Thai Elite, Middle Class Cold To Unfavourable Poll Results

[swillowbee]

"Thai society is suffering from a "cultural illness" wherein the middle class and elite have difficulty accepting electoral legitimacy when results go against their wishes, says Chulalongkorn University political scientist Aek Tangsabwattana."

... I am glad to see the the ills of Thai society discussed in context to Thai cultural values ... the behaviors we witness here are not the problem ... the cultural values commonly practiced by the overwhelming majority of Thais establish the acceptable standards for such behaviors.

... "cultural illness" is the root of Thailand's social and political woes ... a Thai friend and behavioral psychologist here who has been treating Thai family problems for 10+ years describes Thailand as a "pathologically ill society" ... the examples of family-wide, multi-generational pathological behaviors she cites are really quite remarkable ... she deals with it every day, and understands it from a clinical perspective.

... unsurprising ... think of the deformed cultural values developed by the tormented populations of Ceaucesceau's Romania, or Kim's North Korea, or Mao's Great Leap Forward.

... perhaps not as extreme as the examples cited above, but the Thai "cultural illness" described in this article is not so difficult to see here ... it is all really quite remarkable to witness ... and, what a discertation this would make for an enterprising PhD sociology or psychology candidate.

Edited June 3, 2011 by swillowbee

[geriatrickid]

The reaction of the Thai "haves" is mimiced by many in TVF: Denial, mixed with condescending hostility.

WHAT reaction of the Thai "haves"?

As per the article;

The elite and the middle class believe [the masses] are easily bought and deceived," he said, during a symposium on post-electoral Thai politics organised by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Institute of Democratisation Studies (IDS). He added that in fact the masses were not stupid and did negotiate politically.

Go into any thread on politics and someone is claiming that the supporters of a political party have been bought and paid for. One of my workies is a supporter of Thaksin and sympathetic to the redshirts. He has never received a payoff for that support. He feels that way because he is disenfranchised economically and socially. This is what alot of people don't get.

No, someone paid by a foundation set up by one of Thaksin's deputy PMs said that.

If your "workie" is not paid enough to be "economically franchised", then I suggest he take it up with his employer.

His wage scale is set by the government agency. His alleged worker representation is for all intents and purposes a lapdog of the employer. Where exactly is someone like that supposed to turn when there are limited options valiable to him? The end result is an internalized anger that bubbles up in a willingness to embrace political groups that provide an outlet for the frustration.

Your comment of taking it up with the employer demonstrates my point of condescending hostility. Ask those employers that provide fair wages and benefits what their reception in the market is. If they are bidding on a contract, the additional costs make them uncompetitive against the oligarchy's common front of preferred vendors or worse, earns them a talking to by employer groups. My view is that the government does not support those employers because typically they are foreign based competing against one of the important Thai families. If they don't make nice to the power brokers, then they are cut off from the market. Look at construction sites for big projects. If there is foreign involvement, typically you will see workplace safety rules such as hardhats, and a road guard for cement truck deliveries. Go to a site where there isn't a foreign presence and will you see the same attempt at safety?

There is no concept of collective bargaining in Thailand because the large unions for the most part are restricted to the large state enterprises. The other unions are left fighting for scraps such as safe working conditions or compliance with the existing labor codes. The end result is that honest and fair employers are screwed over. A double standard is applied for foreign employers to the point that the existing structure interferes and sabotages attempts to be a good employer. Ask some of the MNE's what they put up with. When you invest in a manufacturing plant and try to operate in an ethical manner that upsets someone, the innovative ways of retaliation are numerous. The plant has carrying costs and if energy supply to operate is subject to magical brownouts, it doesn't facilitate operations. Ask some of the entrepreneurial foreigners with a business about the employment code hassles they contend with. The small number of families that own a large chunk of the economy don't want to hear about anything other than their own views and have worked as a group to preserve their monopoly. Play by their rules or suffer the consequences.

There are no checks and balances, which then results in the antisocial outbursts of street violence because there is no legitimate structure in which to channel the discontent. The haves of Bangkok do not want to hear about the problems because they are like the Emperor with no clothes. Complain to the employer , right. The wealthy Bangkok families that own the land and companies don't care about anyone but themselves.

[Spalpeen]

What did Winston Churchill say, You can fool all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all the people all of the time... Winnie had never been to Thailand... obviously..!!

I think that you will find this homily is attributed to Abe Lincoln. One thing that Winston did say was 'Jaw, jaw, is better than War, war." The Thai populace might keep that truism in mind.

A more apt Churchill quote would be "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." 1947, after he won the war and then lost the subsequent election. Worth remembering in a country that averages one coup every four years.

[Spalpeen]

"......... then its obvious the Lower classes go kicking and screaming if they dont get their own way"

By 'don't get their own way' I take it you mean when they democratically elect a government only to see it repeatedly overthrown by military coups?

If you are referring to Thaksin, he was a caretaker PM at the time, and was trying to make amendments to the constitution to allow him to remain that way instead of calling the election he was already late in calling.

But dont let the facts get in the way of a good troll post

What i actually mean by 'dont get their own way' is demanding that the PM at the time immediately step down and hold a snap-election. The funny thing was, they were promised an early election and turned it down saying it wasn't good enough. had they taken that option at the time they would have had a new government by now. Instead they decided to hold the city to ransom and then when the troops were deployed to remove them, proceeded to burn down as much of the city as they could.

Now they are saying if they dont get elected they will be back o nthe streets - yeah i class that as 'kicking and screaming if they dont get what they want' - maybe you have a different definition?

Reminds me of that little girl from yester-year "i will scweam and scweam until im sick!" - what program/advert was she from?

I do have a different definition, as it happens. I would describe closing the national airports through terrorism and shutting the country off from the world as "kicking and screaming if they don't get what they want". Personally I don't care who wins the election as long as it's free and fair and I don't see tanks on the streets a few weeks later to change the result, or mobs in the street either.

[otherstuff1957]

Unfortunately, I suspect that we will see 'mobs in the street' no matter who wins.

[Chris Lawrence]

The reaction of the Thai "haves" is mimiced by many in TVF: Denial, mixed with condescending hostility.

Well said and to the point.

[sirchai]

This really does sum up the reality in Thailand beautifully. Thank you K. Aek for helping the ThaksinVengeance.com bashers get more of an insight into the society that they are trying to understand.

"I think it's symptomatic of a cultural illness in Thai society... The elite and the middle class believe [the masses] are easily bought and deceived," he said, during a symposium on post-electoral Thai politics organised by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Institute of Democratisation Studies (IDS). He added that in fact the masses were not stupid and did negotiate politically.

What a bunch of BS...................:jap: Konrad would die laughing............:jap:

[lanna2011]

The reaction of the Thai "haves" is mimiced by many in TVF: Denial, mixed with condescending hostility.

Well said and to the point.

agreed

[lanna2011]

One wonders on what Aek bases his insight views of the middle Class and the Elite. And how does he define "middle class" or "elite"?

Idle blabber with anecdotal knowledge.

I disagree, I think he is spot on, the culture of inherited privilege in very much a function of Thai society. Stemming from its feudal past (which is barely 100 years ago) the elite or wealthy could basically do what they liked as they had all the power.

The peasant class had no rights at all. Even today, one only has to watch the interaction between the wealthy elite and poor country people to see how things have changed very little.

Rich people in Thailand think they can do what they like, can buy off policemen and politicians, get special treatment in the government bureaucratic system by paying bribes (and expecting it) and generally behaving as if they deserve these privileges.

It is their culture, this is the way things have always been and a short history of Western values will not change things here any time soon.

And what about the "middle class"? A generation or two ago, these people would have been defined as peasants.

It's all just stereo-types.

The "elite" and "middle-class" includes just the rich and better off in Bangkok, ignoring all the well off people in the other big cities and country areas.

From my experience, the middle class is difficult to define because that would include self made business people who have benefited from the growth in the economy over the past thirty years, but the largest sector has been the explosion in government paid workers, most of whom are university "graduates". These most definitely consider themselves as middle class even though most are struggling on their salaries. But the attitude of this group I would describe as elitist, the university system here seems to give them a sense of superiority over their more uneducated compatriots.

I have had to deal with the large government departments for many years now and I find that many of the bureaucrats are arrogant about their status, resent having to perform to any outside (i.e. farung) performance indicators, spend most of their time in their pecking order office politics (sucking up to the big boss and giving their underlings a hard time) and generally doing as little as possible.

One thing is for sure, they have a superiority complex about where they stand in the Thai class system and look down on the country folk who didn't have the benefit of higher education.

very true - hence the backlash - it's surprising how many posters here support this elite system. It's been my experience that 90% of farang I meet are more 'yellow' then 'red' - why is that? nothing to do with comprehension I'm convinced - but more to do with being raised and making their living in countries with wealth. More a lack of empathy? a resistance to support the oppressed? interesting...

[lungmi]

One wonders on what Aek bases his insight views of the middle Class and the Elite. And how does he define "middle class" or "elite"?

Idle blabber with anecdotal knowledge.

I disagree, I think he is spot on, the culture of inherited privilege in very much a function of Thai society. Stemming from its feudal past (which is barely 100 years ago) the elite or wealthy could basically do what they liked as they had all the power.

The peasant class had no rights at all. Even today, one only has to watch the interaction between the wealthy elite and poor country people to see how things have changed very little.

Rich people in Thailand think they can do what they like, can buy off policemen and politicians, get special treatment in the government bureaucratic system by paying bribes (and expecting it) and generally behaving as if they deserve these privileges.

It is their culture, this is the way things have always been and a short history of Western values will not change things here any time soon.

And what about the "middle class"? A generation or two ago, these people would have been defined as peasants.

It's all just stereo-types.

The "elite" and "middle-class" includes just the rich and better off in Bangkok, ignoring all the well off people in the other big cities and country areas.

The "elite" in my rural area are skilfull workers in Libya, Algeria, . Quatar and so on.. They can speak English with me, know Farang style,, and vote Democrats. They know something about economics ( k. Korn).

[whybother]

very true - hence the backlash - it's surprising how many posters here support this elite system. It's been my experience that 90% of farang I meet are more 'yellow' then 'red' - why is that? nothing to do with comprehension I'm convinced - but more to do with being raised and making their living in countries with wealth. More a lack of empathy? a resistance to support the oppressed? interesting...

No. Just a resistance to support Thaksin.

There aren't many posters on TV that don't think that the government need to do more to help the poor.

But the red shirts (particularly their leaders) don't care about that. They just care about getting Thaksin back in power.

Take Thaksin out of the picture and the whole game would change. While he's there, it's only about him.

If you support then red shirts, then you support Thaksin.

[473geo]

very true - hence the backlash - it's surprising how many posters here support this elite system. It's been my experience that 90% of farang I meet are more 'yellow' then 'red' - why is that? nothing to do with comprehension I'm convinced - but more to do with being raised and making their living in countries with wealth. More a lack of empathy? a resistance to support the oppressed? interesting...

No. Just a resistance to support Thaksin.

There aren't many posters on TV that don't think that the government need to do more to help the poor.

But the red shirts (particularly their leaders) don't care about that. They just care about getting Thaksin back in power.

Take Thaksin out of the picture and the whole game would change. While he's there, it's only about him.

If you support then red shirts, then you support Thaksin.

That is where you show your limited understanding

A person who is disatisfied with the performance of the current government may vote PT because it is a vote for change....nothing more nothing less

[whybother]

That is where you show your limited understanding

A person who is disatisfied with the performance of the current government may vote PT because it is a vote for change....nothing more nothing less

There are plenty of other parties to vote for.

It's clear that a vote for PTP is a vote for Thaksin. It is abundantly clear that supporting the red shirts is supporting Thaksin. One might support the poor, and be sick of the "elite", but supporting the red shirts doesn't reflect that.

Someone who votes for PTP doesn't vote for change. They are voting for the past.

[lungmi]

Most of the no-skilfull workers in Libya (dog work in construction) came from Esaarn, the Thai governnment had to take them home. Phuai Thai party blame the Governement., not Thaksin.

The skilfull workers had serious international contracts, their international compagnies took care of them.

Thaksin didn't take care of his voters. The loan sharks in Esaarn forced these workers to go to Lybia with slave contracts.

We will see for the elections.

Edited June 4, 2011 by metisdead
Derogatory comments removed.

[473geo]

That is where you show your limited understanding

A person who is disatisfied with the performance of the current government may vote PT because it is a vote for change....nothing more nothing less

There are plenty of other parties to vote for.

It's clear that a vote for PTP is a vote for Thaksin. It is abundantly clear that supporting the red shirts is supporting Thaksin. One might support the poor, and be sick of the "elite", but supporting the red shirts doesn't reflect that.

Someone who votes for PTP doesn't vote for change. They are voting for the past.

More misunderstanding from you.......there is only one party capable of bringing a change of government.......there are many Thai who understand this.....even if you cannot.......they therefore vote PT if they are disatisfied with the incumbent government...and require change

[whybother]

More misunderstanding from you.......there is only one party capable of bringing a change of government.......there are many Thai who understand this.....even if you cannot.......they therefore vote PT if they are disatisfied with the incumbent government...and require change

I think you're being a bit naive.

There maybe only one party capable of bringing a change of government, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a vote for Thaksin.

If PTP do well, do you think they will be out there saying "well, some people voted for us because they were dissatisfied with the government, but they don't want Thaksin, so we will shelve our plans to give him amnesty".

Not a chance in hell. If they do well, they will be saying that the people want Thaksin back.

Edited June 3, 2011 by whybother

[landofthefree]

very true - hence the backlash - it's surprising how many posters here support this elite system. It's been my experience that 90% of farang I meet are more 'yellow' then 'red' - why is that? nothing to do with comprehension I'm convinced - but more to do with being raised and making their living in countries with wealth. More a lack of empathy? a resistance to support the oppressed? interesting...

I was quite neutral until I started working with the elite and then decided I really didn't like their attitudes to less well off people that puts me in the 10% I wonder if the other 90% have ever met the Thai elite? I doubt they would still be yellow after doing so.

[473geo]

@ whybother

I can see we must agree to differ..........

You can continue with your bellicose posting............

Edited June 3, 2011 by 473geo

[landofthefree]

More misunderstanding from you.......there is only one party capable of bringing a change of government.......there are many Thai who understand this.....even if you cannot.......they therefore vote PT if they are disatisfied with the incumbent government...and require change

I think you're being a bit naive.

There maybe only one party capable of bringing a change of government, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a vote for Thaksin.

If PTP do well, do you think they will be out there saying "well, some people voted for us because they were dissatisfied with the government, but they don't want Thaksin, so we will shelve our plans to give him amnesty".

Not a chance in hell. If they do well, they will be saying that the people want Thaksin back.

Which barring the Bangkok elite is what millions of Thais want I think the people should get what they want. Lets see what happens.

[whybother]

@ whybother

I can see we must agree to differ..........

You can continue with your bellicose posting............

Do you really think that the PTP won't take every vote as a vote for Thaksin?

[whybother]

Which barring the Bangkok elite is what millions of Thais want I think the people should get what they want. Lets see what happens.

So, barring the (let's pull a number out of the hat) 1 million Bangkok elite, everyone else wants Thaksin back?

It's funny that with those numbers, the PPP didn't get 90% of the vote in the last election.

[Thaddeus]

What did Winston Churchill say, You can fool all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all the people all of the time... Winnie had never been to Thailand... obviously..!!

I think that you will find this homily is attributed to Abe Lincoln. One thing that Winston did say was 'Jaw, jaw, is better than War, war." The Thai populace might keep that truism in mind.

A more apt Churchill quote would be "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." 1947, after he won the war and then lost the subsequent election. Worth remembering in a country that averages one coup every four years.

The most relevant quote from probably the most quoted man in history that pertains to the 'oh so much better than you' subjects of this topic is this one..........

I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.

Some members of Thai society and some members of this forum would do well to remember that one.

[CosmicSurfer]

... Calling this a "lingering problem", the lecturer said the former should learn to "respect" the voice of the majority. He added that recent research suggested a political awakening among the masses. "Are less-educated Thais in fact more democratically minded?" he asked.

"I think it's symptomatic of a cultural illness in Thai society... The elite and the middle class believe [the masses] are easily bought and deceived," he said, during a symposium on post-electoral Thai politics organised by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Institute of Democratisation Studies (IDS). He added that in fact the masses were not stupid and did negotiate politically. ...

Where did this idiot get his Degree??? His understanding of the democratic process is entirely superficial....

One man One Voter - majority wins is only the Visual tip of a Democracy... like the visual tip of an Iceberg.

Definition of DEMOCRACY

1

a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

c : a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.

2

: a political unit that has a democratic government

3

: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority

4

: the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

Thailand Fails the Democracy test on points 1c, 3, and 4 !!! The rest are passed as long as Vote-Buying and Electoral Fraud are not taken into consideration... Also Failed is the Test of "FREEDOM".. Freedom of Speech and the Press topping the list!

The problem with relying on the Uneducated masses, is that they will vote for corrupt, discredited politicians that promise populist short-term "relief", which usually turns out to be either lies, or ineffectual. Many politicians here have been convicted of criminal & civil offenses, including corruption and electorial malfeasance, but the uneducated still vote for them.. There is NO Accountability.

Until they realize that even "the Perception of the Illusion of Corruption" is unacceptable in a Politician, they will always be looked down upon as not worthy of exercising their Democratic mandate ..

Act as Pawns... Treated as Pawns.

CS

[erobando]

Isn't Mr Aek (and other red shirts) talking about "the elite and middle class" compared to the "rural uneducated poor".

They're the ones trying to make out the issues as being about the "haves" and the "have nots", where as it's pretty obvious that this is all about different groups of "haves" fighting for power.

This is exactly right. Rural Southerners aren't going to vote for PT. All wealthy Northerners aren't going to vote Democrat.

The problem with Thai politics is that it is not about platforms, it's about people. We already know pretty which party will win what area... Suphanburi and a some surrounding areas will vote for a Banharn-affiliated party, Buriram will support a Newin-affiliated party and so on.

None of it is about opportunities to the poor because their policies are pretty much indistinguishable.

And aussiebebe hit the nail on the head with vote buying. All parties do it. When they don't, people are surprised. At least the major parties. Perhaps parties like #5 and #12 don't.

The elections are all about different groups of elites fighting for power.

And the problems go down to the local level... anyone who has access to tax money.

This is a sham democracy but I suppose it's better than always using guns.

[rixalex]

Not a chance in hell. If they do well, they will be saying that the people want Thaksin back.

Which barring the Bangkok elite is what millions of Thais want I think the people should get what they want. Lets see what happens.

Let's be clear, by getting him back what we are talking about is him returning, being white-washed of all crimes, and installed as PM. This shouldn't be within the electorates' power. The electorate can chose whomever it wants as leader - well indirectly by voting for a certain party - but there have to be some guidelines and restrictions surely about who is fit and who is not. If the electorate decided they wanted a convicted serial rapist as their leader, do we all just sit back and say "well this is democracy and the people must be given their wish no matter what" or do we say "actually no, what is democratic about over-ruling a decision made by the courts of the land and allowing the country to be ruled by a convicted criminal?".

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. Another post has been edited to remove derogatory comments.

[geriatrickid]

I note the comment about wealthy northerners and the likelihood that they would not support the PTP. I disagree. One of the characteristics of smaller cities and communities is that the wealthy are more integrated into those communities and they really are the pillars of society. By virtue of the "smallness" they are more likely to come in contact with their workers and the poor. They will go to the 7-11 rather than send the maid as is the case with the Bangkok wealthy that live behind the walls and in secured enclaves.

I suggest that the wealthy in the north are far more in tune with the fears, concerns, problems and needs of the people than are the "haves" living in Bangkok. It is in their own best interests to try and get out ahead of the masses. A cynic would say, they do so to retain their positions. Whatever, the reasons, many wealthy northerners do support the PTP. I believe that is why you will see these wealthy people donating funds and organizing on behalf of their preferred local political power groups. The wealthy northerners are shut out from the "in" crowd living in Bangkok. This isn't something particular to Thailand as it is evidenced in countries around the world. Just as the poor of Thailand are not one homogeneous group, neither are the wealthy.

Edited June 4, 2011 by geriatrickid

[gregb]

Aek urged the middle class and elite to recognise the democratic system as the least evil among all existing systems

Why??

This is a problem I have with all of these modern day academics. They make religious statements like this without any justification, and then simply ask that we accept it? Why? The only reason that democracy is the preferred form of government is because it is the most easily manipulated by those who would seek to control us. A dictator or monarch may be good or evil. Usually evil but there are examples of truly benevolent ones. It's a gamble, and sometimes you suffer for it. The problem with this system from the perspective of the elite is that it can not be readily controlled. A single person is always a wildcard.

A "democracy", on the other hand, can be easily manipulated, and the result is you always wind up with a corrupt institution controlled by those behind the scenes. Crowd reactions can be statistically predicted, and Hollywood among others have decades of experience in understanding how to subtly affect our decisions. You can always win in this system if you understand how to manipulate the uneducated masses (and even the educated masses in many cases.) Thaksin simply understands modern Thai psychology better than the Democrats, but this kind of manipulative behavior only applies on a large scale. A single individual might be his own man. Sondhi, among others, showed that to Thaksin's eternal consternation. An ignorant electorate though, they can always be controlled.

There may be countries where democracy truly works, but Thailand isn't one of them. People always spout "North Korea" when they talk about dictators, but that is simply an extreme example of a bad situation. After the coup, the military government was inept, but they weren't evil. They actually had good intentions and tried to help.

When I see a people supporting a truly evil, convicted fugitive and holding him up as a role model and a savior, I know democracy has failed in this country. I wouldn't be at all disappointed to see it abandoned. I would rather be controlled by a diffuse organization with an internal system of checks and balances like the military than a single evil man like Thaksin.

People like the academic "Aek" should give serious consideration to why he supports democracy. Given the last 8 years, there is no reason to think it will ever work in this country. Anyone who thinks they have any more control in a democracy than in any other form of government is living under an illusion.

Edited June 4, 2011 by gregb

[longway]

if thailand is to become a democratic society thaksin needs to go to jail as much as the rest of them.

the reason for the backlash first from the 'elite' and now the lower classes is that thailand is a country that has mob rule. whoever is on top gets to do exactly as they please and disregard the rights of those who do not support them.

the red shirts are not interested in democracy nor are the 'elite' both only care about mob rule.

Edited June 4, 2011 by longway

[rixalex]

I note the comment about wealthy northerners and the likelihood that they would not support the PTP. I disagree. One of the characteristics of smaller cities and communities is that the wealthy are more integrated into those communities and they really are the pillars of society. By virtue of the "smallness" they are more likely to come in contact with their workers and the poor. They will go to the 7-11 rather than send the maid as is the case with the Bangkok wealthy that live behind the walls and in secured enclaves.

I suggest that the wealthy in the north are far more in tune with the fears, concerns, problems and needs of the people than are the "haves" living in Bangkok. It is in their own best interests to try and get out ahead of the masses. A cynic would say, they do so to retain their positions. Whatever, the reasons, many wealthy northerners do support the PTP. I believe that is why you will see these wealthy people donating funds and organizing on behalf of their preferred local political power groups. The wealthy northerners are shut out from the "in" crowd living in Bangkok. This isn't something particular to Thailand as it is evidenced in countries around the world. Just as the poor of Thailand are not one homogeneous group, neither are the wealthy.

An awful lot of stereotyping and generalising in this post. I feel like i've just sat in on a red rally.

For any of you who weren't paying attention, the message is: all the nasty evil rich can be found in Bangkok - you are best of hating them because they don't care about you - and all the kind benevolent rich stay up-country - you should love them and vote for who they tell you to.