Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Socialism Is Alive and Well ... in Vietnam

By Frank Joyce, AlterNet. Posted October 11, 2006.


Southeast Asian nations could offer a way for countries like ours to become more democratic and prosperous.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Frank Joyce

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Vietnam is mentioned in the news quite often these days. But the references are almost always in relation to Iraq. What's not being covered is what's going on in Vietnam itself -- which is unfortunate, because economically, politically and socially, it might just be the most interesting and inspiring nation on the planet.

In the interest of full disclosure, my affection for Vietnam goes way back. As an anti-war activist I met with Vietnamese liaisons to the anti-war movement on several occasions. In 1970 I visited Hanoi and was profoundly impressed with the character and resolve of the people, not to mention the beauty of the country itself. Even then, during wartime, the food was terrific, too.

It still is, as I discovered earlier this year when I returned to Vietnam. The people are open, friendly and confident, just as they were before. But now, not only is the war over, Vietnam is the second-fastest-growing economy in the world. (China is first.) The standard of living of millions of people is improving at a rapid pace.

From the remote countryside to the cities, it is fascinating to witness an economy developing so quickly. It's like looking at one of those medical scale models of the human body minus the skin covering. You can see the equivalent of the arteries, the kidneys, the stomach, the liver -- virtually the whole economic circulation system and digestive tract before your very eyes. Building is going on everywhere. I've never seen so many brick factories in my life. Scooter traffic is intense. Internet cafes and appliance stores abound. All of that activity is cheek to jowl with the agricultural production that still dominates the economy. It's changing fast, but 80 percent of the population is still peasants. One reason the energy is so high is because the country is so young. The overwhelming majority is under 25.

Is it utopia? Of course not. People are proud of the gains that are being made in income, education and health. But no one is shy about telling you there are problems. During part of my trip, I attended a "Consequences of the Changing World Economy" seminar. It was cohosted by the Ho Chi Minh National Political Academy and the Journal of Nature, Society and Thought, an American Marxist political journal. The scholars of the National Academy spoke quite openly of limitations and problems to be addressed. So did our tour guides, the very well done English language newspaper Viet Nam News, and others.

One Vietnamese speaker at the conference framed the challenge as trying to figure out how to get the good from the "market economy" while avoiding the bad.

Isn't that what we're all trying to figure out?

But the Vietnamese are starting from a quite different place to answer the question. The structure of their economy and their politics -- not to mention their culture -- is decidedly not the same as ours.

What is happening in Vietnam (and in China and Laos, too) is unprecedented in the evolution of economic development of our planet. Never before has a market economy been deliberately introduced into a one-party, state-ruled, socialist economy. This is a significant structural development.

The 20th century taught us to associate mass consumption with capitalism and the absence of personal consumption with socialism. Now things are starting to look different. A twenty-something Vietnamese person with a Nokia cell phone, an iPod and a car looks just like a twenty-something in Chicago with a Nokia cell phone, an iPod and a car. That does not, however, mean they represent exactly the same economic forces at work, or that they have identical values and aspirations. Sometimes a thing that walks like a duck and talks like a duck ain't no duck.

Vietnam did not start its transformation with much capital in the traditional sense of the term. That's why, in 1986, it adopted the Moi Doi policy of opening up to foreign investment in the first place. But accepting foreign investment does not mean that Vietnam has a capitalist class that rules the country. That doesn't mean they don't have "rulers," just that the rulers didn't acquire their power from their private ownership of the means of production.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: socialism, vietnam, capitalism

Frank Joyce is a journalist and labor communications consultant. He is writing a book on reinventing unions.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
PB
Posted by: rsaxto on Oct 11, 2006 2:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whoever runs our government PB (Post Bush) needs to do a better job of decently and fairly paying workers at all levels of activity else the Vietnams and other rising Asian countries will leave the USA in the dusty and forgotten pages of failed societies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: PB Posted by: themotie
You're insane if you want America to be like Vietnam. The best countries are in West Europe
Posted by: mah_favorite_flavor_cherry_red on Oct 11, 2006 4:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Vietnam is a hellhole.

Anyway, Vietnam is NOT SOCIALIST! It is JUST LIKE CHINA. Exploitative conditions for workers because they are highly controlled by an elite.

The countries that provide best for their citizens are clearly those of west europe. Capitalism but with a mix of socialism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Evidence? Posted by: hbw
» RE: vidence? Posted by: albrechtkrausse
And what about America?
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 11, 2006 5:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's socialism in America alright. It's just that it's socializing poverty and terrorism to the max, that's all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What kind of society do we want?
Posted by: marxalot on Oct 11, 2006 5:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What kind of society do we want?

Who gets to decide!? Voting sure hasn't panned out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

US Socialism = Military
Posted by: cielo on Oct 11, 2006 6:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the US we have socialism. It's called the military. Somehow the right-wingers aren't ranting and raving about our state-run, massively subsidied military yet.

We also have massive subsidies...for cheap oil, highways, and air travel. Haven't heard any right-wingers upset about this either, though they do tend to pick on poor little barely-funded Amtrak.

I guess their minds are just poorly socialized.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Meritocracy = Military Posted by: TooDamnCool
» RE: Meritocracy = Military Posted by: Jayzer
It's Nice To Hear of Progress and I am Full of Hope...But Socialism Is Nowhere To Be Found
Posted by: felixcommi on Oct 11, 2006 7:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Vietnam, while apparently more permissive of labor radicalism, may not be a beacon of light to follow. We need governance strongly rooted in the practical issues of our daily realities. When "elites" or "rulers" dictate the process and purpose of good governance, things will never materialize the way the great mass of workers (aka people) will want them to.

Democracy cannot be about governments with limited capacities only to health, education, regulatory schemes and security...The economy has to be democratized....we do not live our lives in legislatures....we do not earn money to feed ourselves, our families, our communities in the halls of congress...

We do it at work, that is where most of our lives happen and we should all have some meaningful discretion over our workplaces and the greater economy through new and innovative democratic schemes....The debate should not be socialism (in a very limited and perverse sense in the southeast asia) and capitalism, whats the right mix?...

The debate should be about getting serious about our alleged obsession and passion for democracy and self-governance (If we are serious about this latter theme and maybe solving some miserable problems, democratizing the economy is imperative)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No matter what kind of government it has, Vietnam will always be friendlier than Iraq
Posted by: DougScott on Oct 11, 2006 10:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can you imagine American tourists 30 years from now visiting Baghdad without bodyguards, helmets and bulletproof vests?

No way, Jose.

But in Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon) with it's "evil" socialistic society (according to George W.), Vietnam veterans are treated like returning heroes. That's the difference between a SEATO defender and a Bush occupier.

For damning revelations about Shrub the Charlatan plus 70 Bushwhacking cartoons and other illustrations, visit one of the best progressive websites on the Internet --www.King-George.biz

Cheers eyeryone, "Doug" -- Vietnam veteran, lifelong registered Republican, staunch Goldwater conservative and RABID neocon-hater.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraq and Vietnam are Different
Posted by: sofla100 on Oct 11, 2006 5:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Vietnam was never a country that defined itself much by religion. If anything, they are mostly a Buddhist country, and Buddhism is well known to be quite pacifistic and a religion that does not believe in prosletyzing at all. Thing are quite a bit different in Iraq. The religious tradition there is very strong and not terribly tolderant of outsiders (similiar to evangelical Christianity). It is blended with the state in many ways such as in Iran. Obviously, we need to let them, as in Iraq, work out there own way, and trying to impose "democracy" on Iraq via the military is just plain suicide. But in Vietnam, they were just never the "true believers" with the religious stuff and the church/state were always very separate. Hence, Vietnam is developing its own way and if that way can encourage a real socialistic society with rights for all, that will be a good development.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't it interesting . . .
Posted by: yesman on Oct 11, 2006 8:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . and more than a little ironic that if you want to find good examples of economic justice (or at least good progress toward same), opportunity, optimism, and working democracy, you have to look toward those countries which used to be called "Third World"--i.e., Vietnam, Brazil, Venezuela, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, etc.; whereas if you want to find a good example of a race toward ever-greater economic injustice and unfairness, lack of opportunity, pessimism, and failing democracy (if not outright fascism already), you have only to look around at the once-proud USA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yesman Is Right On Cue! Third-World Justice Movements Give Inspiration!
Posted by: felixcommi on Oct 12, 2006 10:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clearly it is in South American countries like Bolivia, Venezuela, Argentina etc. which show some real promise for workers TAKING more control, through both the limited but nonetheless important control liberal democracy affords, and more radical politics like plant occupations and workers democracy.

Bolivia's democratic mass movements are a beautiful working of active-participatory self-governance and resistance to the neoliberal (CAPITALIST) order imposed by self-indulgent wealth-fiends from America, Western Europe, and elsewhere.

I did not mean to discount what was going on in Vietnam, I just meant to discount notions that Socialism From Above was a viable alternative to capitalism when it simply transplants one group of disconnected elites with another. I meant to underscore the importance of all of us everywhere, as workers and community members, having meaningful collective discretion over our daily affairs and issues we face.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

debate
Posted by: anechoic on Oct 12, 2006 12:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the typical socialism vs capitalism debate taken on by most americans always seems to be rooted in total ignorance about the facts and philosophy of marxism...not their fault since marxism is seen as the foundational evil that capitalism triumphed over when the Soviet Union collpased -- proof our way is better! ;) -- and we are not taught anything in school about marxism or socialism because of cultural and political frameworks we are trained to see the world through...
but I just can't help to chuckle when the most staunch defenders of capitalism are those who benefit from it the least...
americans seem to fight so strongly for their right to remain ignorant and blind...and perhaps why less than 10% of the US population holds a passport...
carry on comrades

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Socialism Is Alive and Well ... in Vietnam
Posted by: WhatNow? on Oct 13, 2006 11:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Socialism Is Alive and Well ... in Vietnam"

You might ought to keep that secret. It appears alot of times in amerika, there is no greater sin (crime) than becoming a socialist nation. I wonder if hussien, Castro, and Chavez'es worst acts were leading their nations towards socialism. Nothing seems to raise the corporate oligarchs ire more than public ownership. These countries have or had high literacy rates, decent affordable medical care and low infant mortality rates. I see little if any evidence that capitalism was the driving force behind these achievements.

"One Vietnamese speaker at the conference framed the challenge as trying to figure out how to get the good from the "market economy" while avoiding the bad."

Franklin Roosevelt did a decent job at this. Without his socialist programs how much longer would it have taken the US to drag intself out of the Great Depression? If ever.

"The 20th century taught us to associate mass consumption with capitalism and the absence of personal consumption with socialism."

I am glad I had the strength and mind to be able to see more clearly than this. Socialism is nothing more than public ownership versus capitalism stressing private ownership. Capitalism sure gave americans lots of personal consumption in the early 1930's!? lmao.

"Just because the 20th century was all about the triumph of capitalism over communism,"

I'd be more inclined to say it was democracy's triumph over tyranny. Stalin was a tyrant or dictator. He wasn't a communist. Communism is an even distrubition of wealth amongst everybody. We've never seen such a country nor would I want to. It would destroy a person's initiative. Why would a doctor want to go to school for eight years when the garbage collector would earn the exact same pay? If the Soviet Union was communist, the poor foot soldier would have earned the same wages as stalin.

So far the 21st century looks like the same struggle except that democracy is now losing to tyranny. The bush administration is far more tyrannical than democratic.

Down here in the south when I talk to others about socialism, I use the road system as an example of socialism. We (all the people) own it. We pay taxes for it's maintenance and improvement. I ask others, "would you like some rich fuckers to own all the roads and charge you a toll to use it?" "Do you not think it would cost you more if some capitalist owned the roads?" Most say, "Hell yeah it would cost more!"

Capitalism is probably best left for luxury items and socialism for alot of necessities. I wanted clinton to nationalize the oil industry ten years ago. Refineries could have been built that were up to environmental standards that would have paid for themselves by now. ExxonMobil's profits from just last year would have been enough funds to build how many refineries? Don't get me wrong now. This is just an example. I think public transportation, hempseed oil and algae based biodiesel, standardized photovoltaic roofing panels, and windmills are a better alternative to oil.

republicans seem to despise certain welfare programs. I think some equate welfare with socialism. I have to ask though. How many welfare queens abusing the system would it take to equal the amount of welfare money that corporate amerika has recieved? How many thousands of dollars each year could the government give to each american if all welfare went to individuals instead of corporate amerika? I might actually bring home more than 30k in one year while some poor CEO might only make a couple of million. Wouldn't that be sad times for the entire world if such a thing ever happened?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

fatal flaws
Posted by: tokamid on Oct 13, 2006 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I visited Vietnam this year too. I adored it for many reasons, but the free press was not one of them. The Viet Nam News is a thin sophomoric rag full of blatant propaganda. There are reasons you can't get anything but state-sponsored "news" in Vietnam.

I'm no fan of capitalism (or the Kingdom of W either), but I don't look to SE Asia to find a free exchange of ideas in the press. Nor do I look to repressive dysfunctional Cuba for my political idols.

Keep an eye out for Fortune Magazine's take on Vietnamese labor relations ... coming out in the next few weeks I think. Should be interesting at least.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

refreshing news
Posted by: perspicuity on Oct 17, 2006 6:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like to thank you for sharing a new and interesting perspective on Vietnamese culture and economy. Being an alert reader of international news, I have yet to come across a portrayal of Vietnam that synthesizes news and events in a way which highlights the positive aspects of its socio-political becoming.

In commenting on some of the above comments, I don't think the author is saying 'the U.S should be like Vietnam.' I think the thrust of the article simply suggests that The United States may have something to learn from the Vietnamese experience. Moreover, focusing on a culture's positive manifestations is a generous and potentially productive exercise in multicultural interaction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]