Localism (politics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
? This article or section may contain original research or unattributed claims.
Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

Localism describes a range of political philosophies which prioritise the local. Generally they support local production and consumption of goods, local control of government, and local culture and identity. Localist politics have been approached from many directions by different groups. Nevertheless, localism can generally be described as related to Regionalism, and in opposition to Centralism. It is primarily a rural movement.

Contents

[edit] History

Localists assert that throughout the world's history, the scale of most social and economic institutions has been local, as opposed to regional, inter-regional, or global. Only with imperialism and the industrial revolution did local scales become deingrated. Most strands of localism position themselves as defending aspects of this earlier way of life; the phrase "relocalization" is often used in this sense.

In the 20th Century, localism has drawn heavily on the writings of Leopold Kohr, E.F. Schumacher, and Kirkpatrick Sale, among others. More generally, localism has drawn on a wide range of movements and concerns that it proposes to address by re-localizing institutions. These include anarchism, bioregionalism, environmentalism, the Greens, and more specific concerns about food, monetary policy, and education. Political parties of all persuasions have also occasionally favored devolution of power to local authorities. In this vein Alan Milburn Labour Party MP has spoken of "making services more locally accountable, devolving more power to local communities and, in the process, forging a modern relationship between the state, citizens and services"[1]

Beginning in the 1980s, a particular visible strain of localism in the United States was a movement to buy locally produced products. This movement originated with organic farming, and likely gained impetus because of growing dissatisfaction with organic certification. While the advocates of local consumption drew on protectionist arguments, they also appealed primarily to an environmental argument: that pollution caused by transporting goods was a major externality in a global economy, and one that "localvores" could greatly diminish.

[edit] Localism as a Political Philosophy

In the early 21st century, localists have frequently found themselves aligned with critics of globalisation, and especially with the Left. Variants of localism are prevalent within the Green movement. According to an article in the International Socialism Journal, localism of this sort seeks to "answer to the problems created by globalisation" with "calls to minimise international trade and to seek to establish economies based on ‘local’ self-sufficiency only."[2]

Some Localists believe that society should be organised politically along community lines, with each community being free to conduct its own business in whatever fashion its people see fit. The size of these communities is defined such that their members are both familiar and dependent on each other - a size something along the lines of a small town or village.[citation needed]

In reference to Localism Edward Goldsmith, former editor of The Ecologist magazine, claims that "The problems facing the world today can only be solved by restoring the functioning of those natural systems which once satisfied our needs, i.e. by fully exploiting those incomparable resources which are individual people, families, communities and ecosystems, which together make up the biosphere or real world"[3].

[edit] Localism in Thailand

[edit] Self-sufficiency and its proponents

The chief proponent of localism in Thailand is King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who called it "self-sufficiency economic theory." The foundations of Bhumibol's theory included sustainability, moderation and broad-based development. Bhumibol claimed that his theory was a new breakthrough school of economic thought. Public criticism of the theory has been muted due to Thailand's harsh lese majeste laws. The policies of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra are largely considered not to have followed the theory, e.g., his universal healthcare scheme, poverty reduction programs, and a fiscal policy that cut public debt and built strong currency reserves.[1]

On the other side, those supporting this philosophy may argue "who interprets this philosophy that way?", "it's all wrong interpretation." This philosophy doesn't encourage trade volume reduction. It only guides people in all business levels to invest only the amount that, if things fail, they can still have some assets left to tackle the problems. It's true that this philosophy doesn't encourage over-spending or over-expanding activities, but this is in all text books[citation needed]. There should be no theories that encourage businessmen to invest without calculating all the risks, not even acceptable risks, and that is the core of the King's concept about sufficiency economy philosophy. Both market size and trade volume can increase every year under this philosophy, and only the companies behind this growth should grow only by using funds that are not exceeding their all business assets. This was not the case in the past 4-5 years in Thailand[citation needed]. Thai people, especially the poor ones, had been easily requesting for an amount of loans that were far more than their assets or even no assets at all. Some Thai people may say that this policy is excellent but some also say that this policy will lead to a disaster for those people.

[edit] Self-sufficiency and its critics

Info icon This section does not cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!) This article has been tagged since February 2007.

[edit] Failure of the philosophy

There have been the efforts by military junta government to incorporate the King's 'Sufficiency Economy' (Localism) in the national economic policy. The criticism over localism in Thailand does not direct to the philosophy itself (in Thailand, it has also been known as 'self-sufficient economic philosophy'), but the critism 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 criticised 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, (d) If it is the best philosophy, why hasn't anyone used it? [4].

The principle is depicted among Thais as God-given philosophy, but still out of reach and beyond human understanding. Because of this, there have been no Thais (publicly or unpublicly) criticised over the philosophy itself. The philosophy is still far from practicable. An unclear plan and various inconsistent interpretations have been blamed to avoid lese majeste.

The military junta government speak for itself as an advocate for self-sufficient economical policy. However, the government actions still favour export-oriented, and neglect to act consistently to the philosophy (to promote local demand for local products; reduce demand for imported products; decrease market size and promote barter trade instead). Some may argue that the structure of the Thai economy does not allow any government to pursue the philosophy bacause Thailand still rely on import for petroleum products, machinery, and high-tech products, and rely on export for food and textile products. To decrease trade and reduce the market size would be of huge impact to Thai economy.

The philosophy encourage the reduction in market size, particularly it denies the existence of the financial market at all. Without the highly-developed market, comsumers lose benefit from undermining consumers' ability to compare the prices. Without the financial market, large investment cannot be made. Large investment such as sanitary system, water supply, irrigation facilities, etc.

Not all Thais agree with the idea/philosophy, since capitalism has been used and tested for a long time. The self-sufficiency philosophy is not one of the economic schools and can not be used solely without capitalism. It is only designed to cover the weaknesses in the capitalism, i.e. the philosophy alone cannot be used solely, but can be the implement to capitalism. By attacking on the weaknesses in capitalism, his philosophy and the King gain reputation as the savior and the new canon that can save the world.

For example, the philosophy states that one must consider the investment at low risk, avoid the investment that possess the potential of over-finance. This idea is not new, but has already been in the financial textbook (close to the concepts in finance: Liquid ratio, acid retio, debt-capitol ratio, etc.).

Another example in the philosophy: one must save money enough before investment, do not borrow other people money for the investment. This idea in the philosophy demonstrates the unclear understanding of the King about the concepts of economy of scale and economy of scope in economics. In economics text, the size of an investment consideration does not due to the sum of saving solely. But the size of any investment must be condisered to cover the cost, exploit the effect of economy of scope and economy of scale, etc.

Another example, "one must imvest with great care to the environment and future generation." This idea is close to (or even the same as) the concept of sustainable development. The philosophy over-emphasize on the externality that investment, in capitalism, creates. Externalities such as pollution and over-exploitation of resources have been emphasizes in the philosophy. The problem of externality may not need the new economic school to solve, but may be solved by the effective use of regulations.

However, the King brings the concept of sustainable development and feature it as the main idea in his own localist-style philosophy. However, Thais perceive the idea of sustainable development as the king-created concept that is far more superior than any other theories in capitalism. The contradiction of the 'self-sufficient' to tradition mixed-economy contributed to the fact that Thais educates refute to the King's Localism.

Self-sufficiency economy (Localism) offers the idea of limited productions for the purpose of saving the environment and scarce resources. The production is limited to the level that adequate for individual consumption the excess of the consumption will be for sale. However, the some resources are renewable and no cost to the environment, e.g., labor. If the philosophy is used, the production will be restricted and countries may not meet it efficient level of production. For example, a person may work at 2-3 hours a days (compare to current economy that a person work 8 hours a day). The supply of goods to the market will be limited and will raise the prices. Eventually, a person cannot afford the very high prices of products in the market, because a person produces mainly for self-consumption and little income form sales. This would be the failure of the king's self-sufficiency economy.

[edit] Failure of the application

Asia Times Online has published an article that analyzes the Thai military junta government's economic policy that is fully influenced by the King's self-sufficient philosophy [5]. The article notices the unexpected, rather bold step in Thailand economic development of the military junta government, endorsed by the King, that willingly responds to the King's philosophy. The article criticizes the philosophy as being so new as to have no academic ground and no empirical approval. As a consequence, any misstep, whether improper interpretation from the philosophy to be economic policy or the unauditted practices, would have caused the Thai economy's demise. The article also claimed that the protectionism that the Thai government has used will disperse foreign investors and reduce short term cash flow from outside the country. The military junta government also widely educates the public with self-sufficient philosophy together with nationalism, which is another factor that contributes to the downturn of the Thai economy. The philosophy strengthens and emphasizes on individual saving, which, in turn, has caused the shortage of cash flow in Thai businesses. The economy in Thailand for 2007 shrinks and the GDP decreases. In addition, the nationalism agenda in Thailand has been linked with the King. In other words, Thailand means the King: without the King there will be no Thailand anymore. The use of nationalism, as a tool to strengthen the King's status, provides an uncomfortable environment to foreigners and cuts foreign investment.

The article emphasizes on the contradiction between capitalism and self-sufficient economy, which it favor the long-term economic alignment and environmental friendly, that are the main principles in the philosophy, particularly in lowly-regulated market. The Thai model of sustainability is slightly differences to western sustainable development. In western concept of sustainable development, the force that drives the will to save the environment comes from corporations' need. In Thai model, the driving force comes from basic human psychological state of need. This psychological state of need comes from long government education of the public. The other name for localism in Thailand is called "Buddhist Economics" [6].

The philosophy has been made corporeal by Pridiyathorn Devakula, Minister of Finance, who proclaims he is the supporter of the King's self-sufficientcy economy or Localism. The examples of his policies that follow the King's localism are: Limiting foreign companies investment that enormously reduce liquidility in Thai economy; and Capital controls that destroyed US$20 billion of market value in one day. The failure of his policy can be attributable to the failure of the King's proposal. Follow the failure of his policy, the prime minister Surayud Chulanont, who also proclaims the King's localism, has called for the former minister of commerce Somkid Jatusripitak, who are pro-capitolism, to the service of the country. By this evidence, the capitolism is expected to be far more superior to Localism. Even the pro-localism prime minister Surayud prefers pro-capitolism Somkid to pro-localism Pridiyathorn. Articles appearing in the Bangkok Post on 22 February 2007 noted that Somkid Jatusripitak, who had been the finance minister in the previous Taksin-led government, resigned his new position as spokesman for the sufficiency economy within days of being appointed. His appointment to the position had been heavily criticized, and Mr. Somkid said that he resigned in order to prevent ongoing divisions in Thai society.

The Bangkok Post reported on 23 February 2007 that there is now discussion about whether the committee drafting the new constitution should include language defining Thailand's economic policy. The previous constitution, drafted in 1997, had identified capitalism and free markets as the Thai economic philosophy. It is widely perceived in Thailand that unfettered capitalism feeds rampant corruption in both government and private enterprises, and it is this perception that drives the ongoing discussion about the future of Thailand economic policy.

However, the current Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont cannot run away from the fact that: Thailand has long been practicing capitalism; and it is very unlikely that Thailand could easily turn to autarky without costs. He disgracefully speaks for the King's Self-sufficiency and free market together as the national's future economic policy. Even though the King's Self-sufficiency refers to autarky and free market economy is closely associated with capitalism; both philosophies contradict each other and cannot run together. His strong claim makes scholars presume that Thailand would follow free market rather than the King's philosophy, since only one philosophy can be used at a time. The supporting evidence for the future of Thailand's economic philosophy is: Thai officials have signed Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with China and Japan. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is an aspect of globalisation as contradict to localism. The oxymoron in the Prime Minister's words happen because he cannot refuse any of the King's words, by doing so the Prime Minister would be removed from his post. In contrary, he also cannot leave country under autarky created by the King as it would ruin Thailand. The only choice left to hime is to disguise capitalism in form of the King's Self-sufficiency theory as he could save his post as the Prime Minister and leave no harm to the country.

In the effort to please the Thai King, the government has made the King's self-sufficient philosophy corporeal by promote the use of local currency, for example. (It is widely believed that every government office MUST delight the King at all cost, if they want to continue on their posts, as well as every big business and university in Thailand that often donate huge sum of money and honour degree to the King, respectively) The use of "Bea-Kud-Shum"[7], as a local currentcy in specific part in rural Thailand, has been endorsed by the Thai government in August 2006. However, the use of currency instead of 'Baht' had been criminalised before. By using local currentcy such as "Bea-Kud-Shum", the currency itself is excepted from tax collection; and that would reduce the government income. If everybody try to avoid tax by using local currency, instead of official currency 'Baht', that would be the failure of the tax collection. At worst, no one will pay tax anymore, and there will be no more government services such as military, police, facility, water, electricity, etc. This is the failure of both the King's philosophy and government application.

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" is argued by the King proponents that it is not localism but the self-sufficient economy is Localism. "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.

[edit] Self-sufficiency and its link to Political agenda in Thailand

Info icon This section does not cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!) This article has been tagged since March 2007.

Thailand's economy has long favoured capitalism. However, as the King proposes his philosophy that favours localism, the Thais tend to comply to the King. Even the King knows that revoking the national economic philosophy of Capitalism would harm Thailand, but he still persists on his idea without concern for the nation. As a result, Thailand becomes a country that foreign investors avoid and the Thai economy is nearly destroyed.

The well-respected King of Thailand is strengthening his philosophy by developing the link between nationalism and the King, because then his idea of Self-sufficiency is Thailandized. Criticism over the King's philosophy would be a demonstration that the critics do not respect the country of Thailand. A person who praises the King's philosophy would be honoured as a patriot.

The philosophy itself is portrayed as a national barrier that guards Thailand from evil foreign, greedy capitalists. The King has made the Thais believe that if they want to survive from harsh global competition, they must shift from capitalism to the King's philosophy. This is the only way they can survive.

As the King's popularity increased after he got rid of the former Prime Minister Thaksin, the King can exercise his influence over government offices. Every government office must comply to the nationalist tradition of: wearing the clothes that resemble the King and his goodness; praising the King's words as the new country's law, even higher than the Constitution of Thailand (see: Bhumibol Adulyadej#Royal_powers); praising the King's Philosophy all the time; etc.

[edit] Localism and concern for the third world

Many localists are concerned with the problems of the development of the third world. Many advocate that third world countries should aim to rely on their own goods and services in order to escape from what they see are the unfair trade relations with the developed world. This idea has been criticised by George Monbiot who claims that it does not recognise the fact that, though Third world countries often get a raw deal in trade relations, not trading at all would be a significant blow because the countries need the revenue generated by trade.[8]

Some localists are also against immigration from poor countries to rich ones. One of the problems they claim results from such immigration is the drain on the intellectual resources of poor countries, so called brain drain. For example, in the past decade Bulgaria is estimated to have lost more than 50,000 qualified scientists and skilled workers through emigration every year. About one fifth of them were highly educated specialists in chemistry, biology, medicine and physics.[9][10]

[edit] International relations

Some Localists are against political intervention and peace keeping measures. They believe that Communities should find solutions to their own problems and in their own time, in what ever fashion they decide. They believe that all societies are capable of achieving long term peace once given the opportunity to do so. For example, Ulster’s people are now prepared to put hundreds of years of sectarianism behind them, because 30 years of civil war (so-called Troubles) has forced them to realise that compromise and debate are the only solution to the province’s problems. This realisation came from within, and while sending UN peacekeepers to Ulster might have stopped dozens of murders, it would not have reduced sectarianism in the long run.[citation needed]

[edit] Localist activism

Localism usually describes social measures or trends which emphasise or value local and small-scale phenomena. This is in contrast to large, all-encompassing frameworks for action or belief. Localism can therefore be contrasted with globalisation, although the two are best seen as complementary rather than opposing. Localism can be geographical, but often it is not.

Examples of localism are:

  • The slow food movement, using diverse, seasonal, natural food in reaction to multinational merchandizing of food which is uniform, produced using industrial methods, and called fast food.
  • The Interactive Local Media movement as evidenced by:
  • Local radio broadcasting, which is useful to small local communities rather than the national or international community.
  • Tertiary government where small community councils make relevant decisions, with some degree of independence from local or national government.
  • Workers councils, where the employees of a particular workplace discuss and negotiate with their employer, rather have this done by a national union which may be remote from local issues .
  • Postmodernism can be seen as a sort of cultural localism, where accepted cultural values may be ignored in favour of people creating their own criteria of value.
  • Federalism and devolution are examples of politically localistic movements.
  • Religion (Protestantism and heresies):
    • Exclusive localism holds that there can't be more than one legitimate institutionally visible church at one given location, the variation of which varies but is usually held to be either a city or a neighbourhood.
    • Localism is more generally the congregationalist idea that each local church should be autonomous, only extended to reject any formal association of churches. It is specially relevant among Baptists, where localists reject the forming of Conventions.

[edit] Trivia

Localism in Thailand is the political philosophy that the King Bhumibol Adulyadej uses to challenge the former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's dual-track economic policy, "Thaksinomics". Thaksinomics is strong on capitalism and globalization, but the Localism in Thailand is strong on socialism and nationalism.[citation needed]

One of the underlying but unspoken objectives of this philosophy is to maintain social control. In particular it de-emphasises the role of education and ensures that the general population should keep their place rather than strive for self-betterment

Comparisons can be made to the North Korean philosophy of "juche".

[edit] References

  1. ↑ Localism: The need for a new settlement, Alan Milburn MP, Speech given to the "Demos" group in 2004.
  2. ↑ Feedback: Transport and climate change—a reply to James Woodcock, Mark Tomas, International Socialism Journal, Issue: 109
  3. ↑  De-industrialising society, Edward Goldsmith
  4. ↑ Localism in Thailand a study of globalisation and its discontents, Kevin Hewison, 1999.
  5. ↑ Thailand's new economic logic, Shawn W Crispin, Asia Times, 2 February 2007.
  6. ↑ Self-Sufficiency Economy Topic, Chaweewan Saiboa, Prachachat Newspaper, 8 February 2007.
  7. ↑ Buddhist Economics, George Wehrfritz, Newsweek International Edition, 22 January 2007.
  8. ↑ Bea-Kud-Chum as a new currency, Prachachat business newspaper, 15 February 2007.
  9. ↑ The myth of localism, George Monbiot, The Guardian, September 9, 2003.
  10. ↑  East-West brain drain, Hélène Michaud, Radio Netherlands, April 2005.
  11. ↑  Edward J. Feser and Stuart H. Sweeney, Out-migration, population decline, and regional economic distress, Washington, DC: Economic Development Administration, 1998.

[edit] See also

This entry is related to, but not included in the Political ideologies series or one of its sub-series. Other related articles can be found at the Politics Portal.

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/o/c/Localism_%28politics%29.html"
In other languages