Opinion – Middle and upper class Thais are marginalising the true followers of democracy by their lack of knowledge
By
Titipol Phakdeewanich
August 29, 2022
As political parties in Thailand are now starting to prepare for the expected general elections in 2023, the outcome of the polls is unlikely to change the political landscape in the country.
The elections in 2023 would likely be held as the 1st term of the military-led government ends on March 24th, 2023, exactly 4-years after the March 2019 polls that put 2014 military coup d’état leader – General Prayut Chan-o-cha, who was also the leader of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) back in power through the help of the 250 handpicked senators.
The outcome of the 2023 elections is very unlikely to show any significant change in the Thai political landscape, because the military’s drafted constitution of 2017 asserted a legal mechanism to ensure that General Prayut or a NCPO’s surrogate, can remain in power for at least 2-terms, and this is facilitated by the senators who have a vote in picking the Prime Minister.
However, the suspension of Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha from office by the Constitutional Court of Thailand last Wednesday has raised a little hope for the pro-democratic Thais, who have been longing to see the change in the country’s power structure. His deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwon is the ‘caretaker’ Prime Minister for now.
Thailand’s acting Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan leaves Government House in Bangkok on August 26, 2022.
Nevertheless, one cannot be too optimistic, given the fact that the court ruled in favour of the prime minister in all cases against him, since he seized power. Thus, it remains very unlikely that the court will eventually rule against him.
This was evident from the fact that not all the 9-members of the Constitutional Court judges, voted to accept a request for a review of 8-year limit and to suspend him, in fact it was only a vote of 5-4. To make matters worse, the 5-4 vote was after 2nd voting took place with the President of the Constitutional Court judges having had to cast his vote in the minority side, i.e. in favour of not suspending Prayut from his duties. The 1st vote was 5:3 with the President of the Constitutional court judge abstaining from voting.
Thailand’s embattled Prime Minister Prayut Chan-O-Cha drives an electric tuk tuk vehicle at Government House
Failed Promises
Over the past 8 years after the coup, none of the key promises made by the NCPO and Prayut himself were implemented. The democratic reforms that were touted as a pretext to undertake the coup have gone nowhere and the world has been observing democratic decline of Thailand.
The failed promises are among the key reasons why people are so desperate to remove Prayuth from office.
This was highlighted after the International non-government organization, Freedom House, classified Thailand as a “Not Free” country ever since the 2014 coup, and briefly upgraded Thailand to be a “Partly Free” country in 2020 after the 2019 General Election.
Today, the political establishment and the Thai middleclass still believe that voting decisions of rural people are dictated by the embedded Thai political culture of vote-buying. They persist to deny the evolution of the structure of political power within the Thai political landscape, especially in Isan, the North-eastern region of Thailand, where rural voters have gained more bargaining power against the candidates in elections.
Since the very first landslide victory of Thaksin Shinawatra, former prime minister, and leader of the Thai Rak Thai party in 2001, his influence on Thai politics remains influential due to the support base in the Isan and the North for the Pheu Thai party, which is the reincarnation of the Thai Rak Thai party and the People’s Power party.
The political loyalty of rural people, in Isan, towards the Pheu Thai Party and Thaksin is demonised by the anti-Thaksin movement, led by the conservative Thais and the elite and therefore the rural Isan voters remain scapegoats for Thai democratic failure.
Thaksin Shinawatra
Patronising Rural Voters
Question arises whether rural people can understand democracy without educational attainment or if they cannot read and write at all?
Despite the patronising perceptions toward rural population, democracy always remains a debatable term, within both the West and the East, within a society and academia. However, the very main democratic values – liberty, equality, and justice, are non-negotiable and cannot be compromised, in order to ensure that all member of a society is treated with respect and can live in dignity.
The middle class continues to feel that money is the most important thing to win elections. Therefore, they have been looking for an electoral system that can help them to win election, while undermining voting rights of the people, especially in the rural areas of Thailand.
Whilst, on the ground it is not just money that influences the outcome of the polls, there are other things one needs to have when they field candidates in the Isan region. Rural people have learned to scrutinise party manifestos, policy priorities. and their ability to deliver and keep promises, which is a key explanation of the success and ongoing influence of the Pheu Thai Party in Isan.
The core democratic values are not at all alienated from Thais who live in the rural areas of the country. Liberty, equality, and justice are not beyond the ability of rural people to understand, even for those who cannot read and write.
“I want to have a voting right. So that I can choose who can help to improve my life in the village. I know that all of them [politicians] are not always good. But if I can vote I can choose who I think can develop our village”, said a Ubon Ratchathani based woman who is illiterate, because her family could not afford to send her to school and had worked in Bangkok in the 1980-1990’s since she was 12-years of age.
The stereotype of those living their lives in rural villages, cannot actively participate in Thai politics and the country’s political power structure, is something that is a prejudice of the establishment and the middle-class. The people living in rural areas do understand that power is expected to serve everyone in the country. They understand that power must not be reserved to serve the interests of those with social privileges, big businesses, and the establishment.
However, the consolidation of power between the military and big businesses significantly undermines the ability of rural villagers to participate actively. Nevertheless, they are enthusiastic to vote in the 2023 general elections, despite the fact that Thailand may well end up with the same General who seized power from the people through the 2014 Coup.
Indeed, democracy cannot simply be treated as a philosophical or academic terms, without conceding that democratic values are simply part of everyone’s lives, and everyone can understand it from the ground. A day-to-day life in rural villages has long been providing a practical experience for villagers to learn and understand how liberty, equality, and justice can be a mechanism to improve their lives, without referring to it in a philosophical or academic term: “democracy”.
Often the case that rural people say that they do not understand democracy when discussing the Thai authorities or academics, which led to the assumption that they will have to learn what democracy is, in order to support Thailand democratic progress. The Thai government and foreign donors have been spending a significant amount of money to promote democratic understanding amongst rural people, in Thailand and the region.
When rural people cannot convey their democratic knowledge and understanding, learning from the ground, the state must at least give them an opportunity to enjoy their inherent rights, as citizens, rather than taking those rights away. Because inclusivity can be an effective means to amend decades of political divide in Thailand. This remains a big question, whether the political establishment and the Thai middleclass are now ready to share power with the marginalised and unprivileged people living outside Thailand’s capital, Bangkok, especially in the rural areas.
Titipol Phakdeewanich is a political scientist at the Faculty of Political Science, Ubon Ratchathani University.
