For two days now there has been a 24 hour protest going on in Bangkok at Sanam Luang calling for PM Taksin to step down. No violence so far but the crowd is estimated at over 200,000.

The beef is Taksin has sold his company Shin Corp. to a Singapore-based entity and it appears he paid no tax on the sale. Also, the appearance of selling away a part of the country (Thailand).

My bet is Taksin will hang on for possibly a week before submitting to the wishes of the population and step down but there's no qualified replacement waiting in the wings. Very strange situation.

Why would Thaksin step down?
He has a legitimate mandate from the electorate, he was elected by a landslide only a year ago. Yet, in the face of the protests resulting from the sale of Shin Corp, he has opted to dissolve parliament and seek a fresh mandate. In the new elections, set for April 2nd, he will win again, his grass roots popularity, large campaign fund and control of the media will ensure that

Well, events taking place at Sanaam Luang today & tonight don't bode well for Khun Taksin. There was a mock trial held and it doesn't look good for the 'big guy'. Crowds estimated at over 200k and a march in the morning (Tuesday) will interesting to watch.

Meanwhile, Taksin is scuttling around Thailand like a scared rabbit.

Over the years the country of Thailand has been a subject dear to my heart. Though, as a Farang, I do not believe it is my place to get involved in Thai internal politics.

I wonder though, if this apparent Mob rule stands in opposition to the sacrificial meanings inherent in 1973 Democracy movement to which few even remember and or even honor these days. Is not, this endeavor of a mob of a few, instead of a democratic principled mob of the whole, not contrary to those fateful days in 1973?

Having no preference or otherwise towards Thaskin, as he is in my eyes, yet another, in along line of past and, I suspect, future types like him, who, in collusion with a few, act in self interest and corruption. As will, I suspect, his opposition, given time, if they win out.

I must ponder in mistrust as to whether these people who stand against him would offer anything better? Especially if they would NOT allow democracy the opportunity to decide his fate as its leader. Who are they to say they have a better way in being so undemocratic using mob rule to decide governance? Does this mob rule take Thailand in an opposite direction as to what those in 1973 stood and died for to exactly what they stood against then.?

Is democracy built on the idea that a minority MOB who disagrees with a government can seek to change that government merely by being uncooperative, disruptive and or violence or its potential, in tactics of impediments against that government? Who wins if this is the rule of governance that become the rule instead of the exception?

Look at the misinterpreted messages a disrupted and impeded body politics resounds so confusingly and disruptively, both internally and externally, from a much-divided America.

For example, we are told by many, internally and externally, we need friends, yet some, on all sides, in self-interest, say and do things that do exactly the opposite of that. With every spin doctor’s punditry on what is wrong and or right about America’s ever endeavor, who REALLY KNOWS, beyond faith and self supposition, fact from the punditry of self interests anymore?

When Lies beget lies about lies and punditry dilutes national interests for self-interests, who really wins, the nation or merely the pundits who are not likely to do much better than those other’s they would stand against in disruption and selfish undemocratic principles.

Does Thailand win, if a Mob of a minority, who clearly has no confidence in winning at the voting booth, willfully selects not to vote and would only seek to impeded and disrupt a nation’s possible stability, confidence, both internally and externally, possibly it’s economy, its body politics and, in a possibility, it’s near term future?

An elected goverance by a majority may not always be the best of choices, as Hamas may, prove or yet disprove, but it is a willful choice of the majority, who in making it, take democratic responsibility and thereby the resulting consequences for that choice.

An Opine!!!

QUOTE

Only the mob and the elite can be attracted by the momentum of totalitarianism itself. The masses have to be won by propaganda.- Hannah Arendt

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. Thomas Jefferson

To wit, the alternative is?

The problem is, Trader, Taksin made so much money out of the deal when he sold Shin Corp. to Singapore - 1.6 Billion Dollars - people see him as going 'over the top'. Sure, all politicians are corrupt but Taksin has taken greed to a new level.

Actually, as a university lecturer, I pay more taxes than Toxin

Again, I have no interest in this game. We agree Thaskin or not, there will be just another one of this milk, suckling at the teats, if it is not him.

I possed the issue of electoral Democracy by the majority verse Military Junta like mob rule of the minority.

If this moral issue and or a legal issue is that unsatisfactory to THE PEOPLE as you say. It seems unconscionable for those who have that view, if they are indeed in the majority, not to have the issue decided at ballot box, instead of on the streets, boycotting an election and giving voice to further potential for an escalation or maybe violence well beyond where it is now?

If the minority of a mob rules, will Thailand be but another place where the loudest and most violent decide the fate of others when they could not do so at ballot box?

Likewise, is not this minority mob who obviously do not think they can win at the Ballot box nothing more than another form of the Military Junta faced in 1973?



As a University Lecturer, is it not true that you likely pay more taxes than just about most wealthy people, no matter where you live.

Is paying more taxes or not, worth forsaking a Democratic process to get one to pay, while thousands upon thousand do not, is the issue I posse? If the majority of people feel this way, why is there so much opposition to the election? It would seem a done deal. Vote Thaskin out!!

I will abstain from Moral judgments of what Thaskin did or did not do. Instead, leaving that to someone else. But as I stated, I prefer that some else should be the Thai Electorate, not some unruly mob who would have the nation forsake the hard fought for Democracy they have, as it maybe, for yet another era of Junta like rule by a minority who would forsake Democracy just to prove a point most may or may not disagree with.

Again Just an Opine.

I still remember the spirit of 1973 that so many seem to have forsaken once again.

Realize you don't have a dog in this fight, Trader, my initial point is whether or not Taksin will step down. More and more, it looks as if he will since now he's saying that due to 'illness,' he wants to 'step aside' for three months or so and then come back.

The folks (mob if you will) won't have it. If I were HM King Bumibhol, I'd appoint an interim PM and hold elections. Get the business of the country back on its feet. The Free Trade talks are suspended while all this is going on. Only thing that still runs is the Tourist business and retail trade.

My choice for PM - Chamlong Srimuang, The ex-general who looks and dresses like a Tuk Tuk driver.

For more insite go here .

I agree with you Boon Mee. Mr T one sharp cookie but he miscalculated on the front of avoiding taxes and the reaction of the middle class Thai. It would have been smarter to pay taxes therefore giving less fuel to his critics. It seems to be ok in thailand to do things like that but you must be seen to be giving benefits to others rather than being selfish.

There is just not an alternative at the moment to the TRT party. I suspect the opposition is boycotting the elections for the simple fact there is a lack of funds/support to compete. It is going to be a win for TRT so why throw good money at a race you cannot win. An advantage of this is they gain face by refusing to run and probably win a lot of support for the future. They cannot lose if they are not in he race but they can gain a lot by boycotting it and making a lot of noise about the credibility of the current election.

It does seem that Mr T has cornered himself and may be forced to resign. This could open a can of worms as the Thai political system has always been run on corruption.

Recently Mr T has been directing tenders and big contracts towards his friends in big business. That has upset a lot of influential middle class Thai's who suddenly do not get a bite of the cherry as they have in the past.

Thai politics are very interwoven with face and it is difficult to see beyond the exterior facade.

Chamlong is a very possible alternative but there is no chance in the forseeable future of anything like a fair election.

sometimes it's better the devil you know ...... the problem is it's still a devil.

In this case the Devil we know has caused (among Thais) apparent loss of face by selling a majority of shares of Shin Corp. to another country - Singapore, so there's that beef too.

The joke going around today is when Thai schoolkids are asked who their Prime Minister is they answer: Taksin. And when they are asked what's his last name they answer: "Awk Pai"! (go out).

Both of you gentlemen, obviously, having a personnel dog in this fight, present clear and concise arguments as to the overall issues that are occurring in Thailand.

As I paraphrase what Boon mee said in his question of supposition, should Thaskin step down and will he? Will he do it for the sake of the country as this impasse simmers to suspension and or repression economic activity as long as this discourse continues? That strikes at one side of the core issues faced in Thailand for sure.

Likewise, I, as well, paraphrase the good points Englishshoak made when agreeing with Boon Mee that the “folks” are outraged at Thaskin apparent greed and think he should go for it.

He, as well, answers the other side of the issue faced in Thailand that being what the opposition can and or will do no matter what Thaskin does or does not do.

In doing this EnglishShoak further points out the opposition’s apparent self realized futility in knowing it can not win an election, regardless if it would be fair or not, as they are so much in the minority compared to the overwhelming dominance of the TRT party.

Englishshoak goes on to lay the very foundation of my premise, in saying, first, ”This could open a can of worms as the Thai political system has always been run on corruption.” Then second, he later hits the nail on the head when he says “sometimes it's better the devil you know ...... the problem is it's still a devil.”

That leaves my original premise in contention. So what is next for Thailand? Even if Thaskin does leaves office and I assume the country with his $1.9 Billion in tow especially given the potential for personal and financial retributions? Does this effect tourism, Trade and currency as in an abrupt imbalance within the current accounts?

If the TRT is unbeatable, as is supposed, do the Thai’s not get yet another version of Thaskin, a poorer version of him, say a TRT version 2.1 instead?

It seems as in 1973 and again in 1992 Democracy was the call of Thailand. Yet, today even when a Ballot box democracy exists there seems to be no will or acceptance of it. As long as one can raise a large enough mob to rule the streets, this will effectively disenfranchise the ballot box once again.

Democracy, by this example, is non-existent, as EnglishShoak alludes to, in his assessment that the TRT party is so strong it cannot be defeated. Assuming from that, by implication, the minority, who oppose Thaskin, are so weak they must resort to Mob rule on the streets to decide the countries political destiny.

As Englishshoak points out, as I somewhat paraphrase him, Thai politics are very interwoven with face and (a desire for a bite of the cherry). Which makes it is difficult to see beyond the exterior façade as to why Democracy appears to be people power when it suites some of the people.

Obviously, Thaskin stepping down will defuse the current situation. However, will it solve the underlying premise that, be it a Junta or mob street rule, the stability of Thailand and its governance is just but one disagreement or objective of self interest away. Once again waiting yet another voice from the street to start the process of disenfranchising the ballot box once again.

It is, in the coming year, this potential for unpredictability and uncertainty derived from mere political disagreements taken to the streets, which can easily dictate investor sentiment and thusly Thai economic fortune or misfortune. I surmise.

I think maybe I will take one of those offers to sale out most of my stuff except our homes there. For the until now, I never wonder or questioned when the next argument would overrule the ballot box bringing issues and or idioms thusly effecting other’s interests particularly farang into play?

How long ago was it and do many remember the disenfranchised property rights of Farang. How long ago was the issue of property rights for the Thai Females married to a foreigner as compared to those completely franchised rights of Thai males married equally to a foreigner completely different than today?

Is not this nationalistic issue of foreign ownership, as much as Thaskin greed, not a part of the play we see on the streets of Bangkok? Are we not seeing a lot of anti-free trade, anti-foreign ownership groups among the protestors? Will their will prevail and how could that affect investors?

P.S I note now that Boon Mee acknowledges this issue of foreign ownership as being a player to some degree more or less than Thaskin greed. The question is to what end it will eventual effect foreigners in some way or another, if at all. Hey?

I enjoyed the perspectives I think they were insightful.

Well, foreign ownership of real property does not seem to be on the agenda to be changed anytime soon. Not a mention of that issue has been brought up over the course of the past two weeks. All of 'my' property is in the wife's name and that's just the way it is.

What is coming out though is Taksin's scale of corruption on a level not seen in my lifetime. The latest brought out today was that Thai SuperMall project on 42nd Street in NYC and the 'backhanders' on the lease deal Taksin and his cronies were holding out for. They even got the Thai Ambassador to Washington involved and, who was appalled to the point of resigning. Actually, he was with the speakers tonight along with two other resigned Ambassadors.

And, there is outright derision at the thought of Taksin's man nominated to be the next UN Secratery General - a real know-nothing mid-level bureaucrat.

To be continued...

Thaksin has been great for the economy. Under his premiership, he has introduced mega-infrastructure projects, which often are tied to politicians of the ruling government. If a new government is formed by the Democrats (an opposition party), for example, they might want to review the projects so they can get their cut, putting into jeopardy the status of these projects.

This whole Thai situation right now is particularly fascinating because you're actually seeing the political minority protest against the majority (Thaksin's party has a very strong majority in parliament). There's a very clear urban and rural split, with the former supporting the minority opposition and the latter supporting Thaksin. The biggest problem is what happens if Thaksin is forced to step down when the majority of people actually support him!

As much as this whole thing has to do with democracy and accountability, it stemmed from a feud between Sondhi and Thaksin who cut Sondhi out of lucrative government business concessions. People are rightly angered by Thaksin's ownership links to a large entity like Shinawatra Corp; his heavy-handed marginalizing of government agencies or committees like the anti-corruption committee, which became a total ineffective rubber-stamp; and his brash running of government agencies, like the government TV channels and media, as though they were his own business fiefdoms. But that's how prime ministers did things anyways and Thaksin is no different in that respect.

This is a confrontation that has as much to do with the opposition parties getting frustrated at being left out of government-related businesses and concessions that Thaksin's people are controlling. On the economic front, Thaksin has done a remarkable job. Under his leadership Thailand paid all its debts to the IMF and the economy fully recovered from the 1997 collapse of the whole Thai financial system.

Progress on the political front, however, has been very slow. Political expectations were very high following the bloody 1992 massacre of student protesters by the army led by Suchinda Krapayoon, when the King finally stepped in and brokered peace. No longer could the public from that point brook any more military-led coups or blatant abuse of power, so a new anti-corruption committee was set up to correct the abuses but nothing really happened. The government also put tighter controls on the media, which was anathema to the new public feeling for more openess and freedom of expression. Thaksin's mingling with the ITV channel is a classic example of government-led corporate entities taking over the channel and stifling press coverage.

So, it's a combination of these factors that have led the minority-oppositionists to rebel against a leader that has ironically never enjoyed so much majority popularity coming from the rural areas. For the first time since 1992, the King again has intervened in a political situation and it will be very interesting to see how things will be resolved. One thing is sure, the military will not be the force that takes over the country to bring upon stability as Suchinda did last time in a peaceful coup in 1991. That coup occurred when corruption was totally getting out of hand with the Chatichai government. Chatichai was great for business and he was responsible for the new Indochina battlefields to business/investment policy, but those days were like the Wild West and led to the overheating of the economy, setting the stage for 1997.

Now, we are going to see a new change that will have to peacefully be worked out between the political parties, which is kind of unprecedented. Another interesting facet to this story is how, for the first time, Thailand has had such a hard-driving, market-oriented, no-nonsense CEO-type leader, which has rubbed people, used to doing things the old way, the wrong way. Chatichai was supposed to be the first such CEO premier, later followed by caretaker premier Anand, but no person comes close to Thaksin in terms of better yielding results and driving the economy.

Link

Toxin won't last the week!
The people of Thailand have spoken.
They are in the process of tossing out a corrupt, murdering DICTATOR.
Pity the people of the USA are not so wise.

Toxin is getting CREAMED: http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...ws.php?id=88674

I know little about Thai politics, but I know that, if the man is re-elected, in anything resembling a big way, after being elected in a landslide only a year ago, his political capital will be enormous.

So if he wins any substantial majority of seats, watch out.

going, going ... gone! He got a big no-vote and has lost his mandate. I wonder what'll happen next? I'm unfortunately been far too busy to follow much ...

You are right.
You know nothing about Thai politics.
In this election, the opposition BOYCOTTED the election, so a Toxin win would not have meant much.
The man took advantage of some loopholes in a weak constitution and took total power.
The Thais are mostly upset about financial corruption and selling off assets to Singapore, but from the Western perspective his carrying out extra judicial murders is much more serious.
Again, look at the parallels to the USA.

If the opposition boycotts an election in a Parliamentary system, all the better.

Most men in position to be the Prime Minister of a country are mental grown ups, not 14 year olds, and would realize that the opposition boycotting an election would just lead to more seats for his own party, and greater political power should he win.

Not quite. The Thai constitution stipulates that if the seat is uncontested the candidate must receive more than 20% of the vote to be elected. BTW, contrary to your suggestion Thaksin often behaves like an baby throwing his toys out of the pram.

Oh.

Well then.

I guess he just...is a baby.

Boon Mee, it's great to agree with you. Taksin's interview just finished and, as we know, he didn't resign. Maybe in another week or two.

ustrader or somebody mentioned mob rule, as if the non-violent, almost completely law-abiding protestors in Bangkok are ruling parliament. No, they're protesting unparalleled graft, corruption, hypocrisy and lies, which even by the usual tolerant Thai standards are completely over the top.

Out, damned spot! Will these Thai hands never be clean?

These snap elections were called as a desperate political ploy by a sinking dictator. Not a normal election and not yet an advanced democracy.
This isn't over by any means.

Seems there are 38 seats where unopposed Thai Rak Thai candidates failed to gain the 20% of votes needed to win the seat. Until all 500 seats are filled parliament cannot legally reconvene nor can it elect a Prime Minister. As these 38 seats are within the South where Thaksin is abhorred the by-elections are unlikely to succeed either. We have an impasse.

The Thai Dictator finds a way to gracefully "exit" while saving his face.
The Thai people don't know whether to dance or cry, as he will still be around pulling all the strings!


http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/04/04...es_30000957.php

CROCODILE TEARS!!!

With a bad dye job...

Not surprising.
Thai hairdressers often know two colors, black and VERY black.

Perhaps, USA people can LEARN something from FREEDOM LOVING Thais:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/04/05...on_30001015.php

The mob did rule it appears and hopefully Thai Democracy did not become its victim.

Pray Tale, in Thailand be it a PAD for a TRT or but a new face of TRT. Or, in the US, a Democrat for a Republican, the more things change, the more they absolutely stay the same in politics.

Any takers, that in 6 months to a year or so, be it a PAD governance and or new face on TRT governance that takes over in Thailand. Or a Democratic replacement of Republican governance in the US, it will be, in the end, as disjointed, as self servicing in disconnect to the people, as corrupt, as confused, as mistaken and as miscalculating, if not more so, than ALL that came before it.

I totally agree with you.
Gods and clean politicians don't exist.

Amen to that!

Taksin has done the right thing. Pity he can't just take his billions and bugger off.

Toxin most certainly did not do everything right.
He was the most arrogant PM in living history and more corrupt than most.
Take ex-PM Barnham - did more for the province of Suphanburi than and 10 PM's did for any of Thailand.
Proud to have him in my district.

I seldom find anything in your posts I would fundamentally disagree with. Yet Thaskin, rightly or wrongly, has $1.9 Billion USD that is probably not in Thailand now. So he did something right in just being able to get that type of wealth in a country like Thailand irregardless of his tax evasion, corruption and so forth. Especially given that none of the other previous corruptible politicians and leaders have managed to advantage themselves to that level, it surely was an achievement indeed.

Likewise, he, via TRT, accepting, he was their leader, did, since 2001, win a majority of the electorate in all the polling of the Thai people he participated in.

I also note that his influence was particular adapt in bringing effective entertainment and communications to a nation that not so long ago was one where there was no Internet, you would have to wait maybe a month or two to get a phone and or have it fixed and or be without electricity for weeks just in Bangkok alone. Then if you merely went 50 miles away it was far worst and well you know.

Likewise, I am sure you would be hard pressed to find poor Thai people who have used his 30 Bhat Health program unappreciative. I know I have been going Thailand long enough to know for a fact that even in Bangkok, the poor, the vast majority, have often died of the most treatable diseases for a lack of monies and or government health assistance. Leave Bangkok for Non-Farang Thailand and well you know.

I am sure your absolutely correct as to the level of corruption behind his party and himself. The question I pose is what is new about that?

Similarly do you actually think it will not, in equality, be but a similar road as well traveled by the next lot that comes along as his and those before him?

Not in my 27 years have I seen a bird of another colored feather appear once the Dye of color has had time to wear off.

Then again, there is always the likelihood that this will be THE new beginning all hope for. I sincerely hope so as the Thai’s are well deserving of better as arwe we Americans as well.

In a few hours, Today Thursday, I will be financially bailing out except for two family homes. The bank Liquidity and external and internal capital formation issues as well as the likelihood of continued political uncertainty of minority mob rule verse democratic rule, has passed my risk assessment threshold.

Chok dee.

UST, you are very wrong.
The ousting of Toxin is a great VICTORY for democratic forces in Thailand.
A DICTATOR was removed.
It does not matter that this DICTATOR was elected by so called democratic elections.
The greater good was served very well, and Thailand now has a golden opportunity to reform their constitution so that this cannot happen again.
Growing pains, is all.
Do not judge a baby democracy like Thailand by the yardstick of an advanced democracy like ... INDIA.

First, I never said democracy was lost or impaired. I said, I hoped it was NOT lost nor impaired by mob rule. As I personally, as is my right, have no respect for mob rule. Particularly mob rule, who are in a minority and knowingly cannot achieve convincing an electorate of the righteousness and difference of their being as opposed to those they would oppose by merely using disruption and harm to oust them.

What do suppose they will do next time they do not like something and cannot get enough votes to change it?

The rest of what you said is your opinion. Strange as it may sound, I hope it is as you imply, for the betterment of the Thai people which, as I said ,who well deserve better.

I am a pragmatic realist, who have seen many a birds of different apparent colored feathers strut across the political landscape in both the US and Thailand, to find, once again, at some point the feathers were but dyed and the real feather was again of the same kindred color as all before that they opposed.

Yet, I hope you and Boon Mee are right and I am wrong. I truly do hope this time it will be different both in Thailand and the US as well.

ไม่เป็นไรครับ

I'm looking at the so-called 'stability' of Thailand.
If the King whispers in your ear..you better get out of town.

ไม่เป็นไรครับ mai pen lai kop. Unquestionably so. His Majesty the king is categorically a most honorable leader and a true loving champion of the (ไทย)peoples. Of that there is no doubt. I wish sincerely that it turns out well.

He was not removed, he stepped down by himself after a certain pressure, this does not mean however, that in future, Thaksin has nothing to say anymore.
He will be active, but from behind, with a very good friend, selected by himself, as premier minister.

No government in Thailand, after the power was transferred from the ruling King (Rama VII) by the military 1932, was a stable government.

I think, it will continue like that....unstable as always...

Remark:
If India is really an ADVANCED democracy...this might be worth a discussion.

Though, I am in agreement, in some degree or another, in principle, to much of what you said about Thailand. I would add, not in a disagreement but in an opine of perspective as to the quote above.

I would note, the measure of a man, like that of a democracy, is not in a measuring stick supplied of another language and or culture or manliness or manhood of someone else. But, of its internal measures, in like language and culture, knowing historically, where it is as compared to where it was, in either ones manhood and or ones democracy.

Democracy is not faultless nor perfect but in that very reality is its greatest strength. That innate nature to self examine its being and condition and to adapt and modify its flaws and imperfections often way to slowly and sometimes to far to rapidly.

Democracy is not a competition of likeness, similarities, and whose is the best. It is, instead, a competition of the maintenance of human freedom, against the forces that would deprive it.

Barnham was one of the most corrupt PMs Thailand has ever known. If I were you, I wouldn't be too proud of him (despite all he has done for his constituency).