¹ See Mektrairat, N. (2003). ‘Watthakam Kanmuang wai duai Prachathipatai khong Thai’ [Political Discourse about Thai Democracy] in Mektrairat, NakharinKhwamkhit, Khwamru lae Amnat thang Kanmuang nai Kanpatiwat Syam 2475. [Thought, Knowledge and Political Power in the Siamese Revolution of 1932]. Fadiokan, Bangkok, pp. 79–120Google Scholar; and Jeemtirasakul, S. (2006). 24 Mithuna: Kantikwham Sii Baep [24 June: Four Interpretations]: http://somsakwork.blogspot.com/2006/06/causes-mutation-in-existing-structural.html, [accessed 13 March 2015].

² Williams, R. (1983). Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society, Revised Edition. Oxford University Press, New York, p. 155Google Scholar. Ideology's opposites highlight its pejorative sense: sensible people possess worldviews or philosophies; ideology appeals to fanatics.

³ Malaengwi (pseud.) (1947). Buanglang Prawatisat. [Behind History]. Publishing Cooperative, Bangkok; Numnonda, T. (2002). Lakhon Kanmeuang: 24 Mithuna 2475. [Political Theatre: 24 June 1932]. History Association, BangkokGoogle Scholar.

⁴ Gramsci, A. (1972). ‘Notes on Italian History’ in Antonio Gramsci Selections from the Prison Notebooks (eds.) Hoare, Q. and Nowell-Smith, G.. International Publishers, New York, pp. 55–60Google Scholar.

⁵ My formulation is influenced by two excellent studies of different modes of modern Thai neo-authoritarian ideology. See Chaloemtiarana, T. (1979). Thailand: The Politics of Despotic Paternalism. Social Science Association, BangkokGoogle Scholar, on 1950s military politics and its appeal to ‘traditional’ culture, and Connors, M. K. (2007). Democracy and National Identity in Thailand. NIAS Press, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar on ‘democrasubjection’, i.e., use of democratic ideology for social control.

⁶ Thesaphiban, 30:6 (1929), 383; Statistical Year Book Thailand (SYB), 20 (1937–1938, 1938–1939), 57.

⁷ Nakharin, using the SYB, estimates the entire middle class in 1932 at less than one per cent of the population; Nakharin, Khwamkhit, Khwamru lae Amnat Thang Kanmeuang, p. 154.

⁸ Roseberry, W. (1994). ‘Hegemony and the Language of Contention’ in Joseph, G. M. and Nugent, D.Everyday Forms of State Formation: Revolution and the Negotiation of Rule in Modern Mexico. Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, pp. 355–366Google Scholar; Thompson, E. P. (1993). Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture. The New Press, New York, pp. 85–87Google Scholar.

⁹ The last of their six principles, disseminated in paper and broadcast on radio the day they took power in June 1932, stated that the state must provide full education to the people. Moreover, the provisional and permanent constitutions (27 June and 10 December 1932, respectively) stated that the parliament, initially partially appointed, would become a fully elected body when more than one-half of the population had attained a basic education, or at the latest within ten years of 1932. ‘Announcement of the People's Party No. 1 (1932)’ and ‘Provisional Constitution of the Kingdom of Siam, 1932’ in Baker, C. and Pasuk, P. (2003). Pridi Banomyong, Pridi by Pridi: Selected Writings on Life, Politics and Economy. Silkworm Books, Chiang Mai, pp. 72 and 75Google Scholar.

¹⁰ See Osatharom, W. (1981). ‘Kanseuksa nai Sangkhom Thai Pho. So. 2411–2475. [Education in Thai Society 1868–1932]’, MA thesis, Chulalongkorn University.

¹¹ Phraratchabanyat Prathomseuksa Phutthasakarat 2478, Rajanukitchabeksa 25 (24 November 1935), 1591–1616. The act called for all children aged eight to 15 to be enrolled.

¹² SYB, 20 (1938–1939), 392.

¹³ Landon, K. P. (1968 [1939]). Siam in Transition: A Brief Survey of Cultural Trends in the Five Years since the Revolution of 1932. Greenwood Press, New York, p. 98Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Government figures quoted in Landon, Siam in Transition, pp. 96 and 99–101.

¹⁵ Of these, about 84 per cent were younger than 18 years old; the majority were aged 15 to 17. Bantheuk Khwamhen khong Jaonathi khong Krasuang Thammakan Krom Wichakan. [Report of the Education Ministry's Research Department Official]. March 1941, in National Archives [NA], SR.0201.24/4.

¹⁶ ‘Chaophraya’ was the senior-most ennobled title bestowed by the absolutist government for civil service; in descending order of authority, the titles used were: Chaophraya, Phraya, Phra, Luang, and Khun. While the People's Party 10 December 1932 constitution made explicit that the old ranks had no legal authority, they continued to be used and carried social importance, and all senior People's Party members held to the titles they had been given by the absolute monarchy.

¹⁷ He served as education minister for several years beginning in 1916. In 1902, Thammasakmontri and his brother accompanied Prince Vajiravudh to Japan to observe and learn from the Japanese educational system. He reorganized the civil service school in 1916, the basis for Chulalongkorn University. ‘Chiwaprawat’ (1943). [Biography] in Bot Phrapan Bang Ruang khong Khru Thep, Phim nai Ngan Phra Ratchathan Pleung Sop Phana Than So. Thammasakmontri Thephasdin na Ayutthaya. [Some Writings of Khru Thep, Printed on the Occasion of the Royal Cremation of Thammasakmontri na Ayutthaya]. Bangkok, n.p, pp. i–xviii.

¹⁸ Huakho thamanun kanpokkhrong pendin syam samrap pen khumer khong khru chai son nakrian chan prathom [Points on the Constitutional Administration of Siam, a Guide for Teachers of Primary School Students]. NA, ST9.2/253.

¹⁹ Laksut Chan Mathayom 5 theung 8 [Secondary Curriculum Years Five to Eight], in ibid.

²⁰ Minister of Public Instruction's report, 17 March 1937 in NA, (2)SR.0201.24.1.

²¹ The new normative political subject was a man. The drafters of this manual apparently forgot that the People's Party constitution and election laws guaranteed the equal rights of men and women to vote and to run for office, provided they met the same age and educational qualifications.

²² See Wolters, O. (1982). History, Culture and Region in Southeast Asian Perspectives. ISEAS, SingaporeGoogle Scholar.

²³ This contradiction is explained in Riggs, F. (1966). Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic Polity. University of Hawai‘i Press, HonoluluGoogle Scholar. Much more recent history attests to the suspicion and hostility that unanticipated popular democratic activism arouses in the bureaucratic elite.

²⁴ Amendments to the 1935 education act stipulated that ordinary teachers must be at least 15 years old, have a teaching certificate, and have completed three years of high school. In areas where no secondary education was possible, the law required would-be teachers to take an examination demonstrating the equivalent of four years of primary schooling. Headmasters had to be at least 20 years old, possess a teaching certificate, and a high school six education. They also were required to have at least one prior year of teaching experience. It isn't clear to what degree these standards were actually met. Kot Krasuang Thammakan, ok tam khwam nai Phraratchabanyat Prathomseuksa Phutthasakarat 2478 (chabap thi 2) [Ministry of Public Instruction, Addendum to the 1935 Primary Education Act (Second Issue)], Rajanukitchabeksa 54 (17 May 1937), 441–442.

²⁵ Pendulums were common images at the time and one wonders whether the Siamese adopted the image from Britain, which country's intellectual life profoundly influenced the Thai elite. When in metaphorical doubt, as Raymond Williams wrote, the English used the pendulum. Williams, R. (1958). Culture and Society, 1780–1950. Harper & Row Publishers, New York, p. 53Google Scholar.

²⁶ Li Sukriket and group to Prime Minister Phahon, 9 August 1933 in NA, SR.0201.27/8.

²⁷ At the time the government grouped several provinces into a ‘circle’ (monthon) for administrative ease. Pitsanulok was both a province and the central authority of some northern provinces at the time; Phra Sawat would have been responsible for Pichit.

²⁸ Pichit teachers group to Prime Minister Phahon, 30 July 1933 in NA, SR.0201.27/8. ‘Phra’ was Sawat's ennobled title; see footnote 16 for an explanation of the system.

²⁹ Pichit group to Prime Minister Phahon, 18 August 1933, in ibid.

³⁰ Thammasakmontri cited this report in exchanges with Prime Minister Phahon. Another paper summarized the government's objection to the conflict becoming public knowledge because it set a bad precedent: ‘(I)t is not good policy to allow clamour by several hundred people to have any weight.’ ‘Petitions by Ministry Officials’, Bangkok Times Weekly Mail, 13 September 1933.

³¹ Khun Witayawuti et al. to Prime Minister Phahon, 9 August 1933 in NA, SR.0201.27/8.

³² See footnote 16 above.

³³ Letter of 24 August 1933 in NA, SR.0201.27/8.

³⁴ The attack on favouritism became personal when the teachers attacked Naga Thephasadin, Thammasakmontri's nephew. They claimed the government promoted Naga to assistant head of the ordinary education department over many other more qualified candidates. He studied in England because of family connections, they contended, but was a failure and had to return to Siam. Perhaps this perceived failure to show proper respect to Thammasakmontri's family contributed to his anger.

³⁵ The government's ardour for mass education led to the establishment of a new university, Thammasat, in 1934, whose inspired students in later generations would challenge state power. At the outset, however, the People's Party intended that the first generation of scholars would serve the state, especially as legal experts, not question state policy.

The founding of Thammasat was greeted with great enthusiasm. In its first year of operation, more than 7,000 students attended, mostly through correspondence courses that allowed country people to study. This figure is astounding, even by today's standards of mass education. At the time it was completely unprecedented. Chulalongkorn University in 1935 had 756 students enrolled. SYB 20 (1938–39), 416. On Thammasat's founding see NA, S.B.7/3 and Wothong, B. (1966). Mahawithayalai Wicha Thammasat lae Kanmuang: Kamnert lae Khwamkiaophan kap Rabawp Prachathipatai. [Thammasat University: Its Establishment and Relation to Democracy]. Sathaban Banthit Patthana Borihan Sat, BangkokGoogle Scholar.

³⁶ Kham Banyai Rabiap Ratchakan khong Samnakngan Khosanakan [Lecture on the Government System by the Publicity Department], 21 August 1935 in NA (2)SR.0201.18/3. Ronasit also asserted that 25 per cent of the population believed in democracy, 15 per cent were against the new order and the remaining 60 per cent didn't understand the new regime or its ideology and felt that it had no relevance for their lives. For the good of the regime as well as national unity, then, democracy mattered. Kitchakan khong Samnakngan Khosanakan [Activities of the Publicity Bureau], 2 September 1934 in NA, (2)SR.0201.18/3.

³⁷ Gluck, C. (1985). Japan's Modern Myths: Ideology in the Late Meiji Period, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar. Strongly influenced by Nazi Germany, the Thai government established a Publicity Bureau in the prime minister's office in May 1933, and it later became a department. The propagandists formed a modest group; in 1934, the bureau had only 20 staff in total, with 10 of these in the lectures division. Phonlajan, S. (1988). ‘Krom Kosanakan kap Kan Kosana Udomkan Thang Kanmuang khong Rat, 2476–2487 [The Propaganda Department and Dissemination of State Political Principles, 1933–1944]’, MA thesis, Thammasat University.

³⁸ Kanpaitham Kansadaeng Pathakata nai Khet Changwat Chachoengsao, Prachinburi le Nakhon Nayok [Lecture Tours in Chachoengsao, Prachinburi and Nakhon Nayok Provinces], 28 June 1939, NA, (2)SR.0201.18/7.

³⁹ Khambanyai Rabiap Ratchakan, NA, (2)SR.0201.18.

⁴⁰ The Lamphun MP's experience prompted an effort to publicize the work of the various ministries. Khun Inthongphakdi to Cabinet Secretary, 30 December 1933, NA, SR.0201.16/46. The Publicity Bureau argued internally that governmental transparency was key to the success of democracy, but the plea fell on deaf ears. Publicity officials lamented the unwillingness of the ministries (especially defence) to share information. The exchange between the Publicity Bureau and the Cabinet took place three years after the 1932 coup. See the letters in NA, SR.0201.16/47.

⁴¹ Ministry of Interior to Cabinet Secretary, 11 June and 11 July 1934 in NA, SR.0201.16/46. A similar problem was reported in Chiang Mai. Chiang Mai provincial committee letter to deputy Minister of Interior, 6 July 1934, in ibid. Also Publicity Bureau to Cabinet Secretary, May 1934 in NA, SR.0201.18/7.

⁴² Chaiyanam, P. (1935). Pathakata Khosana Phak thi Ha: Rueang Sithi le Nathi khong Phonlamuang. [Propaganda Lectures Part Five: Rights and Duties of the Citizenry]. Songkhla Provincial Committee, p. 2Google Scholar.

⁴³ Charoenwit, F. (1934). Sithi le Nathi Phonlamuang tam Rabawp Prachathipatai. [Rights and Duties of Citizens according to the Democratic System]. Chachoengsao Provincial Committee, p. 18Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ Lak haeng Kan Sadaeng Pathakata (Principles of Lectures), NA, (2)SR.0201.18/9. Undated, this document is probably from 1934.

⁴⁵ Lecturers followed the stipulations of Articles 12 to 15 of the 10 December 1932 permanent constitution.

⁴⁶ Lak Haeng Kan Sadaeng Pathakata, NA, (2)SR.0201.18/9.

⁴⁷ Thong-in passed the Bar exam in 1931 after completing his legal studies with the Ministry of Justice by post. He became a secondary school teacher earlier at age 19. Kasetsiri, C. and Petchlert-anan, Thamrongsak. (2001). Pridi Banomyong lae 4 Ratamontri Isan + 1. [Pridi Banomyong and 4 Isan Ministers + 1]. Social Science Textbooks Project, Bangkok, p. 29Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Kho Sangket Bang Yang thi dai jak Kanpai Ratchakan thi Changwat Ubon [Some Observations obtained on Government Service in Ubon], Khwam pen pai khong Phu Then [Goings-on with Representatives], both June 1934, and Kho Sangketkan neuang nai Kanpai Sadaeng Pathakata thi Changwat Ubon [Some Observations on the Occasion of Traveling to Give Lectures in Ubon], October 1934, all in NA, (2)SR.0201/18.

⁴⁹ ‘Ekaraj’, Syam Ukhos, 21 August 1938. During the Cold War Thong-in and other independent northeastern parliamentarians were murdered by the police, thus paying with their lives for believing in the promise of democracy.

⁵⁰ Sakon's report of 21 July 1933 and Ronasit's radio address, 2 September 1934, both in NA, (2)SR0201.18/3. The number doubled in two years. By one count, in 1931 there were about 11,000 radios in the kingdom. Suwimon, Krom Kosanakan, 12.

⁵¹ Suwimon, Krom Kosanakan, 36. War and right wing nationalism spurred investment in capacity. The government set up stations in Phra Ta Bong (Battambang), Srisophon, and Siam Rat (Siem Reap) when the Thais took these provinces from the French in 1940, and also additional stations in the northeast. Ibid, 33–34.

⁵² MP, Chiang Mai (1934), ‘Pathakata Rueang Saphap khong Changwat Chiang Mai’ [Lecture on the Topic of the State of Chiang Mai Province], in Pathakata khong Phu Then Ratsadon, Thai Club of Japan, Bangkok, pp. 31–37Google Scholar.

⁵³ Darunaphan, P. (1934). ‘Pathakatha Reuang Suphap khong Changwat Pitsanulok’ [Lecture on the State of Pitsanulok Province], in ibid, pp. 100–102.

⁵⁴ Nithithada, N. (1934). ‘Pathakatha Rueang Saphap Changwat Chaiyaphum’ [Lecture on the State of Chaiyaphum Province], in ibid, p. 98.

⁵⁵ Chaiyakul, L. (1934). ‘Pathakatha Reuang Saphap Changwat Ubon Rajathani’ [Lecture on the State of Ubon Rajathani Province], in ibid, p. 23.

⁵⁶ Only those of parian (a religious educational rank) five or higher could lecture and initially the speakers came only from Bangkok and Thonburi due to the difficulty upcountry monks had travelling to Phraya Thai.

⁵⁷ Arjun Subrahmanyan (2013). ‘Reinventing Siam: Intellectual and Cultural Change in Thailand, 1920–1944’, PhD thesis, University of California-Berkeley, pp. 150–161; Chantrabut, K. (1985). Kankluenwai khong Yuwasong Thai Run Rek Pho. So. 2477–2484. [The Movement of the First Generation of Young Thai Monks, 1934–1941]. Textbooks Project, BangkokGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁸ Khambanyai Rabiap Ratchakan [Report on the Government System], 21 August 1935 in NA, (2)SR.0201.18. Monks under pressure, however, praised the government. During his incarceration at Bang Kwang prison after 1932 for allegedly fomenting revolt, Luen Saraphai avoided Sunday sermons at all costs. He described them as naked government propaganda that attacked the old regime and all government enemies. Saraphai, L. (1969). Fanrai khong Khappachao. [My Nightmare]. Saraphai, Bangkok, p. 89Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Wichit Wathakan is the best-known figure of the self-help movement. See Barmé, S. (1993). Luang Wichit Watakan and the Creation of Thai National Identity. ISEAS, SingaporeGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁰ ‘Nayok sang kae Kho Wa thi’ [The Minister Orders Improvements to Debates], Krungthep Warasap, 10 August 1935. The prime minister and other cabinet ministers optimistically described national progress in annual radio broadcasts that were reprinted in newspapers.

⁶¹ ‘To wathi thi Krom Silpakorn meua Wan Athit sanuksanan thang 3 reuang phu fang lon rong’ [Debates at the Fine Arts Department last Sunday, Great Fun with all three topics having overflowing crowds], Krungthep Warasap, 20 August 1935; ‘Phuying nai adit di kwa patchuban’ [Women in the Past, Better than Today?], Mitthraphap, November 1935. A debate on beauty contests, for example, flouted on-air politeness codes when some participants started attacking women as a whole. One competitor arguing against the contests opined that beauty contests were immoral since all entrants, it was well known, were prostitutes. ‘Kanto Wathi’ [The Debates], Krungthep Warasap, 21 November 1935.

⁶² Newspapers, which by this time were largely privately owned, were more assertive and critical of public affairs than state-owned radio. Anecdotal evidence shows many were not terribly impressed with government radio. The main criticisms were that it was boring, patronizing, too propagandistic, insufficiently informative, and that the new regime didn't allow free expression. See, for example, Mr. Ratburi, ‘Kho Khot Khuan Khit’ [Things to Think On], Krungthep Warasap, March 1936; ‘Withayu Krajai Siang khong Rao khuan prapprung hai Krachap kwa thi Thamkan yu Thuk Wanni’ [Our Radio System Should be Improved], Thert Rathamanun, 13 February 1936; and ‘The Radio,’ Bangkok Times, 13 March 1937.

⁶³ Tyrell Haberkorn nicely describes this phenomenon in her study of the 1970s. See Haberkorn, T. (2011). Revolution Interrupted: Farmers, Students, Law and Violence in Northern Thailand. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WisconsinGoogle Scholar.