I'm going backpacking in SE Asia in a few months, i've done loads of research on the place, and basically love how it looks and sounds. I studied Cold War history at school and it was by far my favourite subject and my best subject! In paticular, Vietnam. However , it was only until recently I started to read about other Communist regimes in SE Asia, in paticular the Khmer Rouge, as one of the places i'm most looking foward to going to in SE Asia is Cambodia. What really struck me about Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge was the horrific things they did to the Khmer people. I can't quite grasp how a population can go through such suffering and still survive at the end of it...I suppose this is one of things that has drawn me to this war-torn part of the world; I want to see for myself how resilent these people are. Anyway, basically i'm gathering as much information as I can at the moment about the history of Communism in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. Wikipedia has provided the basic framework so far, but i'd like paticular sources on these subjects: The political ideologies , tactics and roots of each of the communists movements; The Viet Minh, Khmer Rouge and the Pathet Lao. From the struggle against Japanese and French occupation and imperialism, to the modern day communist governments. What effect American intervention in Vietnam had on the civilian populations, economies, environments and cultures in the whole of Indochina? What effect did Soviet and Chinese intervention in vietnam, Laos and Cambodia had on those countries? What effect did the communists have on each country when all of them seized power in 1975 (e.g Mass exodus in Laos, the forced exodus of the entire population of urban areas in Cambodia etc.)? Events from mid-70's to present day? e.g final defeat of the khmer rouge, death of pol-pot. Thanks!!
Could you please reffer to pao pot as stalinist? Sorry it just pissess me off when people corrupt my ideology with some guy like pao pot.
ewan... PLEASE fix your sig to read "if YOU'RE so special, how come you ain't dead?" YOU ARE = YOU'RE it's annoying. thanks.
There was no communism in South East Asia. China was, however (IMO) closest. China was socialist. Why? Because Marxists believe it is idealism to believe that a society can simply go from capitalism and communism in one stage. That's why we have a transitional stage, and China under Mao was just a transition. That transitional stage is usually called "socialism", or "the dictatorship of the proletariat". Hence Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. China wasn't developed enough to advance to communism. Khmer Rouge was anti-Marxist, ultranationalist, and supported by the United States. Vietnam even invaded and stopped Pol Pot, I don't have all the details, but I'm sure you have, considering you are interested in Vietnamese history. Peace
"Khmer Rouge was anti-Marxist, ultranationalist...." Yes. Very true. "...and supported by the United States." This is a controversial area. I haven't quite made me mind up about it yet. You see, America didn't actively support the Khmer Rogue like in other countries where the CIA trained guerrillas/supplied weapons to whoever aslong a sthey were against the communists in that region. However, America did heavily bomb Eastern Cambodia towards the end of the Vietnam War (which was completely ignored by American media at the time and is still overlooked today...hundreds of thousands died as a result however). The reason America gave for this was because Vietnamese forces were hiding there and there were apparently some Viet Cong bases in the isolated North Eastern regions on the border. HOWEVER, the US bombing had a even more fateful knock-on-effect; It pushed Cambodian government forces, along with hordes of civilians fleeing from the bombs, back west towards the capital, Phnom Pehn. This gave the Khmer Rogue forces in Cambodia the advantage and they made a final assualt on Phnom Penh and the capital fell soon after. Pol Pot seized power, the rest is history... The question is, did America really bomb Cambodia because of the Viet Cong presence, or was it because they knew that if Pol Pot and the KR seized control of Cambodia, it would mean a potential enemy of a enemy??? It's highly debateable. It just goes to show how both the west, America in paticular, were just as bad as the Communist Bloc....America supported countless bloody and ruthless dictatorships in there fight against Communism. It pisses me off because America seems to think that there constant interference in other countries affairs during the cold war (which lead to liteartely millions and millions of deaths, directly and indirectly...e.g SE Asia, Africa, Latin America) was totally justified because it was for this 'higher cause'; 'the war on communism'. Now of course, we just have the 'war on terror'. It's depressing how some things never really change isn't it (same shit , different faces)?? "Because Marxists believe it is idealism to believe that a society can simply go from capitalism and communism in one stage. That's why we have a transitional stage, and China under Mao was just a transition." Indeed. We can debate about the meanings of terms and labels all day (communism to some people means left-authoritarianism, while to others it means left-liberalism....), but i'm just going with communism in what the amjority of people (and myself) view it as. Anyway, on socialism as a transitional phase, i'm well aware since i've always studied politics and studied marxism fairly extensively in my late teens....Anyway, yeah, the Khmer Rogue always wished to 'skip' socialism and make an instant transition to a communist society. Pol Pot actually bragged about Cambodia would be the first nation to ever do this. The KR were closest to Maoists ideolologically; they wanted to build an entirely collective peasant society (but also have major differences...the KR were much more extremeist; abolishing money altogether for example). "Vietnam even invaded and stopped Pol Pot, I don't have all the details, but I'm sure you have, considering you are interested in Vietnamese history." Yes, because the KR kept going into the Mekong Delta region of Southern Vietnam and attacking ethnic Vietnamese settlements. Incidently, this lead to China invading Vietnam since Pol-Pot and the Khmer Rogue were China's allies (and Vietnam were on the Soviet side of the China-Soviet split). "Could you please reffer to pao pot as stalinist?" *Pol Pot was NOT a Stalinist. The ideology of the KR was more like Maoism if like anything (where did I claim this?).
Another factor I've heard was that the bombing of Cambodia was just as much what you mentioned, as a demonstration of power in the region. That they could bomb a country more or less literally (the US used many times more explosives than they used against Japan in WW2, go figure). I am sceptical of this claim. I've heard Pol Pot was actually quite happy about the coup in China and the arrestment of the gang of four. I've also remembe reading something of the lines that Mao said Pol Pot was a revisionist and not following 'Mao Zedong thought'. Mao focused on industralization and modernisation, while Pol Pot wanted to put everyone back into the rice fields. Only a few doctors were allowed to obtain their jobs. Cities were turned into ghost towns. The reason for these meausures by Pol Pot are controversial, but anywho, it was the exact opposite of Mao's policies.
Well tharnakly mao was nothing but an authoriatarian state-capitalist himself. He ocntrolled a truthless dictatorship. And yet at the same time it was run by the beauracracy and he had no real idea what was going on half the time.
