On July 10, the Democrat MP for Nakhon Sri Thammarat, Chaichana Dechdecho, wrote a story on his Facebook page. In this story, a family was divided between the choice of a new car. The nephew wanted an electric vehicle, while the uncle wanted to continue using a regular gasoline car. They were forced to bring this issue to a vote in the family.
However, the family has a rule where people who work hard and represent the family has their vote weighted more heavily than others. A family member proposed that this rule be waived, but the motion was defeated. Facing the likelihood of having to buy an electric vehicle, some family members walked out and the meeting was postponed. “This parable,” Chaichana wrote, “teaches us that everyone must respect the rules and accept change.”
Those who are not well versed in the intricacies of internal Democrat Party politics would have been mystified as to what Chaichana was talking about — he insisted the story he wrote was not about politics — but it reflects recent events in the party’s leadership race.
The Democrat Party leader Jurin Laksanawisit resigned in the election’s aftermath, having seen his party’s MPs halved under his leadership. However, the Democrats have still unable to elect a new leader since then, after a party meeting in July collapsed when members staged a walkout due to losing a vote to amend the rules that the party’s MPs account for 70% of the vote in selecting a new party leader.
And so Chaichana’s story communicates a basic fact about the Democrat Party. It is a family deeply divided, with rival factions having opposing views on the future direction of the party. One sees Pheu Thai as the shiny new electric car it should bandwagon with, never mind the party’s twenty-year record of opposing Thaksin. As stated by party power broker Dech-it Khaothong, who refused to brush aside rumors that he met Thaksin in Hong Kong for coalition talks: “it would not be fair to the people if we base our decision on personal animosity.”
Meanwhile, another faction in the Democrats appear to resolutely oppose joining any Pheu Thai-led coalition. According to former Democrat MP Chaiyawat Traiyasuranan, former prime minister Chuan Leekpai has said that he disagrees with joining the coalition. But according to Chaiyawat, 3 to 4 MPs senior MPs take a similar stance. That would not be enough to prevent the party’s MPs from voting to join the government. Or, indeed, to elect a new leader who reflects their views.
A party that has survived this long has long-standing rules, and these rules are now being weaponized by both sides in a power struggle. In the end, however, it looks like raw numbers will determine the party’s future. Once a party that elected MPs up and down the country, the Democrats have been reduced to a truly regional party, with the vast majority of its MPs being concentrated in the south. Rules that once accounted for the views of nationwide MPs now mostly reflect those belonging to a single faction.
And that faction looks like they are on the verge of performing what would be a suicidal act for the Democrat Party.
In 2019, the Democrats under Jurin reneged on its then-leader Abhisit Vejjajiva’s pledge not to join the Prayut coalition. That pledge had already cost it the backing of Prayut supporters, but the subsequent reversal by the party appeared to also turn away supporters who had backed Abhisit but did not like Prayut. Hence why the party has become a shell of its former self, down to under 900,000 party-list votes in 2023, down from 3.9 million in 2019.
As Abhisit himself often points out, the Democrats used to dominate the annual taxpayer donations (Thailand allows every taxpayer to donate up to 500 baht of their taxes to a political party of their choice.) In recent years, Move Forward has come out on top. These are not all new voters: it is evidence of a voter base that has abandoned their former champion.
Dech-it Khaothong said: “the situation has changed, and all the people have changed. Only the party brand is left.” But if the party’s members are unwilling to protect its ideology even when the situation and people have changed, can the brand remain? After backing Prayut even when it promised not to support him, what is the brand of a party that then backs Pheu Thai after expending so much time and effort opposing them?
Political scientists like to refer to institutionalized parties, ones that endure beyond the temporary grip of a single leader. The Democrats, today, remain the only such party in Thailand, priding themselves on a unique system of internal democracy. But as decision-making ability becomes concentrated in an increasingly narrow coterie of power brokers, the question must be raised: for how much longer will the Democrats remain a political institution?
Tomorrow, the Democrats will once again try to choose a new leader. One can only wonder whether they will opt for an ‘electric vehicle’ that ends up charging straight into electoral disaster. A path out of their quagmire may still be possible, but the temptations of short-term power may push them to a final chapter in the party’s story of decline. For a political party that has endured for 77 years, the end could very well be coming.