It’s time, I think, to call a spade a spade - the “sufficiency economy” concept is a piece of lazy ideological madness that is being used as a fig leaf of royal legitimacy on the policy ideas (using the term generously) of those who have no idea. In the latest example of sufficiency madness the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (controlled by the Democrat-except-when-we-cannot-win-an-election-and-then-a-coup-is-ok Party) is offering one million baht to communities that can demonstrate their self-sufficiency!! The Bangkok Post reports:
The Democrat-run Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) is giving away a million baht to each city community that joins its sufficiency economy promotion programme, in what critics see as a copycat of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai’s village fund scheme, The BMA is handing out the one million baht per community fund under a programme called ”Self-sufficiency Community Plan According to His Majesty the King’s Self-sufficiency Initiative.”
According to Bangkok governor Apirak Kosayodhin, about 200 communities are among the first group to receive the one-million-baht fund. The BMA expects that it will be able to recruit an additional 500 communities into the programme by the end of the year. Mr Apirak said the 200 communities are drafting their self-sufficiency plans at the moment. They are expected to hand the plans to the city administration by the end of next month.
The city will disburse the one-million-baht fund to the community once its self-sufficiency promotion plan is approved, said the governor. Defending the city administration, BMA spokesman Chanin Roongsang said the city was not trying to implement populist policies that many said characterised the Thai Rak Thai administration. The BMA’s community fund programme is different from the Thai Rak Thai’s one-million-baht village fund scheme, he said. Under the Thai Rak Thai scheme, authorities in charge simply disbursed the fund to each village without paying attention to how each village was planning on spending the money. Under the BMA’s project, all communities that receive money from the fund have to spend the money on pre-approved self-sufficiency activities.
Mr Chanin said the BMA expects more than 4,000 communities around the capital to join its community self-sufficiency programme.
16 responses so far ↓
1 nganadeeleg // Jun 18, 2007 at 10:52 am
It’s time, I think, to call a spade a spade - the “sufficiency economy” concept is a piece of lazy ideological madness
Or, HMK will ultimately be proven to be very wise, and such an ideology will be seen as the only way to sustain the planet.
Andrew, is this another one of your distortion attempts?
Again, I ask what is wrong with the sufficieny economy principles of reasonableness, moderation & immunity ?
2 Vanessa // Jun 18, 2007 at 2:31 pm
From Today’s Bangkok Post “POSTbag”:
Sufficiency unrelated to free expression
I was absolutely stunned to read that taxpayer money was used to send civil servants into Bangkok’s ghettos to stop the poor from joining a protest rally. Even more mind-boggling, the residents of the 1,700 slums were asked to stay away from anti-coup rallies because that would somehow violate His Majesty the King’s sufficiency economy principles.
Huh? First, is there anyone who understands sufficiency principles better than those who daily struggle to survive in the slums of Bangkok?
And what is the relationship between sufficiency economy principles and free expression of political will at a public demonstration? How does protesting a military government violate sufficiency economy principles?
How about holding a seminar for the arrogant Bangkok powers to explain principles of civilian rule, or principles of non-arbitrary rule of law, or principles of providing essential services? How about principles of sidewalk repair or principles of trash collection?
RURAL MANGO
3 Republican // Jun 18, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Nothing inherently wrong with these principles. What is wrong with “sufficiency economy” as a policy is that (i) sufficiency economy has been implemented by a dictatorship installed by a military coup, ie. through force; and (ii) the right to criticize and, if necessary, reject sufficiency economy is denied to the Thai people because it would violate the lese majeste law.
If sufficiency economy were introduced by a democratically elected government, and everyone had the right to freely discuss and criticize it, I would be the first to welcome debate about the theory. But not before.
4 Oberver // Jun 18, 2007 at 5:48 pm
There is nothing wrong with reasonableness, moderation & immunity. Neither is there anything wrong with happiness, beauty and safety. But without a bit more of an explanation, they are hardly useful principals for guiding an economy. They also have very little to do with the BMA project described above.
When a governmnet calls TRT policies evil, then just changes the name to sufficiency policies which makes them good, it becomes clear that sufficiency is just ideological veneer.
At a slogan level just about any economic policy sounds good. What is wrong with “Juche” or self-sufficiency in North Korea? Nothing. What is wrong with the North Korean economy? Everything.
5 Oberver // Jun 18, 2007 at 6:39 pm
By the way, I also like Nourish, Replenish and Grow. Nothing wrong with them either, except they comprise the slogan for the Fertilizer Institute.
http://www.tfi.org
6 Jon Fernquest // Jun 18, 2007 at 11:01 pm
“…offering one million baht to communities that can demonstrate their self-sufficiency!!”
The way it is worded it sounds like they aren’t going to allow people to be creative.
Allowing creativity would be nice.
7 nganadeeleg // Jun 19, 2007 at 9:07 am
Some guidance from HMK:
“Sufficiency Economy is a philosophy that stresses the middle path as the overriding principle for appropriate conduct by the populace at all levels. This applies to conduct at the level of individual, families, and communities, as well as to the choice of a balanced development strategy for the nation so as to modernize in line with forces of globalization while shielding against inevitable shocks and excesses that arise. “Sufficiency” means moderation and due consideration in all modes of conduct, as well as the need for sufficient protection from internal and external shocks. To achieve this, the application of knowledge with prudence is essential. In particular, great care is needed in the utilization of untested theories and methodologies for planning and implementation. At the same time, it is essential to strengthen the moral fibre of the nation, so that everyone, particularly public officials, theorists and businessmen, adheres first and foremost to the principles of honesty and integrity. In addition, a balanced approach combining patience, perseverance, diligence, wisdom and prudence is indispensable to cope appropriately with critical challenges arising from extensive and rapid socioeconomic, environmental, and cultural changes occurring as a result of globalization.”
8 patiwat // Jun 19, 2007 at 11:04 am
Self-sufficiency is fine, except when it is applied by politicians and bureaucrats.
9 Srithanonchai // Jun 19, 2007 at 3:36 pm
nganadeeleg: Nice quote — full off nice-sounding words (just as is Thai practice). A commentator in another post quoted her Thai teacher as interpreting the King’s idea of sufficiency economy as wanting to make the Thais more farang. This quote nicely supports this interpretation.
10 nganadeeleg // Jun 19, 2007 at 6:23 pm
Srithanonchai - In some respects it would be beneficial if Thai’s did become more farang, just like it in others it would be good if farang became more like Thai.
HMK is not alone in banging his head against a brick wall over a long period - it’s a pity more attention was also not paid to others offering sensible advice like Mechai V & Buddhadasa, or even Phra Bodhirak & Sulak, instead of the fortune tellers & demagogues.
11 Seriously // Jun 20, 2007 at 3:02 am
I’ll start to take all this stuff about being “self-sufficient” more seriously when those who most loudly call for it start to redistribute their wealth and live more modestly. I should have been shocked — but wasn’t — when I discovered recently that Thailand is more unequal than Nigeria with respect to income distribution (check out the CIA World Factbook). The feelthy rich in Thailand, like the feelthy rich everywhere, are utterly shameless.
>>”It’s time, I think, to call a spade a spade - the “sufficiency economy” concept is a piece of lazy ideological madness that is being used as a fig leaf of royal legitimacy on the policy ideas (using the term generously) of those who have no idea”
Andrew: care to expand on that? Bit of a sweeping statement!
12 Sufficient // Jun 20, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Is it possible that your demonised Democrats, New Mandala, are actually making some sense out of the sufficiency economy concept and taking the “sustainability” aspect of it and promoting it in a manner that might see it benefit some communities in a city that surely can do with some kind of guidance in terms of sustainable living?
13 Historicus // Jun 20, 2007 at 8:35 pm
The sufficiency nonsense will continue because the military-installed and backed government has just allocated 7-8 billion baht to SE projects.
The view that the SE is about moderation is laughable because it simply means being moderate with what you’ve got. Read the Thai version of Hello or the Tatler to see how the rich are adopting the SE. If you’ve got a lot, you can live moderately at your level of wealth. If you are poor, make do. Not sure you can see this anywhere except in the propaganda on the TV in Thailand, where OTOP projects are relabeled as SE.
And the sick bit is that the wealthiest family in Thailand is promoting this notion. Keep those masses down!
14 Nick Wood // Jun 23, 2007 at 6:26 pm
If the districts of Bangkok were practicing self sufficiency, why would they need 1mn baht to do it?
15 Olim // Sep 16, 2007 at 3:23 pm
get the knowledge before criticised any theory, use the wisdom, not the emotion. I don’t see any academically argument here. What is “rational” or self-interest really mean in the economic. Does it make sense for your living in this planet. Every theory has it owns argument, so please argue with the knowledge.
16 Lleij Samuel Schwartz // Sep 16, 2007 at 11:39 pm
re: Olim> You make an excellent point; however, before anything can be debated in an academic manner, it needs to be defined. The problem is that no one has yet to propose a definition of sufficiency economy that we can all agree on.
Leave a Comment