Is Prayut's 'pra cha rat' just another word for populism?

LAST SUNDAY, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha amazed the country with his use of the term ‘pra cha rat’ (a state of the people). Since then, the term has remained in the spotlight, whether it’s just a gimmick like others in the past to help create a brand for the government or a serious economic policy initiative that Prayut wants to implement to boost the people’s potential.

Prayut “borrowed” the term pra cha rat from the national anthem and used it in a speech during a forum at Muang Thong Thani to help explain his government’s new economic policy. 

“Our national anthem clearly states that Thailand is pra cha rat [a state of the people], not pra cha ni yom [populist]” he said, in an effort to differentiate between the similarly-sounding pronunciations.

Prayut’s economic policy has been widely criticised for its similarities to the populist policies of former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, which is ironic considering the premier’s frequent derogatory comments about Thaksin and populism.

“The two terms actually mean completely different things,” government spokesman Maj-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd explained.

Sansern said Prayut’s concept of “a state of the people” was initiated by the current Cabinet to create more intensive economic cooperation among government, the public and private sectors. To do this, Sansern said, the government would create policies that respond to the needs of the people by heeding their demands.

For instance, what they would like to do for a living. Then, the private sector would carry out the policies by supporting research, development and marketing for products and services.

To start the policies, stimulus from the government was needed. This was why people think the policies are similar to populism, Sansern said.

“The two terms may be similar in a broader context, but a state of the people [pra cha rat] is meant to create sustainability, like jobs that people can do in the long run.

A populist government, on the other hand, will simply give money and goods to the people to boost their popularity. This will create debt among the people as they are not encouraged to get jobs,” said Sansern, citing the controversial rice-pledging scheme initiated by former premier Yingluck Shinawatra as an example.

“The PM wishes to convey the idea that all sectors have to be united to make Thailand as it is. The government cannot do it alone. Our budget is limited,” Sansern said, by way of explaining why the PM quoted a portion of the national anthem: “Thailand is pra cha rat. Its land belongs to all people.”

Chai-Anan Samudavanija, former president of the Royal Society Institute, was among the first people to use the term. In one of his books, he refers to the relation between the state and social changes. 

Chai-Anan agreed with Prayut’s use of pra cha rat.

“To me, pra cha rat means that the state is based on people and people are considered as the majority,” Chai-Anan explained. “The premier has applied the term in the same way as I would like it to be applied.”

But Sukhum Nuansakul, a political scientist and former rector of Ramkhamhaeng University, suggested Prayut was using the term to catch the ear of the people.

“This is apparently a technique,” Sukhum said. “From now on, pra cha rat will be Prayut’s iconic term and people will recognise his work by |it.”

Sukhum interpreted Prayut’s use of the term as resembling a technique practised before. For example, Sukhum said, the term rattha niyom (state convention) was adopted in 1939 by Field Marshal Plaek Phibunsongkhram, the third premier of Thailand, to promote civilised culture and tradition among the Thai people.

More than thirty years later, the technique was used again by former premier MR Kukrit Pramoj, who used the term ngern pun (distributed money) to distinguish his policy of providing development budgets to rural villages.

However, Prayut’s apparent desire for future recognition does not necessarily mean he wishes to stay in the political arena for long, Sukhum noted.

“The governments that follow can benefit from this recognition, too, as they may continue this political path after Prayut’s term.”

Nevertheless, Sukhum said, some clarification was still needed when using pra cha rat efficiently as the word is relatively new to people.

“But then again, when it is clarified, we can see that it is not so different from the term for ‘populism’,” he added.

Sombat Thamrongthanyawong, former rector of National Institute of Development Administration and former chair of the National Reform Council’s political reform committee, said Prayut may have used the term for marketing purposes, but he said it does not necessarily mean the PM is looking for popularity.

“Why would he wish to achieve popularity when he does not wish to enter future elections?” Sombat asked.

This may simply be an attempt by Prayut to gain recognition, he explained. 

“If you’re doing good deeds, you should be praised. What’s wrong with that?”

Sombat believes Prayut used the term to convey the message that the government intends to fix economic problems at the roots. 

However, like Sukhum, he believes the term still sounds too academic and needs some clarification. 

Pra cha rat in the national anthem literally refers to “a nation state”, which is different to “a state of the people” that the premier wishes to convey.