Interesting article from Malaysia re: Thai culture and politics

[filch]

Wasn't quite sure where to post this, so here it is:


Thailand's messy politics: Is culture the culprit?
By Kaye Eldridge

BANGKOK, Nov 29 - Many Westerners, both inside and outside of Thailand, have been watching closely as the country falls into a deeper political mess, and they are wondering how Thais can be acting so violently against each other.

Thailand, a country once popular for its beaches, temples and carefree people, is fast becoming more well-known for its civil unrest.

Holiday-makers can no longer be sure of reliable flight arrangements and many are being warned by their governments to stay away from the country.

How has Thailand digressed so far from its reputation as a fun-loving tourist destination?

In September 2006, prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra was released of his leadership through a military coup amidst allegations of corruption.

Since then much has happened: consequential elections were won by the People Power party (PPP), a political grouping largely recognised as Thaksin's proxy and favoured by rural constituents; the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) subsequently began their persistent demonstrations; Samak Sundaravej then lost the PM's seat due to a cooking show and Thaksin's brother-in-law took over the seat; and demonstrators have consequently begun using more aggressive tactics.

This week, Thaksin announced a return to politics, despite the criminal convictions recently laid down while he was - and still remains - on the run from Thai authorities, and PAD demonstrators have taken over Bangkok's airports.

Even by Thai standards, it has been an eventful few years for Thai politics.

The cultural values of Thailand offer an interesting avenue for understanding the Thai thought patterns underlying these recent political events. They can also explain why Westerners might need to accept that
they may never appreciate the Thai logic that has led to the current political mess.

Cultural groups can be distinguished from one another by their decision-making practices. For example, in deciding how their communities should be structured, Thai people tend to prefer to adopt a more authoritarian structure, whereas many Westerners favour a more egalitarian approach.

We can identify the possible different types of cultural decision-making by recognising the varying priorities which different groups of people place upon the emotional, rational and spiritual values in their decision-making.

Each of these values is grounded upon a very different principle, and when used in decision-making, reveals a distinct type of motive. Using these values, we can see how Thai society has a culture which makes it
vulnerable to the current volatile political situation.

Emotional values are those values which we think are important in our life because they make us feel good. They are explained purely by our affections and we allow them to influence our decision-making because
they address our emotional needs and wants.

Common examples of such values in practice include spending time with friends, indulging in trashy television, or simply opting to pass on a possible argument with a taxi driver in order to enjoy a planned evening.

Emotions rate very highly in Thai society, evidenced by the strong emphasis they place upon ensuring everyone is having an enjoyable time, no matter where they are and including the work place.

It is also shown by their tendency to avoid stressful personal confrontations or, indeed, anything unpleasant. Thais usually make a conscious effort to ensure their feel-good emotions are preserved.

The priority which Thais give to their emotional state is perhaps one of the main features of their society that has made the country a rather special place in the hearts of many foreigners over recent years.

The Thai enthusiasm for sanuk, or having a good time, is infectious and is a cultural aspect often envied by visitors to Thailand, as it encourages people to listen more often to their feelings, rather than their heads.

In contrast, most Western societies encourage and reward the use of rational values in the decision-making of their people.

Rational decision-making actively uses values that have been carefully considered and finally selected based upon an objective analysis. They are ideas considered desirable because they either result in a good
outcome or are the values of the majority, referred to as consequential values and consensual values, respectively.

Western society places a premium on consequential values. They coincide with the linear thinking popular in this society; if A is followed by B this will then lead to C. Simple and predictable. For example, Western
society regulates a multitude of aspects of its people's life, and their people for the most part obey these regulations because they know that such behaviour will lead to a manageable and civilised society.

So highly regarded is consequential decision-making in Western society that it is often difficult for them to understand why some people might adopt a different decision-making style.

This leads Westerners to then question: How can Thais elect a government that has made promises that clearly cannot be delivered without financially ruining the country? How can they have such devotion to a
politician who, even if ignoring recent court verdicts and assumed not guilty, has demonstrated dubious character?

And how can Thais demand the closure of their international airports knowing that it is likely to cause hardship for their fellow compatriots working in the tourism industry?

The Thai actions underlying these questions contradict the Westerner's consequential thought processes which suggest that there is a strong likelihood these actions will lead to destructive outcomes.

However, Thais are acting upon a different thought pattern that relies more upon listening to their immediate social environment, or consensus values.

Consensus values are ideas that are believed to be important because they are shared amongst friends, colleagues and closer community. The prominent community use of these values can lead to a cultural dynamic where party politics can be susceptible to extreme divisiveness, as people begin to strongly identify with their particular parties or groups, to the exclusion of all others.

Indeed, the community polarisation which is likely to occur when members typically seek to affirm their thoughts through their colleagues has already happened in Thailand, with Thai loyalty being sharply divided
between the PPP and the PAD.

Not only have Thais developed a strong feeling of unity with their specific movement, this solidarity has also created angst for those with views contrary to their own.

Consensus values also lead to a more ready acceptance of ideas without questioning. For example, the media has recently highlighted that the PPP has stumbled with its policies and the PAD has also been short with
offering possible realistic alternatives beyond the short-term aim of removing the current government.

Yet both groups have been able to sustain devout membership irrespective of their lack of substance.

Yet even more influential in Thai society are the spiritual values of its people, those values which cannot be explained by objective analysis but rely on faith.

These are values which cannot be rationally justified but are based on a strong notion of being "right". Thai people have long been recognised as forming a highly spiritual society, with both Buddhism and animism
playing a strong part in most aspects of Thai daily life.

As a consequence, Thai thinking is far more open to making decisions based on faith, including in a range of arenas where Westerners typically advocate objective analysis, such as business and politics.

For example, newspapers in Thailand regularly report on the offerings made to guardian spirits by politicians and the political forecasts of prominent astrologers, events that would not be treated as newsworthy by
many Westerners.

Readers might recall the reports made earlier this year on Samak's angry response to a prominent fortune teller's prediction that a military coup would occur within the following three months (it didn't).

Yet spiritual values are not limited to matters concerning religion but can also be applied across a range of areas, as exemplified by the deep connection that Thais feel with regard to His Majesty King Bhumibol
Adulyadej. This is a connection that is extremely sacred to the Thai people, it is spiritual.

Thaksin's rise to cult-like status amongst his followers can also be best understood in terms of the Thai fondness for faith.

Thaksin's followers have such confidence in him that they cannot accept any intentional wrongdoing on his behalf, choosing to disbelieve any evidence to the contrary and to cite his compassion for the weak and
needy.

When connecting with his people, Thaksin speaks of unfair condemnation and thanks them for placing their trust in him. Indeed, the faith they display in him is above and more knowing than any rational logic, which leaves very little room for objective discussion.

Still, the question remains: How can the Thai consideration for ensuring everyone is happy, or sabai jai, reside with their beliefs in political causes which have resulted in such civil unrest? How can Thais, who are
usually so compassionate with their feelings, be so vengeful to each other?

Unfortunately, in any decision-making, a choice that upholds one value may mean the sacrifice of another value, and spiritual values often take precedence over emotional values, as well as those that are rational.

Spiritual values, by definition, demand commitment from their holders; their selection is usually accompanied by a strong conviction that they are morally justified.

It is therefore often easier to convince a person to forego any emotional needs, such as the opportunity to relax with friends and laugh, than to let go of their righteous ideas. Spiritual values are therefore extremely
powerful.

Hence Thailand has a stalemate where neither side is able to concede to the possibility that their cause might not be worth the associated costs.

Supporters of PPP maintain they are fighting for democracy and PAD demonstrators maintain they are fighting to save democracy from itself since Thailand is not ready. Each side knows they are morally right.

How to break the stalemate? There might be some hope for a resolution in Thailand's political crisis
if Thais listen more to their rational consequential values and recognise the economic destruction that their recent actions are likely to cause for themselves and each other.

They might also make a concerted call for an active return to their fun-loving and krengchai nature that has made the country so special.

However, to do this requires a major cultural adjustment involving a leap over many ideas which they hold on to with great faith - which is difficult to imagine for a country so famous for its temples.

Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/i...re-the-culprit

[Ghandi]

Good article , shame they failed to mention the average IQ of a Thai is 85.

[DrAndy]

Holiday-makers can no longer be sure of reliable flight arrangements and many are being warned by their governments to stay away from the country.

no Europeans are flying there this week, that'll show them

Good article , shame they failed to mention the average IQ of a Thai is 85.

Good for you Ghandi, don't be jealous though

[Marmite the Dog]

They could've just said that most Thais are like 8 year old kids to save on the waffle.

[DrAndy]

pass the maple syrup

[9999]

Good article , shame they failed to mention the average IQ of a Thai is 85.

Bullshit. The Thais are not genetically stupid, it's education and culture.

[panama hat]

Thaksin Shinawatra was released of his leadership through a military coup

What a very soft way to describe it

In contrast, most Western societies encourage and reward the use of rational values in the decision-making of their people.

Rational decision-making actively uses values that have been carefully considered and finally selected based upon an objective analysis. They are ideas considered desirable because they either result in a good
outcome or are the values of the majority, referred to as consequential values and consensual values, respectively.

This is what I found to be the underlying problem with many Thais I worked with or met . . . the act and consequence. We teach our children about consequences . . . Thais simply don't get it. (Not all, of course)