The quinquevirate that rule the PAD have issued a call for a ‘new politics’ that will strengthen the political power of the people by removing their right to elect 70% of political office holders. 

This, according to PAD spokesperson Suriyasai Katasila, will ensure that all ‘professional groups’ and ‘classes’ will be properly represented.  Examples of these groups and classes have been helpfully listed by Khun Suriyasai.  They include chao rai (people who grow things in upland fields), chao naa (people who grow things in rice fields), labourers, poor people in urban areas, poor people in rural areas, ethnic groups on the margin, male traders (pho kha wanit), middle-class business people, women, the disabled, and the socially disadvantaged.

This ‘new politics’, says Khun Suriyasai, will help Thailand achieve the same level of popular democracy as in the Scandinavian countries.  All of which elect 100% of their parliamentary representatives.

The PAD admits that there are some details of this so-called 30:70 model to be ironed out, and Khun Suriyasai suggests that these be debated widely.  By knowledgeable people, academics, educational institutions and universities. 

It is not clear that Harrison George would be considered by the PAD as a ‘knowledgeable person’ but he is certainly not an academic or part of any educational institution or university.  So perhaps it would not be proper for this column to ask whether the all-male PAD leaders think women are a ‘class’ or a ‘professional group’, or what is wrong with mae kha wanit, or what happens to the representation of a farmer who does a bit of rice and some upland crops.

All we can do is present a record a recent meeting of the Faculty of Political Science at an unnamed Thai university.  The Dean, who sees the opportunity to enter this debate as a splendid way to advance the reputation of his university, his faculty and his own deanship, is in the chair. 

‘Now I’ve called this meeting to discuss the 30:70 proposal of the PAD, and …’

He is interrupted by a commotion at the door.

‘Who’s making that noise?  If it’s my graduate Achievements of Fascism seminar, tell them it’s been postponed.’

The Faculty Secretary speaks from the door.

‘I’m sorry, sir, but the Maths Department want to join the meeting.’

‘But this is a political science issue.  We can’t let just anyone join the debate.  The PAD specifically said ‘knowledgeable people’.  What do mathematicians know about it?’

There is a muttered but heated conversation just outside the door.  The Secretary re-appears.

‘Well, sir, they say that one of the details to be discussed is the 30:70 proportion and that is a mathematical issue that can’t be left to political scientists.’

The Dean sighs.  As Assistant Vice-Rector for Decorative Vegetation and Signage he has fond hopes of leapfrogging past the other 57 Assistant Vice-Rectors into one of the coveted 15 Vice-Rectorships.  The support of the Maths Department could be useful.

‘Oh alright, let them in.’

A group of mathematics teachers file in.  Half of them (or more exactly 46.873% of them) can’t find any empty chairs.  The commotion at the door starts up again.

‘What is it now?’

‘Sorry again, sir, but the Sociology Department says if you’re going to talk about class, then …’

‘Oh for heaven’s sake.  Is there anyone else out there?’

‘Er, yes, sir.  Vocational Education want to talk about professional groups, the Geography Department say they heard it’s to do with Scandinavia and Hotels, Tourism and Hospitality also want in.’

‘Hotels, Tourism and Hospitality?’

‘Yes, sir.  Their Cookery and Confectionary section reckons there will be enough people in the meeting for them to sell the cakes their students have been making.  Professional experience, sir.  And income generation.’

‘No, no, no.  There’s just not enough chairs.  Tell Voc Ed they will have to go and make some, Geography can go and find some, and Cookery can shove …’

He decides that a meaningful glare will achieve more than a continuation of his sentence.

‘OK, let’s get started.  Now the issue I want to raise today is …’

The Dean notices that Acharn Khanit has his hand in the air and a sly grin on his face.

‘Acharn Khanit, we haven’t even started yet.’

‘With all due respect, sir, but a point of order, sir.  Suppose we want to decide something in this meeting.  How do we do it?’

‘The same as we always do.  By a democratic vote in line with the chair’s recommendation.’

‘But who gets to vote?  Shouldn’t it be just 30% of us, in line with the PAD’s new politics?’

General mutters of approval around the room.  The Dean wonders if there isn’t some scholarship he could send Acharn Khanit on.  Somewhere far away.  For a long time.

‘OK, if that’s what you want, 30% of you can vote.’

Acharn Khanit’s hand is back in the air.

‘But how do we decide who is in the 30%?’

Before he realizes the trap that has been set for him, the Dean speaks.

‘Well, you can choose the 30% by voting on ….’

The room quickly descends into acrimonious, noisy, but eminently democratic chaos.

The Dean signals the Secretary over.

‘Are any of my Fascism students still around?’