ບົດຄວາມນີ້ລະນຶກເຖິງ ດຣ. ທານິດ, ອະດີດສາດສະດາຈານ ປະຈໍາມະຫາວິທະຍາໄລ ອິລີນອຍ ແຫ່ງ ສະຫະລັດອະເມຣິກາ ປີ 1990-97. ທ່ານ ດຣ. ເປັນ ນັກປະຫວັດສາດ ສາຍອາເຊຍອາຄະເນ ຄົນໜຶ່ງ ເຊິ່ງສະໄຫມນັ້ນເພິ່ນເຂົ້າໃຈວ່າ ຊາດລາວເກີດຈາກຊາດໄທຍສະຫຍາມ ບໍ່ວ່າດ້ານພາສາແລະ ວັດທະນະທໍາ. ສະໄໝນັ້ນຂ້າພະເຈົ້າແມ່ນກໍາລັງຮຽນປະລິນຍາໂທ, ບັງເອີນສົນໃຈຄວາມເປັນມາຂອງ ເຊື້ອຊາດລາວ, ເລີຍຊອກຫາອ່ານ, ຄົ້ນຄວ້າເລິກເຊິ່ງເຖິງເຊື້ອເຜົ່າພົງພັນຂອງ ຕົນເອງຈົນກາຍເປັນບຸກຄົນທີ່ເຂົາເອີ້ນວ່າຊາດນິຍົມ. ເຊິ່ງກໍບໍ່ແຕກຕ່າງຫຍັງກັບ ທ່ານ ດຣ. ທານິດ ເພິ່ນເອງກໍ່ເປັນຄົນຊາດນິຍົມ, ຮັກຊາດໄທຍ. ສ່ວນຂ້າພະເຈົ້າ ເອງກໍ່ຮັກຊາດລາວ. ເຖິງວ່າທັງສອງ ຈະໄດ້ຍົກຍ້າຍມາອາໄສຢູ່ອະເມຣິກາ, ປ່ຽນສັນຊາດເປັນຄົນອະເມຣິກັນແລ້ວກໍ່ຕາມ. ແຕ່ຕ່າງຝ່າຍກໍ່ຍັງຮັກເຊື້ອເຜົ່າຂອງ ຕົນເອງຢູ່ ຈຶ່ງເກີດມີການປະທະກັນ. ແຕ່ສ່ວນຫຼາຍກໍປະທະກັນຢູ່ໃນຂອບເຂດ ດ້ວຍເຫດແລະຜົນຂອງແຕ່ລະຝ່າຍ. ມີບາງຄັ້ງກໍ່ນອກເຫດຜົນໄປເລັກໆນ້ອຍໆ ເຊິ່ງມີການນາບຂູ່, ປ້ອຍດ່າ, ຈາຕົບຈາຕີກັນ ສ່ວນຫຼາຍຈະແມ່ນມາຈາກໝູ່ນັກຮຽນລາວ ຢູ່ອະເມຣິກາດ້ວຍກັນ. ກໍບໍ່ຕິເນາະ ເພາະຕາມອາລົມໄວໜຸ່ມທີ່ຖືກ ເຜົາດ້ວຍແນວຄິດຊາດນິຍົມ. ແຕ່ນັ້ນມັນກໍກາຍເປັນອະດີດໄປແລ້ວ, ແລະວ່າງບໍ່ດົນມາ ນີ້ໄດ້ຍິນຂ່າວວ່າ ດຣ. ເພິ່ນໄດ້ເສຍຊີວິດແລ້ວ ຈຶ່ງເຮັດໃຫ້ຂ້າພະເຈົ້າເກີດມີປັດ ຊະຍາຫຼາຍຢ່າງຕໍ່ຊີວິດຄົນເຮົາ. ເກີດແກ່ເຈັບຕາຍ ຄືຈິລັງແຫ່ງຊີວິດ, ບໍ່ຄວນຍຶດຕິດກັບແນວຄິດຂາວຈັດຫຼືດໍາຈັດ. ເມື່ອມີແນວຄິດແຕກຕ່າງ ກໍບໍ່ຄວນແຕກຂາດດ້ານສະຕິ, ສໍາຄັນຕ້ອງຮູ້ຈັກອະໂຫສິໃຫ້ກັນແລະກັນບໍ່ວ່າກໍລະນີໃດໆ ອະໂຫສິໃຫ້ຄົນອື່ນບໍ່ໄດ້ ກໍອະໂຫສິໃຫ້ຕົນເອງເພາະນັ້ນຄືວິທີດຽວທີ່ຈະພາໃຫ້ເຮົາຜົ້ນ ທຸກໄດ້....ສາທຸ ຂໍໃຫ້ທ່ານ ດຣ. ໄປສູ່ສຸຄະຕິດເທິດ, ທ່ານຄືບຸກຄົນໜຶ່ງທີ່ຊ່ວຍ ເຣັດໃຫ້ຜູ້ຂ້າ ເຖິງຈະຢູ່ຕ່າງແດນ ແຕ່ກໍພູມໃຈໃນຄວາມເປັນລາວ. ຂອບໃຈ.
ຂ້າງລຸ່ມຄືພາກສ່ວນຂອງບົດຄວາມທີ່ຂ້າພະເຈົ້າ ໂຕ້ຖຽງກັບ ທ່ານ ດຣ ໃນເວທີ ລາວຟໍລໍາ. ຫມູ່ນັກຮຽນລາວ ອະເມຣິກັນສະໄໝນັ້ນຖ້າໄດ້ອ່ານອາດຈະຈື່ໄດ້ດີ...
__________________________
Let me help you Thai people, specially you Dr. Thanit
figuring out who's who and why some of you got screwed big time.
The word "Siam" is derived from "Syama,"
a Sanskrit term for Black or Dark Brown--please check the Sanskrit dictionary. In Vishnu
Purana of late 600s AD, the people were mentioned as "Syama
Rastra." The Champ inscriptions mentioned the Siamese. In 778 AD, in Rahang
(South Vietnam) inscription mentioned that "the temple was burned down
to the ground by men born in different country...entirely black and
thin..." There are other inscriptions mentioned capturing Siamese along with
Khmers as prisoners and slaves. In fact, some of the Khmers still
referred to you people as "Siem" meaning "Dark
Green"...There is a province in Cambodia
called "Siamreap." Chu Ta Kwan visited Angor Wat
in the late 13th
century wrote a book entailing the descriptions of the
empire and her people including the description of Siamese as people of
"dark skin and curly hair who went naked and barefoot." On the wall of
Angor Wat, the ceremony of 1183 AD was participated by mercenary soldiers
who were sculpted and denoted as "Syam-kuk." The Burmese
inscription of the same period (12th century) called your people "Hran." Therefore, definitely Syam or Siam or Siem doesn't mean people
of peace and happiness. In fact it was mentioned in Siam Mapped: A
History of Geo-body of Siam (1993) by Thongchai (?) that historically
the Ayudhayans have engaged in the destructive ideology not
peace.
How about the term Tai? Here we go doc…
On the other hand, the term Thai, Tai, or Dhai derived from
a Lao term "Din" to mean earth or soil or land (geographic
term) and local or native (people) (see Princeton Hsu in "The Chuang
People" published in "Archaeological Historical and Linguistic Studies of
the People of Southern China and Hongkong Areas" edited by F.S. Drake
(1961). How the term "Dhai" got to be used? Simple. In the Kwangsi
areas, there were litterally thousands of places associated with the term
"Tai" such as Tai Khao, Tai Loom, Tai Yuan, Tai Leuang,,,...Therefore,
there cannot be more than thousands Tai ethnics. Then people identified
themselves according to their place of settlements (ie., Tai Khao, Tai
Leuang..etc) as such that the term denoted "local" or
"native" of a given place, a self-resignation if you will. Furthermore, the term
"Tai" had always been used in association with another name (ie., Dhai Lue)
never a single word.
When have the word "T(h)ai" been used as a single
word? Many sources mentioned it was first applied during the reign of Ram
Khamhaeng (app.1292 AD) as written in the inscription #1. However, now
scholars have seriously doubted its authenticity, some even went further
to suggest that RK was actually composed by Mongkut himself during the
1850s. Linguistically speaking, the language of Sukhodhaya (collectively
from various inscriptions) differed from that of Ayudhaya to
which Vickery and Chamberlain concluded that the people of Sukhodhaya
weren't the ancestors of the Ayudhayans (see M. Vickery in his #2
installment, The Ram Khamhaeng Controvery edited by James R. Chamberlain
(1991)). If RK was a fake, then the next historical record that
showed the application of the word "Thai" as the name of
people was during the reign of the second Lao king, Sam Saen Thai of 1376 AD.
Here, the king was named after the sensus report of the kingdom's
populations as 300,000 Thais and some 400,000 Khmues. I may be the first
person to
admit that at some point in time, the Lao, too, may have
employed the word Thai as to mean people. In fact, the Lao people still
employ the term "Thai" as in Thai Vientiane, Thai Muang
Luang,,,,to mean the local or native people of those places.
So, how is the term "Thai" related to
"Siam"? Beat the hell out of me! But perhaps this can be explained in term of linguistic
criterion and/or social contacts and migration. According to Herold J. Wiens,
the Siamese learned the language from the Lao people (see China's March
Towards the Tropics, pp.117-118, 1954). Hiram Woodwards, a former
professor at the Sinlapakorn University, proposed the movement of the Mon
people, the Mon of Dvaravati Sri Ayudhaya whom he was believed to have been
the forefathers and foremothers of the so-called Thai people,
from the northeast regions down to the Chao Phraya valley during the
10-11th century as the Khmer power shrunk and thus carried the
language with them. Even Vickery seems to offer the same opinion. If
that's the case, the contacts between Lao and Mon must have taken place much
ealier,
perhaps during 7-10th century. Nevertheless, there were no
concrete
evidences to support either Woodwards' or Vickery's
hypothesis at the present time. Anyway, I do agree with you that the country shouldn't have
been named Thailand for "Thai" already means "land"
in such that if took it litterally Thailand really means "Landland," funny
huh Dr. Thanit?
Other note, Unlike Lao people who paid the respect to the Khamue when
they first migrated to the land by adopting some of their traditions
and honoring them during the yearly ceremony, Thai people had not.
Therefore, they tend to be blind when it comes to other people's customs,
culture, and values. But let's dissect the Thai culture and people as to who are
they and where they came from. Historical records showed that these
Ayudhayans are the direct descendants of the Mon race. Who are the Mon?
The Mon people are racially, culturally, and linguistically related
to the Khmers whom had enslaved them for centuries. Currently,
there are roughly 500,000 Mons left in Southern Mayanma--the old
kingdom of
Ramayana or Souwanna Phoum Pradej centered at Thaton. Some
of the Thai or Siamese are the original inhabitants of Ayudhaya known as
Krung Theb Dvaravati Sri Ayudhaya; some came from the Haripunja kingdom
(now called Lampang, northern Thailand); some came all the way from
Isaan including Ban Xai Fong, Vientiane. It can be traced back where they
had settled not only by the archaeolgical remains but also by the
survival of their language. For example, the word 'Bang' as Bang Hiang and
Bang Fai (Sawannakhet, Laos) and Bang Khrapi and other Bang in
Thailand is the Mon word and would, of course, likely to be the Mon
settlements.
Why do they speak the Lao language? The similarity of the
language, spoken or written, between the Thai and the Lao is
astonishing and thus creates theories and hypothesis that the two groups of people
must have shared the same ancestry. Such topic has been hotly debated
for years. In any events, in order to understand the spread of the Lao
language in the peninsula, history, especially the subjugation and
migration era must be learned. That's when the subjugated Mon came down
from the old
Haripunja, which was overpowered and ruled by the Lao--the
Lan Na branch, from Isaan and Vientiane ruled by the Lan Xang
branch, and from Sukhadhaya ruled by the Lan Na branch, they brought the
language with them. Case in point: it's no mistake that word 'Thai' is an
ancient Lao word as indicated by the linguistic study, to mean 'Din or
earth, land, soil' used as a geographic term, or 'local and native' to
denote people. In fact, history will show that at one time the Lao people
called themselves 'Thai' as well, according to the population
statistics during the king Sam Saen Thai of 1376 AD. Of course, to date the
Siamese or Mon have mostly abandoned their language and history, but
retained their culture and traditions. And they adopted the name 'Thai' as their tribal name instead. Is it good or bad? It all depends
on how one looks at it, I guess.
Certainly, there are people who tried linking the two groups by fusing their histories and language together,
but others saw it differently. The former is the people of academia and
ruling class. Their political agenda, as I see it, is to conquer
the land and to brainwash people to believe that they really share the
same ancestry.
Historically, the Siamese elites had attempted to westernize
their own people by advocating the practice of western culture (ie.,
members of the family kissing before leaving and after coming home).
There was also a period in their history where they had attempted to
exterminate the Chinese population from the kingdom by using the Lao army
(the Anuwong's) to chase them through the sugar plantations.
There is also a period where the ruling class devised the methods to erase
the term 'Lao' and replace them with 'Thai'. Thus, ridiculing
anything including people, culture, traditions, places,,,etc. which associated
with the term 'Lao' is more than appropriate for the sake of the term
'Thai'. Perhaps, this is what happens in the case of Nichole bashing
the Lao people.
So, I know what holocaust means, doctor, and I know what
genocide means, and what the Siamese did to the Vientiane population
in 1827 and afterwards (and even before) certainly qualify as genocide. In fact
the Siamese have
continued to commit genocide against the Lao people up to the middle of this
century and later, by
systematically attempting to destroy the Lao race by saying that Lao people are
Thai. Well, you know what, doctor? There
is a good reason that your adopted race has a peculiar complex in regards to
Laos. This is because Lao people
are the only real Thais left! Your
adopted people, the Siamese, are a mixed breed (some people would
say mutts). Look at what your own
scholars say: "The irony is that on the contrary this notion [younger
brother] should be applied to us. Every
child in school knows that Laos was a cradle of the Thai people and that
the Lao are the Thai (or Tai) whose blood is more ancient and purer than that
of the inhabitants of the
Menam basin, which mixed with the Mons, Khmers and, the the case of Bangkok,
with the Chinese." That was Dr. Sumet Jumsay as published in THE
NATION, August 6, 1984. Pay attention,
Dr. Thanit, to what our
then Crown Price Savang Vatthana said in the 1940s: "we Lao, we are also
Thai, but we don't want to become
Siamese." Capisce? YOUR PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO BECOME OUR
PEOPLE. STOP IT DOCTOR! WE DON'T LIKE THAT....
Sam aka PS 1997 (Laos Forum)
