内容摘要： 如果泰国偏远南方的冲突可以看作1940年代现代主义伊斯兰觉醒运动的复活和重现，为什么当地穆斯林精英和各类代理人在历史的当下规避了这样一次再觉醒运动？与此相反，泰国当局所宣传的是另一种历史：即荣耀的北大年府曾经保持着与Siam（暹罗，泰国旧称：译者注）的和谐关系。我对1940年代伊斯兰再觉醒运动的定义，不仅仅涉及泰国偏远南方在漫长的20世纪的觉醒运动，更宽泛地讲，还涉及那段历史对21世纪政治的意义。本文提出：如果没有严肃的态度探讨暴力回潮和避免不必要的死亡，就根本无法达成在泰国偏远南方政府和普通穆斯林之间的相互理解。

Abstract: If the conflict in Thailand’s far south could be interpreted as a revival and full retelling of thr 1940s modernist Islamic awakening, why have local Muslim elites and various agents in the historical present circumvented such a reawakening? Instead, what was broadcast was another history, namely a certain glorious Patani past that supposedly featured a harmonious relationship with Siam. My stipulation of 1940s reawakening refers not only to what followed the awakening in Thailand’s far south in the long twentieth century but, more broadly, to the meaning of that past in the politics of the twenty-first. This essay argues that the absence of any serious attempt to interpret the resurgence of violence and to account for incidents of unnecessary deaths remains an important barrier to an understanding between the government and ordinary Muslims in the far south.

关键词：泰国偏远南方，荣耀的北大年府，KruSe，HajiSulong，伊斯兰再觉醒运动，同化，分离主义;

Keyword:Thailand, Patani, Kru Se, Haji Sulong, Islamic reawakening, assimilation, separatism;

作者：Kee Howe Yong(著), 周学文(译)(中国社会科学院民族学与人类学研究所,)

来源： 《Social Identities 2014. May》 第1-3期