In my opinion, the struggle for democracy is not the struggle for a political regime. Nor is it for any specific government or political party. Democratic forces should not be confined to merely protecting the government or the politicians of one's liking.
A villager holds a sign at a rally in Mae Wong district in a protest against the Mae Wong dam proposal. THANARAK KHOONTON
The exception is when the necessity to protect the government that comes from public consensus coincides with the survival of democracy itself.
In other words, democratic forces must protect other essential ingredients of democracy, not only the government.
This is to ensure that the mechanisms in the democratic system can fully function and lead to a sustainable political system that we believe is best, or the least evil.
One of the important elements of democracy is freedom of peoples who are diverse.
Many of them have problems with the government's policies, particularly the marginalised peoples who are left behind by national development, or the local communities which are severely affected by development projects proposed by the government or private enterprises.
These peoples are not enemies of democracy. Sometimes they are in conflict with governments. But they are basically part and parcel of a democracy, who help strengthen and provide solutions to the system.
They are another form of democratic force which may be different from the representative democracy of the masses.
Therefore, those of you who consider themselves champions of democracy under the party system must learn to stay calm when your elected government is criticised or opposed on certain issues.
Better still, if you can be a bridge between grassroots democracy and the parliamentary system, this will serve the country well.
Since our democracy is still unstable, it is equally important to continually expand the base of democracy.
The democracy movement cannot go forward when the country's direction is determined by one particular group of people.
Not even when this group has the masses to control the electoral arena. If we are talking about the stability of the system, or a country, this base is not enough.
In other words, those who champion democracy must expand their alliances to include other groups, other classes. It is important to make them see and accept that democratic space is also theirs, desirable, and must be protected.
To be able forge those alliances, it is necessary to pay attention to more diverse problems such as the problems of the new middle class in the provinces or small entrepreneurs in the cities.
The democracy movement must also respond to industrial workers' problems.
Meanwhile, it should not obstruct legitimate demands of the middle class, be they about quality of life, nature, the environment, or whatever.
If we accept that democracy is a system of the people, then we must accept that democracy is but an arena to bargain different interests among different classes and groups which are diverse and often conflicting with one another. We must preserve this common arena to avoid any possibility of bloodshed.
If we accept that the struggle for democracy is to institutionalise its system, expanding democratic power means opening political space for all groups of people. To achieve this, the indispensable political environment is liberalism. Democracy and liberalism are not the same thing, but they are mutually dependent for their growth.
Freedom is essential for a society with diverse beliefs. But freedom alone cannot bind people or society together. There is a risk of to-each-his-own social disintegration, even.
Democracy, meanwhile, has its strengths. It can create consensus and gather public forces to achieve a common good. Its weakness is its inflexibility to manage the relationship between the masses and individuals, and minority voices.
This is why democracy in developed countries has always been accompanied by liberalism. Thailand must also walk the same path.
A strong democracy does not come from political institutions such as elections and a parliamentary system only. Thai society must also be a land of freedom. No political system can exist without a nurturing environment. The democracy movement should push for a more liberal atmosphere. It should be able to differentiate between real opposition forces and mere different beliefs that should not be a source of conflicts.
The intensity of past frictions may prompt many to unjustly give political labels to others. Many shower those who think differently with profanities. If this happens without limits, it will only give them more enemies. As a former student leader, I can tell you that judging people with superficial information or by a ready-made formula will only alienate us from those who can be our friends.
This will alienate the democracy movement. We have learned this lesson from the past. The mistakes should not be repeated.
Of course, ideological struggles must continue. One of the causes of unstable democracy is incompatible political cultures. It is therefore important to continue rebutting the authoritarian culture.
Democracy has many values that are disconsonant with traditional Thai culture. The focus on political equality and human dignity, in particular. Democracy is a culture that respects others, as well as oneself. As long as this respect is not dominant in Thai society, democracy as a political system still lacks a strong foundation.
However, the movements towards cultural change are more sensitive and subtle than political movements because they deal with something that is deeply ingrained among a large number of people. Sensitive cultural issues can trigger massive and violent conflicts. In the cultural arena, the champions of democracy must then make cautious moves in accordance with the constraints to avoid any missteps. They must learn to use soft power to highlight the good, the truth, and the beauty of their views instead of taking delight in projecting their image as being ever-eager to deconstruct anything in sight that they dislike.
Not everything in the old tradition is in conflict with democracy.
Some things are actually compatible, although not the authoritarian elements that contradict the principles of freedom, equality and justice. As for other cultural dimensions, no country can wholly cut itself from its historical roots.
For this, change should be allowed to take its natural course. A democratic process should not force people to lose their space and identity abruptly. What should be done is to make them feel that the new things are better, which will subsequently create loyalty to the system.
Frankly speaking, democracy in the West also has space for all groups, ranging from the conservatives, liberals, to socialists. As long as people cannot see the world through the same colour and want to avoid killing one another in extended conflicts, a non-violent conflict management of democracy is the best way.
The philosophy of democracy is based on the assumption that everyone is equal in human dignity. Democracy then seeks to oppose exploitation, oppression, and ideological domination of all forms. Still, this is not enough. This philosophy must support people to own their power, to rule themselves, and to enable citizens _ as individuals _ to have freedoms and rights to political expression. In sum, democracy both frees and unites the people. Therefore, the ends and the means of democracy cannot be separated from one another. Only when people can take part in the democratic process can they attain the goals of freedom, equality and justice. A democratic society is not a to-each-to-his-own society. It is one where individual freedoms are weaved together by a common mission for the common good. These were the currents that moved the Oct 14 struggle. And I sincerely hope today's currents are moving in the same direction.
Translation of excerpts from a speech in Thai by former student leader and political scientist Seksan Prasertkul to mark the 40th anniversary of the Oct 14 uprising at Thammasat University.