QUOTE(babelone @ Mar 13 2008, 03:45 AM) [snapback]3562662[/snapback]
How do you feel about eskimos, Lanxan?
Having had a little bit of a web-search into Laos, which incidentally has its pown forum listing, and needn't really be added to the Thai sub-forum, but I gotta wonder where your youtube education has led you.
According to the Wikipaedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Laos
, Laos got independence in 1954, as cut and pasted below:Before full independence in 1954
In the 17th century Lan Xang entered a period of decline and the late 18th century Siam (now Thailand) established control over much of what is now Laos. The region was divided into three dependent states centered on Luang Prabang in the north, Vientiane in the center, and Champassak in the south. The Vientiane Lao rebelled in 1828 but were defeated, and the area incorporated into Siam. Following its occupation of Vietnam, France absorbed Laos into French Indochina via treaties with Siam in 1893 and 1904.
During World War II, the Japanese occupied French Indochina. When Japan surrendered, Lao nationalists declared Laos independent, but by early 1946, French troops had reoccupied the country and conferred limited autonomy on Laos. During the First Indochina War, the Indochinese Communist Party formed the Pathet Lao resistance organization committed to Lao independence. Laos gained full independence following the French defeat by the Vietnamese communists and the subsequent Geneva peace conference in 1954.
The period of the Kingdom of Laos
Elections were held in 1955, and the first coalition government, led by Prince Souvanna Phouma, was formed in 1957. The coalition government collapsed in 1958 under pressure from the United States. In 1960 Captain Kong Lae staged a coup when the cabinet was away at the royal capital of Luang Prabang and demanded reformation of a neutralist government. The second coalition government, once again led by Souvanna Phouma, was not successful in holding power. Rightist forces under General Phoumi Nosavan drove out the neutralist government from power later that same year.
A second Geneva conference, held in 1961-62, provided for the independence and neutrality of Laos, but the agreement was subverted by both the United States and North Vietnam and the war soon resumed. The government and army of Laos were generally neutral during the conflict. The United States and North Vietnam subverted the agreement by forming private proxy armies. Growing American and North Vietnamese military presence in the country increasingly drew Laos into the Second Indochina War (1954-1975). For nearly a decade, eastern Laos was subjected to the heaviest bombing in the history of warfare, as the U.S. sought to destroy the Ho Chi Minh Trail that passed through Laos. The country was also repeatedly invaded by Vietnam.
Shortly after the Paris Peace Accords led to the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam, a ceasefire between the Pathet Lao and the government led to a new coalition government. However, North Vietnam never really withdrew from Laos and the Pathet Lao remained little more than a proxy army for Vietnamese interests. After the fall of South Vietnam to communist forces in April 1975, the Pathet Lao with the backing of North Vietnam were able to take total power with little resistance. On December 2, 1975, the king was forced to abdicate his throne and the Lao People's Democratic Republic was established.
Also, from what I know, "laotian" is a word adapted by the American media sometime in the 1960s because Lao was too confusing to the American viewers to be accepted as the adjective for people and things from Laos. Would it be possible then that the reason that most Thai people do not know that Issan people were once laotian might be because the North-Eastern region of Thailand has been a part of the Kingdom since long before the word "laotian"was ever concocted?
I just love the youtube educational system. It takes away the desire for hallucinogenic drugs, for starters.
Please correct me if Wikipaedia is wrong on the 1954 date, and if I have misread the entry. I don't think there's any mistake on the laotian part though. Thailand has enough Macdonalds stores already without more American misnomers. Perhaps it is not the Thai education system that needs to be criticised. This is the information age after all. I have pride in Wiki.
I dont know what is ur point? that Central Thais dont know the ppl of Isan are Lao? or the term Laotian?
Most ppl know Isan ppl are prodominately Lao, so not sure what the argument is?
See there is a Flaw on most Thai ppls arguments. Isan are Thai nationals, they cant be ethnic Thai, because Thai is not an ethnicity. Even so, If they were Thai ethnic's, then that would destroy any credibility of there being such a think as an ethnic Thai. because all of history knows, they are Lao.
THe reference of them being Lao goes, to the core of every manuscript of, Lanxang, Lanna, Burma, and ayutthaya, that suggest they are Lao. the fact that somehow they can change their DNA to being some sort of newly creaed ethnic race of ppl, is absolutely redicuous.
It wasnt until recent history, around that date 1950, that the Central Thais refered to the ppl of Isaan and Northern Thailand as being Ethnic Lao. The name Siamese ppl gave to the ppl of Chiangmai was the "Lao tong dam." and before the nationality was changed on ID cards to "Thai" vs. Siamese and other groups within the country. the Northern Thais and Isaan ppl's ID cards identified them as being ethnic Lao. This is still in recent history, most our parents were just born or are still alive at that point in time.
but there is no mistaken to the effort by the thai government to re-educate the population in thinking somehow there is only Thai. To the point, the Siamese no longer exist as a defined group?
I dont know one Thai person that refers to themselves as being Siamese? why is that. the thaification was so extreme, that even the Siamese ceased to exist, and the word "Thai" became some blurred group of ppl, who dont have any true starting point in history.
There is no mistaken the Thai's who were so worried about ethnic identify and pride, they did all they could to erase everything that wasnt this newly created theme, which is "THai" and "Thaification"; Khmer, Lao, Mala, Mon, all these ethnic groups that make up the actual Thai ppl, had to be erased. so since their birth, only a carefully crafted central Thai hisotry had been created and was taught, thus the begining of the history of Tai ppl ignored.
Which is Fine, but that is the past, there is a Thai Nation today, so my problem is, why still try to lie? Isnt thailand finally at a point, that it is comfortable in their own skin, proud enough of their own unity and identity, that the truth can finally be taught. or are they still insecure about themselves, that they still insist on teaching their ppl a false history.
that is all im concerned about. u cant have true unity under false premise. if Thailand can withstand telling the truth to their citizens, and keep that unity, only then will they become a true Nation.
I dont want anything from Thailand, they are my pi-nong, i care that they are stable, because what benefits their nation, benefits Laos, being that we are so close. By try not to lie about who u really are, is my concern. Like i said, doing so, u have this false Idea of who u are, and that isnt good. lets truely unite by telling the truth.