The Skeptic

During my time here, in the United States, I have listened in on many dinner table conversations regarding politics and watched many forms of media, through all of which I have sensed an incredible amount of pride among Americans for the democratic system that exists in this country. In all honesty, this pride has overwhelmed me at times and, in my opinion, I think that there is a tendency in American media and in the general public to put this democratic system on a pedestal and force others to believe the same, whilst condemning anyone who dares to think different. In this article, however, I want to pose a fairly big question, that is: Can there exist an ideal political system?

Growing up in Thailand, I have witnessed a country try time and time again to implement a democratic system and fail. In just the mere seventeen years that I have been alive, Thailand has endured countless political protests and two successful military coups as a consequence of lackluster democratic governments. In only seventeen years there have been seven different prime ministers  (with only one of them completing a full term), while only one party has gotten into office through a democratic process. Historically and statistically, democracy doesn’t seem to be working for Thailand. Why is this? As promoted and adored by the Western world, a democratic government should be the “best” form of government, a system in which the leaders are elected by the people and in a fair election process; it should not be a system that is constantly pulling the country back into turmoil, trapping its citizens in a perpetual loop of short-lived governments and violent backlash.

A factor in this argument could be the nature of the population. Being a country that has spent the majority of its history under the rule of a monarchy, Thailand has evolved into a country that revolves around system based on hierarchy wherein the people are raised to respect lines of patronage and their elders, while being discouraged to speak up and challenge anyone that is older or more senior in any way. Fundamentally, this is a culture that directly contrasts that of the United States, wherein the Declaration of Independence urges the people to overthrow any government that acts against the common interest of the people. The strength to speak up--the voice--is a key part into what makes a democracy works.

On the other hand, the current government, a military junta (elegantly named “The National Council of Peace and Order”), has ruled Thailand for a little more than four years now and has overseen one of Thailand’s most peaceful periods. Unlike democracy, this government does not turn to the people for guidance or permission; instead, this government is quickly implementing its own policies and initiatives: cleaning up streets from food stalls, creating a national and international railway system, and turning to focus on ending the conflicts in Southern Thailand.

Despite what you might say, peace is a breath of fresh air compared to the years of turmoil and the intermittent unrests and violence that have plagued Thailand for the past two decades. Streets are now cleaner and quieter, and the GDP is predicted to go up by 4.0% (compared to the average of 0.95% from the late 90s to 2017, with a record low of -6.3% in late 2011). However, even though Western media do exaggerate this, the government has placed a greater foothold on people’s privacy, freedom, and voice. Recently, the government released a new computer-crime legislation that enabled the military to police the web and clamp down on computer users that the military deem inappropriate. The junta has also broadened censorship laws in the country and sweeped away any opposition to this government. The question here, however, is whether peace is worth more than the privacy, freedom, and voice of the people that are being taken away by this government. This balance, which fundamentally boils down to the question of what we, as a society, really value most in our lives, is the heart of every government.

The “ideal government” would, in my opinion, have to strike the perfect balance of these values within each community. Is this possible? Is there a solution that lies within the realms of practicality, or is this only a question of theory, a mind game that can only be pondered but never implemented? I never had the intention to end this article this open-endedly, leaving more questions asked than answered. However, I do believe that a certain conclusion can be made if you all tried to answer these questions yourselves, and most importantly, see if you end up with an identical idea of what the values that you care for most are, and what the perfect balance between them is.

​