Categories Writing

Decree 168: a view on Vietnamese identity and Democracy

It is an uncommon sight for all Vietnamese to solely focus on one topic, apart from the street storming after the glory of their national football teams. Yet, decree 168 seems to have upended the lives of all traffic participants, reverberating through every crook and cranny (ngóc ngách) of society. Social discontent is understandable and to be expected, as per a phrase from James Carville, the political advisor of Bill Clinton, ‘It’s the economy, stupid!’, which later won the latter the 1992 presidential election.

However, I wish not to delve deep into this matter for the time being, but to discuss an inherent quality of Vietnamese, our obstinacy and reluctance to change and rule imposed by others.

Except for the Jews, hardly can we find such a tenacious people similar to us Vietnamese given the context.

The Chinese have been renowned for their cultural assimilation capacity for thousands of years, performed by their ruthless treatment towards what they deemed ‘barbaric practices’ (tập tục man di). Emperor Yongle (Minh Thành Tổ) ordered the burning of all Annamese books, including folklore and children’s books. Any structures of historical or cultural significance should be destroyed upon sight and without hesitation. Local customs were forbidden, such as tattooing, women wearing short skirts, to conform to ‘the proper practice of the North’. The power of their assimilation effort is amplified by the allure of their civilization, which was capable of Sinicize (Hán hóa) their invaders and rulers. Mongol customs were neglected by their own aristocrats, who deemed Chinese culture more appealing, while the Manchurians (Người Mãn Châu) were also under this influence, albeit to a lesser extent, despite the rulers’ immense effort.

This mere story, among the vast repertoire of other examples, emphasizes the remarkable feat achieved by our forefathers, whose staunch resistance managed to repel Mongol cavalries, who spread terror across the Eurasian continent. So egregious was their killing intent that it was rumored that the grassland through which they traversed could not regrow. While we were blessed with tropical ‘miasma’ (chuớng khí) and treacherous terrains, which do not aid mass-scale campaigns and cavalries in general, our status-quo victory while admitting nominal defeat to avoid further escalation was nothing short of spectacular.

I understand it if you have planned to abandon this reading by this sentence, as history has never been a subject of interest to the public. But the stories above perfectly exemplify our people’s reluctance to change and rules by other alien powers, no matter how harsh the consequences could be (the Mongols would massacre the whole city if the people did not surrender before a deadline, while the Chinese deterrents include the ‘burning at the stake’ (thiêu sống) for offenders).

I recall hearing many complaints over the government’s lenient treatment towards traffic offenders, especially those inflicting fatal injuries on the innocent, citing public safety. In reality, the imposition of Decree 168 may have reflected another side to their argument, which is that ‘I want stricter punishment for other offenders, not me’. As usual, poverty is universally cited as the primary reason, which, in most countries, is the perfect justification for violations of the law, while they also profess their ideal on a rule-based society. A person who is adequately aware of the double standards the public today apply to practically everything would no longer need to resort to following comedy shows for amusement.

Many even go further, schooling others on democracy and how corrupted the system is, making intriguing comparisons to those of the West’s parliamentary institutions. While it is true that constituents (cử tri) can vote for their representative(s) in legislative bodies (cơ quan lập pháp), their sponsors and true aims should be called into question. It is not unheard of for members of parliament or senators to further corporate causes rather than the common public, look up Tom Harkin, a US senator receiving lobbying money to support a new law deregulating the dietary supplement market, while revoking the FDA’s authorities. There are other covert biddings, such as a US minister of Defense would receive a seat in the board of directors of Lockheed Martins or other military contractors if they managed to pass favorable amounts of funding, which partly explains the inflated US military budget. If you want more examples, take a look at Donald Trump, a convicted felon to be inaugurated as president tomorrow, and his current best friend Elon Musk. In today’s world, sound policy makers simply pale in comparison with reality-program showmans.

A short explanation for why the West advocates democracy is that it is in their interest to do so, as it is easier for them to infiltrate and interfere with the electoral process to make sure the leaders follow them suit.

National interest is permanent, which is true for every country, DEFINITELY NOT PEACE, however many times they apparently vow.

Countries are bound to be run by oligarchs; and some are better at hiding it. Russian invasion of Ukraine faces international condemnation, while Israel’s crime against Palestinians go largely unreported.

In conclusion, our forefathers’ DNA of resistance may have been deeply imprinted (in sâu) in our blood and soul, more than we would like to admit, exacerbated by our tendency to complain instead of appreciate the lives we are leading. This trait is exemplified by our attitude when in good health (somewhat neglectful and take-it-for-granted) and when in bad shape (I shoulda, woulda, coulda had I not blah blah blah). Countries are inherently akin (tương đồng) to one another, no matter how much they wish to tout (ngợi ca) themselves.

That’s the end of my pointless long-winded presentation today. I’m glad you make it here.

More From Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *