As a follow up to James’s earlier post there is a curiously titled article from the Nation “Democrat calls on CNS to explain works” it goes on to say:
“The Democrat Party Sunday called on the Council for National Security to re-explain its reasons behind the coup against the Thaksin government.
Democrat spokesman Ong-art Klampaibool said so far none of the reasons cited by the coup makers to oust prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra had been fulfilled so the CNS should explain to the public why there were no progress in the issues.”
Although I must admit I’m starting to enjoy all the tales of ‘black magic’ ‘voodoo’ and al the other stories flowing from the deep dark recesses of peoples minds. Keep the rumours coming. No evidence is required.
The junta has taken some steps to demonize Thaksin’s economic policies by calling for the use of the “sufficiency economy,” a philosophy created by the king that calls for moderation and stability. Although this initially worried foreign investors, many now see it simply as an effort to re-brand many of Thaksin’s initiatives.
Sufficiency economy is just rhetoric which is ironic as such rhetoric was meant to be done away with along with the evils of the Thaksin regime.
Nganadeeleg, yes good suggestion. I might start with superstitions relating to the jaw chiwit (lord of life).
And, I liked Unlcle J\’s comment too. It reminded me of all the smart young Bangkok types I\’ve seen unwinding after a solid day\’s work down at RCA. A bottle of Chivas, pumping music and no chance of conversation at all. Perfect!
All this talk of voodoo leads me to a suggestion for your research.
Rather than concentrating on ‘vote buying’ I think an analysis of the superstitions and beliefs of thai people might be quite instructive in determining the political sophistication of the various groups in Thailand. Would be even better if you could try to link those beliefs with the way they voted in the 2005 and 2006 elections.
I also liked Uncle J’s comment:
‘I am not interested [in politics]. When I have finished work I drink whiskey’.
[…] As regular contributor – Patiwat – warns, Surayud’s policy manifesto should not be taken too seriously. But, to my reading, there are a number of issues worth further discussion. […]
[…] As I posted a few months ago, perhaps there are more realistic, investor-friendly and people-friendly economic visions. I came across this one while undertaking ethnographic research in a popular northern Thai eating establishment: […]
[…] Second, there is the now familiar references to “sufficiency economy”. It is interesting that this is taking such a central place in the regime’s policy, when it is a concept that still has to be clarified. (”The government is expected to clarify the sufficiency economy philosophy…”) I see little in this policy statement to make me change my mind that sufficiency economy is primarily a regulatory concept aimed at managing the aspirations of rural people (in particular) who see an economic and political future for themselves rather different to the harmonious and virtuous future envisaged for them by the benevolent rulers in Bangkok. Surayud and his advisors seem concerned that foreign investors may interpret “sufficiency economy” as an inward looking economic approach. How could investors get such a silly idea? Just look at this positively cosmopolitan vision from a key book about the “new (?) theory” on sufficiency economy:┬ […]
Hi – here are a couple of observations from my sketchbook about the January 2001 elections from a village in northeast Thailand.
In the weeks before caravans would drive by from dawn to dusk blaring out morlum gorn and political messages/slogans in Lao and young men would jump out and cover every vantage point in the village with posters. A few days before Election Day things, to much relief, seemed to go quiet – I’m not sure if this is because of regulations banning electioneering in the days before voting or if it was just because the caravans just run out of ‘steam’.
Then I experienced, what was for me at least, an extortionary sight. (This next bit is straight from the sketchbook) “On the village tracks and rural roads of the district the dull dust covered motorcycles, bicycles, small tractor drawn carts, tiny busses, and pick-up trucks normally seen was joined by flocks Bangkok taxis, a mode of transport quite unusual in the northeast. That week it was all but impossible to leave Bangkok. Every outbound seat on public transport was booked out with most people enduring the 8 to 16 hour trip standing shoulder to shoulder in the isles of trains and busses. The taxis were arriving not because business was so bad in Bangkok that they needed to ply their trade in northeast. They, also, were jammed packed full with their driver owners, their family, relatives and friends returning ‘home’ to their villages. The bright greens, yellows, blues, pinks and purples of the taxis, moving through the flat, brown post harvest landscape added a festive air counter point to the serious business going on in the local temples and village halls, that of the general election.”
Election Day. Most people arrived from Bangkok during the small hours of the morning and a festive atmosphere took off around the village – that of multiple family reunions. Every 5th or 6th house had ‘tables’ set up in their yards and food and drink (mainly beer, commercially produced rice ‘whiskey’ and a potent, sweet milk, coloured ‘wine’ made from sticky rice) was being consumed at such a rate that it felt like there was going to be no tomorrow. Little kids were quietly sitting on laps and clinging to parents who they hadn’t seen for months. Older kids were running around kicking up the dust and playing with the new toys that were being handed out. Being a stranger I was being called from table to table and introduced to the new arrivals and asked to partake in the feast. I tried, reasonably successfully, to resist drinking too much by saying that my partner forbid me to drink but as she couldn’t see a little sip wouldn’t hurt. I didn’t hear any political talk on my ‘rounds’ just the type of talk you hear between brother and sister, cousin and cousin, patent and child reacquainting themselves. By about midday things began to quieten down – most people were finding their way to somewhere quite and cool to sleep off the excesses of the morning.
Meanwhile, voting was being conducted in the sala at the wat. The sala, in this village, is a wooden structure that is raised of the ground a meter or so. It has too entrances accessed by a small flight of stairs, one facing east the other facing west. The eastern entrance was blocked off. At the front of the western entrance was a notice bord where there was a small (A4), official looking, poster of each candidate that contained a small statement and a passport size photo of the candidate in ‘uniform’. At the top of the stairs was a table for the ‘officials’ (I was quite familiar with these men, the village ‘leader’, a village ‘councillor’, a village ‘police man’ and another man who was known locally known in the village as a ‘person that help’ – I’m not sure if this is an officially recognised position or not.) About 6 meters behind this table, in the middle of the sala, were 4 (from memory) voting ‘booths’ that gave a voter enough privacy that they could vote in secrecy but were open and public enough that ensure that no one could interfere with a voter without been seen.
I sat on the step outside the sala and chatted with these ‘officials’ for an hour or so. We spoke about many things including politics. There was some gentle banter and joking with me about the merit of various candidates. Even amongst this small group of men there was support for three of the candidates from different political parties. However, whenever a voter approached (voters would generally arrive singularly or in small groups) the banter stoped and silence took over. The ‘officials’ went into absolute professional mode. The voter approached the table was asked for their ID card (even though they knew exactly who the person was – poor old grandmother YO arrived without her ID card and was prevented from voting. After she chided the ‘officials’ to no avail her grandson was sent back to the house to retrieve her card. Once the card was produced she was allowed to vote.) The ID card was checked against a list and marked off. Ballot papers were given to the voters and they would proceed to the booths and chose their candidate (even though there was space for 4 people to vote at a time most people hung back until all 4 booths were empty before moving forward.) The voters would fold their ballot papers and proceed to place them in the ballot box. Once this was done then their ID card was returned.
Later in the afternoon, as dusk began to fall, people were beginning to pack up and leave for the long journey back to Bangkok. The thing I remember most about this part were teary goodbyes from small children as parents and relatives piled into cars and busses with their bags of locally grown rice.
Whoops – I just realised how long this post is – I’d better finish here.
I’m not too enthusiastic about the part of about “Virtue before knowledge” in the educational policy. Chances are we will be left with neither virtue nor knowledge. I’m afraid we are doomed to mediocrity when it comes to education, at least in our lifetime.
Vichai N, so true about dark magic! Sondhi has secret evidence that Thaksin hired the man who destroyed the Phra Phrom Erawan Shrine. Thaksin took the relics from the shrine and did cambodian voodoo magic to feed the gods of darkness. Why don’t stupid villagers believe Sondhi? Thaksin was so close to opening the gates of hell.
(1) Try to equate your village research with your earlier theory that HMK’s ‘Sufficiency Economy’ will keep the poor POOR. And contrast that with Thaksin’s straight cash handouts that was meant to keep the poor BEGGING.
(2) Your research on Thaksin’s omnipotence and spell on the poor will not be complete unless you include Thaksin’s voodoo credentials and penchance for dark magic.
No need to thank me if the above suggestions help in your research.
It reads a lot like a ratification of a UNDP development “declaration” after one of their global summits…or the like…vague, yet dangerously ideological…crossing the international funding “Ts” and dotting the diplomatic “I s” while in reality it is business as usual.
Don’t read too much into a new government’s policy statement. They’re always very vague. Thaksin’s policy statements have usually been a bit more concrete, but even they contain lots of hand-waving. See the policy statement of Thaksin’s 2001 government for example: http://www.thaiembdc.org/politics/govtment/policy/54thpolicy/policy_e.html
A much more meaningful statement for analysis would be a party’s pre-election campaign platform, which the current government doesn’t have, of course.
The truth Anon is that Thaksin Shinawatra was a coward of the worst kind . . as he directed from high up in his expensive Penthouse, the execution of 2,500 defenseless villagers. JB’s comment that Thaksin Shinawatra was a micro-manager demanding first blacklists from the those village policemen-hicks, then demanding again thousands of body counts paint a truly despicable picture of a megalomaniac man, bent on displaying his god-like powers to deliver instant justice, and showing off macho gloss to those guillible village masses who could not understand better that rules of law, if not meticulously observed, criminally violate human rights and outrages our decency.
What was the point of the slaughter? Thaksin’s whim? Expediency? Surely Thaksin Shinawatra could have passed the toughest anti-drug legislation on the world in the Thai parliament he then effectively controlled if he really wanted to make a lasting impression against drug abuse. But Thaksin Shinawatra wanted to earn adulation accorded to movie stars when he willfully slaughtered 2,500 defenseless villagers suspected of ya ba trafficking. Mass murder to be popular makes me puke!
Anon you love the extrajudicial killings, do you? I personally would like to see extrajudicial measures tried on the very people who espouses it use (or abuse).
Mr Andrew, of course you must limit yourself to one area and this is more a strength than limitation of your work (your paper on Matrilineal spirits evidencing a strong sensitivity to nuance) but where you question the stereotypes of the portrayal of rural political practice by the middle-class surely in a contextual sense you will need to dispel the myths about the middle-class at the same time? I would say this is achievable if you treat with “political values” in an holistic sense and according to how political power is conceived of and manifest in Thai society, its distribution when understood like this will definitely dispel some of the ghosts of paternalism’s past.
We know and hear about how Thaksin was a popular prime minister and led his party to victory but how much details do we have (data) on how his popularity translated into political alliegance at local and provincial levels? How did people come to know him, who were the local spin doctors so to speak that translated Thaksin the Demi-god into local contexts (urban and rural) where headline concerns over crime and poverty made sense in people’s homes and communities. The opportunism of the population can’t be overlooked in terms of his popularity but Thaksin was represented locally by others and I think these people are key to potentially rich detail regarding the political process, values in practice and behind the scemes in the electoral process…hopefully you have access to these people as they will fill many a gap in terms of the practical application of values to practice…
For example in Uttaradit some 2-3 years ago gangs of “Samurai” sword weilding young men were employed by local politicians from OBT to Ampher to Jangwat and Tetsamontri to threaten and intimidate opponents and their supporters and their mobilisation was reflected in other areas such as the Southern border, the northeast and some of Central Thailand’s more densely populated areas…the upshot of this being that in Uttaradit and the South…and by proxy the other areas I would say, TRT were shown/known locally to be the paymasters of these gangs and the extrajudicial killings that were more than 2500 people dead, similarly allowed for particularly heavy handed political negotiation via the “strong arm of the law”. This was undertaken by local people in local contexts and so local memory would provide a bit of insight into this part of the “political values”. It illustrates that political success and political alliegance came about through practices that are generally overlooked in studies of Thailand’s political system but I think in trms of historical context of the recent past an essential value to pay attention to…again vote buying will be better contextualised from this perspective.
.
Thanks for the various comments and references to other useful research.
Nirut, there is much in your comment which will have to wait for discussion of the proposed paper itself. I don’t disagree with some of what you say about hua khanaen and will try to give some insight into their local practises in the paper. You are right – I do focus on rural people. That is my area of interest and my research focus (not just on politics but on other social, cultural and environmental issues – for example, see my earlier post about matrilineal spirits). Others can write about middle-class/urban situations. And I hope that I don’t just take things at face value – but, ultimately, that will be for others to judge.
Andrew, you might already have seen Albritton and Thawilwadee’s paper Developing Democracy under a New Constitution in Thailand (http://www.asianbarometer.org/newenglish/publications/workingpapers/no.28.pdf). This was an excellent piece of quantitative research that really dug deep and tried to understand just what democracy meant in the Thai political context. I found the paper extremely insightful, particularly how it described popular mistrust towards party politics. Surprisingly, they also found that rural people had a greater trust in political parties than urban people, reflecting the fact that the elite feared the role of political parties as vehicles for popular mobilization.
The paper also describes the Thai preference for non-partisan government, which explains why Surayud’s cabinet of bureaucrats is being given a chance. It also analyzes the changing balance between Thailand’s relatively modern respect for liberal democracy and Thailand’s traditional respect for social stability.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just unhappy to see me?
As a follow up to James’s earlier post there is a curiously titled article from the Nation “Democrat calls on CNS to explain works” it goes on to say:
“The Democrat Party Sunday called on the Council for National Security to re-explain its reasons behind the coup against the Thaksin government.
Democrat spokesman Ong-art Klampaibool said so far none of the reasons cited by the coup makers to oust prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra had been fulfilled so the CNS should explain to the public why there were no progress in the issues.”
Its starting to sound like a familiar story.
The full text can be found here: http://nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/read.php?newsid=30017416
Although I must admit I’m starting to enjoy all the tales of ‘black magic’ ‘voodoo’ and al the other stories flowing from the deep dark recesses of peoples minds. Keep the rumours coming. No evidence is required.
Virtuous sufficiency
A new Asia Sentinel article sums it up nicely:
The junta has taken some steps to demonize Thaksin’s economic policies by calling for the use of the “sufficiency economy,” a philosophy created by the king that calls for moderation and stability. Although this initially worried foreign investors, many now see it simply as an effort to re-brand many of Thaksin’s initiatives.
Sufficiency economy is just rhetoric which is ironic as such rhetoric was meant to be done away with along with the evils of the Thaksin regime.
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Nganadeeleg, yes good suggestion. I might start with superstitions relating to the jaw chiwit (lord of life).
And, I liked Unlcle J\’s comment too. It reminded me of all the smart young Bangkok types I\’ve seen unwinding after a solid day\’s work down at RCA. A bottle of Chivas, pumping music and no chance of conversation at all. Perfect!
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
All this talk of voodoo leads me to a suggestion for your research.
Rather than concentrating on ‘vote buying’ I think an analysis of the superstitions and beliefs of thai people might be quite instructive in determining the political sophistication of the various groups in Thailand. Would be even better if you could try to link those beliefs with the way they voted in the 2005 and 2006 elections.
I also liked Uncle J’s comment:
‘I am not interested [in politics]. When I have finished work I drink whiskey’.
Virtuous sufficiency
All this guff being put forward by Surayad has such a familiar ring. I wonder if he is going back to the future and using Vajiravudh as his model?
Surayud to bring love, harmony and virtue (with strengthened military potential)!
[…] As regular contributor – Patiwat – warns, Surayud’s policy manifesto should not be taken too seriously. But, to my reading, there are a number of issues worth further discussion. […]
Sufficiency in the City
[…] As I posted a few months ago, perhaps there are more realistic, investor-friendly and people-friendly economic visions. I came across this one while undertaking ethnographic research in a popular northern Thai eating establishment: […]
Sufficiency democracy
[…] Second, there is the now familiar references to “sufficiency economy”. It is interesting that this is taking such a central place in the regime’s policy, when it is a concept that still has to be clarified. (”The government is expected to clarify the sufficiency economy philosophy…”) I see little in this policy statement to make me change my mind that sufficiency economy is primarily a regulatory concept aimed at managing the aspirations of rural people (in particular) who see an economic and political future for themselves rather different to the harmonious and virtuous future envisaged for them by the benevolent rulers in Bangkok. Surayud and his advisors seem concerned that foreign investors may interpret “sufficiency economy” as an inward looking economic approach. How could investors get such a silly idea? Just look at this positively cosmopolitan vision from a key book about the “new (?) theory” on sufficiency economy:┬ […]
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Wow, those silly villagers really need to get some education on voodoo! Thanks for the tip.
Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just unhappy to see me?
Wait ’til your child be addicted to drug. You’d appreciate Thaksin’s ‘drug’ policy…
Have your say on “local electoral culture”
Hi – here are a couple of observations from my sketchbook about the January 2001 elections from a village in northeast Thailand.
In the weeks before caravans would drive by from dawn to dusk blaring out morlum gorn and political messages/slogans in Lao and young men would jump out and cover every vantage point in the village with posters. A few days before Election Day things, to much relief, seemed to go quiet – I’m not sure if this is because of regulations banning electioneering in the days before voting or if it was just because the caravans just run out of ‘steam’.
Then I experienced, what was for me at least, an extortionary sight. (This next bit is straight from the sketchbook) “On the village tracks and rural roads of the district the dull dust covered motorcycles, bicycles, small tractor drawn carts, tiny busses, and pick-up trucks normally seen was joined by flocks Bangkok taxis, a mode of transport quite unusual in the northeast. That week it was all but impossible to leave Bangkok. Every outbound seat on public transport was booked out with most people enduring the 8 to 16 hour trip standing shoulder to shoulder in the isles of trains and busses. The taxis were arriving not because business was so bad in Bangkok that they needed to ply their trade in northeast. They, also, were jammed packed full with their driver owners, their family, relatives and friends returning ‘home’ to their villages. The bright greens, yellows, blues, pinks and purples of the taxis, moving through the flat, brown post harvest landscape added a festive air counter point to the serious business going on in the local temples and village halls, that of the general election.”
Election Day. Most people arrived from Bangkok during the small hours of the morning and a festive atmosphere took off around the village – that of multiple family reunions. Every 5th or 6th house had ‘tables’ set up in their yards and food and drink (mainly beer, commercially produced rice ‘whiskey’ and a potent, sweet milk, coloured ‘wine’ made from sticky rice) was being consumed at such a rate that it felt like there was going to be no tomorrow. Little kids were quietly sitting on laps and clinging to parents who they hadn’t seen for months. Older kids were running around kicking up the dust and playing with the new toys that were being handed out. Being a stranger I was being called from table to table and introduced to the new arrivals and asked to partake in the feast. I tried, reasonably successfully, to resist drinking too much by saying that my partner forbid me to drink but as she couldn’t see a little sip wouldn’t hurt. I didn’t hear any political talk on my ‘rounds’ just the type of talk you hear between brother and sister, cousin and cousin, patent and child reacquainting themselves. By about midday things began to quieten down – most people were finding their way to somewhere quite and cool to sleep off the excesses of the morning.
Meanwhile, voting was being conducted in the sala at the wat. The sala, in this village, is a wooden structure that is raised of the ground a meter or so. It has too entrances accessed by a small flight of stairs, one facing east the other facing west. The eastern entrance was blocked off. At the front of the western entrance was a notice bord where there was a small (A4), official looking, poster of each candidate that contained a small statement and a passport size photo of the candidate in ‘uniform’. At the top of the stairs was a table for the ‘officials’ (I was quite familiar with these men, the village ‘leader’, a village ‘councillor’, a village ‘police man’ and another man who was known locally known in the village as a ‘person that help’ – I’m not sure if this is an officially recognised position or not.) About 6 meters behind this table, in the middle of the sala, were 4 (from memory) voting ‘booths’ that gave a voter enough privacy that they could vote in secrecy but were open and public enough that ensure that no one could interfere with a voter without been seen.
I sat on the step outside the sala and chatted with these ‘officials’ for an hour or so. We spoke about many things including politics. There was some gentle banter and joking with me about the merit of various candidates. Even amongst this small group of men there was support for three of the candidates from different political parties. However, whenever a voter approached (voters would generally arrive singularly or in small groups) the banter stoped and silence took over. The ‘officials’ went into absolute professional mode. The voter approached the table was asked for their ID card (even though they knew exactly who the person was – poor old grandmother YO arrived without her ID card and was prevented from voting. After she chided the ‘officials’ to no avail her grandson was sent back to the house to retrieve her card. Once the card was produced she was allowed to vote.) The ID card was checked against a list and marked off. Ballot papers were given to the voters and they would proceed to the booths and chose their candidate (even though there was space for 4 people to vote at a time most people hung back until all 4 booths were empty before moving forward.) The voters would fold their ballot papers and proceed to place them in the ballot box. Once this was done then their ID card was returned.
Later in the afternoon, as dusk began to fall, people were beginning to pack up and leave for the long journey back to Bangkok. The thing I remember most about this part were teary goodbyes from small children as parents and relatives piled into cars and busses with their bags of locally grown rice.
Whoops – I just realised how long this post is – I’d better finish here.
Surayud to bring love, harmony and virtue (with strengthened military potential)!
I’m not too enthusiastic about the part of about “Virtue before knowledge” in the educational policy. Chances are we will be left with neither virtue nor knowledge. I’m afraid we are doomed to mediocrity when it comes to education, at least in our lifetime.
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Vichai N, so true about dark magic! Sondhi has secret evidence that Thaksin hired the man who destroyed the Phra Phrom Erawan Shrine. Thaksin took the relics from the shrine and did cambodian voodoo magic to feed the gods of darkness. Why don’t stupid villagers believe Sondhi? Thaksin was so close to opening the gates of hell.
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Just some sincere suggestions Andrew:
(1) Try to equate your village research with your earlier theory that HMK’s ‘Sufficiency Economy’ will keep the poor POOR. And contrast that with Thaksin’s straight cash handouts that was meant to keep the poor BEGGING.
(2) Your research on Thaksin’s omnipotence and spell on the poor will not be complete unless you include Thaksin’s voodoo credentials and penchance for dark magic.
No need to thank me if the above suggestions help in your research.
Surayud to bring love, harmony and virtue (with strengthened military potential)!
It reads a lot like a ratification of a UNDP development “declaration” after one of their global summits…or the like…vague, yet dangerously ideological…crossing the international funding “Ts” and dotting the diplomatic “I s” while in reality it is business as usual.
Surayud to bring love, harmony and virtue (with strengthened military potential)!
Don’t read too much into a new government’s policy statement. They’re always very vague. Thaksin’s policy statements have usually been a bit more concrete, but even they contain lots of hand-waving. See the policy statement of Thaksin’s 2001 government for example: http://www.thaiembdc.org/politics/govtment/policy/54thpolicy/policy_e.html
A much more meaningful statement for analysis would be a party’s pre-election campaign platform, which the current government doesn’t have, of course.
Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just unhappy to see me?
The truth Anon is that Thaksin Shinawatra was a coward of the worst kind . . as he directed from high up in his expensive Penthouse, the execution of 2,500 defenseless villagers. JB’s comment that Thaksin Shinawatra was a micro-manager demanding first blacklists from the those village policemen-hicks, then demanding again thousands of body counts paint a truly despicable picture of a megalomaniac man, bent on displaying his god-like powers to deliver instant justice, and showing off macho gloss to those guillible village masses who could not understand better that rules of law, if not meticulously observed, criminally violate human rights and outrages our decency.
What was the point of the slaughter? Thaksin’s whim? Expediency? Surely Thaksin Shinawatra could have passed the toughest anti-drug legislation on the world in the Thai parliament he then effectively controlled if he really wanted to make a lasting impression against drug abuse. But Thaksin Shinawatra wanted to earn adulation accorded to movie stars when he willfully slaughtered 2,500 defenseless villagers suspected of ya ba trafficking. Mass murder to be popular makes me puke!
Anon you love the extrajudicial killings, do you? I personally would like to see extrajudicial measures tried on the very people who espouses it use (or abuse).
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Mr Andrew, of course you must limit yourself to one area and this is more a strength than limitation of your work (your paper on Matrilineal spirits evidencing a strong sensitivity to nuance) but where you question the stereotypes of the portrayal of rural political practice by the middle-class surely in a contextual sense you will need to dispel the myths about the middle-class at the same time? I would say this is achievable if you treat with “political values” in an holistic sense and according to how political power is conceived of and manifest in Thai society, its distribution when understood like this will definitely dispel some of the ghosts of paternalism’s past.
We know and hear about how Thaksin was a popular prime minister and led his party to victory but how much details do we have (data) on how his popularity translated into political alliegance at local and provincial levels? How did people come to know him, who were the local spin doctors so to speak that translated Thaksin the Demi-god into local contexts (urban and rural) where headline concerns over crime and poverty made sense in people’s homes and communities. The opportunism of the population can’t be overlooked in terms of his popularity but Thaksin was represented locally by others and I think these people are key to potentially rich detail regarding the political process, values in practice and behind the scemes in the electoral process…hopefully you have access to these people as they will fill many a gap in terms of the practical application of values to practice…
For example in Uttaradit some 2-3 years ago gangs of “Samurai” sword weilding young men were employed by local politicians from OBT to Ampher to Jangwat and Tetsamontri to threaten and intimidate opponents and their supporters and their mobilisation was reflected in other areas such as the Southern border, the northeast and some of Central Thailand’s more densely populated areas…the upshot of this being that in Uttaradit and the South…and by proxy the other areas I would say, TRT were shown/known locally to be the paymasters of these gangs and the extrajudicial killings that were more than 2500 people dead, similarly allowed for particularly heavy handed political negotiation via the “strong arm of the law”. This was undertaken by local people in local contexts and so local memory would provide a bit of insight into this part of the “political values”. It illustrates that political success and political alliegance came about through practices that are generally overlooked in studies of Thailand’s political system but I think in trms of historical context of the recent past an essential value to pay attention to…again vote buying will be better contextualised from this perspective.
.
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Thanks for the various comments and references to other useful research.
Nirut, there is much in your comment which will have to wait for discussion of the proposed paper itself. I don’t disagree with some of what you say about hua khanaen and will try to give some insight into their local practises in the paper. You are right – I do focus on rural people. That is my area of interest and my research focus (not just on politics but on other social, cultural and environmental issues – for example, see my earlier post about matrilineal spirits). Others can write about middle-class/urban situations. And I hope that I don’t just take things at face value – but, ultimately, that will be for others to judge.
Some grassroots views on Thaksin and the coup
Andrew, you might already have seen Albritton and Thawilwadee’s paper Developing Democracy under a New Constitution in Thailand (http://www.asianbarometer.org/newenglish/publications/workingpapers/no.28.pdf). This was an excellent piece of quantitative research that really dug deep and tried to understand just what democracy meant in the Thai political context. I found the paper extremely insightful, particularly how it described popular mistrust towards party politics. Surprisingly, they also found that rural people had a greater trust in political parties than urban people, reflecting the fact that the elite feared the role of political parties as vehicles for popular mobilization.
The paper also describes the Thai preference for non-partisan government, which explains why Surayud’s cabinet of bureaucrats is being given a chance. It also analyzes the changing balance between Thailand’s relatively modern respect for liberal democracy and Thailand’s traditional respect for social stability.