ติดตามชมรายการท้ายกห้อง ทุกวันเสาร์-อาทิตย์ เวลา 20.16 น. ทางไทยพีบีเอส หรือรับชมทีวีออนไลน์ทาง
http://clip.thaipbs.or.th/file-13104#.U93nZuyifek.facebook
http://clip.thaipbs.or.th/file-13104#.U93nZuyifek.facebook
Sunday, August 3, 2014
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
War Crimes
Acts that violate the international laws, treaties, customs, and practices governing military conflict between belligerent states or parties.War crimes may be committed by a country's regular armed forces, such as its army, navy, or air force, or by irregular armed forces, such as guerrillas and insurgents. Soldiers may be punished for war crimes, as may military and political leaders, members of the judiciary, industrialists, and civilians who are enlisted by a belligerent to contravene the Rules of War.
However, isolated instances of Terrorism and single acts of rebellion are rarely, if ever, treated as war crimes punishable under the international rules of warfare. Instead, they are ordinarily treated as criminal violations punishable under the domestic laws of the country in which they occur.
Most war crimes fall into one of three categories: crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and traditional war crimes. Crimes against peace include the planning, commencement, and waging of aggressive war, or war in violation of international agreements. Aggressive war is broadly defined to include any hostile military act that disregards the territorial boundaries of another country, disrespects the political independence of another regime, or otherwise interferes with the sovereignty of an internationally recognized state. Wars fought in self-defense are not aggressive wars.
Following World War II, for example, the Allies prosecuted a number of leading Nazi officials at the Nuremberg Trials for crimes against peace. During the war, the Nazis had invaded and occupied a series of sovereign states, including France, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Austria. Because those invasions were made in an effort to accumulate wealth, power, and territory for the Third Reich, Nazi officials could not claim to be acting in self-defense. Thus, those officials who participated in the planning, initiation, or execution of those invasions were guilty of crimes against peace.
Hermann Göring, chief of the Luftwaffe (the German Air Force), was one Nazi official who was convicted of crimes against peace at the Nuremberg trials. The international military tribunal presiding at Nuremberg, composed of judges selected from the four Allied powers (France, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States), found that Göring had helped plan and carry out the invasions of Poland and Austria and had ordered the destruction of Rotterdam, Holland, after the city had effectively surrendered.
Crimes against humanity include the deportation, enslavement, persecution, and extermination of certain peoples based on their race, religion, ethnic origin, or some other identifiable characteristic. This category of war crimes was created almost entirely from the catalog of atrocities committed by the Nazi regime in World War II. Although other regimes have since committed horrors of their own, the Nazis established the standard by which the wartime misconduct of all subsequent regimes is now measured.
As part of the Nazi blitzkrieg, the Germans constructed concentration camps around Europe where they gassed, tortured, and incinerated millions of Jews and other persons they deemed impure or subversive to the Aryan race. Millions of others who escaped this fate were deported to Nazi labor camps in occupied countries where they were compelled at gunpoint to work on behalf of the Third Reich. The Nazi leaders who were responsible for implementing this totalitarian system of terror were guilty of crimes against humanity.
Many Nazi leaders were prosecuted for crimes against humanity during the Nuremberg trials. For example, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, head of the Nazi security organization in charge of the gestapo (the German secret police), was convicted and sentenced to death based on evidence that he had authorized the extermination of Jews at concentration camps and ordered the Conscription and deportation of civilians to foreign labor camps.
Traditional war crimes consist of those acts that violate the accepted customs, practices, and laws of warfare that have been followed by civilized nations for centuries. These rules of war prescribe the rights and obligations of belligerent states, prisoners of war, and occupying powers, as well as those of combatants and civilians. They also set restrictions on the types of weapons that belligerents may employ during combat. Soldiers, officers, and members of the high command can all be held responsible for violating the accepted customs and practices of war, regardless of whether they issue an order commanding an illegal act or simply follow such an order.
Soldiers, officers, and the high command can also be held responsible for failing to prevent war crimes. Military personnel in a position of authority have an obligation to instruct their subordinates on the customs and practices of war and a duty to supervise and oversee their conduct on the battlefield. A military commander who neglects this duty can be punished for any war crimes committed by his troops. Following World War II, for example, Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita was prosecuted and sentenced to death by a U.S. military tribunal in the South Pacific for dereliction of duty in "failing to provide effective control" of his troops who had massacred, raped, and pillaged innocent noncombatant civilians and mistreated U.S. prisoners of war in the Philippines (Christenson 1991, 491).
For more than five centuries, the rules of war have been applied to military conflicts between countries. Until the last decade, many observers contended that the rules of war do not govern hostilities between combatants in civil wars that take place wholly within the territorial boundaries of a single state. However, during the 1990s, the United Nations established two international military tribunals to investigate and prosecute war crimes that allegedly took place in the civil wars fought within Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda.
The two tribunals indicted soldiers and other combatants in both countries for committing a litany of war crimes, including the torture of political and military enemies, the programmatic raping of women, and Genocide. Although the litigants questioned the jurisdiction and authority of each tribunal, trials proceeded against certain defendants who had been captured. Thus, the theater in which war crimes can be committed and punished has expanded from international military conflicts to intranational civil wars.
In 1998, the United Nations established the international criminal court (ICC) with the signing of the Rome Treaty. The court, which came into force on July 1, 2002, is the first permanent international criminal tribunal. Many countries over the course of many years expressed the need for such a permanent court, but politics during the Cold War and other factors prevented its creation. The treaty, however, received widespread international support upon its signing. The ICC is empowered to hear three major types of cases, including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
The United States originally signed the treaty on December 31, 2000, but did so with reservations. One claim was that the court could be used to prosecute troops based on the political motivations of other nations. The United States introduced an amendment to the treaty that would have given U.N. security council members the right to Veto certain prosecutions, but the amendment was rejected. Even when President bill clinton signed the treaty, members of his cabinet and members of Congress expressed concerns about the court's powers. In May 2002, President george w. bush instructed the U.S. State Department to inform the secretary-general of the United Nations that the United States would not become a party to the treaty.
Simpson, Gerry, ed. 2004. War Crimes. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate/Dartmouth.
Wald, Patricia. 2003. "Trying War Crimes in International Courts." International Journal of Legal Information 31 (summer).
However, isolated instances of Terrorism and single acts of rebellion are rarely, if ever, treated as war crimes punishable under the international rules of warfare. Instead, they are ordinarily treated as criminal violations punishable under the domestic laws of the country in which they occur.
Most war crimes fall into one of three categories: crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and traditional war crimes. Crimes against peace include the planning, commencement, and waging of aggressive war, or war in violation of international agreements. Aggressive war is broadly defined to include any hostile military act that disregards the territorial boundaries of another country, disrespects the political independence of another regime, or otherwise interferes with the sovereignty of an internationally recognized state. Wars fought in self-defense are not aggressive wars.
Following World War II, for example, the Allies prosecuted a number of leading Nazi officials at the Nuremberg Trials for crimes against peace. During the war, the Nazis had invaded and occupied a series of sovereign states, including France, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Austria. Because those invasions were made in an effort to accumulate wealth, power, and territory for the Third Reich, Nazi officials could not claim to be acting in self-defense. Thus, those officials who participated in the planning, initiation, or execution of those invasions were guilty of crimes against peace.
Hermann Göring, chief of the Luftwaffe (the German Air Force), was one Nazi official who was convicted of crimes against peace at the Nuremberg trials. The international military tribunal presiding at Nuremberg, composed of judges selected from the four Allied powers (France, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States), found that Göring had helped plan and carry out the invasions of Poland and Austria and had ordered the destruction of Rotterdam, Holland, after the city had effectively surrendered.
Crimes against humanity include the deportation, enslavement, persecution, and extermination of certain peoples based on their race, religion, ethnic origin, or some other identifiable characteristic. This category of war crimes was created almost entirely from the catalog of atrocities committed by the Nazi regime in World War II. Although other regimes have since committed horrors of their own, the Nazis established the standard by which the wartime misconduct of all subsequent regimes is now measured.
As part of the Nazi blitzkrieg, the Germans constructed concentration camps around Europe where they gassed, tortured, and incinerated millions of Jews and other persons they deemed impure or subversive to the Aryan race. Millions of others who escaped this fate were deported to Nazi labor camps in occupied countries where they were compelled at gunpoint to work on behalf of the Third Reich. The Nazi leaders who were responsible for implementing this totalitarian system of terror were guilty of crimes against humanity.
Many Nazi leaders were prosecuted for crimes against humanity during the Nuremberg trials. For example, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, head of the Nazi security organization in charge of the gestapo (the German secret police), was convicted and sentenced to death based on evidence that he had authorized the extermination of Jews at concentration camps and ordered the Conscription and deportation of civilians to foreign labor camps.
Traditional war crimes consist of those acts that violate the accepted customs, practices, and laws of warfare that have been followed by civilized nations for centuries. These rules of war prescribe the rights and obligations of belligerent states, prisoners of war, and occupying powers, as well as those of combatants and civilians. They also set restrictions on the types of weapons that belligerents may employ during combat. Soldiers, officers, and members of the high command can all be held responsible for violating the accepted customs and practices of war, regardless of whether they issue an order commanding an illegal act or simply follow such an order.
Soldiers, officers, and the high command can also be held responsible for failing to prevent war crimes. Military personnel in a position of authority have an obligation to instruct their subordinates on the customs and practices of war and a duty to supervise and oversee their conduct on the battlefield. A military commander who neglects this duty can be punished for any war crimes committed by his troops. Following World War II, for example, Japanese General Tomoyuki Yamashita was prosecuted and sentenced to death by a U.S. military tribunal in the South Pacific for dereliction of duty in "failing to provide effective control" of his troops who had massacred, raped, and pillaged innocent noncombatant civilians and mistreated U.S. prisoners of war in the Philippines (Christenson 1991, 491).
For more than five centuries, the rules of war have been applied to military conflicts between countries. Until the last decade, many observers contended that the rules of war do not govern hostilities between combatants in civil wars that take place wholly within the territorial boundaries of a single state. However, during the 1990s, the United Nations established two international military tribunals to investigate and prosecute war crimes that allegedly took place in the civil wars fought within Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda.
The two tribunals indicted soldiers and other combatants in both countries for committing a litany of war crimes, including the torture of political and military enemies, the programmatic raping of women, and Genocide. Although the litigants questioned the jurisdiction and authority of each tribunal, trials proceeded against certain defendants who had been captured. Thus, the theater in which war crimes can be committed and punished has expanded from international military conflicts to intranational civil wars.
In 1998, the United Nations established the international criminal court (ICC) with the signing of the Rome Treaty. The court, which came into force on July 1, 2002, is the first permanent international criminal tribunal. Many countries over the course of many years expressed the need for such a permanent court, but politics during the Cold War and other factors prevented its creation. The treaty, however, received widespread international support upon its signing. The ICC is empowered to hear three major types of cases, including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
The United States originally signed the treaty on December 31, 2000, but did so with reservations. One claim was that the court could be used to prosecute troops based on the political motivations of other nations. The United States introduced an amendment to the treaty that would have given U.N. security council members the right to Veto certain prosecutions, but the amendment was rejected. Even when President bill clinton signed the treaty, members of his cabinet and members of Congress expressed concerns about the court's powers. In May 2002, President george w. bush instructed the U.S. State Department to inform the secretary-general of the United Nations that the United States would not become a party to the treaty.
Further readings
Meron, Theodor. 1998. War Crimes Law Comes of Age: Essays. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Simpson, Gerry, ed. 2004. War Crimes. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate/Dartmouth.
Wald, Patricia. 2003. "Trying War Crimes in International Courts." International Journal of Legal Information 31 (summer).
Cross-references
Tokyo Trial.
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Promoting Peace in Myanmar
U.S. Interests and Role
Source: http://csis.org/publication/promoting-peace-myanmar
May 1, 2014
Myanmar has made important progress toward democratic reform since
President Thein Sein’s civilian government came to power in early 2011.
Significant challenges, however, remain and could scuttle efforts at
change. Key among these are the peace process between the government and
armed ethnic groups in the border regions; communal tensions in Rakhine
state bordering Bangladesh and in central Myanmar; and the free and
fair conduct of the 2015 general elections, which could also impact the
peace process and communal relations. This report explores the United
States’ interests in peace in Myanmar and offers recommendations for how
Washington can best promote it.
Lynn Kuok was a visiting fellow with the Sumitro Chair for Southeast Asia Studies at CSIS.
Lynn Kuok was a visiting fellow with the Sumitro Chair for Southeast Asia Studies at CSIS.
Publisher CSIS/Rowman & Littlefield
ISBN 978-1-4422-2845-0 (pb); 978-1-4422-2846-7 (eBook)
ProgramsSource: http://csis.org/publication/promoting-peace-myanmar
Thursday, June 19, 2014
"รัชกาลที่ 4 กล่าวถึงบรรพชนชาวหงสาของพระองค์ - ေအကရာဇ္ေသမ္ဆီမန္"
"รัชกาลที่ 4 กล่าวถึงบรรพชนชาวหงสาของพระองค์ - ေအကရာဇ္ေသမ္ဆီမန္"
ต่อคำถามของ เซอร์ จอห์น เบาวริ่งที่ว่า "I requested the King to favour
me with an account of his own dynasty, and received the following reply"
พระบาทสมเด็จพระจอมเกล้าเจ้
"In regard to the particular narrative or ancient true occurrence of the present royal dynasty reigning upon Siam, I beg to say what I knew from statement of our parents and ancestors, and other tolerable and corresponding families whom I have been present of in considerable space of time when they have been living or alive. The first family of our paternal ancestors, it is said, have been inhabitants of the city of Hansawatty (proper Sanskrit name), the capital of Pegu..."
แปลโดยเจ้าพระยาภาสกรวงศ์ (พร บุนนาค) ดังนี้
"ด้วยเรื่องราวความสิ่งสำคั
นักประวัติศาสตร์หลายท่านไม
แต่หากพิจารณาข้อคิดความเห็
"คนโบราณนั้นท่านรู้กันและน
อย่างไรก็ตาม หากแม้ว่าเรื่องที่รัชกาลที
พระบาทสมเด็จพระจอมเกล้าเจ้
"In regard to the particular narrative or ancient true occurrence of the present royal dynasty reigning upon Siam, I beg to say what I knew from statement of our parents and ancestors, and other tolerable and corresponding families whom I have been present of in considerable space of time when they have been living or alive. The first family of our paternal ancestors, it is said, have been inhabitants of the city of Hansawatty (proper Sanskrit name), the capital of Pegu..."
แปลโดยเจ้าพระยาภาสกรวงศ์ (พร บุนนาค) ดังนี้
"ด้วยเรื่องราวความสิ่งสำคั
นักประวัติศาสตร์หลายท่านไม
แต่หากพิจารณาข้อคิดความเห็
"คนโบราณนั้นท่านรู้กันและน
อย่างไรก็ตาม หากแม้ว่าเรื่องที่รัชกาลที
"The reign of the 4 mentioned book people of his native Hong-ေအကရာဇ္ေသမ္ဆီမန္"
The question of Sir John waring light that says "I requested the King
to favour me with an account of his own dynasty, and received the
following reply."
King Mongkut Rama King Rama IV Royal answered Sir John waring light that came prosperous partnership in the Kingdom of Siam when 2398 (1855) as Ambassador representatives of Queen Victoria published in the book "The Kingdom and People of Siam with a Narrative of the History to that Community in 1855 when the 2400 (1857)
"In regard to the particular narrative or ancient true occurrence of the present royal dynasty reigning upon Siam, I beg to say what I knew from statement of our parents and ancestors, and other tolerable and corresponding families whom I have been present of in considerable space of time when they have been living or alive. The first family of our paternal ancestors, it is said, have been inhabitants of the city of Hansawatty (proper Sanskrit name), the capital of Pegu..."
Translation by Chao Khun passakorn (porn Bunnag). As follows:
"With stories of important events or as the real thing, but historic Royal dynasty, which includes we ask for sayam khrongkrung said, as we know, the story of our ancestors, and ethnic chonni and matching family and thuk. Which we have been familiar, but before too long. When ye have life or live it tells the successor. Genesis house party alongside our ancestors shift pitri thee, that it was Hansawatty ' innovative courses Hong beat ' (real name riti Che Tong) is the capital city of Bangkok of Pegu ...
Many historians do not believe that more firmly convinced and confident that the reign of 4 of his book, said a young man hung people as well. But the Prince inherited the honour Phraya RAM Batman tracked Mon thon two-fold mirror with Siamese King naresuan in 2127 access to be true with any other evidence appeared no earlier than. Period from the date of the incident until the reign of the mentioned 4 apart to 271 years.
But if you consider the opinion of the comment M.R.W. pramot Khuekrit mentioned in "the skeleton in the cupboard" that.
"He knows that ancient peoples and is counted as one descended from whence that talk like this, so the offspring will have in mind that the current associated with the former ..." Another one also said a meeting of Britain and Ireland past ancient Thai notes agent. Do not bring God into the pencil, book, holiday, but used to remember and get back out to write after the Conference finished. The fact that there may be a fall off, but they believe that the most accurate because of the need to "remember." See, for example, just in case the author (and probably many others) ever remember who's who: Halle Berry is 10-20 Harbour, but after the coming of the mobile phone that can fit hundreds of people harbour. The author has a few Harbour. So it seems to believe that the reign of 4 would have to recognize what has been spoken in the family line of succession is not distorted investor.
However, even if the matter is not referred to the reign of the above 4 is true, but it was suspicious why he was referred to as the "Mon" (indicating that the reputation of the "sales" as it happens. The West Caucasian ...) do not claim that it is China and India. Southeast Asia's ancient Khmer and Cham phayu. offerings, to find English or Portugal, and will be linked with the RapPort that hunters are to spread out the wings into the Southeast at the time it was broken. (Translated by Bing)
King Mongkut Rama King Rama IV Royal answered Sir John waring light that came prosperous partnership in the Kingdom of Siam when 2398 (1855) as Ambassador representatives of Queen Victoria published in the book "The Kingdom and People of Siam with a Narrative of the History to that Community in 1855 when the 2400 (1857)
"In regard to the particular narrative or ancient true occurrence of the present royal dynasty reigning upon Siam, I beg to say what I knew from statement of our parents and ancestors, and other tolerable and corresponding families whom I have been present of in considerable space of time when they have been living or alive. The first family of our paternal ancestors, it is said, have been inhabitants of the city of Hansawatty (proper Sanskrit name), the capital of Pegu..."
Translation by Chao Khun passakorn (porn Bunnag). As follows:
"With stories of important events or as the real thing, but historic Royal dynasty, which includes we ask for sayam khrongkrung said, as we know, the story of our ancestors, and ethnic chonni and matching family and thuk. Which we have been familiar, but before too long. When ye have life or live it tells the successor. Genesis house party alongside our ancestors shift pitri thee, that it was Hansawatty ' innovative courses Hong beat ' (real name riti Che Tong) is the capital city of Bangkok of Pegu ...
Many historians do not believe that more firmly convinced and confident that the reign of 4 of his book, said a young man hung people as well. But the Prince inherited the honour Phraya RAM Batman tracked Mon thon two-fold mirror with Siamese King naresuan in 2127 access to be true with any other evidence appeared no earlier than. Period from the date of the incident until the reign of the mentioned 4 apart to 271 years.
But if you consider the opinion of the comment M.R.W. pramot Khuekrit mentioned in "the skeleton in the cupboard" that.
"He knows that ancient peoples and is counted as one descended from whence that talk like this, so the offspring will have in mind that the current associated with the former ..." Another one also said a meeting of Britain and Ireland past ancient Thai notes agent. Do not bring God into the pencil, book, holiday, but used to remember and get back out to write after the Conference finished. The fact that there may be a fall off, but they believe that the most accurate because of the need to "remember." See, for example, just in case the author (and probably many others) ever remember who's who: Halle Berry is 10-20 Harbour, but after the coming of the mobile phone that can fit hundreds of people harbour. The author has a few Harbour. So it seems to believe that the reign of 4 would have to recognize what has been spoken in the family line of succession is not distorted investor.
However, even if the matter is not referred to the reign of the above 4 is true, but it was suspicious why he was referred to as the "Mon" (indicating that the reputation of the "sales" as it happens. The West Caucasian ...) do not claim that it is China and India. Southeast Asia's ancient Khmer and Cham phayu. offerings, to find English or Portugal, and will be linked with the RapPort that hunters are to spread out the wings into the Southeast at the time it was broken. (Translated by Bing)
Friday, June 13, 2014
Types of Papers: Argument/Argumentative
While some teachers consider persuasive papers
and argument papers to be basically the same thing, it’s usually safe
to assume that an argument paper presents a stronger claim—possibly to a
more resistant audience.
For example: while a persuasive paper might claim that cities need to adopt recycling programs, an argument paper on the same topic might be addressed to a particular town. The argument paper would go further, suggesting specific ways that a recycling program should be adopted and utilized in that particular area.
To write an argument essay, you’ll need to gather evidence and present a well-reasoned argument on a debatable issue.
How can I tell if my topic is debatable? Check your thesis! You cannot argue a statement of fact, you must base your paper on a strong position. Ask yourself…
You MUST choose one side or the other when you write an argument paper!
Don’t be afraid to tell others exactly how you think things should go because that’s what we expect from an argument paper. You’re in charge now, what do YOU think?
By addressing the opposition you achieve the following goals:
The same is true in your writing.
How do I accomplish this?
To address the other side of the argument you plan to make, you'll need to "put yourself in their shoes." In other words, you need to try to understand where they're coming from. If you're having trouble accomplishing this task, try following these steps:
For example: while a persuasive paper might claim that cities need to adopt recycling programs, an argument paper on the same topic might be addressed to a particular town. The argument paper would go further, suggesting specific ways that a recycling program should be adopted and utilized in that particular area.
To write an argument essay, you’ll need to gather evidence and present a well-reasoned argument on a debatable issue.
How can I tell if my topic is debatable? Check your thesis! You cannot argue a statement of fact, you must base your paper on a strong position. Ask yourself…
- How many people could argue against my position? What would they say?
- Can it be addressed with a yes or no? (aim for a topic that requires more info.)
- Can I base my argument on scholarly evidence, or am I relying on religion, cultural standards, or morality? (you MUST be able to do quality research!)
- Have I made my argument specific enough?
Worried about taking a firm stance on an issue?
Though there are plenty of times in your life when it’s best to adopt a balanced perspective and try to understand both sides of a debate, this isn’t one of them.You MUST choose one side or the other when you write an argument paper!
Don’t be afraid to tell others exactly how you think things should go because that’s what we expect from an argument paper. You’re in charge now, what do YOU think?
| Do… | Don’t… |
| …use passionate language | …use weak qualifiers like “I believe,” “I feel,” or “I think”—just tell us! |
| …cite experts who agree with you | …claim to be an expert if you’re not one |
| …provide facts, evidence, and statistics to support your position | …use strictly moral or religious claims as support for your argument |
| …provide reasons to support your claim | …assume the audience will agree with you about any aspect of your argument |
| …address the opposing side’s argument and refute their claims | …attempt to make others look bad (i.e. Mr. Smith is ignorant—don’t listen to him!) |
Why do I need to address the opposing side’s argument?
There is an old kung-fu saying which states, "The hand that strikes also blocks", meaning that when you argue it is to your advantage to anticipate your opposition and strike down their arguments within the body of your own paper. This sentiment is echoed in the popular saying, "The best defense is a good offense".By addressing the opposition you achieve the following goals:
- illustrate a well-rounded understanding of the topic
- demonstrate a lack of bias
- enhance the level of trust that the reader has for both you and your opinion
- give yourself the opportunity to refute any arguments the opposition may have
- strengthen your argument by diminishing your opposition's argument
The same is true in your writing.
How do I accomplish this?
To address the other side of the argument you plan to make, you'll need to "put yourself in their shoes." In other words, you need to try to understand where they're coming from. If you're having trouble accomplishing this task, try following these steps:
- Jot down several good reasons why you support that particular side of the argument.
- Look at the reasons you provided and try to argue with yourself. Ask: Why would someone disagree with each of these points? What would his/her response be? (Sometimes it's helpful to imagine that you're having a verbal argument with someone who disagrees with you.)
- Think carefully about your audience; try to understand their background, their strongest influences, and the way that their minds work. Ask: What parts of this issue will concern my opposing audience the most?
- Find the necessary facts, evidence, quotes from experts, etc. to refute the points that your opposition might make.
- Carefully organize your paper so that it moves smoothly from defending your own points to sections where you argue against the opposition.
Sunday, June 1, 2014
The “Wages of Burman-ness:” Ethnicity and Burman Privilege in Contemporary Myanmar
Ethnicity is one of the primary lenses
through which scholars view conflict in Burma/Myanmar. In this paper I
examine the dominance of the majority ethnic group in Myanmar, the
Burmans, and the ways in which Burman-ness functions as a privileged
identity. I draw from the theoretical framework of Whiteness and White
privilege in critical race theory to argue that, although there are
important analytical differences between race and ethnicity, we can
conceptualise Burman-ness as a form of institutionalised dominance
similar to Whiteness. I support this argument by documenting the ways in
which Burmans are privileged in relation to non-Burmans, while still,
in many cases, seeing themselves as equally subject to government
repression. This analysis of Burman privilege (and blindness to that
privilege) is particularly relevant given the fact that the political
reforms implemented by Myanmar's new, partly civilian government since
2011 have opened new opportunities for (mostly Burman) activists while
c.
အခွင့်ထူးခံဗမာနဲ့ တိုင်းရင်းသားပြဿနာ
Queen Chamadevi
The Story Of Queen Chamadevi
SEE RELATED IMAGES @ PICTURES FROM HISTORY
According to the chronicles and legends of Lanna, Chamadevi was a
strikingly beautiful woman who nevertheless enjoyed a fair measure of
personal misfortune. To begin with, she was apparently pregnant but
unmarried at the time she was appointed Queen of Lamphun - indeed, this
unfortunate condition may have been one reason her father, the ruler of
Lopburi, sent her away.
Legend recounts that Chamadevi had at least one other serious personal problem. In her childhood she had stepped across a burning lamp placed in front of a revered Buddha image in her father's city. In punishment for this sacrilege, fate cursed her with a serious - but really serious - body odour problem. To be specific, though gorgeous to look at, Chamadevi's distinctive odour could be detected over a distance 'measured by three elephant trumpets plus seven beatings of a gong'. The chronicles are very specific about this, calculating that an elephant can be heard over a distance of three miles, whilst the sound of a gong "of medium size" travels for about one mile. Hence, Chamadevi's offensive odour could be detected from a distance of sixteen miles!
Chamadevi's journey upstream from Lopburi via the Chaophraya and Ping Rivers took about three months. Unfortunately, most of the sites associated with her journey in legend have now been submerged by the waters of the Phra Bhumibol Dam above Sam Ngao. At one place on the Ping, later known as Ab Nang (Lady's Bathing Place) she stopped for a day to bathe in a waterfall. As the legend has it, the odour of the queen polluted the waters and attracted a number of vultures which mistakenly thought an elephant had died in the vicinity. These vultures perched on a high rock overlooking the fall, and were later turned into stone, becoming a permanent feature of the Ab Nang skyline.
Tradition notwithstanding, Chamadevi's personal odour cannot - surely - have been as bad as is recounted. After all, she had managed to become pregnant before she left Lopburi, and no sooner had she arrived in Lamphun than the local Lawa chieftain, King Luang Viranga, fell in love with her. We are told that Viranga was a widower who lived on the slopes of nearby Doi Kam, a small hill in the vicinity of the present-day Chiang Mai International Airport. Viranga, attracted by the queen's beauty, sent emissaries to Lamphun requesting her hand in marriage.
At this time, again according to legend, the Lawa were a fierce nation of head-hunters as well as being - by some accounts - cannibals. Moreover, they were dark-skinned non-Buddhists. Chamadevi, the beautiful, pale-skinned (if malodorous) representative of Mon civilisation and Buddhism, could not tolerate the thought of marriage to the Lawa chieftain. Fortunately, at this stage she was still pregnant, so she sent a message to Viranga that she would accept his suit only after the birth of her child, and when that child had been weaned.
In the event, Chamadevi gave birth to twin sons, both "healthy and handsome". She named them Anantayot and Mahantayot. In course of time they reached eight years of age, but still the wily queen declined to wean them. Eventually Viranga lost patience, and calling together his Lawa subjects he stormed Lamphun, determined to possess the object of his desire.
The Lawa forces, who were stronger than those of the Mon, managed to cross the defensive moats and climb the high walls of the city. Once within the inner fastness, they wasted no time opening the main gate for King Viranga to make his triumphant entry, mounted on a war elephant.
At this point Chamadevi's twin sons appeared, riding an extraordinary elephant with blackish-purple skin and green tusks which - not surprisingly - rejoiced in the name of "Blackish-Purple". At the command of the twins, this prodigious beast forced back Viranga's elephant, causing the terrified animal to bolt through the northern gate. During this debacle, Viranga was caught between his elephant and the city wall, as a result of which his leg was broken. From that time forth, Lamphun's northern gate was renamed Pratu Chang Si, or "Elephant Crush Gate".
Unfortunately for Chamadevi, "Blackish-Purple" soon died, and when news of this reached Viranga, he determined to renew his assault on Lamphun. In a further attempt to fend off the Lawa chieftain, the queen requested a truce at which she promised to marry Viranga if he could throw a javelin from the top of Mount Pui, near Chiang Mai, to any place within the walls of Lamphun - a distance of about 30 kilometres. Viranga, 'whose lust for the queen's beauty had grown stronger', readily agreed, and summoning all his supernatural powers climbed to the summit of Mount Pui to try his skills.
By the agreement worked out at the truce, Viranga was allowed three attempts to throw his javelin to Lamphun. On the first attempt the Lawa chieftain hurled his javelin at the heart of the city, but it fell just short of the walls, creating a huge crater known today as Nong Sanao, or "Javelin Swamp".
This amazing feat so terrified Chamadevi that she determined to sap Viranga's strength through trickery before he could make any more attempts. Accordingly, whilst the Lawa chieftain was resting on Doi Pui in preparation for his second throw, Chamadevi sent him a gift of a hat she had made with her own hands. Of course, this was no ordinary hat. It was made from the cloth of the queen's petticoat, embroidered with gold and silver, and dyed a delicate shade of red... Viranga should have sensed trouble - but, of course, he didn't!
In the words of the chronicler: 'as is well known throughout Southeast Asia, the dignity and spiritual power of a man is particularly concentrated in his head. A dishonour to his head will cause him to lose his spiritual strength. And the most potent threat to masculine power is the petticoat or other undergarments of a woman, particularly a menstruating woman'.
No sooner did Viranga see the hat than he rushed forward and proudly put it on his head. Immediately his supernatural powers began to melt away. His second javelin failed to get anywhere near Lamphun, landing a mere five kilometres away at the foot of Doi Suthep, where its impact created another "Javelin Swamp" near the settlement of Ban Tindoi. In despair, the ailing chieftain threw his third javelin high in the air, tore open his clothes to expose his chest, and allowed the falling weapon to pierce his chest.
Defeated by Chamadevi's wiles, Viranga was laid to rest on the summit of a nearby peak with his face towards Lamphun, so that even in death he would gaze towards his beloved. With him died the spirit of Lawa independence. Never again would his people attempt to subdue or expel the Mon - or, later, the Thai. Instead they came gradually to embrace Buddhism and to acknowledge the authority of Lamphun, becoming loyal subjects of Haripunchai. And this is what the legend of Queen Chamadevi is really about - the triumph of guile over strength, of city over the forest, of settled rice-growing peoples over the hunter-gatherers of the wild.
SEE MORE QUEEN CHAMADEVI IMAGES @ PICTURES FROM HISTORY
Text by Donald Wilson; Photos by David Henley & Pictures From History - © CPA Media
Source: http://www.cpamedia.com/article.php?pg=archive&acid=120510162540&aiid=120606164020
Legend recounts that Chamadevi had at least one other serious personal problem. In her childhood she had stepped across a burning lamp placed in front of a revered Buddha image in her father's city. In punishment for this sacrilege, fate cursed her with a serious - but really serious - body odour problem. To be specific, though gorgeous to look at, Chamadevi's distinctive odour could be detected over a distance 'measured by three elephant trumpets plus seven beatings of a gong'. The chronicles are very specific about this, calculating that an elephant can be heard over a distance of three miles, whilst the sound of a gong "of medium size" travels for about one mile. Hence, Chamadevi's offensive odour could be detected from a distance of sixteen miles!
Chamadevi's journey upstream from Lopburi via the Chaophraya and Ping Rivers took about three months. Unfortunately, most of the sites associated with her journey in legend have now been submerged by the waters of the Phra Bhumibol Dam above Sam Ngao. At one place on the Ping, later known as Ab Nang (Lady's Bathing Place) she stopped for a day to bathe in a waterfall. As the legend has it, the odour of the queen polluted the waters and attracted a number of vultures which mistakenly thought an elephant had died in the vicinity. These vultures perched on a high rock overlooking the fall, and were later turned into stone, becoming a permanent feature of the Ab Nang skyline.
Tradition notwithstanding, Chamadevi's personal odour cannot - surely - have been as bad as is recounted. After all, she had managed to become pregnant before she left Lopburi, and no sooner had she arrived in Lamphun than the local Lawa chieftain, King Luang Viranga, fell in love with her. We are told that Viranga was a widower who lived on the slopes of nearby Doi Kam, a small hill in the vicinity of the present-day Chiang Mai International Airport. Viranga, attracted by the queen's beauty, sent emissaries to Lamphun requesting her hand in marriage.
At this time, again according to legend, the Lawa were a fierce nation of head-hunters as well as being - by some accounts - cannibals. Moreover, they were dark-skinned non-Buddhists. Chamadevi, the beautiful, pale-skinned (if malodorous) representative of Mon civilisation and Buddhism, could not tolerate the thought of marriage to the Lawa chieftain. Fortunately, at this stage she was still pregnant, so she sent a message to Viranga that she would accept his suit only after the birth of her child, and when that child had been weaned.
In the event, Chamadevi gave birth to twin sons, both "healthy and handsome". She named them Anantayot and Mahantayot. In course of time they reached eight years of age, but still the wily queen declined to wean them. Eventually Viranga lost patience, and calling together his Lawa subjects he stormed Lamphun, determined to possess the object of his desire.
The Lawa forces, who were stronger than those of the Mon, managed to cross the defensive moats and climb the high walls of the city. Once within the inner fastness, they wasted no time opening the main gate for King Viranga to make his triumphant entry, mounted on a war elephant.
At this point Chamadevi's twin sons appeared, riding an extraordinary elephant with blackish-purple skin and green tusks which - not surprisingly - rejoiced in the name of "Blackish-Purple". At the command of the twins, this prodigious beast forced back Viranga's elephant, causing the terrified animal to bolt through the northern gate. During this debacle, Viranga was caught between his elephant and the city wall, as a result of which his leg was broken. From that time forth, Lamphun's northern gate was renamed Pratu Chang Si, or "Elephant Crush Gate".
Unfortunately for Chamadevi, "Blackish-Purple" soon died, and when news of this reached Viranga, he determined to renew his assault on Lamphun. In a further attempt to fend off the Lawa chieftain, the queen requested a truce at which she promised to marry Viranga if he could throw a javelin from the top of Mount Pui, near Chiang Mai, to any place within the walls of Lamphun - a distance of about 30 kilometres. Viranga, 'whose lust for the queen's beauty had grown stronger', readily agreed, and summoning all his supernatural powers climbed to the summit of Mount Pui to try his skills.
By the agreement worked out at the truce, Viranga was allowed three attempts to throw his javelin to Lamphun. On the first attempt the Lawa chieftain hurled his javelin at the heart of the city, but it fell just short of the walls, creating a huge crater known today as Nong Sanao, or "Javelin Swamp".
This amazing feat so terrified Chamadevi that she determined to sap Viranga's strength through trickery before he could make any more attempts. Accordingly, whilst the Lawa chieftain was resting on Doi Pui in preparation for his second throw, Chamadevi sent him a gift of a hat she had made with her own hands. Of course, this was no ordinary hat. It was made from the cloth of the queen's petticoat, embroidered with gold and silver, and dyed a delicate shade of red... Viranga should have sensed trouble - but, of course, he didn't!
In the words of the chronicler: 'as is well known throughout Southeast Asia, the dignity and spiritual power of a man is particularly concentrated in his head. A dishonour to his head will cause him to lose his spiritual strength. And the most potent threat to masculine power is the petticoat or other undergarments of a woman, particularly a menstruating woman'.
No sooner did Viranga see the hat than he rushed forward and proudly put it on his head. Immediately his supernatural powers began to melt away. His second javelin failed to get anywhere near Lamphun, landing a mere five kilometres away at the foot of Doi Suthep, where its impact created another "Javelin Swamp" near the settlement of Ban Tindoi. In despair, the ailing chieftain threw his third javelin high in the air, tore open his clothes to expose his chest, and allowed the falling weapon to pierce his chest.
Defeated by Chamadevi's wiles, Viranga was laid to rest on the summit of a nearby peak with his face towards Lamphun, so that even in death he would gaze towards his beloved. With him died the spirit of Lawa independence. Never again would his people attempt to subdue or expel the Mon - or, later, the Thai. Instead they came gradually to embrace Buddhism and to acknowledge the authority of Lamphun, becoming loyal subjects of Haripunchai. And this is what the legend of Queen Chamadevi is really about - the triumph of guile over strength, of city over the forest, of settled rice-growing peoples over the hunter-gatherers of the wild.
SEE MORE QUEEN CHAMADEVI IMAGES @ PICTURES FROM HISTORY
Text by Donald Wilson; Photos by David Henley & Pictures From History - © CPA Media
Source: http://www.cpamedia.com/article.php?pg=archive&acid=120510162540&aiid=120606164020
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
