Samak Sundaravej's name escaped me when right-wing propaganda demonised the student movement in 1976, culminating in the Thammasat University massacre on October 6 that year. As kids, all we learnt at the time was that young activists were the country's greatest enemies, and when a "left-leaning" school friend tried to tell us there were other sides to the story, he became the subject of hot playground gossip.

We heard more about Samak when we grew a bit older. His star shone brightest in the aftermath of the bloodbath. Older journalists at The Nation recall how he went on air to attack the students before the October 6 infamy, and how, after getting political power as a reward, he clamped down hard on press freedom, with the typical dictatorial mindset that good media has to be pro-state. He never lost elections in Bangkok because soldiers would march like robots to polling booths to vote for him.

Fast-forward 30 years and we have Samak's star outshining his post-1976 glow. This time, though, it's not against a backdrop of blood and tears of the pro-democracy movement. He is a democracy "hero" now, a man who led a "people's party" to defy and overcome the military boots that overthrew the last elected government. He can call the Thai media a dog, for all the world cares, because the bottom line is, he has the legitimacy of the ballot box.

But talking about the latest layer of irony to cloud our political sphere will get us nowhere. Idealism is, well, something that doesn't exist in Thailand - and maybe this is the perfect time to admit the truth. It's all about power at whatever cost. Maybe Samak is having the last laugh because he's one of the few who can change colour and feel proud about it.

"Principles can change," he said recently. If it's not a recipe for political success, it is a brutal and honest summing-up of what has been happening on the Thai political landscape. Thaksin taught us that every rule can be bent and broken. A lot of Thais took that far too seriously and gave flowers to the generals after they ousted him in a coup for corruption and abuse of power that Thai democracy seemed unable to counter. The subsequent crisis had principles entangled, twisted and exploited. And then came Samak, using his great flexibility to provide another major bending of the rules for a political "solution".

But our imperfect democracy demands that Samak gets a second chance. It's what he is going to do in the future that counts now. We can make extra efforts to pretend to forget about Samak and October 6, although bending the rules over Thaksin and hidden shares has cost Thailand dearly.

Samak has never been accused of concealing his assets, but how he is going to exercise his "mandate" and "legitimacy" when it comes to previous corruption issues that sent Thailand into a tailspin is the most important thing at the moment.

Last but not least, if Thaksin was sent to tell us to forget about the rules, Samak may be here with another important message. For decades, Thais have fought bitterly over ideologies, shedding blood and tears and jeopardising national unity. Was Samak resurrected to confirm to us that we have been on a wild goose chase? Is he here to underline the lack of fundamental values, or lack of strength to foster and maintain that one overriding principle? If that is true, at least we should be honest with ourselves about the absence of true idealism. Accepting that truth would make it much easier to explain to today's kids in sincere terms what on earth is going on.

Unlike in 1976, it is impossible for children not to know about Samak. He will be leading Thailand. He will be the one whose morals are under scrutiny. He will, possibly, be asked to attend ceremonies to honour the heroes of October 1973 and October 1976.

It's hard enough to teach our youngsters why the coup is bad and Thaksin is good, or vice versa. Add Samak, October 6, the triumphant democratic flag he's raising and the deafening silence of the former members of the movement he helped crush, and it will be far too much for young minds.

Unless, of course, we tell them straightforwardly that everything is about how to win power, that it has always been this way, and that talks about ideology are only necessary but forgettable sideshows.