Over the past few decades, Thai society has been in a state of not so controlled chaos as it has had to cope with the transformation of its economic, political, social and cultural value systems and institutional structures. Survival strategies based on traditional patterns of behavior, whether political or cultural, are no longer effective. In such a transitional state, both the Thai citizenry in general, and its political leadership in particular, should appreciate that this transformation is not unique, nor are the challenges posed by it. From the distant past to the present, societies worldwide have declined, collapsed and survived. They have done so in response to crises posed by such diverse factors as population pressures, disease, environmental degradation, ethnic and religious rivalries, lust for power, conflicts of interest, mismanagement of natural resources, external enemies et al. A recent book by Jared Diamond, “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed,” provides a most instructive tour d’ horizon of how societies, over time, have failed or succeeded in coping with such challenges. Focusing on the environment, the author argues that ecocide, unintended ecological suicide, is not inevitable but can be averted by reasoned choices and political will.
It would profit both the political leadership and the concerned public of Thailand to participate in a dialogue on the most effective strategies to combat the environmental, political and cultural threats to the sustainability and viability of Thai society.
Thailand today is faced with the disruptive impact on its traditional core values and institutions, rooted in hierarchy and patriarchy, by the emerging forces of individualism, egalitarianism and good governance. The ensuing struggle between tradition and change has proved to be volatile with concomitant instability, disorder and disharmony. Some see Thai society’s survival in retrenchment, in preserving and strengthening the barricades of tradition; only then will there be social and political stability and security. Others contend society’s survival is actually dependent on breaching those very barricades and reforming Thai society to be more in tune with a largely antithetical set of values identified with so-called civil society. Both sides tend to view this culture conflict, this internal “clash of civilizations”, as a zero sum game.
The Buddhist injunction to follow the Middle Path seems to have been forgotten. Before it is too late, efforts should be focused on finding that middle path through compromise, conciliation and accommodation.
In this process, one might well heed the words of a U.S. journalist and historian, H. Brandt Ayers, who, in reference to his country’s South where he was born and bred, spoke of “an antique civilization with wrongs that needed righting and charms worth preserving”. We, in Thailand, should have the courage to admit wrongs committed as well to question the perpetuation of values and beliefs that are no longer productive, just or responsive to the social, cultural and political realities of today. Similarly, we should have the wisdom not to throw the baby out with the bath. We should recognize the “charms” of traditional culture that would be of profit to preserve.
On the battlefield, medics are often faced with the tragic choices of triage; who to save, who to sacrifice. Thailand today is faced with a similar challenge posed by the necessity of a cultural triage if a stable, secure and progressive society is to be sustained. The cultural conundrum to be solved is which traditional core values should be sacrificed, which preserved and which new values should become embedded in the cultural subconscious of the Thai body politic.
Each of us will have different answers based on our differing perspectives of what corpus of values could best preserve the sustainability, stability and survival of Thai society today and in the future.
As an outside observer, sympathetic to Thai culture, I would like to offer a few tentative suggestions as to the “charms to be preserved” and “the wrongs to be righted”. The latter involves replacing certain values that have helped to legitimize past exploitation, abuse and discrimination of less advantaged segments of Thai society. Such values might be productively phased out. I would propose that the approved norms of behavior in the future would reject an unquestioning deference and obedience to those in authority. Those in power would, in this transformed cultural framework, be expected to be transparent and accountable in their actions as well as to be subject to challenge and constructive criticism.
The injunction to maintain a cool heart and avoid confrontation would have to be modulated so as to encompass reasoned debate, criticism and opposing views. Argumentative friendship, fractious trust and earned respect may well be oxymorons, but they capture the essence of this proposed new transitional set of values.
Emotional distance would also become less valued, and commitment and active engagement in issues affecting ones life would no longer be viewed negatively but as necessary elements of a functioning participatory democracy. Also, karma would no longer be interpreted as a justification for the continued unaccountable control by those in power or as approval and acceptance by the disadvantaged of their being exploited.
In such a transitional cultural stage all levels of society would be considered to have equal access to the law and share a belief in the rule of law, not man.
Thais would become more confident and comfortable in expressing their individual views and in safeguarding Thai civil and political rights.
But freedom and individual rights would hopefully be constrained by the defined parameters of lawful behavior and community consensus. More oxymorons capture this contradiction: freedom with borders, rooted or controlled freedom, and ensemble individualism.
The above values would facilitate a political, social and cultural transformation that would result in a more just, equal and fair society. However, not all individuals and sectors of society would adopt or adapt to these new values at the same pace and to the same extent. If the transformation was too abrupt, and if there were no countervailing or moderating influences, social and political instability and unrest might well prevail.
To balance the above emergent values, I would submit that the “charms worth preserving” in the traditional culture be added to the newly transformed cultural mix. In this process, the rough edges of an increasingly more assertive, frank, forthright and individualistic Thai persona would be smoothed and softened. Thus, krengcai, the moral imperative to be considerate towards and avoid bothering or offending others should be preserved. In a similar vein, the traditional value of katanyu, or gratefulness towards ones parents, teachers, and others who have protected or supported one, should be maintained. Also, as a balance to the individualistic bias noted above the value placed on not hurting or impinging on the well-being of others would remain a part of the newly forged Thai persona.
In this context, the Four Sublime States of Consciousness, so central to the traditional belief system, would provide a further moderating influence: compassion, loving kindness, sympathetic joy and equilibrium. And, lest we forget, the Thai smile and the love of sanuk (fun) should pervade the emerging cultural format so as to keep all in a non-threatening perspective.
The resulting transformed corpus of values will assure that the more individualistic and egalitarian society that emerges is still one where respect graciousness, gentility and civility prevails.
Tradition and change have tended to be viewed as opposing sides on the cultural battlefield, the immovable object and the irresistible force. However, as proposed in this essay, it is a productive combination of the most positive elements of both tradition and change that must be sought. The resulting cultural synergy will best serve Thailand as it takes its place in the community of nations subject to the increasingly pervasive pressures of globalization.
William Klausner, an author, professor of law and anthropology, has been studying and living in Thailand for 50 years.
