From Downton Abbey to Bangkok
As I read the opening chapters of The Great Transformation images of Downton Abbey were dancing in my head. Ok, my secret is out: I’m a fan. I could certainly blame my wife, but I really do enjoy it, despite its similarities to a soap opera. Set in the fictional Yorkshire estate, it depicts the lives of the aristocratic Crawley family at the end of the Edwardian and into the post-Edwardian era. What I always find fascinating is the lives and lifestyles, the hopes and dreams of both the “haves”—the aristocrats—and the “have-nots”—their servants. All this is played out during a backdrop of tension; there always seems to be “great change” in the air. The influence, if not status, of the royals seems to be eroding. The economy is shifting to the whims of the markets and all along the Crawleys are white-knuckled, trying to keep up with this transformation of their evolving world.
Polanyi’s The Great Transformation is far less entertaining and far more technical as it surveys the impact of free or “self-adjusting” markets on western society, with a focus on its impact on human relationships. The author’s premise is that markets disrupt social organization, and that they are not natural features of human society and therefore “the unregulated market has done tremendous damage to man, society and nature”[1].
Frankly, I need much more time to work through and understand his rationale and discern his conclusions. But for the sake of this post, I understand one of his concerns and believe it needs close attention. He argues “certain ideologies, which relate to land, labor and money, and the profit motive are required for efficient functioning of markets. In particular, both poverty, and certain amount of callousness and indifference to poverty are required for efficient functioning of markets.”[2] For example in chapter three, “Habitation versus Improvement”[3] Polanyi discusses enclosures. I understand “enclosures” to mean property deeded to specific individuals where it was previously held in common, or held loosely by those living on or working the land. When political changes allowed land ownership to be more strictly defined and enforced, those who wrote the laws understood them better than the common man, and were able to capitalize on them to their own benefit. They controlled the land. Thus, the rich got richer; as Polanyi writes: “Enclosures have appropriately been called a revolution of the rich against the poor”.[4] Add to that the dynamic of the industrial revolution where machines forever changed the way people work, earn and relate.[5] Thus was the creation of the under-class and the upper-class.
I don’t know what Polanyi would think of Thailand, but it’s an interesting case study. In Thailand there are various seasons. The rainy season, the harvest season, and the political protest season. All too often the political and economic turmoil leads to a coup. The politics of Yellow shirts vs. Red shirts is beyond the scope of this post, but suffice to say America isn’t the only politically polarized country. Yellow shirts are primarily found around Bangkok; they are more progressive, business friendly and typically more affluent and they’re strong advocates of the monarchy. Red shirts are primarily the agrarians, living in the rural Thailand and their numbers far outweigh the Yellow shirts. The tension that fuels this divide is largely economic. Thailand’s masses average about 300 baht a day or $10 USD a day. There are some who are insanely wealthy, as there are in any country. It’s important to understand that the entire economy is shaped around 300 baht a day. People can eat, clothe and house themselves on 300 baht a day. The government provides healthcare and education. It is not the lifestyle most Westerners would prefer. These public services would be found less than satisfactory by some Western standards.
But the system works. And what about the tension? What about the conflicts between the Yellow shirt haves and the Red shirt have-nots? That also works. Their political system is constantly flexing, constantly changing because of this tension, this unrest. When the 300 baht a day economy isn’t working as it should, the pressure to change generates enough political tension to reset the government and try again; another reincarnation, often of the same old thing.
Polanyi pointed to societal transformations instigated by political and economic shifts. That happens in Thailand and widely throughout Southeast Asia. The changes happen in subtle and typically gentler ways than elsewhere, probably because of the influence of the Buddhist philosophy. But that’s for another post.
[1] Asad Zaman, The Rise and Fall of the Market Economy (March 15, 2009). Review of Islamic Economics, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2010, pp. 123-155. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2142803
[2] Asad Zaman, “World Economic Association Pedagogy Blog,”, accessed January 27, 2015, https://weapedagogy.wordpress.com/2013/08/28/summary-of-the-great-transformation-by-polanyi/.
[3] Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: the Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, 2nd ed. (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2001), 33-42.
[4] Ibid., 35.
[5] Ibid., 42.
About the Author
Dave Young
husband, dad, friend, student of culture and a pastor.5 responses to “From Downton Abbey to Bangkok”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Dave, I agree we need more time to work through the implications of this week’s reading. Holy Cow! An entire semester’s study could be wrapped around this single work. I think I understand about two of Polanyi’s assertions and just those two are enough to potentially cause a reset in my economic thinking…
Crazy
J
In your explanation of what Polayni’s view of markets about being unnatural – I’ve wrestled with that one. First, wondering if he’s simply saying that markets are bad or if they simply need to be regulated. But more significantly, how are we to account for people’s soul that has both a desire for good as well as selfishness? (created in God’s image while acknowledging the fall). How does that relate to an economic system, much less an entire societal transformation? Do we take advantage of people’s selfishness to benefit others? Or is that just a lie my capitalist tendencies keep telling me to rationalize the value of it?
Hilarious! I was telling a friend about the book and his first connecting thought was … “sounds like Downton Abbey.” 🙂 Crazy stuff. Polanyi’s book had so much punch but I am wondering if it had to be as complicated as it was. My guess is yes, but it sure seemed about as complex as it could be made. I guess what I found interesting is how similar all of our take homes/posts were considering the complexity. I thought my post might be out in left field but seems to compliment and go with the real issue surfacing. So much to chew on, so little time to chew.
How do you find time for Downton Abbey and Startrek? Haha…I love Downton Abbey and your comparison.
Great post Dave. Considering I spent less time reading Polanyi then I wanted I gained a great understanding from your post. Thanks.
Your case study of Thailand reminds me of the time I’ve spent in Uganda. I can be in the middle of the bush and meet a 30 year old man that has never physically left his village and made the 1 hour drive to the robust city of Kamapla where the wealthy are flourishing are setting the economic policies for the entire country. Doesn’t seem right. In Uganda they don’t have the infrastructure to have peaceful unrest. The tension in their country seems to boil until riots take place. The economic and educational gap is so wide it’s hard to see the hope.
Gods blessing Dave,
Just like in Thailand I know that there is a better system that would work fot the United States. I can understand how it works and how people dont have to protest unless their money changes and they are being bullied by their government. Its funny they have yellow shirts and red shirts. Is that like our blue collars workers in any way? Its interesting that 300 baht is enough for them to survive while in our country its hard to survive on 300 dollars a week. Just interesting! Blessings!