A Critique of Pridi Panomyong's Economic Plan
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This paper deals with Pridi Panomyong's Economic Plan (the PEP). Published shortly after the Siamese Revolution in March 1933, the PEP was originally attacked for its alleged Stalinism, but with the rehabilitation of Pridi from the 1980s, by both left and liberal leaning scholars, the PEP was reinterpreted as evidence of Pridi's social democracy – liberalism with the soft socialism elements. For many contemporary scholars, the PEP is not a radical plan; instead, it offers a modest economic program similar to a modern welfare state. They also believe that the PEP is desirable because they believe that if it had been implemented it would have realized economic justice. This paper reexamines the veracity of these perceptions of the PEP, and argues that the PEP is much more radical than it is now being perceived, and that it is indefensible because it would undermine economic self-determination and the status of democratic citizenship. The PEP would turn citizens into state functionaries rather than free citizens able to exercise their economic self-determination, and they would need to trust a central government rather than themselves and their fellow nationals.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Pridi Panomyong, The Economic Plan (Bangkok: The Glorification of Pridi Panomyong Project for Youth, 1999). [in Thai].
About a month after Pridi introduced the PEP, the so-called royal judgement against Pridi's Economic Plan was launched. It is unclear who actually wrote the royal judgement. But it is believed that the King Rama VII would have totally agreed with it. Since the PEP and the royal judgement were first published in 1933, they have been published very often until now. This reflects the historical importance of these two documents [See Nattaphol Chaiching, The Desire for an Unbelievable Dream: Counter-Revolution Movement in Siam (1932-1957) (Nontaburi: Fadeawkan, 2021), Ch. 7. [in Thai]. Apichat and Isakul rightly commend that if the People's Party could implement the PEP, they would be able to win over the old regime because they would have controlled all (productive) land. The old regime would severely suffer from the loss of political and economic powers [Apichat Satitniramai and Isakul Unhaket, Capital, Palace, Treasury, Feudal: Thai Political Economy Wars and the Unsettled Democracy (Bangkok: Matichon, 2021), 76. [in Thai]].
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 109.
Somsak Jeamteerasakul, History That Was Just Made: Collected Articles Related to October 14 and October 6 Events (Bangkok: 6 October Commemoration Publishing, 2001), 4. [in Thai].
Prajak Kongkirati, And Then The Movement Emerged: Cultural Politics of Thai Students and Intellectuals Movements Before the October 14 Uprising (Nonthaburi: Fadeawkan, 2013) [in Thai].
Somsak Jeamteerasakul, “The Problem of the Study of the Thai Monarchy,” Fadeawkan, 11:2 (2013), 82-84 [in Thai].
For many contemporary scholars, it is wrong to interpret the PEP as radical as the communist project. Please see Chattip Nartsupha, “The Cooperative Thought of Pridi Panomyong,” In Nartsupha, C. and Sopolsiri, S. (Eds.), The Cooperative Thought of Pridi Panomyong and Pridi Panomyong and the Creation of Thai Intellect (Bangkok: Augsornsarn, 1987). [in Thai]. Anusorn Thammajai, “A Critique of the Economic Thought of Pridi Panomyong and the Future of Thai Political Economy,” In Kortnonenok, P. et al. (Eds.). Pridi Day (Pathum
Thani: Office of Public Relations, Thammasat University, 2012). [in Thai]; Anusorn Thammajai, “Elder Statesman Pridi Panomyong's Conception of Complete Democracy and Economic Plan,” (2014). Retrieved 1 March 2018 from https://prachatai.com/journal/2014/06/54217 [in Thai]; Anusorn Thammajai, “Elder Statesman Pridi Panomyong's Economic Plan and From Womb to Tomb (1),” (2016). Retrieved 1 March 2018 from https://prachatai.com/journal/2016/07/66659 [in Thai]; Anusorn Thammajai, “Elder Statesman Pridi Panomyong's Economic Plan and From Womb to Tomb (2),” (2016). Retrieved 1 March 2018 from https://prachatai.com/journal/2016/07/66717 [in Thai]; Anusorn Thammajai, “Elder Statesman Pridi Panomyong's Economic Plan and From Womb to Tomb (3),” (2016). Retrieved 1 March 2018 from https://prachatai.com/journal/2016/07/66784 [in Thai]; Anusorn Thammajai, “Presentation. In Prachatai (Reporter.). Reading Panomyong's Economic Plan: Thammajai Points Out “Without Democracy, Without Welfare States”,” (2016). Retrieved 1 March 2018 from https://prachatai.com/journal/2016/06/66531 [in Thai]. Isariya Nitithanprapart, “Presentation. In Prachatai (Reporter.). Reading Pridi's Economic Plan: Anusorn Points Out “Without Democracy, Without Welfare States,” (2016). Retrieved 1 March 2018 from https://prachatai.com/journal/2016/06/66531 [in Thai].
Anusorn, “A Critique of the Economic Thought of Pridi Panomyong and the Future of Thai Political Economy,” 12.
Anusorn, “Elder Statesman Pridi Panomyong's Conception of Complete Democracy and Economic Plan.”
Anusorn, “Presentation. In Prachatai (Reporter.). Reading Panomyong's Economic Plan: Thammajai Points Out “Without Democracy, Without Welfare States.”
Isariya, “Presentation. In Prachatai (Reporter.). Reading Panomyong's Economic Plan: Thammajai Points Out “Without Democracy, Without Welfare States.”
Chattip, “The Cooperative Thought of Pridi Panomyong,” 3-4.
Porphant Ouyyanont, The Economic History of Thailand (Bangkok: CU Press, 2021), 106-107 [in Thai].
Chattip, “The Cooperative Thought of Pridi Panomyong,” 8-9.
Thongchai Winichakul, “Interview,” In Penaek Ratanaruang and Passakorn Pramounwong (eds.), Paradoxocracy (Bangkok: Matichon, 2014), 43-44.
Thaipublica (Reporter), “Economic Plan 1932 – 2013: Is “Land Reform” Possible?” (2013). Retrieved 20 January 2023 from https://thaipublica.org/2013/06/economic-plan-1932-to-2013/ [in Thai].
Somsak Jeamteerasakul is an exception. As a well-known anti-royalist scholar, Somsak also criticizes Pridi and the PEP in many aspects.
For those who are interested in this issue, see Tippawan Jeamteerasakul, The Political Thought of Pridi Banomyong: The Early Years (1900-1934) (Bangkok: The Glorification of Pridi Panomyong Project for Youth, 2001). [in Thai].
For those who are interested in this issue, See Somsak Jeamteerasakul, The Communist Movement in Thailand (PhD Thesis, Department of Politics, Monash University, 1993).
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1971), 14-15.
Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1974), 160.
Somsak, The Communist Movement in Thailand, p. 112. Somsak's criticism will be explored in the next section.
Sarenee Achavanuntakul, “The Economic Plan in Economic Thought,” Thammasat University Archieve Bulletin, 14 (2010), 13.
Isariya, “Presentation.”
Chris Baker and Pasuk Phongpaichit, A History of Thailand, 3rd Edition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 119.
Somsak, The Communist Movement in Thailand, 112.
The collective consent here refers to the consent of all citizens as a whole rather than of each individual citizen. If I have freedom to vote for a public policy, but at the end my preferred policy is outweighed by other less preferred policies, then it can be said that I have given my collective consent to those less preferred policies, given that the process of voting is free and fair.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 17.
Suehiro Akira, Capital Accumulation in Thailand 1855 – 1985 (Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 1996), 107.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 17-18.
David W. Garland, The Welfare State: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 9.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 17.
Somsak, The Communist Movement in Thailand, 112.
Pakpoom Saengkanokkul, “Solidarism and Pridi's Economic Plan,” Aarn, December (2014), 201.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 35-36.
Somsak, The Communist Movement in Thailand, 105.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 8-9.
Garland, The Welfare State, 66.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, p. 10, 15. It should be noted that Pridi means to use “social parasites” to refer mainly to the farmers who are the most citizens of Siam at that time as Pridi says that “the affairs in Siam are different from that of Western countries. In Siam, the middle class (bourgeoisie) is the working people. Instead, the farmers have a lot of free time which makes them lazy, and they would do undesirable things in their free time such as drinking too much, stealing, and so on” (Ibid., 139, 157).
Chattip, “The Cooperative Thought of Pridi Panomyong,” 8-9.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 23, 30.
Preecha Piampongsan, “The Political Economy Thought of Dr. Pridi Panomyong,” In Narong Petchprasert (ed.), Political Economy, 10 (Bangkok: Adison Press Production, 1999), 78.
Michael J. Sandel, Democracy's Discontent: A New Edition for Our Perilous Times (Cambridge, MA.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2022), 13.
Pridi, The Economic Plan, 18-20, 30-31, 35-38, 55-56.