Any pro-Khmer Rouge literature online?

[MarxEngelsLeninStalinMao]

First, I would like to say that I am not a fan of the Khmer Rouge. I am very interested in them and I read a lot about them. But most of the things I read about them come from hostile sources. Of course I have also read about them from "neutral" sources, but I would still like to read something that is pro-Khmer Rouge. So, is there any pro-Khmer Rouge literature online?

[ВАЛТЕР]

You could probably find some in the memos of Ronald Reagan and the likes. Considering the US government supported them.

[Yuppie Grinder]

I'm pretty sure we had a Pol Pot fan on here not long ago. He might still be around.

[MarxEngelsLeninStalinMao]

You could probably find some in the memos of Ronald Reagan and the likes. Considering the US government supported them.

If I am not completely wrong, the West gave aid to other rebel groups in Kampuchea that were allies of the Khmer Rouge, but not to the Khmer Rouge itself. Of course the CIA and others started to publish stuff that said something along the lines of "the Khmer Rouge wasn't so bad after all" after the Vietnamese had invaded, but that was only because they were a part of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea which also included the other rebel groups.

[Prairie Fire]

Here is a mirror of an old geocities site, a "Pol Pot study group": http://www.oocities.org/groupstpp/ ( if that doesn't work ,here is the same site: http://onwardoverland.com/angkorwat/polpot/polpot.html )

Here is probably one of the ONLY readable articles that the late MIM ever wrote, and it happens to be about Kampuchea:
http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/faq/polpot2.html

Also, this guy seems pretty pro- Khmer Rouge: http://polpot8.blogspot.ca/

There aren't a lot of Pro- Khmer Rouge sources in English. What there is generally hasn't been scanned/transcribed to the internet, and is from that period of new left optimism when the Khmer Rouge were first taking power.

Most of the types who now gravitate towards the Khmer Rouge in the west (other than Khmer nationals,) are generally not seriously political, and are often questionable characters. The former Rural People's Party strongly advocated Pol Pot in the beginning, before they moved on to Juche, (and then abandoned socialism altogether to become a Hindu sect worshipping Kali.). I'm not trying to tar the Khmer Rouge by association, I'm just saying that the English language materials available often come from these people, and are of questionable merit.

If you really want get serious, read the post history by (former?) revlefter , Milk: http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=11970

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Shouldn't you want to read a 'good' history of the Khmer Rouge, not a 'pro-', 'neutral', or 'anti-' Khmer Rouge history?

[Art Vandelay]

Shouldn't you want to read a 'good' history of the Khmer Rouge, not a 'pro-', 'neutral', or 'anti-' Khmer Rouge history?

I guess one would probably make the argument that developing an accurate analysis of any historical event, wouldn't simply be reading the most well known and respected sources (obviously it would include this), but also reading sources from all varying perspectives. Now I'm not sure if that's his reasoning for wanting pro-Khmer Rouge literature, but I'm hoping its something along those lines.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

There was a website, which wasn't pro-KR but had some very well written material explaining what happened in Cambodia and why.It seems to be down now. It was discussed on RevLeft a few years ago.

Npot much help, I know...

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Doesn't necessarily have to be the most well-know, official or respected sources. Often, as we know, official narratives are questionable at best and yes, we need a variety of narratives, from a variety of perspectives. But, I would still want to find 'good' historical sources, rather than ones that confirm my own POV or whatever.

[Art Vandelay]

Doesn't necessarily have to be the most well-know, official or respected sources. Often, as we know, official narratives are questionable at best and yes, we need a variety of narratives, from a variety of perspectives. But, I would still want to find 'good' historical sources, rather than ones that confirm my own POV or whatever.

True, but that only applies if one is approaching a topic with pre held convictions and preconceived notions. Reading downright and blatant propaganda can still be useful in historical research.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Of course, fair point.

[blake 3:17]

The best account I've read is in Jonathan Neale's book on the Vietnam War -- it at least makes the whole thing make a bit of sense.

This might be of interest, I dunno: http://undertheoculartree.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/caldwell-malcolm-ezra-malcolm-calwell-pol-pots-apologist-democratiya-issue-16-spring-summer-2009.pdf

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

The Revolutionary Internationalist Movement wrote a critique of the Pol Pot regime from what I think was a principled left-wing perspective, it serves as a pretty good introduction to the history of Cambodia in the period while debunking some imperialist myths without siding with pol pot or the Vietnamese.

http://www.aworldtowin.org/back_issues/1999-25/PolPot_eng25.htm

Of course, admittedly the RIM later went a bit too harsh on Pol Pot in it's later years, and in 2004 one of their articles on Negri went on a tangent on the Khmer Rouge and refered to it as a "nationalistic nightmare" and even went so far to recommend the anti-communist "Anatomy of a Nightmare" as reading material for Cambodian history.

[Red_Banner]

Maoist Rebel News, a person on YouTube, isn't pro-Khmer Rouge, but he offers something else than the typical capitalist grabage about them.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

So wait, instead of a balanced historical account of the Khmer Rouge and their actions and politics, you'd prefer..... what?


A filthy rag of biased Rouge propaganda? Why on earth would you want that? Self-indoctrination!?

[MarxEngelsLeninStalinMao]

So wait, instead of a balanced historical account of the Khmer Rouge and their actions and politics, you'd prefer..... what?


A filthy rag of biased Rouge propaganda? Why on earth would you want that? Self-indoctrination!?
No. To put it shortly, I am just interested to see their part of the story.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

No. To put it shortly, I am just interested to see their part of the story.

Alright then, but wouldn't it make sense to learn the story itself first before hearing a particular groups' take on said story? It's not really a secret that historical distortion is the greatest refuge of the politically ambiguous.

Then again, you did say that you've already read over Cambodian history, so maybe you might find that the political opinions of those who support groups like the rouge are interesting. To be honest, ever since reading about Jim Jones' suicide cult, I find it exceedingly hard to give two shits about rhetorical techniques and theoretical arguments without looking at the parallels taking place in reality at the time - all of which, in the case of democratic kampuchea, point to a neurotic, genocidal, despotic and bloodcurdling hellhole. A hellhole which garnered, all the way through to its' dissolution, the support of Yugoslavia, the UN, America, NATO and China.

[Os Cangaceiros]

The regime was responsible for ethnic cleansing and mass murder (in the most literal sense of the term). I think the only really interesting question is how things became just so fucked up.

[MarxEngelsLeninStalinMao]

There is a lot more to it than that. Like the part Vietnam played in the events.

[Geiseric]

I'm sure the French CP wrote about them, they trained pol pot afterall. Try Marxists.org and you could probably get primary sources written by the khmer rouge.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Well obviously a lot of that had to do with the historical relationship that Vietnam has had with it's neighbors. As well as the Sino-Soviet split, with the PRC supporting the Khmer Rouge and the USSR supporting the Vietnamese forces, etc. But who cares what the apologists for a Khmer supremacist regime wrote? Forces forged by the devastating effects of a protracted war are capable of unspeakable acts (besides the KR, other examples include the RUF in Sierra Leone and the Taliban in Afghanistan) but at least for any faults of the Vietnamese, for whatever their social imperialism or whatever you want to call it, at least they didn't descend into the depths of their neighbors despite decades of non-stop war. That's why there really isn't much in the way of "pro-KR" works, simply because there isn't much to extoll in what the regime did.

[#FF0000]

I'm pretty sure we had a Pol Pot fan on here not long ago. He might still be around.

I think you're talking about that "milk" dude (I think that was his name).

I got the impression he was more a Khmer Rouge hyper-nerd with an encyclopedic knowledge on his topic. Made some really interesting posts about them.


Maoist Rebel News, a person on YouTube, isn't pro-Khmer Rouge, but he offers something else than the typical capitalist grabage about them.

MRN is never a good source on anything.

[rednordman]

What really baffles me about the KR is that most of the ardent defenses I have heard have come from the actual Cambodians (only some I must stress) themselves. Basically some see it as an almost mystical call to arms of the ancient Khmer people, and that the Vietnamese despite so blatantly liberating them, are seen as the imperialist neighbors trying to corrode the spirit and self determination of Cambodia. Real batshit insane stuff, but I have heard that defense a staggering amount of times from actual Cambodian testaments.

[MarxEngelsLeninStalinMao]

Well obviously a lot of that had to do with the historical relationship that Vietnam has had with it's neighbors. As well as the Sino-Soviet split, with the PRC supporting the Khmer Rouge and the USSR supporting the Vietnamese forces, etc. But who cares what the apologists for a Khmer supremacist regime wrote? Forces forged by the devastating effects of a protracted war are capable of unspeakable acts (besides the KR, other examples include the RUF in Sierra Leone and the Taliban in Afghanistan) but at least for any faults of the Vietnamese, for whatever their social imperialism or whatever you want to call it, at least they didn't descend into the depths of their neighbors despite decades of non-stop war. That's why there really isn't much in the way of "pro-KR" works, simply because there isn't much to extoll in what the regime did.
Vietnam actually played a much bigger part in the things that happened inside Democratic Kampuchea than many people would think.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

First, I would like to say that I am not a fan of the Khmer Rouge. I am very interested in them and I read a lot about them. But most of the things I read about them come from hostile sources. Of course I have also read about them from "neutral" sources, but I would still like to read something that is pro-Khmer Rouge. So, is there any pro-Khmer Rouge literature online?

I wouldn't exactly call it "pro-KR literature" - if anything it often makes them look outright unhinged - but there was a small collection of primary documents by the Communist Party of Kampuchea / Party of Democratic Kampuchea, called "Pol Pot Plans the Future". I might still have it somewhere - if I find it, I'll PM you the perfectly legal PDF I have.

[rednordman]

I don't know whether this is the sort of text you are after or already have, but i know that pol pot wrote a book about his vision for DK, called 'saying's of Angkor' or something like that. Also how where the Vietnamese complicit to the KR regime?

[Geiseric]

I don't know whether this is the sort of text you are after or already have, but i know that pol pot wrote a book about his vision for DK, called 'saying's of Angkor' or something like that. Also how where the Vietnamese complicit to the KR regime?

The Vietnamese at some points armed the Rouge during the Vietnam War, because they weren't as batshit insane yet seeing as they weren't in power, or they could of been, i'm not really sure.

[MarxEngelsLeninStalinMao]

I don't know whether this is the sort of text you are after or already have, but i know that pol pot wrote a book about his vision for DK, called 'saying's of Angkor' or something like that. Also how where the Vietnamese complicit to the KR regime?
The Vietnamese worked as a link between the pro-Soviet faction of the Communist Party of Kampuchea and the Soviet Union. After the pro-Soviet faction attempted a coup, Kampuchea-Vietnam relations started getting worse. After that, the (pro-Chinese) leadership of the CPK became paranoid and the mass killings began.

[Malesori]

Brother Number 1 is close

[stalinator17]

Anybody here got any Caldwell's book to share?