Members Login
Post Info TOPIC: lao nationalism
lemongrass

Date:
lao nationalism
Permalink   


getting stronger, or worsening i thnk for our country to become a power house again there has to be unity, wut do u guys think

__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   

lemongrass wrote:

getting stronger, or worsening i thnk for our country to become a power house again there has to be unity, wut do u guys think



I think there isn't enough of the right kind. As Grant Evans once wrote, the government tried to form the cult of Kaysone, which failed.

I think the Lao people doesn't want to be proud of hailing from one of the five remaining "communist" countries of the world. There has never been a real sense of unity amongst Khon Lao, and the hill-dwellers, so its hard to say if it is worsening or getting stronger.

__________________
lemongrass

Date:
Permalink   

yeah i know exactly what u mean, but think of the formler lanxang how did they become so powerful and im pretty sure the ethnicities didint disapear so there are just as many ethnicities now then before. i know what u mean about the communism but do u think theres a way for the citizens of lao to be proud of being lao. (no politics involved just proud to be laos)

__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   

lane xang was an ancient kingdom and very different to modern nations. It is only today that historians and nationalists have 'reinvented' lane xang as a strong and specifically 'Lao' pre-nation. The evidence actually points to these kingdoms as being very unstable, and also being so connected with other kingdoms in the region that it was hard to define national boundaries. It is the daydreams of the national present that create the myths of the national past.

__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   

Anonymous wrote:

lane xang was an ancient kingdom and very different to modern nations. It is only today that historians and nationalists have 'reinvented' lane xang as a strong and specifically 'Lao' pre-nation. The evidence actually points to these kingdoms as being very unstable, and also being so connected with other kingdoms in the region that it was hard to define national boundaries. It is the daydreams of the national present that create the myths of the national past.




Are you sure it is evidence or is it propaganda by the government to legitimize its reign?

But I am sure it was, because why else would it have split into three principalities? Its a shame isn't it? The Lao people have been so divided and conquered, even now we are. I mean any society will be divided, but we Lao have never had a sense of unity.

__________________
lemongrass

Date:
Permalink   

at least i know for sure lanxang was under one ruler at one time and that was by the great fa ngum he was first ruler of laos and if u guys truly read up on ur history u would also know that, whats wrong with a little nationalism who knows american history could have been made up just so that the people would be united u werent there hundreds of years ago so how would u know come on ppl we should be proud to be laos. not saying that ur arguments arnt taken into consideration its just wouldnt u like to believe in something rather then nothing.

__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   

lemongrass wrote:

at least i know for sure lanxang was under one ruler at one time and that was by the great fa ngum he was first ruler of laos and if u guys truly read up on ur history u would also know that, whats wrong with a little nationalism who knows american history could have been made up just so that the people would be united u werent there hundreds of years ago so how would u know come on ppl we should be proud to be laos. not saying that ur arguments arnt taken into consideration its just wouldnt u like to believe in something rather then nothing.



I rather believe in nothing, than ever accept someone else's "something".

I'm familiar with the story of Chao Fa Ngum, but most Lao nationalists don't point towards him as the top figure. I would say Chao Anou is, because it fill the gap of the current missing Monarch.

He bravely tried to revolt against the Siamese, something that the Communists and Nationalists could point to as a "defender of the state" such as a Monarch would have been, and also the "defender of Buddhism".

Instead of pointing to a recent Monarch or Royal of the old regime, such as Maha Chao Siwit Sisavangvong, or Chao Phetsarath, the Communist revert such feelings towards Chao Anou, the last Vientiane Lan Xang ruler.

What I am trying to say is that Chao Anouvong is the scapegoat for a missing Monarch, or at least a Monarch figure (EVERY society has one, whether it is a King or NOT).

__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   

ok then believe in that  im jus sayin be proud to be lao and unite our ppl

__________________


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 3
Date:
Permalink   

Why is it important for people to be nationalistic? What does it mean to be nationalistic?

I feel that it is enough to be happy to live in Laos. As long as the economy is doing okay and the government does not pose too much restriction on our freedom, I think it's fine.

It better to think about respecting each other as individuals, regardless of nationality or race?

-- Edited by Joe ho ho at 21:04, 2008-05-09

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard