Beyond this coloured war, an uglyocracy still squats
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:59 am
Published: 9/04/2010 at 12:00 AM Bangkokpost
The two rounds of peace talks between the red shirts and the government may have offered a glimpse of hope but seem to have ended up simply as a staged propaganda show for public consumption, since the two sides remain far from reaching any concrete agreement.
Democracy can be a dog’s life for the downtrodden in Thailand, if grassroots participation in politics remains a pipe dream.
After a firm "no" to the 15-day deadline for a House dissolution, PM Abhisit Vejjajiva proposed a time-frame of nine months due to three main reasons.
First, the government needed to continue with its measures to ensure a sustained economic recovery. Second, Mr Abhisit argued that an immediate House dissolution would not benefit future Thai politics much, since the old election rules which the red shirts found unfair remained unfixed and would likely still be used in the next general election. He proposed that the Constitution be amended first, which certainly would take some time. And last, the PM pointed out that the atmosphere right now was not yet suitable for an election, given that all the parties would not be "allowed" to campaign freely in every district without being harassed by their opponents.
It seems the reasons cited to support Mr Abhisit's nine-month road map to a House dissolution were nothing more than excuses, a political bargain to prolong problem-solving rather than focusing on the cause of the problems.
If we think carefully about this, over the past year the government has had plenty of time to deal with the charter amendment as well as election rules. However, nothing concrete was done. The display of the "reactionary" attitude has made it difficult for the government to realise that the problem has gone far beyond its nine-month reasoning. Anyhow, it is too late to be "proactive" now regarding the red shirt rally since the magnitude of the protest has accelerated beyond control.
However, it is never too late to find the root cause and fix the real problems rather than the symptoms.
The root of the problems lies in the inability to restore fairness in the national system. Many of our laws, regulations and governmental functions - the whole system of administration - were not designed to benefit the majority of the people in this country. Ever since King Rama VII granted "democracy" to the people, the regime itself has failed to truly reach the grassroots, which is the majority of Thai society.
The doctrine has thus been limited and the power reshuffled among the elite groups. High-ranking military and government officers as well as successful businessmen have taken turns in administration, without much involvement from the grassroots. The only time the rural citizens could directly participate in the regime was when they went to an election and put their ballots in the box. That is why Thai-style democracy has been dubbed a "four-seconds democracy".
Such a disparate practice of democracy has also engendered a saying, by professional political campaigners, that Thai politics revolves around the "stomach" and "emotion". The stomach represents the "well-being" of the grassroots while the emotion represents the "go-with-the-flow" perception of most members of the middle class. If politicians can manage and manipulate these two groups well, they are likely to succeed.
For the middle class, in times of election politicians need to create a positive perception. After they get elected, they are still obliged to maintain the perception whether or not the real work has been done. This is the art of making the "perception" more valuable than the "fact".
As for the grassroots, it is believed that "cash and promises" have been able to obtain their votes, thus the need for populist campaigns.
There are no more than 3,000 politicians in Thailand. Even if we were blessed with the miracle of replacing the current thousands with a whole new group of people, but still have to keep the "four-second" involvement from the grassroots, the problems we have been facing undoubtedly will remain. Corruption, double standards, and conflicts of interest are structural problems that have been grounded in Thailand for decades. The red shirts may view the next election as a sure-fire victory for themselves while the government may insist on the nine-month road map and a new set of election rules.
The reality, however, is that a new election or new election rules will not be the "exit" to all these if the politicians still cannot think beyond their own benefits or are not willing to share power beyond the same group.
The real social problems Thailand faces cannot be solved by new election rules, by amendments to the Constitution, even by the much-called-for House dissolution, but rather by reforming the "system" to accommodate real grassroots participation. It is crucial to focus on identifying and solving these real problems for the grassroots, with the grassroots.
It is uncertain when this "coloured war" will come to an end. However, if both sides are not able to think beyond the current colour-coded conflict, we may reach a point in the near future where people can no longer stand all these vicious cycles of self-interest and mobs of different colours. A new group of people may get together to set up a new fundamental "system" of their own and eventually evict all the colours from their spotlit stage.
It may not take as long as a hundred years for the majority of the people to muster the strength and unity to call for a system that truly benefits all. Hopefully, it can be accomplished within our generation. We should be pushing for a "utopian" politics in which democracy is not just a tool to claim self-righteousness, where moral and social responsibilities can beat the meaningless self-beneficiary schemes of self-propaganda.
Dr Sumit Champrasit is Secretary-General of Institute of Sufficiency Economy. http://www.drsumit.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
The two rounds of peace talks between the red shirts and the government may have offered a glimpse of hope but seem to have ended up simply as a staged propaganda show for public consumption, since the two sides remain far from reaching any concrete agreement.
Democracy can be a dog’s life for the downtrodden in Thailand, if grassroots participation in politics remains a pipe dream.
After a firm "no" to the 15-day deadline for a House dissolution, PM Abhisit Vejjajiva proposed a time-frame of nine months due to three main reasons.
First, the government needed to continue with its measures to ensure a sustained economic recovery. Second, Mr Abhisit argued that an immediate House dissolution would not benefit future Thai politics much, since the old election rules which the red shirts found unfair remained unfixed and would likely still be used in the next general election. He proposed that the Constitution be amended first, which certainly would take some time. And last, the PM pointed out that the atmosphere right now was not yet suitable for an election, given that all the parties would not be "allowed" to campaign freely in every district without being harassed by their opponents.
It seems the reasons cited to support Mr Abhisit's nine-month road map to a House dissolution were nothing more than excuses, a political bargain to prolong problem-solving rather than focusing on the cause of the problems.
If we think carefully about this, over the past year the government has had plenty of time to deal with the charter amendment as well as election rules. However, nothing concrete was done. The display of the "reactionary" attitude has made it difficult for the government to realise that the problem has gone far beyond its nine-month reasoning. Anyhow, it is too late to be "proactive" now regarding the red shirt rally since the magnitude of the protest has accelerated beyond control.
However, it is never too late to find the root cause and fix the real problems rather than the symptoms.
The root of the problems lies in the inability to restore fairness in the national system. Many of our laws, regulations and governmental functions - the whole system of administration - were not designed to benefit the majority of the people in this country. Ever since King Rama VII granted "democracy" to the people, the regime itself has failed to truly reach the grassroots, which is the majority of Thai society.
The doctrine has thus been limited and the power reshuffled among the elite groups. High-ranking military and government officers as well as successful businessmen have taken turns in administration, without much involvement from the grassroots. The only time the rural citizens could directly participate in the regime was when they went to an election and put their ballots in the box. That is why Thai-style democracy has been dubbed a "four-seconds democracy".
Such a disparate practice of democracy has also engendered a saying, by professional political campaigners, that Thai politics revolves around the "stomach" and "emotion". The stomach represents the "well-being" of the grassroots while the emotion represents the "go-with-the-flow" perception of most members of the middle class. If politicians can manage and manipulate these two groups well, they are likely to succeed.
For the middle class, in times of election politicians need to create a positive perception. After they get elected, they are still obliged to maintain the perception whether or not the real work has been done. This is the art of making the "perception" more valuable than the "fact".
As for the grassroots, it is believed that "cash and promises" have been able to obtain their votes, thus the need for populist campaigns.
There are no more than 3,000 politicians in Thailand. Even if we were blessed with the miracle of replacing the current thousands with a whole new group of people, but still have to keep the "four-second" involvement from the grassroots, the problems we have been facing undoubtedly will remain. Corruption, double standards, and conflicts of interest are structural problems that have been grounded in Thailand for decades. The red shirts may view the next election as a sure-fire victory for themselves while the government may insist on the nine-month road map and a new set of election rules.
The reality, however, is that a new election or new election rules will not be the "exit" to all these if the politicians still cannot think beyond their own benefits or are not willing to share power beyond the same group.
The real social problems Thailand faces cannot be solved by new election rules, by amendments to the Constitution, even by the much-called-for House dissolution, but rather by reforming the "system" to accommodate real grassroots participation. It is crucial to focus on identifying and solving these real problems for the grassroots, with the grassroots.
It is uncertain when this "coloured war" will come to an end. However, if both sides are not able to think beyond the current colour-coded conflict, we may reach a point in the near future where people can no longer stand all these vicious cycles of self-interest and mobs of different colours. A new group of people may get together to set up a new fundamental "system" of their own and eventually evict all the colours from their spotlit stage.
It may not take as long as a hundred years for the majority of the people to muster the strength and unity to call for a system that truly benefits all. Hopefully, it can be accomplished within our generation. We should be pushing for a "utopian" politics in which democracy is not just a tool to claim self-righteousness, where moral and social responsibilities can beat the meaningless self-beneficiary schemes of self-propaganda.
Dr Sumit Champrasit is Secretary-General of Institute of Sufficiency Economy. http://www.drsumit.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.