Thai establishment needs to compromise

Since the beginning of the Constitutional monarchy, there has been an “establishment” in Thailand controlled by the most affluent families in the country, key army figures and a few other people having key positions of power. True, Thai governments are elected, but it is essential that those elected understand the power structure. As long as governments are formed that do not interfere with manipulations of the establishment, there is no problem. Even if an unfriendly government is elected there is no problem so long as they do not interfere with the workings of the establishment. Those workings consist of engineering decisions that favour their business interests.
Sooner or later a maverick government will come along and then it is necessary to call out the army and have a coup. The country has progressed under this system for decades. Roads have been built, hospitals and all of the other essentials necessary to keep a country moving. But the poorest citizens have not progressed. They find it necessary to continue to plant and cut their rice and send their children off to Bangkok or Pattaya to “earn” money to keep the family afloat.
Along came Thaksin, a very wealthy man but not one of the “establishment”, but still just as power obsessed as the establishment and various governments. Only he elected to use the deprived to build a power base that would be unassailable. He bought what politicians he needed and proceeded to turn the country upside down by giving the poor health insurance and village loans. This frightened the establishment because they correctly perceived that the masses were becoming aware that their vote could potentially be worth more than the three to five hundred baht they were getting. They indicted Thaksin for ‘”irregularities”, which you can find with any politician in this country, and called out a coup.
He was forced to flee, but not being accustomed to losing, installed his sibling in his place and again seized power through the ballot box. Through her, he established more populist policies designed to strengthen his hold on the populace, but unfortunately also severely damaging to the Thai economy.
There was no danger of a civil war, but there was civil unrest and that gave an excuse to once again depose the government. The problem now is how to prevent Thaksin, or a Thaksin clone from ever doing the same thing again. It is unfortunate, but it appears like the only way to do that is to take the country further away from democracy.
It would seem that some sort of compromise is in order rather than just another power struggle; that it is time for the establishment and government to understand that their fellow citizens in Isan should have some representation in Bangkok. But the powers-that-be have to recognise that it can no longer be “business as usual”, and there is a call for some sharing.
You can try to ignore it, but it will remain in your face and sooner or later must be dealt with by something more than threats or manipulations of the constitution.
John Arnone