Advertisement

They Left Their Plows Behind Them

Before the Revolution: The Vietnamese Peasants Under the French By Ngo Vinh Long '64 The MIT Press, 285 pp., $12.50

Historians have neglected these questions. They have recorded certain features of French colonial rule: how many miles of roads the French built, which Vietnamese served in the successive puppet governments, what the various French governorsgeneral thought of Vietnam and its people. But until this year, there has been no study in English of the Vietnamese peasants themselves, of how colonialism changed their traditional way of life and how they reacted to their French rulers.

Ngo Vinh Long '64, a Vietnamese who works with the Vietnamese Studies Project at Harvard's East Asian Research Center, has taken up this neglected area. Before the Revolution is a remarkable and insightful book which draws upon many Vietnamese and French sources and Long's own experience in his homeland to depict the agonizing destruction of rural Vietnam. The book is divided into two parts: in the first, Long painstakingly molds reams of statistics into a moving but never heavy-handed description of the French transformation of rural Vietnam. In Part II, he presents his own translations of articles and stories written by Vietnamese observers of the new, harsher life that existed in the countryside under the French. The stories are numbing: in one, a peasant woman must sell her seven-year-old daughter to pay her taxes. In them rural Vietnam speaks, and gives life to the statistics.

LONG EXPLAINS that the French set to work immediately to remake rural Vietnam. Even as resistance to the invaders continued to flicker in isolated spots, the French military expropriated by decree extensive tracts of land, which they then gave to a handful of French and Vietnamese collaborators. Peasants returning home after the resistance had ended discovered that they no longer owned their land; village leaders found that the communal lands, which had provided for the young and the sick and the poor, now belonged to outsiders. As the French widened their control over Vietnam and cleared new lands for cultivation, they continued the expropriation by decree. By 1931 the French had stolen and redistributed over two-fifths of the arable land in Vietnam.

The French land policy transformed the character of life in the countryside, creating a tiny elite of largely absentee owners--who controlled wide tracts of land--and a huge class of landless tenants. An 1839 Nguyen decree had limited the size of an individual's landholdings; under the French some landlords owned up to 150 times this limit. Every peasant in traditional Vietnam had been guaranteed his share of land; under French rule over half the peasants became landless and many of the rest owned plots so small that they had to rent more from the landlord.

The new landlord class dictated harsh terms to their tenants. The peasants had to pay all production costs and turn over 50 to 70 per cent of their crops to their landlords. In addition, the colonial government ate away at the remainder of peasant production with a stiff new set of taxes. In traditional Vietnam the Nguyen government had taken an estimated 6 per cent of the peasant's income in taxes. The French added stiff head and alcohol taxes and hiked this to 10 to 20 per cent. Widescale growing corruption among both French and Vietnamese officials in the colonial government added to the burden. The landlords were generally exempt from taxes.

Advertisement

PEASANTS IN traditional Vietnam never had been particularly wealthy, but they had owned their own land, produced their own food, and been guaranteed a measure of security by the village communal lands. The French stole their land and brutally forced them into a tenuous life on the edge of existence. To pay the frightful rents and skyrocketing taxes, peasants were forced to borrow from their landlords--at interest rates ranging from 100 to 3650 per cent. The peasant had to sell everything he owned--his water buffalo, old heirlooms, sometimes even his children--to keep his head above water. He hitched his wife and children to his plow to replace the water buffalo, but still his debts continued to mount. And if he missed a payment on his taxes or loans, he was tossed into a colonial jail and beaten.

The peasant also was in fairly constant danger of starving to death. Since the colonial land policy gave no incentive to land improvements--the peasant could not afford fertilizer and the landlord put his money into usurious loans--land fertility declined until rice yields were among the lowest in the world. (In North Vietnam, which has broken up the large holdings and outlawed sharecropping and usury, rice yields today are four to five times greater than in the South.) Moreover, the French exported rice to take advantage of higher prices on the world market. Coupled with the declining yields, this exportation forced the peasants to the brink of starvation in normal times; during disasters--floods or bad harvests--widespread famines swept the countryside. After the 1944 Red River flood in northern Vietnam two million people starved to death--two million victims of the land policy brought to Vietnam by the French.

Why did the Vietnamese peasant not leave the countryside for a better life in the cities? Long explains that there was no place to go; the French made no real attempt to industrialize Vietnam. Their efforts were confined mainly to using taxes collected from the peasants to widen roads and improve ports in order to speed rice exports. And in the only industrial enterprise of any significance--the rubber plantations in the South--conditions were even worse than in the rural villages. The workers there were slaves: they worked long hours, were fed next to nothing, and could be murdered by guards at whim. Of 45,000 people who worked in one plantation between 1917 and 1944, 12,000 died there. Life was brutal in the village, too, but at least it was a familiar harshness.

II

HARDSHIP ALONE does not breed peasant revolution. A whole set of factors, some as yet dimly understood, prompted Vietnamese peasants to leave their villages and enter the inferno of revolutionary war. Long has promised to examine this question in another study; judging from Before the Revolution, his next book should be a useful and important contribution to a growing debate among students of Vietnamese history.

In Fire in the Lake, the best-known book about Vietnam, Frances FitzGerald 62 argued that the Vietnamese peasants had a particular cast of mind, a conception of the world, which conditioned their response to certain events in the 1940's and caused them to join the Viet Minh resistance. Her analysis--which drew upon the work of Paul Mus, an eminent French scholar of Vietnam--explained that in traditional Vietnam the peasant believed that his father, ancestors and emperor exercised great mystical powers over events. After the French consolidated their control over the country, they replaced the emperor at Hue as the omnipotent father; this mystical sense of respectful awe enabled the French to transform Vietnamese society without serious opposition. When Ho Chi Minh and a small Viet Minh contingent marched into Hanoi unopposed on August 19, 1945, French omnipotence was undermined; the mandate of heaven now descended upon the revolutionaries, and peasants flocked into the Viet Minh. Fewer than 11,00 French had sufficed to keep order before World War II; after it, more than ten times that number fought for seven years and lost.

Ngo Vinh Long has disagreed elsewhere with certain aspects of the Mus-FitzGerald analysis. Traditional Vietnam, he argued in a Ramparts review of FitzGerald's book, was not a stable, ordered moral universe. Vietnamese history is punctuated with peasant upheavals and popular resistance to foreign invasions, including to French landing parties in the 19th century. Resistance diminished somewhat in the middle years of French rule, Long suggested, not because some heavenly mandate rested upon the French, but because their rule so brutally and swiftly transformed Vietnamese society that the peasants were unable to act. Not some mystical power of French rule--but its shocking, wrenching brutality--prevented an immediate peasant response. Long's analysis was regrettably brief and sketchy; his next, longer study should be an exciting and vital elaboration of his basic argument.

In North Vietnam today, at this moment, former peasants are watching radar screens. The bombing ended last January, but U.S. reconnaissance planes still fly over the country and the B-52's are still based in Thailand. From time to time U.S. officials threaten to resume the air war; the watchers remain alert. Across North Vietnam workmen are rebuilding bombed-out bridges, doctors are tending patients and students are attending school. And peasants--men and women who have defied the American thunder and built a new society--are plodding along behing their plows, tilling their increasingly bountiful rice fields.

Advertisement