So some of you may have been watching the news and happen to come across a bunch of Thai people in yellow shirts ranting on microphones and blowing whistles. They are shouting mantras of “down with corruption”,and "out with the government" etc, etc. And you probably, don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about.
At first glance this might seem, like a good thing. I mean generally speaking, when we think about protests; rebellions and people wanting to overthrow the government, we picture the down-trodden, the common-man, the masses, who despite all odds, rise up against the elites who are abusing and manipulating government institutions. And while normally that may be true, in this case things become a bit more complicated.
Where things get strange is that the current regime in charge is in fact representative of the class we normally associate with rebellion (i.e. the common-man). Or at least in so much as they were voted into power. The “rebels” on the other hand, are members of the elite, upper and middle class, who represent only a fraction of the total population. They are the ones taking to the streets and demanding the immediate dissolution of the Shinarwat (Red Shirt) administration.
So what would drive these busy elites to bust out the bongo drums? Well it all comes down to corruption. Yes corruption, you know- bad shit. Okay, g?Now you’re on the side of the protesters.
Well if that wasn’t enough for you, then maybe, “you no understand Thai politic.” But if you need more then so be it. The yellow shirt party has asserted that prime minister Yingluck is a puppet controlled by her exiled former prime minister brother, Thanksin, via skype connection in Dubai. And therefore, her main goal as prime minister has not been to initiate any form of independent agenda, but rather to remove the charges against her brother so that he may come home and reclaim his fortune.
Thanksin and his sister Yingluck
And while that may be true, and it may also be true that Thaksin is a, piece-of-shit sociopathic,megalomaniac- hellbent on manipulating Thai politics for his own gain: it is not, in any respect, unique. What is unique, however, is a country with such a ubiquitous taste of corruption to suddenly say “so and so” politician has somehow crossed the line. One has to wonder where is this line exactly, and perhaps more specifically: what exactly Thaksin has done to set himself apart from from a culture which seems to have conformed to the very principles he is being accused of.
In terms of answers, the only responses have been vague, non-specific criticisms. Most recall only his record of criminality, or personal attacks such as declaring him worse than Hitler. As far as an articulated, specific, and well contextualized explanation as to what it means to be considered ‘corrupt’ in a society infused with corruption has yet to emerge.
But absence of an answer doesn’t necessarily leave the whole situation to be forever steeped in mystery. By contrast, the fact that there is no answer says a lot about what could be the real motives of the anti-government movement could be. How could those who are led by one of Thailand’s most corrupt politicians (Suthep), in corrupt way: killing police, blocking voting, and illegally occupying public roads; possibly justify their quest against corruption? They aren’t, which is why what they are truly saying: is Thailand just isn’t ready for democracy.
And this is not to be taken as reinforcement of the Yellow shirt ideology: that the red shirts are just to uneducated to make a logical political decision", but rather that Thailand is just too undeveloped for a democracy to function properly.
When we consider Thailand’s economy for example, we have to understand that it is still, in many ways, a feudal state with a very small number of people controlling a very large portion of the country. This makes for an extremely lopsided demographic and one that would make legislating for extremely difficult. With no middle ground, politicians must decide if they are to serve the masses, or the elites (each other). Just because the media throws around the word, "middle class" in regards to who’s protesting, doesn’t mean they are not referring to the “average class”. Because the “average class” in Thailand, is actually lower class, and the “middle” is the upper elite. And so with such a small number of people controlling such a large sector of the country, trying to institute policy which meets the demands of the masses and the elite is exceptionally difficult.
A middle class Thai citizen at a yellow shirt protest.
Historically, however these imbalances were of no concern, as the monarchy relieved the country from the burdens of the differing opinions. However, once power was transferred to civilian government, an onset of differing demands began to emerge. People wanted to see changes be made, changes that many of the traditional elites believed would come at a cost to themselves.
To make the situation worse, the tension between classes has been exacerbated by massive amount economic growth over the last two decades. New tycoons have born, eager to compete with the old guard; as well as a 'have not’ class that feels they haven’t got their fair share of the pie.
Up and coming entrepreneurs like Thaksin recognized the lack of representation among the rural poor and knew that he could utilize them as a base. These people were the largest demographic of Thailand yet their needs had been ignored by the ruling elite. Therefore if he was to win an election he only needed to provide a few basic populist policies to get them on board. And so he gave them subsidies on their rice farms, cheap health insurance and Thailand’s first minimum wage. And again, not because he cared about them, but because these traditionally neglected people were key to him passing the old guard.
The old Thai elite.
So Thaksin gets into power, he starts making new deals with new people, and all those guys you might see in the Thai version of Boardwalk Empire are left out in the cold.Coincidentally they decide to point out that corruption is now illegal. And so a few protests and a coup later- he’s gone. Except the game doesn’t end there . Thaksin may have been run out of town, but the people who elected him haven’t. And they are still demanding some form of representation, be it Thaksin, or someone else.
And so the situation is doomed to repeat itself. Because nothing has changed. The vast majority are still working poor and still demand representation. On the other side, the old guard still retains influence over property, the army, and institutions. As long as this social architecture remains intact, so will the cycle of election-rebellion-coup. The masses will vote for the politician they think best reflects their needs, the old guard will perceive this as detrimental, and then will use their power to have that leader removed and replaced with a more “suitable” one. An election will then follow where the elite will lose- as perhaps only to inevitable consequence of being elite and the exclusivity that very title implies, and then they will be replaced with a populist leader again.
Yingluck, knowing full-well that she retains support of the largest demographic, has agreed to dissolve her parliament and hold elections again. Of course she’s done so knowing full well that she will win the election. The Yellow shirt party has of course recognized this too and declared it “unacceptable” as the election will be “mired in corruption” (vote buying) even though many have reported the yellow shirts bought more votes than the red shirts in the last election. And instead have posited that the new prime minister be chosen by a group of un-elected elites via shady-ass privy council.
If the election goes through there is a strong possibility of the army intervening and forcefully kicking out the regime. This will probably be met with perhaps even crazier resistance from the Red shirt party. Buildings could get burned down, and more people will inevitably be killed. The cycle will then repeat itself again as the next election will undoubtedly reach the same conclusion.
The reason such an democratic tragedy is occurring in Thailand, and not other countries, say perhaps the the United States, is because the United States has strong institutions and a high median income. Although the wealth gap may actually be greater in the United States than in Thailand, the difference in standard of living is not. Policies designed for middle class Americans are not that far from the elite making for overlapping interests more possible. However with the American middle class eroding, the new middle class could be lower class, and we might find ourselves in a similar situation.
Americans currently enjoy a relatively large middle class, however if levels continue to drop, America could also find itself destabilized.
Other countries like China just said “fuck it” completely and don’t even have elections. Well they have elections, but only if you like voting for different people with the same platforms. Much in the same, the sensitivity surrounding the relationship between the urban elite and the agricultural poor is something better left unexplored. If the agricultural poor had true access to democracy, the amount of changes they would demand would shake up to the entire system. One can’t imagine 1.1 billion people being happy living on $5-10 per day. So it is much better for the elites to keep the people wrapped up in an authoritarian fist so that current conditions can continue.
Thailand, unfortunately, with its weak institutions and uneven standard of living is not in a position to execute democracy to any desired effect. As long as oligarchs retain the ability to transform the state the very word “democracy”: "demo" meaning “people” and “cracy” meaning to rule, will continue to be inapplicable. The system will instead be reduced to historically feudal rule with an increasingly demanding lower class.These people will look for help anywhere they can find it, and perhaps like many of the of the have-nots in the world, it won’t come from the most moral of characters.