leader.Even after all the so called legal processes the majority of people were still electing him as their leader until a group of armed thugs who just would not accept the majority rule of democracy chased him out of the country.A lot of people seem to be jealous of the fact that he was way better at conning people to vote for him than they were.Politicians are con artists and he he was one of the best,that is how democracy works.Oh he had his fingers in the till oh what a naughty boy well then lets put our guys fingers in the till.How? I know,we will use a gun! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 hours ago, pornprong said:

Says who?

Those who couldn't beat him in an election and a few self loathing TV closet fascists.

(notice the absence of a question mark appending the latter sentence)

17 cases of proven corruption. I suppose people like you dont consider changing laws to benefit them selves is not corruption. i.e his AIS sale to Singapore. Granting a government loan to Burma provided they buy his satteltes. Forcing a govenment bank to bail out his sons bankrupt dealings!!

I guess you are too ignorant to undrstand the meaning of corruption. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gamini said:

17 cases of proven corruption. I suppose people like you dont consider changing laws to benefit them selves is not corruption. i.e his AIS sale to Singapore. Granting a government loan to Burma provided they buy his satteltes. Forcing a govenment bank to bail out his sons bankrupt dealings!!

I guess you are too ignorant to undrstand the meaning of corruption. 

I'm well aware of what corruption is.

I also happen to be aware of what an impartial judicial system and a fair trial are.

Thailand has neither under coup regimes, so your 17 cases lack merit.

Your turn.....go look up propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the last general election, I had actually thought that there is still a decent chance that Thaksin would continue to play a major role in Thai politics for a long time, despite possibly having to reside overseas for many more years. But, the election results surprised me (in a positive way because I am no fan of Thaksin; hehe). Not only did PTP get a lot fewer votes than was expected but also the new party (FFP) achieved quite a success. If FFP's rise continues (which is very likely), it is likely that Thaksin's voter base will diminish further.

 

I am guessing that we are looking at the future where there will be 2 major camps_pro-military/pro-elite Phalang Pracharat Party and the anti-military/anti-elite FFP.  Thaksin's party (or parties or ex-parties, whatever) and Democrats will stay quite behind.

 

Just a guess, which could prove out to be very wrong of course ???? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2019 at 2:00 PM, pornprong said:

I'm well aware of what corruption is.

I also happen to be aware of what an impartial judicial system and a fair trial are.

Thailand has neither under coup regimes, so your 17 cases lack merit.

Your turn.....go look up propaganda.

 

Propaganda - would that be like Thaksin getting friendly TV stations to interview him and then keep a straight face whilst saying he's never done anything wrong, never ever, in his whole life! 555!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thaksin's case has nothing to do with corruption, ( he has money and plenty of it)

he was getting too popular to the point of bypassing the military and the Monarchy,

and that did not go well. As for his new Party it's mainly to create a new generation

of politicians to match or beat the present system, which, at present is not doing too well.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 7/15/2019 at 12:00 PM, Eric Loh said:

There are 2 faces of authoritarianism. Thaksin was an electoral authoritarian [...]

So was Adolf Hitler. I am not going to sit here and say they were the same. At least Adolf didn't bankrupt the farmers, and his public works actually worked out for the better. Say what you want about him, but in 1933 he had well over 6 million unemployed, who were almost all put to work - and contrary to popular belief they weren't all making arms, not even a large portion of them - whereas Roosevelt had 10 something million in 1933 and after his new deal the vast majority of them were STILL unemployed.

 

Anyway, authoritarian is authoritarian, whether originally elected or not. And Adi actually continually received overwhelming public support, that is until he started the war (and then again after defeating France). Does that mean he was good, and right (especially considering, that unlike Thaksin he was actually successful at improving peoples' lives, and even keeping up their living standards for a a couple years while in a WORLD WAR), just because people had elected him, his party had gotten the most votes and thus he was named chancellor and asked to form a government?? And unlike Thaksin, he actually had legimitate reasons to turn to authoritarian measures, as the communists had REPEATEDLY risen up in armed revolts, even in the 1930s and all in all a few thousand of people were killed by them in murders and street battles, of ALL political persuasions.

 

I feel embarassed for you, that I actually have to spell all of this out for you, and apparently for some of the other Thaksin cheer leaders also...

 

Of course a military government isn't great, and far from ideal. But if I have to choose between a corrupt, cleptocratic, incompetent & democracy undermining populist-super rich, who hides behind a thin veil of social justice and patriotism, and OPENLY states, that to him Democracy is merely a tool, but that he'd be willing to do away with it, to reach his goals (a lot like Salvador Allende and his lot, before Pinochet the so called "evil military dictator" did away with them, and who turned Chile from a near bankrupt shithole into the richest country in South America) O R a military junta, who is also corrupt, just like most governments before it and they've never known much else, it seems to me, and who at least doesn't make empty promises to target audiences, only to leave them in financial ruin etc. and who at least upholds at least SOME semblence of order (who knows how much further yellow vs red would have spiralled if they hadn't interceded... and let me remind you: When the coup originally happened, the yellow shirts were also side lined, with some of them even arrested; I didn't follow up on what happened to them, but I do remember that much) I will A L W A Y S pick the junta..

 

tl/dr clilffnotes:

 

Hitler was also an elected authoritarian, with far greater successes than Thaksin and far greater popular support, therefore your point is moot.

 

If I had to choose between a guy like a Thaksin or a military junta (far from ideal choice), I would always pick the lesser evil, which imo is the junta.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2019 at 3:33 AM, pornprong said:

The fact that Thailand managed to still climb to the top of the ranks in such an environment just makes it all the more damning.

 

People aren't borrowing money from loansharks to buy iPhones.

Mortgage, medical and grocery bills are not optional.

lol lefties (so ironic that you think the 1% of the 1% guy is the one to save the poor...) and their drama. You still have provided no source for your claim, that thailand is the most unequal country in the World today, whereas someone else who contradicted you actually did... but that is what the left does, simply ignore facts and evidence to the contrary, keeping up their drama and nonsense, no matter what. And if all else fails: Call them racist, neo nazi/fascist, etc. (You haven't stooped that low yet, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least)...

 

There was no "conspiracy" by traditional xyz voter middle men. The Thaksin clique simply didn't have the budget to pay for the higher rice prices they promised the farmers, but sure as sh't collected the rice anyway, and left the farmers holding the bag. Again, provide a source, not just bla bla under quotation marks. Even hippster-leftie-left Vice says it (feel free to go youtube, and enter Vice rice buying scheme thailand, and please do make me laugh even harder, by claiming Vice is the new fox news or whatever... their male reporters are dripping soy milk...) was the Thaksin government, and you can rest assured, they are no friends of the Junta or any evil right-wing enemies of the Thaksin mob err saviors.

 

As for people getting in debt: I know this girl, who has free health insurance because she works for the government (biologist researcher/teacher or some such), has a salary of like 35-40k baht/month, yet is always broke. Why? Debt because she drives a rather new car, where the payments on that alone is 8000 baht per month (excl. insurance&gasoline, obviously), because she is paying mortgage on her land in the countryside, and that became even more because the guy ended up selling her more land later on and the price was just "too good to say no to", even though her mortgage was already over 10k baht at that point (and is even more now, obviously), often has no more than 30-50 baht for her meals per day (yet often eats takeaway) etc. And no, I don't send her money... but does it sound familiar?? It's like Western lifestyle, adjusted for Thai incomes. Living above your means, on credit. Who cares about tomorrow, **I** live for TODAY!

 

She might not be representative of all Thais, obviously, but people don't just get into debt for "medicine" and "grocery bills"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the current political machine in power, Thaksin is in lala land thinking he can do anything but make some small waves. And those waves will be crushed  in short order.

IMO he is just a nat on the wall now and he cannot stand it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2019 at 10:06 AM, Moo 2 said:

Thaksin's case has nothing to do with corruption, ( he has money and plenty of it)

he was getting too popular to the point of bypassing the military and the Monarchy,

and that did not go well. As for his new Party it's mainly to create a new generation

of politicians to match or beat the present system, which, at present is not doing too well.

 

 

Perhaps that, or a new Thaksin story to distract the sheeple from certain folks not wishing to honour their own constitution. It will most likely work, too. Just look at how this thread has taken off..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why doesn't he just give it up, live in comfortable retirement, and spend his millions on a pleasurable journey into ripe old age. These politicians who are 70 or 80 years old trying to prove something. Power mongers. Why so hard to just retire and be happy. Mai pben rai. Leave it to the next generation...it is their time now. Sheesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...