Three Takes on the Current Situation

[Gadfly]

Let's start with an excerpt from a very good analysis in the (http://Start with an excerpt from a very good analysis from the New York Times which can also be found in the International Herald Tribune

:

 

The protesters call themselves the People's Alliance for Democracy, or PAD. But in fact they are raising a cry that goes back more than a century that Thailand is not "ready for democracy." They want to replace the country's elected Parliament with a mostly appointed body in which power would run top-down, as it does in traditional Thai society.

 

"The PAD is a variation of the deep-rooted hierarchical society," said Thongchai Winichakul, a professor of Southeast Asian history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "In a nutshell it's a kind of distrust of the people."

 

He added: "You can find this idea beginning in the late 19th century, when King Chulalongkorn said Thai people do not want democracy, that Thai people trust the king.

 

"Throughout all the years that kind of idea remained," Thongchai said. "'People are not ready."'

 

* * *

 

The protesters are a self-contradictory mix of royalist elites, generals and businessmen with some liberal democrats, students and trade unionists, some of whom are united only by their opposition to the pro-Thaksin government.

 

At its core, the People's Alliance would move Thailand away from the basic democratic principle of one man, one vote, said Prajak Kongkeerati, a leading political scientist with Thammasat University.

 

"Many Thai elite don't believe in that," he said. "We are really a hierarchical society."

The People's Alliance would return the country to a 20-year-old model of "semi-democracy" in which the bureaucracy and the military have a role in politics and businessmen share a voice with elected representatives, Prajak said.

 

And then the views of a well known member of that elite in the The Nation:

 

The foreign press has played softball when it comes to the incompetent handling of the political mess and ill-conceived economic measures undertaken by the present government, whose leader was stripped of his post on Tuesday. Some even went further, into conspiracy theories, alluding quite openly that the force behind the PAD is the most beloved institution of the Thai people.

 

Is it right or even true that democratic election results should be given the highest esteem, so as to exonerate all the faults and flaws of those elected, and to condemn those who oppose?

 

I think that question says it all. But to put this in context, you need to understand what she proposes - what we had before 23 December 2007 - and compare that with the "ill-conceived economic measures undertaken by the present government"

 

What is proposed in place of what we have now. First, it's not about Samak, and not really about Thaksin. Even if Thaksin left, another elected politician could do the same. Thus, what she and others propose is to replace an elected legislature with one that is mostly consists of (70% is the figured bandied about) of appointed important persons and ex-civil servants.

 

Now let's talk about appointed governments. Are they really that much better than the current elected group?

 

It was the militarily appointed National Legislative Assembly that wanted to change the Foreign Business Act so that tens of thousands of foreign controlled business would either need to be sold to Thais or shuttered.

 

It was the Health Minister in that same government who said - in defense of compulsory licensing of drugs - that the Thai government would hold Western tourists hostages if drug companies refused to provide drugs to Thailand.

 

This same "appointed government" temporarily imposed a 30% tax on investments into Thailand, which made the Thai Stock Exchange drop by almost 15% in about two hours - trading automatically stops at 10%, but the market continued 'skid' downard until the drop was about 15%. It's pretty much agreed know that that this was a major blunder.

 

Make your own judgement.

 

In Bangkok Post, the very well respected former editor in chief of the Far Eastern Economic Review - who has been here for ages - wrote the following:

 

The ruling Bangkok-based establishment, which controls the bureaucracy and much of the corporate sector, was horrified when after 2001, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra built a strong majority in parliament using a mixture of populism and patronage.

 

Previous democratically elected governments were frail coalitions that relied on entrenched vested interests and immovable pillars of bureaucratic authority to survive. Mr Thaksin changed the rules by using his immense wealth to build a strong political party and a rural support base.

 

There is no denying that Mr Thaksin's buying power and uncompromising illiberal views posed a threat to freedom and security in Thailand. The telecoms tycoon took a dim view of Thailand's untrammelled media; his crackdown on drug dealers is alleged to have killed up to 2,000 people. ....

Now it seems, there is a well-financed move to ensure that someone like Mr Thaksin can never come back, by completely changing the rules of the game. In this sense, former prime minister Samak Sundaravej, despite his crude style, had a point: he was elected by the people and to give into a mob is to undermine democracy.

 

And now talking about nationalizing foreign businesses and properties. They also want restrictions imposed on the foreign press Saw this on the Thai TV today. Thaksin and his ilk were bad news, but this...

[Flashermac]

<< They want to replace the country's elected Parliament with a mostly appointed body in which power would run top-down, as it does in traditional Thai society. >>

 

 

So how is this different from the present situation, in which the rural folks elect wealthy and corrupt politicians who rule as if they can ignore the law and do whatever makes them richer and more powerful?

 

The only real difference I see is that the traditional "elite" in politics is a bit less corrupt and nasty than the current ruling group.

 

 

 

 

[Faustian]

"And now talking about nationalizing foreign businesses and properties. They also want restrictions imposed on the foreign press Saw this on the Thai TV today. Thaksin and his ilk were bad news, but this... "

 

GF, where did you hear this? Such measures would signal the end for Thailand.

[Julian2]

Some one wants to send them "A History of Cuba in the Second Half of the Twentieth Century" if they start talking about nationalising foreign businesses.

[samak]

some observations about PAD are spot on! certainly a non democratic, social very conservative and nationalistic movement! well to evaluate whether Thaksin and his cronies or PAD is worse is like comparing the devil and Beelzebub!

[Faustian]

Agreed, some of the noises from PAD are very worrying. What a choice for the people of Thailand!

[Gadfly]

FM - I generally don't disagree with your views, but on this I strongly differ. Even if the rural voters vote for the "wrong" (corrupt) leaders, they should still have a vote equal to that of someone who lives in Bangkok. This is a matter of principle and praticality. And after viewing several Chuwit posters around the town, I am not particularly impressed with the Bangkok electorate either.

 

As a pragamatic matter, the last government was an elite government, and look at the problems they created for Thailand (I listed three in my OP). I am certainly not a Samak fan or a Thaksin fan (look back to my posts when the latter was originally elected), but Samak - as bad as he is - has not been as overtly hostile to business as the "elite" one we just had.

 

I have spent some time with some of the elites here on a business level, and most are only concerned about their own selfish interests. And I have no problem with this - namely, people acting in their self-interest. Indeed, it is entirely irrational to think that people, on balance, will act otherwise (this is where socialists and collectivists get matters so horribly wrong - this idea that they create some new, selfless man, who will sacrafice his interests for the good of some abstract greater good. It's never worked on the left or the right (rule be an enlightened elite)).

 

The problem is that when only the elites get to make the rules, the rules benefit only the elites. Same with any dictatorship, be it one of class privilege or a dictatorship of the proletariat.

 

This is why I think the rural poor should have an equal vote. Mistakes will be made and corrupt politicians will be elected into office (we see that now). But, on balance, their interests will only be better served if they have an equal say about their own governance.

 

This is how I see the current mess. It's not really about Thaksin, although Thaksin is certainly exploited and exploiting is expoiting this serious problem to his advantage. But the problem is not going to go away when Thaksin, Samak or the PPP go away. It's more fundamental than that.

 

 

[Flashermac]

<< And after viewing several Chuwit posters around the town, I am not particularly impressed with the Bangkok electorate either. >>

 

The other day I was told Chuwit hasn't even filed to run yet. No idea what he is up to, since he has zero chance of becoming guv of Bangkok. Apirak should be a shoo in, since Bangkok is a Democrat stronghold. (Samak was once a Dem himself.)

 

I've worked enough with the "elite", including some I would genuinely consider belong to that category plus a majority of wannabes who think they are just because they have money (and are almost invariably Chinese businessmen).

 

I've certainly got nothing against the rural folks voting. I do have with vote buying, no matter which side does it. And I am simply gobsmacked by the Isaan folks' insistence that Thaksin has done nothing wrong ... despite all the evidence that he has. That itself demonstrates the double standard in Thailand. Even the rural folks believe it is all right for political leaders to loot the public tills.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gadfly]

Yes, there are double standards in Thailand. And I think they need to be highlighted. Loss of face is a good incentive.

 

Embarass the hell out of local polcy makers for bad and unfair policies. Demostrate that those who claim you need to accept local politics and policies - not matter how ludicrous - for what those claimants turly are - apologists for tyrnany and bigotry. We're not "guests", and we have the right to comment.

 

But at the end of the day, if the majority picks Thaksin or one of his cronies, I am not going to support an elite or militairy nullification of that choice. I have seen where that leads.

[khun_khon_neua]

Of your â??three problemsâ? caused by the military appointed government, only one is something that actually happened. Changes in Foreign Business Act and the compulsory license issues never actually came about did they? But you go one like they actually did it. Even the 30% withholding (not a tax by the way), though certainly unpopular, did stop the huge cash inflows that were going directly into Baht currency speculation didnâ??t they?

 

You also make it sound like there is some huge rural masses out there being repressed by the so-called â??Bangkok Eliteâ?Â. It is a fact the rural folks are being repressed, but it is not by the Bangkok Elite, it is by the same people that have kept them down for generations, the same people that Thaksin bribed into supporting the TRT in first place. The same people that tell them who to vote for and when to show up for a demonstration. Failure to do so can be fatal.

 

If you study the history of every successful democracy, you will see that they started out with a elite middle class in control using various devices to influence the vote. Land ownership, multiple votes based on wealth, literacy test, etc. Over several generations, these various devices were put aside (and apparently forgotten) and movement to the ideal of one man one vote was made. What the PAD is saying that Thailandâ??s route to democracy has been hijacked and is asking to give it more time to develop. It plays right into Thaksinâ??s hands for people like you to go on and on about how anti-democracy the PAD is.