This qualitative study of the relationships between one primate city, Bangkok, and its hinterland, the Thai nation, breaks new ground in general sociological theory, redirects the study of city-hinterland relationships, and presents an interpretation of Thai political history that departs significantly from conventional analyses. Professor London finds a direct correlation between the nature of intergroup relationships and the type of parasitism or internal colonialism evident in center-periphery relationships. He concludes that Bangkok, through the operations of its decision-making elite, has historically been parasitic on the Thai nation and that primate city parasitism is essentially a political phenomenon, more complex than has been previously suggested.

This qualitative study of the relationships between one primate city, Bangkok, and its hinterland, the Thai nation, breaks new ground in general sociological theory, redirects the study of city-hinterland relationships, and presents an interpretation of Thai political history that departs significantly from conventional analyses. Professor London finds a direct correlation between the nature of intergroup relationships and the type of parasitism or internal colonialism evident in center-periphery relationships. He concludes that Bangkok, through the operations of its decision-making elite, has historically been parasitic on the Thai nation and that primate city parasitism is essentially a political phenomenon, more complex than has been previously suggested.