What is the Role of the Monarchy in Thailand?

This video called simply "Revolution" is very interesting indeed, especially the ending because it raises a question which nobody dares to ask in Thailand: "What is the role of the Thai monarchy?"

Why has Thailand had more military coups than any other nation in the world? What has been the Thai king's role in these coups? Has the king been a "stabilising" factor, or the instigator behind these coups? What nobody can deny, is that Bhumibol Adulyadej is always there. Coup after, coup, after coup. The monarch's power is never dented by these coups, but rather enhanced. Curious.

How many of these coups "benefited" Thai people themselves? Did the "bawordet Rebellion" benefit Thai people? What about the "Lance Corporal Rebellion"? The "Phraya Suradet Rebellion", "Separatists Rebellion", "Aide-de-camp Rebellion", "Royal Palace (Wang Luang) Rebellion", "Manhattan Rebellion", "Santiparp Rebellion"......

It's easy to get confused, as one army General after another desolves yet another democratic parliament, or abolishes yet another Thai Constitution, but there's a pattern here. It's all about stifling democracy in thailand. It's about securing privileges and wealth for the ruling elite at the expense of poor Thais. Perhaps this is what Thailand's current illegitimate "Prime Minister" was refering to, when he talked about Thailand's "unique history"?

The video brings us nicely to the present day with the military coup against Thailand's former Prime Minister (notice no quotation marks, Thaksin was elected by Thai people not appointed by the Thai king). This is the most interesting part. When the 2006 coup was staged, it was under the "Revolutionary Council in the Thai Democracy" in the name of HM the king. Then it was hurriedly renamed: "The national Security Council" under General Sonthi.

Did we briefly glimpse the face of the man who has remained in the shadows throughout Thailand's history of multiple military coups? Maybe. As if we hadn't already figured out the answer, the video ends with the questions: "Who is behind these rebellions?" and "Who benefits from them?". Cue big question mark.

To answer this question fully, it is first necessary to define the word "benefit". What benefit could there be in staging a military coup? Power? Wealth? Certainly, the Thai army hasn't done badly from Thailand's many coups. They have the power. But who is the person with all the wealth? And if by chance this person was also the head of the army? Could we have answered our initial question?

Coups don't just happen, they happen for two reasons: Power and wealth. "Legitimate" power comes from a mandate from the people, this is called democracy. But legitimacy can also come from a military coup, if it is "approved" by those who are above criticism as enshrined in the Constitution and lese majeste laws. Is that the role of the monarchy in Thailand?

From ThaiFreeNews



Pearl of Wisdom from apochromatic


Survey Results - GlowDay.com