The Battle Between Populism And Privilege In Thailand

[steveromagnino]

The rural poor are still voting exactly they way they have the past 50 years.

I am very sorry to disagree here.

Anecdotal evidence is countered by academic research. Andrew Walker has done a very interesting field research that touches this subject - read it.

Baker - the researcher who has for years defined "godfather politics" (and has been disputed) has now reversed his position.

Korn has a few days ago openly admitted that money politics is not all there is, and neither is vote buying.

Read Ungpakorn's papers on this subject.

Society is in a process of change, especially rural poor and the from this sector recruited newly developing urban proletariat. The last years have seen a rise in political consciousness, reflected by TRT/PPP as they were/are the only party that has seen the political marketing potential of these developments, while all other parties are still struggling with accepting these developments.

You cannot discount these clear facts.

My feeling is yes, the playing field has significantly changed, since Thaksin discovered the benefits of using the state coffers to help reduce the costs for each faction to acquire their votes by providing a cohesive 'brand' with TRT, and using market research to control policies - with a large enough block of votes, he could then more easily control each faction and with no checks and balances he was able to increase the level of the skim.

Always previously, each government tended to fall as soon as certain factions felt left out of the feeding frenzy; by increasing the size of the skim pie using voter friendly policy, indeed TRT changed the way the rural poor voted; the vote became slightly split between the godfather at home, and the party in BKK giving them parties/30b healthcare/war on drugs/kicking out foreigners/beating up the southerners/etc etc (whatever tended to be electorally popular).

As long as the godfathers continue to side with the people running this scheme of cards, then in effect, the end result has not changed at all, but the method to get there has become more cost effective for the godfathers, since now they can not only get more money for their allegiance, but also there is more skim to be shared despite more people at the trough. Of course, the long suffering tax payers might complain, but they are mostly in BKK and without a free media or justice system or watchdogs, there would be very limited checks and balances to get them out of power anyhow.

The legacy of such a system is that anyone inheriting the mantle of TRT can still probably get some brand value even though TRT is no longer around; and thus acquire the factions perhaps more cheaply. However, what we have since seen (other than the total ineptness of the PPP in actually dividing up the skim i.e. 20-40% of the total government budget to the relevant individual families/related parties) is that getting this mantle is not easy.

Certainly, vote buying is not required any longer in the rural areas; you just need to buy the factions; hence my comment that the so called Elites could become government tomorrow if they were to pay out each faction at the rate of 100m per MP (well above what PPP are paying) and then also offer specific cabinet positions to each faction to share in the skim.

The key problem is that the so called Elites (that no one can identify) are probably not up for being so brazen in skimming 20-40% off the top of government budgets and not quite as skilled in hiding it; I have to say TRT certainly came up with some clever ways (like the PTT listing or the endless chicken for this or that schemes or the 7:11/block on big retail play) to really cash in without even touching the government budget; the normal way of the government 'rub mao' type of Banharn, Chavalit and Chatichai. That's why the factions like to be connected to such a guy; he makes them richer than what they could get otherwise.

With talks of non elected officials, it is interesting to see no mention in the article of Chavalit, the guy who basically dragged Thailand and the Asian region into financial crisis. Not elected, not sane and not suited to do anything other than laugh jovially and perhaps provide some sideline entertainment in Korat; after all this guy left his size 22 clown shoes by the door each time he came to work as PM (with Thaksin along side him).

As for the idea that the so called elite were infuriated about cheap health care and social welfare - not one of those things were reasons to demonstrate... my personal final straw was the lie that he would resign followed up by incessant attempts to get back into politics; there are some people I could never lie to in my life; obviously Thaksin does not agree....I could go paragraph by paragraph about how wrong this article is. Which is pretty much how I feel about Economist and most of the other foreign publications that claim to know something about politics here.....

Trying to teach an alligator to swim......the guy is like Manuel in the Faulty Towers Episode 'I know naaaaaaathing Mista Faulty'

'Whatever oversimplifications the article may or may not contain, I think that it is right about the new voting block. I wonder if Steve has talked to people in the villages? What he describes is the old way, but the genie got out of the bottle in 2001 and won't go back now. '

My family have been asked to be TRT politicians before; I know the terms, the way money gets divided up and how it works. I hear exactly how voting goes down in the part of Isaan where we have a rather large rubber plantation.....it is absolutely exactly the same as what I have heard every time; the only difference is in 2001 and 2004 and 2006 they got paid. This time they didn't, and they voted exactly the same way as they have been asked to since 1992. What genie are you talking about?

And yes, the villagers don't care about who their guy works for, if he switched to be a democrat (actually he personally is banned, but if his people who he asked people to vote for instead switch) then the villagers would continue to vote for him just the same. The guy is a gangster, he is f&*king scary, he probably should be in jail and he is a hero to the villagers, don't ask me why.

Edited October 3, 2008 by steveromagnino

[Plus]

Its most notable members include Thaksin's former foreign minister Surakiart Sathirathai, Suranand Vejjajiva...

Heh heh, these guys don't stand a chance in winning in rural Isan, they were big in TRT, ideology wise, but no one votes ideology there, no matter how much you harp about fundamental shift and ginnie out of the bottle.

It's all about personalities - local big shot and Thaksin, that's all that matters.

Someone mentioned it here before - it's incredible how a party less than three months old can win elections here. So much for policies and ideologies - they were all exactly identical. The only thing PPP had was Thaksin's name and local MPs, not policies.

[Howsitgoin]

And yes, the villagers don't care about who their guy works for, if he switched to be a democrat (actually he personally is banned, but if his people who he asked people to vote for instead switch) then the villagers would continue to vote for him just the same. The guy is a gangster, he is f&*king scary, he probably should be in jail and he is a hero to the villagers, don't ask me why.

Lots to cover, in general your facts are correct.

Nevertheless, it still is a view of elitist struggles, that does not take into account important social changes. Elites here also can be defined - as overlapping power networks, partly competing, but also collaborating on issues.

Why do people follow these "Gangster" type politicians? For many people these are the only functioning mechanism to solve their problems in their areas of influence.

The problem though is how to diminish their influence. TRT strategy was one way - incorporating them, managing them somewhat, and slowly erode their hold by replacing their power with state power, so that people will one day trust in the state.

Which to some extend has happened under TRT rule.

We have to note though that not all areas of Thailand's rural areas are under the influence of the type of politicians, and in the ones that are, there are varying degress of hold these politicians have.

PAD? Well, they cry foul, but have so far completely failed to come up with any feasable solution, other than their juvenile debating club called "New Politics".

The military coup failed to solve anything.

People expect a quick fix, but there isn't one. We have to accept that this problem will continue to haunt Thailand, and we will have to work with it, and make very uncomfortable compromises.

You expect a bit much from journalistic articles of the foreign media. Their job is not to write an academic paper, but to give broad outlines to a foreign audience. And broadly, they re not too far off the mark.

If you want the details - go into the academic papers. There are many around, some better, some less. A few i have just posted.

Yes, we don't like Thaksin, we don't like TRT populism. But can you honestly suggest that any of the available alternatives are any better. In some aspects they may have advantages, and in others they are absolutely useless.

And all that are there will not get around "Godfather" politicians and patronage networks if they want to form a government, elected or not.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Howsitgoin

[steveromagnino]

The problem though is how to diminish their influence. TRT strategy was one way - incorporating them, managing them somewhat, and slowly erode their hold by replacing their power with state power, so that people will one day trust in the state.

Which to some extend has happened under TRT rule.

We have to note though that not all areas of Thailand's rural areas are under the influence of the type of politicians, and in the ones that are, there are varying degress of hold these politicians have.

PAD? Well, they cry foul, but have so far completely failed to come up with any feasable solution, other than their juvenile debating club called "New Politics".

The military coup failed to solve anything.

People expect a quick fix, but there isn't one. We have to accept that this problem will continue to haunt Thailand, and we will have to work with it, and make very uncomfortable compromises.

And all that are there will not get around "Godfather" politicians and patronage networks if they want to form a government, elected or not.

I think you are spot on the money; and that's why it is frustrating I guess to have two groups (PAD and PPP) both pushing their equally wrong views.

I grew up in NZ so I am well familiar with the Herald, the lack of knowledge of most of their reporters. I also know they work for not much money and often would like to learn; that's why to some degree I've been surprised an offer extended to this writer has not been taken up, but I digress.....

In my humble opinion, the role of the courts is to ensure that anything illegal by these godfather politicians is stamped on; and gradually we will see the use of the law rather than the use of force dictating the conduct for these guys. They keep getting in through a combination of intimidation, force and carrots - a truly educated electorate with higher standards will force these guys to adopt higher standards in the way they govern; controlled by watchdogs with teeth. Yongyuth, Newin and the rest of teh banned politicians should be the start of the clean up; I have no problem with Jao Por politicians provided they start running clean books and the cleaner the books, the less likely the really dirty ones will want to be involved.

This requires a strong judiciary and a non partisan Senate plus the relevant watchdogs and willingness to stop people from standing who break the law; something quite evidently missing in 2001 with Thaksin, but since implemented in the more recent elections. Eventually, the god father families will either start playing by the rules, or they will run out of family members and nominees ;-0

My own feeling is a truly independent media and reduction of the kind of interefence that Channel 11/NBT has seen would also help considerably; executions for truly massive levels of corruption and lifetime bans would also be a nice step forward.

Just as the TRT discovered the carrot and stick approach for the factions, so can a very focused political system.

The rhetoric that somehow we cannot get rid of these guys is rubbish. It takes time, but that is the price of democracy.

What is not acceptable is political meddling such as what we see PPP trying to do, and political grandstanding as per PAD.

And printing the kind of rubbish as per this article with blatant mistruths (why PAD are protesting, that PPP had a majority, etc etc) does Granny Herald no favours; mind you it isn't exactly a great paper.

It's just funny to somehow think someone out there reads this article and thinks that a new bunch of politicians were elected as the result of TRT/PPP; let's face it the new blood with the new ideas; guys like Purachai and Somkid.....they are LONG GONE.

[Howsitgoin]

It's just funny to somehow think someone out there reads this article and thinks that a new bunch of politicians were elected as the result of TRT/PPP; let's face it the new blood with the new ideas; guys like Purachai and Somkid.....they are LONG GONE.

The problem though with Purachai is that he has been very myopic in his views, he spoke for a social conservative middle class. He definitely has taken more than a bit of fun out of the place...

But yes, i do agree very much. It does take time, lots of it.

The problem here is that now the public discourse is dominated by extremes, and mostly intellectually not exactly appealing. People that are or were originally in the middle, are forced to take one or the other side. No middle ground left.

You appear to be on the side of Dems/PAD because your strong views about Thaksin/TRT, and i appear to be on the side of PPP/UDD because my disappointment by Dems and my strong dislike of PAD. Yet our views are not very far from each other at all. We do see the problem and the possible solutions in very similar ways.

My hope, and i believe justified, was that Thaksin would have shot himself in his own foot, eventually. His reliance on the electorate also meant an empowerment of those voters. He had to supply them with money and else they needed/wanted.

People upcountry, and in the industrial suburbs are far less stupid than Thaksin's opponents try to polemically make them out. At least they know their limits, and have a strong desire to overcome them. And none of them believes that Thaksin is a truly clean man. Rising wealth, rising opportunities, would have gradually given them independence from the usual power networks. And that would have also meant that one day, they would have demanded more than Thaksin would have been willing to deliver.

Right now, many TRT politicians have already started to move much further than Thaksin. You won't read or hear of that in the medias, or listen to their public statements, but if you personally know some of them - you might hear some surprising views.

The tragedy in Thailand is that no side, nobody is truly independent. The now partly appointed senate has been supposed to be independent, yet some of its members are blatantly supporting PAD. And the same in every field - journalism, academics, judiciary, army - name them, and you have people with supposed clear neutral positions yet part of large patronage networks that overlay their formal powers.

You mentioned Channel 11, and you are right. What never really made it into the medias though is that previous to what you are talking about, still during coup days, PAD has, partly successful, tried to inflitrate this and other media outlets with their members and supporters.

PAD has spent at least several month before Makhawan building up underground councils in every province, its leaders mostly high ranking members of military, civil service and judges. They have started building up militias (their disgusting Naclop Srivichai, and next level their Arsar Samak), increasingly getting military style training.

No side in this increasing mess is clean, public debate is only possible on selected aspects of this mountain of shit, and the fallout is going to be massive.

[steveromagnino]

You appear to be on the side of Dems/PAD because your strong views about Thaksin/TRT, and i appear to be on the side of PPP/UDD because my disappointment by Dems and my strong dislike of PAD. Yet our views are not very far from each other at all. We do see the problem and the possible solutions in very similar ways.

Right now, many TRT politicians have already started to move much further than Thaksin. You won't read or hear of that in the medias, or listen to their public statements, but if you personally know some of them - you might hear some surprising views.

You mentioned Channel 11, and you are right. What never really made it into the medias though is that previous to what you are talking about, still during coup days, PAD has, partly successful, tried to inflitrate this and other media outlets with their members and supporters.

I am NOT on the side of the Dems/PAD, and there are plenty of people who like the Dems and dislike the PAD, in the same way there are people who like PPP but don't like the thugs of the UDD. The reason to like the Dems, is they are the only non Thaksin aligned party and have a few good people; the PPP and their allies, seriously can you think of ONE PERSON who is not morally bankrupt or a moron?

But that's the issue; both sides have a strategy of them or us, and it alienates the people in the middle.

TRT and PPP have thrown more money and have more supporters in media (including Channel 11 after the purge that Jakapop oversaw the moment he got in power) than PAD would ever have. Using the AIS marketing budget, ownership, legal action and some nice bribes, this was definitely the case in 2001-2006, and remains the case now for different reasons. I cannot think of many media outlets that are not allied with one side or the other; Channel 11 was previously mostly neutral or aligned by show (e.g. Newsline is owned by Traffic Corner, which is owned by the Shinawatras among others, so was always massively pro TRT and thus was rewarded by getting the highest rating slot on the network and a super sweet heart revenue deal; one of the Thai hosts got kicked off for being neutral during the coup and losing his time slot to the brainless rantings of the new show which bears a striking resemblance to watching animals at a zoo - bear in mind this is political interference as it is coming directly out of the PM's office). Now it is a case of you are either pro PPP or you haven't got a job, is the rumour.

Purachai's policies were entirely based on what the electorate asked for, and were very popular. They were part of market research. They also have actually stayed around to a large degree; I haven't seen 14 year olds out clubbing at RCA since the social order campaign began. Foreigners might complain, but at the end of the day, productivity increases for society when everyone isn't totally boozed up the whole time.

The rumour is the subsequent war on drugs and war on dark forces; well dark forces was a political vote winner; the war on drugs was a personal vendetta against the fact his kids were big time drug users at that time.

Alledgedly of course. After all, if someone cannot see a bloke getting shot in Club 20 and then hide the culprit and then become Minister twice in the last 9 months, then surely none of us could ever see the former PM's side snorting c&*p non stop in a very gay manner while his underage sister partied big time prior to the whole 'war on drugs'

[JetsetBkk]

... i am looking for photos of thaksin with his special toy, a X-sign he hold up when he didn't like the question at a press conference...

Here you go, PD:

[citizen33]

The rural poor are still voting exactly they way they have the past 50 years. They vote for who the local bigshot tells them to. There is no new voting block. That is a myth perpetuated by the TRT/PPP which foreign reporters too lazy to do actual ground level research have fully bought into.

Have you ever witnessed a local election?

TH

Yes, I have been in rural Isaan for 2 general elections since 2001, the referendum on the Constitution and indeed the local government elections in August this year (which the PPP-linked candidates won easily in my area). This is so despite the fact that I live in the West for a good part of each year. Things may have changed since 2001 which seems to be the last time Thaihome witnessed an election, but I can assure you that there is considerable antipathy towards the Democrats (and PAD) in the part of the NE that I know and I do not think this party would have much success in buying votes. I also get the impression that Steve has strong opinions but not too much direct contact with local people. He showed that he really does not understand the Thai health care system a few weeks ago and I am not convinced that he has a better grip when it comes to local politics or genies! As somebody else said, it is worth taking a look at recent academic papers on this topic.

Edited October 3, 2008 by citizen33

[Howsitgoin]

Purachai's policies were entirely based on what the electorate asked for, and were very popular. They were part of market research. They also have actually stayed around to a large degree; I haven't seen 14 year olds out clubbing at RCA since the social order campaign began. Foreigners might complain, but at the end of the day, productivity increases for society when everyone isn't totally boozed up the whole time.

The rumour is the subsequent war on drugs and war on dark forces; well dark forces was a political vote winner; the war on drugs was a personal vendetta against the fact his kids were big time drug users at that time.

Alledgedly of course. After all, if someone cannot see a bloke getting shot in Club 20 and then hide the culprit and then become Minister twice in the last 9 months, then surely none of us could ever see the former PM's side snorting c&*p non stop in a very gay manner while his underage sister partied big time prior to the whole 'war on drugs'

Just briefly.

I am of course aware of these rumors, but i would totally discount that this was the reason for the drug war. Not logical.

First of all - the drug situation was indeed dire at the time. Yaa Maa was everywhere, whole villages and urban neighborhoods ran on the pills. Something had to be done.

Secondly - the drug war did not just consist of the killings. For the first time selling and use was separated. Up to a certain amount of pills people were classified as users, got fined, and sent to re-education camps mostly under army authority. We do tend to forget this.

We also forget that this was not just "Thaksin's drug war", but that all sectors of power have found an agreement. Otherwise this would not have been possible. Therefore the from the PPP government announced drugwar never happened. No dead, no nothing other than slight increase of budget for certain border units.

The killings in my opinions were counterproductive, and completely out of order, but their effect as a deterrent worked, for some time at least.

Today the pills have been creeping back into society on a major scale, and part of the reason is the political turbulence of the past years. Policing is hardly possible under those conditions.

Until we see the next drug war.

My view on Purachai's social order campaign is more about the many people who have lost income. Middle class kids may have stopped clubbing, but all the dek serves, the late night food vendors, etc.

[thaihome]

The rural poor are still voting exactly they way they have the past 50 years. They vote for who the local bigshot tells them to. There is no new voting block. That is a myth perpetuated by the TRT/PPP which foreign reporters too lazy to do actual ground level research have fully bought into.

Have you ever witnessed a local election?

TH

Yes, I have been in rural Isaan for 2 general elections since 2001, the referendum on the Constitution and indeed the local government elections in August this year (which the PPP-linked candidates won easily in my area). This is so despite the fact that I live in the West for a good part of each year. Things may have changed since 2001 which seems to be the last time Thaihome witnessed an election, but I can assure you that there is considerable antipathy towards the Democrats (and PAD) in the part of the NE that I know and I do not think this party would have much success in buying votes. I also get the impression that Steve has strong opinions but not too much direct contact with local people. He showed that he really does not understand the Thai health care system a few weeks ago and I am not convinced that he has a better grip when it comes to local politics or genies! As somebody else said, it is worth taking a look at recent academic papers on this topic.

Considering the thread in the News Forum I think this thread is worth a bump to the top again. There are some very good discussions on the PAD and the history and current state of Thai politics that many people should read, particularly the posts by steveromagnino.

So you think that Steve is not close to the local people and reading academic papers make it better?

The piece posted above THAILA D'S “GOOD COUP”:

THE FALL OF THAKSI , THE MILITARY A D DEMOCRACY by Michael K. Connors and Kevin Hewison was very interesting and I think did a very good job in many areas. But I don’t think it actually makes a good argument that upcountry voters are changing the way they vote. As a matter of fact, they make a very good argument that rural voters still vote for who takes care of them the best, and populist polices and popularity are just a minor part of that.

I can say that in the last election, the village I know voted just as it always had, it voted for who Sahoh told them to. In this election it was the party that Sanoh formed since he couldn't make a deal with the PPP that stuck and the democrats wanted no part of him.

TH