Talk:Khmer Rouge/Archive 2

message: This is not going to be settled by the people editting this, this is just a back and forth edit war.  What is the next step, arbitration?  Let us bring this into arbitration or whatever. Hanpuk 05:49, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try chiming in again here.  I do find the research you're doing as to the figures interesting, but there are a quite a number of sources mentioned in the article other than Ponchaud, such as the Yale project and AI.  Although I don't know their methods, I doubt you can just dismiss all this scholarship as based solely on a misunderstanding of a figure in one book.  As for the name, you've already had the common names policy explained to you numerous times:  This is the English encyclopedia, and uses the names English speakers use and are familiar with, regardless of the source of that name, whether it's the "corporate press" or implantation by aliens.  Your claim that it's "crazy" and "foreign" is ridiculous; are Renaissance and Cinco de Mayo "crazy, foreign name"s?  If the KR has a bad reputation, it's not because of their ("scary") French name.  Finally, claiming the KR evacuated the cities to avert a famine and not as part of their utopian agricultural collectivization is not consistent with present historical consensus, nor is implying it's all the fault of the US (like everything, apparently) convincing either.  You do seem to know some things about the subject which could be worthwhile additions to these articles, but your present tactic of using multiple accounts to attack pages and people and insert wild claims about corporate conspiracies and so on is not the way to go about this.  A possibly enlightening comparison would be the AIDS articles, where a persistent faction insists that HIV does not cause AIDS and that this has been proven by medical data; just like you, they're sure they are right, but the fact that their beliefs run counter to scientific consensus means they must accept lessened coverage.  -- VV 07:52, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mar 26 

message: The Yale  Cambodian Genocide Project, part of the  Yale Genocide Studies Program. They claim extensive documentation. Quote:
:In Phnom Penh in 1996, for instance, we obtained access to the 100,000-page archive of that defunct regime's security police, the Santebal. This material has been microfilmed by Yale University's Sterling Library and made available to scholars worldwide. As of December 2003, we have also compiled and published 22,000 biographic and bibliographic records, and over 6,000 photographs, documents, translations, and maps, along with an extensive list of CGP books and research papers on the genocide.
The CGP estimates "approximately 1.7 million" deaths, roughly 21% of the country's population, died during this period. You can read Ben Kiernan's "The Demography of Genocide: Cambodia and East Timor" (Critical Asian Studies, 35:4, 2003) [in .pdf format] for a more detailed account of how these figures were reached. -- The Anome 08:27, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: From 1979 to 1983, the Cambodian government supported a research committee to survey the country, in every province, and in some provinces right down to the village level, to attempt to determine what had happened in Cambodia between 1975 and 1979. [...] The research committee reported the deaths of 3,314,000 persons under the Khmer Rouge regime. We believe that this is the source of the figure most commonly cited in Cambodia as to the human toll of the genocide.
Note that the CGP has revised this Cambodian government figure downwards to a more cautiously calculated estimate of 1.7 million dead, based on the evidence it has reviewed. -- The Anome 08:36, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some research 

message: There is no mention of Khmer Rouge's famous Jail S-21, which was where many citizen were Killed.--Plato 10:46, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: S-21

message: There are 5 Cambodia pages under contention, I think if someone (VeryVerily?) would feel compelled to edit all 5 pages as well, a centralized discussion of the issues common to all pages (number of people killed in Cambodia, history of CPK) udner contention could be discussed here, in one centralized location, unless someone has a better idea.  Unless someone thinks 5 seperate discussions of the same issue on 5 different pages is a better idea (or more likely no discussion and just a revert).
Most of the points I've made above already.  It's up to others to decide.  I am refuting flat out wrong arguments like "Ponchaud says 2 million died 1975-1979".  Ponchaud did not say that his timeline started BEFORE 1975.  Anyone can go pick up his book and see this.  I correct an error which is undeniable and the mud-slinging starts, I'm whitewashing genocide, I'm a crazed whatever, I'm accused of being a sock puppet of someone, anything and everything ad hominem instead of the issue at hand.  I mean, wouldn't sourcing these wild claims bolster your argument?  Unless there are no credible sources for the wilder claims made here. Hanpuk 06:23, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cambodia 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Khmer Rouge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160216054030/http://opus.macmillan.yale.edu/workpaper/pdfs/GS24.pdf to http://opus.macmillan.yale.edu/workpaper/pdfs/GS24.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614224951/http://research.yale.edu/ycias/database/files/GS24.pdf to http://research.yale.edu/ycias/database/files/GS24.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050403182720/http://www.cambodia.gov.kh/krt/english/ to http://www.cambodia.gov.kh/krt/english/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160115205405/https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/552494 to http://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/552494
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:49, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I am confused by this sentence "The Khmer Rouge explicitly targeted the Chinese, the Vietnamese, and even their partially Khmer offspring for extinction; although the Cham Muslims were treated unfavorably, they were encouraged to "mix flesh and blood", to intermarry and assimilate." 
I take it to mean that the Cham were not targeted for extinction like the Chinese and Vietnamese, but this seems to contradict this sentence later "And according to Kiernan, the "fiercest extermination campaign was directed against the ethnic Cham Muslim minority"" A.rutnam (talk) 00:59, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment of Cham Muslim 

message: The section Khmer Rouge#Historic legacy is strange. It reads more like a quick summary of their history - which is what the lead is for - and as far as I can see contains no information about the legacy of the Khmer Rouge. It might be best to be removed entirely in its current state. Fences&Windows 19:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, it's a summary and an inaccurate one at that (the CPK's goal wasn't to create a 'purely agrarian-based society' for example). Better to delete entirely Svejk74 (talk) 20:18, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic legacy 

message: The majority of the edits to this article at present consist of tinkering with the infobox and "political position". At present they are described as "far-left and far-right", which is obviously ridiculous.
A good essay on the complexities of this is Karl Jackson's "Intellectual origins of the Khmer Rouge". It explains why it is very hard to try and classify 
the movement. Their ideology is leftist but bears little resemblance to most mainstream currents within Communism. He describes them as "a post-Leninist amalgam of nostrums of the left, a union derived from sources previously thought to be incompatible": elements of Maoism; (fewer) elements of Stalinism; Franz Fanon; Samir Amin; and, lastly, indigenous ideas including deep seated Khmer xenophobia. They believed, with disastrous results, they were developing something politically new and uniquely Khmer.
With all this in mind is it possible to agree on something that can be put in the infobox?Svejk74 (talk) 20:54, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit warring over political position

message: It should be "because of." Widespread deaths in rural areas filled up Khmer Rouge's ranks with people who were eager to revenge. 2100s (talk) 18:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but it also killed many people, including Khmer Rouge fighters. Both angles are mentioned in the article as is. Just saying. RhinoMind (talk) 04:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Despite" a massive American bombing?  

message: I agree that the assertion the KR "renounced" Communism in 1981 is dubious. Isn't this just the date that a formal coalition was agreed (largely due to pressure exerted on all parties by China) between the KR, Sihanouk and Son Sann's KNPLF? The KR were still Communist, just operating as part of a non-Communist "front"? Svejk74 (talk) 16:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your assessement, however, I'm pretty sure this would fall under WP:No Original Research. Our job is to report what other sources are saying about whether the KR renounced communism, not to determine ourselves whethere this is the case. I would suggest people look for sources that contradict the renunciation, as it sounds dubious to me too. DifferenceTone (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone back to contemporary news sources and I think the key event being referred to here is the Khmer Rouge announcement of 6 December 1981 (coincident with an ASEAN foreign ministers' conference in Thailand) that the Communist Party of Kampuchea had been dissolved and replaced by the "Party of Democratic Kampuchea". As noted above this was to enable them to join a 'front' with the Sihanoukists and KNPLF. Whether this amounts to renouncing Communism, particularly given that there seems to have been a general understanding of the purpose of the announcement, I'm not sure Svejk74 (talk) 20:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: 1981