This kind of attitude is something new in Thai society. In the past, people everywhere had an unshakeable faith in honesty and ethical values and they hated corrupt politicians most of all. Five years of Thaksin Shinawatra as prime minister seems to have had a heavy impact on the moral values of people. The manner in which he governed the Kingdom, as a chief executive officer lording over his company, ignored any form of correctness and ethical values and seems to have sowed a new worrisome mentality, which has spread widely.

If people think they can accept a corrupt government only because they receive some of the benefits of that government's populist policies, this suggests they no longer have faith in honesty and ethics. Such a thought is tantamount to giving the green light to corrupt politicians to act against the country's interests even more openly. This is the evil legacy the Thaksin regime has left behind.

The crumbs that Thaksin fed the masses in the form of benefits doled out via his populist projects are the main reason why many people still blindly worship him even after his fall from grace. These people firmly believe that only a billionaire like Thaksin can be a good and dependable leader.

The issue of corruption becomes immaterial to people with this kind of thinking.

The Thaksin regime's actions set numerous bad examples for the general public. By breaching the rules and regulations set for proper governance during its administration, the regime made some people believe that by doing the same they were not in the wrong.

This attitude might explain why the opinion survey mentioned above also showed that 82 per cent of respondents said they were ready to break rules and regulations if necessary. Since they saw those in power flouting rules, it is understandable some of them might have begun to think that the common people could also do the same.

The instances of tax evasion allegedly committed by Thaksin and his family have certainly left many people wondering why they have to bother about paying taxes.

These alarming survey results clearly demonstrate how the legacy of the Thaksin regime has influenced the way the public thinks to a far more severe degree than most of us had previously thought. The politicians who served the regime seem to have quite successful in instilling this attitude among citizens in order to make it easier for their government to rule.

The legacy of the Thaksin government and its detrimental effect on the mindset of the people is made painfully clear by respondents saying corruption in the government and elsewhere is acceptable.

This line of thinking is dangerous and it could eventually lead to a social crisis. Supporting a corrupt government is like subjecting oneself to the Mafia's rule for the sake of whatever trifle they might give away, while they are enjoying their plundering of the country. This is a bad political relationship that will never last long because of its evil nature. Corruption will, without a doubt, lead to the fall of the country. The observance of morality and ethics in the government is what can save it.

Thai people must ask themselves now whether they will allow this kind of dangerous mentality concerning corruption to prevail and whether they will accept political evil in exchange for the benefits handed out to them by corrupt politicians. Are we happy to see our children grow up with the attitude that corrupt politicians are all right as long as they can please the people?