A tale of two cities in divided Kingdom

A tale of two cities in divided Kingdom
source: The Nation December 31 2007 -Thanong Khanthong

 

PERSON OF THE YEAR - YOU!

'You' is a far cry from Time magazine's 2006 person of the year. 'You' is more complicated than the spontaneous forces that shape the digital world. 'You' are bitterly divided, yet fiercely determined though somewhat clueless. One half of 'You' is accused by the other of being 'na๏ve' and 'gullible', as opposed to the returned charges of being 'elitist' and 'uncaring'. 'You' have been skating on thin ice, so precariously but so far superbly. And because 'You', without a single drop of blood being shed, have brought back democracy with strong warnings to past, present and future powers-that-be, 'You' are our Person of the Year for 2007.
You no longer trust your neighbours or even your closest friends. Your family is split; so are your neighbourhood, community, province and country.
Talking politics has become taboo because you do not want to lose friends or engage in endless arguments that will never arrive at a conclusion.
The state of Thailand in 2007 was no different from that in 2006. It boiled down to whether you would like to embrace ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra as your hero again or whether you would like to remove him forever from your nightmare.
It was a black-and-white proposition.
You did not have to exercise any profound thought to realise a Thaksin comeback would bring about endless political problems and retribution. You were anxious for the future of the country.
You were concerned over the sharp political divide. And you were disturbed by Thaksin's massive political influence and wealth, which allowed him - even as he was exiled abroad - to shape public opinion.
You woke on December 23 knowing it would be a fateful day, one determining the country's course for years to come. You had just one vote. This time you knew it was crucial.
No matter what the outcome, you knew political turmoil was moving to another phase - a final showdown.
The September 2006 coup marked only the beginning of an end. It should go down as the most polite coup ever. It did not resolve any problems. It only prolonged social polarisation that would manifest itself again in 2007 and beyond.
On second thoughts, you tried to soothe yourself by holding that a bloodless coup was a "Thai way" to resolve political conflict.
A lot of people should appreciate the polite coup, given a more prevailing culture of bloody violence in other parts of the world. Note the Bhutto assassination.
Polls showed the People Power Party, the reincarnation of the Thai Rak Thai, enjoying a lead and it could win at least 200 seats.
People Power would sweep the North and Northeast, where standards of living are the lowest. In Bangkok, there were signs it could manage a strong showing.
Still, you did not trust polls; there were attempts to manipulate them.
You were no big fan of the Democrat Party, which was a bit boring and lacked imagination. But you knew it was the strongest opposition to the People Power.
There were no national parties in Thailand. Thai politics is represented by regional diversities. The South, and at times Bangkok, voted Democrat. The North and Northeast voted People Power. Chart Thai took Central.
Other political parties, mostly breakaway factions of People Power, were all newcomers.
People Power campaigned on material gain and economic wellbeing, while the Democrats emphasised honest leadership.
You were surprised to find some of your neighbours, who had never voted before, did so. Again, they were no big fans of the Democrats. But they voted Democrat because they just did not want Thaksin back.
The election was split between those who supported Thaksin and those who did not, judging by the popular vote. The Democrats mustered 14,084,265 votes against 14,071,799 votes for People Power, a margin of about 10,000.
But the Democrat edge did not translate into more seats in the House. People Power won 233 seats of 480 thanks to its rural support. The Democrats took 165.
You were heartbroken. The middle class and other urban voters were too. They wanted to see an end to political turmoil and the country moving forward.
They were simply outnumbered. Bangkok had ignored the North and Northeast voters for too long. They saw in Thaksin a saviour who could improve their wellbeing through economic populism. They voted People Power because they would get a material benefit in return.
The Democrats did not lose this election. Its votes doubled to 14 million. The PPP (alias Thai Rak Thai) found its votes falling from more than 18 million to 14 million.
Voter turnout was a record 73 per cent, signalling voter realisation that the stakes were particularly high this time.
This was reminiscent of the George W Bush-Al Gore 2000 presidential race. US politics was shaped by geographical diversity. Gore won the popular vote by a tiny margin. But Bush bagged the electoral college votes.
Thailand had never faced this kind of sharp political divide before. You suddenly recalled His Majesty the King's speeches. His Majesty had expressed his concern over the divide. The King repeated warnings that people must reunite to keep the country on a steady course.
You also recalled the theory of Anek Laothamatas, the well-known academic and member of the Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana Party. In his "A Tale of Two Cities" theory, he argues rural voters vote in governments but urban voters kick them out. A government without broad-based support from the middle classes almost always finds it difficult to survive for long.
Once again, this theory will be put to the test.
Thanong Khanthong
The Nation
_________________