.
The
ideas of Thomas Jefferson and John Locke being invoked by Bangkok
protesters? (See LINK)
.
I am continually astonished at the
extent to which the Bangkok middle classes (and students) loathe Thaksin
Shinawatra (while the rural majorities love him for his populist policies and
giveaways to them, policies that are usually financially disastrous and
corruptly administered). He, and the
parties he controls, has dominated (opponents say, “bought”) contemporary elections,
even after he fled the country as a fugitive to avoid a two-year jail sentence
after conviction for blatant corruption and abuse of power.
.
His sister Yingluck Shinawatra
became Prime Minister after a landslide victory in the election of 2011, but
the opposition objects to her government and to the “entire Thaksin regime,”
calling her a “puppet” of his as he dictates from abroad. They rage against the pro-Thaksin government’s
assaults on the Rule of Law.
.
The Thaksinistas have the most
votes, but the moral high ground seems to belong to their opposition. At least one anti-Thaksin intellectual has invoked
Jefferson’s warning against a possible “elective despotism” that is
democratically elected but thoroughly unjust and unrestrained in its use of
power. (I might add James Madison’s
similar warning in The Federalist Papers that there must be
strong constitutional restraints on government lest there be any “tyranny of
the majority.”)
.
And I am especially astonished at
the massive anti-Thaksin rallies today.
I expected the opposition rallies to fade away, but perhaps 200,000 or
more Thais filled the streets of Bangkok today, paralyzing all traffic and
marching to Government House from all directions. As they marched there, PM Yingluck announced
the dissolution of the House of Representatives and a new snap election on 2
February. But this does not satisfy most
protesters, mainly because the pro-Thaksin faction led by his sister and the
Pheu Thai party will certainly win power again, thus the paradox in politics
here.
.
At 06:30 today we were suddenly
shaken by a very LOUD loudspeaker on the street below us at the entrance to
EGAT. By 09:00 a group of about 200 –
mostly EGAT workers – were forming a parade order below us, intending to march
to join other protesters elsewhere. I
got to look at them closely via binoculars from above, and they looked like cheerful,
decent middle-class folks, many of them surprisingly young. This is a distinct difference from my
personal observation of the pro-Thaksin Red Shirts as I walked through their
encampment on 9 April 2010, the day before the violence started. (See blog post, below, on that date.) By comparison, the Reds looked like thugs.
.
I created a Twitter account recently
to get up-to-date news on protester activity and traffic reports. Social media have had a tremendous role in
mobilizing people and getting the latest news out.
.
Thailand
lacks a solid constitution that is dedicated to limiting political
power (as do most other constitutions throughout the world, while the
USA was lucky to get it partially right in the early days). When there is a lot of power to be grabbed – democratically
if you have numbers behind you – you will be tempted to use that power to make
laws and regulations to benefit you and yours financially; and then you can
also “buy” more votes with populist policies that will give you (read: Thaksin)
a continued democratic majority while ruining the nation’s finances; also power
to ban peaceful behavior that you don’t like; etc.
.
Friedrich
Hayek nailed this hazard of when too much power is constitutionally available. In his chapter, “Why the Worst Get on Top,”
in his 1944 The Road to Serfdom, he was answering the question
of why supposedly “civilized” Europe was at that time rife with “gangster
states,” i.e., Germany, Italy, and the USSR.
His answer: loose constitutions
allow immense political power to be had, and the most ruthless wolves will win
the power game. Ah! I need to read more Hayek again for that
wonderfully sane perspective.
.
How
it will end here? I don’t know, but I am
encouraged to see some of the protesters and intellectuals invoke the very core
libertarian insights of Jefferson and Locke.
They had provided the world-classic arguments for rebellion against
unjust lawmakers.
.
-Zenwind.
.
