Japan is sending a team of “social metrics” experts to the Himalayan nation of Bhutan to study the accuracy of its famous Gross National Happiness (GNH) index. Since the 1970s, Bhutan has judged the success of its policies by measuring GNH – based on the people’s well-being in nine categories – rather than Gross National Product. But the country remains among the world’s poorest, raising concern that the system needs improving.
Epicurus would probably point out that one person’s happiness is another person’s misery. For instance, I have no doubt that the ultra-orthodox in Israel are really happy that Palestinian women and children in Gaza are being indiscriminately killed in the current over-reaction. Palestinians are less happy. Extreme fundamentalist christians are delighted to find a new way of stopping working women using birth control in the United States; the rest of us are certainly not.
So without knowing in detail how the Bhutan government governs, it is difficult to know why the GNH is not bringing the hoped-for greater happiness. But the idea is great. The problem is that in most parts of the world society is divided between the large number of have-nots and the tiny fraction of haves, and until the latter use a bit of selfless common sense national happiness everywhere is unlikely to grow. Actually, if the poor throughout the developed world would stop voting against their own economic interests we could make a start.
Might Epicurus’ friend give us examples of the nine categories which comprise the Gross National Happiness?
Excellent blog as always 🙂 but could you clarify how exactly the poor in the developed world vote against their economic interests?
Actually, I have in mind the two countries I know rather well – the United States and the United Kingdom. In both countries working people vote in large numbers for , repectively, the Republicans and the Conservatives. Both the latter support and sustain big business. Many big businesses have outsourced jobs to China and other low income countries, leaving large unemployment and static incomes. This is only exhibit no. 1. These right wing parties have crushed the unions, who at least stood up for the workers and protected their income and benefits. They have privatised government services , to the benefit of Big Money. They have stood by and let their respective financial sectors wreck both economies, and no one has been jailed. They have voted to reduce welfare programs that help the poor. and they have presided over a growing disparity between rich and poor. Need I go on? And yet, maybe because of religion and nationalism, the workers , or .”middle class” as they are called in America, still come out and vote for the party of the bosses.
Have I said enough?
Yes you have!! You’re right as always. Epicurus would have called for moderation of the 1%’s excesses, and he would have been feverently anti-Iraq and Afghanistan wars. What the Tories and the GOP need is a quiet afternoon in the Garden where they can ponder over the results of their policies and hopefully change their ways.