泰國地方政治中的塔信體制網絡：以塔信時期鄉村政策為個案

儘管塔信被放逐國外將近十年時間，其對於泰國政治發展仍具影響力，由2011年7月盈拉(Yingluck Shinawatra)贏得國會大選，以及延續其胞兄過去民粹的政見即可發現，塔信不論其個人所領導的「泰愛泰黨」(Thai Rak Thai Party，TRT) 或是其執政期間的施政績效皆在泰國政治發展史中具有獨特的地位：塔信善用煽動性的政治語言、「贏者全拿」(winner take all) 的政治態度以及將傳統以「中央 (曼谷) 泰國」為核心的泰國政治「解構」成以「非曼谷泰國」為關注焦點的「去中央化」(decentralization) 及「地方化」(localization) 的新政治「new politics」，造成曼谷城市中產階級標籤化塔信政權為「民粹政治」，引起中央與地方對抗並深化城鄉階級矛盾。以「非曼谷」 (non-Bangkok)地區 (特別是東北與泰北) 的泰國人民而言，塔信是個打壓舊權貴的傑出領袖；然而，對於曼谷都會區人民而言，塔信是個貪汙、分裂社會與危害泰國民主的政客。正因為塔信擁有如此兩極的評價，即使因遭政變罷黜而自泰國政治舞台上消失，但其政治影響力卻持續發酵，顛覆以往傳統政治的框架。本文擬以泰國著名學者Ukrist Pathmanand針對塔信現象(Thaksin phenomenon)所提出的「塔信體制網絡」(Network Thaksin)模型為研究框架企圖理解在該模型中所提及的「群眾基礎」為何，並以塔信地方鄉村政策(rural policies)分析之。研究結果發現，塔信網絡體制的群眾基礎主要是由塔信鄉村政策的提出與落實構築而成的，在歷經亞洲金融風暴下與長期以後受到忽視的鄉村民眾，受到塔信政策的感召，即使在塔信下台後依然持續支持。

關鍵字

塔信；塔信體制網路；鄉村政策；地方政治

並列摘要

Thaksin Shinawatra, twice elected prime minister of Thailand, was the most controversial figure in modern Thai politics. He won an unprecedented absolute majority of parliament, thus fulfilling a ‘New Political Era’ in Thailand based on electoral politics. Thai scholars named the Thaksin phenomenon: new political thinking, efficient governance and his legitimacy of the most electorate never before in the first decade of 21st century as ‘Thaksinization.’ Following, he was ousted by the 2006 coup d’état, and opposed by the palace, conservatives and a coalition of opponents, but supported by a broad rural people, the prolonged political crisis in Thailand is thus sustained. There is nothing new about the political disputes in Thai society, but it is crucial to explore the political maneuver of Thaksin which could get a wild mass support. Related literatures are argued that Thaksin’s popularity was seen to result from its authentic party operation, CEO-style rule and populist policies directly beneficial to the people. The people in ‘Non-Bangkok Thailand,’ however, most from rural area of the north, north-east, and among rural migrants in the capital, had been politically enlightened by Thaksin, they countered back the ‘new conservative alliance’ organized by the rich and urban middleclass in Bangkok, led to severely class struggle. Nevertheless, the civil society discourse dominated by intellectuals and elites traditionally has turned to the local people that could compete to the power of voice. In this vein, the article aims to examine the practice of rural policies among Thaksin’s government based on the perspective of ‘network Thaksin’ model which is posed by Ukrist Pathmanand to analize the essence of rural policies. This paper finds out that the base of rural people in the model comes from the implement of rural polices which enlighten these people the meaning of the votes and supports.