Draft Constitution

[sunsnow]

i would also suggest that some East European countries are NOT running their business better than Thailand .... in fact until relatively recently they were ALL being run from Moscow !!!

(Didn't notice this thread had moved on since last week) Actually you hit the point that I didn't express out loud but I was thinkin' off: they are running, especially the Baltic countries, their business pretty damn good (=advanced a lot) considering that they WERE run like sh*t just 16 years ago and the time frame I was thinkin' in my head when making the post...Good for pointing it out.

There should have been a law prohibiting the acceptance of a constitution with a yes vote by just a third.

Actually a nice comparison, as amendments and changes to constitutions are always (?) the most hardest to get passed in congresses around the globe. They demand the most yes votes, biggest majorities...and the way you put it, yea, it is really a low figure. But as Loburt said when it comes to "approving" it this way, maybe if I may use his words in this way, this was better option than let the military elected government vote about it between themselves?

Well, now it is up for the coup makers get their amnesties, and everyone will be jolly good fellow. For few years no changes will be made and so on, as the amendments will be damn hard to get thru as I have understood.

[commie]

i would also suggest that some East European countries are NOT running their business better than Thailand .... in fact until relatively recently they were ALL being run from Moscow !!!

(Didn't notice this thread had moved on since last week) Actually you hit the point that I didn't express out loud but I was thinkin' off: they are running, especially the Baltic countries, their business pretty damn good considering that they WERE run like sh*t just 16 years ago and that was the time frame I was thinkin' in my head when making the post. So the time frame was my focus...

Ahem and what are they run like now - like economy miracles? One of them is one of the largest exporters of rare metals in the world. Funny, since it doesn't have any natural resources of its own And pro-nazi (yeah I'm talking about fascism, SS etc) propaganda of some of them pisses me off big time. Memorials to SS troops? Give me a break...

[sunsnow]

OT:

Memorials to SS troops? Give me a break...

Thought that those run also in Denmark eh eh...Maybe need to start defining now what recently independent east-european countries we are talking about...Are u talking about official state policy of pro-nazism?

I was actually, sorry for my short mindness but we just happen to have biggest trade relations there, Baltic countries. I know now that I should have used that word. But talking about East-Europe, Romania is improving fast too, Losts of corruption still, that 80-mentality left. Big problems on that side still. Hungary, Czech repulbic and Slovakia are doing amazingly, I think. And Poland too rising. All have taken a lot of wobbly steps since iron curtain broke down, in pretty fast space imho. But I am no historian as it is obvious so, I stand corrected gladly.

[commie]

Are u talking about official state policy of pro-nazism?

Although it's never admitted on government level one can feel it... Esp. in Latvia and Estonia.

Funny that - I've been in Finland 3 weeks ago on a rally. One day we were approached by a guy from Latvia, he heard us speaking Russian and came over to chat. I was quite surprised when this guy started apologizing to us for his own government's actions and policies and his words towards them weren't chosen carefully..

[sunsnow]

OT OT OT

Although it's never admitted on government level one can feel it... Esp. in Latvia and Estonia.

ESTONIA? What on earth!? Since when? Lativa, that was over run by first Russians in WWII and then by nazis and then again by Russians? Pro-nazis? I just thought they hate russians a lot. Or what u mean with pro-nazis, as hating russians is not nazism...(The situation of russians in baltic countries is not fun at all, being without nationality etc) (Had nice time in Jyvaskyla? It is such a huge event there...:-) I've never been but my mates are originally from there...) (Ok, we're taking this off topic now maybe send me private message, mate?)

[Loburt]

The overwhelming majority of Thais on this site are young women, and generally speaking, they didn't sign up to post about politics.

I'll go out on a limb and say neither did most of the guys. That does not seem to affect our willingness or ability to make comments on political topics however.

Yes, but it's also much more typical of our cultures to have heated political debates.

It's less common for young Thai women, and the relatively aggressive manner in which we talk about politics would be a turn off for many of them, and they would avoid that kind of discussion.

[The Punisher]

The overwhelming majority of Thais on this site are young women, and generally speaking, they didn't sign up to post about politics.

I'll go out on a limb and say neither did most of the guys. That does not seem to affect our willingness or ability to make comments on political topics however.

Yes, but it's also much more typical of our cultures to have heated political debates.

It's less common for young Thai women, and the relatively aggressive manner in which we talk about politics would be a turn off for many of them, and they would avoid that kind of discussion.

Which is exactly what you should have said in the first place :wink:

[Loburt]

But when you come from a culture where keeping your mouth shut and listening to your patron are the prime political virtues then the ideal will always be a rather quiet monologue by your leaders, and they'll always be claiming to have been "misunderstood" by those "stupid" enough to vote "no".

Funny, the word stupid, which you put in quotes, wasn't used by the person you were quoting. That's your word.

Your contempt for the locals, as always, shines through.

[CiaranM]

One of my points is that 57 percent went to vote.

58 percent of those 57 percent agree with the thing - that's whether they understand it, or not.

It is assumed that those against don't know what it really contains but that cuts in both directions. The big majority of those yes-voters will have equally distorted views obtained from the mainstream media, see it as a vote against Thaksin, do it because their godfather or their boss tells them to during a meal he's paying, and all other silly reasons you can think of.

When I multiply 0.57 with 0.58 I get about 0.33.

That means you can force a consitution down the throat of a whole country if 1 in 3 people say "well OK, I don't know any better and I don't wanna sound negative to such important people".

I think to invoke the name of democracy in such a case is propaganda itself.

There should have been a law prohibiting the acceptance of a constitution with a yes vote by just a third. After all this is not just a little law about who can drive a car but limits democracy itself .

From the viewpoint of those organizing the circus it means if you can buy 50 percent of 50 percent of all votes then next time you can forget about the other 75 percent.

check out the percentages who turn out to vote in more "developed" countries and then start to lecture Thais on "democracy" !!!everybody was entitled to vote ... if they didn't that is THEIR fault, not the fault of the ppl writing the constitution !!! if ppl start whining about the result, but didn't vote .... well tough f**king **** !!!

if memory serves correctly Labour and Blair won a "majority" in the British Parliment with 36% of the vote on something around a 50% turnout ... ie 18% of the ppl able to vote put him in power !!!

[Neo]

I guess most farangs are from a culture where democracy still means something, from places where you are actually invited to think or talk about politics. It also requires more language skills to participate, that is true.

They are? So most farangs are from New Zealand or some other obscure country that still has some semblance of democracy? I didnt know that.

But when you come from a culture where keeping your mouth shut and listening to your patron are the prime political virtues then the ideal will always be a rather quiet monologue by your leaders, and they'll always be claiming to have been "misunderstood" by those "stupid" enough to vote "no".

That's how things have been in the main in Thailand, except of course for the students, some media, and political science professors, and those instigating the occasional political action. But these days it's encouraging to see how much discussion is happening amongst Thai's about things such as the constitution. Seems to be moving in the direction of greater awareness and participation in politics. And the referendum turnout figures back this observation.

[duanja]

If you wanna discredit "Vote No" folks for not reading the draft.

Some of "Vote No" folks could respond by accepting that: We did not read it.

Exactly, when u did not read the draft through, there are 2 ways out:

1. No vote.

2. Vote No.

How to say yes for Constitution you are not sure about, it is not a lottery. And Whoever had a priviledge to read it through in a short time are either don't have to work like 8-12 hours per day, or their professions are somehow related to laws, education, etcs.

Actually, the coupgangs have to discredit vote no folks coz they are totalitarian old-ginger, not satisfied with just winning, but expect to have a landslide winning coz they boasted that the majority of Thai agreed with the coup's methods. What comes out bad for them is that they did not blame the vote no folks who lived all over thailand, but only specified the folks in two regions, Isaan and North, as misinformed, gullible, misunderstood, and did not read the draft.

However, the dusit pools reported that 45.68% of Vote No Folks said no because they thought it was not right to do it this way.

http://dusitpoll.dusit.ac.th/2550/2550_041.html

Besides Thai 's records of people who go to vote for electioin is about 60-70% , much higher than the Brittons. i think we should not compare a statistic of voters for the constitution draft with that of election.More importantly, the Britons don't a chance to read nor vote for their constition.

Constitution is the heart of democracy. Constitution is like a design of form of democracy ; general election, and parliament got to follow Constitution's rule.

However, I think that the percentage of Yes Voters was not too bad

= if the process had been free and fair =

Anyway, HMK approved it joyfully, the newspaper reported.

[Loburt]

That's funny, in reading over 20 news reports, both local and foreign, on HMK approving the new constitution, none of them mentioned any display of emotion on his part. Certainly not joy.

In none of the photos of him signing the charter is he smiling.

[sunsnow]

What was sad was the discredition and illegal procedures to stop campaigns for voting no...All those seizures of brochures, police harassment etc...Not that it would have changed the balance in favor for no, but never know.

[Loburt]

The current powers that be certainly did not allow free space for those campaigning against the charter. It wasn't a total shut down of opposing views, but it was repressive.

On the other hand, there were reports by P-Net (the poll monitor) that local political bosses in certain areas intimidated those campaigning for the charter, and handed out money to vote against it.

Having witnessed seven national elections here during the pat 12 years, I haven't yet seen one that that by Western standards could be labeled free and fair. Even when the result did basically reflect the will of the electorate.

They've all been plagued by massive vote buying, electoral fraud, murder, violence and intimidation, and attempts to deny opponents access to the media or the ability to speak. And collusion on the part of the supposedly independent Election Commission - voters were denied a secret ballot last time around in 2006. The EC filed charges against the opposition for "criticizing the government.''

I'm hoping the coming election will be a bit cleaner - some party leaders have already warned their candidates not to violate any laws this time around because they expect the authorities will be stricter.

But in the end I think it will still be disappointing. There is still, sadly, a long way to go.

[zeusbheld]

[

I guess most farangs are from a culture where democracy still means something, from places where you are actually invited to think or talk about politics.

no, but i guess most farrangs are eager to give themselves credit for being from such a culture.

[frankenburner2]

haven't really read any of the above....just a possibly off topic comment.

I know someone who's entire family were paid 200 baht each to vote "yes"

I though that was interesting.

[duanja]

HMK gave compliment to the writers team, Meechai said to the news.

So i presume that he was in a good mood?

[Loburt]

I don't think any of us could really say. But it seems every prime minister who has met with him has said he gives them encouragement. Probably the same here. Just a guess.

But as long as we're on that subject, I'll relay a story told by former Prime Minster Anand Panyarachun at a dinner this week at The Oriental.

Khun Anand said that when he was Prime Minister for the second time during the early 1990s, he went to see HM to brief him on certain aspects of the draft constitution of that time that he thought HM would be interested in or concerned about. HM actually did not seem too concerned about most of it, according to Khun Anand.

At one point, however, they were discussing the sections of the charter that dealt with the monarchy and the king. According to Khun Anand, HM suddenly looked up at him and interrupted to say:

Khun Anand, the charter says that the king must be a defender of Buddhism. It says he must be this and he must be that. He must do this and he must do that. His rights are this, and his responsibilities are that.

But Khun Anand, nowhere does the constitution say that the king must be a Thai!!!

[sunsnow]

But in the end I think it will still be disappointing. There is still, sadly, a long way to go.

Ultimately if we take into consideration how long Thailand has even had democracy in comparison to Sushi's aforementioned "westerners" anything other than disappointing would be quite remarkable.

Hmm, so, someone could please say what is the opinion how long so called democracies "should" be "given time" to develop from infant to teenager and beyond until one could "apply" the same "standards" as you would for "westerners who have been playing with it so long"? Or to come anything "close"/"closer" even...Now that we are playing here with ideas and words.

This same thing pops up time after time:"but look how little time Thailand has been trying democracy, only since 1932"...So, I really am interested what are the mysterious "qualifications" untill people would start to measure things with same "demands"? :idea:

Finland, 1918. Norway, 1884, Germany 1918 (yes, weird example,but true), Japan 1889, Hungary 1989, Estonia 1918-1940, then again 1991, Spain 1975 (Spain has very messy political history, dont really know at what point it could have been called democracy before 1975, atleast somewhere in the early 1930's...)... Not sure are these one to one examples at all but at least some time lines about passing of parliamentary systems in some countries that come to my mind...

[Loburt]

Yes, but look at Italy and Greece.

And Germany and Japan reverted to fascism and then had democracy imposed upon them after losing a war.

Each country has its own unique set of circumstances. Comparisons can be useful, but it's not always fair to make comparisons.

And while there may be some universals, I doubt all peoples will ever measure things in the same way.

There is a good book on Thai democracy by Anek Laothamathas called "A Tale of Two Democracies" that talks about the split in how rural and urban Thais view democracy. Unfortunately, I don't think it has been translated into English yet (no, I can't read the Thai version). It seems at this point in Thailand's development, even many Thais don't agree on what democracy really is.

As a side note, 1932 is best referred to as the end of absolute monarchy in Thailand, not the dawn of democracy.