November 24, 2024: The $300 billion pledge announced at the global climate summit over the weekend sounds all right, until you start wondering how the rich nations will find the money to fund it or make up for what they have to contribute.
This is a cynical assumption, of course, because the rich contributors may use entirely-clean energy to come up with the needed money. Otherwise, the aid package, already described as “a drop in the ocean” by some representatives of poor nations, is clearly wealthy men’s expression of guilt.
That amount of money will come annually by 2035. The agreement to fund poor men’s efforts to cope with increasing calamities came after more than two weeks of bitter, fractious and chaotic negotiations marred by boycotts, political spats and constant fears that the summit would implode.
Poor nations led the criticism, obviously, calling the rich countries hypocrites who are acting too little and too late.
Whatever it actually is, the $300 billion agreement which has just been sealed in Azerbaijan this weekend underlined rampant contradictions _ some may say hypocrisies _ on the global scale. The aid apparently reflects concern for fellow human beings whereas in some places of the world grown men are killing children and women in great numbers and with wild abandon, a virtual mass genocide that some of the generous climate change contributors have refused to condemn.
How ironic would it be if the donors in the $300 billion deal say to themselves: “Since we have to pay such a big amount, we must whip our industries into working full throttle to make it up to us.”?
US president-elect Donald Trump is a focus on attention when the future of climate change campaign is concerned. Some say he’s biggest enemy of climate change conscience while others agree with his skepticism of current global rhetoric. (That is in addition to the criticism in some quarters calling him the biggest threat to democracy who undeservedly happened to prevail democratically in America.)
Thaksin's rivals: It's far from over
November 23, 2024: Political enemies and critics of Thaksin Shinawatra as well as analysts have emphasised the obvious: This week’s Constitutional Court development is just a prelude to real horror.
He and the Pheu Thai Party were not deemed by the court as an existential threat to Thailand’s system of constitutional monarchy, but there remain charges that appear less abstract with convincing evidence, along with other legal channels that have not been really explored or activated, they say.
“It’s like watching a boxing match,” said former Red Shirt leader Jatuporn Prompan in a live Facebook comment that made the 2010 Red Shirt uprising in downtown Bangkok which he led increasingly puzzling. “You pay attention to each round separately.”
There’s a hint that he fears Thaksin’s clout might be expanding, though. “Whether there will be a total surrender is something to watch,” he said. “If the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the Election Commission are hesitant about performing their duties, it means the whole convoy is going in the same direction.”
A Thai Post columnist said the Constitutional Court did not say specifically that what Thaksin and the Pheu Thai allegedly did was not a threat to the system. Rather, he said, the ruling talked about weak evidence.
“If we look at it carefully, the ruling virtually told us what to do (which is to come up with more solid evidence),” wrote the columnist, who noted that in the ancient Thai way of beheading punishment, there were always “second sword” and even “third sword” on standby in case the first execution act failed.
The columnist said the NACC and EC would play big roles from now on when evidence is concerned.
Nantiwat Samart, a former senior intelligence official, agreed, saying Thailand’s political justice system is made of several elements and the Constitutional Court is just a part of it. Not only that, the judges can only base their decisions on evidence in front of them, he said.
“All I can say to the people who were disappointed this week is don’t lose hope,” he posted on his Facebook.
If we mix red and yellow, what colour does that make?
November 22, 2024: The answer, everyone knows, is orange. That is intriguing, ironic even, because the Thai political context has orange as the most extreme colour, not something with a hint of spreading dilution.
Today’s reception of the verdict of the Constitutional Court on Thaksin Shinawatra and the Pheu Thai Party suggests the dilution of the red-yellow formerly-irreconcilable rivalry may be continuing. The dilution phenomenon is reflected through the overall interest in the ruling among the politicians, the media and the general Thai public.
In a not-so-remote past, the judges’ ruling would have been eagerly and tumultuously anticipated, preceded by continuous media countdowns and analyses. The Thai public and the rest of the world would have been obsessed with nothing else.
Today, many Thais greeted the verdict with shrugs and went on to speculate about who will be the next celebrity to be arrested for fraud. Half of America is still celebrating Donald Trump and the other half is still moaning Kamala Harris. Europe is more worried about Ukraine.
To be fair to the Constitutional Court, it can never win. If the judges had said “Guilty!” they could have been dubbed an authoritarian tool. Now that they have let Pheu Thai and Thaksin off the hook, many are saying “No surprise there. Look at the formation of the government.”
Make no mistake, the apparent red-yellow blending can prove deceptive in the long run. The love-hate triangle can turn violent any minute. Thailand’s version of Romance of the Three Kingdoms is now at a “dilution” chapter, and readers simply don’t know how long it is.
Pro-Trump people, don't buy "47th" T-shirts just yet
November 21, 2024: Technically, Kamala Harris could still be America’s first female president, and even if that happens, don’t count on Donald Trump becoming the United States’ 48th leader.
Joe Biden’s voluntary resignation from the presidency before handing over the White House to the Republicans would make Harris the 47th president, though just for a few days. That is a funny scenario that a good number of people have begun to take seriously.
Yet it could get funnier, in some universes at least, according to “Civics Review” YouTube channel which has done a great job in explaining unlikely but possible twists in the US politics between now and early next year.
Without Biden’s voluntary resignation, Harris and the Biden Cabinet can practically stage a coup by submitting a declaration to Congress describing him as unfit. That is called involuntary transfer. It will enable Harris to take over as president even for a very short period.
But believe it or not, the US Constitution allows Biden to fight back. He can tell Congress he is in fact fit and thus come back to be the 48th president after Harris.
This might not be over yet. Harris and the Biden Cabinet can immediately submit their second declaration to Congress reiterating that Biden is really unfit. Congress then will have to vote and a lot will depend on the Republican lawmakers. Biden will continue to be the 48th president or Harris’ takeover will be revived.
All these mean the number on the Trump T-shirts can keep changing.
Those are only the possibilities, of course. Biden voluntarily stepping down or a forceful transfer of power will shine very bad lights on the Democrats, who have been defending Biden’s physical and mental states for so long, up until his disastrous debate with Trump just a few months ago.
In other words, both scenarios (voluntary resignation or forceful transfer) are very unlikely. But keep in mind, though, that we live in a world where Jill Biden wore totally-red dress to cast her ballot on the election day and where Joe Biden couldn’t look happier a few days ago when he shook hands with the man he had deemed the greatest threat to American democracy.
Capitalism politics by numbers
November 20, 2024: If it had been Thailand, the Election Commission would have received endless complaints, forever delaying declaration of winners.
Money spent legally on the presidential election in America always beggars belief, particularly if you are a small nation or familiar with legal limits designed to prevent wealthy people from buying their way to power. Yet a current financial scrutiny of Kamala Harris’ campaign is somehow unprecedented, because a lot of people are curious why her team had spent that much and still lost.
Here are some of the figures that are dropping some jaws but making some shoulders shrug:
The Harris war chest was more than $1 billion, dramatically dwarfing bout $382 million the Donald Trump team pulled during the same time frame. (Campaign funds are largely from donations that practically can come from anywhere in the country. When she controversially replaced Joe Biden as the Democratic ticket, her campaign raised $200 million within the first week, an unexpected record that sent new-found optimism off the chart.)
Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings seemed to show the Harris campaign enjoyed delivery food and ice cream with wild abandon, spending some $24,000 on records. That might not sound too obscene until you convert it to Thai baht and imagine the People’s Party does the same.
Harris’ private jet travels to “battleground” states reportedly cost $2.6 million, bringing the total private jet expenditure to some $12 million. (This also triggered a “Hypocrisy!” outcry because private jet is worse for the environment than travelling en masse on commercial aircraft, especially when considering that climate change was prominently in her election platform.)
Her campaign also reportedly spent $6,000 on a site fee to an Arizona board game café for an event featuring Tim Walz.
“Celebrity overload” cost an obscure amount of money, but the spending could be huge. Her campaign made a couple of $500,000 payments to Oprah Winfrey’s media company, Harpo Productions. Some media outlets, however, claimed she was paid personally for her appearance, but Winfrey strongly denied that, both personally and through her company.
The outgoing vice president’s campaign reportedly spent $100 million per week, during her 15-week campaign. (Her war chest could go up to $1.5 billion or $1.6 billion depending on how donations and financial aid were considered and calculated.) Some of this money was spent on rallies with star performers like Lady Gaga in Philadelphia, Christina Aguilera in Nevada, Katy Perry in Pittsburgh, Jon Bon Jovi in Detroit, and James Taylor in North Carolina.
Critics said obfuscation was to be expected in this type of spending. Though the celebrities were not officially paid, the support staff were, and the overall bill came to more than $10 million. And the line dividing Winfrey and her company can be quite blurry.
Arguably the best part is that although the Harris campaign blew through $1 billion (or more) and is allegedly $20 million in debt, a charge that the team has denied, it is still trying to solicit more donations, saying in online messages to prospective donors that the fight for her cause(s) must continue even after America has its new president.
Mind you, the 2024 presidential race was not the costliest election in America’s history. Some widely-accepted statistics say the 2020 fight between Biden and Trump was a $7.7 billion showdown.
Watch Ukraine war
November 19, 2024: It’s a move that will fuel all kinds of conspiracy theories, no matter what the White House says. America’s decision to give the green light for Ukraine to use long-range missiles supplied by Washington to strike deep inside Russia is huge, coming two months before President Joe Biden hands over power to Donald Trump, whose election victory barely two weeks ago raised fears and speculation over US support for Kyiv.
The Ukraine war will likely escalate dramatically. That was the main reason why Washington had previously refused to allow such strikes if Ukraine was to use US-made ATACMS missiles.
Hours ago, the Kremlin warned that the sudden White House U-turn would “add fuel to the fire” and that international tension will increase considerably. Alarmists have even said that if the US long-range missiles were launched, it could be a point of no return for a highly-volatile world.
American hegemony will be different under Trump, with the White House’s relationship with NATO and the future of the Ukraine war in sharp focus. But while Trump always boasted that he could end the Ukraine war in a matter of days, US-supplied missiles striking deep inside Russia will make that claim highly questionable.
November 18, 2024: Is “resistance media” necessary in a democracy? The answer is yes, but hypocrisy is a no-no.
“Resistance 2.0” is a now famous term following a Donald Trump political Grand Slam on November 5, featuring his win of electoral college votes, his capture of the popular votes, the Republican control of the Senate, and the Republican control of the House.
A dictatorial leader has been elected democratically, MSNBC said on the election night. You are still awake and this is real, not a nightmare, another famous newscaster of the some network concluded. These were among myriads of on-air comments apparently devaluing votes cast for Trump. Free speech, yes. Properly respectful? Maybe not.
MSNBC ratings tanked in the wake of the Trump victory.
CNN was more reserved on November 5, but its ratings had been taking big hits due to content deemed to be politically biased long before the election day, dating back to Trump’s first term. Continuously-poor ratings have led to speculation about massive layoffs.
Of course, speculated “Resistance 2.0” has CNN and MSNBC at its core. Both networks led the anti-Trump media before the election and Trump’s “fake news” accusations were controversial. On the one hand, any democracy wants the other side of the story, but on the other hand, the other side of the story has to be truthful as well, and anti-Trump propaganda, to his supporters at least, can be considered very lopsided or biased.
There are two ways for the likes of CNN and MSNBC to bounce back. One way is to edge back toward the middle and thus be seen as less judgmental. The other way is go down the rebellious road, which any democracy will require so that “minority voices” can be heard. The second option might not be financially effective, but when images are concerned, being anti-Trump when he is the state is better than being anti-Trump when he is fighting the state.
Yet rebellious or resistance media will have to walk a tightrope. This type of media is often associated with prejudiced reporting aimed at giving strength to the “minority”, enabling it to fight, but, in fact, resistance media can be credible and powerful only when they are seen as unbiased.
Rhetoric in favour of free press is easier said than done. We have heard something like “The strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech. … If we want a robust society, we need more robust dialogue and that must include the right to insult or to offend.”
That’s correct, but that’s also an easy part. The hardest part comes when we are confronted with opinions that we, including the speaker of the above sentence, don’t like. Resistance is necessary, but what is more necessary is that resistance must tolerate resistance.
Why alleged frauds involve more and more pretty, young faces
November 17, 2024: There couldn’t be a simpler analysis on why an increasing number of suspected scammers are youthful and most of them are beautiful. New-age crimes have become increasingly digital and sophisticated, and old people are more awkward, less efficient, slower and less well-versed in using smartphones, computers, tablets or applications.
Alleged activities of iCon Group may not directly concern people becoming “victims” because of their technical disadvantages, but police said they were lured by a highly-effective promotional campaign on the social media. Famous lawyer Sittra Biabangkerd was also allegedly involved in a bitcoin plot that only young people with expertise could come up with.
This week, another pretty face was added to an iCon subplot. Hers was a case that involved leakage of secretly-taped phone conversations and there was speculation that she might strike back using security camera clips of her own. Again, the techniques used involved modern technology.
Good fraud is establishing good, albeit misguided, trust. And building strong trust has much to do with the social media nowadays.
This is a new world where some 100 people are falling victims to fraud using sophisticated expertise every hour. All contributing factors point to knowledge and roles of the younger generation. They include the rise of cryptocurrencies, the increasing prevalence of the dark web, the limited circle of cybersecurity professionals (who can turn villains) and the rapid rise of artificial intelligence (AI).
Too old to box, but he can be Joe Biden's youngest son
November 16, 2024: The best food for thought coming out of the Mike Tyson versus Jake Paul match is probably how ageing people keep relevance in the world.
Too old to fly a jetfighter? Be a commander and control them all. Too old to score an overhead kick? Be the FIFA president and lay down all the rules for those who can. Too old to box? Enter politics and you are a new wave.
Tyson, 58, re-entered the ring hours ago, and no matter how hard arguably the most-feared boxer in his days tried, his age showed. Yet it might have been lost on many that if he had run in the US presidential race, some would say “How dare a boy like you try to eclipse Donald Trump and Joe Biden?”
Another irony is the fear factor. More than three decades ago a Tyson stare would be enough to weaken an opponent’s knees. Today, Paul, 27, was toying with him and comfortably won on points.
Simply put, the younger you are, the more fear you bring about as an athlete. But according to how things go in this world, the older you are, the better chances you stand as a politician.
Meanwhile, take away the debate on whether boxing is a sport, a historic female match-up before the Mike Tyson-Jake Paul fight was the day’s best spectacle. The girls were warriors.
Burnt bridge is now re-burnt
November 15, 2024: If it was unlikely before for Pheu Thai and the People’s Party to be reunited, it appears impossible now.
But really? They say only politics can make the impossible possible. Pheu Thai might soon find out that the only way to save Thaksin Shinawatra is a reunion with its former ally. The People’s Party might not achieve an election landslide it is hoping for. All it takes is just one of these scenarios.
Yet as of now, it seems someone has lit up the dynamite at the base of the gutted bridge. Thaksin has practically said in Udon Thani while campaigning for a Pheu Thai PAO (Provincial Administrative Organisation) candidate that Move Forward was too stubborn regarding the lèse majesté law, a remark that Progressive Movement leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit has mocked.
You know full well that was not the reason why we the election winner were unable to form a government, said Thanathorn, who compared Thai politics to an object getting heavier and heavier due to temporary fixes while a total renovation that could make it lighter and more modern has been ignored.
Pita Limjaroenrat has fired a follow-up salvo. Thaksin must have misunderstood something, he said. Udon Thani is not "the Red Shirt capital" as declared by Thaksin, but the "democracy capital of Thailand", Pita said, supporting a different candidate.
An exiled academic who is leaning toward Thanathorn’s camp more and more, Pavin Chachavalpongpun, said Thaksin in Udon Thani was Thaksin at his lying best.
“This is a man who announced publicly countless times that he was through playing politics, that he wanted to just stay home and look after grandchildren,” Pavin wrote in his Facebook. “Truth is he is afraid his daughter will lose the next election so the People’s Party must be discredited.”
Noteworthy stuff in first official Thaksin rally in years
November 14, 2024: Political rhetoric is usually boring, but when it comes from a man who has not officially said it for almost two decades, is delivered to his most diehard supporters, and all of it is against a backdrop of lingering legal restrictions, it’s well worth taking note.
In Udon Thani on Wednesday, Thaksin Shinawatra appeared on a legitimate political campaign stage for the first time since he was ousted and went into exile in the middle of 2000s. He was helping Pheu Thai promote a PAO (Provincial Administrative Organisation) candidate.
Here are some of possibly-remarkable sentences:
“There used to be times when they read what I wrote and (our candidates) won in landslides.”
“I have no right to influence my kid (Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra). I’m the kind of fathers who love their children so much that they let them influence them.”
“Prime Minister Ink (Paetongtarn) told me her outmost concern is about overwhelming debts of villagers. People are risking losing their homes and cars, the two things that are the most important in their lives. She said that in December the Thai people will know how the problem will solved.”
“Stay away from Laotian and Hanoi lotto. I have heard things. Keep your money for more fruitful investment.”
“While overseas, the only thought on my mind was the question how I could return home. To be able to do that _ paying utmost respect to the king, openly worshipping our religion and directly meeting you who support me _ fulfils my biggest wishes.”
“The world is changing. University degrees alone are nothing. Thai people have to be told to realise that. Thais need to realise that expertise and experiences are a lot more important than degrees. A true education reform is a must.”
Good news is that much of what he said is not bad. It’s quite good actually. Bad news is that every politician can say so with equal “sincerity.”
TrueVisions rocked by true blow
November 13, 2024: Don’t be surprised if contacted lately by TrueVisions’ telesales force, as membership of the cable and satellite television content provider is under threat due to failures to extend broadcast rights of the English Premier League.
It’s a seismic shift in the industry dominated by TrueVisions, which has been able to maintain its market control thanks largely to live football broadcast, mostly from Europe.
The superiority is coming to an end. The Thai telecom carrier Jasmine International Plc (JAS) has managed to outbid the existing broadcast-right holder to broadcast live English Premier League (EPL) football, thus seeking to attract more customers to its relatively-little-known streaming business.
It’s three seasons starting next year for certain. But JAS appears very able to extend its EPL broadcast rights for three more seasons. Three years is a heavy blow already when TrueVisions is concerned, but six years can be tantamount to a knock-out punch.
JAS will be spending some $560 million. Yet company insiders say fees will be fair and attractive, as the big boss is a football, specifically Liverpool, fanatic. He is wearing two hats in taking over the broadcast right _ one as a businessman and the other as a football fan. The football fan hat has played a bigger role, they claim.
TrueVisions members have been receiving calls from sales persons of the losing company, offering all kinds of attractive “packages”. When all the dots are connected, a major campaign to hold onto current members, many of them drawn to TrueVisions primarily because of football, is anything but a surprise. Its mother company is already staring at massively-reduced paid phone usage as more and more smartphone users are switching to free calls, businesses like providing internet service and selling TV content are becoming more and more important.
Some best legal brains face formidable nemeses
November 12, 2024: The “Lawyer Tam” scandal allegedly involves some of the best-laid deceitful plans, which are now up against the fast-evolving investigative skills of the mainstream TV media and social media. Who will come out on top remains to be seen.
Just like the iCon Group controversy, the “Lawyer Tam” case is unfolding at an unprecedentedly-fast pace. Just days after a billionaire woman accused famous lawyer Sittra Biabangkerd of defrauding her of a large sum of money, he, his wife and two people allegedly close to him have been arrested, the couple’s assets frozen and their houses searched.
The iCon Group and Sittra crackdowns, if inevitable, had been unthinkable when their lightning-quick developments are taken into account. Usually, it took months for the police to formulate cases strong enough to “summon” high-society people, let alone capture them without advanced notifications.
Much credit must go to the TV news outlets and the social media. They dug up supposed “evidence”, asked justified questions, found potentially-related incidents that the police investigators might not have looked at, talked to people that might not have featured in official probes, and added value to whatever is discovered without caring who discovered it.
The whole world is witnessing a dramatic shift in “investigative” coverages, which used to be an exclusive hallmark of the print media. In this era, when TV news outlets need to compete minute by minute, there is no chance for the print media’s “embedding” investigative strategy that used to give them one piece of major evidence after a month or two.
Today, if one TV network goes to a previously-ignored house in the morning, another network must locate a formerly-unheard-of “witness” by noon.
And with overwhelming “evidence” coming in rapid cascade, the police have no choice but to act accordingly.
Trump arrival could revive “Deep State” myth
November 11, 2024: One of the most mysterious political terms ever coined may stop being a taboo and be openly talked about by the mainstream media in America and across the world.
Today CNN used “Deep State” as a blurb of a main story. The words had often been whispered about in the past, and to see them as a teaser of a homepage lead story of a major news organisation hits right between the eyes.
CNN was talking about the possibility of a Trump purge of the American bureaucracy, which he had reportedly suggested was crawling with people implementing Deep State ideas. According to the network, a lot of permanent employees could lose their jobs and America could return to the “spoils” system in which the bureaucracy was formed largely not by merits but by political leanings.
CNN reported that “feeling of dread” was spreading across the entire bureaucratic workforce. That means it’s not a one-off reporting on the Deep State subject. The myth would possibly be revisited and widely addressed by the mainstream media.
Deep State is, allegedly, a secret network of powers (ultra-lucrative and far-reaching businesses, military and intelligence groups and top levels in key industries like finance. Mind you, some media moguls are in on it as well.) It exists, allegedly, in other countries, too, coordinating and laying down grand plans from within covert societies like ones in Dan Brown novels.
In America, Deep State rumours have it that the presidency is just a show, because utmost-important directions associated with American hegemony, wars and economic as well as cultural supremacy are influenced or initiated by such a secret and powerful network and promoted subtly but effectively and patiently through various means including movies.
Allegedly, “Deep State” dictates what the government should and should not do and can resort to extreme measures when all else fails.
The term “Deep State” has been a taboo, of course, and most mainstream intellectuals are still laughing at it. But, said CNN, “Trump, who has derided civil servants as agents of the ‘Deep State’, promised on the campaign trail to reinstate a 2020 executive order known as Schedule F, giving him the power to commence mass firings of nonpartisan federal employees who might spoil Trump’s partisan plan.”
As we can see, there is no way to avoid discussing “Deep State” in future coverages of the massive job threat. Trump’s alleged obsession with “Deep State” has been well documented. He features in a Wikipedia article on the controversial subject.
Strange Day
November 10, 2024: This is a world where billions of chickens live in torturous environment 24 hours a day until they are big enough to be fried by global food companies using the animals’ happy cartoony characters as their logos, and where the internet goes up in flame when a black cat is treated allegedly badly by a TV drama production crew.
How much horror does it take for human beings to be able to live peaceful and noble lives? In other words, how many animals have to live and die violently every day to maintain a status quo that many people are not even aware of?
Make no mistake, the black cat uproar is what should happen. But as everyone sympathises with the poor animal, spare a thought for the countless numbers of cows, chicken, pigs, fish and etc that suffer unimaginably day in and day out to give us strength to complain about animal cruelty. According to one estimate, from the time you start reading this to the time you get to this line, some 150,000 chickens have been slaughtered.
Why does it take so long to call US House?
November 9, 2024: First thing first, they say everybody is advised to put aside the traditional belief that the longer vote-counting takes, the higher the chance of something fishy going on.
It is also recommended that everyone should forget about technological advancement of America when it comes to counting the lower House votes. Forget that Thailand took just four or five hours after the ballot booths closed nationwide to know which party won how many seats in the 500-member House of Representatives.
Like Thailand’s, the US House, which has 435 members, wields crucial legislative power. It can stall various Donald Trump’s agendas. The House importance has increased exponentially after Kamala Harris lost. The Republicans will be over the moon if they manage the unified control of the presidency, US Senate and US House.
As this is being written (Saturday, 10.45 am Bangkok time), the Republicans are six seats away from such a total dominance. Trump has won and they have had the Senate majority. But it will be long, tortuous wait to see if they can get to 218 House seats, and their worst nightmare is still possible.
The future of federal power will be determined by the remaining uncalled House races across the country. The Republicans have won several seats in battleground states and currently are leading in enough districts to hold onto their pre-election House majority.
Do the Democrats still have a chance of gaining the House majority? Possible but very difficult. Their current leads in uncalled races will not get them enough seats. They need more wins.
US mainstream media (some of them, of course) say patience is a virtue. They explain that dozens of seats are in competitive districts, meaning many races can be too close to call for days. Absentee and provisional ballots need to be counted, recounted, checked and rechecked. One recent House campaign in Iowa, it is said, came down to just a six-vote difference.
In other words, the longer, the fairer. Thailand’s Election Commission, take note.
Tough job of political speech writers in America
November 8, 2024: Kamala Harris’ speech writers have had one extremely difficult mission. They must make her look like a gracious loser but subtly maintain that democracy remains under threat and the presidential election earlier this week is a proper democratic exercise that everyone must accept although it did not quite solve the problem.
This is what came out, which on the surface was not a bad concession statement delivered to her supporters: “Let me say my heart is full today. My heart is full today, full of gratitude for the trust you have placed in me, full of love for our country, and full of resolve.
“The outcome of this election was not what we wanted, not what we fought for, not what we voted for, but hear me when I say the light of America's promise will always burn bright as long as we never give up and as long as we keep fighting."
“I am so proud of the race we ran and the way we ran it. Over the 107 days of this campaign, we have been intentional about building community and building coalitions, bringing people together from every walk of life and background, united by love of country with enthusiasm and joy in our fight for America's future. And we did it with the knowledge that we all have so much more in common than what separates us.
“A fundamental principle of American democracy is that when we lose an election, we accept the results. That principle as much as any other distinguishes democracy from monarchy and tyranny, and anyone who seeks the public trust must honor it.”
She said Americans owe loyalty not to the president but to the Constitution, their conscience and God.
“My allegiance to all three is why I am here today — to say while I concede this election, I do not concede the fight that fueled this campaign,” she said, pledging to continue fighting for democracy, the rule of law and equal justice.
She (or her speech writers) was right in suggesting that American democracy is not perfect. How far from perfect she didn’t say. And neither did she say who has made it imperfect against the will of the Constitution, against good conscience and against the will of God.
What Lawyer Tam and Boss Paul have in common
November 7, 2024: One has been denied bail and the other must be praying he will not face the similar fate. That is the major difference between iCon Group head Waratphon Waratvorakul and famous lawyer Sittra Biabangkerd which may cease to exist depending on breaking developments.
Similarities between the two have already been striking. Both are youthful and good looking. Both are rich, more or less questionably. They have relied a lot on feel-good images in doing what they allegedly did. They told everyone they only wanted to help people who would not have been helped. They have had credible voices to back them up.
Those are a good formula for success whatever their plans really were. Sittra’s arrest today is shocking, but so was Waratphon’s a few days ago. The sudden turns of their fates after just a few tumultuous days in the news are seriously affecting beautiful reputations they built over the years.
The swift police action admittedly turned public opinions against them even more. Now, all the luxurious possessions have stopped being admired and are going through a lot of legal and social scrutiny. More importantly, their high-profile lives have led many to ask “Would the police have arrested them without strong evidence, considering their fames and social statuses?”
If only the Thai police were consistent in carrying out their duties in complete disregard for political and social clouts.
Who’s won _ Democracy or its biggest enemy?
November 6, 2024: A correct, unequivocal and reasonable answer to that question will get you a political science doctoral degree anywhere on earth.
Some will say democracy won. When about 140 million Americans (give or take) have excercised their rights to choose a president under a political model lauded by much of the world, what else can you say is the victor?
Yet again, many of the voters and the current White House will say democracy has been defeated by its greatest threat. A criminal convict-cum-demagogue has simply lied his way to the presidency, they virtually are saying.
But if the “Democracy has been hijacked” camp is right, the model must be seriously wrong requiring a big revamp then. By the same token, if the “People have spoken” half is right, what filthy idea has been injected into American public and the rest of the world during the past four years? Was what democracy told us over the years a truth or a lie (assuming what was speaking to us was democracy, not something else)?
What’s your thoughts?
What if there was no MoU 44?
November 5, 2024: Overlapping claims lead to wars. This fact started on the Day One of humanity. Some of the latest examples are Gaza and parts of Ukraine, and the South China Sea will remain one of the world’s hottest spots forever.
Religiously or politically, innocent people will suffer when conflicting claimants clash. Cue energy resources and/or tourism and the problem is multiplied by a hundred.
This is why they came up with the MoU (Memorandum of Understanding), a virtual “agree to disagree in the meantime” formula designed to guard against bloodshed and prevent a disputed area from becoming a totally-useless no man’s land.
The Paetongtarn government should have been asked to do constructive things, not annoy the neighbor just for the sake of national pride. Scrapping MoU 44 is not much more than a nationalistic move, and a risky one as well whether a roller-coaster bilateral relationship is taken into account or not.
The Thai conservatives have forgotten one thing. They have their Cambodian counterparts, too, and both sides are saying the exact same thing: The Kut island is ours.
If they were still alive, the dinosaurs which lived there before anyone would be laughing their heads off.
Bank of Thailand controversy can boggle the mind
November 4, 2024: Both advocates and opponents of total “independence” of the central bank from politics can always find a scenario supporting their causes.
But, strange as it seems, they share the biggest argument: What if the central bank is totally inefficient or absolutely corrupt or both?
In other words, a “totally-independent” central bank can be totally inefficient or absolutely corrupt if run by bad people, and the same can happen to a central bank interfered by politicians who take turn gaining state power.
The current controversy revolving around the imminent appointment of a new Bank of Thailand chair has to do with the chicken-and-egg puzzle. Politicians are saying “Look, what’s the point of democracy if the government can’t implement budgetary or monetary policies election winners had promised the people?”.
The other side is saying “What will happen to national wealth if today’s election winners implement their monetary plans at will only to lose in the next election to be won by someone who is totally opposed to the plans?”
What’s your thoughts?
Paetongtarn threatens to pull away in popularity race
November 3, 2024: There is no way to get rid of political biases in opinion polls, but when different pollsters start spotting the same significant change, it’s worth taking note.
Dusit Poll has somehow detected an unlikely development found earlier by NIDA pollsters. Both surveys _ one arguable and the other quite obvious _ have Paetongtarn Shinawatra ahead of any prime ministerial candidate in terms of popularity. Pheu Thai suffered a heavy image setback when it decided to join hands with the conservatives after last year’s general election, so Paetongtarn exceeding expectations in the latest popularity checks is a considerable surprise.
Dusit pollsters surveyed more than 2,130 Thais during the last week of last month. It was not a direct popularity contest between Paetongtarn and opposition leader Natthaphong Ruangpanyawut of the People’s Party, but nearly 53% think she is the most outstanding politician on the government side, while he receives 37.8% support as the most outstanding opposition figure.
Natthaphong’s closest popularity rival in the opposition bloc is someone at the same party, Sirikanya Tansakun, who breaths down his neck with more than 34%. Paetongtarn’s closest government rival is Anutin Charnvirakul who receives only 26.4%.
Weeks ago, NIDA found a similar trend. Paetongtarn, brand-new prime minister at the time, shot to the first place in its popularity survey covering 2,000 people, coinciding with the “first-phase” Digital Wallet launch. She received more than 31% support, comfortably leaving Natthaphong, a new face, behind.
In that survey, Natthaphong came third with almost 23% backing. Very interesting in the NIDA survey was what was between the man and the woman. Up to 23.50 % of the people surveyed said there was no suitable leader for Thailand at the moment.
A lot of academic language accompanies Dusit pollsters’ presentation of their latest findings, but to sum it up in layman’s terms: Paetongtarn must have done something right during the big flooding and the opposition had better start delivering a good performance beyond the parliamentary floor.
One more straw could land on badly-strained camel’s back
November 2, 2024: Don’t let news from America occupy all the attention this week, because what happens at the Thai Central Bank can be very impactful politically, too.
Both events _ the US presidential election and the Bank of Thailand’s appointment of a new chair _ can easily become a slow-motion car crash. Or the opposite, quick-paced turmoil to be specific, can happen.
A Pheu Thai loyalist and proven critic of the central bank governor is joining a couple other candidates to compete for chair of the Bank of Thailand, and the conclusion could come around the same time as the election of the new American president.
Kittiratt Na-Ranong and Pheu Thai can deny a conspiracy but a big army of critics are warning against political interference in the Bank of Thailand, some with thinly-veiled threats of a political uprising.
Pheu Thai has been pushing the BOT. Digital Wallet, interest rate cuts and frequent prime ministerial criticism. You name it. But in pushing the BOT, Pheu Thai is also pushing the conservatives, who are their reluctant allies and thus have had to grit their teeth and bear the appointments of Srettha Thavisin and Paetongtarn Shinawatra, start of the Digital Wallet Programme, reversal of the cannabis policy and vocal support for constitutional amendment.
Kittiratt’s possible appointment in a normal political circumstance would be already tumultuous, let alone in this highly-unusual atmosphere. Don’t rule out vociferous street protests, which may form quicker than those organised by supporters of the loser in the United States.
When an apostrophe might come to the rescue
November 1, 2024: You can call your political opponent garbage, but never his or her supporters. That’s why the White House is working at full throttle trying to repair damage caused by a very recent Joe Biden remark.
And it was just a few days before the presidential election, too. Which makes his administration’s hectic move highly understandable.
Biden was reacting to a comedian who referred to Puerto Rico at a Donald Trump rally as an “island of garbage”. “The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters,” he was originally quoted as saying, prompting a major Republican backlash and sending Trump to ride on a garbage truck in a follow-up campaign.
Kamala Harris is distancing herself from Biden’s controversial remark, of course.
Immigration is a big electoral issue and the Democrats are relying a lot of non-white votes, but the “garbage” remark is too damaging for comfort, especially when America’s political divide is volcanic.
The White House later released a transcript of what Biden said that included an apostrophe. “Supporters” became “supporter’s”.
You be the judge on whether the apostrophe made sense. Here’s Biden full sentence in the official transcript: “The only garbage I see floating out there is [Trump's] supporter’s… his demonisation of Latinos is unconscionable, and it's un-American.”
This is what all media networks reported initially: “The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters – his – his demonization of Latinos is unconscionable, and it’s un-American.”
Considering Biden, who used to call a senior journalist “stupid son of a bitch” in a hot mic incident, if the garbage remark was meant to be blanket, it’s not a total jaw-dropper. But the apostrophe came straight from the White House so it’s absolutely up to you what to believe.
Whatever your assumption is, Trump is now giving rally speeches in a garbage collector outfit.
Daily updates of local and international events by Tulsathit Taptim
