Tag Archives: Thai Raksa Chart Party

Post-Script on Ubonrut’s Nomination

Giles Ji Ungpakorn

[This article should be read together with my previous post “Politics of the Sewer” https://bit.ly/2SHQrZW ]

Now that King Wachiralongkorn has scuppered Ubonrut’s nomination as Thai Raksa Chart’s candidate for Prime Minister, it is worth looking at what the incident exposed.

Firstly, most of the analysis concentrated on the politics of the top elites without raising the question about how a military dictatorship can be brought down in order to achieve real democracy.

People who spend their time looking up at the view above risk stepping in dog shit.

So once again we had people claiming that if Ubonrut became Prime Minister that this would reinforce the supposed growing power of the “Absolute Monarchy”. They were soon proved totally wrong when it became obvious that Wachiralongkorn and Ubonrut did not see things in the same way.

Those who have always been mesmerised by the monarchy and conspiracy theories about a “New Absolutism” have been twisting their theories into a contradictory muddle. Some claim that Ubonrut “must have” consulted the king beforehand since he holds absolute power. Is this really the case?

The question which has been posed now is why Wachiralongkorn intervened to stop his elder sister from entering politics. The most likely explanation is that he was politely “ordered” to stop Ubonrut by a junta agent who pretended to grovel to him. The reality is that the military are Wachiralongkorn’s golden meal ticket. Without them, his position would be very weak. The military were very annoyed by Thai Raksa Chart’s move, which threatened their monopoly on power. If possible they would prefer not to do a power deal with Taksin, which was the aim of Ubonrut’s nomination in the first place. But Wachiralongkorn would not be threaten by Taksin at all. After all, Taksin had paid off his gambling debts in the past. It is true that the competing egos of Wachiralongkorn and Ubonrut and their wish “to be number one” might have helped to persuade Wachiralongkorn. But that was not the key issue.

Some racist foreign observers, who repeat all the conspiracy theories and are not interested in searching for the truth, just laugh smugly at the stupidity of Thai citizens and the bizarre nature of Thai politics. These people should be treated with contempt.

There were many other people who claimed that Ubonrut’s nomination was a clever chess move to beat Prayut. No sooner had they said this than the junta’s side shouted “checkmate”!! People who seek short cuts in order to win in politics often come unstuck.

Check2

After Pumipon’s death many Red Shirts deluded themselves that Wachiralongkorn would turn out to be a friend to their side and might even abolish lèse majesté! If they hadn’t already realised how wrong this myth was, they do now.

Many former Red Shirts and Taksin supporters defended Taksin and Thai Raksa Chart’s role in this chapter of the “Politics of the Sewer” because they mistakenly believe that the junta is all powerful and there is nothing that ordinary people can do.

This bring us to the main issue which has almost totally been ignored by the dog-shit-stepping, star-gazers: How can a military dictatorship be brought down in order to achieve real democracy? This is a key question because the coming elections are rigged in favour of the military and their 20 year future influence on politics. [See https://bit.ly/2RIIvrD ].  It is also a key question because most people who support Taksin’s parties want genuine democracy, even if that is not the priority for Taksin and his team.

The answer is that there are no short cuts. Ridding Thailand of military influence and building democracy means building a pro-democracy social movement which coordinates its struggle with pro-democracy parties. We know from Thai history that such a movement can be built and can be successful so long as it is not controlled by elites. If this reality is rejected and the role of ordinary citizens is denied, the result is a political farce where a royal is posed as an alternative to Prayut’s junta.

Politics of the Sewer

Giles Ji Ungpakorn

The nomination of Princess Ubonrut, eldest daughter of the late Pumipon, (full name: Ubolratana Rajakanya Sirivadhana Barnavadi), as a candidate for Prime Minister by Taksin’s Thai Raksa Chart Party, is a new low for Taksin and his fellow politicians in all his parties, for the former Red Shirt leaders in Thai Raksa Chart, and for people who should know better like Chaturon Chaisang. But worse than all that, it is a symbol of the total degeneration of the Thai electoral system into the politics of the sewer, especially after the interventions of the military.

555656565650f

Most people with half a brain and an ounce of democratic principles will not need to ask themselves about Ubonrut’s qualifications for the position of Prime Minister. But this might need to be spelt out for some Thais. Has Ubonrut ever been in touch with the lives of the majority of poor people in the country? Has she ever said anything progressive? Has she ever supported the struggle for democracy and justice? Has she ever condemned the military? Has she ever opposed the backward idea of hereditary public positions? The answer is clearly No! The only experience she has had in recent years is to promote herself in rubbish TV programmes while living her life in a bubble of luxury.

1488096_10152461877613872_2504312497063576982_n

The nomination of Ubonrut by Thai Raksa Chart is a slap in the face for all the Thai people who made huge sacrifices in the struggles for democracy, equality, justice and human rights. It spits on the memories of the 1932 revolution, the 14th October 1973 uprising, the 6th October 1976 massacre, the 1992 uprising and the great Red Shirt movement. Many people sacrificed their lives during these events. Ubonrut’s nomination spits on the very idea of democracy and peoples’ participation by saying that ordinary citizens cannot make any social changes and that the only person that can challenge the military has to come from the royal family. It is an exact mirror image of what the Yellow Shirt PAD protesters believed when they were trying to unseat Taksin.

masses

But there is a background to all this. Taksin deliberately destroyed the Red Shirt mass movement, the biggest pro-democracy movement in Thai history, after the election of Yingluk. He, along with the donkeys that led that movement, put it into cold storage and killed it so that it could no longer oppose the military. It is a terrible shame that progressive Red Shirts were unwilling or unable to build an alternative leadership of the movement.

Historical experience from Thailand, and elsewhere, shows that so-called “clever manoeuvres”, which involve adopting the reactionary ideology or views of opponents, always end badly. Ubonrut’s nomination will not destroy the power of the military, its 20 year National Strategy or the extreme political and economic inequality in Thailand. Even now, the mainstream Thai media is still using outdated and feudal Royal Language when referring to Ubonrut, although we are led to believe that she is a commoner. Worse still, the nomination opens the door to a “government of national unity”. All this merely represents another attempt at an elite settlement between Taksin and his opponents.

Some people seem to confuse “form” with “content”. Ubonrut’s nomination is not a consolidation of any mythical absolute monarchy. This is confirmed by the fact that King Wachiralongkorn has now come out against Ubonrut’s nomination, claiming that it drags the monarchy into politics.

It is a process which was aimed at cementing a conservative alliance between Taksin and the military within the framework of “Guided Democracy”, leaving out any space for democracy or participation by Thai citizens.

For those of us who are totally opposed to this “politics of the sewer”, we must redouble our efforts to build a progressive mass movement and to oppose the reactionary ideology of the ruling elites.

Dxcc29yW0AQEpBn

 

Gender Politics and Thailand’s Political Parties

Giles Ji Ungpakorn

Gender politics has always taken a back seat among the policies of Thailand’s political parties. This is because of the weakness of gender social movements and the weakness of the left.

Mainstream pro-democracy parties like Pua Thai (and its sister party “Thai Raksa Chart”) pay lip service to gender equality, but there is little concrete detail about any policies. The Future Forward Party and the Thai Pua Chart Party (another sister party of Pua Thai!) say that there needs to be changes to existing laws. But they tend to add that the issue of gender rights is “sensitive” in society, thus providing themselves with a get out clause. Many parties also admit that there is internal disagreement within the party over gender rights. [See Prachatai https://bit.ly/2DYsbuU ]. Importantly, most parties are not prepared to agitate among the population to achieve changes in people’s attitudes. They prefer to emphasise the need to win votes and follow existing attitudes in society.

This is not surprising, since in capitalist society, progress on gender rights is the result of campaigns by social movements, trade unions and the left and not due to any innate pro-gender rights ideology among main stream parties of the right. Worldwide, increases in women’s participation in the workforce has resulted in greater confidence among women to demand more rights and this has spilled over into the LGBT movement. At the same time, capitalism still requires women to carry out unpaid family work and this is the source of conservative family values which go against gender rights. There is always a tension between these two factors. Thailand is no exception.

Increased participation by women in the workplace has resulted in trade unions pushing for maternity leave, child care and abortion rights. But the women’s movement is very weak and dominated by middle-class women who are only interested in equality for women in managerial and elite political roles. Many members of the women’s movement also supported the destruction of democracy.

Thailand, along with other South-East Asian societies, has a long history of transgender people being tolerated, though not respected. There have never been any law which criminalise gay men, lesbians or transgender people. The LGBT movement tended to grow out of NGO activity.

LGBT activists have been commenting on the draft bill on Civil Partnerships which was initiated under the Yingluk government before Prayut’s military coup. Recently the BBC Thai website published a discussion about this [see https://bbc.in/2P5xn1T ].

GLBT
Photo by WASAWAT LUKHARANG/BBC THAI

Although LGBT activist say that this draft bill is a step forward, many say it does not go far enough. This is because Civil Partnership gives less rights to the partners than marriage between men and women. For example, there is no provision for adoption of children, tax reduction,  or the use of a partner’s surname. One activist suggested that the way to solve this problem is to change the marriage law and make it concerned with marriage between “people” rather than just men and women.

Transgender and non-binary activists also criticise the draft law for doing nothing to improve the rights of transgender and non-binary people. They have no choice regarding their gender preferences and no rights as transgender and non-binary people.

The weakness of the LGBT movement is reflected in their use of many English terms. Given that ordinary people hardly speak any English, their activism is rooted among the middle-classes, leaving working class people unorganised. This needs to be addressed.

What is needed is a socialist party of the working class which would campaign on concrete gender issues such as LGBT rights to marry or have children and to choose their own gender classifications, including the right not to be classified. Such a party would also have to campaign for abortion rights and state subsidised child care. These gender issues need to be linked to other demands in society such as the demand for real democratic rights, freedom of expression, the right to self-determination for the people of Patani and labour rights. This could be done by building mass social movements and linking them up in solidarity networks. Yet the political parties which will be taking part in the next election have no such agenda.