|
Thailand Class Consciousness
Of the categories or strata discernible in Thai society, only
one--the royal family and the hereditary nobility--constituted a
self-conscious group. It was not clear that class consciousness
had developed among the power elites or upper middle-level
bureaucrats by the 1980s, in spite of their shared views and
aspirations. Nevertheless, as social mobility diminished, which
it had begun to do in the early 1980s, and as each category or
section increasingly generated its own replacements, distinct
status groups might emerge. Outwardly there were many indications
of a conscious middle class, consumer-oriented, cosmopolitan way
of life. For example, golf, tennis, delicatessens, fast-food
restaurants, boutiques, and shopping malls were very popular
among the Thai residents of Bangkok in the late 1980s.
Militating against solidarity, particularly at the upper and
middle levels, was the continuing competition for political power
and the access to economic opportunities and resources that
flowed from such power. People competing for high-level positions
in the military, the bureaucracy, or within the economy were
engaged in a complex and shifting pattern of patron-client
relationships. In this system, all but the individuals at the
highest and lowest ends of a chain of such relationships were
simultaneously patrons to one or more others and clients to
someone above them. A developing career was likely to put a
person at different places in the chain at various stages.
Given the fluctuations in the fortunes of individuals (to
which the patron-client system contributed), patrons and clients,
particularly at the higher levels, had to make judgments as to
the benefits accruing to them from their relationship. Moreover,
a client had to assess present and potential sources of power and
the extent to which his support and services would be
reciprocated by the current or alternative patrons. It was not
uncommon in this system for both patrons and clients to shift
allegiances. Patrons often had several clients, but there were no
real bonds between the clients of a single patron.
Data as of September 1987
|
