Talk:Khmer Krom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is indeed an article that needs to be written as it is an important issue in that part of the world. However, it is obvious by the second paragraph that this article is not written from a neutral point of view and, in fact, is errant in many of its facts. One example is from the second paragraph where the author states that the Khmer living inside the borders of Vietnam are the original inhabitants of that area. I don't know where to start with this sentance! If what the author intended to say was true, it would properly be worded "the Khmer living inside the borders of present-day Vietnam are the descendants of the original inhabitants of the area. However, even that would not be accurate since the presence of the Cham ethinc group and their Kingdom of Champa predate the arrival of the Khmer in South-East Asia by centuries.

This article on an important issue is in desparate need of cleaning up.

Also, I would like to suggest a similar article on the "Khmer Surin" or the Khmer living within the borders of Thailand. While they are not nearly as oppressed as the Khmer Krom, they do have a unique culture and a substantially different dialect (Northern Khmer) that some linguists consider a separate language. WilliamThweatt 02:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You're wrong about the Cham. The Cham did not live in the delta of the Mekong, they lived further north, in what is now central Vietnam. The most ancient inhabitants of the Mekong delta, as proven by historical sources and archeology, are Khmer people. Hardouin 12:18, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Been busy lately, haven't had time to check back here. You're right, Hardouin, thanks for the correction. Some of my text was deleted probably before I saved the page (got a new laptop for Christmas and my palm keeps hitting the touch pad and moving my cursor). As I intended to write, it is the common consensus that the Khmer-speaking ethnic group originated somewhere around the Himalayas in what is now either Tibet or India. As they migrated south into the Southeast Asian peninsula, they displaced and/or intermingled with the ethnic groups already present which were of Austronesian extraction. Keep in mind that what is now the Mekong Delta region was, at this time, still mostly underwater, only recently (geologically speaking) being formed by the deposits of silt from the Mekong. During this period, what is now Phnom Penh was practically on the coast. As the Delta Region formed it was constantly being fought over by Austronesian tribes (both from the Hue region (Chams) and from Java) and Khmeric tribes. Of the current Nation-States in the region, Cambodia does probably have the best (oldest) claim on the area, but to say they were the original inhabitants of the area is not only unverifyable, but most likely inaccurate.WilliamThweatt 01:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population of the Khmer Krom

The issue of the population of the Khmer Krom has been talked over and over again in the article about Vietnam and some other articles. So far, after more than a year, the only sources available for the 7 millions Khmer Krom is the Khmer Krom Federation (an anti Vietnamese organization) and 1 or 2 more personal websites created on free web host provider like geocities. I have 2 domain names registered for $8.99 per year plus a cheap web host for $1/month, I could have written anything like "I'm the father of all the Khmer Krom in the world", would you quote that into this article and all articles about the Khmer Krom as well??

Just because the Khmer Krom Federation is the only source doesn't necessarily mean its inaccurate (although I agree with you that it probably is an inflated number). Futhermore, while it may be fair to characterize the Khmer Krom Federation as "an anti Vietnamese organization", a case can also be made that, based on official policies, the Vietnamese government is "anti Khmer Krom"; so their statistics should not be accepted as gospel truth either. To compromise, I added a sentence to the "official" government numbers stating that the figure is disputed by the Khmer Krom. This maintains factual integrity and NPOV while presenting both sides of the issue.--WilliamThweatt 00:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The figure claimed by the KKF should be discarded altogether because there is no way for them to know the number of pure blooded Khmer Krom remaining in Viet Nam. During the Lon Nol regime, a lot of them have moved back to Cambodia to participate in the ethnic cleansing campaign against the Vietnamese living there. They later probably got killed by the Khmer Rouge. So, the 1 million figure is correct.

In order to maintain the NPOV policy, we have to be impartial. To claim that the 1 million figure is correct and that there's no way the KKF figure can be accurate qualifies as original research. As long as there is a verifiable source for both figures, we can't prefer one over the other.--WilliamThweatt 01:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that the 7 million figure is not a verifiable source per the definition because it is a self-published source. While the 1 million figure is definitely a verifiable source as it is an official figure as well as being used by CIA World Fact Book, World Bank, etc.--lt2hieu2004 16:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Population

I've changed the population to debated and add the Khmer Krom census. The population figure used by the CIA world book is drawn from the Vietnamese government. Vietnam can't be trusted when it comes to minorities in the country, epecially when it comes to Khmers. Vietnamese are very oppressive toward other people, they are not known for tolerance. Thats why many organization like the Degars and Khmer Krom seek to spread awareness of their existence. CanCanDuo 02:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Please see the above argument. The Khmer Krom Federation also has a political agenda and so their population figures are not reliable. It is also a self-published source (another reason it is not a reliable source). Government-published sources are considered reliable per WP:RS and WP:V. The fact that there are disputes should be mentioned in a separate section, not in the "official" population area.--William Thweatt ^Talk | ^Contribs 03:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Btw, WilliamThweatt, care to explain why you keep changing the page to add the 8 millions figure if you really think so?--82.23.6.177 15:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

There is no official population area yet, it just states origin. You act as if Vietnam is does not have an agenda against minorities. When it comes to khmer Krom, there are no trusted source. CanCanDuo 23:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you don't know this but the highest ranking government official in Vietnam for the last 6 years (the secretary general of the Communist Party) - Nong Duc Manh - is of ethnic minority origin (Tay). Beside, we have been having this discussion for such a long time that I think it's pointless to restart the same discussion all over again. See the Vietnam Talk Page, if you are a sensible person you will understand why the figure from KKF is not mentioned. Until you can provide a single verifiable source that use the 7 millions figure, I don't think it is constructive or wise to restart the same old argument.--lt2hieu2004 02:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History section heavily biased

The history section reads like a drama and not an encyclopedia article. No supporting evidence is provided. I've tagged it with the POV tag. DHN 01:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)