From: ttran@cv3000.Prime.COM (T. Tran)
Subject: Re: History lesson/Call For A Dialogue
Organization: Saigon.COM Public Access BBS; Data Line: (408)730-1092
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 07:06:31 GMT

As a response to Tin Le's posting on "History lesson", Kim Nguyen made
some comments on "CALL FOR A DIALOGUE", which I believe, missed the points
altogether.

I'll reprint the relevant section as is, with my notes prefaced with "**".

>From <992Dec26.034511.21141@emr1.emr.ca>:

[Deleted]

An article, called *Call for dialog* on SCV, displays many flaws about 
Vietnam History, mainly in the period 1925-1945. All is almost based on 
HKK's book and convince Vietnamese abroad that

** It's not "all" based on HKK's book. If you've followed the exchanges,
** references have been made to many others regarding the Communist
** movement in VN (Jeffery Race's War Comes To LongAn, Frank Snepp"s
** Decent Interval, A. Woodhouse's Community and Revolution in Modern
** VN, etc.)
**
** HKK's study was highlighted not only because it's been recognized as an 
** authoritative scholarly work on VNese communism, but also because it's 
** a short, very readable book. For those of us  who grew up in SVN, who 
** had been bombarded all our life with 50 years of the most modern psywar
** in recent history, it would serve as a good introduction for a different
** perspective. There is no point to any dialogue if we only want to 
** consult books that support our own view !

-Independence is what Vietnam communists are for. But if they are
really advocates for the independence of their beloved country, why
did they not respect the independence of Laos and Cambodia ?

** I'm most surprised by this kind of logic, the mixing and matching of
** unrelated issues. Does Kim Nguyen agree that the communists do fight
** for the independence of their country, but that they do not respect
** the independence of others, or that because they do not respect the 
** independence of other countries, THEREFORE, they do not fight for the 
** independence of their country ? If it's the latter, then I'm totally
** confused.
** All colonial superpowers of the 20th century certainly yielded to no one
** in protecting their own sovereinty, but certainly no one in their right
** mind would argue they achieved the colonial superpower status BECAUSE
** they supported other countries' independence.
**
** As for the Cambodian question, I've dealt with it at length in many
** postings (repplies to BUI, KVT2, KVT3).

If they love independence which they did exchange by innocent Vietnamese
corpses, why did they not use the home-grown VIETNAMESEISM to let 
Vietnamese enjoy to live in a independent and happy land ? Why do they 
still use Leninism to rule Vietnam ?

** I'd support Kim Nguyen's right to voice his debunking of communism if
** it's his preference. There are certainly enough data to build a coherent
** alternative to the communist ideology.
** What I find distressing in this paragragh is that it provides neither.
** What does Kim Nguyen mean by "home-grown VIETNAMESEISM" ? Does he mean
** Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, Catholicism, or some sort of mixture ? 
** Or something else ? Please help. Let's at least make clear what we want
** to say !
**
** There are enough books in the West that have come out during the last
** 20 years that document how well the VNese coummunists were able to
** marriage the traditional forte of VNese patriotism with the Communist
** ideology in order to achieve what no other small nation has been able
** to achieve: defeated the most modern superpowers of the world with
** the most primitive means.
**
** If we really want to create an alternative to communism, let's find
** what its true strength and weakness are. It does not really provide
** any insight if we keep relying on some sort of vague anti-communist
** catch-alls. That might serve us alright in the pre-1975 period. With
** all the vast amount of information now available, it just doesn't
** do anymore. 

** As for the question of Lenism, it's a matter of realistic perspective.
** Sure, if we believe in mirarcles, then we can always hope for one. If
** we follow VNese communism as a mass movement, that started in 1930s,
** survived several near-death wipe-outs by the French, got reconstituted,
** succeeded in defeating a colonial superpower that had rulled VN for
** 100 years, then defeated another superpower that no country in the world
** has ever been able to challenge, surely it'd be an easy task to convince
** it that it should drop the very thing that made it what it was and is !
** Especially now when it has to face the potential invasion from the 
** North, and a complete embargo by the West since 1975 ?
**
** Again, I take no issue with Kim's desire, and perhaps the majority of
** us oversea VNese, in seeing the abandonment of some of the worst inhumane
** practices of communism. But it does not serve any purpose in posing
** question that seems to ignore the reality of history. It might be a goal
** that Kim Nguyen might work for, but not something that simply drops out
** from the sky ! 

-This article suggests a deep-rooted Leninism and its natural fusion into
Vietnam. Is it ridiculous ? A champion of independence can say that ?
That part of history (1925-1945) has no deep-rooted origine from Leninism but IT WAS FORCED TO MINGLE WITH AN IMPORTED DOCTRINE. No one talks about HOISM, but Marxism or Maoism.

** Again, Kim Nguyen's argument really confuses me. If Kim bothers to read
** HKK's study, or others in the same subject (D. Marr, A. Woodhouse, Paul
** Mus, etc.), he would not dismiss it so easily (D. Marr's "VN Tradition
** On Trial, 1925-1945" has a particular extensive bibliography).
**
** As for HOISM, could Kim give me a name for VNese Buddhism, VNese Taoism,
** VNese Confucianism, or VNese Catholicism ? Is it therefore all these
** are purely foreign grafts to some sort of VNeseism to be defined ?
** There is certainly a case to make for the failure of the Communists to
** truly appreciate the cultural tradition of VN, but it requires a great
** deal of work to make it intelligible.  
** If we cannot even make ourselves intelligible, how can we expect to
** challenge the communists ?

The only origin for that period is VIETNAMESE PATRIOTISM. Vietnamese has
shown to the world that they did not need Leninism or Maoism or Stalinism
or Troskyism to kick Chinese and Mongols out of their land ! WITH A 
PROTRACTED WAR, THEY WOULD DO THE SAME TO THROW FRENCH OFF THEIR 
TERRITORY NO NEED OF USING COMMUNISM. 
 
** Again, this is both faulty logic and fautly history. As I've mentioned
** in my posting:

>> -- When Nguyen Thai Hoc failed in his revolt at Yen Bai ("Kho^ng tha`nh>>    co^ng thi` tha`nh nha^n"), we've seen the last of the nationally-
>>    known resistance organized by the non-communist intellectuals in
>>    Vietnam. In fact, all non-communist movements against France shared
>>    the same fate: crushed completely by the security apparatus of the
>>    French colonial adminstration.
>>
>> -- It was then that HCM and his Indochinese Communist Party became the
>>    only significant force left that could challenge Great France (Dda.i>>    Pha'p), which it did successfully, booting France out of North VN.

** You might believe that "THEY WOULD DO THE SAME", but the historical
** fact is that they didn't, and couldn't. The power, sophistication,
** and technology of a colonial superpower like France was vastly
** different from the traditional occupation of the Chinese troops in
** earlier history. HKK's book and D. Marr's works go into great details
** how the coummunists managed to solve that dilemma: to invoke the
** age-old patritotism that every VNese seemed to be born with, combined
** it with the modern organization techniques, analytical methodology, and
** international alliance to encircle and eventually squeeze the French
** to death.

That period of history has shown a failure of APPLYING BLINDLY a foreign 
doctrine to solve a war and then to put that doctrine on every head of 
Vietnamese to bear until today.

** For all I know, you may be absolutely right. But we need much better
** understanding both of the nature of VNese communism and what has
** happened during the last 150 years. It serves no good purpose to
** overrate our own resource and severly under-estimate the capability,
** resilience, and prowness of our opponents. After all, it was us, and
** the French, and the Japanese, and the US, and the Chinese that lost
** in VN, not the communists. I'm sure none of these superpowers lacked
** people of the highest ability and intelligence, or the resources to
** back them up.
** If we truly wish to have an impact on the future of VN, let's get REAL.
** Let's not keep repeating most of the materials created ex nihilo by 
** the most modern psywar experts for public consumption during the war.
** To paraphrase Santayana, those who fail to learn from the mistake of
** the past are condemned to repeat it.


T. Tran