Violence on the Periphery of the Thai State and Nationhood

Zackari, Karin

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-11181-6_5

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The ethnic revival of 'Thai-ness', a sense of national group primacy, is however noteworthy, as is the historic Siamese dress code encouraged at formal events after the 2014 coup; the notion of 'us' vs. them (ethnic minorities and outsiders vs. foreigners) is nothing new. Pavin (2010: 333) has shown how the state conflates the notion of unity with Thai-ness, while Poowin (2010) has argued that former royalist Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's use of Thai-ness functioned as a weapon against the threat of the (pro-democracy) Red Shirts in -2011. Zackari (2016 also notes the perpetuating problem of state violence against both marginal minorities and nationals connected to ethnic notions of Thai-ness.…”

Section: National Revivalism and 'Soft Fascism'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Thailand’s new right, social cleansing and the continuing military–monarchy entente

Taylor

2021

Asian Journal of Comparative Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article looks at the nature of the state and society in contemporary Thailand using a comparative historical analysis. Thailand is led by an officer corps, faithful only to the monarchy regime, while the land is at the disposal of the absolute sovereign who unquestionably holds control over its terrain, resources and people. It is a mix of Siamese palingenetic ultranationalist sentiment with re-interpretations of a conservative Buddhist ideology which is based on the morality and right of the rulers to rule. To the military leaders, its general officers, the military–monarchy nexus embodies a supreme source of secular morality and power with the right to dominate and where the ends (always) justify the means. Thai society has become irreparably divided by the interests of the ruling elites, defining the exceptions and, it is argued, comparable to historical and contemporary authoritarian regimes elsewhere. The article argues that the country, led by the New Right, articulates disarming elements of semi-fascism under the military, in a compact with the interests of the monarchy.

show abstract

Section: National Revivalism and 'Soft Fascism'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Thailand’s new right, social cleansing and the continuing military–monarchy entente

Taylor

2021

Asian Journal of Comparative Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Exactly what has been in the interest of power holders has shifted and therefore the content of what is described as “Thai‐ness” ( khwampenthai ) (Chachavalpongpun, ; Sombatpoonsiri, ; Sturm, ). The discourse on Thai‐ness has been used in oppressive ways, and it has been used to legitimize violence against people (Zackari, , p. 72). Crucial to the argument in this article, Thai‐ness has been constructed so that there are different levels of “Thai,” or “un‐Thai” (p. 88; Buchanan, , p. 69).…”

Section: Affective Self‐nationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

To Belong or Not to Belong. Affective Self‐Nationalization in Thailand

Gaber

2019

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through analyzing conflict narratives regarding Khao Phra Wihan, a territorial conflict important for nationalists in Thailand, this article aims to detangle how nationalization is experienced and performed on an individual level. In this article, the concept “affective self‐nationalization” is proposed to analyze the emotional and embodied practices through which individuals fashion themselves into nationalized subjects. In Thailand, self‐nationalization is instigated by the governing agency through repeated, regular, mandatory, public performances of loyalty through which individuals create the nation collectively. These performances create automatic feelings to the nation, establishes national others as fearsome, and rule through the basic human need of belonging. At the same time, individuals’ emotions shape the society through how they decide to perform nationalization. The concept of “affective self‐nationalization” captures the connections between the official nationalizing program of “outside” society in a form of nationalist emotional socialization with individual experience of nationalizing.

show abstract

Opposition from Within? Mobilization and Organization of Civil and Political Society During Regime Change

Maduz

2020

Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Violence on the Periphery of the Thai State and Nationhood

Cited by 6 publications

References 14 publications

Thailand’s new right, social cleansing and the continuing military–monarchy entente

Thailand’s new right, social cleansing and the continuing military–monarchy entente

To Belong or Not to Belong. Affective Self‐Nationalization in Thailand

Opposition from Within? Mobilization and Organization of Civil and Political Society During Regime Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About