Thais Against Democracy
I usually don’t get involved in political arguments, but the actions of the PAD last night in seizing control of Thailand’s main airport, Suvarnabhumi International, was a major exercise in stupidity and short sightedness. Their justification? To shutdown down the airport until the current government steps down. Riiiiiiiiight. Crippling the nation by preventing tourists and business travelers from entering or leaving the country will hurt the government officials you despise. What about the struggling airline industries? The thousands of workers and business that depend on tourism and travel? Oh, they’re not you, so in your egocentric world they really don’t count… or even exist. And nothing says “I love democracy and the King” more than illegally seizing control of an international airport or using firearms in the streets of Bangkok. When your cause must resort to violent tactics, you have lost all objectivity. Not to mention how can the country support people who shout at the injustices of a corrupt government but then do not follow the law themselves?
The PAD doesn’t like the fact that the current government came into power through a legal and open democratic process where the majority of the citizens of Thailand chose one party. Oh, so the only government you’ll accept is one that came at the end of a violent protest and was not elected?! The PAD’s problem is that they will cry foul if any politician they don’t like comes into power, regardless of whether he was legally and democratically elected. It reminds me of Animal Farm by Orson Wells. “All animals are equal, some are just more equal than others.” The PAD will be content when the current government steps down and a new one is elected… unless of course the majority vote again for the same party. Then the PAD will wine again and say the process is corrupt. What they should be saying, in all honesty, is that they will only support a government that they put into power, not one that is democratically elected. Hmmmm… Cry about the abuse of power, demand a fair and open election, and then protest when the results don’t go in your favor. I think the PAD should change their title to TAD, Thais Against Democracy.
I’m not for the former Thaksin regime in any amount, but I respect the democratic process and the rule of law. Hell, Americans and the world put up with eight years of George Bush, Jr. But citizens didn’t storm the countries airports hoping he would step down. The PAD sets a bad precedent for the future of Thailand if any group who disagrees with the current regime can just seize control of the nations airport and force the government out. What’s to stop the “red shirts” of doing the exact same thing in a PAD endorsed politic?
[UPDATED]
My colleague found an interesting similarity to what the PAD is doing and what defines Fascism. Enjoy.
A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. – Robert O. Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism .[6]
I read your blog about the political situation in Thailand, and you are way off the mark. I think you need to do more research before you write such commentary. I am an American who lived in Thailand for 7 years. I speak and read Thai fluently, and married a Thai. Thaksin used to be one of my clients when I did business in Bangkok, before he went into politics.
Look, the problem is being grossly misunderstood by the foreign media, and especially in the Thai media, which you may not realize is largely controlled by private interests in the hands of Thaksin. Free media as Thais used to know it has largely gone away as Thaksin used his economic power to eliminate any opposing outlets.
The main point is this -that Thaksin was responsible for doing away with the checks and balances–he basically disabled the constitution as it stood–and in addition to rampant centralized corruption and thousands of extra-judicial executions of suspected drug traffickers, he also abused the power of the intelligence services to damage business rivals and political opponents and was responsible for several assassinations that were purely politically motivated. He really needed to be gotten rid of.
You see, the people that are protesting in BKK are not just the old elite, they are the well-educated people that understand that the real threat from Thaksin was that Thailand was rapidly becoming an authoritarian regime like Singapore under Lee Kuan Yu. That is not how Thailand sees its future, and its unfortunate that the rural Thais in many cases have not caught on to this larger geopolitical issue. Remember that it is the BKK Thais that originally supported Thaksin in his initial run for Prime Minister against the provincial candidates. Why do you think they would subsequently turn away from their candidate? Because they realize how dangerous he has become.
Now there are things that Thaksin did for the good of the rural population, and those were good things for them. However, it has basically acted as a huge vote-buying scheme that has cemented his votes in the rural areas, with those people not able to see the terrible things he was doing to civil liberties. Think of it as throwing a dog a bone, and then stealing all the meat while the dog enjoyed his bone.
I have a Thai restaurant in the US, and I just had an entourage of Thai cardiologists in my place, and they were emphatic about preventing the return of Thaksin, and eliminating his cronies. They understand the greater political problems represented by a Thaksin administration. In previous administrations, there was ample corruption to be sure, but that corruption would always come to light, and the opposition parties in parliament would investigate it and eventually the coalition government would disintegrate, and new elections would be held. These were the checks and balances. Under Thaksin, however, he isolated a marginalized the opposition through fear of physical and economic retaliation to the point where there was no longer anyone to stand in the way of the corruption. And he used that opportunity to make huge personal gains for himself at the expense of the Thai people without recompense. There was no end in site to the abuse of power, hence BKK Thais, with the support of the King, finally had to throw him out. Rural Thais did not generally care about the abuses of taxpayer money, because most of them pay little or no taxes anyway, so they would not be adversely affected. All they saw was the medical programs, rural loan programs, etc. being used extremely wisely to buy their votes. Previous administrations always bought their votes illegally with cold cash. Thaksin found a way to do it legally through these programs.
Many in the foreign media have chastised the protesters for blocking the airport, as you have as well. But the protesters have tried other means for months, and to no avail. So when you need to really make your point and create change, hitting them hard economically may be the only way to do it. So while I understand that this may cause a lot of economic hardship for everyone, I applaud the people for standing up to authoritarianism in ways that I never thought they would. Many in the foreign media have said that the protesters are un-democratic in calling for the ouster of the “democratic” government. But as I have said, there is nothing democratic about this government, and with all democratic checks and balances throw out the window by Thaksin, the BKK Thais have no other vehicle to use.
I wonder if these same media sources would consider the protesters of the Vietnam War who interrupted the Democratic National Convention in the US as “undemocratic.” Or how about the civil rights movement under Dr. Martin Luther King marching against Jim Crow laws of the southern US states? Was that un-democratic? Again, there are many cases in the world where in the case for just, moral, and right action calls for people to rise up against government, even government that claims to be “democratically elected.” As a westerner, I am sure you must understand this. So how can you call them dumbasses for doing so? It is extremely naïve in your part, because you don’t understand a thing about Thai politics. You are also degrading the Thai people by not considering that they are capable of understanding the full implications of the severity of their situation and the impacts of their actions.
You are welcome to email me if you have comments. Jestr0123@yahoo.com
J Walker
J Walker:
It is always important to acknowledge and listen to other points of view. So I thank your for your opinion.
But just to clear some of your false assumptions… I am a Thai, who was born here, and have been living here for more than 7 years. I also speak and read Thai. I also work in the Thai media and have first hand experience at the censure and influence of the Thaksin-era regime. I did not vote for him or any candidate affiliated with his party or politics. Nor do I condone what he has done to the climate of trust between the government and citizens.
As a member of the media I have spoken with many political officers, from ministers to departmental clerks from all political backgrounds. If you look back throughout Thai history, you will see different faces but the same underlying story. What is printed in newspapers or shown on TV usually does not encompass the “full story” or if not an actual lie, obfuscates the truth. Many of my off-camera conversations with high-ranking officials revealed very different opinions about political and social policies from leaders such as Thaksin. As with any major political party though, keeping the rank and file often lead to decisions known to be counter productive, but safe for one’s own political career. I was witness to many beneficial programs that never made it to the public eye simply because they were initiated by the opposition. Every political party has been guilty of that.
Thaksin’s rise to power, influence, and popularity among the rural Thais is a key point to the current political unrest. I wholly agree that he exploited the masses. But why was he successful? Because, as you said, he addressed their needs as no previous administration did. The problem is that the current opposition is so focused on the negative aspects of the Thaksin regime that they have failed to address the _cause_ of his power. You mention that the educated have joined the Bangkok elite in forcing this proxy government out. Why do we not see the grass roots people joining the fight? I have just returned from a trip to Ubon Ratchathani in Issan where many say Thaksin has his biggest support. The rallies there were not chanting for Thaksin’s return, they were pleading for an end to a socio-economic divide that has polarized this country. They shouted for those in the city to stop labeling them as uneducated and uninterested in the abuses of power. They want what every Thai wants, to provide for their family and make a better life for their children. Their choice of leaders in the past were either those who helped them achieve that, through populist programs, or those that treated them as second-class citizens. Which would you chose: to feed and care for your family or know that a political ideology is upheld?
It is a noble cause to fight for one’s beliefs. Especially in the light of a corrupt and selfish government. But the protestors at the airports should attack the source of that power, not an institution that is vital to all Thais and the welfare of this country. Political movements as you mentioned concerning civil rights and the end to the Vietnam War did not succeed because the minority held hostage the majority or crippled the country economically. They prevailed because they inspired citizens of every economic class and educational background to take note of their rights, privileges, and _responsibilities_ as members of society and change it at a fundamental level. The protestors are in the wrong place. They are preaching to the choir and worse, alienating those people who support their ideals. The socio-economic gap must be crossed in order to bring an end to this crisis and prevent it from happening again.
And I’m most certainly not “degrading the Thai people by not considering that they are capable of understanding the full implications of the severity of their situation and the impacts of their actions.” If that is your logic then by your own words are you degrading rural Thais. They just never had the choice or opportunity of something better. And if you’ve learned anything from your stay in the Land of Smiles, you should understand the prejudice and cultural stigmas between the “well-educated” urbanites and rural Thais.
Democratic checks and balances all derive their true power from the people. Government is by its nature made up from the citizenry. Most people in the Thai government know what is right and wrong and agree with the protestors that change is needed. But it is the manner of that change that they find error with. I don’t think they are “dumbasses” as you used, just misguided and ignorant to the real reasons behind the Thaksins of this world.