Democracy and despotism (by Greg)

I woke to the sound of a loudspeaker broadcast — all in Thai, so of course I couldn’t understand a word.  But the speaker droned on in the unmistakable tone of “official” broadcasts the world over.  The darned loudspeaker had been waking me up every day since we got to Thailand.  But since I was up, I decided I’d better write my long-overdue blog.  (I can’t very well tell my kids to stay on track with writing assignments when I’m behind as well.)  And what had been on my mind the last several weeks was the Thai king, or former king that is.

We hadn’t planned to visit Thailand at all, so I was completely unprepared when we arrived to discover that the entire country was prepping for the late king’s cremation ceremony in just a few days.  He had died a year ago after reigning for some 70 years.  And the one thing you hear constantly in Thailand is that the Thais love, love, love their king.  So I’d been thinking that flippant questions about where they’d kept his body were probably better left unasked.  In any event, it really did appear that the Thais loved and respected their king.  Much of Bangkok was shut down for the week of the ceremony - a huge, loud, frenetic, jam packed SouthEast Asian capital city rendered eerily quite and subdued.  There were huge pictures and memorials on almost every street corner, shop wall, subway stop, ... you name it.  

 

Huge numbers of volunteers were out preparing for the ceremonies.  And without exception the Thais was dressed in only black, grey, or white.  Apparently, people had dressed in somber colors for the entire year.  Even a week after the cremation ceremony, in the Northern city of Chiang Mai, that was still true.  Strange to see an entire population in muted colors.

Every Thai I asked about the king appeared genuinely moved, describing a humble man who rose early and worked every day for the good of the people, despite his wealth and position, and did a great deal especially to improve the lives of the poor in the remote Norht.  He is credited with many agricultural and economic improvement projects, and sharply curtailing the opium trade in the North.  Given our ever-more polarized and vitriolic politics back home, I couldn’t help but be suspicious of an entire population so unquestioningly in love with a king.  So I tried to research his legacy.  And it does appear that he is “credited” with a great many improvement projects.  But, as it turns out, it’s a crime punishable by prison term to criticize the Thai king or his family in any way. In fact, you can’t even openly discuss the succession, even though outside sources seem pretty clear that the new king, his son, is not well-liked.  

So just how “true” is the the late king’s glowing legacy?  I couldn’t really tell.  To be fair, I only did a bit of internet research, but most of what I found was the official story from government sources.  Not to say that characterization is false; while there is another story, it too seems somewhat hazy.  Thailand was an absolute monarchy until 1932, when a popular revolution forced the then-king to accept a constitution with significant limitations on his power — sort of on the British model.  In 1946, the 18-year old Bhumibol Adulyadej, was crowned after his elder brother died of a gunshot to the head …. (Yes, shot in the head.  I found almost no information about this.). 

Throughout his reign, King Bumibol (also called Rama IX) supported a string of military dictatorships.  He also brought back many of the symbols of a strong monarchy, and least according to some outside accounts, appears to have exercised a great deal of control behind the scenes. 

In the early 1970s, there was growing political unrest in Thailand, especially among students. At first, the king supported the demonstrators, even granting them sanctuary in the royal palace compound in 1973.  But as the demonstrations continued, the king began to support right-wing and paramilitary groups. These right-wing groups were anti-communist in name, and while there were definitely communist movements in Thailand at the time, it appears that any reform or anti-establishment movement was branded “communist.”  The right-wing opposition grew with the king’s support, and in 1976, massacred at least 46 (and probably over 100) student demonstrators at a University.  The king not only continued to support those groups after the massacre, he supported the ensuing military coup.  Since then, Thailand has seen a few short-lived returns to parliamentary democracy, but has mostly been governed by a series of military dictatorships.  The current regime came to power in a 2014 coup that abolished both houses of the legislature and prohibited all political gatherings.  

So, what’s my (admittedly cursory) conclusion?  The late king was a force of stability and prosperity for Thailand. Thailand never experienced the horrors of communism seen in Cambodia or Vietnam, and it clearly benefited from economic stability and foreign investment (although the king also amassed an astonishing amount of wealth even by the standards of other monarchs).  The king might even have been a true champion of the poor, although it’s hard to gauge his actual impact and motivations.  But, for all of that, he clearly was not a champion of democracy or individual rights.  

All of which has me thinking once again of the increasingly divided and vitriolic politics at home.  I don’t understand the motivations, or even the rationales, of Trump supporters.  But whatever their reasons, they do not have a problem with his authoritarianism — in fact, it seems to win him points with his supporters.  If I’m feeling generous, I suppose they must believe that a “strong” (i.e., anti-democratic) leader will bring stability and thus economic prosperity.  But even if that were true (and I’ve never believed it), are those folks willing to pay the price of authoritarianism?  I know we can’t directly compare Thailand.  But I just asked someone about the droning message over the loudspeakers.  Apparently, it’s the military dictatorship’s twice-daily “news” announcement - broadcast in every village and city across the country.  Maybe we can compare.