Thaksin and the man who ought to be a star

GMT +07:00

Send suggestions

Opinion » Opinion

Thaksin and the man who ought to be a star

  • Published: 14/12/2008 at 12:00 AM
  • Newspaper section: News

I first met Thaksin Shinawatra during the first days after the Thai Rak Thai party won its first general election in 2001. The then prime minister and his cabinet came to the Post Building for a press visit.

Thaksin entered the ground floor of the building with much pomp. The staff of Post Publishing lined up to greet him, all smiley and happy. Many had a 100 baht note in their hands, and were asking Thaksin to autograph them. He was a star.

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

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

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

What's going on? Is the new prime minister going to chastise that arrogant-looking kid for his smug pose?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don't hate Thaksin, just be better than him.

voranaiv@bangkokpost.co.th

About the author

Writer: Voranai Vanijaka

Share your thoughts

For more candid, lengthy, conversational and open discussion between one another, use our Forum

Report objectionable comments click here. Include: discussion #, commenter name, comment date / time as it looks on the page. Example: discussion 15: 09/01/2009 at 10:00 AM.

  • Alex

    Discussion 80 : 13/02/2009 at 02:39 AM80

    Wantmymoney, I don't mind racial slur when it's against me, so be my guest. I do mind, though, when people try to stop or cripple a free flow of information/discussion. Nevertheless, this thread is virtually dead so, unless someone comes up with something new and interesting, I will follow your precious advice, and eventually "get out". Let me just add one little thing, though. If you only cared to read my comment #76, you would know that your anti-PAD sermon is very useless with me, as you're preaching to the converted there. Read it again, and you'll know what I think about the PAD. But, whether you want it or not, Takhsin's human rights record, facts are facts, is just about as dirty as the Chao Phraya. The rest (whether Takhsin was good or bad for Thailand etc.) is debatable, but facts aren't. Still, you have the right of having your opinion. Thing is, whereas you're free to think that extra-judicial killings are ok, many laws, most international agreements, and the Declaration of Human Rights will have to dramatically change before your dream of getting rid of junkies by simply killing them comes true. In the meantime, let me just hope you change your mind. Despite all your rage, no hard feelings here...

  • Alex

    Discussion 79 : 13/02/2009 at 02:17 AM79

    "All smart people knows PAD is doing everything to grab as much power, money without giving regard to Human Rights, rule of law, fellow citizens miseary much less 'paper democracy"
    Well, I guess I'm smart then.

  • Futurist

    Discussion 78 : 12/02/2009 at 08:11 PM78

    It seems that the author, Mr. Voranai Vanijaka didn't understand PM Thaksin's statement - "human rights is the right to be human."

    That statement is very ordinary and self-explanory, but it is only self-explanotary to the critical minds who know how to interpret the meaning of "human."

    For those of you who are simple minds, here's what it means to be a human:

    To be a human is to be able live with honors and respects and to be entitled to the rights bestowed to him by the world community. However, a human also must perform his/her inherited responsiblities to the world community and must live within the laws of the land, as long as those laws do not violate the world's currently acceptted legal priciples.

    Any critical mind would have thought of that meaning of "human" and would have understood what PM Thaksin meant when he said, "human rights is the right to be human"

    The fact that the author, Mr. Voranai Vanijaka failed to intepret the true meaning of what PM Thaksin said indicates that he is just another simple mind, who for some reasons gets lucky and gets to write for Bangkok Post. It is unfortunate for the Post have such simple minded columnist/reporter/journalist or whatever he is.

  • Jahisun

    Discussion 77 : 11/02/2009 at 06:49 PM77

    Wow, only 1 staff member didn't run up. Amazing Thailand. The Post staff loved him from the start by groveling at his feet. Great paper. Views seem to switch with the seasons though with the post.

  • Alex

    Discussion 76 : 11/02/2009 at 02:54 PM76

    Oh, and by the way, just for the record: I am genuinely anti-PAD. I consider PAD's leadership a bunch of overprivileged and often corrupt elite who would go to almost any extent to defend their privileges. They are reactionary (superstition, sakdina...), ultranationalistic (Preah Vihear), anti-democratic (70/30 ratio in voting for parliament seats). In other words, worryingly bordering fascism.

  • Alex

    Discussion 75 : 11/02/2009 at 12:40 PM75

    Wantmymoney, your comment, and even the silly nickname you chose, don't call for any reply. They just beg for pity and compassion. I truly feel sorry for people like you.

  • wantmymoney

    Discussion 74 : 09/02/2009 at 01:20 AM74

    Firstly, Alex please get out. That's right get out like what the yellow protest to Thaksin and started to bring the whole country to its knees.Perhaps in your country drugs is very common and welcome even if it means destroying a young mam lives, destroying a traditonal family. In the western nations you can pop into a 7 eleven or macdonald's to buy your cannabis, ice, etc. You can get AIDS but its ok as long as you can pass it to somebody. Drugs is big money and wars are financed by drugs money as evident in middle east and america. So what Thaksin did like all other sensible government in this region did is wrong according to your silly mental state. If terrorist can bomb innocent holiday makers, that is ok for you, as long as its not done by government. So do get out Alex, dont bother to reply.

  • Sen Monorom

    Discussion 73 : 07/02/2009 at 10:58 AM73

    It's good to see more honest articles on the Bangkok Post lately. All these months I had thought all of Thailand had been dishonest especially the meadia, the police, military and government. Thailand, it's good to see a lot of honesty coming out, well done!

  • Alex

    Discussion 72 : 06/02/2009 at 11:01 AM72

    Serpico, on # 71. Whereas I kinda agree with your comment, I also have a thought about roles in society. Not everyone can be a hero. I wished there could have been people who bravely started a movement against the atrocities committed during the War on Drugs. Did you do any such thing? Anyway, what I'm saying here is that forming a new soft approach against human rights abuses is also good. People might be scared to think that the only way to oppose government's misbehaviours is to adopt a tough stance and hit the streets. But if mentality changes, then people will naturally welcome those who are brave enough to do it. So, I think there is space for both things, but the only way to success is to have both: the protesters and the "simple good people" who nod with a smile when they see the protesters on TV. So far I don't think the latter are very common, as people here are taught to be conservative and to look at dissent with distrust and fear.

  • Serpico

    Discussion 71 : 05/02/2009 at 08:33 PM71

    Voranai,a good recap of what happened when you first met Thaksin.But I can't help noticing your overly inflated EGO in denouncing the premier's stand in solving the menacing drug problem.

    If you have been around you would know that the drug menace was getting out of control.If I remember clearly, most of your colleagues from the Post and other journals were happily reporting on the number of death and the fact that the Thaksin admin had brought some semblance of control.

    Did you even attempt to chastisise or protest against the executive orders? Did you initiate a protest march against the unlawful killings? If you had done so,perhaps the movement would have got enough support to stop the mayhem, mid-way through.

    But you didn't. Why? And why recollect your heroic stance only now?

    Fear? But I swear you sounded fearless in your article.Or is it because the odds are against Thaksin now?

    Much as I despise drug addicts and users my grouse is that many innocents could have paid for their lives, knowing the trigger happy nature of Thai police with village mentality.

    What I'm trying to say is that we all know the score, after the match but very few wanna commit during the duration of the game.You see, some might have to pay for predicting the wrong score.

Reply

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  • As a courtesy to our readers, please use proper punctuation and correct spelling.

back to top