泰式民主的核心：父權專制主義的塑造與實踐

The Essence of Thai-Style Democracy: The Formation and Practice of Despotic Paternalism

政治系統內含有政治制度、政治角色、政治行為及政治文化等四個要素，每一構成要素的發展與變化，影響整個民主系統的運行與穩定。泰國自1932 年革命後推翻君主專制，施行君主立憲制以來，民主制度受到威權政府的控制，成為鞏固政權的工具。歷經長期軍事威權統治下，在炳．廷素拉暖（Prem Tinsulanonda, 1980-88）執政期間把「父權專制主義」（DespoticPaternalism）的傳統政治文化，結合恩庇主義（Clientelism）的政治行為，建構由「王室／軍方／官僚政體」組成「君主網絡」（Network Monarchy）的半民主體制（Semi-Democratic），形成「泰式民主」（Thai-Style in Democracy）。
Thak Chaloemtiarana 認為「父權專制主義」為1960 年代沙立（Sarit）獨裁政權的本質，在1980 年代成為半民主體制的核心；准此，本研究認為：「泰式民主」是將傳統階級與服從權威的文化，結合國王傳統權威形成「父權專制主義」，並內嵌於泰國政治領導階層成為核心原則，具體展現在以軍方為主導與指導式民主發展的政治模式。換言之，國王在「泰式民主」政治系統中，扮演最後仲裁者；軍隊扮演監督、控制政權的改變者；官僚組織為施政的執行者。憲法、政黨、選舉等各項代表民主政治運作的象徵與方式，都必須在「君主網絡」內方可進行，而泰式民主進一步發展關鍵，則取決於軍方菁英階層。

The political system consists of four elements: political system, political role, political behavior and political culture. The development and change of each element affects the operation and stability of the entire democratic system. Since the overthrow of the monarchy and the implementation of the constitutional system in Thailand after the 1932 revolution, the democratic system has been under the control of the authoritarian government and has become a tool for consolidating the regime.
After a long period of authoritarian military rule during the reign of Prem Tinsulanonda (1980-88), the traditional political culture of Despotic Paternalism was combined with the political behavior of clientelism to construct a Semidemocratic system consisting of a Network Monarchy of the royal/military/ bureaucratic regime.
Thak Chaloemtiarana argues that “Despotic Paternalism” was the essence of the Sarit dictatorship in the 1960s and became the core of the semi-democratic system in the 1980s. In this regard, this study argues that “Thai-style democracy” is a political model that combines the traditional authority of the king with the traditional authority of the king to form “patriarchal authoritarianism” and is embedded in the Thai political leadership as a core principle, which is manifested in the development of a military-led and guided democracy.
In other words, the King plays the role of final arbiter in the “Thai democracy” political system; the military plays the role of supervising and controlling the change of power; and the bureaucratic organizations are the executors of governance. The constitution, political parties, elections, and other symbols and methods of democratic politics must be carried out within the “monarchical network,” and the key to the further development of Thai-style democracy depends on the military elite.