an alienation of peasants and the power of capitalist state: case study central region peasants in...

Graduate Schools: Mahidol University M.A. (Social Science and Health) / 1

AN ALIENATION OF PEASANTS AND THE POWER OF CAPITALIST STATE1

WONGSAKORN ANGKHAKHUMMOOL,

M.A. (SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HEALTH)

THESIS ADVISORS:

SUPHOT DENDOUNG, Ph.D.,

NARTRUEDEE DENDOUNG, M.A.,

MULIKA MUTIKO, Ph.D.

ABSTRACT

The study aimed at investigating the characteristics of the peasants’ alienation

and the relationship between their alienation and the capitalist state power. This was

qualitative research that employed interview conducted with 9 peasants a focus the

paddy field concentration focusing on the production for distribution but with rented

lands having alienation conditions.

The results revealed that A: The peasants in the study met five (5) dimensions of

alienation, ; (1) alienation from production; absence of rent contract, career instability,

advantages taken on rising rent fees, deception of cultivation on the undeveloped

lands, burdening the price surge of the raw materials, price cut selling, rising debts and

pressure of debt repayment; (2) alienation from products, for example powerless to

choose the paddy seeds, disability to fix paddy price and using the money from selling

to repay the debt; (3) alienations from others, the rich peasants with lands had better

quality of life than the peasants without lands, and advantages taken from

compensation registration; (4) alienation from oneself, included feeling that life had no

values, and words were meaningless; and (5) physical and mental anomaly, for

instance stress, myopathy and skin rash. B: the peasants’ alienation had relationship

with the state capitalist power in that the state became the special tool facilitating gains

to the various capitalist groups comprising of landowners, merchants, mills and

financial institutions that took advantage of the peasants on (1) the government policy

of paddy pawning which facilitated gains for the capitalist land owners, merchants and

mills to fix disadvantageous and unfair land rent rate, rising the prices of production

materials, pressuring paddy prices, and fixing high interest rate and creating the debt

cycle of life. (2) The government policy on selling paddy facilitated rice merchants

and mills to exploit and pressure paddy price. (3) The Bank of Agriculture and

Agricultural Cooperatives a financial institution gearing gains extorted peasants

through the debt cycle of life which led to various alienations among peasants.

KEYWORDS: ALIENATION/ PEASANT/ CAPITALIST STATE/ LAND RENT/

CAPITALISM/ POLITICAL ECONOMY

1

Thesis for Master of Arts programme in Social Sciences and Health, Mahidol University, Thailand.

Publications: December 22, 2015. 52-172.

Wongsakorn Angkhakhummool Executive Summary/ 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROBLEM

The alienation of peasants are critically growing because the conditions which

they have to face and the repetitive problems incline to be more grave such as

problems of their lands for earning, their debt, and violence leading to their suicide.

The problem of no lands for earning is serious among peasants and the lands are

the critical factors for production in cultivation. Countless peasants are subject to

peasants without lands for earning. Almost 3.2 million families of peasants face this

problem and the peasants without lands for earning are the greatest number followed

by those with lands but cannot claim for title deed or certificate of ownership and

peasants with lands but inadequate for earning, respectively (Piyaporn Aroonphong,

2012:49).

The peasants’ debt is in the very critical situation too. They have repetitive debt

an inclined to be ongoing growth. Two in three peasants’ household are in debt

(National Statistical Office (NSO), 2011). It is seen then that their quality of life is not

better. Though rice creates enormous values for the national export but countless

peasants have to encounter repetitive and critical problems which leads to self-harms

and suicide. Peasant career inclines to self-harm and suicide at higher rate than other

careers (Vipaporn Setachandana, 2010). The graveness of the alienation problem

found in peasants pervasively affects their health, their mental conditions, their

household economic system and society at large too.

This study attempts to understand the peasants’ alienation by viewing that the

state power in the age of capitalism might be part creating the peasants’ alienation

while the studies of their alienation meet with restrictions. The previous studies on

alienation have been focused on industries or evident bureaucracy only. Therefore, this

study needs to investigate what are the real causes of their alienation. Various

condition caused by extorting peasants from the social structure is the model of

political economy perspective which is an attempt to explain their alienation found in

the upper structure or the state power dominated by the capitalist ideology.

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

2.1. To investigate the characteristics of the peasants’ alienation; and

2.2. To investigate the relationship between the peasants’ alienation and the

capitalist state power.

3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study has employed the theory of political economy as the concept by

explaining the capitalist social relationship containing two social classes, i.e., the

working class or peasants and the capitalist under capitalism. Peasants have been

exploited, extorted, and oppressed by the capitalists through the course of production,

production materials and production power which led to alienation. The Marxian

concept of alienation has been employed, i.e. alienation of production activity,


alienation of product, alienation of colleagues and alienation of human potentials

have been used in the conceptual framework.

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The qualitative research implemented was based on political economy theory

conducted with in-depth interviews to explain the alienation phenomenon happened

with the peasants and the relationship between the peasants and the capitalist state

power through the experiences of their words, thoughts and ideology which was the

native’s point of view.

The field research was the purposive site in Banglen District: Nakhonpathom

Province where the peasants were characterized in cultivating their paddy fields for

transition destined to focus on productions for distributions, large amount of

production, modern technological dependency, and land lease or called the loss-

production-material peasants such as lands.

The population was the peasant group producing for distribution majorly earned

their living on paddy fields twice a year but lost their production means such as lands

but they have land lease for production in the area of Banglen District: Nakhonpathom

Province.

With the purposing sampling based on the theoretical sampling, 9 peasants have

been selected because they were qualified with production for distribution, paddy

cultivation career and attending the twice cultivation a year, losing production material

or lands either entirely or partly, and/or leasing lands for added cultivation, and

having alienation condition. The researcher conducted the interview on their alienation

caused by their paddy cultivation such as uneasiness or stress or having stress

symptom such as insomnia and so on for the past one year and they were willing to

provide information.

The research instrument was the interview guideline developed by the researcher

from the concept, documents and researches involved covering the contents as in the

research objectives and the conceptual framework. They have been validated on

linguistics and content validity from the thesis advisors before the actual interview.

The method of data collection was conducted after the researcher has been

verified by Office of The Committee for Research Ethics (Social Sciences), Faculty of

Social Sciences and Humanities, Mahidol University (MU-SSIRB). The researcher

coordinated with the site and the sample group by seeking the assistance from the

personnel of local public health and the community leaders while directly coordinating

with the samples. Informants were allowed to set dates, time and places for interview

appointment. Before conducting the in-depth interview, the researcher introduced

himself and clarified the research objectives while pleading volunteering from

informants as well as every time requested approval for tape-recording from the

informants. The researcher spent 6 months in data collection beginning in April to

October 2015.

Data from interviews had been analyzed, concluded and processed in each issue

based on the conceptual framework of political economy theory under the content

analysis. They were categorized to be presented in overview for the purpose of


explaining the characteristics of the peasants’ alienation and the relationship between

their alienation and the capitalist state power in order to summarize the process of

thinking of the informants.

5. RESULTS

The results were divided into 4 parts, i.e. (1) the context of the peasants’

community, (2) the peasants’ context and the background of the peasants’ society, (3)

the nature of the peasants’ alienation, (4) the relationship between the peasants’

alienation and the capitalist state power as below.

5.1. The context of the peasants’ community

By its geography, it was the river low land where most of the

community members cultivate paddy but it developed into the business zone such as

industrial factories move in the community more. As for the land ownership, most of

them were not the land owners. The change of the ownership turned to capitalists and

most peasants lease the land for earning and were not affordable to own one because

the land prices hiked. Also, the cultivation process had changed from cultivation for

living into selling. Technology was used and cultivation was mostly hired with

chemical dependency. The cost of cultivation rose which brought risk to loss and

needed loan where it ended at peasants were in debt. This reflected the characteristics

of community change and the course of paddy cultivation was also changed from

traditional and into urbanization which emphasized production for distribution in the

capitalist market system.

5.2. The peasants’ context and the background of the peasants’ society

The 9 informants in the research site had the same characteristics: land

lease for earning and the areas are from 20 rais (8 acres) to 50 rais (20 acres). The land

lease fees were around 700-1,500 Baht/rai/years and the frequency of cultivation was 5

times per five years. They produced mainly for distribution. They never collected

seeds but invested by buying from the shops. All peasants had ever joined the rice

subsidy scheme of the government and had met the lower price of paddy. Some after

selling their paddy had found that they lost which led them to seek loan from financial

institutions and entered debt cycle. Further the selling process had made them

encounter exploitation, and underpriced from paddy traders. The production

mechanism for commerce led to high cost incorporated with impacts from the

government policy which worsened the peasants’ lives by the production price

impacts. This became the corridor to the peasants’ alienation in many forms such as

low price for paddy, loss, debt, stress and illness and so on.

5.3. The nature of the peasants’ alienation

The study showed that alienation of peasants contained 5 dimensions,

i.e., (1) alienation from production activity, (2) alienation from product, (3) alienation

from other people, (4) alienation from oneself, and (5) physical and mental anomaly as

below.


1. Alienation from production or paddy cultivation activity

It was like the peasants had no power to control their cultivation, no

power to control production means and raw materials such as lands, seeds, fertilizer

and chemical, and the paddy selling process. Peasants cannot control the cultivation

process by themselves. This made them faceless and led them to the condition that

their production was relaying on market system and capitalist. They met powerless

condition for negotiation and had to finally surrender to capitalists as below.

1.1.) Alienation from land lease

The nature of alienation which peasants reflected with their

word and feeling of being exploited, advantages-taken in rising the land al fees and

powerlessness of negotiation tin various forms such as land al fees and land al

contract, which led to the conditions that they had to surrender to the land capitalists as

below.

(1.1.1). No contract for land lease and career insecurity –

common land lease, the leaser and lease must have land lease contract in written to be

the evidence for real lease. But peasants the leasers had no land leasing contract but

just in words only. It led to the feeling of insecure career when the land owners could

change the form of leasing and hiked the price of the leasing freely. This was the

nature that peasants were powerless to control land leasing but surrendered to the

conditions fixed by the land owner capitalists because if not leasing lands they would

not have career security.

(1.1.2). Fishing to hike the land lease price – pricing the land

lease should consider the production price coupled with the cost and the leasing price

should be specified in the contract. But the land owners did not consider the cost the

peasants had to encounter but fishing the time when the price of rice is hiked in order

to hike the price of land lease and the price was unclear. The peasants felt the rise of

land lease during the hike of the rice price which was the fishing because when the

rice was lowered, the leasing price was not lower as the lowering price of rice.

(1.1.3). Powerlessness in bargaining land lease price – peasants

should pervasively access the means of productions such as land in order to be used in

paddy cultivation activity. But they could not control their production activities. The

lands belonged to the capitalists but the peasants had no rights on the lands and the

capitalist inferiorized them into the workers in the agricultural sector as just being the

leasers for producing paddy only. It made them powerless to bargain the price of

leasing.

(1.1.4). Peasants were deceived to cultivate paddy on the lands

without enriching the soil – lands for earning rented to them by the owners and

charging for the leasing fees should be improved for quality ready for cultivation. But

the owners burdened all the soil enrichment to the peasants which hiked the costs and

it was their burdens to invest in the lands of the owners for experiment even paid

nothing. Though unpaid the lease in the form of land lease; peasants had to burden its

enrichment which needed high costs as if peasants were deceived to cultivate on the

lands needed entire enrichment.


1.2) Alienation from the hike of the raw materials

The paddy cultivation aiming at commercial agriculture

demanded the peasants to explore raw materials such as seeds, fertilizer and chemicals

and they were the raw materials were owned by the capitalists. However, the modern

production demanded the peasants to rely on seeds from markets, chemical fertilizer

and chemicals. With the raw materials owned by the capitalists for accumulated

profits, it led to extort the values from the peasants and they had to burden the hiked

price of raw materials.

(1.2.1). the costly seed price burdened the peasants – selecting

seeds which the capitalists fixed for cultivation instrumentalized by the market

mechanism and needs victimized the peasants to produce under the market mechanism

which they could not collect their own seeds by relying on the seeds prepared by the

capitalists. The prices of seeds were surged and the peasant had to burden the high cost

too.

(1.2.2). The peasant had to burden the hiked price of fertilizer

and chemicals – chemicals were necessary in cultivating modern paddy fields. Rice

seeds were necessary taken care of with chemical fertilizers and pesticide. The

commercial cultivation of rice demanded the peasant to be haste in the cultivation but

needed fertilizing and chemicals. Moreover, they could not produce any chemical

products by themselves. It became a gap for traders or the capitalists could produce,

distribute and fixed the price to extort profits from the peasants which demanded them

to burden the higher price of raw material which leading to worries and stress.

1.3) Alienation from selling rice

Appearance that the peasants were just the agriculture

workforce who cultivated paddy to sell to the capitalists who extorted them through

pressing price and quality of rice which made them powerless for bargaining and had

to surrender.

(1.3.1). Peasants were pressured on the rice price – peasants

cultivating rice should gain the value-added price but the capitalists controlled selling

rice and monopolized the price and pressed its price through checking the rice quality

such as grain humidity which was specialized for only the rice merchant. Also, the

relation of the peasants as debtors with the rice traders, the creditors would cheapen

the rice price ever than before. This was the act leading to the feeling that peasants had

been exploited and unfair.

(1.3.2). Powerlessness to bargain the rice price – fixing rice

price was controlled by the capitalists exploiting market mechanism as the tool to fix

the production price and accumulate profit from extorting the rice price of peasants.

They lowered the price to enable them to further profit in market while the powerless

peasants could not bargain production price. The interaction between the rice traders

and the peasants was under the condition of creditors and debtors who made the

peasants were powerless to bargain their low rice price. This led them to loss and

worry.


1.4). Alienation of peasant from financial institution

The alienation which the peasants were exploited from high rate

of interest and dominated by the financial institution in the form of easy loan; the

peasants were endlessly subject to debt imposed by the financial institution.

(1.4.1). Peasants were endlessly anguished in debt - Bank for

Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) was the public financial institution

which helped peasants for investment loan in agriculture but crafted to be funding

sources to maximize gains and extort them through credit and credit loan as the

instruments for peasants to ongoing borrow and to be the hub of accumulating debt

which led peasants to face the incremental debt problems, and agony to struggle for

repaying debts.

(1.4.2). Peasants were pressured to repay because they would

lose their lands – loans from BAAC given to peasants should not burden the peasants’

cultivation. But the financial institution expected to accumulate and control both

capital and production. Therefore, the title deeds became the tools for loan from

financial institutions. Peasants with title deeds could submit them to mortgage with the

financial institutions and gained greater amount of loan than those without collaterals.

This made peasants worry to lose their lands which led to feelings of coercion and they

had to struggle to repay.

(1.4.3). Peasants were extorted with high rate of interest-

peasants without means for production and capital should access funding sources with

not so expensive rate of interest. But they have to rely on loan from private capitalists.

They were then exploited because of no capital for production and became the tool to

take advantages of surging the interest rate by 3% a month. Still peasant had to take

the loan for their cultivation investment.

2. Alienation from Product

It was the characteristics that peasants cultivated paddy but could not

own it. But all paddies were owned by the capitalists to sell in market to maximize the

gains. Peasants could not control their own products and were powerless to bargain the

rice price. Models of alienation were as below.

2.1). Peasants could not decide selecting paddy seeds for themselves –

to cultivate any paddy seeds was depended upon the market mechanism and the mill

capitalists who bought them. It led to alienation where they were not free to select

seeds by themselves. They had to produce under the shadowing control of the mill

capitalists and if they did not follow as the capitalist had fixed; they could not sell their

rice or if they could, they would have the same price with any seeds quality such as the

jasmine rice and the photoperiod sensitive varieties rice (4 months).

2.2). Peasants could not fix their own rice price – rice was their

investment and labor but in selling them, the price was fixed and controlled by the mill

capitalists. They had no bargaining power of their products. It made them exploited

from the fixed rice price from merchants and mill capitalists. The low price was not

worth their investments which led to frustration and stress.


2.3). Money from selling price is for debt repayment – money gained

from their products should be theirs for product exchanges but in the era of capitalist-

based production and agriculture for selling, peasants had to loan capital sources and

were in debt with capitalists and / or financial institutions. When they earned money

from selling rice, they did not spend them for product exchanges but they had to repay

the capitalists.

3. Alienation from other people

Their alienation from other people was characterized in conflict with

their own peasants’ classes compared to their differences from the wealthy peasants

with peasants without lands. Both had conflict on the values of the products under the

conditions of different lands for earning.

3.1). Peasants with lands had better life than peasants without lands =

productions for commerce differed the peasants’ social classes using lands as tools to

categorize their classes: peasants with lands and peasants without lands or land lease.

This led to the comparison of quality of life. Peasants without lands were those who

had no means for production and needed to invest more while they had to lease lands.

This was found that their quality of life was worse than the peasants with lands.

3.2). Peasants with fewer lands were exploited by the peasants with

more lands with registration for compensation - Lands used in cultivation became the

tools to destroy interaction with each other among peasants. They could differently

access lands by their capital which created differentiations. Peasants with fewer lands

were exploited by the peasants with more lands such as registration for state

compensation.

4. Alienation from oneself

Alienation from oneself was characterized as peasants had been

devalued themselves because they could not control their own products which led to

worsening their own human potentials.

4.1). “Life is valueless…if not paddy cultivation; what else then to

do…” – this was the nature of alienation that the peasants felt valueless affected by

lowering rice price. Peasants were powerless to control their productions which led to

worsening their own human potentials and surrendering to the uncontrollable

conditions even lowering product price but they had to continue their cultivation.

4.2). “Being peasants; their words are meaningless” – the production

system with capitalists had freedom to control the production activities and peasants

were powerless and valueless did not bring them pride and became the condition that

they felt their words were valueless to bargain with the capital group.

5. Physical and mental anomaly of peasants

These were the alienation of the physical reaction such as insomnia,

myalgia, dermatitis and so on while their mental anomaly were stress, nervous, and all

these alienations were the feeling affecting the physiology and the mind of peasants.


5.4. The relationship between the peasants’ alienation and the capitalist

state power

This study found the model of capitalist state power with the mechanism

of exercising power to exploit and extort peasants and led to alienation in three (3)

dimensions, i.e. (1) the policy of interfering the rice price by the government

facilitating the land capitalists, traders and ills and extorting peasants; (2) the policy of

trading rice facilitating rice traders and mills to extort and pressure the rice price of

peasants; and (3) BAAC a financial institution expects gains by extorting peasants

through debt cycles.

1) The public policy of interfering the rice price and crating alienation

In this study, the public policy of interfering the rice price was the

policy of rice subsidy scheme which was the public mechanism to guarantee paddy for

15,000 Baht/ton. Such impact from the policy surged the rice price and peasants

because the government policy facilitated various groups of capitalist, the mills, the

rice traders and the land owners who exploited by raising the price of land lease,

production means and endlessly affected the cultivation which brought various forms

of alienation to the peasants as below.

(1) The policy of rice subsidy scheme exploited the peasants on

expensive land lease because all peasants leased land and the land owners maximized

gains through land lease, extortion, and exploitation with expensive rate of land lease.

All these were the results of the government project of rice subsidy scheme which

raised the rice price. When the policy failed and ended; the rice price sharply dropped.

Still, peasants had to burden their expensive land lease and the owners never reduced

them. This led to their alienation and felt they had to burden expensive land lease and

exploitation of rising the leasing price.

(2) The policy of rice subsidy scheme led to absence of bargaining

power for land lease and self-valuelessness of peasants. When the policy failed and

ended; the rice price sharply dropped while the state had no clear measures to fix the

rate of land lease. Peasants had to burden their expensive land lease already, and been

subject to the condition of powerlessness for bargaining land lease because the owners

freely fixed the price. Though the price hiked; but the peasants had to surrender and

could not bargain it because their words were valueless which made them felt

valueless too.

(3) The policy of rice subsidy scheme was repeated and insecure the

peasants’ career. The failure of the policy of rice subsidy scheme drove peasants to

meet repeated miseries more because they were powerless to control and powerless to

bargain the price of land lease with the owners. Land lease without contract gave

benefits to the land capitalists who could change the form of leasing. Peasants had to

surrender to the more expensive land lease, which conditioned them to their career

insecurity.

(4) The policy of rice subsidy scheme burdened peasants on seeds, and

rising expensive fertilizer because the rising price of paddy from the government

policy permitted shop capitals to hike the price of seeds, fertilizers or chimerical and


burdened peasants on raw materials and high cost of cultivation which led to worries

and stress among peasants.

(5) The policy of rice subsidy scheme dumped the price of product

which brought peasants frustration, ill-health, abandoning the cultivation and debts.

Such impacts of the policy hiked the rice price at first but at the end deeply dumped

the price from 15,000 Baht to 6,000-7,000 Bath only. This lowered the peasants’

income to half while their expenses were as normal or more. Some peasants who lost

had more debt. The lowering price of products brought them frustration, stress and

abandoning their cultivation.

(6) The failure of the policy of rice subsidy scheme led to the policy of

minimizing cost among the peasants and disabled to control the production. After the

end of the policy of rice subsidy scheme, it led to solving the rising price of the

production means. Through the policy of minimizing cost and demanding the peasant

to minimize their cost and promoting to cultivate other economic crops to replace their

paddy cultivation or to cultivate with biology. Solving the problems of the government

was driven to be the burden of peasants who had to suffer their fates of the lowering

production volumes while the rice price was still low but the price of material means

was still hiked without guarantee that the low price of their productions. Peasants had

then to face minimizing cost of production which also lowered the production

volumes.

2) The policy of rice price and selling rice to traders or mills leading to

the peasants’ alienation

The government policy of rice price intervening the market mechanism

through the project of the rice subsidy scheme and fixing the higher price that the

market price and increasing targets of the scheme including supporting the private

mills to be one of mechanism in the scheme; they impacted the rice price at the level

of peasants who had to burden the dumped price of paddy. Fixing the price in the

market demanded to depend on the world market price as the referred price in trading.

Exporters linked and exported it through the world market price of the export market

and Bangkok market including the merchant sin the export markets to be data in fixing

the reference price in the local market or with the peasants. So, the government

interference of rice price led to various forms of alienation as below.

(1). The government never set the cost estimate for the lowering rice

price led to the stress and frustration among peasants. Without the cost estimate after

the policy of the rice subsidy scheme ended freed capitalists to fix the rice price and

the estimated price was subject to the criteria of the traders who control the trends of

the market such as estimating humidity by eyeing and touches the peasants’ paddy.

Most farmers were pressured to sell in low price excusing of humidity fixed by rice

traders and the mills. Peasants were powerless to bargain the price. “Their mouth are

not wide enough” with bargaining the price with the capitalists and led to poor price of

the ducts and unfair pressure on rice price.

(2). The state did not control the purchases of rice with the mills which

affected the price pressures against peasants when the rice traders or mills purchasing


rice from peasants and the process of estimating rice price at the purchasing posts

which used just eyes and touches as the special tools to claim their specialization only.

They became the significant tools for rice traders to exploit pressuring the rice price

against peasants. This included the fixation of rice price without controls from the

state. Without clear measures on rice price, it became the gap for the capitalist to

exploit pressures of rice price and peasants had to meet dumped rice price.

(3). The state did not check the purchase of rice by the mills which led

to the fixation of rice price for the quality rice was not differed from the common rice.

This made peasants abandoned to cultivate quality rice such as the jasmine rice. It

reflected the exploitation of traders and mills as alibi such purchasing jasmine rice at

same level of the common rice excusing that no mills would purchase jasmine rice in

the area. It led to abandonment of cultivating the quality rice. Peasants found that if the

government needed quality rice, it had to fix different price between those cultivating

the jasmine rice from those cultivating the photoperiod sensitive varieties rice (3-4

months). By ignoring of the clear cost estimate by the government, it became a tool for

traders and mills to group up and fixed the exploited price and extorting peasants

which brought loss to peasants and demanded them to finally abandon cultivating

quality rice.

(4). Coup d’état lowered the rice price and loss for peasants. Under the

coup of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) led by General Prayuth

Chan-o-cha ended the policy of Miss Yingluk Shinawatr the previous government

particularly the project of rice subsidy scheme which linked with the feedings and

living to other dimensions of the peasants’ daily living. The coup of the NCPO also

ended the project of rice subsidy scheme. The rice price was dumped and the price

after deducting humidity should stay at over ten thousand Baht remained 6,600-7,000

Baht. Such dumped rice led the peasant to finally face losses in cultivating rice.

(5). The coup allowed rice ports to exploit cheap price for rice and

peasants were powerless to bargain. After the project ended, the price was dumped and

relied on traders to estimate the selling posts the eyes and touches evaluation. And

the price was around 6,000-7,000 Baht/ton. Traders and mills sent trucks to buy at the

paddy fields and famers did not trouble to transport it but traders and mills deduct the

transportation fees with similarity in every paddy land. For example buying at the rate

of 6,000 Bath with a paddy land, another one would similarly bought at the same price

of 6,000 Baht. It made all peasants thought that the price was just 6,000 Baht. In fact,

they could sell at 7,000 -10,000 Baht or possibly more but the traders and the mills

fixed just this price which the peasants could not bargain for higher price.

3) BAAC and the peasants’ alienation

The BAAC was the state financial institution with ideology of the being

the state bank to develop the quality of life for peasants and rural areas. But the

solutions were focused on promoting strong loans. Peasants who wanted the loans

from the bank had to be their members to create conditions of funded debt or bound

debt. Illusions of helping peasants were locked into the endless cycle of debt. This led

to alienation in the nature of debt cycles as follows:


(1). The BAAC loans crafted recurrent debt for peasants because the

continuous low rice price ever since the intervention of the state under the policy of

rice subsidy scheme but the price of cultivating material means was hiked while the

product volumes decreased. Consequently, the peasants could not invest as before

because the cost hiked and selling brought loss to them. Peasants had to borrow capital

for their circulated investment in cultivation. The relationship between BAAC and

peasants was characterized in the form of debtors and creditor. It demanded the

peasants were endlessly bounded with debt with BAAC as the recurrent debt.

(2). The credit card of farmers brought gains to the grocery capitalists

but peasants were subject to debt. Peasants applied for the credit card for farmer

project needed to bring their cards to be used in the shops collaborating with the

BAAC project only. The price of agro-materials were unlikely different for common

shops. The credit cards for farmers did not reduce debt for them but created the

conditions of alienation which struck them in the debt cycle from pay by installments

in using credit cards as credit limit specified by BAAC t o buy their production means.

Credit cards could be used only with the shops introduced by BAAC but the peasant

had to be in debt under their names of the cardholders.

(3). The cultivating materials of BAAC were poor quality and

mismatched with their needs and lowered their product volumes. The BAAC initiated

its unit to bind with the state affairs through be a unit in servicing agro-products using

the credit card for farmer project. The materials for cultivation were distributed by the

Agricultural Marketing Co-operative Limited (AMC) in order to help peasants who

were the BAAC clients. Goods for distribution mismatched the needs of peasants and

if they had to sue them, the products would decrease and what followed were loss and

entry to the loan cycle foe the new investment.

(4). The BAAC “Credit for Loan” crafted the peasants to strive for

repayments and the credit loan became the tool that BAAC to tie peasants in the debt

cycle – if peasant did not fully repay and unpunctual as in the loan contract, they

would lose “loan credit” with BAAC but if they did they would be easier for them in

loan than others in the next round. However, this was their struggle to find repayment

to sustain their next credit loan with the BAAC.

(5) Loan with the BAAC was at risk on land loss. The loan with the

BAAC for peasants was for their agriculture but needed collateral which some of them

who owned some lands would look for loan from the BAAC by using their title deeds

to warranty their loans for the purpose of cultivations and other expenses. The

peasants who sought loans by using title deeds for collateral but disable to repay; they

were at risk to lose their title deeds.

(6) The credit loan was the machine for the BAAC to increase debt. It

was the credit that accomplished with shops or the machine shops to sell agro-machine

by installment. This was the collaboration between the public financial institutions and

the private shops to impose conditions of extortion through the interest rate when the

peasants had to pay by installment in seeking for agro-machines for their cultivation.

This increased more debt for peasants.


6. DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY

This discussion involves first the public policy phenomena related to the global

capitalist economy system leading to the alienation of the peasants’ families. Second,

it involves the findings of this study whether to what extent they are corresponded

with the theories as below.

6.1. The expansion of capitalism permeated into the policy making of the

public rice policy and making peasants lost their lands and

differentiating peasants

The peasants in the sites of the study are the land lease families which

come from the changes of the global economy and global social while permeating and

eroding the production-based commercial system. The expansion of capitalism

demands production to rely on money. Farmers then need to mortgage their lands with

the capitalist groups and lose their lands. Then they had to lease lands for cultivation.

This differentiates the peasants’ social classes. Lands become the tool to divide the

social classes in the production-based of the peasants. Those owning their lands are the

rich ones with better quality of life than those who lease lands. The latter are exploited

and extorted by the land owners in various forms such as expensive land lease,

unfertilized soils and career insecurity, also the government policy such as the policy

of rice subsidy scheme becomes the tool for the land owners to hike their land lease.

Then the recommendations are crafting the public policy, the state should look at

peasants with different dimensions as the elements because there are both land owning

peasants and land owing peasants. It needs to reduce discrimination but build equality

for the land lease peasants to own the allocated lands or having the fair land lease or to

have lease contract between the land owners and the peasants in written and

specification of clear land lease for their career security.

6.2. The start of free trade leads to rice price intervention and exploited

price for peasants

Rice price relies on the volatility of the global price and free trade becomes

the tool of the mill capitalists to monopolize trades in the domestic and international

markets and rice pricing requires the global market reference. Therefore, the

government demands the policy to buy paddy at the higher price than traders and mills

under the mechanism of the rice subsidy scheme project. It impacts rice price in

markets and the paddy price at the farming where peasants have to burden the dumped

price of the products. These become the tools for capitalists to exploit buying paddy

from peasants in the lower rates because there is no cost estimate from the

government. Rice trades return to the mechanism relying on the price of the global

market where the capitalist groups of rice traders who are the monopolizors. At this

point, it victimizes peasants on pressures of rice price from rice traders and mills.

So far, recommendations are designing the public rice policy demands awareness

on the dimensions of the stakeholders: peasants, mills, exporters, consumers and the

government and so on. The following impacts demand to think of peasants the

producers particularly the land lease peasants who own no production means for their


cultivations. Also, the promotion of the rural rice markets to become free trade areas;

peasants have to be able to access the rice selling markets without any monopolies

from the capitalists.

The state should create fairness and transparency in the rice selling process and

there has to be the cost estimate, database making for peasants and the state should set

measures over the mills or the rice traders to run the affairs transparently such as

estimating the rice quality needs methods that peasants are accessible rather than

specialization of the traders and of the mills only.

In the product price, the state should awaken and promote peasants with good

and secure income from their cultivation having the ways to calculate the real costs

and real profit which will be displayed in the form of income that peasants should

gain.

6.3. The capitalist system mechanizing the state financial institution to

help peasants becomes extorted capitalists with peasants

The state financial institution most interacted with peasants is BAAC.

Though it is the state financial institution but its ideology is focused on collecting

funds and gains under the global capitalist economic system which is not different

from other groups of capitalists. Incorporated with the public policy of intervention on

rice price which leads to lower price after the project ends; peasants have to encounter

the condition of loss on products and have to depend upon the financial institution:

BAAC. At the meantime, the bank gains huge amount of profit while the number of

the peasant householders have growing debt. The forms of credit loan and the BAAC

projects become the tools of maximizing gains. The state and the capitalist are

uniformity. The public policy facilitates the private shops rather than facilitating the

peasant families. For example, the credit card for farmer project facilitates more to the

shop capitalists but peasants are trapped into debt.

Recommendations are the state should reduce the price of raw materials because

if the price of the material means is lower; the cost will be lowered and the state

financial institutions should help farmers and life some kinds of credit loans that

burden peasants such as the credit card for farmer because the price is not differed

from common markets.

6.4. Nature of alienation found in the study which has more dimensions

than of Karl Marx

The nature of the peasants’ alienation contains five (5) dimensions

differing from the concept of Karl Marx who identifies just four (4) dimensions, i.e.

(1) alienation from production activity, (2) alienation from product, (3) alienation from

other people, (4) alienation from one’s human potentials (Ollman, 1976). But in this

study the alienation in peasants there is am alienation dimension which Karl Marx

does not mention: physical and mental anomaly which affects individual health. The

study reflects the concept of alienation by Karl Marx applied among the peasants is

differed from the industrial factory or units with clear organizational management such


as bureaucracy. Therefore, the study on alienation should be left to the alienation

dimension reflects with diverse forms for the new meaning.

7. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS

Due to this study has been focused on the purposive agricultural career group:

peasants; therefore, the relationship between peasants and the social structure and the

public structure maintains diverse dimensions which cannot reflect all dimensions.

This study has been focused on the state dimension related to the peasants’ production

only.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES

1. This study has investigated the peasants’ alienation in the dimension linking

the capitalist state power mainly on the production activity but it does not investigate

the alienation of the dimensions linking the health institution. So, the further study

should also study the alienation of peasants with health institutions.

2. This study is to reflecting the peasants’ selves by overview on their production

with land lease but does not view them in other dimensions such as the hired peasant

in the agricultural sector and does not view the dimension of difference between male

and female. Therefore, the future studies should investigate alienations in the

dimension linking with the differences of being peasant and the power of male-female

too.

3. This study focuses on the study and analysis of the relationship between

peasants and the state has not studied the social power of the community. Therefore,

the future studies should investigate the social power or peasant’s power dimensions.

9. Refferences

1. Piyaporn Aroonphong. (2012). Guide book for land reforms. Bangkok:

Duantula publisher.

2. National Statistical Office. (2011). Analytical reports about the behavior of

indebtedness of farmers BE 2010. National Statistical Office: Bangkok.

3. Vipaporn Setachandana. (2010). Epidemiology of Intentional Self-harm and

Suicide in Buriram Province. Journal of Psychiatric Ratchasima

Rajanagarindra Hospital, 11 (October 2010 - September 2011), 51-59. 4. Colin, H., Gamble, A., Marsh, D., & Tant, T. (1 9 9 9 ) . Marxism and social science:

Marxism and the State / Andrew Gamble, David Marsh and Tony Tant, Editors: London:

MacMillan, 1999. 1st ed.

5. Dnyandev, T. (2013). Political Economy of Agricultural Distress and Farmers Suicides in

Maharashtra. International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary Research, 2 (2 ) ,

95-124.


6. Firth, H. M., Williams, S. M., Herbison, G. P., & McGee, R. O. (2 0 0 7 ). Stress in New

Zealand farmers. Stress & Health: Journal of the International Society for the

Investigation of Stress, 23(1), 51-58. doi: 10.1002/smi.1119

7. Jonathan, K., & Lawrence, K. (2014). The political economy of farmers' suicides in India:

indebted cash-crop farmmers with marginal landholdings explain state-level variation in

suicide rates. Globalization and Health, 10(19), 1-9.

8. Kaewanuchit, C., Muntaner, C., Dendoung, S., Labonte, R., Suttawet, C., & Chiengkul,

W. (2012). The psychosocial stress model for Thai contract farmers under globalization: a

Path analysis model. Asian Biomedicine, 6 No. 3 (6 June 2012), 385 – 395.

9. Ollman, B. (1 9 7 6 ) . Alienation: Marx's conception of man in capitalist society / Bertell

Ollman: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, c1976. 2nd ed.

10. Pratten, S. (1993). Structure, agency and Marx's analysis of the labour process. Review of

Political Economy, 5(4), 403.

11. Raine, G. (1 9 9 9 ) . Causes and effects of stress on farmers: a qualitative study. Health

Education Journal, 58(3), 259-270.

12. Steeves, A. D. (1 9 6 9 ) . Dissatisfaction and the Farm-Nonfarm Work Context. Social

Forces, 48(2), 224-232. doi: 10.2307/2575263

13. Sue Simkin, K. H., Joan Fagg, Aslög Malmberg. (1 9 9 8 ). Stress in farmers: a survey of

farmers in England and Wales. Occup Environ Med, 55, 729–734.

14. Vasavi, A. R. (2 0 0 5 ) . Suicides and the making of India’s agrarian distress. Agrarian

Distress and Farmers’ Suicides in India’ organized by the Governance and Policy Spaces

Project (GAPS) of the Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad and held at

Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh (24 to 26th February 2005).

an alienation of peasants and the power of capitalist state: case study central region peasants in...

Documents