It's the other guy's paradigm, not mine!

Interesting how people at the University of Hawaii view the Mists of Ramanna. From an official university page:

"It addresses the theory that a 'Kingdom of Ramanna' in Lower Burma, the foundations for early Burma and Mainland Southeast Asia scholarship for over a hundred years, is a myth. It is essentially an ethnic interpretation of history."

What does "it" refer to? Aung-thwin or the Mon Paradigm? This summary exhibits the same confusion that almost everyone exhibits when first confronted by the Mon Paradigm:

Honest-question: Is the Mon Paradigm Michael Aung-thwin's theory?

Honest-answer: No, well actually yes, in a way:

1. It is specially constructed by Aung-thwin to be wrong.

2. It is placed in the mouths of other historians to discredit them.

So yes, it sort of is his theory.

Professor of FUD Michael Aung-thwin at work again, keeping up the good fight for the Myanmar Junta, even using their tactics.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is a terrorist, right? And every historian of Burma except Michael Aung-thwin and friends (and you damn well better be one, no criticizing my theories, or else...) is a Mon Paradigmist!