Talking Thai Politics: Pannika Wanich, Progressive Activist

Welcome to the new Books Network. Welcome to Talking Typhiletics, a podcast on the new Books Network. I'm Duncan Macargo, President's Chair in Global Affairs at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, and one of the hosts of Talking Typhiletics. As the title suggests, in this podcast we're going to be talking about what's happening in Thailand politically from a wide variety of perspectives. And I'm really delighted that for our very first podcast we have with us, Banika Onit, of the Progressive Movement. Banika, welcome to Talking Typhiletics. Glad to talk with you and good morning. A very fresh morning for me after the dissolution of the second generation of the party that we love. Indeed, and we'll get to that very question in just a moment. So for disclosure, Banika and I have been talking for a number of years now, since we first met in 2018, we meet up from time to time and discuss what's been happening, what's in, what's out, and so forth. And a lot of our conversations have been really thinking about the evolution of politics in terms of generational change and contestation over the past few years. Maybe one of the things we're going to talk about today as well as the inevitable recent dissolution of move forward and the launch just yesterday, as it happens, of the new people's party. But maybe you could give our listeners a bit of background. Some of you listening to this, maybe you were that Banika was previously very much involved in the original incarnation of the Thailand's recent Progressive Political Party's Future Forward. Do you tell us something about how you got involved in this? Because you used to have another life before. You were a political journalist before and you somehow took another turn. How did that happen? My previous life, I was a journalist spent six and a half years in TV channel, Voice TV, just about a few months ago. At that time, it was one of the rarest, most progressive TV channels and all-I-mediate in Thailand. And it was rare at that time. And I enjoyed being a reporter, TV anchor, analyst, and a host for a program called I ASEAN covering International Issue, focusing on ASEAN region. That was my very happy, previous life. And then I was invited to join a new founded party called Future Forward Party. At that time, we were second to own the Secretary General of the Party, invited me because he was a frequent guest at Voice TV. He invited me to join the party as spokesperson, because they were all nerdy per people and told very academically and they need somebody to help communicate and he thought of me. So I accepted invitation to join. At the time, I joined the party, the party hadn't had the name yet. It's just the new party, whatever party that we have to follow at that time. That was six and a half years ago. And then the Future Forward Party entered the Thai politics. We were seen as an alien species, disrupting the Thai politics. Very naive, young, angry people, challenging older de-establishment. But we shocked them by winning the election and gaining 81 seats in the parliament in the first election. Then we were dissolved just because of a very stupid accusation. Alone, turn out to be on the former leader of the party. I can't even remember the total is like 160 or 200 million some parts. And more than 30 political parties in Thailand take loans too. But it's the only out Future Forward Party that got dissolved from this stupid accusation. Political party cannot take loans, which is actually not true. And then the second generation of the party, the move forward party, was founded four years ago. And then enter another election and became the biggest party, the number one, we gained 151 seats. And yet again, dissolved. This time with a much more stupid accusation of overthrowing constitutional monarchy by attempting to amend Article 112-Alessemites' law. The court decided that it was illegal because it will overthrow constitutional monarchy in Thailand. Right. Yes. So as we know, you've been involved in the movement for a number of years in various different incarnations. And one of the topics that we often discuss when we talk, and perhaps I would like to have your thoughts so that we can share them with a larger audience. You mentioned the idea of Future Forward in the beginning as this being seen as this angry young party. To what extent was Future Forward and Latterly move forward and maybe going forward, the people's party? To what extent of these parties actually something to do with generational contestation? Parties that are primarily appealing to young people who see themselves as unhappy with a seniority-based top-down hierarchical politics. I think we create some false thesis at the beginning of the story, at the era of Future Forward party. During the Future Forward time, more than half, more than 50% of our voters would be people below 40. Yes. From 25 to 40, that's our base voter. And it created an assumption that people who are very angry and who are very desperately need change in this country, there would be younger people, younger generation. But I think that's not true. Why? Because we have to accept this truth, this fact, that at the time of Future Forward party, we nearly 100% rely on social media. Because it was free, because it was very convenient for us. And because mainstream media in Thailand didn't really take us seriously if you understand what I mean. They didn't really pay attention to our party at the beginning of the story. So we totally depended on our own social media. At that time, six years ago, people who use social media very effectively, often, and they see information from social media, they are mostly young people. And that's why our base voter were younger generation relatively. That created what I call a little bit, an unassured false assumption, but it's actually not true. And during the second generation of the party, the move forward party, first, we already had more than 50 MPs in the parliament. People knew our party very well after winning one election. And after the dissolution of the party, that's kind of a bad joke. You became most popular after your date. So at the second generation of the party, we became a pretty mass political party. And in mass party, I don't mean mass party, like people's party. But the party that is very well known to the general population of Thailand, even in rural areas. So during the time of move forward party, we became gradually able to penetrate to every age group, every occupation, and every region of Thailand. Not just younger population, not just urban population, not just educated and quite well paid population. And that was a population who used social media. And when we can penetrate more to people in rural area, older generation, we realized they have literally the same idea, the same need, the same desperate need to change. And they are even more desperate. Because people in urban area, educated, well paid, relatively young, which we say earlier. They are actually the people who can take care of themselves. But older generation, they are all poor, and they don't, they never receive any well quality care that they are far from the government. And they are very desperate. So I would say they are even more desperate and they need a party like us, even more than people in urban area. And I think that's one of the key factors that move forward party was very successful during the past election last year. It was very obvious at that time. And even the time before the decision of the party, that in every poll, move forward party became number one in every age group and every occupation. I think that's proof that this desperate need for change, doesn't belong particularly to any age group. It belongs even more to the older generation when Thailand is facing aging society problem, right? And people after COVID era, people desperately need a good welfare system. I think that's the thing. Right. So clearly, you make a strong case for arguing that certainly by the move forward area, you move beyond this generational notion of being the angry young party. And clearly, if we compare the vote levels, you know, future forward got about 6.3 million votes, move forward got 14.4 million votes. And we know there aren't 14.4 million Gen Zs who can vote in Thailand. So quite clearly, there's a broadening out that's taken place over time. So we use these words like progressive and the names of the various parties that have this very anticipatory, forward looking and positive and optimistic dimension to them. But what did future forward move forward, the people's party really aspire to? Is the goal a way to change? was, for example, with Future 4, with the goal really to win the election, or was the goal to change the way people thought about some of these issues and to make them understand the importance of changing certain key structural elements in Thailand's existing state society and economy. What's the end goal? Is it to take power? End goal. Or is it to get people to understand that Thailand needs to be changed? People already understand Thailand needs change. I think the end game of this off-party journey, first building a political party that last and it shows in this third generation of the party. We call it the People's Party. If you look back and compare and contrast between the first era, second era and now we have the third generation of the party, the first party we call it an Ahot Mai, right? New Future. It's a very hopeful looking forward name, very progressive, very modern, it's niche, it's not mass, and Ahot Mai is not mass, new future. What's the name of that party, people from a panel of a name of the party? Second generation, Dalglai, move forward, progressive, also looking forward, less futuristic, more tangible, but still very colorizing, right? The third generation of the party we call it the People's Party. Why? Because the thing is high time, it's a job done. That the Thai people, the Thai population, they are not that polarizing anymore. They kind of see the same thing, the same problem. And I think it's time this party will become a mass party in both ways, a mass party in its most sacred meaning, that is the People's Party and we mean all the people, not just progressive people. Because as of now, even I added the last month of move forward party before and after the election last year, more and more conservative old people, believe that move forward party will be the future of the solution to the problems in this country also. You see people like Kun An An Ban Yara should be people like many conservative figures. And Kun Su Tishayu, very well known media mogul, he was once perceived as a conservative mind, right? But now people like this, they see that this country needs change and the agent of change that can really make it happen, will be a party like move forward party. So we think it's high time, we can create the party that lasts long and be a real mass party, which means we unite the people. With my progressive mind, I think the general people of Thailand can believe and can trust that this country will be the agent of change and will make a better country for the next simulation. That's the first end game, the party that lasts and be a mass party. And the second end game, we really need to form a government of change. What I mean by a government of change. Now, we are living in a country in which we have a government. We believe, past tense, that this government can really at least make a better economy. After a year, it's proven that we were wrong. Totally wrong. We have a government that cannot do anything when they are in power. No leverage whatsoever to the people who currently hold power in this country. And the government doesn't hold the power in this country. So what's the use of this government? How can we utilize a government that doesn't really have power to make any change? So end game for the third generation of the party. I think it will be making this next election three years from now to be a battle. That's not final battle, but to be a very important battle to make the government of change. It must happen because Thailand can wait no longer. And when I say to create a government of change, it's very clear that it will have to be a one party government. I really love this metaphor. We call ourselves Bramokang. So you know that the tilapia crisis in Thai, in the right, we call it Bramokangdam, the tilapia. This black tilapia fish that have been a kind of invasive species causing a disruption to the ecosystem. Yes. Yes, we are the orange tilapia. Right. Yes. A lens species invasive to the whole system. And we grow very fast, expand to every river, everywhere in Thailand. And you cannot just kill us. We have disrupt the Thai politics in the past six years. But now we are going to disrupt it to the point that we can create enough leverage to change and to make a government. I think that's the end game for the third party. It will be a party who will be in the government house. Right. So we see this kind of idea from the beginning, of course, in the orange color, which is in other words, orange is a place where people from the red side, the old protaxen side and the yellow side, the old. It's not true that orange is a mixture of red and yellow. No, it's the color of dawn, new dawn. Yes. Yes. I think for many people comes out of an era of polarization, but it sounds as though what you're saying is the people's party is going to be in some way more mainstream or more centrist. And it's going to be less threatening than maybe move forward or future forward. Oh, that's totally wrong. Okay. Is it easier? Yes. It's the same. Liberty, Egality, fraternity, yes. Of course. Right. Yes. You think this part is going to be softer or stronger? I'm eager to see. This is what I'm trying to fight out by talking to the other people's party. You are of all people. You know what that means. I was going to say that's the other thing. You're talking about this as being in some way more mainstream, but of course the English name of the party invites us to think about Canalrat, the original people's party who were behind the end of the absolute monarchy. And we've seen, I was sort of play about the people's party last night. There is a film, an animation film. There is a comic book. There's all kinds of public discourse about 1932 at the moment and going back to 1932. In some way, you're also with the English name of this party channeling that revisited discussion. Is even more. Yes. If you look at the typography of Park Brasjardt, Sean Odefuel's party, the style we call it, Rachelinear. Rachelinear is a more modern form of ruthless art. Right. The art of the people's party in 1932, we have seen many ruthless architecture and art. So the typography of people's party, the people's party is a more modern form of brutalism. So right. Rachelinear, the use of straight lines. Yes. Very sharp. And it's a representative of modernism, equality and freedom, equality and modernism. I think from the future of the party to move forward party, we had more compromising stance, but also the proportion of minimum of one or two. Right. You could argue the opposite. In some ways, less compromising to be. I also want to look at move forward party because we have Peter as a leader also. So the characteristics of the party, it was a little utterly significantly softer than future party with Sanatana as leader. But now. In a sense. So with the people's party, I am very confident that it's becoming to be a very strong, progressive and straightforward in showing our political stance. So people who, and it is very funny, some people who believe in Chinese, I don't even know what to say, Chinese. The three anglers of the triangles are not sharp. It's triangle with six, six points of people's party. People who build informially. Believe that we try to make this triangle less sharp. That means we are going to be softer. That's all. We didn't create it in a way that made less sharp. No sharp point on three anglers. But it's triangle with six anglers to represent six points of the people's party. So that's funny in what people are trying to integrate the local of the party. But I can guarantee to you that. These people's party, much inspiration from the people's party who was a founding father of democracy in Thailand. Right. And I know that with all three of these parties, a lot of thought always goes into the branding, the symbols, the colors, the designs. Is that something that your movement has been very, very expert in crafting? It's an interesting moment. The launch of the new party and the way that you describe. At the same time, some people are going to say, come on. Look, we went along with this move forward thing. It was all great, but look in the end, you weren't allowed to form a government and then you were dissolved at this new party, even if they managed to get, you know, 300 seats in the next parliament and form the one party government. Wouldn't be a really allowed to take power because someone would come along and stage a coup or do something to zap the party away again or dissolve you overnight or whatever it was. So there'll be people who say, we've gone along with this. We went along with future four. We went along, move forward. But we have to know now it's never going to work because you're never going to be allowed to take power. What's your answer to? I'm not suggesting this is my view, but I meet people all the time who say things like this to me, and you must also come across them. Believe me, that assumption of yours totally based on the fact, I think the past 10 years that his ablishment cannot be negotiated. Right. And the ablishment will not be compromised whatsoever. In the past 10 years, it's the same truth. When you look back further than that, 30, 40 years ago, when the ablishment was not really packed, not was not really strong and established enough, it totally depends on negotiation and trying to seek a life, both inside and outside the country. So I think it depends on the situation. And the ablishment can be negotiated when they are in a position that needs negotiation. We just have to make ourselves strong enough, enough leverage to be on the table with dignity and with enough power to negotiate. And by that, I mean numbers of the votes. That is a saying, move forward party and future forward party, they cannot do anything but winning the election. Right. You are a political party, the only thing you have to achieve would be winning elections. Yes. That's the only way that we can enter the government, right. We don't have pants. It's very simple. Get enough votes, get enough seats in the parliament. If and when you get more than 250 seats in the parliament, to under 60, maybe that's the time for negotiation. And we're very interested to see that moment. The next couple of years is going to be fascinating to see how things evolve with the new party. One of the assets and you've touched on this briefly of both future forward and move forward was the high profile leadership of Tanneton and then Pita. And we've talked about this before. Cult of celebrity, almost pop star style image that these politicians and other key people in the party, perhaps you yourself achieved at certain moments. Do you think that the people's party with a less prominent leadership can win big in the social media game, which is inherently very, very important to the way that you perform outstandingly well in the recent past. You know, now we are 22 hours after the launch of the new party, less than 24 hours of the launch of the new party, the people's party. We've got now 26,000 members and we've got more than 60 million by donation. Right. And very small donation people try to say that is 10 million but from Tanneton or not, I think in one or two days the party will release a data set indicate that it's all small donations. Right. Do you think it would be different if we don't have good not a poem as the leader of the party. Actually, people don't need the name of the new leader at all. They just need the party. Right. And a place to donate and to apply for membership. Time of the beginning, we totally depend that on a very charismatic leadership. Now, after 60 years, I think we have reached the point to call ourselves probably as the people's party. Some people ask me, "Share the party in why influences today's event to apply for membership?" Because many, many famous people, singers, famous business people, actors, would like to apply for membership and they will come to apply if we ask them to come. I say, "No, that's totally against the core values of the party." We are the people's party. Why? Why do you need influencers to be the first people who apply for membership and invite other people to apply to? People don't need any influencers to influence them to apply for membership of people's party. People know what they are doing. And this is first a way to unleash that and about the disrogeon of the party. Very importantly, I think it's a way to show that they really believe in this way of doing politics. They really believe that a political party that is good for this country would be party like this. An MP who is doing a good thing to the country would be an MP from party like this. So that's the way to show support. And I nearly cry when I saw some comments on TikTok saying that it's a very rare occasion that we can help create a party from zero. And that's why people are very eager. Do you understand what they mean? Of course. He says, "Once in a lifetime experience for the people to help building this party from zero." They've seen it from day zero, day one, and brick by brick day by the "help creating this party" to be the real people's party. It's not just a beautiful word. You have to make it the real thing. And that's why last night I couldn't sleep. I just sat with my phone and refreshed the website. It's very beautiful to see increasing numbers in membership and donations. It's not built like to have money of course, but it's not just money. It's a way for the people to show to the powerful people in this country that you can destroy any political party and we will help build it again and again and again. Until we win. We need to ask you the obvious question, which is what are your hopes and expectations for the future? To win the election would be the first primary goal. 200 seats, sorry to be sounding very arrogant here. 200 seats would not be that difficult, but we don't need 200 seats, right? We need 260. So that is a very challenging task for the people's party. And we have three years, a very short time for politicians to do a good enough job to win 260. So I hope the MPs would do that based on all the provincial team. The people on the ground would be very diligent and keep doing hard work in three years time to win the election in next time election. We really have to win this time because it's the third opportunity already to raise the power. If you miss it this time, I think people will become hopeless and kind of believe that this country cannot be changed. People start to believe that this country is cursed. That's what I was sort of a leading to. Yes. Right? So this third opportunity would be last. That doesn't mean if it cannot win the election, you just close down the party or whatsoever. But this is the most important election for us all. If we cannot win this election, people will be hopeless and we will believe that this country is forever cursed, not being able to be changed. So this is important of the next election. Second, I am looking forward to the transition from conservative to a more progressive mind of the people. We have seen this transition since a few years ago after the dissolution of the future forward party. That means during the time of the forward party, we have seen the transition. People become illiterate when they are illiterate, once they are illiterate forever. So we are witnessing gradual change, gradual transition from conservative to a more progressive mind. I think that transition will reach critical point during the time of people's party era. And it will significantly affect the result of the next election. And I think that social, political phenomena that is witnessing. Thank you so much for joining us for this incredibly topical and interesting discussion. Thailand is a very, very fascinating juncture at the moment. It's a difficult time, but it's also an incredibly interesting time for everybody in the country and for everybody following typolitics. I think it's the most hopeful time. The last stage cancer, why is it hard? So we are very hopeful that a very bright future is waiting. Thanks so much, Bannica. I'm Duncan Maccargo of Nanyang Technical University. And for this inaugural episode of Talking Typolitics, I've been in conversation with Bannica on it of the Progressive Movement.