How Should We Look at History?

The history, of Southeast Asia in particular, may be controversial, if different perspectives are taken into account. Thus, it requires us to rethink critically. One of the ways to view is doing the comparison study, which will help us to understand our history more accurately and from which we can learn from the experience of other countries dealing with problems and then we can select which better policies best applied to our country’s future problems.
One example of how we should look or compare attentively is the history of Thailand specifically. Thailand, in Thai National Museum, tried to reinvent it history by giving argument that Thai precedents were there in the early Pleistocen period in SEA; it rejected that Thai people originated from the southern China, Yunan by showing the difference in Thai and Chinese languages and the Chinese chronicle which showing that no Chinese immigration from China southward when Kublai Khaan invaded China. Another argument is that Thailand does not start from Sukhothai but traced back to Lopbury (it was doubtful based on the study of Phungtian ()); Thai was invaded by Mon, or Khmer but eventually it gained the land back. There are more explanations which can be questioned.
In order to get more accurate history or information, many different methods should be employed including oral history, cartoons, painting or movies. To be more precise, a case of a barber going along with Japanese army troops (Prof.’s Nakao’s lecture) is true; or, interviewing of anthropologists after the war provides more accurate account. This case was also true in Cambodian situation after Pol Pot regime (under Vietnamese influence) which Vietnamese barbers were everywhere in Cambodia at that time.
An idea of nationalism encourages the ruler to invent the history that is not relevant to the daily lives of people, but legitimize their role and land. This makes a case of what Manchuria is to be suspected. The same applies to what Thailand is.
Yet, a case of foreign researcher working on our history can be questioned in terms of reality. This point can be seen in Cambodian histories written by some foreign researchers including David Chandler, Milton Osborne and Francois Ponchaud. This can provide more or less true information, though, a further examination should be conducted.
In conclusion, comparison study helps us understand more clearly who history is written and rewritten (Cambodian history needs to be revised too), learn from the other countries and find out the best points to adapt or adopt.
It is not finished yet, another question can be raised: so, we should forget about the past or not! A case of Japanese army’s brutality to Chinese and Korean is somehow similar to the brutality of Thailand, Burma, Vietnam or Cambodia amongst each other.