A typical view came from the country's largest circulation daily, Thai Rath, yesterday. Columnist Lom Pleanthid has raised the fear that Thailand might become another Singapore if Thaksin turns the April 2 election his way. In that situation, he pointed out that the opposition would be reduced to a decoration for ceremonial purposes in what is supposed to a democratic system.

Indeed, amid these troubling times, all kinds of verbal assaults are being carried out by all sides, public and private sector alike.

Singapore, on the other hand, is perhaps one of the most transparent societies under a government that provides for its people all the goods and services they need. Thaksin, on the other hand, is good at marketing but fails miserably in the after-sales department - as seen in his numerous populist schemes and projects.

True, the Lee family members are in a number of key positions in the government and investment arms linked to the state. But in Singapore, what's good for the island state is good for the Lee family. In Thailand, it's the other way around - what's good for Thaksin is good for Thailand.

Singapore is not alone in having a political system dominated by one-party. Malaysia's Umno has also succeed in consolidating virtually all political power in its hands.

But unlike Chinese-dominated Singapore, the United Malaysia National Organisation had to come up with an umbrella group under which Indians, Chinese and Malaysians could unite. Both countries are trying to show that a one-party dominated system is workable and provides the needed goods and services for its people.

But yesterday's column was not the first time the so-called Singapore model has been used as a reference.

The particular situation with Thai politics does not permit it to drift in that direction. There are just too many elements in Thai politics to manage the country in the same manner as Singapore. These elements include the communist threat and a solid base of political dissidents.

Singapore did not have traditional sectors, like rural-based agriculture, and therefore had no choice but to move towards modernity and strengthen its human resources. Strong institutions, including the media, came to life with the understanding that their role was to enhance the building of Singapore as a nation-state.

Thailand's rural area, on the other hand, was and is tied to money politics. Despite all the hoopla about "act new, think new", the Thai Rak Thai Party exploited this age-old system of money politics to gain rural support.

If anything, Thai Rak Thai could evolve like Japan's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) - assuming that Thaksin survives the current political storm.

The LDP has managed to unite all interest groups - farmers, politicians, intellectuals and civil servants - under one roof that provides all of them with enough political space. So big is each faction that they do not have to switch to a different party as all their in-fighting is done under the party umbrella.

Thailand, on the other hand, has never evolved that far, although it has the potential. The Democrat Party under the leadership of Bhichai Rattakul experienced a split that turned the country's oldest party into a "southern party".

TRT has a shot at evolving into an LDP style institution. The country is sizeable enough for one party to experience the kind of dynamism as seen in Japan. But like other things, this is pretty much up to Thaksin himself.

The LDP was able to attract various groups to its fold because, unlike TRT, the benefits were not allocated exclusively to cronies and friends.

If Thaksin could find in himself enough generosity that allows him to allocate

benefits to interest groups outside his immediate circle of friends and family, perhaps someday the TRT could be like the LDP.