[Image source.]
Chai-anan Samudavanija’s recent op-ed in Manager may provide a clue to his attempt to develop his theory of the Thai state: the Three-Dimensional State Model. In short, the Model argues that a regime, no matter what type of power distribution it has, must pursue at least three goals in order to maintain its power: security, development,and participation. Chai-anan argues that security occupies the top priority of the Thai state’s agenda, whist participation (or democracy) is subordinated.
In this opinion piece, Chai-anan proposes that Thai people should adopt ‘sufficiency democracy’ in addition to ‘sufficiency economy’. He argues that Thailand’s democracy creates conflicts in society instead of acting as a conflict resolution mechanism.
His rationalisation of sufficiency, or ‘enoughness’, is that as part of capitalism democracy is a rule-making mechanism that helps the system to continue and reduce conflict amongst capitalists. Representative democracy lacks broad-based societal relationships. In a representative democracy, people do not know their representatives in person but mainly through their occasional political campaigns and advertisements. Therefore, representative democracy does not promote civic participation in political and policy processes, nor shared values and experience.
Chai-anan argues that democracy works better in other countries because of their long historical experiences, especially the struggle against colonialism. Independence movements encouraged close contact between the movement’s leaders and their supporters.
Chai-anan suggests that Thailand only experiences one type of democratic system through representation. Competition is the key to the state’s power in this system. This is detrimental to social harmony and reconciliation. Those who are economicallywell-off benefit most. This is evident in rampant vote-buying and quotas for many ministerial posts.
Therefore, Chai-anan proposes that Thailand should not pay too much attention to rectifying its political structure. What Thailand can do is to focus on promoting community activities whereby people can work together towards common goals. This doesn’t have to be political or something involving money but something basic and close to their daily problem solving. This community-based participation – not democracy - leads to reconciliation.
He concludes that Thailand should adopt sufficiency as the basis of democratic development. Working together for collective goals comes first. People will learn among each other and know who should be their leaders. They will choose them to be their representatives. Then, democracy comes later.
Chai-anan’s point is not complicated when compared to his seminal Three-Dimensional State Model. His view may reflect three dimensions of ideas that are present in a large group of Thai intellectuals today. First, it is part of a reaction to capitalist economic development at least since the late 1980s when Thailand experienced its economic boom. This anti-capitalist thinking peaked in the aftermath of the 1997 financial crisis. Second, Chai-anan is reflecting a bottom-up approach to democracy and, apparently, a reaction to the rise of the Thai Rak Thai party under Thaksin. Lastly, a nationalist rationale — Thailand’s uniqueness — is the key to negating ‘external’ elements in Thailand’s political economy.
[For previous New Mandala discussion of "sufficiency democracy" see here, here, and here. AW]
All these top-down, aka right-wing, theorists begin with the desired result and then construct a theory that they feel, or hope will produce or justify that result. Their arguments are worth following just as much as are the arguments of ‘creation scientists’ or the disciples of Lysenko. Not at all.
Quality comment or not?
8 
1
Already in August 2011, Chai-anan had published two colums on “sufficiency democracy.” What follows are excerpts from them (apologies for the long “comment”)
(1)
Chai-anand Samudavanija. 2011. “Prachathipattai baep phophiang.” (From a web site, dated August 3, 2011)
Normally, it is thought that decentralization was about local government authorities. However, this still involved people who worked instead of the people. “When com-plete democracy has occurred already, each individual must certainly be able to take care of himself.” This has a broader scope than politics and government. Elections are merely one part. Taking care of oneself means, “comprehensively to take care of one’s way of life.”
This is why we should be interested as much as possible in managing oneself at the community level.
Western democracy has created complete stability, and opened the way for borderless economic activity. “The question is: What is the ultimate goal of our lives? Is it capi-talist democracy, the support of competition, struggle, and an endless quest [for profit, I assume]? On the contrary. The sufficiency philosophy is appropriate and in harmony with the way of life in communities, because in sufficiency there is happiness. Coop-eration and mutual help makes the community peaceful. Therefore, our Thai-style democracy should also have the sufficiency philosophy as an accompanying frame-work.”
A military friend of his had told him about an interesting community on Prachinburi, which had developed features of self-organization stemming from lack of credit and cheap crop prices. Finally, this also included “community democracy.” Everyone took part in the savings groups. They have solved all their problems, including salty water. They even have a local police volunteer.
This community did not start from an emphasis on creating democracy.
It started from joining in activities responding to their needs, which then continuously expanded. Finally, they established sapha ongkon chumchon (community organiza-tion assembly). his is the right direction, because the goal of having democracy is to manage one’s own way of life.
(2)
Chai-anand Samudavanija. 2011. “Prachathipattai baep phophiang (2)” [Sufficiency democracy]. ASTV Phuchatkan, August 8, 2011:12
Talking about “sufficiency democracy” last week “led to the idea that western democracy (prachathipattai baep tawantok) existed to support the capitalist economy, which is the reason why democracy only responds to the needs and interests of the capitalists and the middle class, leading to the conclusion that an important factor of democracy is the support by the middle class.”
In the USA, and many other countries, the poor do not have any place to stay, and no representative of their interests.
The question is what benefit democracy has for the poor in countries such as Thai-land, which has a high number of poor people. We see that the problems of the poor are “not truly” (yang thaeching) paid attention to. Only private organizations and peo-ple’s organizations act as representatives and make demands for this people.
We hope that rural communities can have the shape of democracy. This refers to es-tablishing a form of administration for local communities that uses the means of de-mocracy. However, the truth is that rural people do not quite see the benefit of democ-racy as a method of administration. They do not even cherish their voting rights. Rather, they sell their votes. In national and local-level processes of democracy, the people are rather more objects than they truly participate.
When one’s hope for democracy in Thailand is based on the people’s readiness, and them being an important part of politics, then this probably does not correspond to the real situation. Democracy as form and method “does not have significance in the lives of the villagers.”
Self-organized activities for solving their basic problems are more important to them. For this, they rely on primary relationships, without having to establish formally de-mocratic structures and methods.
From this perspective, “sufficiency democracy” is probably the answer. Yet, what is this “sufficiency democracy?” The most important thing is to look at the goal of de-mocracy, namely the “creation of sufficiency,” and the “creation of immunity for the community and villagers.” “One part of immunization is to protect the communities from the capitalist system entering and destroying them.”
“The capitalist democracy turns out to be dangerous for the villagers, which we can see from villagers being dependent on fertilizer, pesticides, and credit from both in-side and outside the system. Those villagers that could escape from these dangers have invariably returned to natural agriculture, and reduced their involvement with the market. They look for ways to grow plants and raise livestock for their living.”
“The sufficiency economy rejects the capitalist system. The creation of strong com-munities does not start with democratic community structures. Rather, they start with joining simple activities and relying on themselves. …, relying on the market as little as possible.”
“Creating and supporting sufficiency democracy means to emancipate the people so that they are free from the patronage of a political system that uses populist policies as a tool.”
“At the community level, sufficiency democracy can occur.” People also have to rely less on local government authorities. “From this perspective, true decentralization does not mean decentralization from the central government to local government au-thorities. Rather, it has to reach the people, making them perform various activities themselves by preparing a community plan that establishes community-level goals and sets and manages a budget by themselves. Therefore, we can call this a democ-racy that is truly in harmony with the peoples’ ways of life.”
“If we understand the differences between western representative democracy and suf-ficiency democracy, in which the people do not need to have representatives, but have their own plans and budgets, then we will be successful, and are able to solve the peo-ple’s problems.”
Quality comment or not?
3 
3
Sounds to me like another camouflaged plea for “unity”. Same same yawn.
The increasingly desperate ‘network monarchy’ (to borrow McCargo’s famous term) know their usual mantras of one unified nation under king, religion and state blah blah are falling on deaf ears, so now they’re trying other some other pretty words that mean much the same thing.
Quality comment or not?
18 
0
Why is it always that democracy must wait; that conditions just aren’t quite right for democracy yet ?
Secondly, you only need security for a regime to survive. Look at north Korea for heaven’s sake or China (Thailand?).
Sorry, but I think this guys argument is just silly/ignorant.
Quality comment or not?
9 
2
“Sufficiency Democracy” sounds like another harebrained utopian ideology to me. I sometimes wonder how many such ideas have crash and burn, usually leaving behind the blood soaked wreckage of a society, before it becomes clear to those who support them that they simply don’t work. I’m not sure it’s accurate to credit right wing political theorists with a monopoly on this kind of nonsense. After all, the most blood-soaked utopian ideology of them all, defeating even Hitler’s grotesque National Socialism in the body count stakes, was the one invented by Karl Marx and lethally implemented by such narcissistic psychopaths as Mao, Pol Pot and Stalin. Indeed, the kind of enforced collectivism described here as “Sufficiency Democracy” is faintly reminiscent of the back-to-the-land approach of the Khmer Rouge. (The fact is, I suppose, all these demented schemes sound vaguely similar).
Thailand’s democracy is certainly flawed. However, while its undoubtedly true that poorly functioning democracies such as Thailand’s provide a nurturing environment for kleptocrats and Mafia politicians, the answer is not less democracy, it is a functioning judiciary and a strong constitution so that democracy can flourish.
Quality comment or not?
20 
2
Only a half-witted Bangkok hi-so royalist could believe in “Sufficiency” anything…….get out of Bangkok…..
the gigantic modern secular industrial/mass tourism/aviation/container port megapolis of Laem Chabaeng/Chonburi/Pattaya/Jomtien/Rayong (a few million people, much bigger and more dynamic economically than Chiang Mai awaits you….
the bustling cities of Korat, Buri Ram, Ubon, Udon with all of their universities, complex trading and economic relationships, ambitious energetic populations……….
the Meking River cites of Mukdahan, Nakon Phanom, Nong Gai each now with its own bridge facilitating trade, cultural interchange and future prosperity zones with Laos and Vietnam, both way closer than distant Bangkok….
the frantic economic development zone in and around Phuket/Khao Lak, Krabi, soon to have ten million tourists a year with most of them not even setting foot in Bangkok….
the Trat/Koh Chang/SW Cambodia triangle, an economic and cultural zone all to itself which will explode once Koh Kong has its international airport and the mega-development project on Koh Kong Island gets going….
Hat Yai and the Muslim South full of Bahasa speaking ethnic Malays and almost a million Bahasa speaking visitors from Malaysia each year……
Chiang Mai/Chiang Rai and the northern/NE border region, connected more and more to the rapidly developing SW China area and the about to be opened Myanmar……
None of the inhabitants of these areas give a stuff about the Bangkok hi-so royalists’ regressive rightwing fantasies about “Sufficiency Economy” much less being dis-enfranchised by the introduction of “Sufficiency Democracy”…..
None of them share the Bangkok hi-so royalists’ wet dreams about Bhutan as a model for Thailand’s future….
None of them see themselves as going back to their little ancestral rural villages and huts on stilts, living with no incomes and bartering for their daily needs, their kids getting a minimal education and living without dreams……no bank accounts, no motorcycles, no PU trucks, no plasma tv’s, no refrigerators, no overseas contract work, no children leaving the farming areas en masse for the urban centers where the jobs and higher incomes are…..
All this talk of “Sufficiency” is just a load of cod’s wallop, total nonsense, sheltered desperate coddled Bangkok hi-so royalist elites desperately trying to comfort each other as their privileged fantasy world collapses all around them in a constant state of change…
Highly rated. Quality comment or not?
49 
3
#6
Indeed, the almost entire loss of contact to the Thai socio-economic reality (not to mention politics) by people such as Chai-anan (two decades ago arguably the most brilliant political scientist in Thailand, and I do not mean this ironically) truly is one of the more “amazing” phenomena in the public sphere.
Quality comment or not?
9 
0
To be democratic, like being pregnant…either you are or you aren’t.
Quality comment or not?
4 
2
Srithanonchai – yes : I remember Chai-Anan’s brilliance decades ago.
He was one of the brightest analysising May ’92. Not much there now.
Quality comment or not?
6 
0
Forget “Sufficiency Democracy”, how about “Sufficiency Monarchism” per this latest news on the CP’s antics in Germany:
http://www.zenjournalist.com/2012/02/german-newspaper-accidentally-exposes-thai-crown-prince/
Quality comment or not?
12 
0
all these hyper-royalists and relentless right-wings come up with different theories and paradigms of thai state… as a matter of fact, they are saying the same thing: Thais, kiss the dust at the feet of the dhammaraja for his gracious gift — democracy!
Quality comment or not?
7 
0
Great …
and while “communities are actively working together towards common goals on something basic and close to their daily problems”, we will need to identify a someone else to take care of the national weal.
The someone else must be freed from the time-consuming work of … actively working towards common goals on something basic and close to the peoples’ daily problems.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
“What Thailand can do is to focus on promoting community activities whereby people can work together towards common goals.”
Maybe I’m reading the summary wrong, but it appears an author in the Manager is supporting the Red Shirt Village concept . . .
Quality comment or not?
5 
0
Hehehe…
Reminds me of when David Collier and Steven Levitsky warned against “Democracy with Adjectives”.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7620760
Quality comment or not?
3 
0
The entire concept of “sufficiency” is laughable and developed solely with the idea in mind to make the rich even richer, being it in money terms or in power terms and the poor even poorer. Kings and emperors who are not “sufficiently” schooled in economics, water management or any other field should not give their unwanted advice to society, knowing that in a feudal society there close to nonsense comments are often taken seriously by those who close to the top.
It is about time that serious economists will write about nonsense theories of monarchs and their horsemen. If sufficiency was practiced minimum wages in Thailand could have been raised to Chinese levels long time ago, the king would not have donated 100,000 Baht to the flood victims but like Bill Gates a few billion dollars. The rich embraced the nonsense of sufficiency a decade ago, since than their wealth have skyrocketed. Please stop kissing the royal boots.
Quality comment or not?
4 
1
Permit me to ask for some contextualizing information.
Isn’t Chai-anan the principle author and main organizer of the 1997 country-wide writing of the post-Suchinda constitution?
Before that, wasn’t he the co-author (with David Morell) of the magnificent “Political Conflict in Thailand”?
Help me out, but I would say that these two rule out any facile judgements of him as a right-wing royalist. He may just be a victim of the forced-choice polarization that we see occurring.
Further, isn’t there some writing about his reaction to Thaksin’s abuse of power within the same 1997 constitution? Could his current view of democracy’s fallibility stem from that period?
Quality comment or not?
10 
1
“The entire concept of “sufficiency” is laughable and developed solely with the idea in mind to make the rich even richer . . .”(#15)
If what Georgie says is true about ‘Sufficiency”, then that’s no laughing matter. ‘ Making the rich even richer’, if I am not mistaken, happens to be the very same foundation by which capitalism thrives and exults and multiplies . . . exponentially and to great excess.
But Greece (where democracy was invented?) is being prescribed (coerced yes?) the most austere sort of ‘sufficiency’ imaginable to right its past excesses (spending beyond means) by the world’s capitalist lords (IMF, European Central Bank and Big Banks).
Maybe HMK was ahead of the curve with the ‘Sufficiency Economy’, yes?
Quality comment or not?
1 
11
Is not it ironic to me that the people who preach on sufficiency economy the most (the K and those people around him) are mostly people who are extremely rich and famous in Thailand?
If they really believe in sufficiency economy, why don’t they don’t practice it? Why don’t they move to the villages, grow rice & vegetables, raise animals by themselves? Why don’t they sell all their expensive cars and use a small Toyota..why they must keep expanding their business empire? Why don’t settle for a small house somewhere in the village and live happily ever after?
Until those who parrot and/or preach sufficiency economy really practice sufficiency economy, my opinion of this theory shall not change: this whole sufficiency economy theory is all BS.
Quality comment or not?
15 
0
“Chai-anan argues that security occupies the top priority of the Thai state’s agenda, whilst participation (or democracy) is subordinated.”
A military and police force without oversight may be security, but wouldn’t security be better without rampant corruption and rent-seeking in these institutions? This requires oversight so that they are not a law unto themselves and also the participation of an active citizenry. How to get to active participation is an important problem to be solved, not relegated to the dustbin as not important because it is not Thai! There are model politicians such as Rosana in Bangkok who was the watchdog on the PTT privatization and who provide a precedent for active involvement and there are the environmental activists too who often seem to get shot (unfortunately).
Honestly, wouldn’t people like a theory that solved practical problems in their lives more than some non-falsifiable theory that tells them how unique they are or searches for some unique solution for them because they are supposedly so different and unique? And also apparently does so without providing concrete examples. People already do what Chai-anan proposes and not just in Thailand!
“What Thailand can do is to focus on promoting community activities whereby people can work together towards common goals. This doesn’t have to be political or something involving money but something basic and close to their daily problem solving. This community-based participation – not democracy – leads to reconciliation.”
Um, life surrounding the Buddhist temple? That has existed for thousands of years already. Not only here but in Burma, Cambodia, Laos, … In Mae Sai the Tai Lue community comes together every Wan Phraa for morning offerings to the deceased. How many morning drives in the pickup with streamers flying in the back can I remember. Temples in Burma are likewise a focal point for activity. I remember my Burmese wife running off to make the Mohinka for the Dhammayogi (lay women meditators in brown) retreat at “Khin Nyunt’s monastery” down the street. Or in Tachileik waiting in line to get the sage advice of a popular monk on resolving the marital disputes of father and mother in law and listening to so many interesting cases before us, such as the parents of girl apparently crazy, who kept stripping her clothes off and dancing in the street (mental health advice from monks). All community life revolving around the Buddhist temple.
“In a representative democracy, people do not know their representatives in person but mainly through their occasional political campaigns and advertisements.”
Why do you need to personally know your representative as long as he or she is working on your behalf and you are kept up-to-date on their work via a thorough local media (which is perhaps problematic as long as journalists are shot with impunity).
“Therefore, representative democracy does not promote civic participation in political and policy processes, nor shared values and experience.”
Development of a vibrant local media that keeps people informed about what is happening at the local level would promote civic participation. Once again, an active problem solving approach is needed, not casting something off as being not important with the non-falsifiable argument that it is not Thai or not Burmese or not Malay, etc, etc (the old-worn out Southeast studies unique solution gambit, all the mandalas, galactic polities, geobodies, of the past, blah, blah, yawn).
Quality comment or not?
2 
1
Vichai N – 17
You shouldn’t mix up “political system” with “economic system”. They got nothing relate to each other, Greece fail because of undisciplined fiscal policy coupled with global economic slowdown.
Furthermore, the if you want na see ‘Sufficiency Economy’ in action you should check out North Korea. That’s where I think the word “sufficiency” is being push to limit.
Quality comment or not?
1 
0
Maybe an even more ambitious stab at a “pure Sufficiency Economy” than North Korea was the extreme effort by the “French educated, French utopian leftist” plus extreme “denial of ego/self Buddhism” influenced Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge.
Empty out the trading/financial hub/Capital, void all bank accounts/records/credit/credit cards/money, eliminate all “office/white collar” jobs/workers, destroy all records establishing proof pf property ownership, put the entire population “back on the farm”, living in shared huts, eking out a subsistence living, force an extreme “flatness” on the entire society with only a tiny elite in total control with total impunity.
Now that’s enough “Sufficiency” to make even “Sufficiency Economy’s” most strident advocates like Sondhi and Thanong and Chamlong shake in in their boots, much less the average middle-class resident of Bangkok.
Quality comment or not?
2 
0
Here is a recent column by a retired development technocrat on the “universal validity of the sufficiency economy concept”:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/296751/the-universal-truth-of-sufficiency-economy
Quality comment or not?
0 
0