|Siliphan Nogsuan Sawasdee|
|Spelling||Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee|
|Job||Indonesian Political Scientist|
|Essay||The transformation of dominant parties in Asia|
|The development of political science in Thailand|
|The conundrum of a dominant party in Thailand|
2016 03 01 Publish
[The development of political science in Thailand] This paper recounts the development of political science in Thailand and identifies the subfields and approaches used in political science studies. The paper argues that the orientation of political science has been a product of the historical process of semi-colonialism and Thailand’s pattern of development based on internal colonization with a high degree of centralization in Bangkok in all dimensions, whether economic, political, or cultural. Moreover, the alternation between varying forms of military rule and prolonged colour-coded politics have been major factors influencing the debates and the substance of political science in the country which has also brought about the politicization of Thai academics. The paper seeks to assess the current situation of and challenges to the study of political science in Thailand
2018 05 07 Publish
[The conundrum of a dominant party in Thailand] Although Thaksin Shinawatra’s three political parties, together called ‘the TSP’ in this article, overwhelmingly won all four elections between 2001 and 2011, explaining their dominance is a challenge. Nevertheless, this article attempts to shed some light on how the TSP politicized already latent cleavages, namely the basic split between the lower-middle class and the rural poor versus mostly Sino-Thai Bangkokians and the urban middle class, and made them even more significant.
After the TSP was dissolved by court order following the 2006 military coup, these deep divides transformed into two major cleavages, namely the dominating center-local dimension which pits Bangkokian and the urban pole against the provincial pole and the royalist and traditional establishment pole against pro-populist politicians.
The TSP’s ability to incorporate certain demands into its agendas pointed to its power to manipulate these cleavages. At the same time, its capacity to organize and mobilize certain groups deepened those divisions and allowed the party to win elections without having to institutionalize the party.
The TSP’s failure to develop a strong organizational structure was partly a result of frequent coups d’etat as well as its centralized style of leadership. The TSP’s reach across groups spanning these two cleavages would allow the TSP to win the upcoming election without having to embrace the dynamics of change in voters’ preferences. However, the precariously balanced relationship between the TSP and its supporters has to be carefully maintained, or the existing social cleavages may be increasingly difficult to sustain if new political parties emerge.
2019 04 04 Retrieve
[The Thailand Election Commission can seek to remove members for election misconduct and call new elections in those seats, in some circumstances barring the previous winner from running again. More than 180 such complaints have been filed] They have the whole year to disqualify people. So the number can be changed the whole time
2019 02 24 Retrieve
[That Campaign regulations could be source of friction] The complicated regulations [could lead to] tens of disqualifications from the Election Commission after the poll [where Voters who cast ballots for the disqualified parties would not be happy]