Personally, I like the term “localism” as it contains the “-ism” which refers to a condition or a (in this case unwritten) doctrine. The context of local wisdom is wrongly applied to this terminus as it disregards the etymological root of the word. Localism hence is a “doctrine of the place”.
There is nothing very particular with Thailand’s localism. Like Srithanonchai has said, it happens all over the world. In Africa we have the redistribution system that works similarily. And in Germany the parlamentary system has incoorporated the localism. Every district and sub-district is electing MPs hoping that the local community is benefiting from that electoral choice. However, what is different in Thailand is the regionalisation of political parties, obviously very much due to its leaders. In some countries we have ethnic parties, but as in Thailand ethnicity is not very much a factor in politics, the regional or local identity plays as a counterbalance to the centralised Thai administration.
The Thai centralised state has very much swiped out any local loyalties. As it tries to retreat under the term “decentralisation” (krachai amnaat – which I don’t believe to be really happening as the Thai center is extremely anxious on losing the margin, see Mandala system), the void space if filled out by what I would call “local heroes”. As the country had no opportunity to develop a diverse local/regional political landscape, these emerging (or existing) heroes enter the political stage uncontested on the local/regional level. Now they end up fighting for the central power.
What rather strikes me is that on the administrative level we have a reversed picture. Here we cannot see (at least I can’t) any localism as it is seen on the political level. With regards to administration the provinces are still colonialised by the center. Even in Maehongson you have district officers, teachers and even the head of the post office coming from central Thailand.
Seeing that it is no wonder that one adheres to a kind of localism to oppose all that…
Sorry if there is a incoherence in my comment, I am writing that at work….
Andrew, the argument that rural voters are more sophisticated than the stereotype assumed by middle class Bangkokians and the junta propagandarists is an important one. However, I’m not sure that “localism” is evidence of sophistication.
The charge that is repeatedly laid against rural voters is that they are too dumb to know the difference between good and bad policy; that they are easily led by “populist” promises etc. It is a rather unfair charge, because the same charge can probably be laid on urban middle class voters who will vote for tax cuts without giving a damn about how it was funded, but nevertheless the charge is there, and it must be answered/refuted. I’m just not convinced that showing that “localism” exists in rural Thailand refutes the charge.
You need to go further (and you may have done so in the full version of your paper). You need to show that, in Baan Tiam at least, the majority of voters are not only relatively unswayed by “vote-buyers”, but they are also able to discern the merits/pitfalls of the policies offered by the various candidates. This is not to say you need to show that the villagers have PhD-level understanding of economics. You just need to show that they are be able to understand the arguments & criticism put forward by the various candidates and make informed decisions about which policies/candidates best meet their short and long term interest. In my book, if they can do that, then they are as sophisticated as most voters in the most advanced democracies.
Your remark includes voters in urban areas, right? In his campaign for the governorship of Bangkok, Aphirak ran under the slogan “Krungthep khong rao.”
Grown up outside Thailand, I am not sensitised to the symbolism of the Thai monarchy. All I have is my sister-in-law as a case study and she reads out all the implicit signs that Thaksin has been making and is extremely angered about that. I believe that many react like her.
Andrew, my post #1 above refers to the problem.
Do you accept that the ‘localist’ values you outlined contain many of those attributes?
Of course I accept that rural thai voters are not alone in finding it difficult to rise above human nature, and to a large extent they are a captive of their particular environment and circumstances.
IMHO it is a problem when the majority of the electorate are in those circumstances, and I also believe they could do better for themselves if they used a different decision making process in deciding how they vote.
Tosakan: I don’t think that your understanding is wrong. Only that I expressely talked about the provincial/constituency level. I assume that TRT disbursed the money to its people on the understanding that they use it the way they see fit in order to be successful, based on their personal phuak and canvassing networks. This was complemented by Thaksin’s statement, “Don’t do anything during the election campaign that is against the law!” It must be kept in mind that vote buying is a most serious electoral offense that will break your political neck if it is proven. It is not without reason that, notwithstanding of all the talk of widespread vote-buying during the past almost 20 years, only a handfull of small fry has ever been found guilty.
“voting trends or electoral behavior about Thailand as a whole” > I don’t think that this is Andrew’s aim. Rather, he wants to present a case (not anecdotes), based on his observations. Being familiar with these issues, the research situation, and the available literature, I am happy about every article reporting observations on the ground. If carefully constructed, it will add to the small amount of data we do have, and thus help broadening our understanding. So, bit by bit, and over time, we will increase our knowledge. The piecemeal nature of research is often as much overlooked as is its time dimension.
Of course, I would be more than happy if I had 50 researchers stationed in as many provinces/constituencies for one year all over Thailand to closely observe the current election season (TAOs, municipalities, House, Senate, and PAO in April next year). But that’s just a dream. Unfortunately, we have to be content with what we have.
Other people might take up the task of looking at the overall picture by collecting statistical data, newspaper reports, and descriptions such as Andrew’s.
nganadeeleg, localism is on a small scale what patriotism (and maybe also nationalism) is on a larger scale… and you wouldn’t want to throw away all your nice yellow shirts, wouldn’t you?
The problem I have with the term (besides my resentment against such things as nationalism) is that it is too common to prefer people who share your background. I don’t think it is something that is special to the Thai rural community (but I do think that the observations are true).
Thanks PL – I know it’s very difficult to rise above human nature, but the first step is to recognise the problem.
No problem can be overcome until you admit there is a problem.
Beal didn’t work for Tara Siam, he worked for a rival, and I think his study of the family businesses of Thailand done in 2 or 3 volumes dates to the mid-1980s and was his own work. As he knew, lots of people copied hist work.
At the time he also did a massive chart linking all the Sophonpanich family businesses that looked as complex as a computer chip.
Later he was responsible for some (if not all) of the Thai players on the the Forbes billionaires list, including the one time in the late 1990s Forbes decided to include King Bhumibol.
He was also a super-keen jazz buff, full of great stories.
In today’s Matichon (March 6, 2007, p. 11), there are two brief articles, printed next to each other, that make one wonder about the democratic prospects of Thailand and the “exploitation” of the “symbolic power of the monarchy.” Both articles concern the Ministry of the Interior.
In the first article, the MoI announces that it will start its democracy promotion project. People all over the country will be taught what democracy means. The units responsible for this project are the Regional Administration Department, the Department of Local Government, and the Community Development Department. No details, for example about the budget, are given. Only trainings for withayakorn maekai are mentioned. One wonders whether this will be done in a way similar to the NPKC’s democracy promotion project under Issarapong Noonpakdee.
In the second article, the MoI announces that it will ask all civil servants, employees, temporary staff, and all citizens to dress in yellow every day until December 31, in order to show their loyalty to the king and celebrate his 80th birthday.
How do both projects go together? On the one hand side, the MoI wants to promote democracy, which is about individual responsibility and decision-making. On the other hand, the MoI falls back into the time of dicatorial, almost totalitarian, administrative-political practice in order to exert pressure and push through their authoritarian intentions.
One imagines a democracy promotion class in which participants and teachers are all dressed in zombie yellow, discussing the virtues of individual civic decision-making. The MoI really seems to be a lost cause as far as democracy is concerned. But, then, this is not exactly brand-new news.
From my understanding, the money is dispersed from the top down to the political canvassers.
I think the whole financing of the TRT party infrastructure came from Thaksin, his wife, and maybe a few other fundraisers.
And this is the reason why Thaksin had such control over his party caucus.
1. He sponsored and funded hand picked candidates.
2. He gave them a salary above their normal publically funded salaries.
3. The party funded all the marketing activities, including canvassing.
In return for this financing, his party caucus was expected to give him unconditional support, which it did.
This was the key reason I think that TRT didn’t give Thaksin the boot and save the country from a coup.
Thai Rak Thai could have dumped Thaksin any time it wanted, but it didn’t. Why? He was their bread and butter.
Also, I think the statistics are there concerning votes bought, or cash dispersed, and votes cast for TRT candidates, or measurable voting results from the cash dispersed.
It is statistically possible to figure it out the numbers. But I doubt TRT will hand over their campaign financing figures.
I think Andrew’s proposal is interesting, but I doubt you can make a reasonable assessment about voting trends or electoral behavior about Thailand as a whole from anecdotal evidence from one or two villages.
“Also, they should have data on the correlation between votes bought and votes cast for their candidate.” > I have some doubts about this, since vote buying seems to be a local affair, i.e. belongs to the sphere of the constituency candidates, not so much the political party (the hua khanaen also don’t belong to TRT, but to its individual candidates; writing about a “key TRT canvasser” is very misleading). What TRT does have is polling data concerning the prospects of their constituency andidates. But I doubt that TRT will easily let anybody access these data. Of course, one can try.
I would not put too much pressure on the article. Rather, I would be satisfied with a carefully constructed local case that I can relate to more general conceptualizations and data from other areas. However, without being able to read the entire piece, an evaluation, or even comments, are difficult. So, I will be waiting for the printed version.
Suriyon Raiwa, yep, that’s it. Although my copy was blue and was from before the crisis.
No excuses: if you want to understand anything about how business and society works in Thailand, you need that book. It’s nearly a thousand pages long and is written very fairly, i.e., with no political agenda. It wasn’t designed for political science researchers – it was designed for business people. Used to play a silly game with my buddies going through that book, comparing who knew/dated/studied-with/was-related-to the families listed – the winner would get bragging rights to being the most connected person in the company.
The only issue I had with it was that the name spellings weren’t always consistent with what was reported in the media. But any book with the same scope would face the same problem.
With on-line directories like Business On-Line (later purchased by Reuters), doing research on Commerce Ministry filings became much easier. But still, the research and attention to detail invested in the Tara Siam directory is unmatched. Rest In Peace, Peter Beal – you created a masterpiece.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Personally, I like the term “localism” as it contains the “-ism” which refers to a condition or a (in this case unwritten) doctrine. The context of local wisdom is wrongly applied to this terminus as it disregards the etymological root of the word. Localism hence is a “doctrine of the place”.
There is nothing very particular with Thailand’s localism. Like Srithanonchai has said, it happens all over the world. In Africa we have the redistribution system that works similarily. And in Germany the parlamentary system has incoorporated the localism. Every district and sub-district is electing MPs hoping that the local community is benefiting from that electoral choice. However, what is different in Thailand is the regionalisation of political parties, obviously very much due to its leaders. In some countries we have ethnic parties, but as in Thailand ethnicity is not very much a factor in politics, the regional or local identity plays as a counterbalance to the centralised Thai administration.
The Thai centralised state has very much swiped out any local loyalties. As it tries to retreat under the term “decentralisation” (krachai amnaat – which I don’t believe to be really happening as the Thai center is extremely anxious on losing the margin, see Mandala system), the void space if filled out by what I would call “local heroes”. As the country had no opportunity to develop a diverse local/regional political landscape, these emerging (or existing) heroes enter the political stage uncontested on the local/regional level. Now they end up fighting for the central power.
What rather strikes me is that on the administrative level we have a reversed picture. Here we cannot see (at least I can’t) any localism as it is seen on the political level. With regards to administration the provinces are still colonialised by the center. Even in Maehongson you have district officers, teachers and even the head of the post office coming from central Thailand.
Seeing that it is no wonder that one adheres to a kind of localism to oppose all that…
Sorry if there is a incoherence in my comment, I am writing that at work….
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Andrew, the argument that rural voters are more sophisticated than the stereotype assumed by middle class Bangkokians and the junta propagandarists is an important one. However, I’m not sure that “localism” is evidence of sophistication.
The charge that is repeatedly laid against rural voters is that they are too dumb to know the difference between good and bad policy; that they are easily led by “populist” promises etc. It is a rather unfair charge, because the same charge can probably be laid on urban middle class voters who will vote for tax cuts without giving a damn about how it was funded, but nevertheless the charge is there, and it must be answered/refuted. I’m just not convinced that showing that “localism” exists in rural Thailand refutes the charge.
You need to go further (and you may have done so in the full version of your paper). You need to show that, in Baan Tiam at least, the majority of voters are not only relatively unswayed by “vote-buyers”, but they are also able to discern the merits/pitfalls of the policies offered by the various candidates. This is not to say you need to show that the villagers have PhD-level understanding of economics. You just need to show that they are be able to understand the arguments & criticism put forward by the various candidates and make informed decisions about which policies/candidates best meet their short and long term interest. In my book, if they can do that, then they are as sophisticated as most voters in the most advanced democracies.
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Your remark includes voters in urban areas, right? In his campaign for the governorship of Bangkok, Aphirak ran under the slogan “Krungthep khong rao.”
Sonthi on manners and democracy
Grown up outside Thailand, I am not sensitised to the symbolism of the Thai monarchy. All I have is my sister-in-law as a case study and she reads out all the implicit signs that Thaksin has been making and is extremely angered about that. I believe that many react like her.
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Andrew, my post #1 above refers to the problem.
Do you accept that the ‘localist’ values you outlined contain many of those attributes?
Of course I accept that rural thai voters are not alone in finding it difficult to rise above human nature, and to a large extent they are a captive of their particular environment and circumstances.
IMHO it is a problem when the majority of the electorate are in those circumstances, and I also believe they could do better for themselves if they used a different decision making process in deciding how they vote.
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Yes, I agree. Rural Thai voters are a lot like voters anywhere else.
Localism and the “rural constitution”
What can one say — yes, this sort of localism is widespread all over Thailand (even in Europe, and elsewhere).
Localism and the “rural constitution”
nganadeeleg, maybe there ought to be a stazi to maintain *adopts ocher accent* the locals denial of their confounded animal desires?
р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Шр╕гр╕гр╕бр╕Щр╕╣р╕Н р╕Кр╕▓р╕зр╕Ър╣Йр╕▓р╕Щ – the “rural constitution”
Tosakan: I don’t think that your understanding is wrong. Only that I expressely talked about the provincial/constituency level. I assume that TRT disbursed the money to its people on the understanding that they use it the way they see fit in order to be successful, based on their personal phuak and canvassing networks. This was complemented by Thaksin’s statement, “Don’t do anything during the election campaign that is against the law!” It must be kept in mind that vote buying is a most serious electoral offense that will break your political neck if it is proven. It is not without reason that, notwithstanding of all the talk of widespread vote-buying during the past almost 20 years, only a handfull of small fry has ever been found guilty.
“voting trends or electoral behavior about Thailand as a whole” > I don’t think that this is Andrew’s aim. Rather, he wants to present a case (not anecdotes), based on his observations. Being familiar with these issues, the research situation, and the available literature, I am happy about every article reporting observations on the ground. If carefully constructed, it will add to the small amount of data we do have, and thus help broadening our understanding. So, bit by bit, and over time, we will increase our knowledge. The piecemeal nature of research is often as much overlooked as is its time dimension.
Of course, I would be more than happy if I had 50 researchers stationed in as many provinces/constituencies for one year all over Thailand to closely observe the current election season (TAOs, municipalities, House, Senate, and PAO in April next year). But that’s just a dream. Unfortunately, we have to be content with what we have.
Other people might take up the task of looking at the overall picture by collecting statistical data, newspaper reports, and descriptions such as Andrew’s.
Localism and the “rural constitution”
nganadeeleg, localism is on a small scale what patriotism (and maybe also nationalism) is on a larger scale… and you wouldn’t want to throw away all your nice yellow shirts, wouldn’t you?
The problem I have with the term (besides my resentment against such things as nationalism) is that it is too common to prefer people who share your background. I don’t think it is something that is special to the Thai rural community (but I do think that the observations are true).
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Where is the problem in the “localist” values I have written about? Or is the problem simply that you have different values?
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Thanks PL – I know it’s very difficult to rise above human nature, but the first step is to recognise the problem.
No problem can be overcome until you admit there is a problem.
Localism and the “rural constitution”
nganadeeleg,
you wish to fight human nature?
Localism and the “rural constitution”
Localism = playing on peoples fears, prejudices, greed & ignorance.
The tawdry cloak of sufficiency
Beal didn’t work for Tara Siam, he worked for a rival, and I think his study of the family businesses of Thailand done in 2 or 3 volumes dates to the mid-1980s and was his own work. As he knew, lots of people copied hist work.
At the time he also did a massive chart linking all the Sophonpanich family businesses that looked as complex as a computer chip.
Later he was responsible for some (if not all) of the Thai players on the the Forbes billionaires list, including the one time in the late 1990s Forbes decided to include King Bhumibol.
He was also a super-keen jazz buff, full of great stories.
RIP
“Unrealistic expenses”?: the 5.5 million baht “sufficiency teow”
In today’s Matichon (March 6, 2007, p. 11), there are two brief articles, printed next to each other, that make one wonder about the democratic prospects of Thailand and the “exploitation” of the “symbolic power of the monarchy.” Both articles concern the Ministry of the Interior.
In the first article, the MoI announces that it will start its democracy promotion project. People all over the country will be taught what democracy means. The units responsible for this project are the Regional Administration Department, the Department of Local Government, and the Community Development Department. No details, for example about the budget, are given. Only trainings for withayakorn maekai are mentioned. One wonders whether this will be done in a way similar to the NPKC’s democracy promotion project under Issarapong Noonpakdee.
In the second article, the MoI announces that it will ask all civil servants, employees, temporary staff, and all citizens to dress in yellow every day until December 31, in order to show their loyalty to the king and celebrate his 80th birthday.
How do both projects go together? On the one hand side, the MoI wants to promote democracy, which is about individual responsibility and decision-making. On the other hand, the MoI falls back into the time of dicatorial, almost totalitarian, administrative-political practice in order to exert pressure and push through their authoritarian intentions.
One imagines a democracy promotion class in which participants and teachers are all dressed in zombie yellow, discussing the virtues of individual civic decision-making. The MoI really seems to be a lost cause as far as democracy is concerned. But, then, this is not exactly brand-new news.
р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Шр╕гр╕гр╕бр╕Щр╕╣р╕Н р╕Кр╕▓р╕зр╕Ър╣Йр╕▓р╕Щ – the “rural constitution”
Srithanochai-
From my understanding, the money is dispersed from the top down to the political canvassers.
I think the whole financing of the TRT party infrastructure came from Thaksin, his wife, and maybe a few other fundraisers.
And this is the reason why Thaksin had such control over his party caucus.
1. He sponsored and funded hand picked candidates.
2. He gave them a salary above their normal publically funded salaries.
3. The party funded all the marketing activities, including canvassing.
In return for this financing, his party caucus was expected to give him unconditional support, which it did.
This was the key reason I think that TRT didn’t give Thaksin the boot and save the country from a coup.
Thai Rak Thai could have dumped Thaksin any time it wanted, but it didn’t. Why? He was their bread and butter.
Also, I think the statistics are there concerning votes bought, or cash dispersed, and votes cast for TRT candidates, or measurable voting results from the cash dispersed.
It is statistically possible to figure it out the numbers. But I doubt TRT will hand over their campaign financing figures.
I think Andrew’s proposal is interesting, but I doubt you can make a reasonable assessment about voting trends or electoral behavior about Thailand as a whole from anecdotal evidence from one or two villages.
р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Шр╕гр╕гр╕бр╕Щр╕╣р╕Н р╕Кр╕▓р╕зр╕Ър╣Йр╕▓р╕Щ – the “rural constitution”
“Also, they should have data on the correlation between votes bought and votes cast for their candidate.” > I have some doubts about this, since vote buying seems to be a local affair, i.e. belongs to the sphere of the constituency candidates, not so much the political party (the hua khanaen also don’t belong to TRT, but to its individual candidates; writing about a “key TRT canvasser” is very misleading). What TRT does have is polling data concerning the prospects of their constituency andidates. But I doubt that TRT will easily let anybody access these data. Of course, one can try.
I would not put too much pressure on the article. Rather, I would be satisfied with a carefully constructed local case that I can relate to more general conceptualizations and data from other areas. However, without being able to read the entire piece, an evaluation, or even comments, are difficult. So, I will be waiting for the printed version.
The tawdry cloak of sufficiency
Suriyon Raiwa, yep, that’s it. Although my copy was blue and was from before the crisis.
No excuses: if you want to understand anything about how business and society works in Thailand, you need that book. It’s nearly a thousand pages long and is written very fairly, i.e., with no political agenda. It wasn’t designed for political science researchers – it was designed for business people. Used to play a silly game with my buddies going through that book, comparing who knew/dated/studied-with/was-related-to the families listed – the winner would get bragging rights to being the most connected person in the company.
The only issue I had with it was that the name spellings weren’t always consistent with what was reported in the media. But any book with the same scope would face the same problem.
With on-line directories like Business On-Line (later purchased by Reuters), doing research on Commerce Ministry filings became much easier. But still, the research and attention to detail invested in the Tara Siam directory is unmatched. Rest In Peace, Peter Beal – you created a masterpiece.
р╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╕Шр╕гр╕гр╕бр╕Щр╕╣р╕Н р╕Кр╕▓р╕зр╕Ър╣Йр╕▓р╕Щ – the “rural constitution”
I am not sure if I buy into this.
Where is the empirical evidence?
A few anecdotes in one or two villages doesn’t prove anything
Is there any credible polling data available?
What about exit polls?
I reckon that the Thai Rak Thai Party has some marketing data also.
I would cross check your data from your village with other data , such as polls and marketing data elsewhere.
How does your data align with other data from other villages that chose TRT candidates?
Are there regional trends, provincial trends?
Seriously, you should call Thai Rak Thai and ask them for the data.
Electioneering is a very sophisticated “business.”
If they don’t have the marketing data, I’d be surprised.
Also, they should have data on the correlation between votes bought and votes cast for their candidate.
It might be a drag, but you have to do the math.