Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-01T05:13:00.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thai Habitus in Contemporary Society: Paving the Way for Tackling Inequality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2024

Sirima Thongsawang Open the ORCID record for Sirima Thongsawang [Opens in a new window] ,
Boike Rehbein  and
Supang Chantavanich
Sirima Thongsawang*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University; Center of Excellence on BCG towards Sustainable Development, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
Boike Rehbein
Affiliation:
Institut für Asien- und Afrikawissenschaften (IAAW), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany
Supang Chantavanich
Affiliation:
Center of Excellence on Migration and Development, Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
*
Corresponding author: Sirima Thongsawang; Email: usirima@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines the habitus of contemporary Thailand based on the concepts developed by Pierre Bourdieu and their operationalisation to Thai society developed by Boike Rehbein's principles, which explain how contemporary habitus is linked to social inequality and mobilisation participation. Thailand has two key social structures: precapitalist and capitalist. Both create and reproduce different types of habitus. The paper used a mixed-methods research approach to analyse social inequality and challenges in Thailand since 2019. Data collection was conducted during the years between 2021 and 2022 from 400 surveys and fifteen qualitative interviews. The paper proposes eight habitus types rooted in Thai social structures with seven characteristics for explaining contemporary Thai society. The pre-capitalist structure generates the following habitus types: subsistential, traditionalist, and powerful (phuyai). The capitalist structure generates the following types: desperate, individualist, aspirant, and content creator. Between these two structures is the conformist. All habitus types share some characteristics. Authoritarianism is the fundamental trait of the predominant habitus types in Thai society, which are interconnected with social structures, thereby reflecting the consequences of social inequality and mobilisations. The demographic most affected by social inequality is the desperate group, but a more significant habitus for mobilisation participation is that of content creator, which is considerably small now but is likely to increase. Traditionalist and conformist groups are less likely to protest and, to a lesser degree, this is true of the subsistential and powerful types. Moreover, rationales of being affected by social inequality and reacting differently are distinct characteristics of each type, and socio-economic positions interplayed with social media influences.

Keywords

HabitusThailandMobilisationInequality
Type
Original Article
Information
TRaNS: Trans-Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia , First View , pp. 1 - 26
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Institute for East Asian Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baudrillard, Jean. 1976. Symbolic Exchange and Death. Translated by Grant, Iain Hamilton. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Ulrich, and Johannes, Willms. 2004. Conversations with Ulrich Beck. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1987. “What makes a social class? On the theoretical and practical existence of groups.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology 32: 1–17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41035356.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1989. “Social space and symbolic power.” Sociological Theory 7 (1): 14–25. doi:10.2307/202060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1993. “Outline of a sociological theory of art perception.” In The Field of Cultural Production, edited by Bourdieu, Pierre, 215–237. Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1997. “The forms of capital.” In Education, Culture, and Society, edited by Halsey, A.H., Lauder, Hugh, Brown, Phillip and Wells, Amy Stuart, 46–58. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1998. Practical Reason—On the Theory of Action. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Wacquant, Loic J. D.. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bureau of International. 2008. Towards a Learning Society in Thailand. Available at: https://www.bic.moe.go.th/images/stories/book/ed-eng-series/intro-ed08.pdf (accessed 25 September 2023).Google Scholar
Chaiwat, Thanee. 2023. Chula Communication Center (CCC). 28 February. Available at https://www.chula.ac.th/en/highlight/106356/ (accessed 23 September 2023).Google Scholar
Chantavanich, Supang. 1991. Kanchat chuangchan thangsangkhom: kiattiphum khong achip tangtang nai sangkhom thai. [Social Stratification: Occupational Prestige in Thai Society]. Bangkok: Social Research Institute.Google Scholar
Chuanpraphan, Winai. 1967. “Rabop sakdinā kap kānbō̜rihān rātchakān [Sakdina System and the Administration].” Dissertation. National Institute of Development Administration. Bangkok (Thailand). Graduate School. Available at: http://www.thaithesis.org/detail.php?id=1222510000014.Google Scholar
Clark, Terry Nichols, and Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1991. “Are social classes dying?” International Sociology 6 (4): 397–410. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/026858091006004002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhiravegin, Likhit. 1978. The Bureaucratic Elite of Thailand: A Study of Their Sociological Attributes, Educational Backgrounds, and Career Advancement Pattern. Bangkok: Thai Khadi Research Institute, Thammasat University.Google Scholar
Ernst, Stefanie, Christoph, Weischer, and Behrouz, Alikhani. 2017. “Changing power relations and the drag effects of habitus. Theoretical and empirical approaches in the Twenty-First century. An introduction .” Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung 42 (4): 7–21. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44469357.Google Scholar
Evers, Hans-Dieter. 1973. “Group conflict and class formation in South-East Asia.” In Modernization in South-East Asia, edited by Evers, Hans-Dieter, 108–131. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Forrest, Adam. 2022. “Britain's ‘desperate’ middle-class are turning to food banks.” Independent, 26 March. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rishi-sunak-food-banks-middle-class-b2042958.html (accessed 4 May 2023).Google Scholar
Fowler, Susan B., and Lapp, Valerie. 2019. “Sample size in quantitative research: Sample size will affect the significance of your research.” American Nurse Today 14 (5): 61+. Gale OneFile: Health and Medicine. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A592663691/HRCA?u=anon~99d47bdd&sid=googleScholar&xid=ef77f33a.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Nigel. 2001. “Research, theory and method.” In Researching Social Life, edited by Gilbert, Nigel, 14–27. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Hakuhodo Institute of Life and Living ASEAN. 2015. The Seamless Middle: New Perspectives on the Asean Middle Class. Available at: https://hillasean.com/assets/pdf/Forum_2015_en.pdf (accessed 5 May 2023).Google Scholar
Horatanakun, Akanit. 2022. “The network origin of the Thai youth revolution.” New Mandala, 15 June. Available at: https://www.newmandala.org/the-network-origin-of-the-thai-youth-revolution/ (accessed 5 May 2023).Google Scholar
Husu, Hanna-Mari. 2013. “Bourdieu and social movements: Considering identity movements in terms of field, capital and habitus.” Social Movement Studies 12 (3): 264–279. doi:10.1080/14742837.2012.704174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutaserani, Suganya, and Somchai, Jitsuchon. 1988. Thailand's Income Distribution and Poverty Profile and Their Current Situations. Bangkok: TDRI. Available at: https://tdri.or.th/2013/05/y88c-2/.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J Craig. 1983. “Resource mobilization theory and the study of social movements.” Annual Review of Sociology: 527–553. Available at: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.so.09.080183.002523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, Alex. 2021. Another Bangkok: Reflection on the Ccity. London: Penguin Books Ltd.Google Scholar
Keyes, Charles. 2012. “‘Cosmopolitan’ villagers and populist democracy in Thailand.” South East Asia Research 20 (3): 343–360. https://doi.org/10.5367/sear.2012.0109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laothamatas, Anek. 2013. Two Democracies in Thailand. Bangkok: Kobfai.Google Scholar
Maninphun, Napaphat, and Chunlawong, Saowanit. 2017. “Ideology of Thai middle class in “Rattanakosin”.” Journal of Humanities, Naresuan University 14 (3): 79–90. Available at: https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jhnu/article/view/172206/123646.Google Scholar
McCargo, Duncan. 2017. “Thailand's urbanized villagers and political polarization.” Critical Asian Studies 49 (3): 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2017.1342985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mobdata. 2022. In Numbers. https://www.mobdatathailand.org/ (accessed 5 May 2023).Google Scholar
National Statistical Office. 2021. Demography Population and Housing Branch. Available at: http://statbbi.nso.go.th/staticreport/page/sector/en/01.aspx. (accessed 5 May 2023).Google Scholar
Pakulski, Jan, and Malcolm, Waters. 1996. The Death of Class. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Pannarunothai, Supasit, Kongmuang, Charatdao, Wattanasupt, Nisaporn, Boonwanno, Thanida, Chaicharoen, Siwaporn, Chankong, Warangkana, and Tonboot, Sila. 2018. Health Equity Monitoring in Thailand. Naresuan University, Pitsanulok: Centre for Health Equity Monitoring Foundation (CHEM).Google Scholar
Rabibhadana, Akin, M.R. 1996. Sangkhom thai nai samai ton krung rattanakosin pho so 2325–2416 [The Organization of Thai Society in the Early Bangkok Period, 1782–1873] 2. Wisdom of the Land Foundation and Thai Association of Qualitative Researchers.Google Scholar
Rehbein, Boike. 2022. “Laos in 2021: One more return to the subsistence ethic?” Asian Survey 62(1): 145–152. doi:https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2022.62.1.14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rigg, Jonathan. 2019. More than Rural. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Rogers, Todd, Goldstein, Noah J., and Fox, Craig R.. 2018. “Social mobilization.” Annual Review of Psychology 69: 357–381. Available at: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Longman Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Sarntisart, Isra. 1994. “Poverty, income, inequality, and health care consumption in Thailand.” Income Distribution and Health Care 25 (4): 618–627. Available at: https://www.tm.mahidol.ac.th/seameo/1994-25-4/1994-25-4-618.pdfGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, Rebecca, and Chen, Guo-Ming. 2012. “The impact of social media on intercultural adaptation.” Intercultural Communication Studies 21 (2): 151–169. Available at : https://web.uri.edu/iaics/files/09RebeccaSawyerGuoMingChen.pdf.Google Scholar
Scott, James C. 1976. The Mmoral Eeconomy of the Peasant. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Stanley, Tom D., Doucouliagos, Hristos, and Ioannidis, John P.A.. 2022. “Beyond random effects: when small-study findings are more heterogeneous.” Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 5 (4). doi:10.1177/25152459221120427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statista. 2023. Average Time Spent Using Online Media in Thailand as of 3rd Quarter 2022, by Activity. 28 February. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/804035/daily-time-spent-using-online-media-by-activity-thailand/ (accessed 4 May 2023).Google Scholar
Streator, Joycelyn. 2020. “Modeling social media influence on social group formation.” SAIS 2020 Proceedings. Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/sais2020/2.Google Scholar
Tang, Mui Joo, and Chan, Eang Teng. 2020. “Social media: Influences and impacts on culture.” In Intelligent Computing, edited by Arai, Kohei, Kapoor, Supriya and Bhatia, Rahul, 491–501. Springer Cham. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52249-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thongsawang, Sirima, Rehbein, Boike, and Chantavanich, Supang. 2020. “Inequality, sociocultures and habitus in Thailand.” SOJOURN: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 35 (3): 493–524. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26937815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Ralph H. 1960. “Sponsored and contest mobility and the school system.” American Sociological Review 25 (6): 855–867. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, Bernhard, and McLaughlin, Kenneth. 2015. “Politicising the psychology of social class: The relevance of Pierre Bourdieu's habitus for psychological research.” Theory & Psychology 25 (2): 202–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Andrew. 2012. Thailand's Political Peasants: Power in the Modern Rural Economy. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Wilterdink, Nico. 2017. “The dynamics of inequality and habitus formation: Elias, Bourdieu, and the rise of nationalist populism.” Historical Social Research 42 (4): 22–42. doi:10.12759/hsr.42.2017.4.22-42.Google Scholar
Yamane, Taro. 1973. Statistics: An Introductory Analysis. 3rd Edition. New York: Harper and Row Publications.Google Scholar
Yanyongkasemsuk, Rungnapa. 2007. “Chonchan nam nai kanmueang thai patchuban: kansueksa krabuankan phalitsam thun watthanatham tam naeo Pi-ae Budi-oe.[Elites in Ccontemporary Thai Politics: A Study of Pierre Bourdieu's Approach of Reproduction of Cultural Capitalism].” PhD diss., Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.Google Scholar