Many Chinese tourists who travel to Thailand have seen such scenes: Whenever they meet the King of Thailand on his travels, the locals have to perform a great prostration towards the King of Thailand. In fact, Thais do not only kneel when they meet the king, but also when they meet the queen, prince, princess and other members of the royal family. Not only do Thais kneel when they meet a member of the royal family, but they kneel by prostrating their entire bodies on the ground. This kneeling ritual is unique to Thailand, unlike the ancient Chinese kneeling on both legs and the ancient European kneeling on one knee.
The Chinese, who have long since abolished prostrations, always find it hard to help when they see Thais prostrating to the royal family. Why is the Thai ritual of meeting a member of the royal family so solemn and demanding around the world? Thailand is one of the more powerful monarchies in the world today. Thailand's history is far less ancient than ours: it was not until 1238 AD that the Thai people formed a more unified nation. Thailand has experienced four unified dynasties in its history: Sukhothai Dynasty, Ayutthaya Dynasty, Thonburi Dynasty and Bangkok Dynasty.
The Bangkok Dynasty, which now rules Thailand, was born in 1782 AD. This was a time when the Western powers were penetrating and expanding into Southeast Asia. In 1893, France found a pretext to provoke a dispute between the two sides and then forced the Thai side to sign the Treaty of Bangkok, which ceded Laos, which was attached to Siam (the old name for Thailand), to Indochina, a French territory, and paid 3 million francs in compensation. 3 million gold francs.
Although Thailand was eventually able to become the only independent country in Southeast Asia that was not colonized by the Great Powers, its independence was achieved to a considerable extent at the expense of the loss of large areas of territory. In 1909, Siam's GDP per capita was 17.3 times that of the Qing Dynasty, and a new, modernized army was created.
The goal of Chulalongkorn's reforms was to strengthen Thailand's national strength and ease the national crisis. Chulalongkorn never tried to free the minds of the people, but Thailand was inevitably influenced by the new ideas that were introduced to the Western system: more and more people influenced by the new ideas began to reflect on the Thai monarchy. The Great Depression of the 1930s, which originated on Wall Street in New York City, spread rapidly around the world. As Thailand became increasingly integrated into the international market after the Chulalongkorn reforms, it was inevitably affected by this worldwide economic depression.
The King of Thailand at the time, King Rama VII, cut the pay of the army to relieve financial pressure. This naturally aroused the discontent of the military. In the early hours of June 24, 1932, the Thai army, led by the PPP, occupied the royal palace, arrested ministers, army, navy, air force and police officers in the capital, disarmed the Royal Army, took control of the Bangkok Railway, Central Station, radio and telegraph stations, and took over the arsenal. A military government was then declared.
The military government has chosen to return power to a democratically elected civilian government in light of the fact that the Thai public does not support military intervention, but this does not mean that the military has completely surrendered its power - in fact, the military remains a key political force in Thailand to date and could invite a coup if a democratically elected prime minister touches the military's interests. The Thai military, in order to normalize its nominal return to the elected government, has in fact been able to manipulate power by introducing the king as the object of its allegiance.
The King of Thailand in this period was similar to the Emperor of Japan in the Shogunate era. Although the military claimed nominal allegiance to the king, in reality the military held power in the name of the king, who was succeeded by his brother Bhumibol after the assassination of King Ananta-Mahidol in 1946. Bhumibol was born in Massachusetts, USA and lived abroad for many years as a child. It was not until 1945 that Bhumibol returned to Thailand in 1935 to help stabilize his brother's regime, but only a year later his brother Anantha Mahidol was assassinated, making the 19-year-old Bhumibol the new king.
The military leaders at the time thought the little brat was nothing more than a puppet that could be manipulated at will. After graduating from Lausanne University in 1951, Bhumibol returned to Thailand again. After returning to Thailand, Bhumibol had to cooperate with the military group led by Luangpiboon Sonkham, but at this time Bhumibol was also paying close attention to the changes in the situation at home and abroad. During this period, there was a growing demand for the formation of a democratically elected government to replace the military government.
The Thai military government was overwhelmed by the various demonstrations and protests, and the protests also intensified the struggle between the different factions within the military government. Bhumibol cleverly used the contradictions between the military generals to place young officers loyal to him in the army. In 1956, Bhumibol said in a public speech that the military should not interfere in politics. Bhumibol's speech immediately struck a chord with the Thai public.
Against this backdrop, Army Commander-in-Chief Shari staged a coup and took over power. Shari was a strong supporter of the monarchy, so with his support, Bhumibol's royal power and status steadily increased. The two constitutions of 1977 and 1978 again increased the king's power: he had the power to directly appoint the prime minister, members of the Privy Council and members of the parliament.
In fact, Thailand has been a constitutional monarchy since 1932, yet real power has remained in the hands of the military and the king. Before King Bhumibol came to power, the military dominated the political alliance between the military and the king, and the king was only a banner put out by the military to rally the people; after King Bhumibol's political operation, the king still had to hold power through cooperation with the military, but the military-born government leaders had in fact quietly become Bhumibol's "puppets. puppet".
The conflict between the vested interests in Thailand, including the military, and the grassroots is quite sharp. Both sides have set up their own political organizations. The battle between the Red Shirts and the Yellow Shirts in Thailand is basically a battle between two factions representing different classes. Bhumibol cleverly used the dispute between the two factions to choose the government according to his needs: if the incumbent government was not liked by the people, then the king only needed to change a representative of the military. The Thai government thus became the executor of the royal will: on the surface the government was operating, but in reality the king was in command.
Bhumibol is the "master of water" in politics - he has made the best choice between power, military power and public opinion. In front of the royal power, the army and the government were only pawns for Bhumibol to please the public and stabilize the royal family. Whenever Bhumibol found that the army and the government were antagonistic, he would throw out one of them to stabilize his position as the king of the country. In 1973, a quarter of a million people took to the streets and clashed with the army during a massive march in Thailand. In the aftermath, 75 students were killed by the army's crackdown.
In 1992, another march broke out in Thailand. This time the government cracked down at the behest of the king, resulting in a large number of student casualties. Although the crackdown was carried out at the king's behest, King Bhumibol once again abandoned his car to save the day: he posed as a mediator and ordered the then prime minister and top military officer to kneel before him and admit his mistakes to the nation.
During these regime changes, Bhumibol maintained a transcendent position between the government, the army and the people. Bhumibol coordinated the relationship between the three parties through clever political operations, thus establishing himself as the "savior" in the hearts of the Thai people. Since then, the king has become the god of the people and the lynchpin of Thailand. Students stand up before classes to thank the King for books, people stand up before watching movies to pay silent tribute to the King's picture, and pictures of the King are posted everywhere in the streets.
Thai children grow up in a social atmosphere where they see people around them worshiping the king from an early age, so when they grow up they naturally worship the king as a god from their hearts. Although Thailand, with its constitution, is not an absolute monarchy like Saudi Arabia, it is the above-mentioned special background that makes it different from other constitutional monarchies. The Thai military forms a political alliance with the king. The king, who holds the military power, is able to indirectly influence the administration of the country.
From the 1950s King Bhumibol started to develop agriculture: replacing poppy cultivation with cash crops, starting to mechanize agriculture, developing water pumping machines, mid-tillers, rice transplanters ...... Later on, Bhumibol developed livestock farming in Thailand, thus solving the daily consumption of Thai milk and increasing the income. In 1969, knowing the backwardness of the Thai countryside, Bhumibol established the King's Plan to help the mountain people: the mountain people planted more than 300 cash crops such as oil tea, macadamia nuts, tea and coffee, which greatly improved the income level of Thai farmers.
These Thai peasants, who benefited directly from the king's policies, naturally became staunch supporters of the monarchy. During his reign, Bhumibol also actively opened up the Thai market to attract investment from abroad. By the 1990s, Thailand was considered to have one foot in the developed world. At that time, Thailand was the center of automobile manufacturing in Southeast Asia and the largest automobile market in ASEAN. This not only brought economic benefits, but also solved the problem of employment for Thais. With the rapid development of tourism, the life of Thais was changing day by day. As a result, Thailand began to be known as one of the Four Asian Tigers.
The Thai people naturally adore such a king who can constantly improve the quality of life for everyone. It was against this background that the Thai people's love for the royal family was formed. The king's prestige has grown over the decades, and the royal family's wealth has grown. Looking at the history of the Thai royal family since the Bhumibol era, it is easy to see a pattern: as the power of the royal family increased, so did the wealth of the royal family, which in turn strengthened the power of the royal family.
When Bhumibol came to power, it was just a mascot for the military to manipulate at will. At that time, the Thai royal family was not known for its wealth among the royal families of the world. After Bhumibol took back the real power of the country into his own hands, the wealth of the Thai royal family went up like a rocket. During King Bhumibol's reign, the royal family became deeply involved in the country's economic system by virtue of the power in its hands. Today, the Thai royal family owns the most land in the country, and almost all of Thailand's most prestigious companies have royal stakes in them.
The assets of each of the five richest royal families in the world, as ranked by Forbes, are as follows: $4 billion for the Royal Family of Dubai, $15 billion for the Royal Family of Abu Dhabi, $18 billion for the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia, $20 billion for the Royal Family of Brunei, and about $30-40 billion for the Royal Family of Thailand. The income of the Thai royal family accounts for about 1/10 of Thailand's total GDP, so it is said that the royal family is actually the biggest plutocrat in Thailand. In the United States, Japan and Korea, capitalist countries can see the phenomenon of consortia indirectly interfering in politics by providing campaign funds.
This phenomenon is in fact equally objective in Thailand. The battle between the red and yellow camps in Thailand has been going on for a long time. Both camps have organized their own political parties to run for office, and to run for office requires money. The biggest plutocrat in Thailand is the royal family, so who is most capable of interfering in national politics? The Thai royal family has also earned a good reputation for itself by engaging in philanthropic work with its strong financial resources. During his reign, King Bhumibol often traveled around Thailand to "deliver warmth": visiting and giving to the underprivileged to create an image of himself among the people.
King Bhumibol has repeatedly acted as an arbiter in resolving crises in Thailand's volatile political situation. At the same time, the royal family has also been avidly involved in various religious rituals. The royal rituals are highly integrated with Buddhist rituals, thus portraying himself as a half-man, half-god in a country where almost everyone believes in Buddhism. The authority of the Thai king is also protected by the Thai constitution. Any attack on the royal family is a crime in Thailand, and in June 2017 an insurance salesman in Chiang Mai, Thailand, named Thai Weng, was sentenced to 35 years in prison for criticizing the royal family on Facebook.
In fact upwards of 70 people have been jailed for this charge since 2014. To this day, people in Thailand are still required to bow down in respect when they meet a member of the royal family. It is important to note that the power of the King of Thailand does not come from the institutional level. Thailand is not an absolute monarchy like Saudi Arabia. In fact, Thailand has been a constitutional monarchy since 1932. The monarchs of constitutional monarchies like Britain and Japan are usually nominal heads of state - more as a political symbol than an actual intervention in national politics.
A leading authority on the British constitution once said, "If the Houses of Parliament decide to send the Queen's own death sentence to her, the Queen can do nothing else but sign it. Thailand's constitution also provides for a democratically elected government to govern the country. It is also true that Thailand is normally governed by a democratically elected government. Today the King of Thailand does not usually interfere in the day-to-day administration of the country. However, the Thai constitution gives the king relatively more power than the constitutions of other constitutional monarchies.
The Thai Constitution expressly provides for the King to have important powers of appointment and removal. The King has the power to appoint the Speaker and Deputy Speakers of both Houses on the recommendation of the Upper and Lower Houses of Parliament; the King has the power to appoint the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers; the King has the power to appoint the leader of the ruling party from among the members of the ruling party and the leader of the opposition party from among the members of the non-ruling party; the King has the power to dismiss Cabinet Ministers on the recommendation of the Prime Minister; the King has the power to appoint and dismiss The King has the right to appoint and dismiss military officials; the King has the right to appoint and dismiss judges.
Theoretically, the monarchs of some other constitutional monarchies also enjoy some power of appointment and removal, but the power of appointment and removal enjoyed by the monarchs of other constitutional monarchies is more formal and symbolic. For example, the prime ministers of Britain and Japan are appointed by the monarch's signature, but in reality, the monarchs of Britain and Japan merely sign after the parliament has made a resolution. In contrast, the Thai king's power of appointment and dismissal is real - in fact, King Bhumibol has placed his inner circle in almost every government since he assumed power.
The Thai Constitution also gives the King the power to sign bills: all bills in Thailand, after being passed by the National Assembly, must be submitted by the Prime Minister to the King for his signature within 30 days before they can be enacted. If the King does not sign or does not sign the Royal Decree within 90 days, the National Assembly will have to reconsider the contents of the bill. However, in reality, it rarely happens that such bills are returned to the National Assembly without the King's signature. The King of Thailand also has the right to dissolve the lower house of the National Assembly and hold a new election. The King of Thailand has the right to convene and preside over the National Assembly and to convene and preside over special sessions of the National Assembly.
The Thai Constitution also stipulates that the King may issue major decrees and put them into effect immediately when necessary in the interests of national security, maintaining public safety, and maintaining economic stability. This means that the King has the same power as the Parliament to legislate in special emergency situations, and the decrees issued by the King can repeal or amend existing laws. The Diet may veto a decree issued by the King, but it remains in force until vetoed by the Diet. The King also has the right to declare a state of emergency or cancel it under the law on military control; the King has the right to declare a state of war on the basis of a decision of the Diet.
Thailand's diplomatic power is also in the hands of the King: the King has the authority to sign important treaties, including peace treaties and armistice treaties, with countries and international organizations around the world. Only in the case of treaties concerning the territory or jurisdiction of Thailand must the Parliament approve them. In addition to these political and diplomatic powers, the King has some symbolic powers of an honorary nature: deciding on amnesties, ennobling (or revoking) titles, bestowing (or withdrawing) medals ,,,,,, These symbolic powers are basically enjoyed by the heads of all monarchies.
This shows that the real power of the King of Thailand is far greater than that of the false monarchs of other constitutional monarchies. First of all, the power to appoint and dismiss people is a real power in the actual political operation of Thailand. Secondly, the King of Thailand has the power to dissolve the parliament for re-election, to declare a state of emergency or cancel it, and to issue new decrees or amend existing laws during a state of emergency ...... In contrast, the monarchs of other constitutional monarchies merely sign the resolutions passed by the parliament. The most important thing is that the Thai royal family also holds the army and wealth.
The fact that the King of Thailand has more power is due to the fact that King Bhumibol is able to move between the military, the people and even the religious community through his long-sleeved political maneuvering. Bhumibol has taken control of the military through clever political maneuvers. Since the Thai military is under the control of the king, the king can use the military to quickly intervene in the political situation when the country is in a state of emergency. At the same time, the royal family can also use its huge wealth to indirectly influence government elections.
Of course, we must also look at the fact that the Thai royal family, despite the fact that it holds considerable power in its hands, is unable to reach the point of absolute control over the country as the Saudi royal family does. Thailand is, after all, a constitutional monarchy. The Thai royal family's control over the military was achieved by King Bhumibol through smooth political maneuvering, taking advantage of the contradictions within the military and between the military and the people, but the Thai royal family's control over the military is not guaranteed by any system like the Saudi royal family. Bhumibol also had to give the military enough sweeteners in order to use it to control the country's situation.
During Bhumibol's time, the royal family and the military actually formed a community of interests: the military used the king's prestige to make money, and the king used the military to hold state power. If we compare Thailand to a large group of companies, then the elected government is like the manager of the company, while the royal family is the board of directors who really holds the highest real power. Perhaps usually the board of directors does not care much about the company's specific business operations, but really when it comes to major critical moments can play a decisive role or the board of directors.
The Thai royal family does not manage the country's specific administrative affairs in normal times, but if there is a political turmoil in the country, the royal family will use its control over the military to quickly intervene in political affairs. The royal family and the military are thus firmly in control of Thailand's political situation, but in the end, the king needs to appease the military by giving them benefits in order to control the real power. In the past, Bhumibol relied on the military to hold the power, but no one knows if the future king of Thailand will have his political skills. At least the current King of Thailand does not yet see his father's political skills.