Search

This research article aims to study, analyze, and develop community capacity to empower communities and prevent social problems in Nakhonpathom province. This work is qualitative research and uses documentary research to create training prototypes and focus groups among sample groups or key informants. This is a group of volunteers' spirits, Phutthamonthon, Nakhonchaisri Samphran district totaling 34 people to be aware of the community's problems. The study results showed that the training model obtained from the document's synthesis and processing consisted of the volunteer concept, The King's philosophy, the concept of community empowerment. After that, the focus groups found that the volunteer spirit group in the Phutthamonthon district voted that the garbage problem was the biggest, consistent with the volunteer spirit in Samphran district. Both groups propose a waste separation campaign, support equipment from government agencies, educators. In contrast, the Nakhonchaisri district volunteer spirit group resolved that the problem of invasion of the Tha-chin river was the most important. Moreover, proposed state legislation to create a group to negotiate seriously with the government and put pressure on those who transgress the river, including the media as a tool of pressure. Finally, by training the model with a volunteer group, they will understand the problems in their communities and formulate groups to solve problems in the community through volunteer activities.

This article would like to reflect the history of the Thai gambling industry. The nature of gambling that is hidden in tradition, opinion of Thai society towards gambling. Moreover, the effects of gambling that the state allows and does not allow through literature, law, Buddhist principles, the King's philosophy and the theoretical concept of gambling, and the theoretical concept of gambling. The results of the synthesis of the data showed that gambling has been in conjunction with Thai society for a long time. The context and process of gambling in Thai society can take many forms. It will depend on the context of the environment, the law, and the government, etc. Their views and attitudes towards gambling can be divided into two groups: the one that sees gambling as a pleasure. It has created a social space to legitimize gambling in various forms, such as gambling for gambling. The hidden gambling tradition gambling of the types permitted and prohibited by the government, etc. Furthermore, the second group viewed gambling as a danger to society. It is a terrible thing that the state must restrict it from society. This concept is primarily connected and related to religious and legal principles. From the information found, I believe that gambling is a huge source of income for the government, even though the state knows that it is mescaline. But cannot cancel the business, that is, the deadly poison or the public's silent threat that is submitted to the government.

This article on the debate about who should rule? It discusses the diverse answers of influential political philosophers and political scientists. The study found that Plato argues that philosopher king should be the ruler. In contrast, people cannot take part in the Government. Rousseau supports the rule by the people who must be able to legislate. Furthermore, try to enforce it on yourself before leading to a majority vote. Aristotle believed that no one or any other group was a ruler but ruling it for the public good. While Mill believed that the representative system could create great happiness for the people, and it can be recalled. Finally, Sylvan argues that there was no need for a ruler. Because rulers bring war and exploitation, people can rely on themselves without their ruler to aim for utopia or an ideal society that should be inhabited. As a result, the representative system of the authors' view is the most appropriate form today. Because when a ruler is a tyrant, we can always recall power and choose a new ruler and create great happiness for people as well as possible.

This research was an investigation of the behavior and decision-making of student who involved in Thailand’s Referendum of 2016 and participated in this research’s activities for gathering information of the political participation of students within the Mahamakut Buddhist University. The aims of this research were to 1) study the behavior and decision making of the students involved in Thailand’s referendum of 2016, and 2) study the factors affecting the students' decisions related to Thailand’s referendum of 2016. Based on group discussion tools of the four sampling groups of students, Faculty of Social Science and Faculty of Education, these four groups can be divided into 2 groups (10 persons for who participated in this Referendum and 10 persons for who did not participate in this Referendum), with the total number was 20 persons. The research findings indicated that the behavior and decision of both faculties’ students made their own decision differently. Students from Faculty of Social Science used their own political interests by using the political information through press media and social media. The study of draft constitutional considerations that also affect the decision of students who did not go to take part in the referendum. While political interests, political information through social media and knowing the constitutional content affects the students’ interests especially in the Faculty of Social Sciences to take part in the referendum participation. For the sampling students from the Faculty of Education, their decision has been influenced by accessing the media after the political turmoil and these led to the students’ bias and their tiredness of political issues, these decisions also based on their own information. While a group of students from the Faculty of Education went to the referendum as a result of the influence of the dominant parents. However, the power of the parents comes from the good hope that if they do not go to the referendum will result in legal consequences for students lose political rights. In fact, there are no legal barriers to the election. In addition, the living environment and the differences between the study groups did not have any significant impact on student behavior and decision-making. Similarly, the public relations campaign, which emphasized public relations, emphasized the referendum only, could not much affect the student's decision.