Ideal Worlds versus Real Worlds and Giving the Scary Guys the Benefit of the Doubt

OK so this may be a controversial post, but probably not for the reasons you’d expect. I want to talk about the recent arrest of the former cabinet minister of the Thai government, as he denounced the coup. It’s an interesting conversation, because we Americans believe in Democracy to such an extent, that it seems like any breach of that democracy must have been done by malicious forces. I can tell you that I can’t find one piece of evidence to support this. For those not familiar with what happened Tuesday, AFP reported “Bangkok (AFP) - Thai soldiers swooped to detain a fugitive former cabinet minister on Tuesday after he emerged from hiding to become the first member of the ousted government to publicly denounce a military coup.” The former official held a press conference in which he stated his opinions openly about the coup. He knew that he would be arrested, and he still firmly believed that it was the right thing to do.

Here’s the thing, maybe he’s not wrong, but I also don’t think that the military is wrong. At least in Lampiog, there doesn't seem to be a negative view on the military. Even university students here, a demographic notorious for political angst, seem to see the military in a less negative light than many in the western media has portrayed them. As I walked next to a train station/ pop up market yesterday I saw military men in full uniform carrying automatic weapons. This, of course, can be disheartening or generally scary for American tourists. The two young Thai university girls with me, they took the opportunity to take selfies. They asked if I wanted to try and get one with a solider. I declined, though when I tell this story later in life I’ll fudge that part. That’s a humorous slant on a very serious issue but it is a reaction indicative of a general feeling. Thailand is not a violent place. There are low crime rates, and the popular sport Maui Thai (A mix of kick boxing and other fighting styles native to Thailand) is general disliked by Thais because of their feelings towards aggression. Overwhelmingly, it is foreigners who really enjoy and support the sport. But, during the protests people were actually dying here. From everything that I have seen of Thailand that doesn’t make sense.

So the military stepped in and seized power, not granting it to one side over the other through political-gainsmanship, rather they stepped in and removed both sides of the conflict. Now perhaps this move doesn’t make sense to Americans. But let’s give this some serious and critical thought. Both sides of the conflict seemed completely entrenched in the idea that their side was the legitimate voice in Thailand. In my last post, I talked about the necessity for someone to be willing to lose for a democracy to properly operate. In a situation in which both sides showed less than superb leadership to end the conflict peacefully for the sake of saving lives, there was a force whose whole mission is to protect a nation, that stood there with enough power to act, and what they say, was a legitimate reason to—to ensure peace only. This reminds me particularly of the Egyptian army.

 The Thai military didn’t really seize power, so to speak. They always had power. During the revolts in Egypt some questioned the role of the military really without thinking about a possible motive. Militaries are often painted as power hungry factions within foreign countries but neither the Thai nor Egyptian army are power hungry. I’m not saying that they are benevolent, but rather that they already held the largest share of power within their respective countries. The Egyptian army corners basically most of the major economic markets within Egypt and is the most stable organization within that country by far. This is similar to Thailand. In Thailand the military has not had to face the political drawbacks of democracy (unhappy citizenry entitled to a voice). The royal family enjoys a large amount of popularity as I have noted but though everyone seems to love the king and his daughter, there are those who worry about who will take over if the aging king passes. (Let me be clear to any possible Thai readers, this is not a criticism. This is simply a restatement of some of the things I have heard from the Thai people.) The military however, does not have to operate in such a strong feedback loop. In both Thailand and Egypt, the military has had really one motive: ensure stability regardless of the leader because that is their job, and to their advantage.

Often we good liberals can paint a reactionary and negative picture of military forces without really thinking about it critically (note I include myself in those that make this mistake). In truth, militaries were devised to organize a citizenry against a physical threat that looms too large for individuals to combat or police forces to police. Perhaps, one could object that these have to be external threats, but I think only the most radical of thinkers would object to the military in America, attacking credible threats of domestic terrorism or mass violence committed by citizens. If twenty people died in an American protest tomorrow, we would be clamoring for the National Guard to swoop in and restore order. What I’m saying is that, in an ideal world. Democracy and the agency it affords individuals should be cherished and held in the highest of regards. However, in a world in which two opposing political parties start killing each other, someone has to consider the right of impartial parties to ensure their security and life. I’m not taking a side here. I love democracy, but I’m just saying, it’s also nice to know that I won’t be caught in the cross-hairs of an unreasonable political actor.                  

Lastly I want to make two notes. First, everyone was asked by the military to turn themselves in for questioning, and some who complied have even been already released. He was already wanted, not because of his denouncements, in which he said “from now on there will be more and more resistance”, which was a poor choice of phrasing. Secondly, the curfew, that was already lax in enforcement, was eased today from 12(midnight) to 4(in the morning). Thanks for reading.                             

We begin with a Question

The last few years, have seen their fair share of political upheavals. What would the first half of this decade be without the Arab Spring? What is to become of Venezuela? How can we reach a critically equitable solution to the Ukrainian problem, which threatened to throw the entire world back thirty years? So when I heard about the problems in Thailand, like so many others, I thought I had some general idea about where this was going. I thought that this was the next Domino. As I prepared to take a job in that country for nine months, I did my research and learned that I might have been mistaken. And getting here today I now know that I don’t get it at all. Whatever Thailand is said to be in the media or over a water cooler, that isn’t what greeted me. I flew into a country under Martial Law, and didn't realize it until I was two minutes late for mandatory curfew, and lost in a dark and alleyway market.  It also seemed I wasn't the only one who forgot about it— it seems the crowds of native Thai’s, and the police did as well.

‘Life goes on as usual, this is nothing new’. This is the message that I got from everyone who had actually been in Thailand for an extended amount of time, or was living in the land during the coup. Of course, my employers could have been lying to get me to continue to accept moving half way across the world to a country with a destabilizing (turned non-active) government. But this was told to me by friends, by mentors, and by people who had taken the trip themselves and had nothing to lose by telling me the truth. Nevertheless, my nervousness persisted. But the truth is Thailand is not a powder keg. It’s not going to blow any second. It’s probably not going to blow at all. How can this be? We all saw the protests on TV, and we saw how passionate the parties were against each other. But as I saw myself in a crowd of people— people not running home as curfew loomed ever closer, I knew that something different was happening here. Folks in Thailand seem actually pretty relaxed— scratch that— insanely relaxed. How can this dichotomy persist? How can the Land of Smiles also be the Land of the Repeating Coup, averaging about one every six years? This is what this blog is going to be about. I want to look at Thailand in the light of Contemporary Political Thought, Ancient Buddhist philosophy, the on the ground experience of an amateur philosopher from the West in a country he doesn't understand. I hope to post daily here, but I don’t know how reliable my internet will be, and I don’t know my schedule. Likely most posts, like this one, will be hastily planned in the morning on a piece of tissue paper and cobbled together late at night, instead of sleeping. I hope we can all learn something.