The relatively calm response from the country’s young people is notable for several reasons. The MFP and its former leader Pita Limjaroenrat, who led the party to victory in 2023, were particularly popular among young Thais. More importantly, the dissolution of the MFP is largely a repeat of another groundbreaking episode in Thai politics from 2020. The MFP’s predecessor, the Future Forward party, was dissolved after unexpectedly strong election results and its executive board members were banned from politics. Most of Future Forward’s MPs switched to the MFP, which continued Future Forward’s progressive policies.
So if this is indeed a repeat, should we expect another round of national protests, perhaps with similar fervor and harsh rhetoric as in 2020? That seems quite unlikely.
A comparison of the immediate reactions to the two resolutions shows that reactions this time were much more muted. Students tended to engage in symbolic actions on campus rather than street demonstrations, such as law students walking out of a Constitutional Court judge’s lectures. While several student groups announced “flash protests” on campus, such as in Thammasat, Chulalongkorn and Chiang Mai, these were much smaller than those in 2020. Even though the MFP invited supporters to its headquarters on the day of the ruling, the crowd was described as “small.” It seems that the urge to protest among young Thais has largely subsided. This can be explained by several factors.
One commonly cited reason is that the student movement was crushed by the same justice system that disbanded Future Forward and MFP. The leaders who emerged from the 2020 protests were charged, imprisoned, apparently fled the country, or tragically died in custody. Faced with such losses, the movement has struggled to maintain its momentum. It should be noted that some of the energy was already lost in 2021, when the government under Prayuth Chan-ocha responded with increasingly violent measures. After one death and permanent injuries to several protesters, the state has succeeded in deterring many people from attending rallies.
Another reason could simply be that it was a “repeat episode” – a reused storyline is simply less likely to shock audiences. Although Thailand’s Constitutional Court has a habit of dissolving political parties, the dissolution of Future Forward likely came as a shock to many of its supporters. In contrast, the dissolution of MFP had already been somewhat expected following a ruling in January that said proposals to amend the lese majeste law amounted to an attempt to overthrow the monarchy. Since it was a less surprising ruling, not as many people and students were motivated to join the various protests.
Other reasons are due to the 2023 elections. Many young people were likely disillusioned with the results after the MFP failed to form a government. Another less discussed factor is that the 2020 pro-democracy coalition, which included Pheu Thai supporters, fell apart somewhat in 2023. Pheu Thai is itself a successor to two dissolved parties and issued a statement of sympathy for Future Forward in 2020. Several prominent Pheu Thai supporters were often present at the 2020 protests.
While the Thai establishment has arguably succeeded in breaking the youth’s motivation to take to the streets, it has failed to quell the discontent of the MFP’s 14 million voters, a significant proportion of whom are young people. Their lack of protest at present may not necessarily be a sign of apathy or fatigue – perhaps they will choose to strategically express their political frustration through the ballot box and other official channels that carry a lower risk of violence and prison sentences.
Finally, MFP’s voter base doubled after Future Forward was dissolved. A successor party, the People’s Party, has already been formed. In less than a week, it has attracted over 46,000 members and more than 23 million baht (US$635,000) in donations. It remains to be seen whether the new party can repeat MFP’s success in the next election, when even more young people will be eligible to vote.