Thai Democracy

[PattayaMale]

 

Here is a good article from a Thai reporter on Thaskin and democracy. I tried to make a link to the article but did not work so here is the full article.

 

 

I first met Thaksin Shinawatra during the first days after the Thai Rak Thai party won its first general election in 2001. The then prime minister and his cabinet came to the Post Building for a press visit. Thaksin entered the ground floor of the building with much pomp. The staff of Post Publishing lined up to greet him, all smiley and happy. Many had a 100 baht note in their hands, and were asking Thaksin to autograph them. He was a star.

 

When the lift doors opened to the first floor where the boardroom was located, Thaksin came out flanked by the then editor of the Bangkok Post and the then editor of Business Post, followed by his entourage. Again, a crowd of staff gathered in front of the lift to greet the man of the hour, the saviour of Thailand.

 

Alone, I was leaning against the rail of the balcony that overlooked the ground floor. About six metres from the lift, I took in the scene, arms spread out over the rail, just chilling nonchalantly, wearing a suit with no tie like in the picture on today’s page one.

 

After a few seconds greeting his fans, Thaksin looked up and clocked me. He walked straight over to me from about three metres away and grabbed me by the shoulders with both his hands. Everyone else looked on with puzzlement.

 

What’s going on? Is the new prime minister going to chastise that arrogantlooking kid for his smug pose?

 

With a big smile, he spoke: ‘‘Are you a reporter here? You ought to be a star [a dara].’’

 

Well, who was I to contradict the then prime minister and most popular man in Thailand, so I muttered, ‘‘Err ... krub phom’’. Then I heard a collective sigh of relief from everyone else.

 

Later, inside the boardroom, after over an hour of Q&A between Thaksin and his cabinet and the reporters and editors of the Bangkok Post, the meeting drew to a close, though not before Thaksin asked if there was one last question.

 

It was then that the man who ought to be a star raised his hand to ask his first question: ‘‘Sir, what does ‘human rights’ mean to you?’’

 

An uncomfortable silence descended over the room. What’s this? A question that isn’t about economic policy? Foreign policy? Any policy? What’s going on? What kind of question is that?

 

With a sage smile, Thaksin replied with a story of how once he was talking to a group of foreign dignitaries on this very topic. He said that no one was quite sure what ‘‘human rights’’ were, until he told them.

 

‘‘I said to them ... human rights is the right to be human,’’ Thaksin proudly announced. He then added how the foreign dignitaries were impressed with such an ‘‘original’’ and ‘‘insightful’’ answer.

 

His cabinet were all cheering, laughing and smiling at the boss’s brilliance. Everyone else breathed a collective sigh of relief ... well, everyone except for the man who ought to be a star, instead of a starving writer with a penchant for asking goofy questions.

 

I was nearly knocked off my seat by the forceful blow of his empty reply: ‘‘Human rights is the right to be human!’’

 

No kidding? Really? But old chap, I thought you had a PhD in criminology! What has Thailand just done? Elected a leader who has no clue what the foundation of democracy is? As if that’s not bad enough, being a clueless person is fine, anyone can still learn, but a clueless person who pretends to know is dangerous, isn’t he?

 

How dangerous? Dangerous enough to order the murder of some 2,500 citizens, disregarding their right to the due process of law — dangerous enough to intimidate, manipulate and censor the public, disregarding freedom of speech.

Seven years since I first met Thaksin, I would like to ask supporters of the Thaksin camp who have been screaming about him (or his nominees) being democratically elected. I would like to ask the sea of red shirts waving Thaksin banners and gathering to hear his message last night:

 

Why do you want to be ruled by a tyrant who murdered his own people and took away our basic democratic rights? Why do you use the term ‘‘democracy’’ (United Front of Democracy against Dictatorship) to champion someone who is so contemptuous of it? Isn’t that as hypocritical as the People’s Alliance for Democracy shouting for an ‘‘appointed’’ government and prime minister, or taking the airports hostage? I take no sides.

 

I will ridicule the ridiculous no matter the colour of their shirt.

 

Going to the ballot box is merely a function of democracy, a function that serves democratic values such as human rights.

 

If the democratically elected party shows disregard for democratic values, it loses the right to govern. That’s why leaders of democratic countries get impeached when they commit a crime; it doesn’t matter if they are democratically elected or not.

 

But then again, why should the redshirt proponents of Thaksin care about such things as human rights, liberty and freedom when even the law does not care. The Constitution Court found him guilty of corruption, but is there even one of the some 2,500 murder cases being looked at by the Criminal Court?

 

Corruption? Please, show me a politician who has never dirtied his hands, and I’ll show you a prostitute who will give a Christmas discount.

 

Forget money matters for a moment and ask: What happened to the value of human rights in this country? Do we not realise that we cannot have democracy without human rights?

 

In the parliamentary vote for prime minister tomorrow, if a Puea Thai nominee wins, it’s a vote for Thaksin as our ruler, which means a vote for the mastermind behind mass murder and the robber of human rights — an enemy of democracy.

 

Then there’s Abhisit Vejjajiva. Now, this man who ought to be a star instead of a starving writer is no fan of the Democrats, but at least they haven’t committed mass murder ... yet.

 

If he wins, can we expect him to champion human rights? But why should he when most of us seem to obsess only over corruption, which is a money matter, but pay little mind to human rights and liberty?

 

Thailand is stuck in the perpetual black hole of democracy because we only obsess over the capitalistic side of democracy, but disregard the humanistic side of it. Which, given Thailand’s notorious materialism, our greed over fame and fortune, our hobby of banning this and censoring that, of suppressing liberty, here’s another question:

 

Barring mass murder, how many of us are actually better than my sevenyear-long friend, Thaksin Shinawatra?

 

So my dear friend Thaksin, you haven’t been around for a while now, stuck over there in Hong Kong, but still I miss you, After all, you thought I ought to be a star. However, looking around the streets of Thailand, there are so many more Thaksins to make friends with.

 

And since some wise guy decided to put my picture on the front page of the newspaper (I’m a bashful boy, by the way), allow me to conclude this commentary with something that may not be anywhere near as profound as ‘‘human rights is the right to be human’’, but here it is anyway:

 

 

 

[PattayaMale]

Sorry the link sent people to the wrong page so I did a cut and paste

[Guest Steve1903]

In the UK human rights means that a burglar can sue you when you kick his teeth in.

[Guest fountainhall]

but here it is anyway:

 

Excellent article, but it seems to be cut short. What comes after "here it is anyway"?

[PattayaMale]

Excellent article, but it seems to be cut short. What comes after "here it is anyway"?

 

Ops again

 

What followed was; "Don't hate Taskin. Just be better than him."