Vietnam

[Paradox]

Anyone know anything about Vietnam? I heard they're comparable to Cuba? Is this true? I haven't read much about Vietnam, but I'm skeptical that they're like Cuba. Don't they have sweatshops? Nike has factories there don't they, and a lot of other products are produced there. And doesn't the u.$. have some sort of trade agreement with Vietnam? What's the situation with that?

[Hiero]

They have are pushing a more liberal economy, the private sector is growing.

[redstar2000]

They are restoring capitalism, following the Chinese model.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I've heard they don't even have free healthcare and education.

They are restoring capitalism.

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

Vietnam has been capitalist since the late 1970's or so, when they started relying more and more on the USSR instead of going on with socialist transformation of the country. The effects of capitalist restoration in Vietnam can be seen here:

http://rwor.org/a/v19/905-09/908/nike2.htm
http://rwor.org/a/v19/905-09/908/nike1.htm

There is a good discussion on why Vietnam's revolution was never completely victorious here as well: http://awip.proboards23.com/index.cgi?boar...&num=1091306260 (http://awip.proboards23.com/index.cgi?board=history&action=display&num=1091306260)

[flyby]

both cuba and vietnam have come far in reintegrating themselves into the world capitalist market -- i.e. selling the labor of their people for exploitation by world capitalism.

Cuba has done this in various ways (selling labor and resources to Euro capitalists) including mainly by setting up classic colonial tourism (including sex tourism, the most gruesome form of exploitation!)

Vietnam has opened up its populations for mass exploitation in the textile and shoe insdustries -- and similar "labor intensive" manufacturing. But they have also expanded the sex tourism (bringing back conditions that have not been seen since the U.S. troops were expelled in the mid-70s.)

[1949]

I disagree with Comrade Andrei's statement that "Vietnam has been capitalist since the late 1970's or so", since it seems to imply that they were actually socialist before that.

As that AWIP thread he linked to said, Ho Chi Minh was not a revolutionary communist, but a revolutionary nationalist--and the Vietnamese leaders after him were downright revisionist.

How can a nation be socialist if it is led by non-communist forces?

[chebol]

Vietnam is easily mischaracterised, due to it's painful birth-pangs.
1949 is on the right track in questioning how 'socialist' Vietnam was, but has Ho Chi Minh all wrong. Ho was most definitely a revolutionary socialist (and a stout Leninist to boot)- more so than many more well known 'communists', and the Vietnamese revolution is even now oriented towards the continuing construction of Socialism.

Where the confusion lies is in not correctly analysing the development of an independent socialist republic of vietnam. After decades of warfare (including the Chinese invasion "after" the 'Vietnam War') the Vietnamese economy was in tatters. The situation is comparable with that in Russia when the NEP was implemented. In fact, that is exactly what was done in Vietnam.

Vietnam hasn't *reached* socialism yet, but then who has? However, it is building it. Vietnam is currently consciously going through a period of transitional capitalism (named "Doi Moi" or 'renovation') that began with the VCP Congress in 1986. As with the NEP, this is not a pure capitalist regime. Instead the party talks about maintaining and strengthening a 'socialist orientation' within this mixed economy. At the 9th national Congress of the VCP in 2001, the party claimed the path to socialism involves “bypassing the establishment of the dominating position of capitalist production relations and superstructure, but acquiring and inheriting the achievements recorded by mankind under the capitalist regime.”
Vietnam is currently the second-fastest growing economy in the world (after China), but we should be careful not to equate growth with capitalism alone. Interestingly, Doi Moi not only injected limited capitalism into the economy, but resulted in larger state-control of industry, which, in turn is proving itself more profitable than the sectors of the economy that have foreign investment.

Some elements of the VCP are clearly won over to Capitalism (in it's neo-liberal variant), and would like to implement it fully throughout the county. But the ongoing orientation of the VCP is not clear- there is much debate as to whether they should take the "Chinese path" to full capitalist 'restoration', or whether there is still a viable alternative in socialism (most of these debates are being injected by the pro-neoliberal wing of the party). For this reason (and others) the VCP has been sending fact-finding missions to socialist and communist organisations world-wide, and recieving visits from the likes of Castro. In short, they are looking for support and ideas on the best way to continue developing the country.

I can't say which way they'll go, because they can't either. I know someone who is currently living in Vietnam and has his finger on the pulse, so to speak, and if anything juicy turns up I'll post it.

[Dysfunctional_Literate]

The Vietnam War was definitley fought more for nationalist/independence reasons instead of communist/socailist reasons.

[Citzen Smith]

At first the Vietnam war was a war over the independence of the Vietnamese state, a rebellion against the French esentially. It developed into a socialist/communist revolution after the super powers became involved, China on the side of the communists America on the side of the capatalists. Ho Chi Minh was always a socialist/communist, but he wasnt the only power in forces that were behind the liberation of vietnam from the French. The war only really became socialist vs capatalist after the Americans entered the war. As for its current status, anyone whose been there will most certainly tell u that it is a capatlist system with socialist beurcracy at the top. Whether this is just a stage in its development, who can say.