Were I lucky enough to be able to live there permanently, one of the upsides for me would be getting away from politics and politicians at home. Thai politics in my opinion is their business and as a foreigner I can "like it or lump it" ( as mother used to say).
Thaksin was before I first came to Thailand, so I can't judge. Anyway, my interest in Thai politics is limited.
But I can say that the change from democracy to military dictatorship didn't affect me at all (once the few weeks of curfew were over), it simply makes no difference. I wouldn't even know if I'm living in a democracy or in a military dictatorship if I hadn't learnt from the news!
The decline in number of Sunne Plaza gogo bars is deplorable, so is the price rise in Soi Twilight (approx 8% per year). But that cannot directly be attributed to politics.
Originally Posted by MFAS
Fountainhall: (and MFAS): Have you ever considered that the Thai have it right by "institutialising" society's embedded 'corruption'?
Many other countries around the world - including most of the westernised countries - have tried to stamp out corruption with little success. Yes, some big names have gone to the 'slammer' or "left for warmer climes" or suffered 'extreme prejudice'. Yet, as one head is cut from the hydra, another emerges. Total apparent progress = zero, zip, zilch, none. And it is still the "few at the top of the tree" that profit most.
I know of one senior bureaucrat who, just prior to retirement, was offered a 5-year contract as the Head of Department under the Minister if he was willing to donate US$5mill. to a special good-works fund. Double-edged sword, yes. But workable and with societal pluses.
I am not condoning 'corruption' but I am realist enough to know .....
that the effort & funds dedicated to destroying it are wasted with many better uses for these resources,
that it is part of the 'human experience', and it will never go away,
that unconscionable miscreants should be rooted out when they directly cause harm to other people.
Thai society appears to have adapted to its own system. Who are we to criticise or sit-in-judgement?
To answer MFAS' original question, I have been in Thailand regularly since 1996 and, as a visitor, I have experienced no significant changes for better or worse. The 'horse' hasn't changed, only the jockey(s).
[i][color=#0000FF]"One day our descendants will think it incredible that we paid so much attention to things like the amount of melanin in our skin, or the shape of our eyes, or our gender, instead of the unique identities of each of us as complex human beings."
~ Franklin Thomas[/color][/i]
As a living decendant of my ancestors I think it incredible that Thais pay so much attention to the amount of melanin in their skin.
This substance I assume is the target of the white cream army that my friend carries around with him in his knapsack (not handbag!) where ever we go.
Yes, certain basic fundamentals don't change.
I have certainly considered it, but do not accept in any way that they "have it right"!
You are of course absolutely correct when you say corruption is not limited to Thailand. In one or more of its forms it is surely in evidence in most countries. Even with the much-praised Independent Commission Against Corruption, no-one claims that Hong Kong is corruption free. Only recently the co-Chairman of Hong Kong's largest Property Developer and a former Head Civil Servant were jailed for corruption. But the level of corruption has been decimated and all Hong Kong residents have become hugely grateful for that. In another thread, I have railed against the American electoral system which to outside observers as well as many Americans seems bedrocked in the obscene amounts of money trying to elect Presidents. In other countries like much of Africa and quite a few in Asia it is much more deep-rooted.
But I can see zero merit in "institutialising" corruption. It quite literally rots away at the very fabric of society. When it gets to the levels practiced - and tolerated by most - here in Thailand, there is nothing like a level paying field in any endeavour, whether it be in industry and commerce, the awarding of government contracts, tourism, education (rotten virtually to its core), the ambitions of its younger generations, the forces of supposed law and order - and so on. The only winners are those at the very top who through their ill-gotten brides and pay-offs are able to control and manipulate the way people have to behave.
Anyone who considers the institutialising of endemic corruption as acceptable, also accepts that society will revert to the laws of a particularly dense mangrove swamp, a mafia way of controlling a society and its people, a system where vast amounts of funds which should accrue to the state disappear into the ether of offshore accounts (yes, Thaksin had those as well - illegally) and where influence is all. Do you think Thais really are happy that the heir to the Red Bull fortune has got away Scot-free with racing his Ferrari along Sukhumvit at 5:00 in the morning with alcohol and drugs in his system, knocking over and dragging a policeman to his death and then hiding in the family compound for around 8 hours before being given up for questioning? Are they happy that second rate Hollywood producers, Gerald and Patricia Green, the partners-in-crime of the former Governor of the Tourist Authority during the Thaksin era, Jutamas Sirawan, were fined and jailed in the USA some years ago for offering substantial bribes to the aforesaid lady for the rights to set up the ill-fated Bangkok Film Festival, bribes that just happened to find their way into the offshore accounts of Jutamas and her daugher? The Greens were jailed in the USA in 2010. To date, no action has been taken here against Jutamas. How many billions has THAI International lost over the years through government ministers and civil servants lining their pockets with bribes from the purchase of far too many different aircraft and engine types? And who is now paying for that? TG staff and passengers.
I believe the vast majority of Thais put up with corruption because they cannot believe there is a way to get rid of it as long as the politicians and top businessmen are corrupt. Establish a Hong Kong-style ICAC here and I am certain their response eventually would be similar to that given by Hong Kong residents in 2000. When asked what were the most important events in 150 years of Hong Kong history, the establishment of the ICAC polled in 6th place. Yet when set up, it was called "Mission Impossible" and few gave it any chance of succeeding.
Well said, fountainhall. The 'realists' who imply or openly state that most Western countries are as corrupt as Thailand (so why bother trying to change things in Thailand?) are good at providing anecdotal evidence but when it comes to international bodies which systematically collate the evidence (eg Transparency International) we invariably find that Western countries dominate the upper reaches of lists for their relative lack of corruption. Singapore is usually the only non-Western country in the top ten. I agree with you that endemic corruption holds back a country in all sorts of ways. Of course sex tourists and sexpats can be said to benefit from corruption which makes me, at least, feel uneasy about discussing the subject. But I hope I never reach a point where 'institutionalising' corruption seems the right way to go, surely the ultimate in cynicism.
[i]There is a boy across the river with a bottom like a peach,
But alas I cannot swim.
[/i]
- From an early-19th-century Pashtun marching song
Singapore is an interesting case and owes that position inevitably to its former PM Lee Kwan Yew. I suspect corruption was pretty rife in Singapore prior to independence, as in Hong Kong pre-1975. Lee realised that the root of corruption is cash and power and in the majority of cases it occurs because those who feel they deserve more do their best to make it happen. To stop that rot, he ensured that government ministers and civil servants were paid, relatively speaking, the same as their counterparts in industry. Consequently, he looked for the brightest and the best with Singapore quickly having the highest paid ministers, civil servants and Prime Minster in the world. Thus the younger Lee's annual salary last year - after a recent 28% cut - is in the region of US$1.7 million, more than the combined salaries of the PMs of France, Italy, Germany, Britain, Russia, South Africa, India, Brazil, Turkey and Japan - COMBINED! It certainly dwarfs Obama's $400,000, although US Presidential perks perks include a couple of special 747-400s etc. and tens of millions in speaking fees after leaving office! Throw in a dash of national pride and Singapore consistently is top of the ratings.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
