The Kingdom of Bhutan, a tiny country in the Himalayas, is known as the “Kingdom of Happiness” and is inspiring California lawmakers.

Bhutan measures “Gross National Happiness” based on public policy decisions. Naturally, California lawmakers love the idea of regulating for happiness, so much so that in a report released earlier this year the Assembly Select Committee on Happiness and Public Policy Outcomes, chaired by Speaker Emeritus Anthony Rendon, held up the tiny kingdom as a model to emulate.

Left out of the report, however, was that while it was making itself into the land of happiness, Bhutan was engaging in a campaign of what Human Rights Watch called “ethnic cleansing,” making it a strange government to emulate.

In fact, Bhutan spent part of the 80’s stripping one-sixth of its population of its citizenship, along ethnic lines, and then spent part of the 90’s kicking them out.

Ethnic Cleansing

Apparently, Bhutan has been concerned with happiness as a public policy outcome since the 70’s and is focused on four key areas: Good Governance, Sustainable Socio-Economic Development, Preservation and Promotion of Culture, and Environmental Conservation, according to the report.

But the timing of that is hard to ignore. A decade after then-King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, said “Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross Domestic Product” and the government was considering legislating happiness, it passed a law that stripped many of its citizens of their citizenship, targeting those of Nepali descent, according to Human Rights Watch. This led to their expulsion, tearing apart families and barring entry for the dissidents to this day.

Admittedly, I was shocked to see that there was no mention of the ethnic cleansing in Rendon’s report. It just seems like a massive oversight.

I asked Rendon about this. Was it an oversight? If not, why was the info omitted? Most importantly, what effect did he think this ethnic cleansing had on Bhutan’s culture, especially its perceived happiness?

This is Rendon’s response, in total: “I appreciate your interest in the work of the committee, a first of its kind in the United States. To answer your question, the report wasn’t a defense of any particular jurisdiction, rather it chronicled the committee’s survey of happiness policy work done here and abroad, including the well-known happiness policy work of the Kingdom of Bhutan.”

But… ethnic cleansing.

A Refugee’s Point Of View

I spoke with Pingala Dhital, who, at the age of 16, was pushed out of the country. She told me the country’s happiness designation “doesn’t feel right.”

Dhital told me that growing up she felt like Bhutan was in fact one of the happiest places in the world, and that she appreciates some of the more recent public policy decisions the country has pursued.

But Dhital, who lives now in the United States, also spoke of being denied a visa, just to come visit, and how her 97-year-old mother with mobility issues in law is forced to travel all the way to India just to visit family.

“Just allow us to visit the country,” Dhital pleaded. ”That would be really nice.”

Is It Really That Happy?

While Bhutan performs very well in the GNH index it created, more objective measures rank it far lower. According to The Guardian, the independent Oxford World Happiness Report ranked Bhutan 95th of 156 countries in 2019 (the last time it was measured). Just over half of women in the country have jobs, the unemployment rate is around 29% and one in eight Bhutanese live in poverty.

Economically, the country is doing so poorly that its Prime Minister, Tshering Tobgay, is considering updating its GNH model because the government has “failed economically.”

In terms of civil rights, Bhutan ranks 147th in the world for press freedom and approximately one fifth of the population doesn’t feel it is allowed to join the political party of its choice. There are around three dozen political prisoners being held on what in many instances seem to be held of fabricated or trumped up charges.

“People can’t talk, there is a threat,” said Dhital. “People are still traumatized. There is lots of fear.”

Why Bhutan Again?

The committee’s report cites World Bank data suggesting that poverty in Bhutan has decreased significantly since 2017, but according to the ruling party in Bhutan, the People’s Democratic Party, poverty is much higher, at the rate I cited above.

Undoubtedly, its socialized healthcare, free college and environmental policies (it’s the first carbon-negative nation) appealed to California’s Democratic supermajority and Rendon. But the country is roughly the population of San Francisco, its GDP ranks 182 in the world, and judging by its prime minister’s comments, it’s failing by many of its own standards.

“This is not to say the GNH approach has solved every problem in Bhutan,” reads the report. “Poverty, economic issues, and climate threats remain. But the Bhutanese model could serve as an inspiration and a reminder that centering happiness and wellbeing in public policy can lead to significant successes.”

While Bhutan is probably lovely, especially if you’re one of the people allowed in the country, its abhorrent history and economic reality make it a truly bizarre place for any California lawmaker to suggest emulating.

Ethnic cleansing, civil rights abuses, failing economy. This is not the utopia Rendon thinks it is.

If Rendon and other California lawmakers want to do what they can to pursue happiness, they should consider receding from people’s lives: Lower taxes, cut onerous regulations, you know, those kinds of things.

Matt Fleming is a columnist with the Southern California News Group. Follow him on X @FlemingWords