maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:49 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


It's the Gulag of Fun



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2015 3:11 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:26 am
Posts: 11537
Reputation points: 6762
mdiehl wrote:
The tragedy of Viet Nam is that the USA did not back Ho starting in 1945, rather than trying to aid France in the maintenance of its vicious empire.

This was the second time the US made this mistake. The Chinese asked the US for help and when we declined they turned to the USSR...


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:28 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14516
Reputation points: 9875
:lol:

_________________
History is just one damn thing after another.
ODTAA


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2015 8:51 pm 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9766
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 11156
I am very uncomfortable agreeing on the point, but don't get me wrong. I don't mean to be smug about it, as I suspect Diehl and Knuckles probably do.

You did start the thread by pointing out that 'there might be some important lessons to learn, given the current situation of the War on Terror.

Well, I hate to say it but, I think it is correct. Had we finagled Ho Chi Minh into OUR camp instead of letting him go to the Commies, Vietnam, and the ~59,000 U.S. KIAs, the hundreds of thousands of US WIAs, the millions of Vietnamese deaths, and casualties, the billions of dollars wasted, yes WASTED, poured down the drain . . .

It all might not have happened.

Ho Chi Minh might have been a cruel despot, and eventually become a rogue anti-American. He might even have betrayed and turned back to the Commies. But it wouldn't have made any difference, we know that from hindsight.

I think we in the West need to be a LOT more careful in picking our fights.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:55 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14516
Reputation points: 9875
:D
Quote:
Biography of Ho Chi Minh
https://www.marxists.org/reference/arch ... graphy.htm

Ho Chi Minh, real name Nguyen Tat Thanh (1890-1969), Vietnamese Communist leader and the principal force behind the Vietnamese struggle against French colonial rule. Ho was born on May 19, 1890, in the village of Kimlien, Annam (central Vietnam), the son of an official who had resigned in protest against French domination of his country. Ho attended school in Hue and then briefly taught at a private school in Phan Thiet. In 1911 he was employed as a cook on a French steamship liner and thereafter worked in London and Paris. After World War I, using the pseudonym Nguyen Ai Quoc (Nguyen the Patriot), Ho engaged in radical activities and was in the founding group of the French Communist party. He was summoned to Moscow for training and, in late 1924, he was sent to Canton, China, where he organized a revolutionary movement among Vietnamese exiles. He was forced to leave China when local authorities cracked down on Communist activities, but he returned in 1930 to found the Indochinese Communist party (ICP). He stayed in Hong Kong as representative of the Communist International. In June 1931 Ho was arrested there by British police and remained in prison until his release in 1933. He then made his way back to the Soviet Union, where he reportedly spent several years recovering from tuberculosis. In 1938 he returned to China and served as an adviser with Chinese Communist armed forces. When Japan occupied Vietnam in 1941, he resumed contact with ICP leaders and helped to found a new Communist-dominated independence movement, popularly known as the Vietminh, that fought the Japanese. In August 1945, when Japan surrendered, the Vietminh seized power and proclaimed the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) in Hanoi. Ho Chi Minh, now known by his final and best-known pseudonym (which means the “Enlightener”), became president. The French were unwilling to grant independence to their colonial subjects, and in late 1946 war broke out. For eight years Vietminh guerrillas fought French troops in the mountains and rice paddies of Vietnam, finally defeating them in the decisive Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Ho, however, was deprived of his victory. Subsequent negotiations at Geneva divided the country, with only the North assigned to the Vietminh. The DRV, with Ho still president, now devoted its efforts to constructing a Communist society in North Vietnam. In the early 1960s, however, conflict resumed in the South, where Communist-led guerrillas mounted an insurgency against the U.S.-supported regime in Saigon. Ho, now in poor health, was reduced to a largely ceremonial role, while policy was shaped by others. On September 3, 1969, he died in Hanoi of heart failure. In his honor, after the Communist conquest of the South in 1975, Saigon was renamed Ho Chi Minh City. Ho Chi Minh was not only the founder of Vietnamese communism, he was the very soul of the revolution and of Vietnam's struggle for independence. His personal qualities of simplicity, integrity, and determination were widely admired, not only within Vietnam but elsewhere as well.
When was he not a communist, how do you suggest we should have 'finagled' him?

_________________
History is just one damn thing after another.
ODTAA


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:31 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:07 pm
Posts: 3135
Reputation points: 4269
Perhaps we should have finagled him into dying in 1945... that might have worked ?

Given the results, perhaps if we developed drones earlier......

_________________
"You can always spot the fool. He's the one that's sure he's right."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2015 11:21 pm 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9766
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 11156
Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist. His "communism" was simply a means to that end. All he ever wanted was Vietnam. Communism gave him that. I liken more to Tito than to Mao or Stalin.

The U.S. could also have given him Vietnam, but the idea of even negotiating with him or doing something that could "topple the dominoes" had become such anathema by the mid 1950s that the idea of trying to win him into a more neutral or 'non-aligned' if not Western aligned sphere was just unthinkable.

I'm speculating, but it is probably also no accident that Eisenhower probably felt obliged out of honor to help the French, and it was our backing of their collapsing colonial regime which got us into that shit in the first place.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:10 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14516
Reputation points: 9875
Anthropoid wrote:
{Snip}
Quote:
Ho Chi Minh and the Vietnam War
https://shafr.org/teaching/ho-chi-minh-and-vietnam-war
Essential Question: Is it more accurate to describe Ho Chi Minh as a nationalist or a communist?

Common Core Standards: RH1, RH2, WHST1, WHST2

Introduction:

From Matthew Masur, “Nationalism, Communism, and the Vietnam War,” in Understanding and Teaching the Vietnam War, ed. John Tully, Brad Austin, and Matthew Masur (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, forthcoming).

Two narratives or frameworks tend to dominate historical teaching of the Vietnam War. In the "nationalist" narrative, the struggle in Vietnam pitted local nationalists against traditional French colonialism and its successor, American neo-imperialism. In the "Cold War" narrative, the United States, guided by the dictates of containment, gradually and incrementally intervened in Vietnam to stem the spread of communism. The nationalist and Cold War narratives are not mutually exclusive. In fact a full understanding of the wars in Vietnam requires teachers and students to understand how nationalism and communism became linked in Vietnam and how the United States reacted to this phenomenon.

The implied dichotomy between nationalism and communism parallels a common discussion about the ideology of Ho Chi Minh, the most famous figure in modern Vietnamese history. For much of Ho's life, and in much of the historiography about the Vietnam War, observers have wondered whether Ho Chi Minh was primarily a nationalist or a communist. This question plagued American officials as they contemplated the appropriate policy toward Vietnam in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. What students may not know is that Ho Chi Minh's communist allies were similarly uncertain about his true motivations and guiding principles. Moreover, supporters and critics of the war, both while it was being fought and in the decades since, often used Ho's political ideology to support their arguments. Thus, teachers can use the rise of Ho Chi Minh and America's response to his popularity to show that nationalism and communism, decolonization and the Cold War, were all part of the Vietnam War.

Objectives:

Students will examine primary sources to find evidence that indicates the extent to which communism and nationalism motivated Ho Chi Minh.

Initiation:

Is LL Cool J a musical artist or an actor? Is Ice T a musical artist or an actor? Are you a friend or a student? Am I a teacher or a taxpayer?

Does it make a difference? Can someone be two things at the same time?


Learning Activities:

Students will be taking straw polls after each source on whether Ho is more of a communist or more of a nationalist. These polls can be done by raising hands or moving to one side of the room.

After introducing each source, the teacher should guide the class through the following questions:

How does this indicate that nationalism was important to Ho?

How does this indicate that communism was important to Ho?

Teachers can have students complete a T-chart for each document, either individually or in small groups.

Source #1: The Vietnamese Declaration of Independence (1945)

Context: From Matthew Masur, “Nationalism, Communism, and the Vietnam War,” in Understanding and Teaching the Vietnam War, ed. John Tully, Brad Austin, and Matthew Masur (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, forthcoming).

Students can look at Ho's August 1945 Declaration of Independence in a similar fashion. His decision to quote the American Declaration of Independence is understandable in light of Viet Minh cooperation with the Allies during World War II. Students can also discuss whether this is evidence of Ho's weak commitment to communism or if it was simply a calculated effort to flatter American officials. Teachers can also ask students to discuss the effectiveness of this address. How does Ho Chi Minh make the case for Vietnamese independence? Is his argument persuasive? Why or why not?

----------

"All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

This immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. In a broader sense, this means: All the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live, to be happy and free.

. . . Those are undeniable truths.

Nevertheless, for more than eighty years, the French imperialists, abusing the standard of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, have violated our Fatherland and oppressed our fellow­citizens. They have acted contrary to the ideals of humanity and justice.

In the field of politics, they have deprived our people of every democratic liberty.

They have enforced inhuman laws; they have set up three distinct political regimes in the North, the Center, and the South of Vietnam in order to wreck our national unity and prevent our people from being united.

They have built more prisons than schools. They have mercilessly slain our patriots; they have drowned our uprisings in rivers of blood.

. . . From the autumn of 1940, our country had in fact ceased to be a French colony and had become a Japanese possession.

After the Japanese had surrendered to the Allies, our whole people rose to regain our national sovereignty and to found the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

The truth is that we have wrested our independence from the Japanese and not from the French.

. . . For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government, representing the whole Vietnamese people, declare that from now on we break off all relations of a colonial character with France; we repeal all the international obligation that France has so far subscribed to on behalf of Vietnam and we abolish all the special rights the French have unlawfully acquired in our Fatherland.

The whole Vietnamese people, animated by a common purpose, are determined to fight to the bitter end against any attempt by the French colonialists to reconquer their country.

We are convinced that the Allied nations, which at Tehran and San Francisco have acknowledged the principles of self-determination and equality of nations, will not refuse to acknowledge the independence of Vietnam.

A people who have courageously opposed French domination for more than eight years, a people who have fought side by side with the Allies against the Fascists during these last years, such a people must be free and independent.

For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, solemnly declare to the world that Vietnam has the right to be a free and independent country-and in fact is so already. The entire Vietnamese people are determined to mobilize all their physical and mental strength, to sacrifice their lives and property in order to safeguard their independence and liberty.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1945vietnam.html (link is external)

(Continued)

_________________
History is just one damn thing after another.
ODTAA


Last edited by abradley on Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:15 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:11 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14516
Reputation points: 9875
Quote:
Source #2: Report of a U.S. General in Hanoi, 1946.

General Gallagher had spent six months in Vietnam. The “Cao Dai group” refers to a sect working with the Viet Minh.

“Memorandum of Conversation,” Richard L. Sharp, Division of Southeast Asian Affairs, 30 January 1946, in Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, The Far East, p. 19.

Source #3: Ho Chi Minh, “The Path Which Led Me to Leninism” (1960)

Context: From Matthew Masur, “Nationalism, Communism, and the Vietnam War,” in Understanding and Teaching the Vietnam War, ed. John Tully, Brad Austin, and Matthew Masur (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, forthcoming).

In "The Path Which Led Me to Leninism," Ho Chi Minh describes the excitement of reading Lenin's writings on colonialism in 1920. This document gives students a lot to consider. They might start by thinking about the historical context that Ho is describing (although the recollection comes from 1960, he is referring to his experiences in 1920). Students may recognize that both World War I and the Russian Revolution exerted a deep influence on Ho's thinking. The war had created global instability and prompted a wave of anticolonial activity. The Russian Revolution suggested that Marxism could provide a political and economic alternative to the status quo.

Teachers using this source should consult Sophie Quinn-Judge's biography of Ho Chi Minh for a more detailed account of his early views. In it Quinn-Judge describes Ho's involvement with other communists during his stay in Paris in the early 1920s. The book also includes some of Ho's early writings, which capture his attitudes at the time rather than four decades after the fact. In one piece Ho attacks "the hydra of western capitalism" for "stretching its horrible tentacles towards all corners of the globe." He accuses the French of hypocritically talking about a "civilizing mission" while bringing "misery, ruin, and death" to their colonies. He criticizes the French Socialist Party for silence in the face of these policies and applauds the Communist International for taking up the colonial question. Ho's language provides an early example of his belief that colonialism and communism were inseparable.

Teachers can also ask students why Ho Chi Minh was attracted to Leninism. Some students might emphasize his nationalistic motives. As Ho explains, he embraced Leninism because it offered a "path to liberation" for the Vietnamese people. But other students might pick up on another passage: when Ho describes Leninism as "the radiant sun illuminating our path to final victory, to socialism and communism," What are we to make of these comments? Are they contradictory?

---

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archi ... 04/x01.htm (link is external)

After World War I, I made my living in Paris, now as a retoucher at a photographer’s, now as painter of “Chinese antiquities” (made in France!). I would distribute leaflets denouncing the crimes committed by the French colonialists in Viet Nam.

At that time, I supported the October Revolution only instinctively, not yet grasping all its historic importance. I loved and admired Lenin because he was a great patriot who liberated his compatriots; until then, I had read none of his books.

The reason for my joining the French Socialist Party was that these “ladies and gentlemen” - as I called my comrades at that moment - has shown their sympathy towards me, towards the struggle of the oppressed peoples. But I understood neither what was a party, a trade-union, nor what was socialism nor communism.

. . .What I wanted most to know - and this precisely was not debated in the meetings - was: which International sides with the peoples of colonial countries?

I raised this question - the most important in my opinion - in a meeting. Some comrades answered: It is the Third, not the Second International. And a comrade gave me Lenin’s “Thesis on the national and colonial questions” . . . to read.

There were political terms difficult to understand in this thesis. But by dint of reading it again and again, finally I could grasp the main part of it. What emotion, enthusiasm, clear-sightedness and confidence it instilled into me! I was overjoyed to tears. Though sitting alone in my room, I shouted out aloud as if addressing large crowds: “Dear martyrs compatriots! This is what we need, this is the path to our liberation!”

After then, I had entire confidence in Lenin. . . .

. . . At first, patriotism, not yet communism, led me to have confidence in Lenin, in the Third International. Step by step, along the struggle, by studying Marxism-Leninism parallel with participation in practical activities, I gradually came upon the fact that only socialism and communism can liberate the oppressed nations and the working people throughout the world from slavery.

Closure:

Exit slip –

“The most convincing piece of evidence that Communism was more important to Ho was ________________.”

“The most convincing piece of evidence that nationalism was more important to Ho was ________________.”

Additional Primary Sources:

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam.htm (link is external)

http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu (link is external)

Further Reading:

Frederick Logevall, Embers of War: The Fall of an Empire and the Making of America’s Vietnam

Pierre Brocheaux, Ho Chi Minh: A Biography

_________________
History is just one damn thing after another.
ODTAA


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 6:35 am 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9766
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 11156
So yeah, it does seem to be the linch pin to the whole thing. As we cannot go back and replay history, it strikes me as a worthwhile point: MAYBE Ho was more a nationalist than communist and MAYBE had we taken a friendly if not allying stance toward him from the very beginning, things might have played out differently.

No one knows the answer to such hypothetical what-if questions, but going back to your original comment that started the thread "lessons" given our current War on Terror situation: the idea that maybe making a would-be enemy an erstwhile 'friend' (by virtue of buying them off) is a worthwhile consideration.

We have done this many times: Saddam Hussein is the one that comes to mind most immediately but there are others. Clearly, it wasn't a panacea. Hussein wound up being a dictator, instead of the democratic liberator which he had originally been conceived as _possibly_ being. But it arguably did buy time, and in the context of Cold War Middle East, having a temporary friend was more valuable than another Vietnam fiasco.

End of the day: there are never "perfect" policies. I don't think any of us should be critical of the men who (in hindsight) "led us" into the Vietnam fiasco (Roosevelt, who was the earliest supporter of "Ho Chi Minh," at that time an anti-Japanese insurgent; Truman who went with the flow; Eisenhower who went with his French allies; Kennedy who went with the policy bequeathed to him by Eisenhower; or LBJ who tried to make a situation that was already going very badly wrong right again using his leftish view of how to do it (perhaps the most egregious error, given that unbridled war at that point MIGHT well have led to a Korea-style armistice . . . or it might not have, and instead led to WWIII); and then Nixon who tried to get us out of it with Honor).

None of these men individually is "responsible," and in fact, to a considerable extent the nature of our representative democracy in which a new Executive must inherit--like it or not--the real factors of his predecessors foreign policy is to blame.

But understanding how these fiascoes came about and how they maybe could be avoided in future contexts is certainly worth consideration.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: How I began to teach about the Vietnam War
PostPosted: Fri Mar 20, 2015 6:49 am 
Offline
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 17944
Reputation points: 14886
Anthropoid wrote:
I am very uncomfortable agreeing on the point, but don't get me wrong. I don't mean to be smug about it, as I suspect Diehl and Knuckles probably do.

You did start the thread by pointing out that 'there might be some important lessons to learn, given the current situation of the War on Terror.

Well, I hate to say it but, I think it is correct. Had we finagled Ho Chi Minh into OUR camp instead of letting him go to the Commies, Vietnam, and the ~59,000 U.S. KIAs, the hundreds of thousands of US WIAs, the millions of Vietnamese deaths, and casualties, the billions of dollars wasted, yes WASTED, poured down the drain . . .

It all might not have happened.

Ho Chi Minh might have been a cruel despot, and eventually become a rogue anti-American. He might even have betrayed and turned back to the Commies. But it wouldn't have made any difference, we know that from hindsight.

I think we in the West need to be a LOT more careful in picking our fights.




The suggestion that shacking up with Ho would've solved the whole issue is rather short-sighted. Something like that wouldn't happen in a vacuum.

We had seen, before, that Communist China were quite opposed to having American influence on their border. I suspect an American-backed Ho-run Vietnam would've caused China to invade earlier and with more determination. Then we could easily have been in a proxy war with the Chicoms instead. Not to mention other possible results.

_________________
..
.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group