A few months ago, I wrote a column here in the Diplomat predicting that Thailand’s Constitutional Court would end up ordering the dissolution of the Move Forward Party, the largest party in the country’s parliament. After several delays, the court finally delivered this verdict last week. The party was dissolved.

The point of my earlier column was that dissolution would always be a foolish move. On an intellectual level, the attacks on Move Forward were led by reactionaries who argued, without evidence, that Move Forward’s campaign proposal to amend the royal defamation lese-majeste law amounted to an attempt to overthrow the nation’s constitutional monarchy. Yet, by doing so, they have seemingly just admitted that two-fifths of Thais have no problem voting for a party that apparently wants to overthrow the monarchy.

Note, their argument wasn’t that Move Forward was silently plotting against the King, that this aim was somehow hidden from the public. The slander flung against Move Forward was that it campaigned on that agenda. In other words, the reactionaries (and now the Constitutional Court) have opined that tens of millions of Thais voted for the party in the full knowledge that, as they claim, it wanted to overthrow the monarchy. Aren’t these voters, then, guilty by association? Hasn’t the highest court in the land just opined that a large plurality of Thais are knowingly voting for a seditious party? Isn’t the Constitutional Court’s ruling the most damning indictment of royalism? After all, despite the threat of dissolution for this apparent crime, Move Forward remains the most popular party, and its former leader, Pita Limjaroenrat, is the most favored candidate for prime minister, according to the latest opinion polls

Can one understand why the royalist-conservative establishment pursued the dissolution of Move Forward? Maybe. It’s been a desperate past few months for the reactionaries. Thai politics is rarely orderly, but it has been a hot mess since last year’s elections. The reactionaries could only break up a wobbly, pre-election pact between Move Forward and Pheu Thai, the two largest parties, by allowing the exiled Thaksin Shinawatra to return home. That bought off Pheu Thai, which quit its pact with Move Forward and joined the reactionaries and militarists in a coalition government.

The problem, however, is Thaksin thought he was free and started politicking again, so the establishment was forced to reactivate an old lese-majeste charge against him in June to try to shut him up. No one in the establishment really wants this to go to trial, but it’s a useful dagger to hang over him, especially as Thaksin’s parole ends later this month.

At the same time, the reactionaries faced a change to the Senate, which stripped the upper chamber of its military-appointed delegates, in June. The Bhumjaithai party gamed the Senate “election” that month, so now the reactionary Anutin Charnvirakul, the interior minister, is pretty much in charge and his party has made itself royal-defender-in-chief.

All of this tinkering with the post-election landscape, Thitinan Pongsudhirak wrote recently, is a way for “establishment forces to feel sufficiently secure.” Naturally, then, they thought they’d feel more secure with Move Forward out of the way (for now).

Institutionally, this is senseless. Granted, Pita and 10 other senior figures will now be banned from politics for 10 years. But it brought international censure that Bangkok could do without; even the U.S. State Department said it was “deeply concerned” by the party’s dissolution. Moreover,  the other 143 Move Forward parliamentarians met last weekend and formed the People’s Party, which is now the largest opposition party. It’s no different from Move Forward, something the Thai people know.

Also, pay attention to this “new” party’s leader. The ex-Move Forward, now-People’s Party parliamentarians elected Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, 37, a computer science graduate, as their new champion. In many ways, he’s a cut-out of Pita: young, good-looking, Western-educated, from a business background, and knows how to campaign on social media.

Indeed, what Move Forward did was to create a new archetype for a popular leader. In the past, Thai leaders were either paternal or avuncular. The generals and reactionaries offered the stern hand of a father to provide for the “children” and keep them in order. Thaksin Shinawatra’s populist clan ruffled the people’s hair like a caring, wise uncle who knows what’s in their best interests.

But the new archetype, epitomized by Pita and now adopted by Natthaphong, is a brother-like figure who’s happy to play the same games as you (especially on social media) and who’s happy to go along with your ideas. (Remember, it was activists who pushed the Move Forward party to take harder and harder positions on royal reform and lese-majeste.) It’s hard to see how the reactionaries and populists can now rid the political theater of this brotherly character that is so popular with the Thai people.