ORIENTATING PHASE: What was the background to the first Indochina war?
Recommended Reading: Cold War Museum - 'Overview of the First Indochina War' LINK"The First Indochina War, fought between December 1946 and August 1954, was a struggle between the Viet Minh and the French for control of the country. In the West this conflict is usually referred to as the First Indochina War, in Vietnam it is called the Anti-French War..." source: http://alphahistory.com/vietnam/first-indochina-war
As Australians we are often preoccupied with what we know as the 'Vietnam War', or as the Vietnamese call it. 'the American War' - 1956 to 1975; the war 'Australia took part in from August 1962 to 11 January 1973' (Australian War Memorial 2014). However, many Australians don't view the 'Vietnam War' as it was - just one period of Vietnam's struggle for independence from colonisers such as the Chinese and French, and the later perceived colonisers the United States of America (Australia included). Therefore, in this inquiry we will delve into the period prior to the American War, the period known as the the First Indochina War in order to give greater clarity over the motives of the Vietnamese in their struggle against the French, the interests of the French as a colonising force, and to provide a chronological context of the Vietnamese struggle for independence and anti-colonialism up to the Second Indochina War - the American War.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read pages 76-80 of Hoepper 1996 Inquiry 2: DOCUMENT LINK and,
- answer the questions 1 to 4 on page 78 relating to 'Briefing 1'
- answer the three questions at the top of page 80 that refer to Source A1.
- Then, using Google Earth (or just the map below) compare modern day Vietnam with the map from the text (French colonial Indochina) and note the differences to political boundaries in a table.
View Larger Map
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTIVITY 2: DEFINITIONS and OVERVIEW of French Imperialism in Indochina
- In your glossary add to or revise the following terms: SELF-DETERMINATION; IMPERIALISM; ANTI-COLONIALISM; NATIONALISM; COMMUNISM
- As we discuss the information in the following PowerPoint, complete an CONCEPT MAP analysis or a FLOWCHART (depending on how you prefer to organise information) of imperialism in Indochina
- Link to the PowerPoint: CLICK HERE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the following two parts of the Discovery Channel documentary titled 'First Indo-China War' and respond to the questions collaboratively on the Shambles Pad beneath. Be sure to copy and paste afterwards and add to your notes!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENHANCING PHASE: Why was communism so attractive to many Vietnamese nationalists?
RECOMMENDED READING:Hoepper et al 1996 Inquiry 2. Jacaranda, pp.81-87: CLICK HERE
Halligan 'Profile of Ho Chi Minh': CLICK HERE
RECOMMENDED VIEWING:
History Channel's 'Biographies' 45min. - Ho Chi Minh (note the in-depth text explanation below on the YouTube site under 'About') CLICK HERE
ACTIVITY 4: Consulting and Reviewing the Evidence
Read, and then respond to the guiding questions for each source from the 'Recommended Reading' link above. After class discussion, in class review the evidence as shown in the table below.
- Read through and respond to the guiding questions relating to each of the sources in the recommended reading above.
- review the evidence in a table such as the one to the right >>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work in pairs (you may want to do this on a shared Google Doc.) and navigate back through the source-based biography PREZI and prepare an interview with Ho Chi Minh according with the success criteria below; be ready to present to the class!
NOTE: If you need to fill in any narrative gaps, please refer to the PowerPoint profile of Ho Chi Minh in 'Recommended Reading' above .
SUCCESS CRITERIA (things to include):
-----------------------------------------------------------
- REVISION: Revise your understanding of why Communism was so appealing to Vietnamese nationalists by going back through your notes from the text activities (source analysis and narrative) and the interview with Ho Chi Minh activity and HIGHLIGHT THE EVIDENCE you might use in your writing task below.
- EXTENDED WRITING: Answer this sections focus question 'Why was Communism so attractive to Vietnamese Nationalists?' in an extended piece of writing using the source evidence studied above and any other to support your ideas - the next installment in your preparation for the upcoming Category 1 Exam. The success criteria is below in order to guide you and allow you to self-evaluate, i.e. gauge how well you are doing. When you have finished the writing, post it in the 'Comments' at the bottom of the page for teacher and peer evaluation.
Silver: Analyses EXPLICIT reasons for Vietnamese nationalists to be attracted to communism.. CORROBORATES secondary evidence to support your ideas. Includes evaluation of the likely RELIABILITY of evidence used in your writing.
Bronze: Describes why communism was attractive to Vietnamese nationalists.
BOARD NOTES: Introducing and integrating evidence in your writing - CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SYNTHESIZING PHASE: How were the Viet Minh able to defeat the French by 1954? And, was self-determination achieved?
RECOMMENDED READING:Moise 1998 The First Indochina War [online] VN Wars: CLICK HERE
Hoepper et al 1996 Inquiry 2. Jacaranda, pp.89-96 CLICK HERE
RECOMMENDED VIEWING:
Polygram Documentary: Battlefield Vietnam - Dien Bien Phu (from 11min.) CLICK HERE
--------------------------------------------------
ACTIVITY 5: Who were the Viet Minh? And what was their strategy for waging and winning war?
i. Introductory Reading: - Moise 1998 VN Wars, The Emergence of the Viet Minh: CLICK HERE>>> Answer the above two questions in the form of a concept map from the reading
ii. With reference to the source CLICK HERE explain:
- Firstly, what tactics are being employed by the Viet Minh and why?
- Secondly, how has Giap and the Communist Party represented themselves and the French and why?
- Based on evidence from this source, would you evaluate General Giap and the Communist Party's motivation as 'communist' or 'nationalist' by nature?
---------------------------------------------------
Watch the following three remaining parts of the Discovery Channel documentary titled 'First Indo-China War' and respond to the questions collaboratively on the ShamblesPad beneath. Add relevant quotes to the responses too as supporting evidence. Be sure to copy and paste the final product and add to your notes!
--------------------------------------------------------------
ACTIVITY 7: Consulting and Reviewing the Evidence
- Read, and then respond to the guiding questions for sources B1 to B4 from Hoepper et al 1996 Inquiry 2. Jacaranda, pp.89-96: CLICK HERE
- Also, view the 15 minute section of the following film and complete the table below for greater analysis of the Battle of Dien Bien Phu: Polygram Documentary: Battlefield Vietnam - Dien Bien Phu (from 11:00 - 26:20 min.)
- Read through and respond to the guiding questions relating to each of the sources in the recommended reading above.
- review the evidence in a table such as the one to the right >>>
----------------------------------------------------------
Bringing it all together - Revision and Extended Writing Practise
REVISION:
Revise your understanding of How the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954 by going back through your notes from the text activities (source analysis and narrative) and the collaborative activity above and HIGHLIGHT THE EVIDENCE you might use in your writing task below. (15 minutes)
EXTENDED WRITING:
Answer this section's focus question 'How the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954? And, what was the outcome? ' in an extended piece of writing using the source evidence studied above and other to support your ideas - the next installment in your preparation for the upcoming Category 1 Exam. The success criteria is below in order to guide you and allow you to self-evaluate, i.e. gauge how well you are doing. When you have finished the writing, post it in the 'Comments' at the bottom of the page for teacher and peer evaluation.
SUCCESS CRITERIA (things to include):
Gold: Uses a DIVERSITY of primary and secondary evidence to ANALYSE the EXPLICIT and IMPLICIT reasons why the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French and the outcome of the Geneva Conference in 1954. Your writing will include MOTIVATIONS of both sides during the war and at the negotiations in Geneva afterwards and include DIRECT and INDIRECT reference to CORROBORATED evidence in support of your ideas. Evaluations discussing CREDIBILITY (accuracy, reliability, relevance etc.), UTILITY (usefulness) and PERSPECTIVE (bias? missing or absent voice?) should also be included.
Silver: Analyses EXPLICIT reasons why the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French. and the outcome of the Geneva Conference. CORROBORATES secondary evidence to support your ideas. Includes evaluation of the likely RELIABILITY of evidence used in your writing.
Bronze: Describes how the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French.
Bringing it all together - Revision and Extended Writing Practise
REVISION:
Revise your understanding of How the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954 by going back through your notes from the text activities (source analysis and narrative) and the collaborative activity above and HIGHLIGHT THE EVIDENCE you might use in your writing task below. (15 minutes)
EXTENDED WRITING:
Answer this section's focus question 'How the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954? And, what was the outcome? ' in an extended piece of writing using the source evidence studied above and other to support your ideas - the next installment in your preparation for the upcoming Category 1 Exam. The success criteria is below in order to guide you and allow you to self-evaluate, i.e. gauge how well you are doing. When you have finished the writing, post it in the 'Comments' at the bottom of the page for teacher and peer evaluation.
SUCCESS CRITERIA (things to include):
Gold: Uses a DIVERSITY of primary and secondary evidence to ANALYSE the EXPLICIT and IMPLICIT reasons why the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French and the outcome of the Geneva Conference in 1954. Your writing will include MOTIVATIONS of both sides during the war and at the negotiations in Geneva afterwards and include DIRECT and INDIRECT reference to CORROBORATED evidence in support of your ideas. Evaluations discussing CREDIBILITY (accuracy, reliability, relevance etc.), UTILITY (usefulness) and PERSPECTIVE (bias? missing or absent voice?) should also be included.
Silver: Analyses EXPLICIT reasons why the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French. and the outcome of the Geneva Conference. CORROBORATES secondary evidence to support your ideas. Includes evaluation of the likely RELIABILITY of evidence used in your writing.
Bronze: Describes how the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French.
REVISION:
Revise your understanding of How the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954 by going back through your notes from the text activities (source analysis and narrative) and the collaborative activity above and HIGHLIGHT THE EVIDENCE you might use in your writing task below. (15 minutes)
EXTENDED WRITING:
Answer this section's focus question 'How the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954? And, what was the outcome? ' in an extended piece of writing using the source evidence studied above and other to support your ideas - the next installment in your preparation for the upcoming Category 1 Exam. The success criteria is below in order to guide you and allow you to self-evaluate, i.e. gauge how well you are doing. When you have finished the writing, post it in the 'Comments' at the bottom of the page for teacher and peer evaluation.
SUCCESS CRITERIA (things to include):
Silver: Analyses EXPLICIT reasons why the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French. and the outcome of the Geneva Conference. CORROBORATES secondary evidence to support your ideas. Includes evaluation of the likely RELIABILITY of evidence used in your writing.
Bronze: Describes how the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French.
------------------------------------------------------------
Exam Preparation
After completing ALL the EXTENDED WRITING TASKS, its time to put it all together!Copy and paste all your writing into a Word Document and start editing your work - complete with introduction and conclusion - that addresses the following:
The end of French colonialism in Indochina can be attributed the leadership of two prominent Vietnamese men. Who were they and how did they achieve their goal?
Be sure to include:
- A brief background to the First Indochinese War (colonization over time in Indochina) and the life and political persuasions of the men in question (discussing Nationalism and Communism and their role in the movement towards independence).
- You will want to then focus your argument around the period of history surrounding WWII, with an acute focus on the events, motivations and arguments during and after WWII.
- You then will need to discuss the effects of the decisions made after WWII and the role of these significant leaders - their ideas and methods - in the pursuit and achievement of independence and self-determination for Vietnam by 1954 (The War).
- Lastly, you will need to discuss the outcome of the War and what that meant for Vietnam.
Be sure to integrate sources covered in the sections studied so far! For a list of SEEN SOURCES CLICK HEREHAND WRITE your draft on a page for peer and teacher feedback in the process of revision and preparation for the upcoming Category 1 exam.
Criteria that you will be assessed against (from the QSA Modern History Syllabus): Unpacking the criteria: CLICK HERE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Considering the theory of Social Darwinism and 'survival of the fittest', do you think that France (among other imperial powers) were justified by their colonisation of Indochina?
ReplyDeleteFrance, among other imperial powers, was not justified by their colonisation of Indochina. While they justified colonising Vietnam with Social Darwinism, stating it was their responsibility to colonise undeveloped regions, French colonialism intentions, first and foremost, was profit and economic exploitation. This was driven by the demand for resources, raw materials and cheap labour, and not to help to “help” Vietnam. As we already know, Vietnam realistically in comparison to other Asian countries was by no means ‘backward’ and I think France already new that didn't plan on helping them to the extent that they would be of equal power to that of France because they knew that ‘civilising’ these people would mean that France as the coloniser would have to grant their independence, and this was not part of Frances plan. Therefore, I do not believe that Frances actions were justifiable in accordance with Social Darwinism.
DeleteIt was very justifiable at the time for France to colonise Indochina based on the theory of Social Darwinism. Most Europeans at the time were under the impression that it was their responsibility and duty even to ‘liberate’ the non-white people of the world and bring them into modern society. This ‘white man’s burden’ made sense to many people, and as a result the empires of Europe, including France, took it upon themselves to colonise the areas of the world where European civility was not present. The British for example had colonised India and Australia among other places. Why shouldn't the French do the same for Indochina? We may look at it differently today, but at that time the French thought they were doing the right thing.
DeleteAt the time, I think it was justifiable for France to colonise Indochina. The French believed that what they were doing was the right thing based on the fact that they felt their culture was superior and that it was their duty to help modernise eastern society by spreading their culture throughout. The French, and other imperial powers, believed that it was their right to colonise the places that did not have European culture throughout based on the theory of Social Darwinism and the 'white man's burden'. This 'white man's burden' appealed to people and this is what could have driven, along with Social Darwinism, the French to colonise Indochina, as they both imply that the country colonised will be better off with another country's help. It was justifiable for the French to colonise Indochina based on Social Darwinism and the 'white man's burden', as the French believed that it was the right thing to do at the time from these two theories.
DeleteAt the time of the French colonisation of Indochina, these actions were justifiable, at least in the minds of the French and many other European nations, such as Great Britain. As the French strongly believed people who are not 'blessed' by French culture are very, very, underprivileged people, the French very much believed that what they were doing was the right thing. They were also under the influence of (yes, I shall refer to this like an illegal substance) the 'White Man's Burden' and Social Darwinism, two very prominent ways of thinking at this time. Furthermore, many other European Nations (again, Great Britain) had already been colonising other nations, so the French knew no better than to get out there and give it a go to, as they were really quite concerned for their own welfare also, when it came to competing with Great Britain. (Note to France: I will always love trifle more than Crème Brûlée) So not only did the French believe that they were doing the right thing by the people of Indochina, they also believed they were doing the right thing by themselves.
DeleteDisclaimer: In no way do I believe that any form of colonisation was ever justifiable, and writing this without modern day ideals in mind was very, very painful.
I believe for this time it was very justifiable for the French to colonise Indochina due to Social Darwinism. Reasons justifying this include the French’s national Pride, this meant that they wanted to expand their great and fabulous culture with non-colonised countries. The French also wanted to help the less fortunate countries become more modernised which plays a key role during this time and is known as the ‘White Man’s Burden’. This concept was mainly that they would apply their culture to help other countries such as Indochina. According to these concepts during this time period that is what was best for Indochina and the French.
DeleteAt that time, France, among other imperial powers, was justified to colonise Indochina. Based on the theory of Social Darwinism, the French and other imperial powers believed that they were culturally superior and that it was their responsibility to ‘liberate’ and teach civility to the inferior races. This belief was represented very clearly in the ‘White Man’s Burden’ where it positions the ‘superior’ countries as the ‘saviour’ and that it was their responsibility/burden to help the ‘inferior’ countries so they could be brought into the modern society. This concept influenced them to colonise areas that did not have European cultures so the France was justified to colonise Indochina.
DeleteFrance, among other imperial powers were not justified in their colonisation of Indochina, and still aren’t today. Justifying their actions with the theory of Social Darwinism, however, their underlying motivations were to exploit and profit from the Vietnamese. At the time most citizens of developed countries felt as though they had a responsibility and duty to “liberate” and modernise the ‘inferior race’ by bringing their “superior” culture and way of life to them. The White Man’s burden was the belief that Western culture was superior to other cultures, whites were at the top because they were the wealthiest and most technologically advanced. I don’t think that this was a justifiable reason for the French colonise Indochina.
DeleteI believe that the French did justify their colonisation successfully using Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism was about survival of the fittest, and the French being French believed they were the best; they had to be the best. And to do so was to ensure every other nation knew this. By colonising other countries France was not only proving its ‘power’ to the greater nations, it was also spreading French culture and ideologies. (Ironically they did not however want to preach their ideology of independence.) So, the French basically reminded the world they were ‘the best’. By taking over Indochina the French were ‘helping’ another nation, a less powerful one, become stronger and more economically stable. The French believed it was the right thing to be doing, the theory of the ‘White man’s burden’ was adhered to and the French were ultimately ‘helping’ out the less fortunate. (In the most greedy, selfish way of course.)If the French weren’t going to gain anything, like the resources Indochina had to offer, then they would not have taken on the white man’s burden in the first place. However, at the time, their colonisation of Indochina was justified under the theory of Social Darwinism.
DeleteTo what extent can multinational corporations like Nike, Gap, or McDonalds be viewed as the modern equivalent of imperialism? Consider class discussion about feudalism's link to French colonial Indochina as historical contiuity and the to the exploitation of peasant labour, and the section of the film 'New Rulers of the World: http://johnpilger.com/videos/the-new-rulers-of-the-world
ReplyDeleteTo a very large extent, multinational corporations such as Nike, Gap, or McDonalds can be viewed as the modern equivalent of imperialist. Imperialism is defined as a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonisation. This documentary displays very clearly that these multinational corporations, while not through colonisation, intend on using countries such as Indonesia as means of exploiting cheap labour to reap staggering profits, parallel to the French imperialism of Vietnam. This documentary discusses the idea of these Indonesian workers living in a ‘labour camp’, with no clean running water available, and despite the fact they have a job, they are still malnourished. This idea corroborates with source A7 from the text book, particularly the first image which suggests that the Indonesian workers are subject to conditions, both living and working similar to that of the Vietnamese peasants. The Indonesian workers are paid approximately $1/day, which coincidently happens to be the legal minimum wage and are given no choice but to work 36 hour shifts; if they refuse, they are punished. That amount they earn wouldn’t even buy the shoe laces of a pair of Nikes. Surely these types of conditions should not exist in this day and age! A human price is paid for items readily available in the western world. Despite the West excelling in all facets of life, clearly a more improved life than our predecessors, those that are being exploited haven’t progressed at all. It is so disgusting, these people face conditions which are eerily similar to that of the Vietnamese people, only the rich are richer and the poor are still very poor. Governments should be doing more to protect the rights of these people, not encouraging these businesses that do nothing but exploit the less vulnerable.
DeleteMultinational corporations, like Nike and McDonalds, exploit workers in factories by paying them low wages but then sell the product for high prices in wealthier countries. These factories are based all around the world in places such as Cambodia and Indonesia. This globalisation can be viewed as the modern equivalent of imperialism as instead of empires colonising territory, these corporations are ‘colonising’ the world’s economy. Considering the French colonising Indochina, the hierarchy of order can be compared to the hierarchy of the multinational corporations. At the top of the hierarchy, there is the King of France which is the equivalent to the company owners and then there is the church which is the same as the branch owners in different countries. Under them, there are the colonial government which is the same as the consumers who buy the products and then at the bottom of the hierarchy there were the Vietnamese peasants which are the equivalent to the workers in the factories. These peasants and workers both have to produce products for the higher levels of the hierarchy however, they do not have much ‘power’ (wealth, freedom) themselves. It can be seen as if these peasants/workers are the ones ‘holding’ the system together. These two hierarchies are very similar in the means of power and wealth but different due to the fact that the French hierarchy was the social system of an empire while the other hierarchy is the system of a corporation. Nevertheless, these multinational corporations can be viewed as the modernised imperialism.
DeleteMultinational companies to a certain extent can be similarly compared to imperialism. They, just like the French in Indochina, are to some extent exploiting the poor and underprivileged in society (who are more likely to work for lower wages) by having their products made and factories overseas to ensure ‘maximum profit’. That is the people acting as directors of these companies are ensuring that they are ones receiving the maximum amount of money. However, unlike imperialism, these modern countries are just in it for the economic prospects: they see no responsibility to ‘colonise’ other countries, like the French did with Indochina. But regardless, they can be seen as representations of modern imperialism.
DeleteLOUISE, I completely agree! I particularly like the way in which you have compared this contemporary view of Indonesian GAP workers with Source A7 - the description of Vietnamese peasants as colonised people - to demonstrate your understanding of the similarity of exploitation of workers. This is historical continuity of exploitation of a working class in many ways. Also, I like the way in which you link this to progress towards the end. Overall, a strong critique Louise, well done.
DeleteMr S.
STEPH, You compare the the social hierarchies beautifully in your argument. Well done.
DeleteCASSIE, You make an excellent point about the parallel in economic benefits of both the French and modern MNC's in the exploit of labour of the poor for economic reward. However, you state that there is no 'colonisation' occurring. In essence you are right, but some academics argue that the colonisation process is occurring in the form of ideas/ideology and not geography. What I mean is that through MNCs imposing the capitalist model in countries that are still industrialising and reconstructing their political system and economy, they are prescribing a way of life, a life that is focused heavily on consumerism. There is definitely infiltration here, albeit more surreptitious. What do you (or anyone else) think?
DeleteMultinational companies such as Gap, Nike and McDonald's can be viewed as a modern version of imperialism to a large extent. The world has been 'colonised' by these large scale corporations in many aspects. As presented in the video, people of poorer countries such as Indonesia are exploited for their cheap labor and treated extremely poorly, similarly to how people have previously been treated on occasions of territorial colonisation. The 'colonisers' reap their rewards (money) and a vicious cycle ensues. However, people of countries such as Indonesia are not the only to have fallen into this money driven, economic trap. Even in Australia, we have fallen prey to this colonisation as we live, eat and breathe the products that these companies sell. Our own economy takes a hit, as we hastily move away from anything Australian made and support mainly American brands, all profits of course going to the American companies and again, barely anything to the laborers. This American takeover is not only happening in the manufacturing of clothing and food, but also in that of music and cinema. The world is becoming 'Americanized' (I spelled that with a 'z' to demonstrate) and if people are not buying up their products like crazy, they are slaving in a factory to make them.
DeleteYou also use the American spelling of 'labour' - 'labor' :)
DeleteTo certain extent multinational corporations such as Nike, GAP and McDonalds can be viewed as the modern equivalent of imperialist. Similarly to the French in Indochina, these companies main goal is to exploit poor and disadvantaged people, through producing their products in overseas factories where minimum wage and overtime shifts are the outcome for the workers, and maximum profits is the outcome for the businesses. Displayed in the documentary “The new rulers of the world” Indonesian factory labourers are paid approximately $1 a day, barely enough to survive, corroborating with the first cartoon image in source A7, the people are malnourished and only just surviving. On the other hand, unlike imperialism, these companies don’t feel they have a responsibility to colonise 3rd world countries like the French did. They have a sole purpose of making money, by exploiting others.
DeleteTo a certain extent western corporations such as Nike, Gap and McDonalds can be viewed as the modern day equivalent of imperialism. Although these companies do not carry out an imperialist rule through colonisation like the french in Vietnam, they do however exploit the poor and disadvantaged lower class in countries such as Indonesia. This exploitation is similar to what has been seen in Vietnam during the 1930's as seen in source A7 the communist party leaflets. The source represents the Vietnamese as being poorly treated and living in terrible conditions all at the hands of the french colonialists. The documentary shows that in Indonesia 70+ years on the conditions are much the same but instead its the major corporations who are exploiting the disadvantaged (who are in need of any kind of work just to survive) by placing them in unsafe working conditions for very little pay. This inhumane treatment is only beneficial for the top corporate workers as they are able to sell their products and receive the largest profit possible through offshore manufacturing. Therefore, even though the world has advanced past what was seen in Vietnam, the western world is still demonstrating elements of imperialism at the expense of workers within non western countries.
DeleteTo many people, the thought of an imperialist world still remaining may be unthinkable, however to a large extent imperialism still remains today, but it is not the divine right of kings that rule our world, but the divine right of multinational corporations and financial institutions. The exploitation of countries during the Indochina war can still be seen today as counties are being exploited through the use of cheap labour from these multinational corporation giants. They are sucking the life from the people of these third world countries by using cheap labour to gain economic growth and stability. This is exactly parallel to what the French were doing to Vietnam in the Indochina war, when the French exploited the Vietnamese for their resources and the use of their cheap labour. Companies are using the cheap labour to their advantage, while the people of these countries are left with very low salaries, creating bad living conditions. Again, this was seen throughout Vietnam in the Indochina war. Source A7 shows the people living in unsuitable living conditions as they were poor. Not a lot has changed as today many people living in these countries experience living conditions like these. In conclusion imperialism remains in our society today as the multinational companies continue to grow.
DeleteTo a considerate extent, multinational corporations like Nike, Gap, or McDonalds can be viewed as the modern equivalent of imperialism. As shown in the video, people from poorer or disadvantaged countries are treated poorly and exploited for cheap labour. While Nike, Gap and McDonalds do not carry out the French's motives in Vietnam of imperialistic ruling through colonisation to a huge extent, they do exploit the underprivileged lower classes of society - much like the feudalistic system during Indochina, where the feudalistic government and King of France were the imperialists making all the decisions, while they exploited the Vietnamese (peasants and workers) cheap, who were the lowest class. This could be similar to a hierarchical system of the modern day - where these multinational corporations sit at the top of the system giving the orders, while these underprivileged countries of the lower classes are exploited for cheap labour. Only being paid around $1 a day is not nearly enough to last from day to day and live a healthy lifestyle, and because they are paid so little, there is more of a possibility of being vulnerable to illness, poverty and hunger, which corroborates with the first cartoon of source A7, showing the lower classes of the Vietnamese sick and weak because of the poor conditions that surround them from day to day. To a considerate extent multinational corporations such as Nike, Gap and McDonalds can be viewed as the modern day equivalent of imperialism, as at the end of the day, all these corporations really want, is to make a large profit for themselves and by cheaply exploiting these underprivileged countries, it can happen.
DeleteWhy was Communism so attractive to Vietnamese nationalists?
ReplyDeleteDue to the French Colonial rule in Indochina, the people of Vietnam were oppressed, exploited and unhappy. Vietnam became a part of French Indochina after the French, under the influence of their beliefs in social Darwinism, the ‘White Man’s Burden’ and their ongoing competitive tendencies with Great Britain, looked to colonise Asia. The French colonisation of Indochina resulted in a society divided by social hierarchy and the exploitation of the common people, who were in fact, the majority of the people. The French exploitation of the Vietnamese in demonstrated in the primary source A7 in which two illustrations are shown. Illustration one pictures the oppressed peoples of Vietnam, who are shown as malnourished and helpless as mother’s hold their children’s limp bodies. This explicitly demonstrates the Vietnamese suffering. However, as the oppressors are not pictured in the illustration, it implicitly shows the misery of these people is caused by French control. This suffering is corroborated by source A8 in which an account of a peasant demonstration against French oppression. The source states "Horribly mutilated men and women not killed outright staggered into the paddies to die and flooded fields along the roadsides were soon stained dark crimson with their blood." The suffering of the Vietnamese peasants is explicitly evident in this text, as it describes a violent French attack on protestors. The words used this text allows readers to envisage a horrifying scene of human suffering that would be rendered inhumane and disgusting by readers from contemporary Australia, which demonstrates historical change, as in 1930 if a similar thing should have happened it is unlikely that people would have reacted the same one way. Colonialism was, as that stage, still very acceptable. The suffering of the people is further shown by the second picture in source A7, which pictures an uprising of the Vietnamese people, chasing away their French oppressors. This source demonstrates a credibility as it is primary evidence, and was illustrated at the time of the people’s suffering which allows for an accurate reliable account of what happened. The source is however, from a communist perspective, so some bias may be present. This source makes evident that the people of Vietnam were indeed suffering under French colonial rule and as communism promised to abolish the suffering of the people through the independence of Vietnam and the equality of the people, this would have motivated many Vietnamese Nationalists to follow communism.
Ho Chi Minh, founder of the Indochinese communist party brought hope to the people of Vietnam through his communist visions and ideals and his thirst for equality, which many Vietnamese nationalists shared. Ho’s visions for Vietnam and its people would have attracted many Vietnamese Nationalists as he envisioned an equal and free Vietnam. This is evident in source A4 in which Ho states “The Communist party of Indochina is founded. It is the party of the working class… it will lead the revolution… for all the oppressed and exploited people.” This quote explicitly demonstrates Ho’s intentions to create a Vietnam in which no people are oppressed or exploited and in which all people are equal. It implicitly demonstrates Ho’s wish to overthrow the French Imperialists and create and independent Vietnam through his use of the word ‘revolution.’ This demonstrates credibility as it is corroborated by source A9 in which Ho once again makes his intentions clear. “If our entire people are united and single-minded, we are certainly able to smash the picked French and Japanese armies.” The statement explicitly demonstrates Ho’s determination to push the French out of Vietnam, but it also implicitly calls his people to take up Communism and make it a common cause among all, by calling for unity and single mindedness. Ho finishes his speech with the statement
ReplyDelete“The hour has struck! Raise aloft the insurrectionary banner and guide the people throughout the country to overthrow the Japanese and French! The sacred call of the Fatherland is resounding in your ears; the blood of our heroic predecessors who sacrificed their lives is stirring in your hearts!”
This statement is Ho’s call to action, he asks the Vietnamese people to rise together to take back their country through his emotive language and the scene he sets. The language Ho uses in this is captivating and uplifting and would certainly stir nationalist feelings within the people to inspire them to take up the cause, and fight for what is rightfully theirs. One can only imagine the delivery of this speech also, which would have most likely been invigorating and inspirational. As he brought communism to Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh also brought charisma, hope and Vietnamese leadership. Ho’s vision, presence and insight would have attracted Vietnamese nationalists to communism, as he promised independence and equality.
This is 'Gold' Lillie as per the success criteria. Well done. A couple of suggestions though. You need to incorporate chronology... Especially when it may impact on a source's information - when it was produced and it's relevance to the time/event in question. This is REALLY important in the discipline of history. Lastly, most of the sources, if not all, are from a Vietnamese perspective. Be sure to note this and mention the voice/perspective that is missing; in this case the French colonialist voice. These are simply a couple of areas to improve, overall the piece is absolutely fantastic Lillie. You are hitting your analytical straps at the right time and the coherency in your writing is vastly improved from Year 11. You have come along way. Keep up the GREAT work!
DeleteCommunism became attractive to Vietnamese nationalists as it represented equality, freedom and self-determination; rights that most Vietnamese people did not enjoy under French colonial rule. For centuries even, the Vietnamese had endured occupation from other countries, especially China, and now in the late 19th and early 20th centuries had to endure that of French and later Japanese rule. Despite the French Revolution, French society and therefore Vietnam virtually operated on a social hierarchy, where the poor were exploited and miss-treated for the personal gain of the rich. The workers and peasants of Vietnam were especially fronted with this un-fair and often brutal treatment coming from the French officials, where in a primary account a Vietnamese school teacher states “…the French bashed, killed and hurt the colonised Vietnamese…”. This can be corroborated in a secondary source written by author Anthony Gray, where he describes the almost careless action of the French killing a mob of protesting peasants. Even though this source is a work of fiction and is somewhat biased towards the Vietnamese people rather than the French, it still can be viewed as a reliable piece of historical evidence. Since the Vietnamese were living under such an oppressive regime, it is obvious to see why Vietnamese Nationalists in particular would have been searching for an alternative to French colonial rule.
ReplyDeleteThis alternative came in the form of Socialism and Communism, in which the foundations are of equality, social class freedom and especially unity; everything that the majority of Vietnam did not have. Ho Chi Minh, the leader of the communist movement in Vietnam, exploited this idea and used it to appeal to the vast majority of the Vietnamese population. This can be seen in a public appeal made by the newly formed Communist Party of Indochina, where Ho appeals “Workers, peasants, soldiers, youth, pupils!” Explicitly here, Ho is talking to the lower classes and majority of Vietnam. Implicitly, he is excluding the rich and more privileged classes; the people who probably wouldn’t benefit from Communism. This can be corroborated in cartoon from the time, where the caption reads, “Workers-peasants-soldiers! Your wives and brothers and children, sisters and brothers are hungry and ill-clothed…” The cartoon portrays a mal-nourished village of sorts and a group of peasants ‘banding together’ to essentially fight off another group, implicitly the French. This cartoon would appeal to Nationalists in particular as it implicitly shows that by becoming unified, under the umbrella of Communism, the enemy that caused such destruction can be ‘chased out’. Later even in another source, Ho Chi Minh also calls all people, even the less-unfortunate, to unite and defeat the enemy; “Rich people, soldiers, workers…national liberation is our most important problem. Let us unite together!”. In summary, Communism became so appealing toward the Vietnamese as it represented an opportunity for unity, equality and freedom.
Well done Cassie. A 'Gold' effort also. However, the same chronology issue occurs here - read comment on Lillie's above. When using source evidence introduce it with the date of production to show further relevance. Also, when stating that a source is reliable, be sure to explain why... You simply stated it here and it's not enough. Lastly, you could focus more on any perspective within sources and note whether it impacts on the credibility or accuracy of evidence. But overall you produce a strong piece of analytical witting - mostly in the second paragraph.
DeleteCommunism was attractive to the Vietnamese people/nationalists due to the social system being appealing to the basic need and rights of the peasants and the working class. When France first colonised Vietnam, Vietnam was divided into three sections and was renamed Indo-China. At this time being controlled by the French, the Vietnamese people were oppressed and felt as though they loss their identity and pride. Communism was seen as the total opposite to Colonialism as Communism was equality between the rich and the poor with no hierarchy or imperial powers. After the First World War, the leader of the Vietnamese nationalist movement, Ho Chi Minh was first introduced to Communism (Leninism) when he joined the French Socialist Party where his comrades gave him Lenin's Thesis on the' National and Colonial Questions'. After reading the thesis, Ho Chi Minh stated in 'The Path Which Led Me to Leninism' that "I was overjoyed to tears…'Dear martyrs, compatriots! This is what we need; this is the path to our liberation". In this thesis, he saw the solution to the problems and struggles of Vietnam, and he was fully confidence that it was "a compass for us Vietnamese revolutionaries and people; it is also the radiant sun illuminating our path to final victory, to Socialism and Communism." Same as Ho Chi Minh, most nationalists saw this thesis as a solution and a light of hope to overthrow the French. The 'Appeal made on the founding of the Communist Party of Indochina, 18 February 1930' tried to convince to the public as they stated "From now on we must join the Party, help it and follow it ..." before listing steps that the Party was going to take which included overthrowing French imperialism, making Indochina completely independent and other points which benefitted the lower classes. These points automatically appealed/attracted the public as it was what they wanted but were too afraid to speak out about. Also, in order to spread this solution, French Communist Party propaganda leaflets were smuggled into Vietnam, however the Communist party did not explicitly state that the thesis was Communism because the French officials also distributed propaganda leaflets that demonised Communism. The Communist leaflets included captions such as 'Worker-Peasants-Soldiers! Your wives and children, sisters and brothers are hungry and ill-clothed because of the imperialist feudalist system of the royal court. Join together to wipe out those who suck the blood of our relatives'.
ReplyDeleteThese captions were used to target certain groups in society, to gain support of those who were afraid to rebel and those who did not realise the struggle that Vietnamese were in. A primary picture on the leaflets that were distributed in 1930, explicitly show Vietnamese villagers in a negative light and miserable while implicitly showing that all this misery was caused by the French. The suffering shown in the leaflets can be corroborated with the secondary Source A8 which states “Horribly mutilated men and women not killed outright staggered into the paddies to die and flooded fields along the roadsides were soon stained dark crimson with their blood” as this text describes an attack by the French. This primary quote from a Vietnamese school teacher can also corroborate with the conditions which the Vietnamese public were being treated, he states that “…the French bashed, killed and hurt the colonised Vietnamese…” The other picture on the leaflet shows the men of the village uniting and chasing the imperialists away which acted like a ‘call to action’. It was acting as a push to get those who want to overthrow the France to unite and rebel. This method of persuasion was very effective as the villagers would not have been very literate so there weren't a large number of words on the leaflets and also the story was told by the pictures. Throughout this time of violence and struggle, Communism was attractive/appealing towards the Vietnamese people/nationalists as it was seen as a solution to achieve equality, unity and independence.
ReplyDeleteWell done Stephen... You cover very well the motivation for Vietnamese turning to communism as a means to improve their circumstance - this is gold! Areas that you could improve on however are relating to the evaluation of sources - you don't deal with credibility, reliability, relevance or accuracy of any of the evidence that you present. This will hinder you from achieving in the A standard. Also, you need to adhere to chronology more closely as do the others in the class - see comments on other students above. Overall, you present a well supported argument, you synthesise evidence with your ideas well - you have come a long way since the beginning of Year 11 in your historical writing Steph... But be careful with your grammar, in particular your verb conjugation.
DeleteLOUISE - Communism, under nationalism and patriotism, became enticing to many Vietnamese Nationalists as it provided Vietnam with the opportunity to regain self-determination. For hundreds of years, the Vietnamese were suppressed by colonialist China, where they lost much of their cultural identity and restricted to very conservative social structures. The Chinese were superseded by the French in the late 1700’s who gained imperial control over Vietnam. While some nationalists embraced modernising Vietnam in hope of avoiding collaboration with France through adopting some of French practices while still maintaining independence and own culture, others were infuriated by French occupation as the French expelled many cultural traditions which gave the country pride, which meant they lost a great sense of identity. This intrigue was soon turned into anger and disappointment as they fought all many years to resist colonisation and maintain independence. This is particularly pertinent in primary evidence, source A7. The source is extremely useful in gaining insight into the French style of government and exploitation of the Vietnamese people. In this source, the people are explicitly depicted as old, frail, and malnourished. The source implies that the French government is an absent participant, represented as a cause of misery. They were exploited for labour by those who owned the land, i.e. the French colonialist. This is also explored in source A8 and despite the fact it is a secondary source, the ideas corroborate with source A7. It highlights that the French were ruthless in the treatment of Vietnamese and Vietnam had well and truly lost the status as a powerhouse. The Vietnamese people lost their sense of unity and self-dependence. From knowledge of other oppressive regimes, it is only natural to expect the Vietnamese people to look for something that provided a better life, one of which includes self-determination, equality and unity. This environment provided the perfect climate for Ho Chi Minh to realise his aspirations for Vietnam through Socialism/Communism.
ReplyDeleteLOUISE - Ho Chi Minh introduced the concept of Communism into Vietnam in the 1920s as he believed he could fully achieve freedom. Ho was impressed with socialism/communism, as through Leninism-Marxism, he thought it could provide rapid change for a more equitable future for the Vietnamese people. Source A3 is representative of Ho’s admiration for Leninism-Marxism. It is written by Ho himself which ensures the accuracy of the perspective displayed in the source, which is evident when he states, “The reason for my joining the French Socialist Party was… they had shown their sympathy toward me, toward the struggle of the oppressed peoples… This is what we need, this is our path to liberation!” This source identifies Ho’s realisation that Lenin’s manifesto was the road map Vietnam needed for liberation and self-determination. He saw Lenin as a great patriot and saw their causes align in riding of oppression. Ho also mentioned, “If you do not condemn colonialism, if you do not side with the colonial people, what kind of revolution are you waging?” This is representative of his belief that the people either wished to achieve one or the other. If they didn’t condemn colonialism, he believed that they were standing for a society that allows full or partial political control over Vietnam, which wasn’t his aspiration. He hoped looking for a society that treated all equally. He didn’t want the people to think that he was overthrowing the French only to put himself in power, but honestly believed it would benefit the majority. This sense of benefiting the majority is explicit in source A4 as identifies the French imperialists as exploiters and appeals the larger demographic for support, the workers, peasants, soldiers etc. It also depicts Ho’s plan for the future of Vietnam which was to overthrow French imperialism and make Indochina completely independent from any higher power, including Japan and France. This evidence implies Ho’s belief in communisms innate ability to unite and equalise Vietnam; to modernise the country through working together to create a country of equality, liberty, and fraternity. Due to the oppressed conditions enforced by French colonialists ensured that communism appealed to Vietnamese nationalists as it promised an egalitarian society, one that benefited all.
ReplyDeleteExcellent work Louise - a 'gold' effort on all accounts. You wonderfully show perspective in the use of evidence and beautifully include representativeness with the 'absent participant'. You introduce the philosophy of Ho Chi Minh well and deal with the influences, but could introduce the man first and explain his significance to the cause first - why should the reader care who he is in terms of Vietnam's struggle for independence? You have really improved on the integration of source evaluation without hindering the argument - well done! One last point to consider, you could possibly incorporate the contrast of perspective over whether HCM was acting under the guise of nationalism - it was definitely clear that this was the ideology that brought the peasantry together and galvanised society in pursuit of self-determination - or communism, or did one lead to the other?????? Great work Louise!
DeleteCommunism was so attractive to Vietnamese Nationalists as it was seen as an opportunity for the Vietnamese to break away from the colonisation of the French and gain equality, freedom and independence. Once the French gained power over Vietnam, the Vietnamese felt a sense of loss of identity and loss of pride within their country, as the French got rid of the Monarchy. Vietnam was divided into three sections by the French and named Indochina, where the French implemented a social hierarchy throughout society. It was within this social hierarchy that the French colonialists, whom were at the peak of the social ladder, oppressed and exploited the workers, peasants, soldiers, youth and students – majority of the population who sat at the bottom of the hierarchy. It is clear that this exploitation of the lower classes, the Vietnamese, and the unfair treatment of them was to provide opportunity for personal gain for the rich. Evidence of this unfair treatment, involving the physical brutal hurting they caused the workers and peasants of Vietnam, is scene in a quote from a Vietnamese school teacher, where he states that “… the French bashed, killed and hurt the colonised Vietnamese…” It is clearly evident here that the French were not necessarily implied by the French colonial policy brutally hurt the Vietnamese, as it was not stated to do so, but it was out of their own will and choice. This corroborates with Source A8, a secondary source written by Anthony Grey based on the Nghe-Tinh uprising and how the French, to a very large extent brutally hurt the Vietnamese during their protest, killing many people and leaving people alone. The credibility of this source can be ensured as it shares the similar brutality of the French on the Vietnamese, just like the Vietnamese teacher describes and therefore can be seen as reliable evidence. As the majority of the Vietnamese population were in a state of oppression from the French, the idea of Socialism and Communism came into play.
ReplyDeleteThis vision of having an egalitarian society throughout Vietnam, freedom of social class and unity, was seen as a result of Socialism and Communism. Ho Chi Minh exploited this ideal to the Vietnamese people in hope of the Vietnamese society appealing to his beliefs. Through primary source A4, it can be seen that Ho Chi Minh addressed the vast majority of the population in order for his ideas to take action and allow for himself to appeal to the people of Vietnam. This is evident when he explicitly addresses the lower classes of Vietnam, “Workers, peasants, soldiers, youth, pupils! Oppressed and exploited compatriots!” Implicitly though, Ho Chi Minh is disregarding the Vietnamese capitalist class, as they were similar to French imperialism and were regarded as higher up of the feudalist system. This can be seen when Ho Chi Minh states, “To overthrow French imperialism, feudalism and the reactionary Vietnamese capitalist class,” explicitly regarding the Vietnamese capitalist class as similar to the French colonialists. It was Ho Chi Minh’s inclusiveness of the majority of the Vietnamese population that would have appealed to the Vietnamese Nationalists, as it implicitly, was a symbol of unity and nationalism, working together. It was through these images and speeches of unity, freedom and equality that made communism so appealing to Vietnamese Nationalists.
Well done. You explain the motivation for change in the first paragraph quite well, but you do not give any chronological framework - integral in historical writing. Furthermore, for a strong 'Gold' effort, it really needed to inude more variety in the evidence used in support if your ideas. Plus the evaluation made above needed to be more detailed in explaining why it was credible/reliable and useful - refer to the nature of the source and any associated perspective.
DeleteOverall, a good piece of historical writing that does address the question adequately.
There were many reasons as to why Vietnamese nationalists were attracted to the Communist ideology, mainly because they were under the control of an oppressive government, the French, who exploited the Vietnamese people. Communism, in their eyes represented freedom, equality and independence. French colonialism in Vietnam lasted more than six decades. By the late 1880s France had full control over Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Exploiting and using the Vietnamese people for their own gain, the French were “justified” by the theory of Social Darwinism and the White Man’s Burden, along with their eternal competition with Britain to expand their empire. At the time most citizens of developed countries felt as though they had a responsibility and duty to “liberate” and modernise the “inferior races” by bringing their “superior” culture and way of life to them. The French colonial rule over Vietnam was structured into a social hierarchy, much like the feudalist one in place in France before the revolution. On top was the King of France and the French government; under them was the church, then the Colonial government then the Vietnamese people. This hierarchy becomes highly evident in many primary sources. For example a Communist Party leaflet published in 1930, in the first image the villagers are depicted as oppressed, malnourished and weak. The French however are an absent participant, implicitly displaying the French as the cause for such suffering. Corroboration can be seen to support this view, the primary account of a Vietnamese school teacher states “the French bashed, killed and hurt the colonised Vietnamese”. This shows that the French were brutal towards the Vietnamese people, further corroborated by source 8A where a peasant demonstration during the Nghe-Tinh uprising went horribly wrong. The source describes the French bombing a group of protesting Vietnamese people. However, the descriptions and imagery used by the author suggests that the author sympathised with the Vietnamese and not the French, making the source slightly bias, however, the source is still considered reliable and credible. It was because of reasons like this that it becomes quite obvious to why the Vietnamese were on the lookout for new ideologies, such as communism that would assist them in overthrowing the imperialist French government.
ReplyDeleteAs a result of this treatment of the Vietnamese people that Ho Chi Minh first began his mission to make Vietnam once again independent and free from the oppression placed on them by the French. He was first introduced to the ideology of communism by Russian revolutionist Lenin, just after he joined the French Socialist Party. It was at this time that he read Lenin's Thesis on the' National and Colonial Questions'. After reading the thesis, Ho Chi Minh stated in 'The Path Which Led Me to Leninism' that "I was overjoyed to tears…'Dear martyrs, compatriots! This is what we need; this is the path to our liberation". It was through Lenin that he saw an alignment in their needs, to overthrow an oppressive government. Both Lenin and Ho Chi Minh opposed the idea of colonialism as it deprived both their countries of independence and as Ho stated that “only socialism and communism can liberate the oppressed nations and the working throughout the world from slavery”. He saw communism as the path to independence, he believed that as a nation, Vietnam needed to work together to a common goal by all contributing what they could. This belief is clearly shown in a primary quote from Ho where he states “National salvation is the common cause of our entire people. Every Vietnamese must take part in it. He who has money will contribute his money, he who has strength will contribute his strength, he who has talent will contribute his talent. For my part I pledge to follow in your steps and devote all my modest abilities to the service of the country and am ready for the supreme sacrifice.” Ho Chi minh was very specific as to who he aimed his work towards, in 1941 he addressed a letter to “elders, workers, peasants, traders and soldiers”, he did this because at the time Vietnamese villagers were exploited by the French imperialists. He did this because by appealing to the lower class, Ho was appealing to the majority of the population that was negatively affected by French Colonialism. Meaning that he will gain more support and cooperation from the people of Vietnam to achieve his mission of self-determination, equality and freedom.
ReplyDeleteWell done Maggie. You address the question well and synthesise ideas and information nicely. Just be careful when discussing French social hierarchy - in the 19/20 centuries there were emperors and presidents, the kings had finished by 1850.
DeleteJust a few things to consider.
1. when evaluating you need to explain why a source is reliable, don't just say that it is and expect the reader to believe you. This goes for bias too!
2. You address HCM's motivations and his adoption of communist ideology really well Maggie and support beautifully with primary evidence - GOLD! However, most of the points you make are explicit nature... see if you can extract implicit meaning from sources and incorporate in your writing SEEMLESSLY :)
Overall, a great job!
Communism initially was so attractive to the Vietnamese Nationalists because it was the way out of French imperialism and the rule that was, in their terms, unworthy to the French, and a way into a nation led by self-determination. When French imperialism was enforced, it enabled the French to exploit the Vietnamese, forcing the Vietnamese workers to get poorer and the already wealthy to profit, but it wasn’t just financially that the people of Indochina were abused. They were put under physicals train if they were to go against the French, since technically the Vietnamese were under French rule and therefore must abide by their laws, no matter how they eradicate any central belief. This was initially what fuelled Ho Chi Minh, the former leader of the French Communist party. He was led to this through Leninism. Lenin was the ultimate muse for an uprising for independence because he liberated the people, something that Ho Chi Minh very much decided he was going to do for Vietnam. Communism was a way in which Indochina would be able to modernise its society and go against the colonialism that had been forced upon Vietnam. It allowed the ideal that as a community, they would be allowed to be a community, something that the French imperialists despised, as seen in the propaganda that was distributed on the behalf of the French, which focused mostly on the destruction that communism would do to Vietnam if it was led out. Propaganda was the last option for the French because of the widespread impact that the Communist party had, especially when being able to address the masses, most of which who knew themselves as the lowest in the rung of hierarchy. Ho Chi Minh does this in the majority of his speeches, starting off with “Workers, peasants, soldiers, youth, pupils”, and “Elders! Prominent personalities! Intellectuals, peasants, workers, traders and soldiers!”, but in both of these circumstances, he groups all of these different people into his “compatriots” instilling a sense of unity, in this case against French imperialism. This sense of hierarchy is what led the people of Indochina to ultimately turn against the French, all of their actions, though meant to be seen for the Vietnamese peoples benefit, showed an act of betrayal in how they were treated in their own country. Communism had the ability to make Vietnam independent, as Ho Chi Minh refers to in his article in the Pall Mall press, stating that as he read the book of Lenin, “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”, something that was of the highest importance since he was well aware that the majority of the Vietnamese people were made to be the working class, exploited by the French imperialists. Ho Chi Minh’s comments about Communism also highlights the fact that conditions were so declining when he describes Communism as the “radiant sun illuminating our path to final victory”, this final victory being Communism for Vietnam and independence.
ReplyDeleteYou explain your ideas very well. But what you do n ot do in the 'Gold' success criteria is use a diversity of evidence, corroborate and extract implicit meaning in your analysis. Also, like everyone, have not incorporated a chronological framework in your writing. Overall, this is really a 'Silver' level response minus any evaluation for reliability of source evidence. A fair effort Caitlin, but I know you are capable of GOLD :)
DeleteNATALIE- Ho Chi Minh was the most important political figure during the years of the cold war. His ideals of communism and nationalism were what ultimately liberated the lives of millions living in French colonised Indochina. France colonised Indochina in hopes of gaining economic and political strength. In an invisible competition between France and England, France was first in succeeding colonisation of an Asian country. And as Vietnam was known for its many valuable resources, this was a very big victory for the French. However, the effect it had on the people living in Vietnam was certainly no victorious moment. Their lives were soon to become very oppressed and undervalued. During the French rule, Indochina ultimately had its life sucked out of it. The French exploited the people living there for the use of their resources. It was the working class that was mostly affected by the colonisation, as they were the ones who had to work in poor conditions, whilst being paid very little creating unsuitable living conditions. This is evident in primary evidence from pamphlets that were passed around in 1930. These images explicitly show how the lives of these people were affected. They are depicted as weak, malnourished and poor. Implicitly, it shows the brutality of the French, allowing the people in their colonised country to live like this. As the French are not seen in this source it suggests they are an absent participant. They were although not actually there, they were still the cause of this. As the majority of those who were affected were from the working class, Ho Chi Minh aimed his campaign for freedom towards these social groups. As the start of one of the first public pronouncements made by the Communist Party in Vietnam, Ho starts of by saying “Workers, peasants, soldiers, youth, pupils! Oppressed and exploited patriots!” This makes it evident that Ho aimed his campaign towards the lower class rung on the social ladder. Similar to the social order of the late medieval France hierarchy. By grouping these people together Ho Chi Minh was creating unity and patriotism throughout Vietnam. The people felt united and whole, even though at the time geographically the French had divided them into different sections (Hoepper et.al). This can be corroborated with Ho’s letter from abroad written in 1941 where he states “If our entire people are united and single-minded, we are certainly able to smash the picked French and Japanese armies.” By appealing to nationalism Ho was able to gain large support groups all aiming for the same thing, self-independence. Later he states “only socialism and communism can liberate the oppressed nations and the working throughout the world from slavery” Ho’s vision was clear, by uniting the lower social classes and gaining support, overthrowing the French government and implementing Communism would be the only way for Indochina to once again be free from colonisation. The people became nationalistic, and the idea of being independent was what appealed so many people to join the communist movement.
ReplyDeleteYou cover the 'content' well and address the question, but don't necessarily address all the success criteria for a 'gold' effort. Look through for opportunities to integrate the evaluation of evidence - usefulness and credibility etc. also you should try to corroborate evidence where possible. A good effort - a 'silver' effort.
DeleteAnother point to focus on is the structure of your writing - you can't just lump everything into one paragraph without succinctness and coherency. This is why we preach the TEECL structure! Keep this in mind for your next piece is writing and the final exam prep.
DeleteAs a direct result of the French imperialist rule in Vietnam, the Vietnamese were exploited, had no control over their homeland and were brutally treated. This therefore created a period of social unrest for the country, which made the idea of communism extremely appealing to the Vietnamese nationalists. Under French rule, Vietnamese society was structured upon a social hierarchy system, which left the lower class/ peasants extremely poor through their exploitation by the rich imperialists causing them to remain wealthy and reap benefits, which were not available to the lower class. Not only were the Vietnamese exploited for their labour they were also severely mistreated at the hands of the French this is evident in the secondary source A8, which although is not a first hand retelling describes the violence subjected upon the Vietnamese people taking part in a protest during the Nghe-Tinh uprising. The reliability of this evidence can however be increased through its corroboration with primary source A7 – French communist leaflets in which the caption states, “ …Your wives and children, sisters and brother are hungry and ill clothed because of the imperialist feudalist system of the royal court..” These two sources together further the notion that the Vietnamese were strongly disadvantaged under the oppressive French regime. Its not hard to see why a system such as communism which opposes many of the imperialistic rules and values and promises equal benefits to all members of society would be attractive to the Vietnamese.
ReplyDeleteCommunism however isn’t something that the Vietnamese automatically took on board when dealing with the French as many were at the bottom of the social hierarchy. Under an oppressive rule such as French imperialism, in order to be effective in an uprising and reach goals of independence, communism had to be presented in a way that would attract the support of a large amount of people. Ho Chi Minh and the Viet Minh recognised this and aimed their campaign of communism towards the peasants and workers – the people who were most subjugated within Vietnamese society. Ho positioned the peasants to view communism as the key to unlock the door of freedom and equality. This is explicitly evident in Source A4 – the appeal made on the founding of the communist party of Indochina where it states, “…Oppressed and exploited compatriots! The communist party of Indochina is founded. It is the party of the working class. It will help the proletarian class to lead the revolution in order to struggle for all the oppressed and exploited people…” This quote demonstrates the direct appeal primarily towards the working class of society and uses the wants and needs of these people in an attempt generate a larger following. Illustrated primary sources from the time also reflect this same appeal towards the lower class of society. Source A7 communist party leaflets – 1930 although the sources meaning could be exaggerated, as it is a form of propaganda it does however implicitly show how communism was attractive to the Vietnamese as it has little text but mostly pictures to appeal the cause to the lower class who were predominately illiterate. Explicitly the source uses historical reference to Nghe-Tinh to uplift the oppressed and further the attractiveness of communism to the Vietnamese.
You address the question beautifully, especially in the first paragraph. You structure your argument really well in the first paragraph and include all of the success criteria - gold! You address the motivation for nationalist support for communism really well. You could think about including a little more on Ho Chi Minh's influences and choice of ideology to drive Vietnam's pursuit of self-determination. Furthermore, you lose your way a little in the second paragraph. Structurally, the second paragraph adheres to the TEECL framework, but it is not so succinct in the backend where you seem to rush. The last part of paragraph two needs to drive home your argument on why Vietnamese nationalists were attracted to communism and the use of evidence, albeit relevant, is not seamlessly integrated with evaluation for usefulness to your argument as it is in paragraph one. But overall, it is a 'gold' effort Meg. Just be sure to maintain succinctness to the end of your writing and sum up definitively.
DeleteViet Minh was able to defeat the French by 1954 due to the significant participation of Ho Chi Minh as the ideologist and General Giap as the military stregetist. At that time, Ho Chi Minh was considered the 'father of Indochina' as the people of Vietnam was encouraged by him and he showed the public the ideal society that they wanted to achieve. General Giap on the other hand, was the genius military strategist who created a method of attacking the French without head on battle that the Viet Minh used to achieve Ho Chi Minh's idea. He explain Guerilla warfare using an analogy of an elephant and a tiger where the elephant represented the French with brute strength and the tiger represented Viet Minh who are fast and ferocious. Rather than attacking the elephant head on and having to deal with its strength, the tiger will attack its enemy from behind and then retreat. Continuous harassment will wear down the enemy and in the end, the tiger will be victorious. This was the strategy was surprise/ambush/harassment which Viet Minh used in the battle of Dien Bien Phu in1954 which led them to surround the French forces and achieve victory. Geneva Conference was where the fate of Indochina would be decided. However U.S does not want to participate due to their fear that Communism will take over, no matter what course of action is chosen. In the Memorandum by the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the US Secretary of Defence on the 12 March 1954, the course of actions that were brought up as options were all in reason for opposition by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. The explicit reasoning for opposing ‘establishment for a coalition government’ was that "it is highly improbable that Communist agreement could be obtained to a negotiated settlement". This puts the blame on Vietnam however the implicit reasons for opposing the course of action was that the US was afraid of a Communism take over. Through the significant of Ho Chi Minh and General Giap, Viet Ming was able to defeat the French by 1954.
ReplyDeleteThe explanation on Ho was done well along with the military strategies however there are not many sources throughout this paragraph to improve this would be to add in some primary quotes that corroborate with secondary sources.
DeleteYou begin structuring your argument well within the TEEC method; you cover the topic sentence and elaboration well. However, you don't use evidence (the next E) to support your claims. Therefore, it really is just a narrative, not a well substantiated analytical piece of writing. Include a variety of primary and secondary evidence with corroboration/contentiousness etc. and you'll cover the success criteria much more profoundly. Also, you jump into the Geneva conference within the same paragraph - it's really a new topic, therefore, a new paragraph. But overall, this is a great place to begin. Well done, a silver effort.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French by 1954 due to the political and military genius of Ho Chi Minh and General Giap. Ho Chi Minh through adopting a father-like role throughout the war against the French gave support and reason for fighting. This can be seen explicitly in a letter, written in 1953 by General Giap, expressing that the victories achieved by the Viet Minh were due to the great leadership of Ho Chi Minh, "Those victories show the clear-sighted leadership of the Party, the Government and Chairman Ho. This can be corroborated in another primary source, where Ho implicitly adopts a father-like role in establishing the path to victory where he gives "Six forbiddances" and "Six permissables". Ho's ability to unite the Vietnamese people under a common goal was also vital to victory. This can be seen in a poem used by Ho Chi Minh in one of his writings in 1948, where he says "And victory is built with the people as foundation". Just as Ho used this theme of unity to persuade the people of Vietnam to join his cause, he is now using it again to lead the Viet Minh to victory. Along with this encouragement from Ho Chi Minh, General Giap's political genius also helped the Viet Minh in defeating the French.
ReplyDeleteGeneral Giap used tactics of Guerrilla warfare to defeat the French. Throughout the war, French held a significant amount of power over the Viet Minh. However, through tactics of surprise, ambush and harassment, the Viet Minh were able to use the strength of the French against them. This can be seen implicitly in source produced during the war, where the Viet Minh use the analogy of a tiger and an elephant to represent themselves and the French. "The enemy is fat and sluggish like an elephant. Our army is like a tiger..". This analogy represents that the Viet Minh knew that the French was stronger, but they used their stealth and element of surprise to overcome this. This can be seen in the most significant battle of the war at Dien Bien Phu, where the French ultimately became outsmarted by the Viet Minh's genius tactics. This can be seen where French General Henri Navarre commented in 1965 about how the strategic placement of weapons was the "...major surprise of the battle." From a French perspective, this shows just how successful the Viet Minh must have been in their tactics if the French even were willing to admit it.
Even though the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French, their goal of self-determination was in the hands of others. The Geneva conference in 1954 was held to decide the fate of Indochina, where the US in particular had certain beliefs about what should happen in Vietnam due to their strong anti-communist tendencies.
Really well written paragraph! The use of primary and secondary information to support your statements is well done. The roles of Ho and Giap are clearly identified and you answer the question perfectly.
DeleteI agree with Nat, well done - a gold effort! The biggest accomplishment is that you did this under the pressure of test conditions in a tight time frame. Excellent work Cassie... Given more time, you would have elaborated further in the last paragraph about the Geneva Conference and the US position, and then support with evidence. Well done.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialist in 1954 because of strong political framework of Ho Chi Minh and the military ideas from general Giap. As the ideological leader of the Viet Minh, Ho played a significant father like role in the eventual defeat of the French colonialists. This is evident within primary source G written in 1948 by Ho chi Minh in which he presents twelve recommendations to all the people within the Vietnamese army, administration and mass organisations. Explicitly within this source it is stated that, “The above mentioned twelve recommendations are feasible to all. He who loves his country will never forget them.” Implicitly however this further instils the strong motives of nationalism and communism within the audience as well as encouraging unity and the creation of moral rules to be followed by all. This source presents a moral framework on which the resistance movement was based upon. Without this strong sentiment from Ho and its spread among the people of Vietnam there would be no basis on which to begin a battle against the French imperialists but victory could not be obtained without a secondary significant figure – General Giap. General Giap was the militaristic genius behind the success of the Viet Minh. Giap promoted the use of guerrilla warfare as the Viet Minh’s main tactic for waging and winning war. These tactics by the “peoples army” are evident within Source E, primary documents from the people’s army in 1944-54. The source describes guerrilla warfare as being, “a method of fighting in partisan units or with relatively small groups of the regular army disguised as citizens and mingling with people…” Overall the Viet Minh relied on three main tactics of Guerrilla warfare, which were surprise attack, ambush and harassment. This is corroborated in source E from a Vietnamese perspective, which represents the two forces, the Viet Minh and the French as being a tiger vs elephant. The source states that, “If the tiger confronts the elephant then he will be crushed. If the tiger attack the elephant when he least expects it then bites on the elephants leg before running away, the elephant will eventually weaken...” The Viet Minh’s unclassical approach to war gave them a significant advantage over the French, which is evident in the battle of Dien Bien Phu. French General Navarre in source B5 explicitly demonstrates this by stating that the Viet Minh were able to, “make shambles of all the estimates of all our own artillery men. It was the major surprise of the battle.” This quote although published two years after the battle provides a highly reliable first hand opinion of the successful use of the Viet Minh’s Guerrilla warfare tactics. The Viet Minh’s eventual victory over the French by 1954 would not have occurred without the political ideals of Ho Chi Minh and the war tactics put in place by General Giap. However this was just a minor victory in the long road to freedom. The Frenchs alliance with the USA meant that the self-determination of Vietnam could not be obtained without America’s input as discussed in source H and the Geneva conference, the Memorandum written by the US joint chiefs of staff in which Americas perspective shows that they did not view the Vietnamese people as able to participate in free elections for self determination as they were “brainwashed” by communism.
ReplyDeleteReally good paragraph! The information is clearly supported by primary and secondary information, the evaluation of sources is seamless and the question is answered well. Great Job!!
DeleteAgain, I agree with Nat... A Gold effort! You incorporate the evaluation of evidence towards the end without hindering your argument, well done.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French by 1954 due to the determination and moral compass of Ho Chi Minh and the military genius of General Giap. Ho Chi Minh and General Giap were two sides of the same coin. They both wanted Communism and self-determination. Ho was the founder of the communist party of Vietnam and strongly believed that in order to reach independence, the French colonialist had to go. Giap was similar in beliefs and was also quite nationalistic. This can be found in "The Tactics of the People's Army" from 1944-54 where the communist party and General Giap state, "The enemy is fat and sluggish like the elephant. Our army is like the tiger; swift, resourceful, deadly and unpredictable." By comparing the Vietnamese to the strong and deadly tiger, the Communist Party and General Giap are instilling a sense of national pride and confidence. They are making the people believe they are strong than the French. It is these shared views that united Ho and Giap but it was their actions and attitudes that made them two different sides of the same coin. Ho was seen as a caring father and was given the 'nickname' Uncle Ho. This caring nature came through in his "Appeal made on the founding of the Communist Party of Indochina" in 1930 where he greets the peasants, workers and soldiers and speaks of the equality and independence of Communism. He became a moral compass to the people. General Giap was the opposite. He was the military genius and who decided to implement Guerrilla warfare. Guerrilla warfare involved fighting in small groups, disguised as civilians and mingling with ordinary people. Its idea was "surprise, ambush, and harass" much like a tiger and an elephant. It focused on stealth and patience. They would attacks enemies from behind and would aim for the weak points (Tactics of the People's Army, 1944-54). It was this tactic that led to the Viet Minh winning the war at Dien Bien Phu. Once Vietnam won independence, the US at the Geneva Conference began discussing how to contain the communist spread in Vietnam. Vietnam had won independence due to the military and political brilliance of General Giap and Ho Chi Minh but the world powers were still in control.
ReplyDeleteHey - two points you did well were showing General Giap analogy of the tiger and the elephant and his tactics such as "surprise, ambush and harass", however areas of improvement include the evaluation of sources and ways to improve this are through exploring the reliability, relevance and accuracy.
DeleteGood work Tash. You address the tactics of Gen. Giap well. But you could support your claim about Ho Chi Minh being the moral compass with evidence from his 12 points etc. also, you need to try to integrate the evaluation of evidence - relevance, reliability and representativeness etc. You present a mixture of gold and silver criteria.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialist by 1954 due to the roles of Ho Chi Minh and General Giap and his military strategies. Ho Chi Minh was a significant figure when Vietnam was trying to defeat the French colonialist. Ho was the political figure and enforced ideas of communism through Ho Chi Minh’s speech Twelve Recommendations in 1948 which was to show how the people live through communism which is explicitly stated “to help the people in their daily work”. This identifies that Ho was trying to prepare Vietnam in achieving communism after the battle was won. To win the battle General Giap was used as military strategist. General Giap use a tactic known as guerrilla warfare which consisted of defensive, equilibrium and offensive these were implied in the tactics of the people’s army written in 1944 and 54, the source states “we must concentrate our forces rapidly, launch lighting attacks, then disperse like a flash”. General Giap enforces strategies such as this as it was known that the Viet Minh could not take on the French head on due to the Frenchs heavy artillery. General Giap used this strategy to win many successful powers his analogy was to stake them like a tiger and wait them out and follow them back through their own mine fields (the ballet for Xom-Pheo, January 1952). Once these takes have been put in place it leads to success such as Dien Bien Phu. This battle took place between 1954 stated in General Navarre on the Viet Minh’s use of heavy artillery at Dien Bien Phu 1954 it states “camouflage had been so perfect that only a small number of them had been located prior to the beginning of the attack” this is implies that the General Giap’s strategies were good and well planned as this is what won the battle which was started by General Navarre, leading to the Viet Minh winning the battle of Dien Bien phu. This lead to the memorandum by the joint chiefs of staff for the us secretary defence on the 12 March 1954 which suggest that the US did not want to have much part in the decision as it would make them seen to be colonialists that were in support of the Viet Minh which followed communist ideologies. The joint in chief of staff stated “….continuation of the fighting with the objective of seeking a military victory appears as the only alternative to acceptance of a compromise settlement…” this statement implies that the US will only fight to defeat communism and no other reason which also complied with the Truman plan of supporting the French. Therefore the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialist by 1954 through Ho Chi Minh’s political strategy and General Giap’s military strategies.
ReplyDeleteYou answer the question well Lexy and I like how you answer in a chronological order. One point of improvement is that you could use further evidence to corroborate the point you made about Ho Chi Minh.
DeleteCassie is 100% right in that you need to corroborate evidence further in support of your claims. Also, you tack on the discussion of the Joint Chief of Staff and it doesn't flow. Really you need to introduce it as part of the end of French colonialism and the international community (mostly European powers) deciding the fate of Indochina at the Geneva Conference. Then you can mention that the US position the Viet Minh as a communist group, not nationalist, and advise the continuation of war etc. according to the memorandum. But overall, a good job... Mostly gold criteria, but not all, especially lacking in source evaluation.
DeleteNATALIE: The Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonists by 1954 due to the ideologies that Ho Chi Minh and general Giap held. Ho’s goal of a communist future is what united the population of Indochina and created the base for a platform of militarist strategy that Giap implemented. This is explicitly shown when Ho stated in his 12 recommendations that “A victory is built with the people as a foundation” This is a highly reputable source as it was published in 1948 during the time of the war. By stating this Ho is implying that the key to winning and war or conflict is to have a strong platform of unified people working together to achieve a common goal. Communism was used as the moral backbone for resistance, if the people had something worth fighting for they would unify against the enemy. This fit in with Giap’s military strategy as it required strength and unity. In General Giap’s letter to the Vietnamese people in 1953, the year before the war was over, he states that “The victories show the clear-sighted leadership of the Party, the government and Chairman Ho.” Explicitly it shows the relationship between Giap and Ho, implicitly however, it shows how Ho’s communist ideals are a key factor in the plans to winning the War.
ReplyDeleteThe French were clearly at the advantage being so technologically advanced; the people of Indochina needed all the strength they could muster. General Giap used the Guerrilla warfare strategy in hopes of over throwing the French. This involved three stages, defence, equilibrium and offense. Defence was to set up a unified plan, to be patient and ware out the enemy. The equilibrium stage was to organise the army ready for attack but remain calm and patient, to slowly tighten the noose around the French without them knowing. Patience was a key factor to this strategy. Finally offense is when the army would finally attack. The patience and waiting would be worth the element of surprise. An account from the battle of Xom-Pheo states that the attack occurred “With incredible speed, indicating the whole operation had been carefully rehearsed”. They constantly used this strategy, and it constantly won them victory after victory. They were like a tiger, patient and planning and had precise stealth when attacking, their prey similar to an elephant, often seen as large and strong, however also slow and dumb. With Giap’s militaristic strategy the Viet Minh were able to win the victory that would end the war. Dien Bien Phu was essentially a trap set by the elephant, to lead the tiger into a place where it would have no power, but, with Giap’s strategy the tiger was patient and planned its every move and through defence, equilibrium and offense the Viet Minh won the battle over Dien Bien Phu.
However, the end of this war was not a whole victory for the people of Indochina, in the same year as the end of Dien Bien Phu, 1954, the Geneva conference was held on March 24. This conference was to determine the future of the Vietnamese. In this conference it was discussed that the people of Vietnam would be too ‘brainwashed’ into communist ideals, and that to let a communist government rule over Indochina would be fatal. The US government allowed the Vietnamese to be an independent state however did not allow free elections.
Really good paragraph! All your points are supported well by primary and secondary sources. However to make it even better maybe add a bit more evaluation of sources and make it seamless. To achieve this, make sure you talk about perspective, motive, credibility and corroboration!!, but other than that Great Job!! :D
DeleteWell done Nat. Your elaboration of each topic is done very well. I would like to see more corroboration of evidence to support though. Try to list two or even three pieces of evidence where possible to support the major points you make. And, when talking about Ho and Giap's relationship at the end of the first paragraph, I think you have confused explicit and implicit, the explicit is that Ho and his leadership is the reason for victories and the I plicit is the other. Overall though, a gold effort minus the variety of sources and evaluations (only done once and you only talk about the reliability). Good work.
DeleteAs a result of the roles played by the ideologist and politician Ho Chi Minh and the military strategist General Giap, the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954. These two prominent leaders represent a two way approach to dismantling the colonialist rule over Indochina. Ho Chi Minh’s goal for the future of Vietnam and the way in which he would achieve independence was through the ideology of communism. As he stated that “only socialism and communism can liberate the oppressed nations and the working throughout the world from slavery”. Implying that the only way for the Vietnamese people to achieve independence and self-determination was through unifying the country and working together towards a common goal, by implementing the methods of Communism. By doing this, Ho Chi Minh created the base for General Giap to implement his military strategy of Guerrilla Warfare. This is explicitly displayed in Ho’s Twelve Recommendations, when he states in 1948 that “A victory is built with the people as foundation”. Further showing that the people of Vietnam needed to unite together as one, to fight for a common goal of independence. Ho played the ‘father figure’ role in Vietnam, always having the people’s best interest at heart; he served as the moral backbone of the resistance. This allowed for the military strategy of General Giap to fit right in. Displayed implicitly in a primary source from 1953, General Giap’s states in his Letter to the Vietnamese People that “The victories show the clear-sighted leadership of the party, the government and chairman Ho”. This statement clearly defines the relationship between the two leaders, showing that only with both can they have victory. As a result of the French having superior technological advancements in terms of weaponry in comparison to the Viet Minh, they were unable to implement the usual ‘head to head’ battle tactics to win the war and defeat the French. As to why the strategy of Guerrilla Warfare was implemented, the three main traits being surprise, ambush and harassment. And through this tactic the Viet Minh used the French’s superior power against them. This is implicitly displayed in a primary source produced by Giap in 1961, an analogy of a tiger and an elephant is used to symbolize the Viet Minh and the French. “The enemy is fat and sluggish like an elephant. Our army is like a tiger…” by this analogy the Giap was implying that the elephant, generally perceived as large, strong and powerful is also slow and dumb. Whilst the tiger is seen as patient in stalking its prey, swift in attacking. Much like the Viet Minh.
ReplyDeleteAs General Giap also stated in 1961, “the general law of a long revolutionary war is usually to go through three stages: defensive, equilibrium and offensive.” These three stages are clearly displayed in the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, in the first stage, defensive, the Viet Minh strategically planned, in the second stage, equilibrium , was when they organised and mobilised their peasant army ready for attack, surrounding the French. The final stage, offensive, the Viet Minh attacked, coming from all sides, surprising the French. By using these tactics the Viet Minh ultimately won the war, by ‘outsmarting’ the French. This can be corroborated with a primary quote in the French perspective from General Henri Navarre, a French commander in 1956, where he says “…major surprise of the battle”. This shows that the Viet Minh’s tactic of Guerrilla Warfare was successful, as the French even admitted it.
ReplyDeleteThis strategy of Guerrilla warfare, alongside Ho Chi Minh’s ideology of communism, and the support of the Vietnamese people, they were able to defeat the French and win the war. However, even after this success, the decision of their independence wasn’t up to the Vietnamese people. The Geneva Conference was held in 1954 to determine the fate of Indochina. The US had a massive input into the fate if Indochina, and at the time had strong feelings against communism. They thought the Vietnamese people were too ‘brainwashed’ into believing communism, and that the communist rule over Indochina would be disastrous. In the end, they were allowed to be independent, however were not permitted to have free elections.
This is a really good paragrpah. I like how you included quotes and then explain what the statement meant/showed. However I personally think that this is a really long paragraph and so just be mindful of the amount of time you'll have in the exam.
DeleteGreat paragraph - you use a range of sources to show implicit and explicit meanings and have a good chronology throughout. While you've gone into a good amount of detail, which is good, be careful of how much you write - you don't want to run out of time!
DeleteBoth the above the points are very accurate. You do use single pieces of evidence to support your claims quite well. But it would be great if you could corroborate with another or two other pieces of evidence when you support - shows depth in your argument. You also do not evaluate any of the evidence put forward... you cannot get an A standard unless you do this! Other than this, you cover most gold criteria.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French colonialists by 1954 with the clear-sighted leadership from Ho Chi Minh and the military genius on General Giap’s part, both of which contributed to the power built up for the nation of Vietnam. The Viet Minh knew from the start that negotiations were never going to be made, since the only input that the French offered were never going to be accepted by Ho Chi Minh, but Ho Chi Minh alone would never have been able to accomplish his vision for the future if it was not for General Giap. Together the two were able to transform the seemingly passive nation of Vietnam into something to be feared by the French. Patience was a virtue, something that General Giap knew all too well. In 1961, Giap outlined his intention on winning the war, stating that to overtake the French they had to, “wear out the enemy forces, gradually reverse the balance of forces, turning our weakness into strength and concurrently availing ourselves of the changes in the international situation”. From this, it’s evident that although Giap was imminent on their success, he was well aware of the repercussions that would come with the radical change in approach to the French, though he also knew that it was what the French desired. From that point in, the fight for self-determination was stepped up onto a level that the French imperialists could never have imagined. With the continuation of Ho Chi Minh’s “confidence that the long term and difficult resistance war will definitely win”, the Viet Minh were led into battle under strict tactics. General Giap instilled them with what can only be labelled as genius, since the actions in which followed secured the Viet Minh’s place into one of respect. Giap had brought forward the intention of guerrilla warfare, to first surprise the French in Dien Bien Phu, in which they would then ambush and ultimately harass the French, Giap initially using the analogy of the elephant and the tiger. Though the elephant, used to represent the French, was obviously larger than the tiger and held more power in the way of overpowering them, the tiger, which was used to represent the Viet Minh, were superior in the way of stealth and patience, which implied that if they attacked at the right time they would be able to defeat the French, the analogy ultimately calling the French docile and almost inferior to the minds of the Vietnamese. This was all words until put into practice, and in 1953 the guerrilla warfare tactic that Giap initiated was put into action, ultimately surprising the French and tipping them over the edge by surprising them with sheer power and tactics that came from careful planning. All accounts of the outpour of the Viet Minh captures the utter shock that came with the willpower of the Vietnamese and the effect that it had on not only the French, but all of the higher powers. This fight for determination as such seemed to have been taken into the Vietnamese’s own hands, but still at the Geneva conference the higher powers decided what the fate of Indochina was, though certainly it was very different after the surge of power the once passive nation had shown against one the world had once seen as undefeatable.
ReplyDeleteYou answer the question really well Caitlin! I really liked how you integrated the source on General Giap. To improve perhaps you could use a some more sources to further support you point. :)
DeleteReally good paragraph Caitlin! I really like how you describe General Giap's motives and how you seamlessly integrated sources throughout. and the way you explained the analogy of the elephant and the tiger. However, to make it better you could include more evaluation of sources, to do this talk about perspective, motive, credibility and corroboration. Overall great job :)
DeleteI agree with Louise... you cover the elaboration/explanation stage of the TEEC paragraph model really well. however, You really don't support your claims with evidence, nor do you corroborate with multiple pieces of evidence to support - integrate the evidence more like you wonderfully did with the Giap quote, this is the key; let the evidence argue your points!. On top of this you really need to evaluate as well. Plenty to work on, but you are well on your way.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French Colonialists by 1954 due to effective leadership used by having two roles, the political leader, Ho Chi Minh, and the military leader, General Giap and the guerrilla warfare techniques used to end the battle at Dien Bien Phu. This effective means of leadership is reflected in source B3, General Giap's letter to the Vietnamese People from January in 1953 "In one year of struggle, we have annihilated 65 000 of the enemy's man power… These victories show the clear sighted leadership of the party, the Government and Chairman Ho… these victories show the firm faith of our army and people in the leadership of the Party, the Government and Chairman Ho." This source explicitly demonstrates General Giap's role as a military leader, as he speaks about military victory in the speech, and also discusses the outcome of battles. It also explicitly demonstrates Ho's role as political leader, through Giap's statement "the clear sighted leadership of... Chairman Ho..." It implicitly demonstrates Giap's faith in Ho Chi Minh and his intention to spread that faith and belief to the people through the repetition of the greatness of the leadership. The Viet Minh's success in defeating the French Colonialists is further demonstrated by General Giap's effective use of Guerrilla Warfare as demonstrated in the source 'The Tactics of the People's Army' described by General Giap as "The enemy is fat and sluggish, like an elephant. Our army is like a tiger." This use of symbolism demonstrates that General Giap intends to take down the strong, yet slow and docile enemy with wit and speed. The clever use of the tactics is corroborated by source B5 in which a French General Navare (1965) states "It was the major surprise of the battle." Demonstrating the well used guerrilla warfare tactics of the Viet Minh. Although these things combined lead to the ultimate defeat of the French at the battle if Dien Bien Phu in 1954, the fate of the people of Vietnam was not in their own fans, and they were not yet truly independent as the United States, along with others such as Great Britain and the Soviet Union were to have great input in their fate with their power, and the Geneva Conference respectively.
ReplyDeleteYou paragraph is really well written Lilly! It is very succinct and your synthesis of the sources was done really well. To further your argument you could add something on the reliability/representativeness/motives etc. of the sources.
DeleteThis is a really well written paragraph. It is short and straight to the point. Also a good job on using quotes and showing the implicit/explicit meanings. I agree with Louise, you could add evaluation when refering to those sources/quotes.
DeleteGold Lilly! Or at least in part... You certainly do as Louise says above, you write quite succinctly. However, you don't evaluate source evidence - can't get an A without integrating these seamlessly and not disrupting the argument. One thing to consider for further depth to your argument is to use two or even three pieces of evidence (primary and secondary) one after the other to support your claims.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat communists due to strong political framework of HCM and the military genus of General Giap. Due to Ho Chi Minh’s strong leadership and new ideals of nationalism and communism, the Vietnamese people were able to realise self-determination as a reality and unite over this common cause. Ho Chi Minh’s ability to unite the nation is depicted in primary source titled, “Ho Chi Minh – Twelve Recommendations.” This source is very useful to historians as it provides insight into a Vietnamese perspective, particularly Ho’s motives for the country as it was published in 1948, before the war. This source displays Ho as the nation’s father, looking after his children, which is evident as he prescribes a way of life best for his people. Some of ideals that he provides include, “Not to do what is likely to damage the land and crops or spoil the houses and belongings of the people… To help people in their daily work…” Ho Chi Minh provided moral substance by which the people could live by, and while these ideals sought to unite and modernise the country through correct and disciplined manners, it is very evident that Ho Chi Minh was attempting to instil the values of communism to overthrow the capitalists. This way of life Ho prescribes, in conjunction warfare ideals promoted by General Giap, advocated to the people that Vietnam could win with these values and be a better place for it. While the Viet Minh army was predominately composed of peasants, the tactics employed by General Giap and the Viet Minh ensured that they had a fighting chance against the French colonialists. This is evident in primary evidence produced by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, Documents of the People’s Army 1944-1954 which is representative of the tactics used by the Viet Minh army. Their tactic is explicitly stated when the source states, “In other words, from a tactical viewpoint, we must wage guerrilla and mobile warfare.” This source continues to explain specifics through the use of the tiger and elephant analogy. The elephant, the French, is so much more superior in size and strength and for the tiger, the Vietnamese, to win they needed to catch the enemy off-guard (surprise), admit that they couldn’t handle front on attack to win, so they needed to think strategically and use ambush methods, and finally the idea harassment, the use of wearing the French down through making small, unexpected attacks. By 1953, the French had suffered many defeats and Giap had shown himself to be successful leader. General Giap places these successes, as evident in primary source, B3, through the humility and elevation of the leadership of the party, government and Ho Chi Min. He also places a lot of importance on the bottom end of the hierarchy saying, “Peasants are the main force of the revolution”. These very Marxist ideals secured victory for Vietnam, ridding of the French colonists in 1954, but this did not yet mean self-determination for the Vietnamese people.
ReplyDeleteThis paragraph is structured really well and you fluently integrate the source about Ho Chi Minh excellently, especially when touching on both the explicit and implicit meanings! I think perhaps a few more sources could be included at the end of your paragraph, perhaps another to link to the Giap tactic and the elephant and tiger paragraph. Really good job, Louise :)!
DeleteWell done Louise. Collectively, a gold effort in terms of structure, elaboration of the narrative, and explicit and implicit analysis and evaluation of evidence presented. However, there is not a variety of evidence presented. One point to note about your use of direct quotes, when including the quote, be sure to only use evidence that directly relates to your point. For example, you introduce the twelve recommendations beautifully, but then give an example that really does not illustrate your point - a father figure, or moral substance. You needed to explain how that quote illustrates your point. You also only use one source to support each claim - more corroboration needed! That said however, you evaluate beautifully for reliability and utility - Gold! You could include the Navarre source to show a French perspective though to add emphasis to the genius of Giap's guerrilla strategy at Dien Bien Phu and the end of French colonialism in Indochina. You allude to the next chapter of Vietnam's pursuit of self-determination, but give no clarity, nor the US's position leading up to the 1954 Geneva Conference. This would have been the point of considerations - the take away - for the reader once you had finished responding to the question.
DeleteThe Viet Minh were able to defeat the French by 1954 because of the leadership led by Ho Chi Minh and General Giap. Ho Chi Minh was a political leader, who led the Viet Minh and his people of Vietnam to eventually winning self-determination. For a number of reasons, Ho Chi Minh was called ‘Uncle Ho’, because of his attitude towards fighting for independence for Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh believed that once Viet Minh won, it would help create an egalitarian society; however it would come through acting together. His attitude towards this was the fact that he was only fighting for what was best for Vietnam, and for this, he was seen as almost a fatherly figure to his people of Vietnam. This can be seen in the primary source, “Twelve Recommendations”, published in 1948 where Ho Chi Minh states, “The nation has its root in the people.” Implicitly, this shows a sense of nationalist pride and provides evidence that Ho Chi Minh wanted his people to come together to fight. General Giap was a man who was greatly involved in the military of the Viet Minh as he was the Viet Minh commander. General Giap was seen to be the most successful guerrilla warfare leader of the time and believed that military was a direction through leadership that needed to be maintained in order to achieve final victory over the French. General Giap shows this sense of fighting in one of his letters to the Vietnamese people in January 1953 when he states, “Those victories show the clear sighted leadership of the Party, the Government, and Chairman Ho.” Explicitly, General Giap is stating in this primary source, that the road to independence must come through great leadership of the Viet Minh. General Giap took on this sense of leadership through his role in the military by using tactics within Guerrilla Warfare. With the concept of the inferior fighting the superior, stealth and patience, Giap used Guerrilla Warfare to defeat the French through coordinated fighting with acts of sabotage through the three tactics he employed – surprise attack, ambush and harassment. Giap believed these three tactics would be of the most beneficial to the Viet Minh in defeating the French. This can be supported through the primary source, “The Tactics of the People’s Army”, from documents of the People’s Army, 1944 – 54, when it states, “To attack forcefully and wipe out the enemy in every battle we must apply tactics of maximum mobility, penetrating deeply and then withdrawing as far as possible. We must concentrate our forces rapidly, launch lighting attacks, then disperse like a flash. In other words, from a tactical viewpoint, we must wage guerrilla and mobile warfare.” It is in this quote that General Giap implicitly states that the tactics of surprise attack, harassment and ambush are the best tactics to use as they will give the Viet Minh the greatest chance at defeating the French. Through these implements of Guerrilla Warfare in the fight for independence, the Viet Minh were able to defeat the French in 1954 in the battle of Dien Bien Phu. The Viet Minh hoped to surround the French, wear them out so a full sale assault could become a success and to surprise the French in their attack for steer power, all of which are Guerrilla Warfare tactics and succeeded in the defeat of the French. Due to the Viet Minh’s defeat, in late April 1954, Britain, France and the Soviet Union agreed that the future of Indochina needed to be discussed at the Geneva Conference, who urged the United States to reconsider their involvement. Primary Source B9 written in 1954 shows explicitly how the United States wanted to keep fighting as they believed that the Viet Minh could never come to a negotiated settlement, therefore turning the blame on the Viet Minh.
ReplyDeleteWell done Ellie! Most of the Gold success criteria is covered. However, not all. You don't really corroborate - use more than one piece of evidence tom support your major claims! Also, you don't evaluate the evidence presented as stipulated in the Gold criteria - the same as the A standard for assessment. You need to integrate this and explain how it impacts on the information presented.
DeleteImplicitly, this source shows just how much the United States feared communism and did not want it to become the ‘way of life’. This can be seen when the US Joint Chiefs of Staff state, “Therefore, continuation of the fighting with the objective of seeking a military victory appears as the only alternative to acceptance of a compromise settlement…” This quote is reliable as it is written in the interests of the United States, however does not represent the Vietnamese to the same extent as it does the United States. Ultimately, even though the Viet Minh fought for independence and won to an extent of which they could lead, Vietnam never truly gained self-determination as in the end, it was still Britain, the Soviet Union and France made the decisions.
ReplyDelete