Quote:
Originally Posted by good2bhappy  But was that expressly stated by HRM himself? Or is that an interpretation?
The question is based on your statements regarding your knowledge of HRM's mind. |
That's the thing innit, this policy that he's linked directly to the King by virtue of his intimate knowledge. This is what he left off from his cut 'n pastes:
Quote:
|
There have been the efforts by military junta government to incorporate the King's 'Sufficiency Economy' (Localism) in the national economic policy. The criticism is directed towards the military junta government, i.e., to the practitioners not to the principle itself. The ineffective uses of the philosophy/principle are criticized as (a) The philosophy is not consistent with Thailand economic development, (b) nobody understands it and there are several unclear interpretations, (c) Other theories have historic academic ground
|
And of the article:
Quote:
Note
It should be noted here that the Asian Times's article "the King's 'Sufficiency Economy' (Localism)" is not the right quote and is led to be misunderstood. "Sufficiency Economy" calls for partial localism - a quarter - not the whole[citation needed]. In other words, "sufficiency economy" is meant to be "partial" localism. It is true that many parts of Thailand still enjoy capitalism. "Sufficiency Economy" calls on those to practice "some" localism particularly those in the rural areas.[citation needed] However, the oppositions see no different between "Sufficiency Economy" and "Self-sufficient economy", i.e., they are the same as Localism [5]. Kevin Hewison describes the self-sufficient political agenda in Thailand as Populist Localism.
|