Go through the newspapers of the past 10 days and you will find the following statements:

Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda urged Thai people to stop showing public respect to "corrupt people". In an address to the Navy Academy he said: "Don't pay respect to a certain person simply because he or she is wealthy."

No names were mentioned of course, but whom could he be referring to? Anyone specific you wonder?

You may find it strange but you would soon realise that there is a clear consensus on the answer to that question.

A few days later Charan Phakdithanakul, the secretary-general of the Supreme Court, told reporters: "There has been relentless pressure to interfere in the judicial process by people with state and financial powers. On various occasions, all forms of illegal power abuse and intimidation are applied, such as creating mobs to put pressure on the justice system."

The senior judicial official minced no words when he said: "There is a great danger in a capitalist system which believes that money can buy everything, even people." He didn't name names, naturally, but can you imagine anybody else who has been enthusiastically promoting such a system of capitalism in this country?

Almost at the same time, a well-known political scientist, Withayakorn Chiangkoon of Rangsit University, warned during a three-day "Thai Politics Forum" that conflicts of interest are rampant in the country. "They create economic problems by distorting real market competition, hinder competition and slow economic growth to the detriment of the poor."

He called for harsher penalties for politicians unable to prove where they acquired their wealth, including jail terms and asset confiscation.

"Corruption is not a natural urge…but it can be prevented and suppressed," he said. In other words, very few people are born corrupt. Power generates greed and greed creates all kinds of conflicts of interest.

Is it likely that this academic was perhaps referring to somebody running the country at the moment?

A week before that, former Cabinet secretary-general Borwornsak Uwanno revealed that a study by King Prachadhipok Institute found that the indifference of Thais towards corruption has increased during the current government. More Thais, he said, now take corruption for granted than they did in 2001, when the current government came into power. "The number of people able to tolerate corruption has risen from 3.04 per cent in 2001 to 4.2 per cent of the population in 2005," he said.

 The level of indifference increased despite a reduction in the number of people saying they have had personal experience in the scandalous practice of graft.

Who's responsible for this increased tolerance of corruption in the country? Borwornsak didn't have to identify the one person who sits right in the middle of this serious national malaise and is still congratulating himself on the great success of his style of government. Borwornsak left the government a few months ago apparently because, as he put it: "My opinion didn't count anymore."

And when he added: "Politics bent on reciprocating vested interests was the most detrimental thing to democracy," there was little doubt that he was referring to the same "capitalist system that assumes that money can buy everything, including people's souls" that Charan mentioned a few days later.

Thirayuth Boonmi, a respected social critic, chimed in with his response to the caretaker premier's earlier statement that the country would be thrown into danger if the fairness of the judicial process were to be brought into question. "The root causes lie in the wicked political system, rampant corruption and disabled checks-and-balances mechanisms. All these factors have led to the decline in foreign investors' confidence. In regard to the judicial process, I think the problem is that we have not taken enough legal actions against wrongdoing politicians and bureaucrats," he added.

Do you have any doubt as to who Thirayuth thinks is the "root cause" of the country's alarming decline in political standards?

Then, you would be struck by perhaps the most relevant remarks of them all - those of Dr Prawase Wasi, arguably Thailand's most trusted social critic: "Thaksin must learn how to spell: E-N-O-U-G-H."

What do these public figures have in common? Without exception, they have no political axe to grind. They are not running for political office. Their patriotism is clearly unquestionable. They certainly can't be accused of "harbouring ill intentions towards the welfare of the state".

They all seem to point in one particular direction, all the way to the top of the current political leadership. And their consensus is undoubtedly this: things just can't go on as they are.

Suthichai Yoon