Tino translated an article about the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the current Thai middle class, published on May 1st on the news website AsiaSentinel. The writer Pithaya Pookaman is a former ambassador for Thailand and also a prominent member of the Pheu Thai Party.
Why is a large part of the urban middle class so attached to an authoritarian system? The most obvious explanation is the interest they themselves have in this system, especially when it comes to highly educated people, civil servants and business people. However, much of the middle class is dull or uninterested in the shades of Thai politics as such, or worse, don't understand democracy, globalization, and universal values.
Since the democratic revolution of 1932, Thailand has mainly had regimes of varying authoritarian character and they have instilled in Thai minds a tolerance for arbitrary military rule and a certain contempt for the rule of law.
Coup
Barely a year after the 1932 revolution, Phraya Phahol staged a coup to put Thailand back on the democratic path. It was a 'coup to end all coups'. That was not to be. The military was then responsible for a further 20 coups d'état, 14 of which were successful, to maintain their stranglehold on Thailand's polity with weapons.
At present, the unique tolerance of Thailand's urban middle class for authoritarian regimes seems to have led them to embrace and support the 2014 military coup without much resistance. This sad devotion to an old-fashioned medieval political system has spurred them to excuse the dictatorial regime against all internationally accepted norms.
fluke samed / Shutterstock.comMid-range
Paradoxically enough, the tolerance of a large part of the middle class for a dictatorship in particular has made them intolerant of freedom of speech and the democratic process. They have become deaf and desensitized to injustice and clear violations of the fundamental rights of those who challenge the regime to voice their grievances. Their moral core is so malleable that it can be turned into a tool for demagoguery and tyranny in opposition to morality. It shows indifference to injustice, contempt for compatriots on the margins of society, it looks down on the democratic process, is suspicious of freedoms, and shows unabashed joy in suppressing dissidents who only defend their inalienable rights.
A misplaced patriotism has made Thailand's middle class suspicious of elections and representative government that they see as an import from outside, while they mistakenly see authoritarian and military governments as embodiments of Thai traditional values. In addition, the restraint of the Thai media plays a role in not telling the whole truth.
Political chaos
Thailand's urban middle class blames the former democratic government and then praises the dictatorial regime for restoring calm and stability after a long period of political chaos that paralyzed parts of the capital. It adheres to the mantra of 'the coup d'état to stop corruption' although contradictory enough corruption is widespread under the current regime and it takes no responsibility for it. Moreover, it ignores the fact that democracy has always been sabotaged by the military and has never been allowed to develop fully. It turns a blind eye to the fact that the unrest in the years 2013-2014 was caused by the army itself, in collaboration with its political allies, to create a pretext for a coup and then claim for itself the restoration of stability and calm .
Censorship and oppression
But stability imposed by deception, double standards, media censorship, restrictions on freedom of expression, arbitrary arrests, intimidation and detention of civilians in secret military facilities is unsustainable.
False stability is no substitute for progress. Those who prioritize stability tend to lose the broader economic and political vision needed to move the country forward. Shouldn't give preference to the economy that hasn't picked up much since the coup, causing the livelihoods of many to deteriorate.
Wouldn't a democratically elected government be better suited to restore the country's honor and prestige on the international scene, more in tune with globalization? Shouldn't the regime go back on its repeated promises to the United Nations to restore democracy?
Human rights
Couldn't the Thai middle classes see the contradictions in the so-called 'road map' to elections that kept getting postponed? The pretense of supporting the “National Human Rights Agenda” while human rights are trampled underfoot? The claim to be 99 percent democratic when the new and undemocratic constitution and fully appointed Senate will stifle genuine democratic processes and weaken the role of the political parties? All that to keep a fat future military finger in the pie? Claiming reconciliation as polarization increases?
Discussing reconciliation is pointless as long as the regime exercises absolute power, without any oversight or accountability. Meanwhile, the regime criminalizes criticism, misjudges the intentions of students, academics and the media, imprisons civilians without any safeguards against mistreatment and uses a double standard to destroy the other side.
Dictatorship
Such a bewildering and contradictory dichotomy has made the current regime unique from the more brutal form of dictatorship in the XNUMXs and XNUMXs, yet this uniqueness has not served the country and its people well over the past four years. .
However, it takes more than this treatise to rid the Thai middle classes of its delusions.
Pithaya Pookaman, former ambassador to Bangladesh, Bhutan, Chile and Ecuador, now living in Bangkok.
Source: www.asiasentinel.com/opinion/moral-intellectual-bankruptcy-thailand-middle-class/
Dear Tina,
I think that most citizens are not at all concerned with democratic values.
I sometimes talk about it with my wife and she doesn't like the regime much either, but she looks more at her own world and circle of friends.
These people are also busy earning their own living and they don't really care who pulls the strings because they know that they have little influence anyway.
I think it is also a global phenomenon, just look at NL where the average citizen is more concerned with the latest Iphone or the addition to their new lease car, while the government is breaking down the social system bit by bit for the benefit of big business.
For years, this thinking of more consumption has been pushed down our throats by the government because that is good for the economy, meanwhile we have also squandered our democracy.
I think the moral compass in Thailand or NL or wherever is pretty fucked up.
It's a sad realization and I don't think it's getting any better.
That's true: it's a global phenomenon. The difference, I think, is that in Thailand it is more hopeless and fearful. People are afraid to say or do something. Whether you are listened to in the Netherlands is often the question, but no one picks you up or locks you up if you say something or resist. If I asked Thais: why don't you do anything? then they regularly made a shooting gesture. That is the difference.
It is my experience that most Thais do want more say.
The opinion of Pithaya Pookaman is hereby expressed. Of course you can quote many people and there are many opinions that differ, but you can always find something that is correct or that is not correct. I do agree with you Marco. A large group of Thai people lack the interest and the capacity (knowledge and skills) to be busy at this level and to understand enough, or to have an opinion about it that makes sense. It is also not an easy matter and having some control in your own environment is difficult enough for many. The rich and/or strong among the Thai people in a country like this will always be in charge. They have made that place their own and will not soon be relinquished.
Western democratic thought may have become an elitist hot air balloon. In the Netherlands, too, we are under the yoke of the VVD and some other parties, and they are mainly working for the big money and not for the average, let alone the poor citizen. There is still a lot of poverty in the Netherlands and things are not going well for the elderly either. Look at what has happened to our pensions (an average of about 700 euros per month) and how groups of civil servants have been appointed at the ministries to only draw up rules that by definition only make large groups in our society poor instead of of making them better. Incomprehensible decisions are made in the field of taxation and large companies are kept afloat with special provisions, such as large exemptions. If you think about it a little longer you end up with a headache.
This is apparently what many Thai people think. Don't think too much because I already have enough on my mind to survive. There are and always will be differences to mention, but for a large group they are not so different.
Well, the semi depressive 'it doesn't make sense' can be found among the Dutch and Thai. Fortunately, I was able to talk well with my love about current affairs, including Dutch and Thai politics. Even if 1 vote does not help, talking about how things can and should be improved is still part of it.
Think positive Mark. Noem is a country where there is a higher level of prosperity and freedom for citizens than the Netherlands. We don't realize how good life is in this country. Cockaigne land and paradise do not exist.
Mr. Pookaman's whole story is as leaky as a basket, or based on quicksand.
THE urban middle class does not exist in Thailand at all. The growth of the middle class in Thailand does not take place in Bangkok (because you can read that between the lines; all those miscreants who support the dictatorship live there) but in regions that were traditionally red such as Chiang Mai, Chiang Mai, Khon Kaen, Udon and Ubon. Apart from the fact that part of the middle class in Bangkok is also (or has become) red. (see support for the new Future Forward Party).
Mr. Pookamen is also alien to any self-criticism. A large part of the middle class supported Thaksin, but he squandered that support through greed, selfishness and an authoritarian way of governing (as elected prime minister). This middle class, based on the new money (new industries and the service sector) thought that with Thaksin they could fight the old money (see the Forbes list of wealthy Thai families from eg 2000) but were disappointed. The problem in this country is not the military, but the politicians and the political parties. One rich clique wants to replace another rich clique. And that apparently has to be done in Thailand through elections and over the heads of the ordinary Thais.
Thais are indeed ordinary people. They want to live in peace and quiet, not afraid of bomb attacks and demonstrations that get out of hand. That is why, and only because of this, part of the middle class is silent, not because of support for a dictatorship. But people also hold their breath for the future if the disagreement breaks out again after the elections and is fought out in the streets. That's the doomsday scenario that only the likes of Pookaman could and should avoid. But so far it doesn't seem that way.
On tee points you are right, dear Chris. Who is that urban middle class? What about the middle class outside the cities that is also getting bigger? What shifts are there between classes and within classes? Incidentally, you undermine the criticism of Pithaya's use of the term 'middle class' by referring to the 'middle class' a number of times afterwards. It's a bit more complicated than Pithaya makes it out to be, but hey, you once said that generalizations are necessary.
You are also right that Pithaya and other politicians can sometimes put their hand in their own bosom. They do that far too little.
But what I absolutely disagree with is this: 'The military is not the problem in this country'. You have always defended the military, sometimes, I think, against your better judgement. Thailand has many problems, but the attitudes and behavior of the military is one of the biggest. When I look at Thai history, I am almost certain that without the actions of the military, Thailand would be in a better position in every way.
'
If red and yellow and their leaders would have behaved better, more mature, more responsible and less greedy, the coups of 2006 and 2014 would not have happened and Thailand would be in a much, much better, and more democratic position. Elections are for them only an attempt to gain absolute power and then to enrich themselves. And I foresee that those parties have learned nothing from the past and blame the military for everything. But the people know better.
Incidentally, all my colleagues (who all belong to the middle class and should therefore support the dictatorship) have today searched in vain for all those celebrations and parties in honor of the dictatorship that you announced a few weeks ago. In Isan people also produce “fake news”.
Quote:
Incidentally, all my colleagues (who all belong to the middle class and should therefore support the dictatorship) have today searched in vain for all those celebrations and parties in honor of the dictatorship that you announced a few weeks ago. In Isan people also produce “fake news”.
Come on, Chris, ever heard of irony?
If, if… If the military had remained in the barracks in the past eighty years (20 coups, 15 of which were successful), Thailand would have had a fairly mature democracy by now.
Can you estimate how many civilian deaths the military is responsible for?
We will talk about the role of the military, who in your eyes can never do wrong, but can never agree.
Remember the demonstrations of Thammasat University students in 1973. Hundreds shot by the army.
You (still) have a lot of trouble with a nuanced opinion. I've written a lot about what's going wrong in this country. Not only the military are to blame for this, but also the politicians who should work with the mandate of the people.
And no, then Thailand would NOT have had a mature democracy because the attitude of the influential red and yellow Thais was and still is feudal.
If you now make an estimate of the deaths that the military has on their conscience, I will make a calculation of all the deaths that democratically elected governments have contributed to by not doing anything substantial about the problem in the south of Thailand, the drug problem, wrong-kills due to excessive alcohol consumption and illegal possession of weapons.
Think the military is pretty good.
(Note: My parents taught me to always look both ways when crossing the street.)
dear tin…
The urban middle class in Thailand does not exist, which is why the whole world is utter nonsense. The growing middle class (in the cities and outside the cities) is - as far as I can tell - certainly aware of what is going on in the world and is not at all enamored of a dictatorship. But we are also aware that the main players in politics of the last 20 years have let it come to this. There is perhaps more skepticism about politics than about the junta. And few are enthusiastic about elections that produce the same political conditions as in the recent past.
Because let's be honest now: politicians don't make the economy and as far as Thailand has had the wind in the last 15 years, the revenues have disappeared into the pockets of the few (yellow and red).
Dear Chris,
You argue that one rich clique wants to replace the other and that the military is not the problem.
The military (and also the most important top officials) and the old clique you mentioned are in fact 1 group. The old cabal ensures that the right people are placed in the positions most crucial to them, so that they can best represent their business and financial interests. It is a top-level network that is very difficult to break.
The new 'rich' clique poses a threat to this network, and that is the main reason for the intervention by the military in 2006 and 2014. The 'new clique' you mentioned still has far too little grip on the military and civil service apparatus to successfully challenge the old cabal.
During elections, the new clique has a significantly better chance. Positions elected by the people cannot be filled by the old clique because they are in the numerical minority. The old clique (and therefore everyone who is associated with it in a positive sense) would rather see an authoritarian regime that defends their interests than an elected government over which they have little control.
These coups were also substantially different in design from those before. In both 2006 and 2014, large protests were organized (and financed by the old 'rich' clique) to create an “unsustainable” situation, so that the military could intervene as 'white knights'.
Without this unsustainable situation created, the coup could lead to much stronger protests in the west, and even a boycott. And the old clique didn't want to run that risk.
The old clique does not really care that the economy is not really picking up. They no longer see their own growth in Thailand and are increasingly investing in other economies. The total wealth of this old cabal is growing enormously, while the rest of the country remains stagnant, and they like to keep it that way.
A few notes before I start writing a book:
– the old clique and the military are not the same clique. Many top military personnel are also entrepreneurs and some have made their money in new businesses.
– those network weeks are broken with every change of government. Top officials lose their jobs if they do not belong to the right blood group (clan and political affiliation). Have several examples of that;
– the new clique sometimes finances the old clique and vice versa. You have to look at the individual level to see that some live in quite a split;
– the reason for the change of power in 2006 was that Thaksin overplayed his power. It also came as a bolt from the blue and not at all in a situation of major protests;
– all protests and demonstrations in this country are financed by the political clique. Also the one in 2011;
– the growing group of the new rich is much larger than the old cabal.
The military is not the problem.
? !!
I nearly fell off my chair. Since 1932 it has almost always been (the) military who were in power! Phiboen, Plaek, Thanom, Sarit, Prem… Since 1932, beautiful Thailand has barely had the chance to develop into a democracy. Those soldiers are a big part of the problem. Yes, along with the other wealthy clans of various backgrounds who compete for power and wealth. The people must get rid of their green shackles and the clans. Only then will we see that power is not fought in the street with tanks and machine guns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_Thailand#Prime_Ministers_of_the_Kingdom_of_Thailand_(1932–present)
Quote:
'The problem in this country is not the military, but the politicians and the political parties. One rich clique wants to replace another rich clique. '
Yes, you're right, I see it now. Take Chuan Leekpai, a politician, son of petty shopkeepers, elected Prime Minister (1992-95 and 1997-2001). Not worth a punch in the nose. Rich? He lived in a ramshackle rented house on a potholed road. Wasn't even able to enrich himself any further. A klutz.
But then the military field marshal Sarit Thanarat (premier 1959-1963)! A great man. Worked hard in the national interest despite his 100 mia noi's. In between he also occasionally had to execute an arsonist or communist on the side of the road. Carried a heavy burden of $100 million (now worth a billion). Due to his heavy duties he died of an alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver. A real man! And then General Suchinda! In May 1992, he managed to shoot 60 peaceful demonstrators, received an amnesty and became director of True Move. Military isn't the problem, really.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
Look at all the other PMs from the last 40 years…..and yes, from red and yellow…
In my view, both politics and the military are to blame for everything that has gone wrong in the past and present. This has been clearly stated by Tino and Chris. Only it seems as if a mirror is being held up when both people hold their arguments. They are not open enough to each other and the truth, however, is somewhere in the middle, I dare say. Soldiers do not belong to the government, but should defend the country and politicians should do their very best for the well-being of this society. Well, we have seen strong examples of that or not, you judge for yourself. They get a big thumbs up from me. Or the youth and the new democrats, because there are those who could possibly do something meaningful, get enough space to contribute, I would like to, but I am still skeptical, because money still rules.
Hello Marco,
Tino did not write the piece, but translated it.
The author is :The author Pithaya Pookaman is a former ambassador for Thailand and also a prominent member of the Pheu Thai Party.
Marco you write: I think that most citizens are not at all concerned with democratic values.
Isn't that also what Pheu Thai party writes and substantiates?!
Regards,
Duco
Amsterdam
The Nation has this opinion piece 'This junta was no good for anyone'
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30345973
Two quotes:
'Observers inside and outside the country appear agreed that this junta launched reforms not for the people's benefit but to consolidate its hold on power'.
'The vast majority of Thais have derived no benefit at all from the coup. The “peace and stability” we supposedly enjoy thanks to the generals is an illusion. There is plenty of animosity bubbling just under the surface. Four years – and we got nowhere.'
In itself there is truth in the story, but every country gets the form of democracy that its inhabitants deserve.
A government is no different than a company and sometimes unpopular measures have to be taken to keep the ship afloat. If things really get out of hand, the other UN countries will have known about this for a long time, but for the time being it is a domestic matter because that is how the democracy fairy tale works.
I agree with Marco that people look and act more in their own world. In that respect it is no different in the Netherlands, for example. The family and then maybe the family comes first and when we feel spiritually touched we start to think of others.
Perhaps it is true that if there is a little more compassion for a fellow human being, understanding will arise, which will also change the democratic process.
It seems that the best writer has never been able to bring that to the understanding of his bosses, which is not surprising given the history of that party.
Strong story Tino!
Thank you for your translation! Very interesting and in my opinion very believable. Something you can't say about politicians...
Look at the entire Thai society: it has always been the dictatorial way of government, under which every Thai lives from cradle to grave.
See the first-of-the-best “management” meeting: his perfect infallibility, his gigantic genius infinite omniscience, called Zhe Bozz, alone speaks, decides and the rest… executes his decisions without any input, let alone discussion.
In my opinion, in the last 20 years there has been a struggle between the very wealthy group - with the man in lederhosenland as the most important representative - with mainly financial interests in the "old" economy (focused on production for export) and the very wealthy group - with the Shinawatras as the most important representative – with mainly financial interests in the “new” economy (focused on domestic spending).
For profit, the “old” economy benefits from low wages, while the “new” economy benefits from purchasing power.
When the “new” group started to determine the political agenda, the “old” group tried to thwart this legally and – when that was not enough – to create political unrest, so that the soldiers affiliated with the “old” group had an excuse to commit a coup.
Because the penultimate coup ultimately did not have the desired result - the "new" group again won the elections with a superior force - coarser guns had to be used. So, after the last coup, a new constitution was created to guarantee the power of the “old” group. That the current military coup plotters are strongly affiliated with the man in lederhosenland is evident from the fact that he was able to amend the constitution on a few points after it had been adopted by referendum (which was not allowed to be criticized in advance).
So it seems that the “old” group has won the battle for now.