Jump to content
BANGKOK
Sign in to follow this  
webfact

Twin evils are battling to bring down Thailand

Recommended Posts

It absolutely amazes me that there are actually people who actually advocate taking the right to choose their government away from the people. Somehow they seem to believe that the "selectors" and "selected" will somehow offer greater protection from corruption. This despite history's numerous examples of the dangers of putting power in the hands of small numbers of people.

Sadly it would seem the "peaceful protesters" are showing their true colors as the seek to use violence and intimidation in an attempt to bring down an elected government and impose the will of a minority.

Sometimes people don't want to think too mut. Truth is, what is wrong with a semi appointed senate.

They work a little like non executive directors of a company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely amazes me that there are actually people who actually advocate taking the right to choose their government away from the people. Somehow they seem to believe that the "selectors" and "selected" will somehow offer greater protection from corruption. This despite history's numerous examples of the dangers of putting power in the hands of small numbers of people.

Sadly it would seem the "peaceful protesters" are showing their true colors as the seek to use violence and intimidation in an attempt to bring down an elected government and impose the will of a minority.

And actually what actual current evidence do you actually have that the actual protesters actually represent a minority? Actually, that is.
Counting actual votes in an actual election is acknowledged worldwide as expressing the wishes of the actual majority. Therefore, those who oppose the government elected by an actual majority would constitute an actual minority. Actually :-)

Actual CURRENT evidence, I said. Which word confuses you, "actual" or "current"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely amazes me that there are actually people who actually advocate taking the right to choose their government away from the people. Somehow they seem to believe that the "selectors" and "selected" will somehow offer greater protection from corruption. This despite history's numerous examples of the dangers of putting power in the hands of small numbers of people.

Sadly it would seem the "peaceful protesters" are showing their true colors as the seek to use violence and intimidation in an attempt to bring down an elected government and impose the will of a minority.

And actually what actual current evidence do you actually have that the actual protesters actually represent a minority? Actually, that is.
Counting actual votes in an actual election is acknowledged worldwide as expressing the wishes of the actual majority. Therefore, those who oppose the government elected by an actual majority would constitute an actual minority. Actually :-)
Actual CURRENT evidence, I said. Which word confuses you, "actual" or "current"?

Let me re-phrase it for you. What actual evidence do you have that the majority of the people do not support their freely elected government?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"BANGKOK: -- The terms "corruption", "tyranny of the majority" and "parliamentary dictatorship" are being heard with increasing frequency. But unlike elsewhere, the so-called tyranny of the majority in Thailand is not being used to persecute ethnic, racial or religious minorities. Instead it supports corrupt politicians."

Above quote is the first paragraph of the article. I am quite surprised by that second sentence, pretending those triple (not twin) evils are only used to support corrupt politicians. Does the author really imagine there is not persecution of ethnic, racial or religious minorities in Thailand, or is he just being selectively myopic to the reality around him and reported almost daily in the Thai and occasionally, international media?

Try telling, for instance, there is no corruption to the ethnic minorities who come to work in Thailand from neighbouring countries, but are shaken down for bribes and favours (often sexual in the case of women) by police and other officials almost from the moment they step foot in Thailand. The Burmese probably get the worst of it, but only the other day I saw Vietnamese entering Thailand being relieved of a 100 B each by immigration as an unofficial tax to enter the realm.

Try telling that to the southern Thai muslims or northern Thai ethnic minorities who are generally taken advantage of, abused, denied their rights and often extorted of sums of cash by corrupt officials on a regular basis, often because they just happen to look different from the majority. Anyone can see this by taking a bus in a northern or southern border area and watching the police or military at checkpoints pick certain people off the bus, just for looking different and not fitting their stereotypes of what a Thai citizen should look like.

Try telling that to the kosher black tourist or south Asian, perhaps from Europe or North America, who is racially discriminated against not just by state officials, but by ordinary members of the public in myriad ways, purely on the basis of the colour of their skin. Racial discrimination is rampant in Thailand and reaches right across society, leading to a culture of impunity for those that commit more serious racial abuse.

And don't even start me on the treatment meted out to Rohingya refugees (and other minorities in the past) seeking asylum in Thailand who suffer a mixture of ethnic, racial and religious persecution......

So to pretend that corruption is only in the political realm is naive at best, but probably disingenuous. Thailand has a long way to go in the realm of self-perception, in its often genuine concerns about how it is portrayed internationally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Anand warned that if the culture of corruption is allowed to continue unchecked, the country could be heading for disaster."

This is exactly why 50% of the govt must be "SELECTED" and 50% elected.

cheque = bank balance.

This half-elected / half-appointed Seant is only a feable force to outbalance a lower house which is majorized by a party. It has an "undemocratic" weakness: who appoints the Senators (and who appoints the appointers etc.) and what are the criteria.

I would suggest to abandon the centralized political and administrative system in Thailand and give the regions and provinces more autonomy.

Each Senator would then be elected in his province and would then represent the interests of his province. If he becomes a "brown nose" to the party ruling the lower house, his constituency will (hopefully) not reelect him.

A positive side-effect would be a calming down of the situation in the South.

Now there is the crux. I don't know why on earth they don't just follow the House of Lords model from the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It absolutely amazes me that there are actually people who actually advocate taking the right to choose their government away from the people. Somehow they seem to believe that the "selectors" and "selected" will somehow offer greater protection from corruption. This despite history's numerous examples of the dangers of putting power in the hands of small numbers of people.

Sadly it would seem the "peaceful protesters" are showing their true colors as the seek to use violence and intimidation in an attempt to bring down an elected government and impose the will of a minority.

And actually what actual current evidence do you actually have that the actual protesters actually represent a minority? Actually, that is.
Counting actual votes in an actual election is acknowledged worldwide as expressing the wishes of the actual majority. Therefore, those who oppose the government elected by an actual majority would constitute an actual minority. Actually :-)
Actual CURRENT evidence, I said. Which word confuses you, "actual" or "current"?

Let me re-phrase it for you. What actual evidence do you have that the majority of the people do not support their freely elected government?

Well, gee, let's see. Maybe a few thousand Thais out in the streets protesting in Bangkok and other cities... I admit, that's only "evidence", not "proof". But it IS certainly more current than an election held years ago. We can't know whether those protesters actually represent the majority of thais or not without another election. Can we? By the way, PTP received, back then, 48% of the vote. So as long as you're re-phrasing things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now there is the crux.  I don't know why on earth they don't just follow the House of Lords model from the UK.

Oh great. Appointees from the paedophile & talking snakes society, plus half-wit hereditary peers. Any more bright ideas?

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It absolutely amazes me that there are actually people who actually advocate taking the right to choose their government away from the people. Somehow they seem to believe that the "selectors" and "selected" will somehow offer greater protection from corruption. This despite history's numerous examples of the dangers of putting power in the hands of small numbers of people.

Sadly it would seem the "peaceful protesters" are showing their true colors as the seek to use violence and intimidation in an attempt to bring down an elected government and impose the will of a minority.

And actually what actual current evidence do you actually have that the actual protesters actually represent a minority? Actually, that is.
Counting actual votes in an actual election is acknowledged worldwide as expressing the wishes of the actual majority. Therefore, those who oppose the government elected by an actual majority would constitute an actual minority. Actually :-)
Actual CURRENT evidence, I said. Which word confuses you, "actual" or "current"?

Let me re-phrase it for you. What actual evidence do you have that the majority of the people do not support their freely elected government?

Well, gee, let's see. Maybe a few thousand Thais out in the streets protesting in Bangkok and other cities... I admit, that's only "evidence", not "proof". But it IS certainly more current than an election held years ago. We can't know whether those protesters actually represent the majority of thais or not without another election. Can we? By the way, PTP received, back then, 48% of the vote. So as long as you're re-phrasing things...

Well that's fine then. If they genuinely represent such a sizeable proportion of the population, all they have to do is wait for the next election and get their supporters to kick the government out at the ballot box, no?

Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

Edited by hawker9000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

OK, this is probably naive of me but let's suppose the government dissolves parliament and calls new elections. The result of this is that the same government gets elected. Again I naively would assume this would show that their actions and policies were sanctioned by the electoral majority. Is this enough or do the protesters come back and try to bring down the government again?

I'm just asking because I can only remember one elected majority that survived a full term. That clearly wasn't acceptable.

I abhor corrupt politicians living off their public positions. Trust me it is prevalent everywhere. Witness the amount of ex-cabinet ministers in western countries who aren't stupid enough to take payoffs in office but sit on multiple boards after their political careers. But you simply cannot continue to bring down the government everytime your gang of crooks loses to their gang of crooks. My sincere hope is that there can be some dialog that brings about a constitution that provides transparency and accountability. This is probably an impossibility since it seems most of the parties have no interest in having their powers checked.

But perhaps if the stability of having elected governments serve full terms and then be judged at the next election can become the norm the country can slowly move towards a model that encourages accountability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

OK, this is probably naive of me but let's suppose the government dissolves parliament and calls new elections. The result of this is that the same government gets elected. Again I naively would assume this would show that their actions and policies were sanctioned by the electoral majority. Is this enough or do the protesters come back and try to bring down the government again?

I'm just asking because I can only remember one elected majority that survived a full term. That clearly wasn't acceptable.

I abhor corrupt politicians living off their public positions. Trust me it is prevalent everywhere. Witness the amount of ex-cabinet ministers in western countries who aren't stupid enough to take payoffs in office but sit on multiple boards after their political careers. But you simply cannot continue to bring down the government everytime your gang of crooks loses to their gang of crooks. My sincere hope is that there can be some dialog that brings about a constitution that provides transparency and accountability. This is probably an impossibility since it seems most of the parties have no interest in having their powers checked.

But perhaps if the stability of having elected governments serve full terms and then be judged at the next election can become the norm the country can slowly move towards a model that encourages accountability.

If, as you say the government did call an election, and did get voted straight back, then this would (all things being fair of course) show they had the support of the people. If the government really thought that was true however, there would have been a statement of an election in the new year - there has not been one. Full terms are not guaranteed, and in some countries they are not particularly common (governments tend to call early when they know/believe their support is strongest - or when heading for a storm they would be better tarnishing the opposition with next time around). In such countries, the UK for example, it is not a leadership race, but a political party race - here it seems to be stuck between the two.

I think two things the government could do that may kill off the demonstrations (maybe not for Suthep - but possibly for most of his support): 1. Announce early elections next year and an emergency bill to amend the constitution to disallow state or legislative en block amnesties (thereby making any recurrence of the amnesty bill illegal and thus void - HM still retains power to commute) ; 2. PTP has a leadership shake up, removes YL, ministers that have appeared on the Red stage (Interior/Education), Surapong, and other contentious heads - and puts out a statement that they are sorry, but give them time to fix things - and of course killing the amnesty bill as in 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

In Thailand (and other countries), it's not necessarily a given that the current government finish out its " term". That's the US model, but certainly not the case everywhere else. These protesters, due largely to the amnesty bill debacle, which can apparently come roaring back to life in about 145 more days, want this government dissolved as the only way to prevent that and PTP's over-reaching generally, not to mention its ties to a convicted felon currently operating outside the country. They claim the current government has forfeited its legitimacy, reason enough for it to be dissolved and new elections called. 'Nothing sacrosanct here about a government finishing out its term.

OK, this is probably naive of me but let's suppose the government dissolves parliament and calls new elections. The result of this is that the same government gets elected. Again I naively would assume this would show that their actions and policies were sanctioned by the electoral majority. Is this enough or do the protesters come back and try to bring down the government again?

I'm just asking because I can only remember one elected majority that survived a full term. That clearly wasn't acceptable.

I abhor corrupt politicians living off their public positions. Trust me it is prevalent everywhere. Witness the amount of ex-cabinet ministers in western countries who aren't stupid enough to take payoffs in office but sit on multiple boards after their political careers. But you simply cannot continue to bring down the government everytime your gang of crooks loses to their gang of crooks. My sincere hope is that there can be some dialog that brings about a constitution that provides transparency and accountability. This is probably an impossibility since it seems most of the parties have no interest in having their powers checked.

But perhaps if the stability of having elected governments serve full terms and then be judged at the next election can become the norm the country can slowly move towards a model that encourages accountability.

Yes. Naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things Suthep has been demanding is that a constitution drafting assembly be set up to review the constitution to strengthen the checks and balances.

He has been saying that after the rewrite had been reviewed and found to do what was intended then it would be taken to the people in a referendum.

Contrast that with PT who have been trying to weaken the checks and balances by their constitution changes, section 109, and such things as cutting the budgets of the Anti corruption commission and others, by refusing to accept the constitution courts decisions, by intimidating judges and putting their own people in top positions.

Changing the senate to all elected is not the main bone of contention as the Dems have agreed to it.

What is the problem is the changes that would allow family and friends of sitting MP's to be senators and allowing an unlimited term (for life) rather than the present 6 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the bland, unsupported assertions like "corruption has got steadily worse since Thaksin...".

It was bad before, it was bad during, it carried on as if nothing had changed during the Dems' period at the helm, it's bad now, and it will be bad for the foreseeable future. Until the voters understand that a deep-rooted culture of nepotism and corruption is at fault - practised by pretty much anyone in a position of power - and not by a few headline-grabbing individuals, nothing will ever change. People are just so naive, and easily manipulated. And not just the Thais, going by the polemics on this forum.

Hmmm... PTP apologists on the defensive?

Or a fairly unbiased view on things, what do you think? Oh, that much I think we now know ...........tuzki-bunny-emoticon-024.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many people in Thailand ARE sick of corruption. Hence the protest.

Oh, I thought it was to demonstrate against the Amnesty Bill, and then I thought it was against the Selection/Election of Senators Bill, and then there was the movement to eradicate the Shinawatra Regime, and then there was the Rubber Farmers protesting, I thought the students were there protesting that they should have their own NRA, I knew the Dhamma Armies were marching for well, because they can, then I thought that Sutheps was definitely there to form his own little Nirvana with a fairy tale Peoples Council to run a country with "good" people

and NOW you tell me it's all about

Corruption?

tuzki-bunny-emoticon-027.gif

Edited by fab4
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...