Jeffrey Race, War Comes to Long An, on "the Land Question" in Vietnam.

(The following quotations are from Jeffrey Race's book War Comes to Long An).

"The defectors interviewed were in substantial agreement that no other Party activities had such an immediate and profound impact on local attitudes. It will be worthwhile to quote Chan at some length on the land issue:

"According to Party doctrine, the issue of land is an integral part of people's war. Thus, when the Party seizes an are, it considers that land reform is a strategic task which must be carried out regardless of cost, in order to produce an impact on the peasantry and in order to set the peasantry in opposition to the government and the landlords. At the same time this is a means of making the peasantry accept the need to pay taxes and to send its youth into the army. According to Party doctrine, the national democratic revolution has two missions: anti-imperialism and antifeudalism. The one implies the other, because the landlords have conspired with the imperialists. It can be explained very simply to the peasants: if you want to keep your land, you must fight the imperialists, and if you want to fight the imperialists, your son must go into the army and you must pay taxes. That is the strategic line of the Party.

The Party's present land-reform program is basically the same as during the Resistance: to reduce land rents, to reduce interest, to reduce rental payments for farm tools and animals, and to confiscate the land of absentee landlords. The ownership of land and the right to collect rents of religious organizations is recognized, as well as that of landlords who remain in party areas. Thus the land situation in the South is not the same as in the North, particularly in regards to denunciation meetings. This is for two reasons. First, in the South making a living is much easier since there is so much land. Second, the party does not dare push the land issue so strongly as in the North, because from the time of the Resistance so many of the Party members in the South have belonged to the landowning elements, the petty bourgeoisie, and the intelligentsia. Now the Party has reduced the numbers of such people but it still does not dare push the land issue strongly because of the need to win over landed and religious elements in the present stage of the national liberation movement.

Party policy is to distribute land to the lowest elements in the countryside, that is, the landless and poor peasants and certain middle peasants. As for the landlords, they are to be overthrown, just as are the rich peasants, although this depends on the stage of the revolution. At present the Party distinguishes various types of landlords: those to be destroyed are the ones who participate in the government; fence-sitters are temporarily permitted to retain their own land, while patriotic landlords are permitted to collect land rents up to a certain level and on a certain amount of land. With rich peasants the Party tries to educate them and persuade them to reduce the rates they charge for interest and for rental of farm tools and animals. During this period the Party never touches their land in the south, but if they have much land and cannot work it themselves, the Party persuades them to let it out at a very low rental.

Once it starts distributing land, what does the Party say to the people? It never says that the land is theirs permanently -- only that it is theirs for ten years, fifteen years, perhaps their whole life, but still only provisionally. this is a lesson drawn from the Resistance, when the peasants got the impression the land was theirs permanently. In the North after the war was over the government needed various areas for industry, etc., but the peasants refused to return the land, demanding compensation and making difficulties. Thus since 1960 when land redistribution began again, the Party has always said that the land is only provisionally distributed, not permanently, because it plans after seizing the South to establish collective farms, industrial areas, etc. Despite what the Party says, the peasants feel that the land is permanently theirs, and should the Party succeed in taking over the South, it will meet with no small opposition thereafter.

Nevertheless, once the peasants received land, their living standard increased tremendously. Formerly they had to pay rent to the landlord and interest to the moneylender. Now for the first few years they could keep the entire harvest, and thus their living was comparatively easy, just as it had been in the Resistance. But as the pace of the war increased, those who received land had to pay for the war, for whenever the Party mentioned land it also mentioned politics: the peasants now own the land, but the peasants are also the main forces of the revolution. Only by sending their sons into the army and paying taxes could the war be won, and only by winning the war could they keep their land. thus land is a life and death issue, inextricably tied to their interests. Although sometimes their taxes to the party are five or seven times those to the government, they nevertheless pay them: in the time of the French, when their parents had no land, their life was extremely harsh. Now they have land, and they are willing to pay and to send their sons into the army to preserve it."

Chan also spoke of the extent to which assistance to the revolutionary movement was 'forced' as opposed to 'voluntary.'

"This is a subtle point. One cannot say that support is voluntary, and one cannot say it is not voluntary. Previously the peasantry felt that it was the most despised class, with no standing at all, particularly the landless and the poor peasants. For example, at a celebration they could just stand in a corner and look, not sit at the table like the village notables. Now the communists have returned and the peasants have power. The land has been taken from the landlords and turned over to the peasants, just as have all the local offices. Now the peasants can open their eyes and look up to the sky:they have prestige and social position. The landlords and other classes must fear them because they have power: most of the cadres are peasants, most of the party members are peasants, most of the military commanders are peasants. Only now do the peasants feel that they have proper rights: materially they have land and are no longer oppressed by the landlords; spiritually they have a position in society, ruling the landlords instead of being ruled by them. This the peasants like. but if the communists were to go and the government to come back, the peasants would return to their former status as slaves. Consequently they must fight to preserve their interests and their lives, as well as their political power.

On the other hand, there are some, particularly the middle and rich peasants, who do not like the communists, because the communists hurt their interests: they are not permitted to charge interest and rentals as before,and if they want to hire laborers they are accused of exploitation. Thus they don't like the communists, but they don't dare oppose them, because, if they oppose the communists, they must go to live in a government area. But do they have enough money to go and live in Saigon? Probably not, and so they must be content to remain.

Thus there are those who willingly and voluntarily support the Party, and those who are forced, and to say that everyone is forced is mistaken. One must make distinctions between classes of people in order to understand the situation."

-- from Jeffrey Race, War Comes to Long An (U. Cal Press, 1972), 128-130.

http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/Vietnam/race128to130.html | Email Me | last modified 6 Sep 2007