Living in a Pressure Cooker

Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a Thai political analyst and professor at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, spoke to The Irrawaddy about Thailand’s evolving political infrastructure, its polarized society, and his call for the elite to make self-enlightened reforms and concessions.

Thitinan Pongsudhirak

Answer: A combination of relative homogeneity, the effective indoctrination of so-called “Thai-ness,” and steady economic development has enabled an elite consensus to take hold in the face of Cold War exigencies.

The end of the Cold War, the economic boom from the late 1980s, and the royal twilight have changed all that.

While the rising tide of development lifted all boats, those on the poorer rungs of the Thai socio-political hierarchy benefited much less than the well-heeled middle and topmost echelons. This structural inequality was laid bare for Thaksin Shinawatra, a consummate politician and tycoon, to manipulate and exploit at will with his pandering populism, facilitated by conducive provisions in the 1997 constitution that allowed money and vested interests to capture its reformist intentions and institutions.

In his own corrupt and abusive ways, Thaksin awakened the hitherto poorer rungs of society, who now will not simply return to passivity. Their rising expectations, bolstered by globalization and democratization dynamics, have shaken the longstanding elite consensus, which was headed for realignment in any case as the royal twilight fades.

It’s like they tasted sticky rice and mango and things were never the same again. The rise and rage of the poorer rungs, as manifested in the red-shirt movement, have upset the working consensus of Thailand’s traditional elites. The ways things are ultimately understood and conducted have thus faltered. But instead of seeing Thaksin as a wake-up call to share more and allow poorer boats a higher lift, the elites appear fixated on crucifying Thaksin.

Of course, accepting and conceding to the poorer rungs would require the upper reaches of Thai society to undertake reforms and adjustments for which they appear unprepared and unwilling. Until they come around, Thailand’s deepening polarization will persist to painful ends.

Q: What reforms could be introduced to address the anger that many Thais feel about their country’s political situation?

A: Thai society is akin to a pressure cooker, sealed at the top by the lèse majesté law, heated from the bottom by official indoctrination, and pressed from the sides by the Democrat Party-led government, the military, the judiciary, and the royalist People’s Alliance for Democracy.

This tightening space in the face of the IT revolution and the demands for dissent are unhealthy. Reforms are needed to release pressure, to allow sensible dissent, and ultimately to bridge the divide between the upper reaches and the bottom rungs. The palpable sense of injustice and double standards is being denied by some in Thailand, but it is being felt by many.
Concrete measures to ensure more disclosure, transparency and accountability of the upper reaches and their material interests would appease the lower rungs, whose demands and expectations should be measured and modest.

Land and inheritance taxes are first steps. An overhaul of education is imperative to allow talent and ability from the have-nots to rise. Media reform is critical to foster a learned and democratic society. Headlines should cover the lives of the poor who stand out. Upcountry but talented villagers like the UK’s Susan Boyle need to be able to have opportunities. All measures to spawn a meritocracy are needed.

Q: Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s critics say that he cannot relate to ordinary Thais. Do you think his government will be able to win over the hearts and minds of rural people who have traditionally voted for ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra’s parties and proxies?

A: It is a pity that Abhisit is prime minister today and not eight to 10 years from now when we will need someone like him.