It is a misunderstanding to believe that Western values and Thai values differ so much, especially in the current era. When I defend universal values, I also defend most Thai values.
So there is no question of me trying to impose Western values on the Thais in my defense of universal values. I also defend Thai values. I don't prescribe anything for the Thais. I try to explain how most Thais feel about it.
On what do I base these unusual views? I have lived in Thailand for fifteen years, speak, read and write Thai at a good level, I have a Thai high school diploma, read Thai newspapers and Thai literature and watch Thai television. Anyone who knows me a little knows that I am 'Mr. Much Talk'. I talk to Jan and Alleman, from high to low.
My Dutch background is of secondary importance. I grew up in a strict Roman Catholic environment and I had to break free from it with great difficulty. Even a Thai does not receive an immutable set of values, opinions, habits and customs during his upbringing.
You should not confuse values and practice
My dictionary defines 'value' as: 'Moral principle as the starting point for the way one lives and acts'. In other words, a value is something one strives for. Because people and society are simply not perfect, the full realization of a value is nowhere attained for the full pound, and sometimes trampled underfoot.
If we want to know what values a person or a community strives for, it is not enough to look at the always imperfect practice. There is no person or country that always puts all its moral principles into practice, but that does not detract from the underlying moral principle. You should not confuse value and practice.
If the circumstances are different between different countries, this does not mean that the underlying values are different. People in a dictatorship can work for more democracy. An inadequate old-age provision certainly does not mean that no one carries the value of a good old-age provision.
As a general practitioner, I did my very best to give my patients the best possible care. I've made mistakes, but you shouldn't deduce from that that I didn't see the value of good care. The prevailing practice in a country does not say everything about the basic principles of the population.
Democracy brings different opinions to a solution
Values can conflict with each other. Ronald van Veen (cf Pastors and schoolmasters, we shall remain) gives an example: Should we spend 600.000 euros on a toad tunnel (photo) or on better care for the elderly? Everyone can give their own answer to this, but that does not detract from the underlying values that everyone cherishes: striving for a good environment and good care for the elderly.
If someone chooses the tunnel, it does not mean that he wants to neglect the elderly. Every choice you make also has negative effects on putting other values into practice. Democracy is the way to bring all those different opinions to a reasonable solution. Trying to force the same opinion on everyone is a dead end.
Many similarities with American values
On what do I now base my opinion that Thai values are not so different from Western or universal values? I refer to my previous post about this The psychology of the Thai, values and behavior patterns. This is a study from the late XNUMXs and early XNUMXs.
Given the tremendous development that Thai society has made in every area since then, we can safely assume that the values and behavior patterns of that time have developed more in the direction of an urban, more affluent and educated direction.
I list some of the twenty final values from that study, in order of importance indicated by the Thais: Equality, Self-respect, Freedom-Independence, True Friendship, World Peace, Wisdom-Knowledge. The pursuit of Pleasure-Enjoyment is in last place. (In the study, measures were taken to avoid socially desirable answers as much as possible.)
A comparison with a similar list of American values shows that there are many similarities, although the order of what is considered important differs. The pursuit of democratic values is not among the top twenty among either the Thais or the Americans.
The practice is also unruly in Thailand
Let me honestly say that I am tired of the claim that Thais do not understand what democracy means and that it leaves them indifferent. It's very simple: democracy means that those who want to can think, talk and decide on the course of events in their community. Present this principle to a Thai and he/she will nod in agreement. Equality before the law? Most Thais want that.
To realize all these principles in a concrete and complex society, you need rules, laws and institutions, and the quality of these is often lacking. You can also say about Thailand that, based on the good principle, the practice is unruly.
Thailand had a far from perfect democracy in terms of rules, people and institutions, and now none at all. But I am convinced that most Thais want to be involved in the fate of their country. Read: Pridi Banomyong, father of real Thai democracy and how his vision fell.
The idea that Thais are fatalistic is a myth
Thailand had thirteen successful and six unsuccessful coups. That the Thais let all this go their way is categorically incorrect. There has always been resistance, sometimes more, sometimes less. And how do you resist a coup? Thai soldiers have killed more Thai civilians than foreign enemies in the past eighty years.
No one knows the total numbers, but thousands dead and many thousands injured is a good estimate. Think of General Suchinda's coup in 1992, when resistance against it during Black May 1992 resulted in a hundred deaths. The red shirt movement was set up as a resistance to the 2006 coup. The idea that the Thais are fatalistic in this respect is a myth. Just wait.
The term 'peaceful coup' reminds me of George Orwell's '1984'. Threatening violence is not peaceful.
Social media is bursting with criticism
That's another thing. Thailand an uncritical society? Then you've never heard a superior scold a subordinate. Then you have never watched debates in parliament. Never read about criticism of Yingluck's policies.
Social media is bursting with criticism. Maybe not as much as in the Netherlands (may I mention the Netherlands after the 1-5 against Spain?) but quite a lot.
Thais are special. We are all special. The Thais are indeed also taught that they are better, but I am not convinced that everyone believes that. Too many Thais have been abroad for work (millions) or for education (thousands).
Democracy, freedom of expression and elections are needed
Thailand is no longer the hierarchical Thailand of 100 years ago with a willing peasant masses kneeling respectfully before a paternal leader. Forget that. Thailand has become a very diverse and complex society with a multitude of views, interests and ideas, as well as a more outward-looking outlook. Reducing all this to a uniform image of how the Thais (should) think, feel and act ('Thainess') is simply no longer possible.
To manage all those differences and contradictions, so that everyone is reasonably (never completely) satisfied with their input and with the outcome of the process, democracy is needed, with everything that goes with it, such as freedom of expression and elections. Most Thais think so too.
Most Thais have not embraced the coup at all
The current situation is not healthy and will certainly lead to more problems in the future. To claim that the current political situation is in line with the existing Thai culture and Thai values sounds nice, but is incorrect. It is a denial of the diversity of Thai society. General Prayuth is just one expression of this and he is by no means the only true representative of the entire Thai body of thought.
Most Thais understand and appreciate democratic norms and values. Most Thais have not embraced the coup at all.
Poor Thailand. I love Thailand and it pains me to see how a small group of people lead Thailand to the abyss. That's how I see it.
Tino Kuis
Submitted communication
The Thailandblog Charity Foundation is supporting a new charity this year by making and selling a book with contributions from blog readers. Participate and describe, photograph or film your favorite place in Thailand. Read all about our new project here.
It's funny that this sermon starts with (read) grew up in a strict Roman Catholic environment, and the finger of the pastor, and this is about a country where people are 99% Buddhist.
Just because most of us don't speak or write Thai doesn't mean that after this story we have to assume that most Thais don't embrace the coup.
My experience is that most Thai people I know and there are a lot of them are happy with the current situation, just because they were sick and tired of Shinawatra era, but it is true that they expect the army to keep their promise, and that a democratic government will be elected in about a year and a half.
It strikes me that opponents of the coup often warn in comments or here in this story about what they think is still to come, I think these people are just bummed that this peaceful coup is going so well.
Following on from my comment above.
Just read that a major weapon find has been made in Nakhon Ratchasima, and not a small one either, this shows once again that the army has committed the coup at the right time, the suffering would not have been over, if they were this scum going to use.
This find is a fine example of why I don't understand that there are people who are against this peaceful coup. And then it may be that Thai soldiers have killed more Thai civilians than foreign enemies in the past eighty years. (which I also regret if this is the case) but then this finding is the other side of the medial, isn't it?
An interestingly written article and convincing too. Only the closing sentence bothers me a bit. Of course it is to be desired that a country not only governs, but also listens to its people and takes the right decisions accordingly.
However, if I follow a bit of what is happening at the moment, I see that that small group is not focused on leading the country to the abyss. That's what the "chosen" group did for that.
And it would go all right if that small group set out a long-term goal: to give the Thai people a good chance to elect a government that does not support the richest or the most manipulated, but that people can support, who know what they choose. That eventually there will be candidates for a government who have Thailand as a country with its people and economy in mind and who want to work for it. Maybe a better social system, more opportunities for the poor, better education..
Then this small group does not have to lead the country to the abyss, but to a new beginning.
dear tina,
I believe that values do not differ so much from country to country, but the importance attached to them does. And that importance attached to certain values changes over time, or is dynamic.
There is an inconsistency in your story. According to you, the Thai embrace democratic values. Yet they are not in the top 20. Apparently there are 19 other values that are more important. So why attach such importance to democratic values such as elections?
You think the current situation is unhealthy. But why? When people are happy, they are generally healthier. As a former doctor, you should know that. Problems lead to health problems in the short or long term. And what about all those studies that show that the Thai population is much happier since the coup. Are they all nonsense? You may not have noticed so much of all the tensions and discomfort in the north, but here in Bangkok it was palpable and noticeable. In all those months that it was restless, I have not been to the city center. You'll just be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
In my opinion, it is not about democracy as a word, as a value, but about the practice of democracy, equality and power over one's own life in practice. Elections are fun, but history in this country shows that the elected systematically abuse their mandate and that the democratic control mechanisms do not work. Then there are demonstrations that are accompanied by violence because the parties do not want to talk to each other. Your comparison with the USA is a very unfortunate one in this regard. For many citizens of the world, the USA is an example of a well-functioning democracy. The practice is:
– the country is financially on the brink of collapse thanks to the greed of the powerful elite(s) in that country;
– income and wealth inequality in the USA is greater than in Thailand and is increasing !!;
– there are many pseudo-Christians in the leadership of the country and the powerful companies: money has become the main belief;
– the USA has murdered more people without trial than any other country in the world in the last 50 years: they don't need a junta for that;
– if you are accused of terrorism in the USA you will be locked up without any form of trial. Accusation is enough, you don't have to put three fingers in the air;
– it has been less than 60 years since black Americans were considered inferior and banned from white schools; it has been less than 60 years since blacks who stood up for their rights were mistreated, imprisoned or killed;
– the USA has invaded and overthrown or killed more sovereign countries and their governments and leaders than any other country in the world, just in defense of their own interests (Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan). The USA is still meddling with all kinds of countries supposedly to promote democracy; decisions were made by democratically elected leaders;
– the USA supports undemocratic governments and countries because it suits them better financially (Saudi Arabia, Brunei, Zimbabwe, China).
Is this the example of a democracy we should strive for in Thailand?
A small group leads Thailand to the abyss. I agree with you on that. So something had to be done. Something needs to be done to prevent that from happening again. Reforms of processes: more democracy, more control mechanisms, more transparency of decisions, of spending money, of making compromises, of listening to majorities and minorities, of tackling criminal practices. I will send my ideas on that to Phrayuth next week. He asked for it. I advise you to do the same if you love Thailand.
Dear Chris,
I wrote about values, which I see as (almost) universal and which you should see separately from practice. Then you hit me with the practice in the US. That does not help.
I will mention a few values of the Americans '….that all men are created equal…endowed with certain unalienable rights…….governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the people….'
The top ten Thai values include Equality, Self-Respect, Fraternity and Freedom-Independence. They are in the top five in the Americans, so it doesn't matter that much. These are democratic values, right?
Do me a favor and ask Phrayuth to release Sombat Boonngamanong, a man I admire for his commitment, his involvement, his selflessness, his non-violence and his desire for freedom. Promise me you will!
Dear Tina,
I don't find a study of universal values in different countries very interesting because they yield almost the same result. THEREFORE they are also called universal values. It's like Human Rights. Every country in the world has signed them, but the practice is very different. Rutte brings the position of homosexuals in Russia to Putin's attention; Putin parries with the fact that the Netherlands has a political party in parliament that denies women the right to vote. And there is a lot of philosophical nonsense: “all men are created equal”. Of course not. We are all unique and are not created equal. Or is there no difference between man and woman, between white and black, between tall and short, fat and thin, big or small nose?
In my networks I (with my wife) stand up for people in Thailand (Thai and foreigners) who – through no fault of their own – get into trouble, are exploited, cheated, cheated and blackmailed. We fight corruption and people who feel they have to exercise their power unjustly. We do not stand up for people who - willfully and knowingly - get themselves into trouble, flout laws and therefore qualify with the police or the judiciary. We have two sayings for this in the Netherlands: 'your own fault, big bump' and 'he who burns his buttocks must sit on the blisters'.
Dear Tino
I must say an article that I can only appreciate. I just got back from Thailand. I cannot confirm what some expats or working Dutch people claim on this forum. It is true that the military presence is not immediately detectable. When I arrived in Thailand there was still a curfew. When I went no more.
Yet I have just noticed that, especially in the north, people are really not behind the coup. In the north, I am fed up with the yoke of Bangkok. Thaksin still has a huge following there. No one will openly admit it now. Part of the population is really not relieved, but simply afraid or feels limited in thinking and acting.
I've always viewed polls with suspicion. I think that as a GP you also know how polls (think of new medicines and "amazing results" based on minimal patient populations) can be cheated. Polls don't make sense to me. Not in the Netherlands and not in Thailand.
Certainly not if these are carried out in a country under a junta.
Of course, the comparison with America is again drawn by the people who believe in Prayuth. How could it be different. How bad America is. How bankrupt the country is. How many murders have been committed with impunity. How bad the terrorism policy is. And so on. Asking if we want this system. I am missing two points in that summary. The freedom of speech and a summary of Russia and China.
These people do not convince me because they only hint at their self-interest. As a foreign teacher in Thailand, one can afford little or nothing in Thailand. Writing letters to Prayuth is then a must to get a white foot with the current rulers. Beautifully disguised in empty rhetoric and self-delusion.
A few notes:
– if you find studies and polls inconclusive, you should also doubt the studies that Tino conducts about universal values. Incidentally, your opinion also means that you only believe in your own right;
– I don't believe in Phrayuth. I believe in democracy, which means something. In Thailand, this does not so much require elections, but democratically-minded and acting politicians;
– in the USA you should say that you are a fan of Osama bin Laden. Look what happens.
– Russia and China do not pride themselves on being democratic nor on preaching democratic values everywhere, by fire and sword;
– in all my courses I must (this is written in the so-called TQF-3 form) pay attention to ethics and moral issues. I discuss all topics with my students, including those that are taboo in this country. Never been bothered by it in 8 years because students appreciate that;
– I write my ideas because I love this country, because I live and work here, because I pay taxes here and have had enough of the elites of any color who lead this country to damnation, also with my money;
– I don't have to get a white foot, with anyone. I've had white feet for 60 years.
Dear Chris
Polls and universal values are something very different to me. What Tino Kluis writes has meaning for me. It also takes courage to stick your neck out in today's Thailand. He does that and I can only appreciate that
I am not at all convinced of my own right. Only through my experiences in the medical field have I experienced to view polls and numbers with suspicion. The same goes for sociologists. Many of them tend to run away in their own numbers and are in danger of being smart. I don't have that need.
Other than that I don't understand your reasoning. On the one hand, you believe in real democracy. On the other hand, Russia and China are no problem for you. You see America as the culprit because in your eyes they propagate false democratic values. Russia and China are ok because they propagate something different. Very shortsighted
I can't judge whether you really like Thailand. You leave a different impression on me. And you really don't take that away by claiming how free you are to address all moral issues in your lessons. Or how committed you are to Thailand. I don't think you dare to discuss that "medieval" law that Thailand knows in your lessons. Or maybe? Because then that might be an interesting moral issue.
Just a few more comments because it's apparently hard to really read. Have several blog commenters suffer from this.
1. I talked about researching universal values. Tinio cites research. You don't believe in research results.
2. I have 20 years of experience in research and I know very well how relative research results are.
3. I have cited the example of America because Tino compares studies in the USA and Thailand. The result of those INVESTIGATIONS is that the universal values are almost equal in both countries. Tino believes that. You shouldn't believe that with your skepticism. I believe the results but show that it has little to do with the practice of applying those values in everyday practice in the USA. A little research for the sake of research for me, as there are many.
4. NOWHERE I am stating that Russia and China are not a problem. I do not know the results of the research on universal values in those two countries. I wouldn't be surprised if the top 5 are the same.
5. I discuss all issues with my students, all laws, corruption (also in the elite of which most students belong), the succession to the throne, the elections, the demonstrations, the bomb attacks…..I teach them to think and not force them to have an opinion on. They have to learn how to form them themselves.
Reading is not a problem for me. When I read all your posts I see an enthusiastic person but also a person fixated on numbers and comparisons. For you, figures as used in sociology may be sacred. To me they are not. These are my experiences as a researcher with a medical-social background and also 20 years of experience. These types of figures are and remain relative
Furthermore, I refer to the content of the article, where I place more emphasis on the content of universal values than all kinds of research into this or polls. For me, that was the core and not in the numbers.
I don't describe behavior and values in numbers. Tino Kluis, as a retired general practitioner, hardly does that either. He lets his emotion shine through in his speech. Speaks from his heart. I appreciate that. Something that unfortunately I completely miss in your argument.
Whether or not to impose an opinion is an argument that you use to put yourself forward. You don't convince me and you would never ever convince me as a teacher. You do suggest that your students should form their own opinions. However, the way in which you charge on this forum and the prickly comments make me suspect otherwise. You have a fixed world view and, in my opinion, are not very open to differing opinions
Perhaps I gave you the same impression. Then I have to disappoint you. I can appreciate people with well-founded content and opinion (even if it differs radically from my own image). These kinds of visions are eye openers for me. Too bad you missed the mark with me there. I would have liked to see constructive ideas and thoughts that I can do something with. So far I miss that. Perhaps a missed learning moment for both of us
Just back in Thailand, I read this posting and responses with great attention. I thank Tino for his worthy argument about universal values. With the exception of the last four lines (which I think are open to discussion), I can endorse it from A to Z. I am also very happy with the responses from Holland1. Both also express the essence of democracy and freedom of expression. And that is that you not only stand up for political kindred spirits in problems, but also stand up for the rights of people with whom you disagree or partially agree. Chris prefers to base his efforts on behalf of people who have gotten into difficulties on the criterion of 'own fault'. In his network(s) you apparently achieve more by waving your brown arm and I am therefore not surprised that he can broach any subject to his students without imposing his opinion.
If you want to talk about universal values, then you have to be sure that those values mean the same for everyone.
If a Texan subscribes to universal human rights, he will declare them inapplicable to illegal immigrants from Mexico.
Probably because their definition of human means you were born in the US and may meet some other criteria.
This won't apply to all Texans, of course, but it probably will to those Texans who hunt for the illegal immigrants at night.
The same goes for all those beautiful definitions.
freedom, equality, ……
What I had forgotten.
What are universal values anyway?
As far as I can see, these are values that mainly relate to Western society as it currently exists.
Suppose an unsolvable energy crisis arises, or that supervolcano under that nature park in America erupts.
Then those universal values no longer exist.
Then we have a new universal value, which is called the law of the fittest.
Every person is equal. Here in Thailand, the Netherlands or somewhere else. But if the wealthy refuse to share their wealth with the economically weak, then democracy does not help anything. The Netherlands has a democracy, yet 1 percent of the Dutch population owns a quarter of the total wealth in the Netherlands.
First teach people to share….And then the structure of a country also changes into true democracy.
Dear Paul,
I have certainly looked at other studies but could not find anything with the breadth and good methodology of this study. It looks solid and reliable. Dr. Suntaree Komin has published much more about Thailand, but those were sub-topics. Just search the Int.J. of Psychology and the J.of Personality and Social Psychology.
Dear Tina,
As I interpret it, the wish is the father of the thought with you. Unfortunately I cannot agree with you. The average Thai does indeed have very different values and standards than the average Dutch person. This is due to the Cultural Difference (a term that you have already dismissed as non-existent in contributions in the past)
Just read this piece by Suntaree Komin (or if you don't have time, pick a paragraph at random)
http://ebookbrowsee.net/suntaree-komin-thai-national-character-pdf-d330256256
Unfortunately, she doesn't agree with you either.
Dear Eugene,
The piece by Suntaree Komin you refer to is a slightly abbreviated chapter from her book 'Psychology of the Thai People, values and behavioral patterns', p. 159-261. So I've read that a few times.
In that book she makes a distinction between end values, where someone strives for but never quite achieves, and instrumental values, which is the way in which you try to reach those end values. Those instrumental values have a lot to do with behavioral patterns.
The final values, such as Freedom and Equality, are almost the same for Thais and Americans and I call them 'universal values'.
The instrumental values, the way in which you want to achieve those values and closely related to behavior patterns, are discussed in this piece of Suntaree. These instrumental values do indeed have a clear Thai accent, but she also warns against generalizations: 'Characterizing a national culture, of coures, does not mean that every person in the culture has all the characteristic dimensions arranged in the same order of importance'. (page 159)
I have never denied that there are cultural differences. What I'm trying to do is debunk the notion that cultures are 'completely different'. There are many more similarities than differences between cultures. And furthermore that within the same culture individuals can have very different views. They are not all 'average', you should always, and rather exclusively, look at the individual and forget his/her cultural background in everyday contact. Otherwise you enter the boat.
But it is true that identifying and emphasizing differences is much, much more fun.
Dear Tina,
That's exactly what I mean.
As long as all the problems in Thailand today can be traced back to the way the Thai interact with each other and organize their society, we are dealing with these 'instrumental values', as you call them here.
And not with “your” universal values, which even when it comes down to it, will also be endorsed by Thaksin, Suthep and Prayuth.
I see the current values and norms of the Thai as the limitations and opportunities on the playing field, with rules that can be changed rather easily, within which the Thai are forced to function.
The Thai will have to operate within its own culture in order to survive or hopefully make something more of its life.
Against your (in my eyes idealistic) vision that every person strives for the same thing in this world, the reality of the tough Thai society stands.
The practice is that no means are shunned within this to survive or to become more prosperous than the other.
Of course, most Thais, if asked, will share your sympathetic worldview. But unfortunately the practice of the day is a lot more unruly.
I agree with you entirely, dear Eugenio. I have nothing to add.
General elections according to young man one-vote. Overall participation at all levels of government. Rule of law: equal treatment for everyone before the law. but also the guarantee of an independent judiciary. As a derivative, binding statements for everyone. Guaranteed checks and balances. Freedom of thought and speech, of association and political party formation. Distribution of wealth, of raw materials and labor, of prosperity and income. General healthcare for everyone.
All universal values for everyone. Regardless of any culture. But not the principle, not the value, but the way to get there differs. As much as the West differs from the East. And vice-versa. Thus: which way to go, opinions differ.
It is also 2014 for Thailand, and every step is one. I do not believe that in the Thailand of the Asian South East, universal values are under discussion. I also do not believe that human rights should not be allowed. I do not believe at all that Thailand intends to exchange its South-East Asian values for those of West Asia (Russia), for example, nor is it going to lean towards those in East Asia (China).
For a good understanding of the Thai situation, it is recommended to also look at the neighbors. Then you can see how it will look in the long run. Look at Indonesia after the Suharto years, the Philippines after Marcos. To Cambodia after Pol Pot, to Laos after 1954, and to Vietnam after reunification. And don't forget Burma, which still has a military regime. Surely you cannot conclude with a dry eye that all those countries, the entire later AEC region, after centuries of exploitation, have not been put at an immense disadvantage by both the EU and the US. If you can already say that every people gets the government it deserves, it is not surprising that things look so different in all those countries than with us and in Europe, let alone in the US.
I believe Thailand should be allowed to determine at its own pace and rhythm what its future should look like, and that Thailand should choose those developments that best suit it for the moment. Even if the West doesn't like this, maipenraai!
There are other phenomena to be observed: how is it that current rulers, i.e. the junta, are able to continuously raise all kinds of political and socio-economic issues and insist on change? Why is it possible that previous civilian governments apparently disregarded the rights and values of the Thai people and spread a net of corruption, self-enrichment and power over the country? How is it possible that so many abuses in Thai society have come to light in the past 2 months? Is it then true that past civilian governments held human rights and universal values so highly?
Firm opponents of the military events will answer the last question with a resounding 'yes', after all: a discussion such as that raised by Tino Kuis was not an issue before. Concerns have not previously been expressed about the lack of universal values and human rights. The same opponents apparently realize this, and for the sake of convenience they report that expats and pensioners who agree with the revolution are concerned with securing their financial and material residence benefits.
Strange view: it could well be that expats and pensioners, due to their years of residence in Thailand, know more about how the Thai population is faring, know better how choices are made in Thailand, have a different understanding of how the whole Thai society is made of pragmatism. A discussion like this is fine, but not sufficient to understand the situation. Just leave Reverend's finger off: how could you possibly get a good bite in it!
While I don't know of a better alternative to a political party, political parties don't exactly represent democracy.
Those parties only represent a small part of the population and at members' meetings the proponents or opponents of a proposal are then brought in by bus.
The voter will be forced to vote for 1 of the parties, as a result of which at least part of his vote will be lost.
If the idea of raising the electoral threshold continues, the choice will only get worse and you will end up with a system where 2 parties fight for power.
What is Democracy?
Vote once every x years?
The power of the elected majority to do as they please?
There are many forms of democracy.
And almost all of them degenerate into a minority getting richer and a majority getting poorer.
A government, which, with the support of the "elected representatives of the people", is exclusively concerned with the economy and puts that goal above the welfare of the population, is a criminal club that is busy making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Is there any difference between the Netherlands and Thailand?
In Thailand, military power is currently in charge.
And in the Netherlands, the very undemocratic Bilderberg-led EU.
And in both countries, you may wonder what your democratic right to vote is or was.
The ever-richer of a minority and the poorer of a majority has to do not only with democracy, but also with the consumer society. Everything still depends on the GNP (gross national product) I can't say if it works but I have heard that in Bhutan it is not GNP that is important but GNG (gross national happiness). That should rather be a death of a society and that happiness does not depend on what you have but how you treat each other.
I know, it sounds very idealistic
Dear HansNL,
This is the difference between the Netherlands and Thailand. In the Netherlands you can object verbally and in writing against what you consider to be the wrong policy. You can set up a party, hold a demonstration or send a letter to a newspaper or the House of Representatives. You can vote for the party that represents your vision and if enough people do, your vision will become a reality. In Thailand you can now go to prison for many of these activities. Don't you understand that most people in Thailand are afraid to express themselves right now? I've been warned several times.
The party that represents your views before the elections is the same party that has very different views after the elections.
Dear Tino, I can't escape the impression that it was all possible in Thailand recently. More than 50 parties, months of demonstrations, various counter rallies, an immense mutual polemic. It became a big mess, with the consequences of which Thailand is now saddled, and about which more and more excesses are becoming known. Not to mention the spreading corruption and self-enrichment. It's a good thing that the prevailing visions of the time have not become reality. Let Thailand itself figure out where to start with the change, let TH reform itself where necessary, and let TH learn from and from its own history, and draw its own lessons. So that the changes last and do not have to be traded in for other realities after a while.
Nice research. I don't know Thai very well yet, but this confirms to me that most people strive for the same thing, just with a different degree of importance. About condemning other cultures I can only say; delve into the differences and see what you can learn from them. Western democratic society is especially good at condemning others and telling them how things should be done. Those who are doing even worse at the moment are the fundamentalist Muslims who do not listen to others at all and see what misery results from that. A lot of misery in the world is and arises from not listening to each other and thinking and delving into that other culture.