In Thailand, royalists’ vision of the late king still reigns
|
Version 0 of 1. Being a royalist in Thailand can be emotionally comforting. You can join millions of like-minded subjects who venerate King Bhumibol Adulyadej. You feel like a member of a gigantic family, as the king is often referred to by these loyal subjects as their “royal father”. And when the king passed away last week, the grief and mourning was shared by millions. Royalists praised his more than 4,000 projects that helped to improve the lives of many Thais over the seven decades of his reign. Most Thais have known no other monarch than Bhumibol. Decades of media exposure to positive stores about the king also means royalists are convinced that he was like a walking angel, and venerate him as a semi-divine figure. Tears and the extreme public display of grief by royalist Thais over the past few days around the Grand Palace in Bangkok where the king’s body lies, and elsewhere, are genuine. Some wish they could die, instead of their beloved monarch. Others pray they could continue to be his loyal subjects through an endless cycle of reincarnation. Strictly speaking, there is no god in Buddhism, which is the religion of the vast majority of the near-70 million Thais. Perhaps many were longing for the comfort of having a god-like figure that is perfect and beyond doubt. Thus anyone, particularly Thai, who casts doubt on this idealised relationship between the king and his loyal subjects are regarded as unpatriotic and ungrateful. To them, to be Thai is to be loyal to the king. However, Thailand in the 21st century is, in reality, a pluralistic society. That means it’s impossible to expect all Thais to share the same royalist ideology. The struggle to break the hegemony on what constitutes Thai identity has been going on since the time of communist insurgency during the cold war. Liberal ideology has taken root among Thais, some of whom want to see the monarchy become more transparent and subject to scrutiny, alongside traditional royalism. It would be inaccurate to regard all Thais as royalists. Beyond the genuine grief expressed by the hundreds of thousands who have been paying their last respects, life goes on almost as normal for many. Those who stepped over the line by criticising or defaming the monarch, violating the draconian lèse majesté law, face heavy punishment, with the maximum penalty being 15 years in prison. Over 60 people have been prosecuted under the law since the May 2014 military coup. One of the reasons why those who think differently about the monarchy must be censored, silenced or prosecuted is because it challenges the dominant discourse that all Thais love and revere the king. Royalist Thais love to imagine that the kingdom of Thailand is unique and regard the late king as “the king of kings”. It is somewhat like the pride in believing that your favourite football team is the best in the world. Any challenge must be suppressed. Beyond the media sphere, royalist vigilante pressure for all to wear black to mourn is growing Three days after the passing of the king, Khaosod English, the online English-language news website I work for, reported that the kingdom’s main cable TV provider, True Visions, admitted to censoring the BBC and al-Jazeera news coverage of the death and its repercussion for Thailand to comply with the mourning period reporting guidelines issued by the state’s broadcast regulator. Khaosod English’s reporter Sasiwan Mokkhasen obtained what appeared to be a recruitment message for freelancers to monitor news. “The job is to watch al-Jazeera and BBC. If they broadcast some negative news about the king, tell the person sitting next to you to cut it off the air,” read the message. “When that news ends, you switch it back.” As if this is not enough, the regulator has also asked internet providers to set up 24/7 monitoring centres to search for “inappropriate content” across all social media platforms including YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, according to the online news website Prachatai. Beyond the media sphere, royalist vigilante pressure for all to wear black to mourn is growing to the point where the spokesman of the military government urged the public to tolerate those who may not be in black. One of my friends asked her father, a former diplomat, whether they had to wear black for a year. Fearing negative repercussion, she was told to “shut up”. “If we cannot ask about basic questions on clothing, then we cannot ask more serious questions,” she told me. Apparently, voices that do not fit the utopian discourse must not be allowed to disturb the royalists’ vision of the late king and the kingdom of Thailand. |