Despite the eroding track record of so-called democracies across the globe, many nations are experiencing increased support for pro-democracy movements. Such is the case in Thailand, where a predominantly youthful, democratic movement is gaining momentum within civil society after years of oppressive military rule.
The foundations of the movement can be traced back to the rise of military General Prayuth Chan-ocha and the controversial elections held in March of last year – the first elections since the 2014 coup. In 2014, military forces led by Chan-ocha overthrew the violence-promoting establishment in attempts to run the country more smoothly, restore order, and enact political reforms. Following the coup, Chan-ocha drafted an interim constitution which granted his military government unaccountable power while restricting civil liberties, the media, and dissent. The government has strictly enforced Thailand’s lese-majeste law which states that “anyone who defames, insults or threatens the king, the queen, the heir-apparent or the regent will be punished with a jail term between three and 15 years”. Such actions are seen by both domestic and international audiences as infringements upon free speech and have heightened tensions between the power-hungry government and the democratically-minded citizenry. Thus, Thai citizens saw the holding of elections last year as a promising opportunity for change after several years of military rule. Chan-ocha, however, was re-installed as prime minister and has since remained in power.
In February of this year, the pro-democratic Future Forward Party (FFP) which won the third largest share of seats in 2019 and was popular with many young and first-time voters, was ordered to dissolve after a court ruled that the party received an illegal loan. In response, thousands of protesters took to the streets, bolstering the movement into what it is today. Peaceful demonstrations continue to defy the government’s orders against large gatherings and numerous protest leaders have been arrested for defamation of the monarchy highlighted in the lese majeste laws.
So, what exactly are Thai citizens demonstrating for? In sum, protesters are calling for the resignation of Chon-ocha to allow for new (and fair) elections, for democratic amendments to the constitution to put an end to systematic harassment, and for reforms to overhaul the current government and make it more accountable.
The government’s response thus far resides in efforts to quell protests by banning large gatherings in accordance with COVID-19 protocol, undertaking legal battles with protest leaders in terms of lese majeste laws, and permitting the police to use tear gas and water cannons to disband protesters outside the house of Parliament. Further action by Chon-ocha and his government will likely be reactionary to the trends of the protests as his government fails to make serious promises of political reform in accordance with the movement’s demands. Recent rumors of another military coup to extinguish the protests have increased the fervor of the movement even more. The threat of violence is looming large over the young, vulnerable protesters, yet still they hold fast to their three core demands.
One of the most striking features of the ongoing unrest in Thailand is the overwhelming involvement of young adults. The movement is said to be primarily student-led, reflecting the generational gap between those in power and those entering the political scene. Those who chose to participate in the protests are putting themselves at extreme risk by illegally dissenting with the government – all for a cause they deem worthy of the repercussions: democracy.
It is also worth noting that these youth are not seeking to come into power themselves, but to change the rules of the game for the future of the country. As one young protester named Ang-Ang, 16, said, “Our voice must be the voice that matters, as well. We are the voice of the future generation of Thailand”.
Similar, student-led, pro-democracy protests in the region, like those in Hong Kong throughout 2019, prove the resilience of younger generations in the face of adversity. Both movements created their own means of coordination and communication, making it difficult for the administration to contain their activities. “Flash mobs”, white ribbons, and the rebellious three-finger salute (yes, the one from the Hunger Games) specifically characterize the Thai resistance, with social media playing a crucial role.
The prevalence of these movements suggest that democracy is still seen as a favorable alternative to authoritarian tactics. Such tactics work to erode citizens’ trust in the ability of the government to adhere to their preferences. Therefore, questions regarding the absence or presence of political efficacy are being superseded by the question: at what point will citizens become so dissatisfied with government action and policy that they respond with mass protests demanding change?
Hello Madison,
I enjoyed reading your blog post and learning about the developments happening in Thailand. First of all, it is always a positive sign to see such numbers of support for those who favor or wish to implement and live under a democracy. Although in the US, for example, there is so much political polarization and contention around politics, one thing certainly seems to be taken for granted at times. The positive side of living in a free democracy where is in countries like Thailand, citizens have had and still have to face the reality of military rule.
You mentioned a large amount of student-led protest and involvement. Two developments come to mind in this regard. First, the case of Thailand is another critical example of how education, and ideally a well-balanced education, can not only be a recipe for instilling democracy but also a manner to strengthen it. Secondly, as you mentioned for those in Thailand, it seems that younger generations of Americans have also shown their support, by and large, for the progression of ideas and a desire to enter the political realm. Where is the current political realm is dominated by politicians of the older generations. This, to me, is such a positive evolution, and it needs to continue.
Furthermore, as you mentioned, the role of media and especially social media, cannot be underestimated. You expressed the role that social media has had in these Thai pro-democracy protests. Yet, the aid of social media is not unique to the Thai example. Instead, in recent years the use of social media has encouraged pro-democratic support from various areas of the globe, whether it be in Hong Kong like you mentioned or the substantial opposition to authoritarianism in Belarus. Therefore, you bring up an ever-growing and crucial point. Where is just how important political efficacy and education are to holding one’s government accountable and even instituting positive change. I, for one, think this is one of the major and necessary pillars of support for this change.
Thanks!
I really appreciated your post about the current political situation in Thailand and the subsequent elements of democratic erosion. The ruling to dissolve the pro-democratic Future Forward Party (FFP) earlier this year is a textbook example of stealth authoritarianism as described by Ozan Varol in Steal Authoritarianism, specifically the notion of regimes utilizing non-political crimes as a method of paralyzing opposition. Charging the opposition with financial crimes is a despicable yet effective manner of discrediting the opposition, while simultaneously legitimizing the current regime and preserving the rule of the law. The methods of steal authoritarianism and the use of non-political crimes are further exemplified in the Thai government’s use of Covid-19 protocols to quell the protests as unsafe and illegal, which you also mentioned. It was very interesting to learn that the protestors were utilizing the three-finger salute (from the Hunger Games) as a symbol of their dissent and truly points to the youthfulness of the movement. I have also read and seen photos of Thai protestors using inflatable rubber ducks to protect themselves from police water cannons, which one may argue also points to the youthfulness of the movement. Your post helps me better understand the current political movement in the nation and how Thailand has gotten to this point. Thank you.
Hi Madison. This was a really well written and interesting post. I did not know much about the situation in Thailand and I felt that you did a really great job explaining and giving some background to what is happening there. You open the article by talking about how Thailand is an example in contrast to other eroding democracies because there is this youthful fight for democracy there. I am wondering if this case study is more in contrast to these other eroding democracies because of the means of erosion rather than the fight back against the erosion. In many of these (more slowly eroding) democracies we see stealth authoritarianism tactics; there is a lot of working within the constitution and laws of the country in order to shift the balance of power a little at a time. In the case of Thailand, as you refer to in your article, there was a military coup and then a new constitution with restrictive laws. I think that maybe the youthful fight for democracy is not the unique element of Thailand. I believe that if there was a coup in many other countries there would be mass protesting as well, but the difference is these tactics of democratic erosion. Since there was a coup and an overhaul of the system it is more visible to the average citizen that there is something and someone to fight against. With stealth authoritarianism it is much harder to decide at what point there should be mass protesting to call for a change in government. Is fighting back on this massive scale only possible when very overt tactics are used to subvert democracy? Overall really interesting article and thanks for helping me learn a bit more about Thailand’s political landscape.
This was very interesting. I do not know much about Thailand or it’s politics, but after reading this I feel like a little expert. It is really nice reading something positive with all of what is going on. Contrary to many other countries, the US included, instead of democratic backsliding, Thailand seems to be creating a stronger democratic environment. I think this could be due to “democracy by mistake.” As your article outlined, there was a military coup and then a new constitution with restrictions in the laws. It gave the people something concrete, something they could see and fight for. From what I have observed personally and in psych classes people tend to believe more in something they can see as opposed to an abstract idea. Therefore, when you give people something to fight for and show them what they are doing it for, you have a renewed since of vigor for whatever the cause may be. However, the scary part is, how do we know when to rally people to this degree? We run the slippery slope between trying to change the government for the better, or just doing it because we do not like a certain rule or leader. (and not because it is the right thing to do) Still though, this is a good thing, not only for Thailand but also for the whole world. It is a good sign that not everything is bad, and every victory for democracy whether it be big or small is worth celebrating. The spirit of democracy still exists in the younger generations and the heart to make things better for their people is very commendable. Thank you for informing me more about Thailand and sharing such a nice story. If you put good in, you will get good out, so if you put democracy in democracy should come out.
This was a very insightful article, Madison. Like the commenters above, I also am not very familiar with the political situation in Thailand and so this was a great introduction to what’s happening over there. I believe that the coup that took place in Thailand is an example of Bermeo’s notion of “promissory coups”. Promissory coups frame the ouster of an elected government as a defense of democratic legality and make a public promise to hold elections and restore democracy as soon as possible . As your article discusses, the expectations that were raised by this regime were ultimately dashed, particularly with the attack on the FFP. Although this is not a favourable outcome, it is certainly not surprising; promissory coups almost universally end up failing to deliver on their promises. This reminds me of the promissory coup that took place in Haiti in 1991. The general who led the coup called it “a correction of the democratic process”, but military violence soon made it clear that true democratization was not in the books. I think the failure of this coup to achieve its stated objective is precisely the reason why protests are occurring. Since the regime has lost its legitimacy, young Thais feel more motivation to mobilize and seek change than if the coup had actually resulted in marginal democratization. The illegitimate nature of the regime change prompted the youth to protest, and despite the corruption and illiberal regime in power, mass mobilization for democracy is a positive sign.
I will certainly be watching this space to learn more about the political developments in Thailand. Thank you!