000			03035nam a2200349 a 4500
005			20250918231705.0
008			131001s2012 njua i 001 0 eng c
020			_a9781412847360 (pbk.) _cRM111.77
039		9	_a201401071205 _blan _c201312161146 _drosli _c201312041327 _dros _y10-01-2013 _zros
040			_aNIC/DLC _cDLC _dDLC _dUKM
043			_aas-----
090			_aJQ750.A38C586 kat
090			_aJQ750.A38 _bC586
100	1		_aHoadley, Steve.
245	1	0	_aSoldiers and politics in Southeast Asia : _bcivil-military relations in comparative perspective, 1933-1975 / _cJ. Stephen Hoadley.
260			_aNew Brunswick : _bTransaction Publishers, _c2012.
300			_axii, 307 p. : _bill. ; _c23 cm.
500			_a'Originally published in 1975 by Schenkman Publishing Company'--T.p. verso.
504			_aIncludes index.
520			_a'The Cold War brought about increasing interest from scholars in the politics of national development and, in the case of civilian-led underdeveloped countries, the effects of military insurgency. Two ideologically opposed positions evolved around the phenomenon of military insurgency. The position of technological conservatism favors military insurgency in previously civilian-led governments on the presumption that it encourages stability, efficiency, and, importantly, anti-communism. The revisionist position, on the other hand, is highly critical of technological conservatism, especially with regard to its political fervor. J. Stephen Hoadley asserts that the relevant question is not one of ideological choices; rather, it is whether a military or civilian-led government is better suited for the political and economic development of a particular underdeveloped nation. Soldiers and Politics in Southeast Asia introduces the reader to the sequences of events that led to military predominance in Thailand, Burma, South Vietnam, Indonesia, and Cambodia. Hoadley uses the data of five case studies to test and quantify his hypotheses. The author characterizes governments controlled by the military as performing slightly less well than civilian-led governments in Southeast Asia. Hoadley argues that while they are demonstrably less capable in responding to outside and domestic challenges, there is little difference between military and civilian-led governments in the areas of establishing stability and maintaining law. The book concludes that neither the conservative nor radical views are fully correct as to the effects of military-led governments on development.'--Publisher's description.
650		0	_aCivil-military relations _zSoutheast Asia.
650		0	_aMilitarism _zSoutheast Asia.
651		0	_aSoutheast Asia _xArmed Forces _xPolitical activity.
651		0	_aSoutheast Asia _xPolitics and government _y1945-
907			_a.b15736337 _b2019-11-12 _c2019-11-12
942			_c2 _n0 _kJQ750.A38C586 kat
914			_avtls003540971
990			_ark4
991			_aInstitut Kajian Etnik
998			_at _b2013-01-10 _cm _da _feng _gnju _y0 _z.b15736337
999			_c553828 _d553828