Thai Values Under Siege
by Richard Watson Todd
Several qualities that make the Thai lifestyle so attractive are being undermined by the government's obsession with economics.
The Thaksin government is almost exclusively focused on improving economic
growth, international competitiveness and income from exports. While no-one would
argue that these economic issues do not warrant attention, there is a danger that
the single-mindedness of government policies could have an adverse effect on other
issues central to a good quality of life.
A reasonable level of wealth is a prerequisite for a good quality of life, and so
the government's attempts to strengthen the economy could be seen as generally
improving people's lives. If, however, these economic initiatives can only succeed
at the expense of societal and environmental assets, quality of life may actually
diminish.
The recent series of articles in the Bangkok Post on the unrestrained development
of Koh Chang has shown how an emphasis on creating wealth can have wide-ranging
adverse consequences on the environment. Less clear is the impact of the drive for
economic growth on society.
In many ways, Thai society provides a model for other countries. Indeed, in an
ideal world Thailand would be exporting certain facets of its society to the
benefit of other nations. Three inter-related social facets in particular are of
great value _
- tolerance,
- personal freedom,
- and the concept of sanuk (fun)
Historically, Thailand has been a very accepting and accommodating society with high levels of tolerance for others. One clear example is the acculturation of Chinese immigrants. The Chinese community in Thailand see themselves as Thai first and Chinese second. This is not the case in other Southeast Asian countries, where the immigrant communities view themselves as primarily Chinese and racial tensions can run high. The integration of Chinese immigrants into Thai society largely comes down to the tolerance and acceptance of the Thai people.
Another example is the gay community in Thailand, which in general is far less persecuted than in comparable countries. Again, a basic tolerance for others leads to a more harmonious society.
Unfortunately, the continuing problems in the far South of Thailand, which have become so tragically serious under the two Thaksin governments, are providing a challenge to harmony and tolerance. There is a growing danger of general intolerance of Muslims, irrespective of their political beliefs.
A second, more subtle type of intolerance which has been gaining ground since Thaksin came to power concerns the second of the valuable social assets of Thailand, namely, personal freedom.
Thai society has a well-earned reputation for being non-judgmental concerning personal behaviour. As long as no-one is being harmed, traditionally people have had the personal freedom to do as they liked. Within the last five years, however, a host of small but voluble pressure groups has sprouted up with the aim of controlling how others behave. Always trying to take the moral high ground, these groups spread an atmosphere of intolerance as they attempt to restrict personal freedoms.
Concomitantly, Thailand is following other countries in moving towards being a "nanny state", where personal behaviour is controlled by a plethora of annoying petty laws. Those hardest hit by the laws are those without a voice to defend themselves. Youth are an easy target, with the 10 p.m. curfew on under-sixteens and the ban on spaghetti straps typically oppressive puritanical dictates.
The government appears to believe that children should spend all of their time studying, and any distractions, such as enjoying themselves, should be banned. Policies and statements by various politicians also imply that adolescents have a general attraction towards sin that must be pre-emptively repressed.
All of this smacks of hypocrisy. It seems very unlikely that all of the politicians were angels in their adolescent days, especially if their adult behaviour is anything to go by. Along with a bevy of minor wives attached to Parliament, within the last few years a senator has been imprisoned for having sex with an underage girl, several politicians have been accused of rape but argued that they paid for the sex, and then there are the infamous "flower arrangers" who gave private lessons in bedrooms at a political function a few years ago.
The need for morality appears only to apply to the unwashed masses whose personal freedom the politicians are always ready and willing to curb.
What's wrong with a little fun?
All of this brings us to the third social asset that is under threat _ the concept of sanuk, or fun. Ten years ago, Thais would proudly inform visitors of the importance of sanuk in Thailand, but the idea is disappearing fast. I cannot remember the last time I read a newspaper interview that included the idea of sanuk or heard someone speaking of the concept with pride.
The government clearly, if not explicitly, disapproves of sanuk. Instead of citizens having fun and enjoying themselves, the government wants everyone to be sober hard-working automatons dedicated to the greater glory of the Thai economy (and, incidentally, putting more money in the pockets of the economic moguls running the country at present).
Some of the petty regulations ostensibly introduced to solve other problems appear to really aim at reducing opportunities for sanuk. An example is the enforced closure of petrol stations at night, supposedly to save energy. This rule, however, has many problems.
Firstly, given that petrol station mini-marts are still open 24 hours and brightly lit, it seems unlikely that the regulation is saving much energy. Secondly, there are many other more effective ways to save energy, such as setting a minimum temperature of, say, 25 degrees for all government offices (including the offices of ministers and permanent secretaries which are cooled to well below 20 degrees so that everyone can look suave by wearing a jacket). Thirdly, petrol stations offer much more than petrol _ where do you go at night if you're driving and get a puncture?
The regulation to close petrol stations at night, then, does not seem to be a rational one. If, however, we view the regulation as a surreptitious way of controlling people's freedom to have sanuk, things become clearer.
I am not arguing that everyone should be out-and-out hedonists, but enjoying life is important. After all, "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" and the Thai concept of sanuk is a valuable way of increasing happiness and harmony.
If the government continues to restrict sanuk, Thailand runs the risk of becoming drab and dull like the Singapore of a few years ago. Realising the importance of sanuk for society, the Singapore government has recently started promoting enjoyment and is actually spending large sums to make the island nation a more sanuk place. At present, Thailand still has the edge, but the Thai government seems to be doing its best to recreate the purely work-focused and dull social environment of old Singapore that the latter now acknowledges as a mistake.
The three social facets of tolerance, personal freedom and sanuk are vital for a happy, healthy and harmonious society. Even focusing purely on economic growth, the Thaksin government's monomania, the three facets are important.
Tourism is a key sector for the economy, and just as a degraded environment hinders tourism, a degraded society, one where intolerance, government control and dullness rule, will repel potential tourists.
There is more to good governance than promoting the economy, and the role of governments is not to control the lives of citizens. Rather, governments need to focus on improving quality of life and a healthy, harmonious society is crucial to achieving this.
More important than another half-point percentage increase in GDP are tolerance, personal freedom and, yes, even sanuk _ those social facets where Thailand has traditionally been a model for the world.
Disclaimer
posted by Chazzsongs at
4:40 AM
