News Forum - Thai democracy at risk following Pheu Thai’s exclusion of MFP in coalition

[cowslip]

3 hours ago, Karolyn said:

You're thinking of the g-factor, or general intelligence. Which measures the ability to override instincts and ingrained habits, and experiment novel solutions.

Thai people have lower average IQ, than do the Chinese or Japanese. Although they descend from two waves of migrants coming out of China. One is the Mon-Khmer who form a language substrate. The other is the Tai-Kadai, who swept through in a volkswanderung, and contributed the Thai languages.

Im not sure why this is. Indigenous Siberians also have high IQ, so it's not urban or rural civilization, makes East Asians smart. And the centers of Shang and Han civilizations, suffered more seasonality than South China. 

Ancient Chinese capitals such as Anyang and Xi'an are considered to have a climate, between semi-arid steppe, and monsoon-influenced humid subtropical. It's true these climates experience subzero tempertures for at least one month of the year, but nothing too severe. Admittedly, snow is very rare in the winters of South China, at latitudes South of the Yangtze, the Tai urheimat, but her climate is still subtropical.

But it's questionable wether racial theories can explain the differences, between northern and southern Mongoloids. (Or Sinodonts and Sundadonts.) Even the earlier expansion of Austro-Asiatic progenitors from China, was recent, taking place in a late stage of prehistory.

QED!!! the racist view of IQ

Edited August 14, 2023 by cowslip

[cowslip]

3 hours ago, Khunmark said:

Thailand isn’t alone when comes to a dysfunctional democracy

So how do the faults of other countries mitigate or justify the situation in Thiland?

[cowslip]

one thing we can calculate is that if Karolyn left his/her home country and stayed in Thailand that home country average "IQ" would go up and Thailand's would go down

[cowslip]

9 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

I don't think it has any bearing at all in today's Thailand.  Thai politics may include the word 'Democracy' but in reality the country is run by the generals for 5 or 6 wealthy families with one in particular at the head - 'The Elite'. Its all about wealth/power and the retention of it. Following the latest election comedy show, even the least educated Thai citizen will realise that there has never been anything even resembling democracy in Thailand.

Over the years various parties have fought with their opposites to gain the people's votes and become 'the government'.  The winners have been allowed to make minor changes to policy and introduce new laws etc. - provided those laws don't damage 'The Elite'. Whenever any party/person/government has become either too popular or sought to introduce changes that threaten the position of 'The Elite' - they have been brought down by either a coup of some huge invented scandal.

Those parties may believe they held power or may have even been part of the charade but the country has never been run for the good of the people and I can't see that changing any time soon.

Its a form of corruption but at its highest level and we all know how common corruption is in Thailand.

Greed, pure greed.

You don't seem to addressing the content of my post at all - you are just stating some fairly obvious instances without asking how and why, which is why we need to understand history.

Edited August 14, 2023 by cowslip

[Khunmark]

28 minutes ago, cowslip said:

So how do the faults of other countries mitigate or justify the situation in Thiland?

I’m glad you asked this question. The question of style of government democratic/authoritarian is a red herring. It is unhelpful to central question; How obtainable is ‘the good life’? So my question to you is, are the people in Thailand less satisfied with their life than citizens of more democratic states? If the answer is no, the system of government becomes a false premise.

[KhaoYai]

1 hour ago, cowslip said:

You don't seem to addressing the content of my post at all - you are just stating some fairly obvious instances without asking how and why, which is why we need to understand history.

I state quite clearly that I don't think history has any bearing on the current situation.

[cowslip]

Just now, KhaoYai said:

I state quite clearly that I don't think history has any bearing on the current situation.

THen you thinking is so flawed that it should be ignored.

[cowslip]

 

The relevance of understanding history to understanding a country's situation today is immense. History is the study of the past, and by understanding the past, we can better understand the present. This is true for individuals, societies, and countries.

If we want to understand why a thaiand is currently experiencing political instability, we need to look at its history. What are the country's past political conflicts? What are its current political challenges? How have these challenges evolved over time? By understanding the country's history, we can better understand the factors that are contributing to its current situation.

This is also true for economic, social, and cultural issues.

By understanding a country's history, we can better understand its current economic challenges, its social problems, and its cultural identity. This knowledge can help people to develop solutions to the challenges that the Thailand is facing.

Not only helping us to understand Thailand’s current problems, understanding history also helps to avoid repeating past mistakes. For example, if we study the history of colonialism, ang the Western powers policies concerning colonialism, we can learn about the negative consequences of colonialism on Thailand and how to avoid them in the future.

Ultimately, understanding history is essential for understanding the world around us. Those who think otherwise simply don’t know what is happening around them.

Making  sense of the past  creates a better future.

 

[KhaoYai]

5 hours ago, Khunmark said:

Thailand isn’t alone when comes to a dysfunctional democracy. In fact if you were to compare all western governments with the ideals of democracy, they would come up short. There are plenty of examples of undemocratic practices exhibited by them. So democracy can only ever be measured on a sliding scale; more democratic and less democratic. And contrary to Western sensibilities, the citizens of less democratic societies are often overwhelmingly content with the model they have inherited.

I don't disagree with you that some democracies fall short of their intended ideals and increasingly so. However, that is no justification for the sham that is called 'democracy' in Thailand.

A couple of years back a Thai friend (educated) was extolling the virtues of democracy and I pointed out to her that I had lived in a democratic country since birth and consider that it has its faults but I agree, its the fairest way........for want of a better word, its natural. All men are equal (or they should be).

I am a little concerned about your comment that people in 'less democratic societies are overwhelmingly content with the model they have inherited'. They may well be but is that not through igorance? Are you saying that its OK for people to be given far less access to decent education or good healthcare facilities simply because they don't know any different?

My girlfriend's daughter will never have access to the same BASIC education that children of richer families do. My girlfriend herself has a 'chronic' illness that requires painful hospital treatment every 2 or 3 months.  When I learned the English name for her condition, I Googled it and found that it can be totally cured by a relatively small operation if she lived in the UK.

I've never heard her daughter complain about her schooling and until now, my girlfriend seems to have accepted the regular hospital treatment - but does that make it fair? The children of the rich will have access to much greater 'life chances' than those of the poor. The poor may well suffer health problems (like my gf) that the rich don't.............is that OK?

Thai people are taught to accept their postion in life without question from birth - does that make it right? Its nothing less than 'conditioning'.

Is the contentment you refer to really blind ignorance?

 

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by KhaoYai

[Karolyn]

2 hours ago, cowslip said:

realy where?

So America and Britain are not the prototypes of modern democracy?

And France, though not always democratic, was strongly liberal and secular, in the 19th C and to the present.

Like Christianity, it doesn't belong where European armies and bullying didn't go. Because it wasn't there before.

Was it? 

Edited August 14, 2023 by Karolyn

[KhaoYai]

30 minutes ago, cowslip said:

THen you thinking is so flawed that it should be ignored.

Please don't start that Asean Now attitude in here.

[cowslip]

1 hour ago, Karolyn said:

o America and Britain are not the prototypes of modern democracy?

since when was UK a colony and US history is more of a colonialiser that a colony - I think you'll have a hard time finding democratic ex-colonies.?

Edited August 14, 2023 by cowslip

[oldschooler]

1 hour ago, Karolyn said:

So America and Britain are not the prototypes of modern democracy?

And France, though not always democratic, was strongly liberal and secular, in the 19th C and to the present.

Like Christianity, it doesn't belong where European armies and bullying didn't go. Because it wasn't there before.

Was it? 

No Doubt all Colonisers were Brutal ( as were the natives there before them !) but Belgium ( Congo) & Spain ( Americas) especially so and actually Genocidal. France by comparison were more reasonable & enlightened but still very cruel & oppressive. British perhaps treated the colonised the best. Slavery Abolished by UK 1807. Democracy was not imparted much to Colonies by anyone as this was Business which then was not democratic even in homelands ! 

[oldschooler]

5 minutes ago, cowslip said:

since when was UK a colony and US history is more of a colonialiser that a colony - I think you'll have a hard time finding democratic ex-colonies.?

True. Colonisation was a Business of Exploitation not any Democratic Experiment to “ civilise the natives”. 

[oldschooler]

2 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

I state quite clearly that I don't think history has any bearing on the current situation.

An odd view and clearly wrong. History reflects and governs Everything.

[cowslip]

30 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

True. Colonisation was a Business of Exploitation not any Democratic Experiment to “ civilise the natives”. 

hence the myth that Thailand wasn't 'colonised"

[oldschooler]

17 hours ago, cowslip said:

absolute drivel and anyone who believes in IQ is equally stupid as those they try to quantify

Check your blinked politically- driven ignorance and READ. Wikipedia “ IQ” article a good start.

IQ is Scientifically Proven and Complicated but Real. Thousands of different scientific IQ studies do not lie.

Kalahari Bushmen or Australian Aborigines are clearly nowhere near as Intelligent as Jews & Japs.

IQ is only a partial limited comprehensive measure of group achievement as it doesn’t measure Creativity for example.

So UK has invented practically the entire Modern World with average 100 IQ ( takes only a few geniuses).

Black Africans average IQ 85 AND Japs at 115 with Both Inventing Nothing of Substance. 
People interested in Truth are not offended or dismissive that other groups are more intelligent or more accomplished than their group. I am not remotely troubled that Jews are way more intelligent than my group.

Offended Blacks can no doubt take “ comfort” that they are more intelligent than Bushmen & Abo’s (IQ Av.65)

IQ IS Driven Both by Environment ( tough luck sub-Saharan Africa with just the worst geography going) and Genetics ( “Pure” Blood Groups Jews & Japs most intelligent probably as near zero breeding with outsiders).

 

[Khunmark]

49 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

I don't disagree with you that some democracies fall short of their intended ideals and increasingly so. However, that is no justification for the sham that is called 'democracy' in Thailand.

A couple of years back a Thai friend (educated) was extolling the virtues of democracy and I pointed out to her that I had lived in a democratic country since birth and consider that it has its faults but I agree, its the fairest way........for want of a better word, its natural. All men are equal (or they should be).

I am a little concerned about your comment that people in 'less democratic societies are overwhelmingly content with the model they have inherited'. They may well be but is that not through igorance? Are you saying that its OK for people to be given far less access to decent education or good healthcare facilities simply because they don't know any different?

My girlfriend's daughter will never have access to the same BASIC education that children of richer families do. My girlfriend herself has a 'chronic' illness that requires painful hospital treatment every 2 or 3 months.  When I learned the English name for her condition, I Googled it and found that it can be totally cured by a relatively small operation if she lived in the UK.

I've never heard her daughter complain about her schooling and until now, my girlfriend seems to have accepted the regular hospital treatment - but does that make it fair? The children of the rich will have access to much greater 'life chances' than those of the poor. The poor may well suffer health problems (like my gf) that the rich don't.............is that OK?

Thai people are taught to accept their postion in life without question from birth - does that make it right? Its nothing less than 'conditioning'.

Is the contentment you refer to really blind ignorance?

You make some excellent points. And l hope your girlfriend gets the medical treatment she needs. However, my point was, high quality education and health care, or low quality for that matter are not the exclusive domain of one political system or another. And going back to my original point, political systems are not binary.

 

[oldschooler]

17 hours ago, Marc26 said:

Really?

I'm not challenging you but I always thought IQ gave an indication of the capacity to learn 

By the way

I do think Thais are overall an intelligent people 

They just haven't been given the tools to expand that intelligence, well a lot of them 

Seriously dude ? They are as thick as mince as a group ! 

[palooka]

18 hours ago, cowslip said:

absolute drivel and anyone who believes in IQ is equally stupid as those they try to quantify

Damn, here I have been all these years thinking I was intelligent with an IQ 135.

At the insistence of my High School teachers, I sat for entrance exams for both law and medicine at a now top ten world rated Uni.

A breeze and the Uni qualified me for a Government Bursary to help with fees. Basically paid for books only.

"Lucky" then I guess that my single mother on a Widows pension didn't have the money to cover the financial gap, even with me working evenings in a restaurant washing dishes and living in a back room. 

[cowslip]

1 minute ago, palooka said:

Damn, here I have been all these years thinking I was intelligent with an IQ 135.

At the insistence of my High School teachers, I sat for entrance exams for both law and medicine at a now top ten world rated Uni.

A breeze and the Uni qualified me for a Government Bursary to help with fees. Basically paid for books only.

"Lucky" then I guess that my single mother on a Widows pension didn't have the money to cover the financial gap, even with me working evenings in a restaurant washing dishes and living in a back room. 

136

[oldschooler]

7 hours ago, Khunmark said:

Thailand isn’t alone when comes to a dysfunctional democracy. In fact if you were to compare all western governments with the ideals of democracy, they would come up short. There are plenty of examples of undemocratic practices exhibited by them. So democracy can only ever be measured on a sliding scale; more democratic and less democratic. And contrary to Western sensibilities, the citizens of less democratic societies are often overwhelmingly content with the model they have inherited.

World of difference between “coming up short” ( compared to say Switzerland perhaps?) and not getting substantially started as no interest ( Russia & Thailand).

[cowslip]

2 minutes ago, palooka said:

Damn, here I have been all these years thinking I was intelligent with an IQ 135.

At the insistence of my High School teachers, I sat for entrance exams for both law and medicine at a now top ten world rated Uni.

A breeze and the Uni qualified me for a Government Bursary to help with fees. Basically paid for books only.

"Lucky" then I guess that my single mother on a Widows pension didn't have the money to cover the financial gap, even with me working evenings in a restaurant washing dishes and living in a back room. 

Even stupid people get degrees.

[cowslip]

35 minutes ago, palooka said:

Damn, here I have been all these years thinking I was intelligent with an IQ 135.

At the insistence of my High School teachers, I sat for entrance exams for both law and medicine at a now top ten world rated Uni.

A breeze and the Uni qualified me for a Government Bursary to help with fees. Basically paid for books only.

"Lucky" then I guess that my single mother on a Widows pension didn't have the money to cover the financial gap, even with me working evenings in a restaurant washing dishes and living in a back room. 

your argument appears to e that you did well in some tests and got a good mark in an IQ test therefore IQ is a valid measure of intelligence - I don't see and logic in that - it is a politicians fallacy  no less and as you haven't even defined intelligence I can't see any logical conclusion at all.

[Khunmark]

16 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

World of difference between “coming up short” ( compared to say Switzerland perhaps?) and not getting substantially started as no interest ( Russia & Thailand).

 

16 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

World of difference between “coming up short” ( compared to say Switzerland perhaps?) and not getting substantially started as no interest ( Russia & Thailand).

You’re stating the obvious. Somewhere along that spectrum of freedoms is a pivot point where a the actions of the state become unacceptable. Tolerance of abuse of power are determined by the historical and cultural relationship between the state and its people. Your ‘no interest’ charge has no basis, because you would not know.