Memory with the Politics of Silence: Historical Wounds in Contemporary Thai Society

Abstract

This article, “Collective Memory and the Politics of Silence: Historical Trauma in Contemporary Thai Society,” examines the relationship between collective memory and silence as a structural mechanism of political power. It argues that silence is not merely the absence of speech but a strategic tool employed by the state and dominant institutions to control historical narratives, avoid accountability, and normalize political violence. Drawing on theories of collective memory, politics of memory, silence as power, and cultural trauma, the study analyzes the development of memory and silence in Thai political history, focusing on the events of October 14, 1973, and October 6, 1976, as comparative case studies. The findings reveal a sharp asymmetry in Thailand’s memory politics: the October 14 uprising is officially remembered as a democratic victory, while the October 6 massacre has long been rendered silent through state discourse, education, media practices, and failures of the judicial system. This enforced silence has fostered a culture of impunity, enabled the repetition of political violence, and undermined the rule of law and constitutional legitimacy. Through comparison with South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Germany’s post-war confrontation with the Nazi past, the article demonstrates that societies which choose to confront historical violence through truth-telling, transitional justice, and institutionalized memory are better able to transform historical trauma into a moral foundation for democratic legitimacy. In contrast, Thailand’s persistent reliance on the logic of “forgetting for the sake of stability” continues to accumulate unresolved moral and political costs. The article argues that transforming silence into shared truth is a necessary condition for sustainable democracy. It concludes by proposing policy reforms, including the establishment of transitional justice mechanisms, legal protections for truth-seeking and memory work, and the cultivation of public spaces for historical reflection, in order to replace “silent reconciliation” with reconciliation grounded in truth, accountability, and human dignity.