Democratization in Thailand
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11068829 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Clark D Neher (Northern Illinois University, corresponding author), Clark Neher |
| Year | 1994 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 195-209 |
| Publication date | 1994-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Asian Affairs An American Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0092-7678 • E-ISSN: 1940-1590 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00927678.1995.10771155 |
| OpenAlex | W1971627034 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 1 |
N o nation in Southeast Asia is as difficult to evaluate in terms of democracy as Thailand. Experiencing its first national election in 1933, successfully carrying out seventeen subsequent elections, and instituting universal suffrage for women and men before other Asian countries, Thailand has shown a long commitment to democratic processes. At the same time, for 80 percent of the period since 1932, when Thais overthrew their absolute monarchy and established republican rule, Thailand has been governed by nondemocratic, militarydominated regimes. Since 1932 Thailand has been ruled by successive military regimes (with intermittent, short-term civilian governments) that came to power by force, usually through coup d'etats as military factions overthrew competing factions. In the sixty-two-year period from 1932 to 1994, nineteen military coup attempts occurred, the majority successfully displacing either civilian or military governments. A minority of coups consolidated the rule of the military group already in power, and several were unsuccessful. During this period, when coups became the primary and expected way to change governments, the military dominated because it was the best organized group in the kingdom. No other group could compete with its discipline, loyalty, and hierarchy--values all congruent with the nation's culture. Moreover, the brief record of civilian rule during the constitutional period was neither long nor illustrious. By decrying civilian ineptness, corruption, and malfeasance, and by proclaiming threats against the nation's sovereignty, military leaders were able to persuade the bureaucratic polity that the military could do a better job of governing. The military co-opted as its own the ideology of nation, religion, and king. It was not until 1973 that Thais ended their acquiescence to military rule and
Constitution · Democracy · Democratization · Economic history · Military government · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Polity · Power (physics · Sociology · Sovereignty · History · Law · Southeast Asian Sociopolitical Studies
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,11 |
| Citation span | 2008 - 2013 (6) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |