Political Discourse in Protest Crisis of People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) between 2013 to 2014

Abstract

This study entitled Political Discourse in Protest Crisis of People’s democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) between 2013 to 2014. The objectives of this study were (1) to study political discourse formation and explore how knowledge and power were used as tools for political movement during the protest crisis of the PDRC between 2013 to 2014 and (2) to study the influence of political discourse, knowledge and power on politics from the political movement in the protest crisis of the PDRC between 2013 to 2014.

This study used qualitative approach - Postmodern Research. The methodologies consist of analyzing discourse through genealogy, collecting data from evidences – videos of Mr. Suthep Thaugsuban’s speeches in the protest crisis, print medias and new medias, and conducting in-depth interviews with participants who are of leadership level.

The method also included analyzing information from the speeches through deconstruction approach which shows discursive practice, social practice, objects of concealment, origin and direction of discursive, and synthesizing the relationship between knowledge, power and truth.

The finding of (1) political discourse formation and the way knowledge and power were used as tools for political movement during the protest crisis of the PDRC revealed that in the political movement of the PDRC, rules of creation and framework of knowledge that were used to direct and dictate are “Democratic discourse”. Democracy is the main content used to argue and fight. The PDRC and its enemy talked about the same subject but they gave meaning to “Democracy” differently. Democratic discourse was spoken, presented, and expressed by creating other discourses in order to justify, raise issues made by the government and by making arguments to claim territory of the framework of knowledge in laws and political sciences. The discourses from the PDRC dispersed with discursive practice to social practice. Democratic discourse is always driven by itself under the condition of counter-conducted discourses and proposes new 11 discourses to be used as rationale of such movement including discourse of democracy, discourse of criminals’ parliament, slaves’ parliament and law for criminals, discourse of peace and non-violence, disarmament and fight as good and civilized citizens, discourse of overthrow of Thaksinocracy, capitalism and corruption, discourse of sub-district headman uncle, discourse of people’s parliament, discourse of people’s sovereignty, discourse of reform before election, law amendment and justice maintenance, discourse of people’s revolution, discourse of sovereignty, and discourse of good people protected by Dharma. All of the discourses supported the PDRC to maintain their righteousness of political movement under knowledge and power. The finding of (2) the influence of political discourse, knowledge and power on politics from the political movement in the protest crisis of the PDRC revealed that the influence of political discourse has impacts on three political dimensions; (1) political dimension from the discourse of “overthrow of Thaksinocracy, people’s parliament, reform before election, people’s revolution, sovereignty” – making the truth that Thai politics is in the condition different from a process of becoming democracy yet its goal still leads to democracy, (2) justification to maintain righteousness and create mass support for the movement and (3) definition of democracy to be changed in différance by the discourse of “good people protected by Dharma”. The PDRC proposed the point of “good people and Dharma” to expand the meaning of “perfect democratic form of government with the King as Head of State in the PDRC’s way”.