A former police officer wielding a shotgun, a pistol and a knife went on the rampage at a childcare centre in Nong Bua Lamphu province. This is not the first mass shooting that has taken place in this country.
Irrespective of the circumstances and state of mind of this former police officer, one thing we can say is that the trend in mass shootings are partly due to the culture of worshipping men with guns in a society controlled by military juntas. As long as we allow the generals to stage coups and shoot down unarmed pro-democracy protesters in the street, with no prosecutions of these killers and thugs, the “rule of the gun” will be given legitimacy.
What is worse, this worship of the armed thugs of the state is reinforced among young children. Just look at what the army does on Children’s Day.
To make matters worse than they ever could be for the bereaved parents and relatives of those killed at the nursery, the junta’s government organised a gross spectacle of a royal visit to the nursery in an attempt to show they cared.
But King Wachiralongkorn showed his total arrogance and selfishness when he visited the nursery at 9 O’clock at night!! All this because he couldn’t be arsed to get up early. So not only did the bereaved have to grovel on the floor in front of this oaf, they had to wait until late evening to do it. This is not the first time that Wachiralongkorn has behaved in this way. He is known for turning up at university degree ceremonies at 11 O’clock at night, keeping graduates waiting for hours.
We need to get rid of the monarchy and the military junta and build a fair and civilised society.
The youth movement for democracy against Generalissimo Prayut’s dictatorship in Thailand has been defeated and key leaders and activists are facing draconian charges which have long prison sentences attached to them.
This defeat has been clear for some time, and given the length of time that has passed since the last significant protest, we can say this with certainty. There are still small symbolic signs of resistance and recently there was a Red Shirt gathering to remember the massacre by soldiers under the command of Prayut and Abhisit in 2010, but this Red Shirt gathering was more commemorative than an aggressive protest against the state crimes. This does not, however, mean that the fight against the dictatorship cannot be revived in the future, but meanwhile we need to assess the reasons for this failure.
Firstly, we need to take a historical look at the present crisis of democracy in Thailand.
The political crisis and unrest which we have seen in Thailand since the 19th September 2006 military coup against the elected Taksin Government, represents a class war between, on the one hand, the rich elites and the military, along with the conservative middle classes, and, on the other hand, the urban working class and rural poor, joined more recently by the new generation of young and progressive-minded youth. This class war has turned Thailand upside down and raised important political questions about the roles of many institutions.
However, it is not a pure class war and those taking part have different aims and different concepts of Democracy. The class lines are not clear cut either. Twenty years ago, due to a vacuum on the Left since the collapse of the Communist Party of Thailand (CPT), millionaire and populist politician, Taksin Shinawat and his Thai Rak Thai Party, managed to inspire millions of ordinary Thais with many pro-poor policies. Later, after the 2006 coup, he provided leadership to the Red Shirt movement, Thailand’s largest pro-democracy social movement. More recently, ever since Generalissimo Prayut’s military coup against Yingluck’s elected government in 2014, other actors have appeared. Pro-business liberal tycoon Tanatorn Juangroongruangkit and his Future Forward Party, inspired many who saw Taksin as being too domineering and also making too many compromises with the elites. Later, the Future Forward Party was forced to metamorphose into the Move Forward Party after conservative judges dissolved the party.
In the last couple of years, a radical youth movement, independent of both Taksin and Tanatorn, emerged onto the streets and at its peak managed to mobilise tens of thousands of people against the dictatorship. This movement also “normalised” criticism of the Wachiralongkorn monarchy. [See my article “Youth-led movement challenges the junta and the monarchy” https://bit.ly/3OwebKy ]. But Prayut’s military government hit back with severe repression and the youth movement became isolated and eventually defeated.
For an overall historical view of the crisis, see my book “Thailand’s Crisis and the Fight for Democracy” (2010). http://bit.ly/1TdKKYs .
Since 2006 it has taken the military, and the other conservative elites, 13 years of manoeuvring between bloody repression, the use of military controlled courts, and fixed elections, in order to stabilise the present system of “Guided Democracy”, which we now see in Thailand. [For further reading see my article “Guided Democracy after the flawed 2019 Election: Continuing Junta, Elite Politics, Myths about Wachiralongkorn and the Need to Build Social Movements” https://bit.ly/2Wm6bzI ].
One of the most significant weaknesses of the pro-democracy movement was the refusal to spread the struggle into the organised working class, which would have raised the potential for crippling political strikes against the dictatorship. This was the case with both the Red Shirts and the youth-led movement. Instead, the struggle merely alternated between street protests and parliamentary strategies, with any emphasis on parliament acting to demobilise the street protests. The parliamentary strategy was flawed from the start, given that the military was prepared to stage coups, and in later years, drew up an authoritarian constitution and electoral rules which guaranteed its power through fixed elections and the use of military appointed senators and judges. [For further reading see my articles “Rubber Ducks cannot defeat the military” https://bit.ly/3p3LlnI, “Warning signs for the Democracy Movement” https://bit.ly/3KcwHEq and “Parliamentary manoeuvres cannot bring about democracy” https://bit.ly/3MmdpOw ].
Another significant weakness for both the Red Shirts and the youth-led movement was the lack of a radical political party, dedicated to the building of a genuine grass-roots pro-democracy social movement. When looking at the entrenched power of the military and the elites, it is clear that some kind of political revolution is required to bring about democracy. Furthermore, a social revolution would be required to end the gross class exploitation and inequalities experienced by most ordinary Thais. Any mainstream liberal political party will not be up to this task.
Instead of building a revolutionary party, the Red Shirts were too dominated by the politics of Taksin’s political parties, the latest version being the Pua Thai Party. This brand of politics looked to make compromises with the elites and to tone down the level of struggle, channelling people towards elections.
When it came to the youth-led movement, they rejected the idea of political leadership, pretending that they were participating in a spontaneous movement. The “we are all leaders” strategy meant that it was difficult to have serious and democratic discussions about the way forward because no democratic structures existed within the movement which could encourage participation in decision making. The top protest leaders become de facto unelected leaders. This was not because they wished to be authoritarian, but it was an unintended result of the “we are all leaders” strategy. Instead, there could have been mass discussion meetings and elections of a united front leadership committee. The Thai movement was not unique here. The same problem occurred with Podemos in the Spanish State.
Initially the youth protests grew out of isolated symbolic protest groups. Experience forced these groups to start working together. But they were not interested in building a revolutionary party. While turning their backs on the likes of Taksin, in practice, they unconsciously appointed themselves as leaders with no sustainable structures for the movement. This autonomist model of organising meant that when the military-controlled state hit back with repression against the top leaders, the movement collapsed. There was no strategy for responding to state repression.
Naturally, and quite rightly, there were political debates within the youth movement. But there was no mechanism for forging these debates into a clear policy backed by the majority of activists. Tokenistic internet polls, which they sometimes carried out, were no substitute for mass meetings and open debates. There was great confusion about the nature of the tasks facing the democracy movement, with many leaning towards the conspiracy theory that Wachiralongkorn ruled Thailand as an “absolute monarchy”. This meant not paying enough attention on the practicalities of how to crush the power of the military and the conservatives, when the military are clearly the major obstacle to democracy. Protests took on a symbolic nature against the “absolute monarchy” while having no clear strategy for moving towards a republic either. Activists vacillated between hoping that the military-dominated parliament might “reform” the monarchy and calling on organisations like the United Nations to step in. Not enough political theory was created, through debates, about the relationship between the military, the conservative elites and the monarchy. [See my article “Flawed theory about the King’s power: an excuse not to fight the military” https://bit.ly/3kaerRq ]
On a more positive note, the youth movement’s brave criticism of the monarchy broke a long-standing taboo, built on fear, concerning the criticism of the King. Of course, this came at a high price for the leaders, who now face lèse-majesté charges and long jail sentences. Another positive development, brought about by the youth movement, is the idea of self-activity from below and the idea that activists do not have to depend on rich tycoons as leaders. This also led to the growing interest in left-wing ideas among the new generation. Sometimes this has been channelled into dead-end ideas of anarchism, the most prominent being the creation of the anarcho-syndicalist organisation called the “Workers’ Movement”. This was thought to be a “short cut” to building political workers’ strikes. But in fact, the “Workers’ Movement” does not even function as a trade union, not bargaining with employers. It has become a diversion from working inside the existing trade union movement to build political activists and strike action. The one bright spark is the revival and moderate growth of the Socialist Workers group, with a small influx of youth members.
The pro-democracy movement is now experiencing a quiet period. But none of the problems that stimulated the past struggles have gone away. The hope is that future activists will learn from past failures and rebuild, as accumulated anger recharges the movement.
The military junta is throwing all its legal weapons at the pro-democracy youth leaders. It is now just over a year since Generalissimo Prayut announce that the government would start to use the lèse-majesté law law against protesters. This was after a brief two year period when the no one was charged under this law.
The human rights organisation “iLaw” reports that 156 people have since been accused of lèse-majesté, with prominent leaders facing multiple lèse-majesté charges. Student activist Parit Chiwarak (“Penguin”) faces 22 cases under this law, while the lawyer Arnon Nampa faces 14 cases.
Other leaders being charged include student activist Panusaya “Rung” Sithijirawattanakul and Ramkhamhaeng University student Panupong Jadnok. Many activists have spent time in jail or are still being detained. The junta’s Kangaroo courts have often refused bail. [See https://bit.ly/3r6hBun .]
The use of the lèse-majesté law this time round has been aimed at those demanding the reform of the scandal-ridden Monarchy, with many pro-democracy activists believing that loathsome King Wachiralongkorn has too much power. Recently, the junta’s Kangaroo Constitutional Court ruled that merely calling for the reform of the Monarchy is equivalent to “treason” or attempting to overthrow the state. The maximum sentence for this is the death penalty. Some protesters have also been charged with lèse-majesté for wearing crop-tops on protests, ridiculing the preferred dress style of Wachiralongkorn.
This repression against the protest leaders has resulted in a revival of calls for the abolition or reform of lèse-majesté. Such calls were raised by myself and others after the 2006 military coup, but the movement against the lèse-majesté law today is more wide-spread and has support of large numbers of young people. A recent on-line petition gathered over 200,000 signatures. People are also refusing to stand up for the King’s anthem in cinemas.
In many ways, the demand to reform the Monarchy is a real threat to the military junta and the Thai ruling class. It undermines the way that the military and the capitalist politicians have always used the weak Monarchy to justify their rule, claiming that they always act to defend the “sacred” Monarchy, when in fact they merely act to defend their own interests.
The so-called “power” of the king is manufactured by the military, and other members of the Thai ruling class, in order to create fear and also enforce the idea that people are not equal. It is equivalent to the way some regimes in the world claim that they rule according to God’s wishes. Neither Pumipon, nor his idiot son Wachiralongkorn have any real political power.
Those who claim that Wachiralongkorn is all powerful need to explain how this can be the case, given that he chooses to spend most of his time living with his harem in Germany. Is there an example anywhere in the world, now or in the past, where a powerful ruler can exercise his power while spending most of his life abroad? Tyrants are very wary of leaving the country where they rule for fear of being deposed while abroad. The idea that Wachiralongkorn has been increasing his power is parroted by some articles published by mainstream news outlets abroad.
The lèse-majesté law is an anti-democratic law. The way it is used in the courts, with cases held in secret, is also un-democratic. It cannot be reformed; it must be abolished. In fact, the parasitic and wasteful Monarchy, which is used to justify the destruction of democracy, cannot be reformed either. It is time to fight for a Republic. Many young people today would agree with this sentiment.
Unfortunately, the building of a powerful pro-democracy social movement to achieve these aims has still not been achieved. The protest movements are fragmented, with many just watching from the sides or merely hoping in vain that the opposition mainstream political parties can achieve reform in a parliament controlled by the military. A mass movement based among the working class is required so that strikes can bring down the military. Some young people understand this, but they are being led astray by Anarcho-Syndicalist ideas about building a “red” trade union: “The Workers’ Union”. Unfortunately, this Red Union is merely an Anarcho-Syndicalist movement made up of youth, it isn’t an affective trade union and, unlike a revolutionary party, it cannot place activists among existing unions in order to agitate among workers. This is a task that is being attempted by a small group of Marxists in Thailand at the moment.
The Prayut dictatorship in Thailand is a fertile breeding ground for conspiracy theories. This is because Prayut and his military gang tell lies, instinctively, in order to justify their rule and to protect their interests. This means that the population quite rightly do not believe most of what they say. The problem is to find alternative truths. But real scientific truths are not the only alternatives on offer, especially in a society with little freedom of expression and accountability. What is seen by many people as an alternative “truth” can often be the nonsense of a conspiracy theory.
I shall give two examples of conspiracy theories circulating in Thai society right now: theories about the Covid vaccines and about the King. Both examples are a danger to those wishing to struggle for an alternative and democratic society.
The military government’s handling of the second and more serious wave of Corona virus infections in Thailand has been a total shambles, especially when vaccination of the population is concerned. In mid-June 2021, the total number of people who had contracted the virus reached nearly 200,000, with the total number of deaths standing at 1,449 in a population the size of Britain. Only 4.5 million people have received 2 doses of a vaccine, just over 6% of the population. Despite the number of deaths being significantly lower than in Western Europe or the United States, the Thai government has failed in its vaccination programme. This is due to the fact that protecting the health of the general population has never been a priority and also due to the mindset of the generals who are running the country. They arrogantly believe that soldiers can solve any crisis, usually by military means. The government failed to order enough vaccines early in the day and initially restricted it to just one single company; the local production unit of AstraZeneca, owned by the King. The junta were clearly aiming to revive the flagging popularity of the monarchy. Later, they have had access to the Chinese Sinovac vaccine in larger amounts.
The lack of a welfare state or single national health service is also a huge problem, allowing for fragmentation of vaccine delivery and allowing private institutions to import some vaccines. One such private organisation is linked to a princess. Corruption and nepotism have also been playing their part, with big-shots jumping the queues.
In such circumstances conspiracy theories about the lack of efficiency and dangers of Sinovac have been circulating, despite the stamp of approval from the WHO. Other un-scientific rumours about AstraZeneca have also been doing the rounds, with people favouring the Pfizer vaccine, which is not being offered to the general public. The efficiency of all three vaccines are comparable and all three have side-effects. But the benefits of the vaccines for the vast majority of people outweigh the potentially dangerous side-effects. In a properly organised vaccination programme, different vaccines would be available to different people to try to minimise these side-effects. Such a programme does not exist under the Thai junta.
By swallowing conspiracy theories, activist become unable to make powerful criticism of the government and unable to offer real alternative visions of how to run the health service or other aspects of society.
“The King is dead”
Another conspiracy theory doing the rounds of social media a few weeks ago, was the “news” that king Wachiralongkorn had “died”. There was no reliable evidence to back this up and unfortunately it was not true. But this conspiracy theory was lapped up by those who are obsessed with the royal family. When it was found to be untrue, no apology or explanation was forth-coming.
These people also believe a much more harmful conspiracy theory that the idiot king Wachiralongkorn holds real political power in Thailand and can give orders to the military junta, which these people believe to be “merely” a tool of the king.
As I have explained in previous posts, that the myth about the power of the king lets the junta off the hook because many activists see the junta as irrelevant. This results in ignoring important discussions about vital strategies to overthrow military rule. The conspiracy theorists merely say that if you overthrow the junta, the monarchy will still remain in power. This is not actually true, as the survival of the monarchy is totally dependent on the military and important sections of the capitalist class who use it for their own purposes. [See: Wachiralongkorn’s power https://bit.ly/2EOjsNL and Can an absolute ruler hold power from abroad? https://bit.ly/3hxGFCv .]
What is more, none of these royal conspiracy theorists have, or are interested in having, a credible strategy for overthrowing the junta. Recently when someone on the popular (anti-royal) “Royalist Marketplace” site suggested the need for strike action, like we are seeing in Burma/Myanmar, in order to overthrow the dictatorship, this was dismissed out of hand by one leading light on the site. No alternative strategy was on offer. [See: Rubber ducks cannot defeat the military http://bit.ly/3tmU5YB .]
This is a very serious issue as the youth-led revolt, which erupted last year, is going down to defeat, with the leaders facing serious lèse-majesté charges and the prospect of spending years behind bars as a result. Unless a realistic strategy for overthrowing the military is taken up in order to revive the movement, this could be the depressing outcome.
The people of Burma are waging a heroic fight against the brutal Burmese military. Over three hundred unarmed protesters have so far been murdered in cold blood since the coup at the beginning of February. Yet, every day we see reports of more mass protests up and down the country. The general strike is having an impact on the economy, shaking the junta. In their anger at the strikers, the military have been threatening to throw people out of their workplace accommodation unless they return to work. Many have chosen to move out of their homes rather than submit to the junta.
Railway workers, hospital workers, civil servants, garment workers and bank workers have all joined the general strike. In stepping up the action, workers councils really need to be formed, as they were in the general strike of 1988. These workers councils could then start to organise the distribution of food and essential services to people, thus creating the beginnings of a functioning parallel government controlled by workers. Trade unionists in other countries could also make solidarity donations to help the workers of Myanmar.
In a challenge to the determination of those on strike, a recent article in the Financial Times argued that business leaders in Burma are saying that “protesters are playing a dangerous game with the Myanmar economy” This shows that strikes and civil disobedience are starting to have a real impact and worry the bosses. That is something to be celebrated. Working class strikes which cripple the economy are vital to overthrowing the military dictatorship and are potentially less dangerous than confronting the military and police on the streets. Yet, not surprisingly, bosses in Burma claim that these strikes and the many demonstrations that are occurring “could wipe out a decade of economic gain”. They are only worried by about their profits. In the past, these bosses were quite happy to go along with the military controlled sham democracy before the February coup and have turned a blind eye to gross human rights abuses throughout the country. Western governments were also happy to talk about “progress towards democracy” under the military constitution which allowed the military to hold real power even before the coup. The concerns for the wellbeing of ordinary people because of the strikes and protests expressed by bosses and even the UN are merely crocodile tears. Bosses and the so-called “international community” cannot be relied upon to liberate the people of Myanmar from military rule. And ASEAN certainly cannot be relied upon to do anything to stop the Burmese military. Most ASEAN countries are ruled by authoritarian governments.
In Thailand, prodemocracy activists look at events in Burma with a mixture of huge respect for the protesters and absolute horror at the actions of the military. Many Thais are really hoping for a victory against the Burmese junta which would invigorate the struggle in Thailand.
But important lessons from Burma are not being learnt by Thai activists. So far there have been no real attempts to build a strike movement against the Thai dictatorship and activists are stuck on a strategy of repeated demonstrations, which are smaller in size than those held in 2020. There have been sectarian comments against a group of more militant protesters calling themselves the REDEM movement. This movement takes internet polls from participants about where and how to organise protests. Their marches have been brutally attacked by police and royalist thugs. Some conservatives are criticising them for being “violent” when they defend themselves. But the violence of self-defence cannot in any way be equated to the violence of the Thai military junta, which uses crowd dispersing weapons, intimidation and kidnapping and the courts and prisons against those calling for freedom and democracy.
The junta has long sensed that the movement is stalling and this has given the military confidence to attack numerous protest leaders using the draconian lèse-majesté law and other undemocratic laws in the junta’s legal arsenal. If the democracy movement does not change tactics and increase pressure on the Thai junta, many leaders will be jailed for merely peacefully expressing themselves during protests. Some are being held in jail anyway after being denied bail.
The protesters are quite right in being critical of the odious King Wachiralongkorn, even if they exaggerate his powers in relation to the military. He has continued with his disgusting behaviour flaunting his wives in public and giving military ranks to his many women. This is going on even when he is engaged in a “charm offensive” to counter all the public criticism by touring the country and spending more time in Thailand instead of Germany.
Meanwhile, the total disregard by the military, for the welfare of Thai citizens in relation to the lack of Covid vaccinations, can be summed up by the news that one of the young princesses received her vaccination ahead of the elderly “because she has to meet lots of people while carrying out her duties”. In addition to this, the head of the army suggested that golf caddies on military golf courses be given the jab as a priority! The generals obviously feel that they can say any old rubbish because they are in power and no one can hold them accountable.
The flawed theory about the so-called power of King Wachiralongkorn, and how he supposedly controls the Thai military junta, has led to idiotic conclusions among some Thais about the struggle for democracy in Burma/Myanmar and Thailand.
Comments on social media claiming that it “easier” for the people in Burma to fight the military “because they have no king” totally ignore the Burmese military’s history of brutality in suppressing unarmed pro-democracy demonstrators. In fact it is likely that the Burmese army has shot down even more civilians in the streets than the Thai army. One academic, who believes in the power of the Thai king, even posted on social media that the British had done the people in Burma a “favour” by removing the monarchy! Hardly a favour when they replaced it with a brutal colonial dictatorship.
The comments also under-estimate the bravery of pro-democracy activists in Burma. They ignore the level of organisation among activists which have allowed the anti-coup protests to spring up in many towns and cities across Burma.
The idea about King Wachiralongkorn’s power, or even Pumipon’s power, was always a myth. Unfortunately it has been used by some as an excuse not to get involved in the struggle against the military. These people see no point in overthrowing the junta since the “all powerful” monarchy, which is “really in charge” will remain. It is a recipe for inaction based on a lie.
So those who are obsessed by the King and the Royal Family prefer the comfort of merely engaging in gossip about the royals on social media. They are not interested in proposing or debating concrete ideas about how to strengthen the mass movement against the military.
In the real world, the fact of the matter is that whether there is a monarchy or not, the military regimes in Thailand and Burma are both capable of using brute force to cling on to power. The issue about the monarchy is irrelevant to any strategy to fight both juntas.
The only difference between the Thai and Burmese militaries is that the Thai military uses the monarchy to justify its repression. But both use “the protection of the nation and religion” as excuses.
On the issue of using the monarchy, the “Move Forward Party” has tabled an amendment to the lèse-majesté law. But it insists that the law must be retained and that a maximum prison sentence of 1 year must also apply to those who insult the monarchy. It justifies this by saying that the monarch and his family must enjoy more protection than ordinary citizens in order to protect the “dignity” of the monarchy! The word “dignity” and the actual nature of the idiot parasite Wachiralongkorn are a contradiction! The Move Forward Party should change its name to the “Standing Still Party”.
Meanwhile scores of youth activists now face lèse-majesté charges and some are in jail because they have not been granted bail.
The organisation among activists in Burma is also seen in the number of strikes and protests by workers. We have seen action in the hospitals, schools, universities, civil service offices, the central bank, the railways, the courts and in at least one copper mine.
Workers in Burma are continuing a tradition of working class action from the past. The great uprising in 1988 started with a dock strike and expanded to a general strike against the military dictatorship.
Unfortunately the same cannot be said for Thailand. Workers did join last year’s youth protests, but only one protest on the Eastern seaboard was organised by trade unions. Strikes did not occur. When asked if worker activists were discussing building for strikes, a long standing activist from Rungsit replied that workers could hardly feed themselves, so they could not strike. Yet, Burmese workers are poorer than Thai workers and have equally been affected financially by Covid. So we see yet another excuse to not attempt to use the potential power of workers in Thailand.
We do not know if the people of Burma will manage to overthrow the junta there. But so far they are doing as much as they can to achieve this. If they are successful, the hope is that it will inspire renewed struggle in Thailand and an interest in building strikes.
The Thai military junta is ramping up the use of the draconian lèse-majesté law against critics, opposition politicians and dissidents.
The latest person to be charged with this authoritarian law is opposition politician Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit. His “crime” was to question the Covid vaccine policy of the junta, which has approved a contract between Siam Bioscience and AstraZeneca for the Thai company to produce the Oxford- AstraZeneca vaccine for sale in Thailand and South-East Asia. Siam Bioscience is 100% owned by King Wachiralongkorn and so far has had a poor financial record and no experience of vaccine production. The junta is also buying a small amount of the Chinese Sinovac vaccine.
Thanathorn estimates that most Thais will not begin to be vaccinated until the end of the year, unlike in neighbouring countries. In addition to this there will not be enough of the vaccine to cover the whole population.
Cutting down Thanathorn is part of a long process of destroying the official parliamentary opposition to the junta, which installed itself through a military coup, followed by sham elections. Thanathorn’s Future Forward Party was forced to disband by the junta’s courts and Thanathorn himself banned as an MP, mainly because his party enjoyed significantly popularity, especially among young people. This is at a time when Taksin’s opposition Pua Thai Party has shrunk to a shadow of itself after a war of attrition waged upon it by the military and the conservatives, which used coups and their courts to try to reduce Taksin’s influence among the electorate. The present junta hopes to stay in power for 25 years! [See https://bit.ly/3731MIZ ].
To add insult to injury, the vaccine produced by Siam Bioscience is being called “the gift from the King”, which it certainly is not.
Wachiralongkorn is the richest person in Thailand, but this has absolutely nothing to do with his abilities in any field. He is an intellectually challenged brutal playboy.
So lèse-majesté is being used to stop Thais questioning Covid policies. It is also being used to prevent discussion about reforming the scandal-ridden monarchy and campaigning for democracy. Scores of young people who led the recent protests against the junta have now been charged under this law. This is hardly surprising, as retired academic Thak Chaloemtiarana recently commented that the demand to reform the monarchy is a serious challenge to the legitimacy of the military.
I have argued for a long time that the monarchy is an important tool for the military in attempting to legitimise their rule and the lèse-majesté law is designed to protect this so-called legitimacy. The target of protests must be the military junta rather than the idiot king Wachiralongkorn. [See the myth of Wachiralongkorn’s so called power https://bit.ly/2EOjsNL ].
In the eyes of the junta, criticism of the monarchy and the military is a much more serious “crime” than murder, rape or terrorism. A few days ago a 63 year old woman was sentenced to 87 years in jail (reduced to 43 years and 6 months) for sharing video clips criticising the monarchy!! She has already spent 3 years in prison awaiting trial.
The Thai junta and ruling class are truly a bunch of barbarians.
Yet the impressive youth protest movement seems to be stuck in a rut and unable to move forward to respond to these attacks on liberties by the military. Unless the movement regroups and takes a turn towards the working class by attempting to organise strike action and civil disobedience, it will lack the power to overthrow the junta. [See https://bit.ly/3p3LlnI ].
The youth-led prodemocracy movement that erupted in August has been inspiring. It has made huge strides forward towards getting rid of the conservative and corrupt, military dominated, society. But it is time to take an honest look at what has been achieved while assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the movement.
The movement has successfully rebuilt the pro-democracy movement on the streets in Bangkok and other locations up and down the country. This is after the bloody repression of the Red Shirt movement in 2010 and the following years when only small symbolic protests took place. At its height over 100,000 people have now taken to the streets in recent months. This is a remarkable achievement.
The protest movement has been invigorated by young people who are not afraid to defy the Old Order. Apart from the demands for the resignation of General Prayut as Prime Minister, and the demand to write a new “peoples” constitution, the protesters have dared to demand that the monarchy be reformed. This is long over-due and occurs in the face of a long history of stifling royalist propaganda and draconian laws used to protect the monarchy.
Young women have played key roles in the movement and activists from a wide range of campaigns have join the protests. LGBT and abortion rights issues have been raised. The right to self-determination for the people of Patani has also been flagged up. And the pressing need to reform the conservative and backward education system has also been a feature of protests by school students.
Rank and file organisation of the protests under the slogan “we are all leaders” has meant that demonstrations have continued when the original leaders have been arrested. The flash mobs are clearly well organised and continually use innovative styles of protest.
But there are weaknesses
Symbolism during the protests, for example, the use of rubber ducks, might be very photogenic and excite foreign journalists, but it cannot hide the fact that so far the protest movement has not been able to make the country ungovernable. Without doing this, Prayut’s parliamentary dictatorship cannot be overthrown. Rubber ducks are no substitute for real protest power that comes from strikes and workplace walk-outs. Unfortunately, little is being done to go out and visit worker activists in offices, banks, hospitals and factories in order to argue for strikes. This is mainly due to the appalling weakness of the left and the unwillingness of activists to rebuild a left-wing political organisation which can argue within the movement for an orientation on strikes.
The “we are all leaders” strategy means that it is difficult to have serious and democratic discussions about the way forward because no democratic structures exist within the movement which can encourage participation in decision making. The top protest leaders become de facto unelected leaders. This is not because they wish to be authoritarian, but it is an unintended result of the “we are all leaders” strategy. Instead there could have been mass discussion meetings and elections of a united front leadership committee. The Thai movement is not unique here. The same problem occurred with Podemos in the Spanish State.
If the movement fails to get strike action, we shall end up with a miserable compromise, carried out in the junta dominated parliament. Some sections of the constitution might be amended, but Prayut and the junta will not resign and the monarchy will not be reformed. [See https://bit.ly/3qol8Bl ].
A dozen protest leaders have been charged with lèse-majesté with the prospect of long drawn out court cases ending in draconian prison sentences. There does not seem to be any strategy to defend these leaders and to be able to pressure the regime to drop the charges.
Given the great strides made by the protest movement, it would be a terrible tragedy if very little was achieved in the end and the leaders ended up being isolated.
The Thai dictatorship is once again turning to the use of the draconian and backward lèse majesté law. The dinosaurs in uniform have ordered that a dozen leaders of the youth-led pro-democracy movement be issued with summonses by the police on charges of lèse majesté.
For a couple of years the scandal around this law, and how it brought the Thai monarchy into disrepute in the eyes of many throughout the world, meant that the junta temporarily stopped using the law. Instead they persecuted activists and dissidents with other equally brutal laws, such as the computer crimes law. But now they have returned to using lèse majesté.
The reason for this is that they can see that the tide has turned as a result of the youth-led protests and people are openly criticising Wachiralongkorn. The dim-witted and vicious king hasn’t exactly helped build his popularity by spending his time in Germany with his harem, insisting on changing the constitution in order to make a grab for all of the wealth associated with the monarchy to be placed under his personal control. In the past there was a separation between his personal wealth and the Crown Property Bureau which was owned by the state. At the moment he is on a “charm offensive”, touring various sites in Bangkok and the provinces to meet the people. But in many ways this has just made things worse since he is only welcomed by ageing royalist fanatics and when interviewed by a British Channel 4 journalist, Wachiralongkorn struggled to say a coherent sentence. In addition to this, soldiers have been dressing up as “yellow shirts” to welcome Wachiralongkorn and also use violence against pro-democracy protests.
Lèse majesté in Thailand is used to support military coups and dictatorships. The monarchy is constantly used by authoritarian powers in Thailand to justify their actions and the monarchy has never spoken out against injustice and the cold-blooded killing of civilians. In the past many people, myself included, have been charged under this outdated authoritarian law. One person was charged with lèse majesté for distributing CDs of an Australian Broadcasting Corporation documentary. This documentary showed the severely sexist and abusive behaviour of the Thai Crown Prince. The same person was also charged with distributing a Wikileaks cable which exposed the fact that at least one member of the Privy Council thought that it would be “better” if the Prince Wachiralongkorn died so as to avoid him becoming king. This was while Pumipon was still alive.
The junta are gambling on the possibility that the youth-led movement will lose momentum and that it will be unable to defend its leaders. Both the main opposition Move Forward and Pua Thai Parties have so far refused to criticise the lèse majesté law or to back demands for serious reform of the monarchy. It is vital that the leaders of the pro-democracy movement are not left isolated. Strike action by Thai workers would strengthen their position. International solidarity would also be a boost to morale.
In a genuine democracy, it cannot be a crime to seek to bring the monarchy to account for its behaviour. This is what the protest movement is demanding.
The lèse majesté law cannot be reformed into a democratic law any more than a military dictatorship can be reformed or amended into a “democratic government”. The lèse majesté law is fundamentally against the freedom of expression and democracy. No one should face charges, be punished or be in jail for speaking their mind about Thai political institutions. This is the line that must be drawn in the sand to defend freedom of speech and build democracy in Thailand. It means that lèse majesté must be abolished.
The fantastic mass movement against the Thai junta is at a junction. Organising flash mobs over and over again risks tiring out protesters and these actions are not enough to make the country ungovernable; a necessary condition for victory.
There are ominous signs that the junta is seeking to pressure the movement into a shoddy compromise with the help of the political parties. The aim is to merely amend some parts of the constitution via a parliamentary process. This will fall well short of the three demands of the movement: the resignation of Prayut, a complete re-write of the constitution by ordinary people, and the reform of the scandal-ridden monarchy.
The government has also been trying to divide the protesters by holding talks with some secondary school students about conditions in schools. The aim would be to get the school students to drop out of the movement.
Let us remember how far the movement has come. Since August 2020 large youth-led pro-democracy protests of up to 100,000 people have targeted the Thai military junta and even dared to criticise the monarchy. These protests have been organised up and down the country and have inspired millions of people in Thailand and other countries who are desperate for change. The energy and bravery of young people has been breath-taking.
Prayut and his gang of military thugs are not about to go easily. They have spent the years since their coup in 2014 putting in place measures to maintain their power, including writing a constitution, appointing the senate, designing the National Strategy and fixing last year’s elections.
The reasons why students have managed to enliven and expand the pro-democracy protests, which have occurred sporadically since the last military coup in 2014, is that this new generation have seen that pushing for reforms within the military controlled parliamentary system has not worked. They are fed up with the entrenched conservatism in society, especially in the education system. The economy is a mess due to the Covid crisis and youth see little to be hopeful for the future. In fact they share all these feelings of anger and frustration with over half the adult population who voted against the military party in 2019. A recent poll, conducted by Bangkok University, found that more than 40% of the population are struggling to make ends meet.
As with all mass protests, the demands of the movement have expanded. LGBT and pro-abortion rights activists have joined in, along with activists campaigning for self-determination in the Muslim Malay region of Patani.
Hopes have been raised.
A miserable compromise with the military junta, only agreeing to amend certain sections of the constitution, would do nothing to solve the issues which have led to the protests in the first place. Therefore there is an urgency to add new tactics in order to increase pressure on the junta.
The movement’s emphasis on devolved leadership, without clear organisational structures, contains both a strength and a weakness. The strength can be seen in the way the protests have continued despite the ongoing arrests of key activists, many of whom face multiple charges. But the weakness is that, in practice, strategy is determined by a group of non-elected key activists without the possibility of much face to face debate on the ground within the wider movement. This is something we saw in Spain with Podemos.
What is needed is an urgent and open debate about the way forward.
Either the protest movement pushes forward to organise more militant and powerful action such as strikes, or the momentum will be lost. Given the level of public support for the protests, it is important to seize the moment and try to build for workplace stoppages which would add power to the movement.
Many active Thai trade unionists have turned up to support the youth-led pro-democracy demonstrations as individuals and also in trade union groups. The Thai working class is much more than factory workers in the textiles and auto industries. There are white collar workers in offices, banks, schools, universities and hospitals. To build for strike action against the junta, youth activists need to link up with worker activists and visit workplaces to discuss how to get rid of the dictatorship. The lack of a significant organisation of the Left will make the task of mobilising workers more difficult, but it is hoped that militants will step forward to try and achieve this.
The key role of the working class is due to its economic power. This is an issue for all the present day movements such as Black Lives Matter, the Climate Strikes, and the struggles in Nigeria or Latin America. The important role of the working class has been well described in a recent book about the Hong Kong youth-led uprising (Au Loong-Yu, “Hong Kong in Revolt”).
It is a shame that some commentators who have influence on the movement seem to have been content with merely criticising the monarchy while not discussing the way forward for the movement. Perhaps this is no coincidence. If people believe that the idiot king Wachiralongkorn, who finds it hard to string a complete sentence together, is the real power in Thai society, rather than the military, it may lead to pessimism about the chance of victory because of the king’s “invisible power”. But the real enemy of democracy is the military junta.
The real people with power prostrate themselves on the ground and pay homage to this king. Yet, this is an ideological play, acted out for the benefit of fooling the public and creating fear. The fact that it is in any way believable by many is a great example of what Marx called “alienation”. It is when we are feeling powerless that we are more likely to believe the nonsense fed to us by the ruling class. What all modern monarchies throughout the world have in common is their ideological role in supporting the status quo. Thailand is no exception.
We must criticise the monarchy and call for a democratic republic, but in order to achieve that, the military need to be overthrown and there needs to be a serious discussion about how to achieve this aim.