The Thai State and EthnicMinorities: From Assimilation toSelective Int terjemahan - The Thai State and EthnicMinorities: From Assimilation toSelective Int Bahasa Indonesia Bagaimana mengatakan

The Thai State and EthnicMinorities

The Thai State and Ethnic
Minorities: From Assimilation to
Selective Integration
Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
The Expansion of the Thai State
The hill tribe people in the northern Thai highlands are now facing an
uncertain future due to a drastic change in the state’s policy of national
integration. Such uncertainty reflects the dilemma of nation building,1
between national integration and ethnic pluralism.
The kingdom of Siam, as it was called until 1939 when the revolution
ended absolute monarchy, grew over a period of some 300 years, from
the rise of the Ayuthaya kingdom in the late 15th century to the early
Bangkok period in the mid-19th century. During this period, the Thai
state extended its military power over the principalities in the north
and northeast, as well as the sultanates in the Malay peninsular, making
them vassal states. By about 1851, the majority of Thai people lived
within the bounds of the Siamese empire.2
Although it had a relatively
small population — between one to two million people in the early
19th century — the kingdom included several ethnic minorities, some  Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
of whom were indigenous inhabitants, along with prisoners of war,
slaves, refugees, foreign merchants, mercenaries, and so forth. Even
in the Ayutthaya period, from the mid 14th century to its fall in 1767,
Siam was ethnically diverse. However, the majority of the population
spoke the ethnic Thai language.
It was not until the period of Western colonialism in the late nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries, with all the implications it brought for
the country’s sovereignty, that the efforts at national integration began.
With the incorporation of vassal states, a unified kingdom emerged. A
demarcation of the boundaries, after much competition and bargaining,
led to legitimate borders recognized by both the British and the French
colonial powers. Identification was also necessary to determine who
actually belonged in the kingdom’s realm.3
Many ethnic groups living
within this entity, who were differentiated from the Siamese by language
and culture, were nevertheless identified as “Thai” people. The “Yuan”
in the north and the Muslims in the south, for instance were included as
members of the emerging state. Similarly, other non-Thai ethnic minorities
and even indigenous peoples, such as the Karen and Lua in the north,
the Kui and Khmer in the lower northeast, and the Mon in the western
region, were incorporated and, to varying extents, assimilated.
The Laos in the northeast, given the similarity of the language, culture
and religion, were more easily identified as Thai. The state-building
process not only incorporated other peripheral vassal states, but also
involved improving control over the newly demarcated territory as the
state had to make good on the ground what it claimed on the map. A
territory based on a local administration system, with salaried officials
from Bangkok, replaced local lords. State power also extended through
manpower with the household registration system.4
The state also
accelerated the modernization of the country by introducing modern
education and scientific knowledge, and by universalizing the central
Thai language, reforming the administrative system, and improving
communication works.
The Thai state also took control of teak forests in the north and
all unoccupied land within the demarcated territory was allocated
to the newly established royal Forestry Department (RFD) in the late
1890s. Through this department, the state was able to manage forest
resources and, in the process, gain substantial revenues from teak forest
concencessions. The “territorialisation” of state power through mapping, The Thai State and Ethnic Minorities 
adoption and recognition of national boundaries, and the establishment
of a forestry department responsible for the unoccupied land, arguably
led to a paradigm shift in the relationship between the Thai state and
resources, people, and space,5
insofar as the state had for the first time
accepted responsibility to use all resources for the purposes of national
development. Although the state did not expel the hill tribe peoples
from the forests at this time, the implications of the “new paradigm”
were as such that tensions had the potential to develop between the
RFD and the hill tribe peoples, and possibly lead to conflict.
Modernisation and Nation Building
Siam wisely saw modernisation as a necessary tool to meet the challenges
from the West. It carefully drew upon the knowledge and skills from
the West in order to escape colonisation. Foreign advisers assisted
the Siamese government to develop their educational, financial, and
transportation systems. Some foreigners served as directors in new
departments that included the RFD. Siam also welcomed a large number
of Chinese immigrants mainly from the great port cities of China to
fill the ranks of middlemen, foremen, and laborers in the rice and saw
milling industries, for mining and construction work, as well as for
navigation and other such areas. The Chinese, alongside the Europeans,
gained control over a number of businesses, particularly in banking,
wholesale trading and mining, among others. To the extent that they
married Thai citizens and adopted Buddhism, they were gradually
assimilated into Thai culture.
Along Thailand’s porous northern borders with Burma and Laos,
overland Chinese traders from Yunnan Province known as “Haw”
developed elaborate trading networks in the northern provinces. Several
other ethnic groups, such as the Hmong, Lisu, Mien, Lahu, and Akha,
also moved across the border to settle in the hills, attracted by the more
benign political and economic climate there. The government even
granted them permission to cultivate opium for resale back to Bangkok.
At the same time, foreign logging companies obtained concessions from
the teak forests and hired the Shans, Karens, and Khmus from Laos to
work as laborers in harvesting teak and other hard woods.
By the turn of the 20th century, enclaves of hill tribe people, known
as the “Others Within”6
, dominated the highlands of northern Thailand  Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
and unbeknownst to Bangkok officials, began to establish ties with the
neighbouring lowlanders, creating a system of interdependence. The
emergence of the modern nation-state system, with its domination by
the centralized bureaucratic system, increasingly jeopardized the hillvalley
balance.7
The gulf between the hill dwellers (mostly Karens and
Lua) and the representatives of lowland authorities correspondingly
widened. Nevertheless, the state’s territorial control was limited, and as
the borders remained porous, flows of “perennial minorities” (Hmong,
Lahu, Mien, etc.) continued.8
The Chinese mainly concentrated themselves in the river basins of
the central plains and in the south, and were seen in a positive light
during the period of modernisation. This success, however, became
a potential source of ethnic problems during the early 20th century
when the ideology of nationalism reached its height. King Rama VI or
King Vajiravudh, whose father was deeply in favour of modernisation
and was thus, a nationalist, nevertheless accentuated a new and more
virulent nationallism that vilified the Chinese as the “Jews of the East”.
This change in policy toward the Chinese eventually affected the hill
tribe people as well. The government promulgated new laws requiring
immigrants seeking Siamese citizenship to foreswear allegiance to any
other state and to become subjects of the monarch. King Vajiravudh also
mooted the idea of the “Thai Nation”, and this was the predominant
theme running through his numerous writings and was sometimes
referred to as his “nationalism”.9
In addition, regulations were established to significantly reduce the
flow of Chinese immigration. Non-Thai schools were banned. Charles
Keyes also observed that King Rama VI believed that the Thai people
shared, as a national heritage, a common language, and common religion,
namely Buddhism, and demanded a renunciation of competing national
obligations.
Descendants of the Chinese however continued to dominate the Thai
economy through their extensive networks and accumulated capital.
Identifying themselves as Thai, and having adopted Thai names, and
embracing Buddhism, they, nonetheless, still retained Chinese traditions.
It was after the military and civilian reformers, the so-called “promoters”,
staged a successful coup d’état in 1932 that a new variant of nationalism
emerged. Although it still emphasised the notion of national identity,
the concept of “Thai-ism” was developed based on new interpretations The Thai State and Ethnic Minorities 
of Thai history and an emphasis on the Thai language. The populace
was, thus, oriented toward a celebration of state and nation with racist
overtones10 that could be detected in its cultural mandates and antiChinese
rhetoric. The resurgence of the monarchy after 1957 facilitated
a resurgence of the nationalism as propagated under Rama VI, with the
emphasis once again on the three pillars: Chat (the Thai people), Satsana
(Buddhism), and Pramahakasat (the Monarchy). According to Keyes,
“As with Chinese in the reign of King Vajiravudh, any person could
‘become Thai’ if she or he spoke Thai (even if they also spoke other
languages), adhered to Buddhism” and offered loyalty and obedience
to the king. This conception of nationalism “was highly tolerant of
cultural diversity”.11
The notion of nationalism also extended to ethnic minorities in
Thailand who wished to become Thai. Keyes made a distinction between
“ethnic minorities” and “ethno-regional” entities. By “ethno-regional”
he meant “that cultural differences [had] been taken to be characteristic
of a particular part of the country rather of a distinctive people”.12
Ethno-regionalism emerged in part as a result of the national integration
policy and the promotion of a “
0/5000
Dari: -
Ke: -
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1: [Salinan]
Disalin!
The Thai State and EthnicMinorities: From Assimilation toSelective IntegrationChayan VaddhanaphutiThe Expansion of the Thai StateThe hill tribe people in the northern Thai highlands are now facing anuncertain future due to a drastic change in the state’s policy of nationalintegration. Such uncertainty reflects the dilemma of nation building,1between national integration and ethnic pluralism.The kingdom of Siam, as it was called until 1939 when the revolutionended absolute monarchy, grew over a period of some 300 years, fromthe rise of the Ayuthaya kingdom in the late 15th century to the earlyBangkok period in the mid-19th century. During this period, the Thaistate extended its military power over the principalities in the northand northeast, as well as the sultanates in the Malay peninsular, makingthem vassal states. By about 1851, the majority of Thai people livedwithin the bounds of the Siamese empire.2 Although it had a relativelysmall population — between one to two million people in the early19th century — the kingdom included several ethnic minorities, some  Chayan Vaddhanaphutiof whom were indigenous inhabitants, along with prisoners of war,slaves, refugees, foreign merchants, mercenaries, and so forth. Evenin the Ayutthaya period, from the mid 14th century to its fall in 1767,Siam was ethnically diverse. However, the majority of the populationspoke the ethnic Thai language.It was not until the period of Western colonialism in the late nineteenthand early twentieth centuries, with all the implications it brought forthe country’s sovereignty, that the efforts at national integration began.With the incorporation of vassal states, a unified kingdom emerged. Ademarcation of the boundaries, after much competition and bargaining,led to legitimate borders recognized by both the British and the Frenchcolonial powers. Identification was also necessary to determine whoactually belonged in the kingdom’s realm.3 Many ethnic groups livingwithin this entity, who were differentiated from the Siamese by languageand culture, were nevertheless identified as “Thai” people. The “Yuan”in the north and the Muslims in the south, for instance were included asmembers of the emerging state. Similarly, other non-Thai ethnic minoritiesand even indigenous peoples, such as the Karen and Lua in the north,the Kui and Khmer in the lower northeast, and the Mon in the westernregion, were incorporated and, to varying extents, assimilated.The Laos in the northeast, given the similarity of the language, cultureand religion, were more easily identified as Thai. The state-buildingprocess not only incorporated other peripheral vassal states, but alsoinvolved improving control over the newly demarcated territory as thestate had to make good on the ground what it claimed on the map. Aterritory based on a local administration system, with salaried officials
from Bangkok, replaced local lords. State power also extended through
manpower with the household registration system.4
The state also
accelerated the modernization of the country by introducing modern
education and scientific knowledge, and by universalizing the central
Thai language, reforming the administrative system, and improving
communication works.
The Thai state also took control of teak forests in the north and
all unoccupied land within the demarcated territory was allocated
to the newly established royal Forestry Department (RFD) in the late
1890s. Through this department, the state was able to manage forest
resources and, in the process, gain substantial revenues from teak forest
concencessions. The “territorialisation” of state power through mapping, The Thai State and Ethnic Minorities 
adoption and recognition of national boundaries, and the establishment
of a forestry department responsible for the unoccupied land, arguably
led to a paradigm shift in the relationship between the Thai state and
resources, people, and space,5
insofar as the state had for the first time
accepted responsibility to use all resources for the purposes of national
development. Although the state did not expel the hill tribe peoples
from the forests at this time, the implications of the “new paradigm”
were as such that tensions had the potential to develop between the
RFD and the hill tribe peoples, and possibly lead to conflict.
Modernisation and Nation Building
Siam wisely saw modernisation as a necessary tool to meet the challenges
from the West. It carefully drew upon the knowledge and skills from
the West in order to escape colonisation. Foreign advisers assisted
the Siamese government to develop their educational, financial, and
transportation systems. Some foreigners served as directors in new
departments that included the RFD. Siam also welcomed a large number
of Chinese immigrants mainly from the great port cities of China to
fill the ranks of middlemen, foremen, and laborers in the rice and saw
milling industries, for mining and construction work, as well as for
navigation and other such areas. The Chinese, alongside the Europeans,
gained control over a number of businesses, particularly in banking,
wholesale trading and mining, among others. To the extent that they
married Thai citizens and adopted Buddhism, they were gradually
assimilated into Thai culture.
Along Thailand’s porous northern borders with Burma and Laos,
overland Chinese traders from Yunnan Province known as “Haw”
developed elaborate trading networks in the northern provinces. Several
other ethnic groups, such as the Hmong, Lisu, Mien, Lahu, and Akha,
also moved across the border to settle in the hills, attracted by the more
benign political and economic climate there. The government even
granted them permission to cultivate opium for resale back to Bangkok.
At the same time, foreign logging companies obtained concessions from
the teak forests and hired the Shans, Karens, and Khmus from Laos to
work as laborers in harvesting teak and other hard woods.
By the turn of the 20th century, enclaves of hill tribe people, known
as the “Others Within”6
, dominated the highlands of northern Thailand  Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
and unbeknownst to Bangkok officials, began to establish ties with the
neighbouring lowlanders, creating a system of interdependence. The
emergence of the modern nation-state system, with its domination by
the centralized bureaucratic system, increasingly jeopardized the hillvalley
balance.7
The gulf between the hill dwellers (mostly Karens and
Lua) and the representatives of lowland authorities correspondingly
widened. Nevertheless, the state’s territorial control was limited, and as
the borders remained porous, flows of “perennial minorities” (Hmong,
Lahu, Mien, etc.) continued.8
The Chinese mainly concentrated themselves in the river basins of
the central plains and in the south, and were seen in a positive light
during the period of modernisation. This success, however, became
a potential source of ethnic problems during the early 20th century
when the ideology of nationalism reached its height. King Rama VI or
King Vajiravudh, whose father was deeply in favour of modernisation
and was thus, a nationalist, nevertheless accentuated a new and more
virulent nationallism that vilified the Chinese as the “Jews of the East”.
This change in policy toward the Chinese eventually affected the hill
tribe people as well. The government promulgated new laws requiring
immigrants seeking Siamese citizenship to foreswear allegiance to any
other state and to become subjects of the monarch. King Vajiravudh also
mooted the idea of the “Thai Nation”, and this was the predominant
theme running through his numerous writings and was sometimes
referred to as his “nationalism”.9
In addition, regulations were established to significantly reduce the
flow of Chinese immigration. Non-Thai schools were banned. Charles
Keyes also observed that King Rama VI believed that the Thai people
shared, as a national heritage, a common language, and common religion,
namely Buddhism, and demanded a renunciation of competing national
obligations.
Descendants of the Chinese however continued to dominate the Thai
economy through their extensive networks and accumulated capital.
Identifying themselves as Thai, and having adopted Thai names, and
embracing Buddhism, they, nonetheless, still retained Chinese traditions.
It was after the military and civilian reformers, the so-called “promoters”,
staged a successful coup d’état in 1932 that a new variant of nationalism
emerged. Although it still emphasised the notion of national identity,
the concept of “Thai-ism” was developed based on new interpretations The Thai State and Ethnic Minorities 
of Thai history and an emphasis on the Thai language. The populace
was, thus, oriented toward a celebration of state and nation with racist
overtones10 that could be detected in its cultural mandates and antiChinese
rhetoric. The resurgence of the monarchy after 1957 facilitated
a resurgence of the nationalism as propagated under Rama VI, with the
emphasis once again on the three pillars: Chat (the Thai people), Satsana
(Buddhism), and Pramahakasat (the Monarchy). According to Keyes,
“As with Chinese in the reign of King Vajiravudh, any person could
‘become Thai’ if she or he spoke Thai (even if they also spoke other
languages), adhered to Buddhism” and offered loyalty and obedience
to the king. This conception of nationalism “was highly tolerant of
cultural diversity”.11
The notion of nationalism also extended to ethnic minorities in
Thailand who wished to become Thai. Keyes made a distinction between
“ethnic minorities” and “ethno-regional” entities. By “ethno-regional”
he meant “that cultural differences [had] been taken to be characteristic
of a particular part of the country rather of a distinctive people”.12
Ethno-regionalism emerged in part as a result of the national integration
policy and the promotion of a “
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:[Salinan]
Disalin!
Thailand Negara dan Etnis
Minoritas: Dari Asimilasi ke
Selektif Integrasi
Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
Perluasan Negara Thai
-orang suku bukit di dataran tinggi Thailand utara kini menghadapi
masa depan yang tidak pasti karena perubahan drastis dalam kebijakan negara nasional
integrasi. Ketidakpastian seperti mencerminkan dilema pembangunan bangsa, 1
antara integrasi nasional dan pluralisme etnis.
Kerajaan Siam, seperti yang disebut sampai 1939 ketika revolusi
berakhir monarki absolut, tumbuh selama sekitar 300 tahun, dari
munculnya Ayuthaya kerajaan pada akhir abad ke-15 sampai awal
Bangkok periode abad pertengahan ke-19. Selama periode ini, Thailand
memperpanjang negara kekuatan militernya atas kerajaan di utara
dan timur laut, serta kesultanan di Semenanjung Melayu, membuat
mereka negara bawahan. Sekitar tahun 1851, mayoritas rakyat Thailand tinggal
dalam batas-batas yang empire.2 Siam
Meskipun memiliki relatif
populasi kecil - antara satu sampai dua juta orang pada awal
abad ke-19 - kerajaan termasuk beberapa etnis minoritas, beberapa ??? Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
di antaranya adalah penduduk asli, bersama dengan tawanan perang,
budak, pengungsi, pedagang asing, tentara bayaran, dan sebagainya. Bahkan
pada periode Ayutthaya, dari abad ke-14 pertengahan musim gugur di 1767,
Siam adalah beragam etnis. Namun, mayoritas penduduk
berbicara bahasa etnis Thai.
Tidak sampai periode kolonialisme Barat di akhir abad kesembilan belas
dan awal abad kedua puluh, dengan semua implikasi itu dibawa untuk
kedaulatan negara, bahwa upaya integrasi nasional mulai.
Dengan penggabungan negara bawahan, kerajaan bersatu muncul. Sebuah
demarkasi batas-batas, setelah banyak kompetisi dan tawar,
menyebabkan perbatasan yang sah diakui oleh Inggris dan Perancis
kekuatan kolonial. Identifikasi juga diperlukan untuk menentukan siapa yang
benar-benar milik di realm.3 kerajaan
Banyak kelompok etnis yang tinggal
di dalam badan ini, yang dibedakan dari Siam dengan bahasa
dan budaya, yang tetap diidentifikasi sebagai "Thai" orang. The "Yuan"
di utara dan Muslim di selatan, misalnya dimasukkan sebagai
anggota dari negara berkembang. Demikian pula, etnis minoritas non-Thailand lainnya
dan bahkan masyarakat adat, seperti Karen dan Lua di utara,
yang Kui dan Khmer di timur laut yang lebih rendah, dan Mon di barat
wilayah, dimasukkan dan, untuk berbagai luasan, berasimilasi.
Laos di timur laut, mengingat kesamaan bahasa, budaya
dan agama, yang lebih mudah diidentifikasi sebagai Thai. Negara-bangunan
proses tidak hanya dimasukkan bawahan negara periferal lain, tetapi juga
melibatkan meningkatkan kontrol atas wilayah baru dibatasi sebagai
negara harus membuat baik pada tanah apa yang diklaim pada peta. Sebuah
wilayah berdasarkan sistem administrasi lokal, dengan para pejabat gaji
dari Bangkok, diganti penguasa lokal. Kekuasaan negara juga diperpanjang melalui
tenaga kerja dengan system.4 pendaftaran rumah tangga
Negara juga
mempercepat modernisasi negara yang modern dengan memperkenalkan
pendidikan dan pengetahuan ilmiah, dan dengan universalisasi pusat
bahasa Thai, mereformasi sistem administrasi, dan meningkatkan
komunikasi bekerja.
Thailand Negara juga menguasai hutan jati di utara dan
semua tanah kosong di wilayah yang dibatasi dialokasikan
untuk kerajaan Departemen yang baru didirikan Kehutanan (RFD) di akhir
1890-an. Melalui departemen ini, negara itu mampu mengelola hutan
sumber daya dan, dalam proses, memperoleh pendapatan yang cukup besar dari hutan jati
concencessions. The "teritorialisasi" kekuasaan negara melalui pemetaan, Thailand Negara dan Etnis Minoritas ???
adopsi dan pengakuan batas-batas nasional, dan pembentukan
departemen kehutanan yang bertanggung jawab untuk tanah kosong, bisa dibilang
menyebabkan pergeseran paradigma dalam hubungan antara negara Thailand dan
sumber daya, orang, dan ruang, 5
sejauh negara memiliki untuk pertama kalinya
menerima tanggung jawab untuk menggunakan semua sumber daya untuk tujuan nasional
pembangunan. Meskipun negara tidak mengusir orang-orang suku bukit
dari hutan saat ini, implikasi dari "paradigma baru"
yang seperti bahwa ketegangan memiliki potensi untuk mengembangkan antara
RFD dan orang-orang suku bukit, dan mungkin menyebabkan konflik.
Modernisasi dan Nation Building
Siam bijak melihat modernisasi sebagai alat yang diperlukan untuk memenuhi tantangan
dari Barat. Hati-hati menarik pada pengetahuan dan keterampilan dari
Barat untuk menghindari penjajahan. Penasihat asing dibantu
pemerintah Siam untuk mengembangkan pendidikan, keuangan, dan mereka
sistem transportasi. Beberapa orang asing menjabat sebagai direktur di baru
departemen yang termasuk RFD. Siam juga menyambut sejumlah besar
imigran Cina terutama dari pelabuhan kota besar China untuk
mengisi jajaran tengkulak, mandor, dan buruh di sawah dan melihat
penggilingan industri, pertambangan dan pekerjaan konstruksi, serta untuk
navigasi dan lainnya seperti daerah. Cina, bersama orang Eropa,
memperoleh kontrol atas sejumlah bisnis, terutama di perbankan,
perdagangan grosir dan pertambangan, antara lain. Sampai-sampai mereka
menikah warga Thailand dan Buddhisme diadopsi, mereka secara bertahap
berasimilasi ke dalam budaya Thailand.
Seiring perbatasan utara berpori Thailand dengan Burma dan Laos,
pedagang Cina darat dari Provinsi Yunnan dikenal sebagai "Haw"
mengembangkan jaringan perdagangan yang rumit di provinsi-provinsi utara. Beberapa
kelompok etnis lain, seperti Hmong, Lisu, Mien, Lahu, dan Akha,
juga bergerak melintasi perbatasan untuk menetap di perbukitan, tertarik oleh lebih
iklim politik dan ekonomi jinak ada. Pemerintah bahkan
memberikan mereka izin untuk mengolah opium untuk dijual kembali kembali ke Bangkok.
Pada saat yang sama, perusahaan penebangan asing yang diperoleh konsesi dari
hutan jati dan menyewa Shans, Karen, dan Khmus dari Laos ke
bekerja sebagai buruh di panen jati dan lainnya keras hutan.
Pada pergantian abad ke-20, kantong-kantong orang suku pegunungan, yang dikenal
sebagai "Lainnya Dalam" 6
, mendominasi dataran tinggi utara Thailand ??? Chayan Vaddhanaphuti
dan tanpa sepengetahuan pejabat Bangkok, mulai membangun hubungan dengan
dataran rendah tetangga, menciptakan sistem saling ketergantungan. The
munculnya sistem negara-bangsa modern, dengan dominasi oleh
sistem birokrasi terpusat, semakin membahayakan hillvalley yang
balance.7
Jurang antara penghuni bukit (kebanyakan Karen dan
Lua) dan perwakilan dari pemerintah dataran rendah Sejalan
melebar. Namun demikian, kontrol teritorial negara terbatas, dan sebagai
perbatasan tetap berpori, mengalir dari "abadi minoritas" (Hmong,
Lahu, Mien, dll) continued.8
Cina terutama terkonsentrasi diri di daerah aliran sungai dari
dataran tengah dan di selatan, dan terlihat dalam cahaya yang positif
selama periode modernisasi. Keberhasilan ini, bagaimanapun, menjadi
sumber potensial dari masalah etnis pada awal abad ke-20
ketika ideologi nasionalisme mencapai puncaknya. Raja Rama VI atau
Raja Vajiravudh, yang ayahnya mengaku sangat mendukung modernisasi
dan dengan demikian, nasionalis, namun ditekankan baru dan lebih
nationallism mematikan yang difitnah orang Cina sebagai "orang-orang Yahudi dari Timur".
Perubahan dalam kebijakan terhadap Cina akhirnya mempengaruhi bukit
orang suku juga. Pemerintah diumumkan undang-undang baru yang mengharuskan
imigran mencari kewarganegaraan siam ke foreswear setia kepada setiap
negara lain dan menjadi subyek dari raja. Raja Vajiravudh juga
diperdebatkan gagasan "Thai Nation", dan ini adalah dominan
tema berjalan melalui tulisan-tulisan banyak dan kadang-kadang
disebut sebagai "nasionalisme" nya 0,9
Selain itu, peraturan didirikan untuk secara signifikan mengurangi
aliran imigrasi Cina . Sekolah non-Thai dilarang. Charles
Keyes juga mengamati bahwa Raja Rama VI percaya bahwa rakyat Thailand
bersama, sebagai warisan nasional, bahasa yang sama, dan agama umum,
yaitu Buddha, dan menuntut penolakan bersaing nasional
kewajiban.
Keturunan Cina namun terus mendominasi Thailand
ekonomi melalui jaringan yang luas dan akumulasi modal.
Mengidentifikasi diri mereka sebagai Thailand, dan telah mengadopsi nama Thai, dan
merangkul Buddhisme, mereka, tetap saja, masih mempertahankan tradisi Cina.
Itu setelah reformis militer dan sipil, yang disebut "promotor",
mengadakan sukses kudeta pada tahun 1932 bahwa varian baru nasionalisme
muncul. Meskipun masih menekankan gagasan identitas nasional,
konsep "Thai-isme" dikembangkan berdasarkan interpretasi baru Thailand Negara dan Etnis Minoritas ???
sejarah Thailand dan penekanan pada bahasa Thai. Rakyat
itu, dengan demikian, berorientasi pada perayaan bangsa dan negara dengan rasis
overtones10 yang dapat dideteksi pada mandat budaya dan antiChinese
retorika. Kebangkitan monarki setelah 1957 memfasilitasi
kebangkitan nasionalisme sebagai disebarkan di bawah Rama VI, dengan
penekanan sekali lagi pada tiga pilar: Chatting (rakyat Thailand), Satsana
(Buddha), dan Pramahakasat (Monarki). Menurut Keyes,
"Seperti Cina pada masa pemerintahan Raja Vajiravudh, setiap orang bisa
'menjadi Thai' jika ia berbicara Thai (bahkan jika mereka juga berbicara lain
bahasa), dipatuhi Buddhisme "dan menawarkan kesetiaan dan ketaatan
kepada raja . Konsepsi nasionalisme "itu sangat toleran terhadap
keragaman budaya ".11
Gagasan nasionalisme juga diperluas untuk etnis minoritas di
Thailand yang ingin menjadi Thai. Keyes membuat perbedaan antara
"etnis minoritas" dan entitas "etno-regional". Dengan "etno-regional"
dia berarti "bahwa perbedaan budaya [telah] telah diambil untuk menjadi karakteristik
dari bagian tertentu dari negara lebih dari orang yang berbeda ".12
Ethno-regionalisme muncul di bagian sebagai akibat dari integrasi nasional
kebijakan dan promosi dari "
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
 
Bahasa lainnya
Dukungan alat penerjemahan: Afrikans, Albania, Amhara, Arab, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Belanda, Belarussia, Bengali, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Burma, Cebuano, Ceko, Chichewa, China, Cina Tradisional, Denmark, Deteksi bahasa, Esperanto, Estonia, Farsi, Finlandia, Frisia, Gaelig, Gaelik Skotlandia, Galisia, Georgia, Gujarati, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Ibrani, Igbo, Inggris, Islan, Italia, Jawa, Jepang, Jerman, Kannada, Katala, Kazak, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Kirghiz, Klingon, Korea, Korsika, Kreol Haiti, Kroat, Kurdi, Laos, Latin, Latvia, Lituania, Luksemburg, Magyar, Makedonia, Malagasi, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Melayu, Mongol, Nepal, Norsk, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Polandia, Portugis, Prancis, Punjabi, Rumania, Rusia, Samoa, Serb, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somali, Spanyol, Sunda, Swahili, Swensk, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thai, Turki, Turkmen, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Vietnam, Wales, Xhosa, Yiddi, Yoruba, Yunani, Zulu, Bahasa terjemahan.

Copyright ©2025 I Love Translation. All reserved.

E-mail: