Democratic Party (Thailand)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Democratic Party
พรรค ประชาธิปัตย์
Phak Prachathipat
Jurin Laksanawisit
Party leader Jurin Laksanawisit
Secretary General Chalermchai Sri-on
Honorary Chairman Chuan Leekpai
founding 1946
Place of establishment Bangkok
head office Bangkok
Youth organization Democrat Party Youth Action
Alignment royalist , liberal , conservative
Colours) Light Blue
Parliament seats
52/500
International connections Liberal International
Website https://democrat.or.th/

The Democratic Party ( Thai : พรรค ประชาธิปัตย์ , RTGS : Phak Prachathipat , pronunciation: [ pʰák pràʔt͡ɕʰaːtʰíʔpàt ]) is the oldest existing party in Thailand . Their orientation is royalist and liberal to conservative . She belongs to the Liberal International . The urban middle class forms the core of their electorate. Their strongholds are in the greater Bangkok area and in southern Thailand .

The party was founded in 1946 by conservative royalists. In 1948, after her election victory, she was in government for a few months. After the military came to power, she was initially in the opposition. From 1958 to 1968 the Democrats, like all other parties in Thailand, were banned. Subsequently, the party again worked against military rule and assumed an increasingly liberal orientation. During a short democratic phase, she achieved electoral successes again in 1975 and 1976 and was briefly head of government. She was involved in government as a junior partner in the 1980s.

From 1992 to 1995 and from 1997 to 2001 she again led the government, also between 2008 and 2011 under Abhisit Vejjajiva , who was party chairman from 2005 to 2019. From 2011 to the 2014 military coup, the Democrats were the largest opposition force in parliament.

Voters and alignment

Strongest party in the 2011 parliamentary elections by province: Democratic Party in light blue, Pheu-Thai party in red.

The Democratic Party is mainly supported in southern Thailand and among the urban middle class in the greater Bangkok area . It is traditionally considered royalist . Duncan McCargo , who researches Southeast Asian politics and publishes with a focus on Thailand, counts the Democratic Party in the "Network Monarchy" he has named. This loose and informal political association, described by McCargo, consists of people and groups close to the palace in the Privy Council , politics, the military and the administration.

The Democrats advocate a liberal constitution, rule of law and incorruptible administration. The party presents itself as the cornerstone of democracy in Thailand and rejects military rule on principle, but its opposition to authoritarian governments was rather cautious. The political scientist Michael K. Connors, who specializes in Thailand, locates the Democratic Party as a representative of a “royal liberalism ”, which in its history has reliably opposed authoritarian rule and for the preservation of private property from an elite position. Because of her tacit approval of the 2006 military coup , she largely lost the reputation it had gained in previous decades as an opponent of authoritarianism.

The Democrats have a market economy profile. They stand for a technocratic style of politics and cautious economic reforms. The party is against redistribution in favor of the poor; instead, it defends the social status quo. She advocates an economic policy of self-restraint and economic independence, as promoted by the former Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej . She rejects populist spending programs and consumer promotion on credit. The party is more oriented towards a long-term perspective than short-term and concrete successes.

During and after the 1997/98 Asian crisis , it was perceived as a pro-capitalist party that relied entirely on the implementation of the measures imposed by the International Monetary Fund . As a reaction to the success of Thaksin Shinawatra , she started a “populist” program in 2005, which emphasizes the advocacy of free democracy and civil society. She has incorporated some of the social programs introduced by Thaksin into her political concept.

In foreign policy, the Democrats have a close alliance with the United States . You have regularly criticized the autocratic system in Myanmar . During the reign of party leader Chuan Leekpai in particular in the 1990s, bilateral relations deteriorated noticeably. The Democratic-led government supported democracy activists and insurgent ethnic minorities in the neighboring country. Abhisit Vejjajiva's government also distanced itself from those in power after 2008 and called for democratic principles.

organization

The party has had provincial associations since the 1970s and a youth organization since the 1980s. In the mid-1990s it reported 300,000 members. The Democrats have party headquarters and numerous field offices with full-time employees. They have had an active membership and functioning internal party democracy for a long time. For a long time, this set them apart from the other parties in Thailand, which had hardly any organizational structure, were "personal property" of an individual politician or a certain group.

The Democratic Party was the only party that did not rely on the personal popularity or charisma of a leader. Therefore it could persist for several generations. While other parties disappeared from the political spectrum when their respective top man left politics, new politicians were able to rise to the top again and again among the Democrats. The party leader has a comparatively limited role. Unlike the other parties in Thailand, the Democratic Party has formalized regulations for the election of the chairman and the presidium. Democratic Party candidates are chosen more often than those of other parties on the basis of party affiliation and less on account of personal notoriety and popularity.

The Democratic Party demands 20 THB from its members when they join and a further 20 THB a year membership fee . It differs in this from the other Thai parties, which traditionally do not levy any contributions. It expects its board members, ministers and parliamentarians to donate 5% (constituency members) and 10% (list members, ministers and board members) of their salary to the party. In 2003 the party said to the electoral commission that it had 3.82 million members. The authority found, however, that 1.37 million of them were also members of another party. Such multiple memberships are common to all parties in Thailand. Party membership is often used as a quick route to privilege and says little about actual political loyalty. At the end of 2008 the party had 2.87 million members. This number is also questionable given the tendency of Thai parties to exaggerate. However, as measured by the number of voters in the party, it is still low compared to other Thai parties. The former Thai-Rak-Thai party, for example, announced a membership in 2006 that was almost as high as that of its constituents.

The Democratic Party belongs to the Liberal International and has been a founding member of its regional organization Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats (CALD) since 1993 . She is a partner of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation , from which she receives support through strategic planning, seminars and candidate training.

Symbols

Democratic Party logo

The party's logo shows the Buddhist earth goddess Thorani wringing water from her hair. The party has used it since it was founded in 1946. The image is inspired by the Thorani statue at Sanam Luang in Bangkok, which was commissioned by Queen Saovabha . The motto of the party is the Pali verse saccaṃ ve amatā vācā ("Immortal, verily, is the word of truth."). Logo and motto stand for the importance of earth and water for Thailand and the importance of truthfulness. They are supposed to symbolize the values ​​of the party. The party color is light blue.

history

Foundation and early years (1946–1958)

Khuang Aphaiwong, the party's first chairman
Seni Pramoj, first general secretary and chairman of the party from 1968 to 1979

A forerunner of the Democratic Party was the short-lived Progress Party founded in 1945 by the noble brothers Seni and Kukrit Pramoj . The Democratic Party itself was founded in 1946 and thus has the greatest continuity in the Thai party landscape. Their aim was initially to counterbalance the left-wing liberalism of Pridi Phanomyong , who was the most influential politician during the brief parliamentary-democratic phase after Field Marshal Phibunsongkhram was ousted . In the Democratic Party, MPs who supported Prime Minister Khuang Aphaiwong joined forces after the parliamentary majority, close to the Pridi, cast their suspicions on him. Their program was conservative and pro-monarchical . The first chairman of the Democratic Party was Khuang, who in 1932 was still a member of the People's Party and a promoter of the " Siamese Revolution ", but had since become estranged from his former allies.

Seni Pramoj, the party's first general secretary, explained the basic idea of ​​the royalist democrats that the constitutional monarchy is a guarantee for democracy. As long as a constitutional monarch rules the state, no politician can strive for total power and become dictator. This belief was a lesson from the authoritarian and militaristic rule of Phibunsongkhram. The party was mainly joined by aristocrats, members of the royal family and large landowners. Initially, however, she was unable to build a solid following or even a mass base.

The Democrats massively attacked the Pridi-led government. They accused her of the rising cost of living, the scarcity of rice and the rampant inflation. They also accused Pridi of being responsible for the death of the young king Ananda Mahidol . Democratic politicians unofficially backed the November 1947 military coup that ousted rival Pridi Phanomyong from power. The coup group then installed Khuang as prime minister because they hoped that their rule would be accepted internationally. After the Democrats' success in the January 1948 election, he remained in office.

Two months later, however, he had to resign to make way for the military under Field Marshal Phibunsongkhram, which proved to be more assertive. Subsequently, the Democrats were the main opposition party. Important representatives of the party, above all the Pramoj brothers, and royalist lawyers, however, had a decisive influence on the drafting of the 1949 constitution, which was characterized by a strong monarchy. It was only when the military reinstated the 1932 constitution in 1951, which weakened the roles of the king and parliament and did not allow any parties, that their influence was eliminated.

After political parties were readmitted in 1955, the Democrats were among the sharpest critics of the Phibunsongkhram government. They accused her of a lack of respect for the monarchy and, after the rigged election of 1957, also of electoral fraud. Kukrit Pramoj in particular attacked the prime minister heavily in his newspaper Siam Rath . The Democrats welcomed the disempowerment of Phibunsongkhram in the 1957 coup of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat . After the success of the Democrats in the by-elections in March 1958, however, Sarit again banned all parties and the Democratic Party ceased its activity until 1968.

Opposition to military rule and democratic interlude (1968–1976)

With the re-approval of political parties by the constitution of 1968, the Democratic Party was re-established. Seni Pramoj became its chairman. In the parliamentary elections in 1969, it became the second strongest force behind the United People's Party (Saha Prachathai) , which the incumbent military rulers had founded. In the capital, Bangkok, the Democrats even won all constituencies, which was seen as an embarrassment for the People's Party. The Democratic Party was joined by many young intellectuals, business people and lawyers who made the party increasingly liberal. During the 1970s there were several ideological conflicts between older conservatives and younger liberals in the party.

Out of the opposition, the Democratic Party prepared the ground for the democratic popular uprising in October 1973 , which led to the end of military rule. Afterwards, party pluralism prevailed for a short period until 1976. The Democratic Party was in the middle of the political spectrum at this time and tried to find a balance. It was itself divided into a conservative and a moderate left wing. In the campaign for the first election after the end of the military dictatorship in January 1975, the party promoted the concept of “mild socialism ” and was perceived as a progressive force. Of the large number of new parties, it was clearly the strongest force. The subsequently formed multi-party coalition under Seni Pramoj broke up after just a few weeks. After the formation of a new coalition under Seni's brother Kukrit Pramoj , who was now head of the Social Action Party , the Democrats found themselves in the opposition. The military and right-wing politicians accused individual Democratic politicians of alleged closeness to communism . In the aggressive anti-communist mood before the early elections in 1976, the conservatives were able to gain strength in the party and it swung slightly to the right. In the new election, the Democrats increased their number of seats significantly. Seni formed a coalition government that lasted five months this time. Domestic conflicts increased and after the massacre at Thammasat University in October, Seni was ousted by a military coup.

Renewed military rule and "semi-democracy" (1976–1992)

In 1978 the right wing of the Democrats split off under Samak Sundaravej and formed the Thai Citizens' Party . As a result, the 1979 election produced poor results for the Democrats. They lost all but one of their seats in the former stronghold of Bangkok. With the exit of the Conservatives, the liberal forces now dominated the party. In 1980 the non-party General Prem Tinsulanonda became Prime Minister. Prem was considered a “middle man” who was recognized by the military and civilian politicians alike. He included the Democrats in his government and gradually democratized the country again. Like Prem, the Democrats were considered moderate and “clean”. The 1986 election was won by the Democratic Party. However, it did not claim the office of head of government for its chairman Bhichai Rattakul , but continued to support Prem. She then fell into party-internal wing battles over personnel issues. Due to the disagreement and unreliability of the Democratic Party, Prem had to call new elections in 1988, in which the Democrats lost more than half of their seats. They became junior partners in Chatichai Choonhavan's coalition cabinet . In 1991 Chuan Leekpai took over the party leadership from Bhichai. As a result, the popularity of the party increased again significantly, especially in Chuan's home region of southern Thailand.

Chuan Leekpai, Chairman (1991–2003) and Honorary Chairman of the Democratic Party

The Chatichai government was overthrown in a military coup in 1991. In March 1992, the putschists held elections, which the Samakkhi Tham party they founded won. The Democrats went into opposition to the military-backed government of General Suchinda Kraprayoon . That is why the Thai press referred to it as one of the "angel parties" (as opposed to the pro-military "devil parties"). The party leader Chuan Leekpai complained of death threats during this period. However, the Democrats did not take part in the street protests, which escalated into bloody clashes in May and forced Suchinda to resign ( Black May ). In September 1992, new elections took place in which Chuan campaigned with the slogan "I believe in the parliamentary system". The Democratic Party was able to almost double its result and Chuan formed a government of the "angel parties".

Multi-party democracy (1992-2001)

Chuan's coalition government was very reluctant to respond to calls from democracy activists for far-reaching reforms. They were disappointed with the prime minister and the Democrats and accused them of breaking their promises. The Democrats' traditional concept of moderate, liberal royalism did not go far enough for them. Land reform initiated by Chuan's government was intended to legally grant poor farmers who had occupied state-owned land. When a Democratic MP in charge of implementing the reform in Phuket allocated land to relatives who were not in need, a scandal erupted in 1995. The government collapsed and the Democrats suffered significant losses in the early elections. While this incident did not diminish Chuan's reputation as a clean and self-sacrificing politician, it became apparent that he was out of control of his party.

The 1996 party program focused primarily on economic policy. The Democrats advocated measures to stabilize the currency and limit inflation to stimulate investor confidence. They demanded a balanced foreign trade balance through more exports and independence for the Thai central bank .

In 1997, at the height of the Asian crisis , Chuan was again prime minister. Before that there was no new parliamentary election, but a smaller coalition party left the government of Chavalit Yongchaiyudh and gave the Democrats a majority. In order to lead Thailand's economy out of the crisis, Chuan's government followed the guidelines of the International Monetary Fund exactly . It let companies go bankrupt, interest rates soared and cut social spending. The Democratic Party neglected the problems of rural areas. The previous government's promise to compensate for resettled villagers through dam projects was withdrawn. She rejected subsequent protests as an attack on the rule of law. The new Thai-Rak-Thai Party (TRT) of Thaksin Shinawatra took advantage of the unpopularity of these measures. TRT countered the cooperation of the democrats with international institutions with a national approach. Instead of austerity measures, it promised development programs such as B. One Tambon One Product . In contrast to the technocratic style of government of the professional politician Chuan, the entrepreneur Thaksin promised that he would run the country like the CEO of a commercial enterprise. Progressive groups and farmers' associations advised against the election of the Democrats in 2001 and called for support for the TRT. The party lost massive approval.

Opposition to Thaksin (2001-2006)

Banyat Bantadtan, former party chairman (2003-2005)

After the 2001 election, in which the Democratic Party won half as many seats as the Thai-Rak-Thai party, it plunged into an ongoing crisis. It did not succeed in presenting a convincing alternative to the popular TRT program.

In 2003 there was a battle vote to succeed Chuan Leekpais as party chairman. Experienced party politician and MP Banyat Bantadtan competed against the 38-year-old, England-born and Oxford- trained economist Abhisit Vejjajiva . Abhisit was Chuan's favorite and was considered a representative of the liberal wing. Banyat, on the other hand, had the support of the very well networked Secretary General and skillful puller Sanan Kachornprasart. The two candidates campaigned across the country. In the end, with Sanan's help, Banyat was able to attract more leaders in the local chapters to his side and won by one percentage point.

In 2005 the Democratic Party tried to break the supremacy of TRT by emulating its social programs. It solicited support for the rural population in the northeast region, known as Isan , by promising free health care, lower tuition fees and debt relief for micro-borrowers. At the same time, it presented itself as a liberal party that advocated a vibrant civil society. This can be summarized as a programmatic development towards social liberalism . However, there were still voices among the Democrats who justified the success of Thaksin only with the lack of education of the rural population and the vulnerability to populism and promises associated with spending. These metropolitan, elite liberals were convinced that their party was only successful in the cities because the more enlightened, politically more mature citizens voted there. After the party's devastating defeat (it dropped to 96 seats while TRT controlled nearly four-fifths of parliament), Banyat Bantadtan resigned as chairman. This time Abhisit Vejjajiva was elected as his successor unopposed.

The Democratic Party supported the mass protests of the People's Alliance for Democracy (“yellow shirts”) against Prime Minister Thaksin, whom they accused of corruption and abuse of power. Together with the other main opposition parties, it boycotted the April 2006 elections to protest against the ruling party TRT and Thaksin. So the parliament was then provided by the TRT alone. The latter therefore called in July 2006 to dissolve the Democrats, as they had violated the constitution by calling for an election boycott and staying away from the election. However, there were no further steps against the Democrats, as the TRT was ousted by the military coup in September of the same year. The party leadership initially saw the coup as justified and tacitly approved it. She advocated the new constitution drawn up under the aegis of the military, which provides for a weakening of the influence of parties and elected politicians and the appointment of some of the members of the Senate. Subsequently, however, they increasingly criticized the transitional government installed by the military.

After the 2006 coup and the Abhisit government (2008-2011)

Abhisit Vejjajiva, former party leader (2005-19)
Democratic Party election poster for its candidate Sukhumbhand Paribatra in Bangkok's 2009 gubernatorial election

In May 2007, the “constitutional tribunal” formed after the coup banned the Thai-Rak-Thai party for serious violations of the right to vote. The Democratic Party, which was accused by its opponents of comparable misconduct and of making false accusations against the TRT, acquitted it at the same time in a unanimous decision.

In the elections on December 23, 2007, the Democratic Party emerged as the second strongest force. It was clearly ahead in Bangkok and in the southern region and was almost on par with the TRT successor organization " Party of People's Power " (PPP) in terms of the seats allocated according to party lists , but this won thanks to its strength in the populous north and northeast. Subsequently, the Democrats were the only opposition party. In 2008 they proposed increasing the threat of lese majesty from 15 to 25 years. In August 2008 they supported the call by the “yellow shirts” for the resignation of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej , whom they blamed, among other things, for the rise in consumer prices.

In December 2008 the Thai Constitutional Court banned the PPP and two of its coalition partners for electoral fraud and imposed a temporary political ban on their top politicians. The unaffected parliamentarians immediately founded replacement organizations, in particular the Pheu-Thai party . A wing of the former PPP under Newin Chidchob , however, went into business for itself as the Bhumjaithai party and defected to the Democratic camp. With his votes and those of the former coalition partners of the PPP, Abhisit Vejjajiva was elected Prime Minister and was able to form a coalition government. Reasons for the defection of the smaller parties were probably money payments and pressure from the top military, namely General Anupong Paochinda .

Abhisit made the revitalization of the economy and the defense of the monarchy institution the main priorities of his government. On the basis of the "Computer Crime Act", it censored the Internet considerably. The Office for the Supervision of Information Technology blocked 20,000 websites between 2007 and the end of 2009 which, according to the government, were “systematically trying to undermine the throne.” The Democratic-led government was bitterly opposed by the Thaksin-affiliated “ red shirt ” movement . They denounced the change in government as undemocratic and accused Abhisit of being a puppet of the military leadership. Their protests escalated into serious unrest in 2009 and 2010 . In November 2010, the Constitutional Court ruled with four to two votes not to pursue a case against the party for misappropriating funds from the 2005 election commission . The court named formal errors as reasons.

Opposition to Yingluck (2011-2014)

The Democratic Party ran on July 3, 2011 under the top candidate Abhisit Vejjajiva in the parliamentary elections in Thailand 2011 . As a result of the defeat of the party, he resigned from the post of party chairman. The party re-elected him to the top shortly afterwards and he became parliamentary opposition leader against the Pheu-Thai-led coalition government of Yingluck Shinawatra . In the direct election of the governor of the capital Bangkok in March 2013, the Democrat Sukhumbhand Paribatra was re-elected. The Democratic Party led the city government since 2004.

Members of the Democratic Party played a key role in the mass protests against the government at the end of 2013 . Former general secretary of the party, Suthep Thaugsuban , resigned his parliamentary mandate in November and resigned from the party to be the leader of the protest movement. In December, the remaining MPs of the party withdrew from the House of Representatives, thus persuading the government to dissolve parliament and call new elections. The party boycotted the elections on February 2, 2014. It stated that it would not be possible until the election date to carry out what it believed to be necessary reforms in order to create a functioning democracy without undue electoral influence and the confidence of the population in the political system restore. The result to be expected is therefore not a representation of the true will of the voters. However, the party leadership distanced itself from protesters who disrupted preparations for the election and tried to prevent the polls from being held.

Renewed military rule (since 2014)

As a result of the military coup in May 2014, the Democrats - like all political parties - had to cease their activities. Sukhumbhand Paribatra initially remained governor of Bangkok. He was suspended in August 2016 by the leader of the military junta, General Prayut Chan-o-cha , on the basis of his special powers (Article 44 of the Transitional Constitution) and finally removed from office in October 2016 on the grounds that he was “involved in several legal cases " be.

In the run-up to the parliamentary elections in March 2019 , the Democratic Party resumed work and again nominated Abhisit Vejjajiva as the top candidate. In the election, the Democrats came in fourth with 11% of the vote and 52 of the 500 seats. They lost more than two thirds of their seats compared to the legislative period. In particular, the party lost all constituencies in its previous stronghold of Bangkok. That was seen as a heavy defeat, and Abhisit resigned from the party chairmanship on election evening. Jurin Laksanawisit , a long-time MP and former minister of education and health, was elected as the new chairman in May 2019 . He prevailed with a clear majority against his party rival, the former Justice Minister Pirapan Salirathvibhaga . Korn Chatikavanij (former finance minister) and Apirak Kosayodhin (former governor of Bangkok), who had also run for the presidency, did even weaker .

Although the Democrats are only the fourth strongest force in parliament, the now 80-year-old former Prime Minister and Honorary Chairman of the Democrats, Chuan Leekpai, was elected President of the House of Representatives and thus spokesman for the Thai National Assembly. He received the votes of the Phalang Pracharat party , which is close to the ruling military junta. An agreement is suspected behind this, according to which the Democratic Party in return joins a government coalition led by Phalang Pracharat.

literature

  • Marc Askew: Performing political identity. The Democrat Party in Southern Thailand. Silkworm Books, Chiang Mai 2008, ISBN 978-974-9511-38-1 .
  • Elin Bjarnegård: Who's the perfect politician? Clientelism as a defining feature of Thai politics. In: Party Politics in Southeast Asia. 2013, pp. 142–162.
  • Michael K. Connors: Democracy and National Identity in Thailand. 2nd Edition. NIAS Press, Copenhagen 2007, ISBN 978-87-7694-002-7 .
  • Søren Ivarsson, Lotte Isager (Ed.): Saying the Unsayable. Monarchy and Democracy in Thailand. NIAS Press, Copenhagen 2010, ISBN 978-87-7694-072-0 .
  • Erik Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. The Politics of Equitable Development in Southeast Asia. Stanford University Press, Stanford CA 2011, ISBN 978-0-8047-7083-5 .
  • Anusorn Limmanee: Thailand. In: Political Party Systems and Democratic Development in East and Southeast Asia. Volume 1. Ashgate, Aldershot / Brookfield VT 1998, ISBN 1-84014-509-9 , pp. 403-448
  • Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. Democracy Sustained. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 1992, ISBN 981-3016-52-3 .
  • Duncan McCargo : Thailand's political parties. Real, authentic and actual. In: Political Change in Thailand. Democracy and Participation. Routledge, London / New York 1997, ISBN 0-415-14795-6 , pp. 114-131.
  • Duncan McCargo: Network monarchy and legitimacy crises in Thailand. In: The Pacific Review. Volume 18, No. 4, December 2005, pp. 499-519, doi : 10.1080 / 09512740500338937 .
  • Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee: Thailand. In: Political Parties and Democracy: Contemporary Western Europe and Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2012, ISBN 978-1-137-27719-0 , pp. 143-164.
  • Thitinan Pongsudhirak: Thailand Since the Coup. In: Journal of Democracy. Volume 19, No. 4, October 2008, pp. 140-153, doi : 10.1353 / iod.0.0030
  • Dirk Tomsa, Andreas Ufen (Ed.): Party Politics in Southeast Asia. Clientelism and electoral competition in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines. Routledge, Abingdon / New York 2013, ISBN 978-0-415-51942-7 .

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Andreas Ufen: Party and party system types in Southeast Asia. In: Ethnicity, Islam, Reformasi. The evolution of the lines of conflict in the Malaysian party system. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2011, p. 71.
  2. ^ Duncan McCargo: Thailand. In: Regional Outlook Southeast Asia 2010-2011. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 2010, p. 54.
  3. ↑ McCargo: Network monarchy and legitimacy crises in Thailand. 2005.
  4. ^ A b c d e McCargo: Thailand's political parties. 1997, pp. 122-123.
  5. ↑ a b Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, pp. 168-169.
  6. ↑ a b Connors: Democracy and National Identity in Thailand. 2007, p. 185.
  7. ↑ Dirk Tomsa: What type of party? Southeast Asian parties between clientelism and electoralism. In: Party Politics in Southeast Asia. 2013, p. 35.
  8. ^ Stephan Haggard: The Political Economy of the Asian Financial Crisis. Institute for International Economics, p. 97.
  9. ↑ Bjarnegård: Who's the perfect politician? 2013, p. 150.
  10. ↑ Michael K. Connors: Article of Faith: The Failure of Royal Liberalism in Thailand. ( Memento from July 23, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF file; 234 kB) In: Journal of Contemporary Asia. Vol. 38, No. 1, February 2008, pp. 143-165.
  11. ↑ Pavin Chachavalpongpun: Thailand-Myanmar relations. Old Animosity in a New Bilateral Setting. In: International Relations in Southeast Asia. Between Bilateralism and Multilateralism. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 2010, pp. 120, 126.
  12. ↑ Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, pp. 167-168.
  13. ↑ Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee: Thailand. 2012, pp. 158–159.
  14. ↑ Bjarnegård: Who's the perfect politician? 2013, p. 152.
  15. ↑ Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee: Thailand. 2012, p. 155.
  16. ^ Duncan McCargo, Ukrist Pathmanand: The Thaksinization of Thailand. NIAS Press, Copenhagen 2005, p. 87.
  17. ↑ Bjarnegård: Who's the perfect politician? 2013, p. 148.
  18. ↑ ประวัติ พรรค ประชาธิปัตย์ (“History of the Democratic Party”) website of the party (www.democrat.or.th). Retrieved January 3, 2013.
  19. ↑ Siripan Nogsuan Sawasdee: Thailand. 2012, p. 156.
  20. ^ Wolfgang Sachsenröder: Political Party Systems and Democratic Development in East and Southeast Asia. Volume 1. Ashgate, Aldershot / Brookfield VT 1998, p. 13.
  21. ^ Alexander Mohr: The German Political Foundations as Actors in Democracy Assistance. Dissertation, Center d'Etudes Diplomatiques et Stratégiques, Paris 2010, p. 200.
  22. ↑ The verse is found in the fifth sutta of the eighth group of the Samyutta-Nikaya in the Suttapitaka , the canon of discourses of the Buddha written in Pali . (Saṃyutta Nikāya 452- 5.1.189.)
  23. ↑ Elizabeth Guthrie: In Defense of the Nation. The cult of Nang Thoranee in northeast Thailand. In: Buddhism, Power and Political Order. Routledge, 2007, p. 172.
  24. ^ Askew: Performing political identity. 2008, p. 83.
  25. ↑ a b c d e Anusorn Limmanee: Thailand. 1998, p. 411.
  26. ↑ Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, p. 144.
  27. ↑ Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, p. 146.
  28. ↑ Volker Grabowsky : Brief history of Thailand. CH Beck, Munich 2010, ISBN 978-3-406-60129-3 , pp. 167-168.
  29. ↑ a b Nattapoll Chaiching: The Monarchy and the Royalist Movements in Modern Thai Politics, 1932-1957. In: Saying the Unsayable. 2010, pp. 166-169.
  30. ↑ Kevin Hewison, Kengkij Kitirianglarp: 'Thai Style Democracy'. The Royalist Struggle for Thailand's Politics. In: Saying the Unsayable. 2010, pp. 185-186.
  31. ↑ Martina Peitz: Tiger Leaping of the Elephant. Rent-seeking, nation building and catch-up development in Thailand. LIT Verlag, Zurich 2008, ISBN 978-3-03735-268-7 , p. 230.
  32. ↑ a b Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 14.
  33. ↑ a b Somporn Sangchai: Some Observations on the Elections and Coalition Formation in Thailand, 1976. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 1976, p. 24
  34. ↑ Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, p. 154.
  35. ↑ a b c d e Surin Maisrikrod: Thailand's Two General Elections in 1992. 1992, p. 15.
  36. ^ McCargo: Network monarchy and legitimacy crises in Thailand. 2005, p. 507
  37. ^ Daniel C. Lynch: Rising China and Asian Democratization. Stanford University Press, 2006, pp. 59, 64.
  38. ↑ Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, p. 168.
  39. ^ Askew: Performing political identity. 2008, p. 45.
  40. ↑ Anusorn Limmanee: Thailand. 1998, p. 416.
  41. ↑ Kuhonta: The Institutional Imperative. 2011, p. 172.
  42. ^ Connors: Democracy And National Identity in Thailand. 2007, p. 256.
  43. ↑ Pavin Chachavalpongpun: Thai Political Parties in the Age of the Great Divide. In: Political Parties, Party Systems and Democratization in East Asia. World Scientific, Singapore 2011, pp. 167, 171.
  44. ↑ a b Punchada Sirivunnabood: Building local party Organizations in Thailand. Strengthening party rootedness or serving elite interests? In: Party Politics in Southeast Asia. 2013, p. 173.
  45. ↑ Michael Kelly Connors: Thaksin's Thailand. Thai politics in 2003-2004. In: Thailand's Economic Recovery. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore 2006, p. 37.
  46. ^ Connors: Democracy And National Identity in Thailand. 2007, pp. 255-257.
  47. ↑ Pavin Chachavalpongpun: Thaksin, the military, and Thailand's protracted political crisis. In: The Political Resurgence of the Military in Southeast Asia. Conflict and leadership. Routledge, Abingdon / New York 2011, p. 46.
  48. ↑ Patit Paban Mishra: The History of Thailand. Greenwood, 2010, p. 18.
  49. ↑ Thitinan Pongsudhirak: Thailand Since the coup. 2008, p. 142
  50. ^ Peter A. Poole: Politics and Society in Southeast Asia. McFarland, Jefferson NC 2009, p. 23.
  51. ^ Björn Dressel: Judicialization of politics or politicization of the judiciary? Considerations from recent events in Thailand. In: The Pacific Review. Volume 23, No. 5, November 2010, pp. 680-681.
  52. ↑ Thitinan Pongsudhirak: Thailand Since the coup. 2008, p. 147.
  53. ↑ a b David Streckfuss: The Intricacies of Reading Majesty. A Comparative Study of Imperial Germany and Modern Thailand. In: Saying the Unsayable. 2010, pp. 132-133.
  54. ↑ Thitinan Pongsudhirak: Thailand Since the coup. 2008, p. 144.
  55. ↑ Federico Ferrara: Thailand Unhinged. Unraveling the Myth of a Thai-Style Democracy. Equinox Publishing, Singapore 2010, pp. 78-80.
  56. ↑ Pavin Chachavalpongpun: Thaksin, the military, and Thailand's protracted political crisis. 2011, p. 57.
  57. ↑ Nicola Glass: Forbearance with the ruling party. In: the daily newspaper . November 29, 2010, accessed December 1, 2010 .
  58. ↑ Head of government draws conclusions. In: the daily newspaper . July 4, 2011, accessed July 4, 2011 .
  59. ↑ Patrick Barta, Wilawan Watcharasakwet: Thailand Parliament Taps Yingluck for Prime Minister. In: The Wall Street Journal , August 7, 2011. Retrieved March 7, 2013.
  60. ↑ Opposition candidate Sukhumbhand Paribatra wins Bangkok governor poll. In: South China Morning Post , March 4, 2013.
  61. ^ Suthep publicly announces his resignation from Democrat Party to join demonstrations. ( Memento from December 12, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) National News Bureau of Thailand, November 12, 2013.
  62. ↑ Thailand: Opposition leaves parliament. In: DiePresse.com , December 8, 2013 and Die Presse , December 9, 2013.
  63. ^ Opposition to boycott Thailand elections in February. DW.de, December 21, 2013.
  64. ↑ Thomas Fuller: Thai Opposition Party Will Boycott February Elections as Large Protests Continue. In: The New York Times , December 21, 2013.
  65. ↑ Sukhumbhand says goodbye to Bangkokians. Bangkok Post (online), October 19, 2016.
  66. ↑ Abhisit resigns but wishes to join coalition. In: Bangkok Post (online), March 24, 2019.
  67. ^ Jurin wins Democrat leadership contest in landslide. In: Bangkok Post , May 15, 2019.
  68. ^ Democrat veteran Chuan named House speaker. In: Bangkok Post (online), May 25, 2019.
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on January 26, 2014 .