2006年9月19日泰國爆發字1991年以來首次的軍事政變，結束了長達近一年的反塔克辛運動，總理塔克辛(Thaksin Shinawatra)被迫下台並流亡海外，臨時政府預計將以一年的時間進行政治改革，修訂新憲法與重新舉行國會大選，塔克辛時代正式宣告結束。事實上，2001年時塔克辛率領泰愛泰黨(Thai Rak Thai Party)以極大的差距擊敗民主黨(Democrat Party)，順利當選泰國總理，歷經四年的執政之後，再度於2005年獲得連任。儘管塔克辛具有龐大民意的支持，但由於塔克辛本身與大財團之間的密切關係，以致於從其上台之後就陸續有反對聲浪出現，到最後則以軍事政變收場。本文主要探討泰國自1932年至2006年政商關係的轉變，以及反塔克辛運動最後演變成軍事政變的原因。主要的論點則在於塔克辛上台之後，泰國的政商關係已經由金錢政治(money politics)轉變成大型金錢政治(big money politics)，而塔克辛與財團企業之間的密切關係，以及所衍生的親信主義(cronyism)等問題則是泰國2006年發生軍事政變最主要的原因。
The first coup d’etat since 1991 in Thailand on 19 September 2006 ended not only the year-long anti-Thaksin demonstrations, but also Thaksin’s political career. The provisional government, led by General Sonthi Boonyaratglin, organized by the Council for Democratic Reform (CDR), was determined to restore a democratic government, to revise the new constitution, and hold a general election within one year. In the 2001 general election, Thaksin Shinawatra led the Thai Rak Thai (TRT) Party and triumphantly defeated the Democratic Party. The victory led Thaksin Shinawatra to becoming the 23rd Prime Minister of Thailand. In 2005, after four years of rule, the TRT won the election again and was re-elected government of Thailand. However, despite of his popularity, Thaksin Shinawatra faced criticism from various civic groups because of his close relationship with his Shin Corporation and the other big business groups. This paper explores the business and politics in Thailand from 1932 to 2006. It argues that since 1991, under the leadership of Thaksin Shinawatra, the relationship between business and politics have transformed from “money politics” to “big money politics”. Moreover, it asserts that this transformation and the cronyism on the part of the Thaksin government led to the coup d’etat in 2006.
國家機關(the State)是否利用國家資源干預市場(the Market)、國家機關是否應選擇某些特定產業加以扶植(selective policy)?這些投入資源是否能被有效達成發展的目的?是政治經濟學界有關「新古典經濟學派」與 「發展型國家學派」爭辯的焦點。在東協國家中，同樣自 1970 年代發展汽車產業，為何泰國與馬來西亞的汽車產業發展出現差距?差距是否源自國家機關與產業政策互動的結果?本研究藉由探討馬來西亞與泰國汽車產業的發展歷程，試圖比較與論證..
Whether should the state interfere the market by using state resources? Should the state cultivate certain industries? Does the state resources work to help the state achieve developmental goals? These are the arguments between the ‘New Classical Economics School’ and the ‘National Development School’. Automobile industries in both Thailand and Malaysia developed in the 1970s with governmental interference but the development in the two countries diverged. Does the difference come from the interactions..
本文主要在探討泰國金融改革過程中，國內主要行為者之間的制度性關係。受到 1997 年金融風暴的影響，民主黨(Democrat Party)的乃川 (Chuan Leekpai)政府接受國際貨幣基金(International Monetary Fund, IMF)的建議與援助，從國家長期發展的角度出發，採取了相關的結構性改革政策。但是，2001 年上台的塔克辛(Thaksin Shinawatra)政府卻採取凱恩斯主義為主的民粹政策，希望可以在短期內達到金融..
This paper explores the domestic institutional arrangements and relationships among key political and financial actors in the process of Thailand’s financial reform. Affected by the Asian 1997 financial crisis, the Chuan government adopted structural reform policies which were suggested by the IMF as a long-term solution. However, the Thaksin government which took office in 2001 adopted Keynesian and populist policies to stimulate economic growth and financial stability which focused on short term results. Whose policie..
Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.