Under and beyond the Law: Monarchy, Violence, and History in Thailand*

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics & Society Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.1177/00323292211033073

T. Haberkorn

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Since the end of the absolute monarchy in Thailand on June 24, 1932, the rulers and the ruled have been locked into struggle, often violent, over what form the polity and the people’s participation in it should take. This essay examines this struggle, the imagination of justice, and the inability to consolidate democracy, or even a stable government, through the lens of the monarchy, which has remained beyond accountability. Violence committed to preserve the monarchy forecloses democracy and fosters a form of what can be called modern absolutist monarchy, when some lives are visibly placed beyond the law’s protection from violence and others are made dispensable by being made subject to repressive enforcement of the law. The emergence in 2020 of a daring challenge to the position of the monarchy beyond the law refracts both the dangers it poses to democracy and the urgency of imagining a new Thai polity.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

法律之下与法律之外：泰国的君主政体、暴力与历史*

自1932年6月24日泰国君主专制制度结束以来，统治者和被统治者就政体的形式和人民的参与问题陷入了斗争，往往是暴力的。本文从君主政体的角度考察了这场斗争、对正义的想象，以及巩固民主乃至稳定政府的无能。君主政体至今仍不受问责。为维护君主制而实施的暴力阻碍了民主，并催生了一种可以被称为现代专制君主制的形式，在这种情况下，一些人的生命显然被置于法律保护之外，不受暴力侵害，而另一些人则被置于法律强制执行的压迫之下，变得可有可无。2020年出现的一场超越法律的对君主制地位的大胆挑战，既反映了它对民主构成的危险，也反映了想象一个新的泰国政体的紧迫性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.

期刊最新文献

Bringing Household Finance Back In: House Prices and the Missing Macroeconomics of Comparative Political Economy Who Pays for Environmental Policy? Business Power and the Design of State-Level Climate Policies* Supervising Local Cadres in China: The Quest for Authoritarian Accountability Rethinking Antitrust for the Cloud Era Antitrust and Equal Liberty