Following Andrew’s extensive reviews of the recently released UNDP report that puts “sufficiency economy” at the heart of Thailand’s human development, The Economist has launched its own broadside at the Thai junta and its economic philosophy. Anybody serious about understanding why so many people around the world are concerned about the direction of Thailand’s political-economy could do worse than read this article.
Its punchline is unsurprising for anybody who has followed Andrew’s analysis. The Economist argues:
In publishing such an unbalanced report on a theory that is untried on a national level, the UNDP has abandoned all sense of objectivity. It is also lending legitimacy to a regime that took power by force. Hakan Bjorkman, the UNDP’s deputy chief in Thailand, says it wanted to provoke a debate. But no such debate is possible in Thailand, because sufficiency theory is the king’s philosophy and anything remotely critical of it could be seen as lèse-majesté, punishable with jail.
10 responses so far ↓
1 Johpa // Jan 13, 2007 at 7:54 am
I do like the note embedded in the punchline that His Majesty is the “developer” of the sufficiency theory, which is why the subject can’t be debated. Or did I just imagine as a young undergraduate, perhaps failing to exhale, reading books and articles on the subject some 35 years ago?
On the other hand, the Economist would not be in favor of self-sufficiency, sustainable development, or any economic theories that did not bring out the pom-poms (with Thomas Friedman as head cheerleader) celebrating the invisible hand of the free market or globalization, which are of course predestined by the almighty and not aspects of economic theory to be debated.
So the failure to discuss economics cuts both ways, Small may be beautiful to only some, but small mindedness seems to be relished by all sides.
2 Bangkok Pundit // Jan 13, 2007 at 10:34 am
We now have a university course on sufficiency economy. Roll up to get your 4 year degree.
3 Andrew Walker // Jan 13, 2007 at 11:17 am
I wonder who will get the first honorary degree? Me, perhaps?
4 anon // Jan 13, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Johpa, surely you’ve mistaken the King’s self-sufficiency theory for some lesser theory? The King himself said in one of his birthday speeches that the self-sufficiency theory was so innovative that it didn’t appear in any textbooks.
As for the undergrad major in sufficiency, that’s not really enough. I’m sure some chlearing university rector (hopefully not that fool who now leads Thammasat) will soon start a PhD program in sufficiency. The first recipient, of course, will be our brilliant genius of a King, who will add it to his record-breaking collection of honorary degrees.
5 VichaI N. // Jan 13, 2007 at 1:15 pm
I am glad Andrew Walker for once accepts he has NOT yet fully studied ‘Sufficiency Economy;. I think no one has for that matter.
But I will accept the point that even those who profess they do, including Pridiyathorn, are actually just groping around trying to interpret the best intentions of HMK on that subject.
And that is the crux of my quarrel with Andrew Walker and Republican to suggest otherwise.
Forget lese majeste fellows, just hone on the facts (of Sufficiency Economy) and criticize accordingly. I will be all ears!
6 fall // Jan 13, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Ehh,.. “sufficient economy” course?
I can live with that if it is for Social Studies program, but in Economics?
I do wonder what the class would be like?
The following situation is just for fun, dont be too serious:
Teacher: Hello, student. Today we will teach about Sufficient Economy. No, we do not have official textbook about it, so dont bother going to library. No, we do not have official theory about it either. But we do have some exemplary case study applied to some local village. Also, Republic of Soviet
could be use to compare to see why it does not work. And how free market does not help improve the standard of living in the US.
Student: Can we comment on its negatively?
Teacher: No, that Lese-majeste!
7 Olivier // Jan 15, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I would be interested to know how the concept of sufficency economy can be concretely implemented in such a touristic country as Thailand !
It seems to me that the “development-through-tourism” policy followed nearly everywhere in the kingdom (especially in the minorities villages of the Royal Projects !) is perfectly contradictory with the idea of sufficiency economy…
8 Olivier // Jan 15, 2007 at 4:09 pm
I find this debates quite surealist in such touristic place as Thailand !…
It seems to me that the “development-through-tourism” policy followed nearly everywhere in the kingdom (especially in the minorities villages of the Royal Projects !) is perfectly contradictory with the idea of sufficiency economy…
9 Republican // Jan 15, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Perhaps they can invite the King, or one of the SS experts from the Privy Council or the Crown Property Bureau, if his age prevents him, to be a guest lecturer. They could explain how all those mega-projects the king has ordered over the last 50 years, particularly the dam-building, which have actually destroyed the local economy and local communities, fit into his self-sufficiency theory. (Or, could the king’s theory of self-sufficiency be an admission, late in his life, that his mega-projects have actually failed?)
But I think I get the idea now: the king destroys any possibility of the villagers’ controlling their own livelihoods by allowing his servants, the ratchakan, to seize control over all the water and other local resources, thereby resulting in widespread rural poverty, as Andrew has argued, where the men have to sell the labour as construction workers in Bangkok and the women sell their bodies. Thus he makes a virtue (self sufficiency) out of a necessity (poverty). To cap it off, he uses the lese majeste law to forbid any criticism of self sufficiency, and supports a military coup to get them to declare it to be economic policy! Oh! What a cunning plan. Yes, he really is a genius king in his ability to deceive even the UNDP.
By the way, if this is the quality of the UNDP’s work in Thailand I would encourage all those interested in working for the UN to write to Mr Ban and apply for a job. The only qualification seems to be a willingness to write propaganda for the royalist military dictatorship.
10 Ann.N // Feb 1, 2007 at 6:53 am
Thanks, first of all for your comments..Republican!!.. to our prefered way of life in here, Thailand. Your comment completely implied how much or barely you really know or understand what about our sufficiency economy’s concept exactly is..apearently! How geneous you are!! You didn’t know what exactly it based on ..right!? Maybe you shoud learn some of our great philosopher Dr.Sittattha before you said or showed off your brilliant IQ, EQ or even PQ also! So, you have to admit one true thing before given your big mounth around here, that we are molded in the different backgrounds both of physical and social environments, including the way of thoughts and particulary different experiances! So, what is the rule that you dared just our prefered way of life…and moreover for the example you gave in case about tourism country as us to be applied by our sufficiency philosophy might be imposible in your eyes but didn’t you know when you came around to travel here that now we’ve already applied it in our tourism more than 20 years before..Its aim to protected over exceeding natural exploitations..to delay the decayed rates to sustainable for recovering..that’s it! But you didn’t mention about it at all..how you understand our philosophy completely..huh?!
Genious!! We all have both of dark and bright sides all the rest! Last but not least,
I give this to you Republican..Do not just anyone if you still not walking 2 moons in his/her moccacines!
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.