What do you think?
Rate this book
The Power of Everyday Politics: How Vietnamese Peasants Transformed National Policy
Ordinary people's everyday political behavior can have a huge impact on national that is the central conclusion of this book on Vietnam. In telling the story of collectivized agriculture in that country, Benedict J. Tria Kerkvliet uncovers a history of local resistance to national policy and gives a voice to the villagers who effected change. Not through open opposition but through their everyday political behavior, villagers individually and in small, unorganized groups undermined collective farming and frustrated authorities' efforts to correct the problems. The Power of Everyday Politics is an authoritative account, based on extensive research in Vietnam's National Archives and in the Red River Delta countryside, of the formation of collective farms in northern Vietnam in the late 1950s, their enlargement during wartime in the 1960s and 1970s, and their collapse in the 1980s. As Kerkvliet shows, the Vietnamese government eventually terminated the system, but not for ideological reasons. Rather, collectivization had become hopelessly compromised and was ultimately destroyed largely by the activities of villagers. Decollectivization began locally among villagers themselves; national policy merely followed. The power of everyday politics is not unique to Vietnam, Kerkvliet asserts. He advances a theory explaining how everyday activities that do not conform to the behavior required by authorities may carry considerable political weight.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2005
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
Read
October 15, 2014The Power of Everyday Politics: How Vietnamese Peasants Transformed National Policy was written by Benedict J. Tria Kerkvliet. The Communist Party government of Vietnam initiated collective farming between 1958 and 1961, and expanded it through the 1960’s and 1970’s; nevertheless, the policy was officially abolished by the end of the 1980’s. The author raises questions as to the dominance of the state and the function of formal organisations in Vietnamese politics. He rather emphasises the role of everyday politics conducted by ordinary farmers in informal ways. Kerkvliet successfully argues that everyday politics against collectivization prompted the state to redress the policy, resulting in the demise of it in late 1980’s. His arguments on the basis on theoretical frameworks are supported with interviews with local villagers in the north and archival documents, mainly from government agencies and local offices. Still, his work underestimates effects of other factors on the erosion of collective farming in national politics including the reunification. Moreover, he fails to provide adequate evidence for an initial improvement in production arising from the adaptation of the product contract arrangement in late 1970’s.
The state had attempted to reinforce collective cooperatives despite resistance from farmers for first two decade since the inception. Up to the early 1960’s, collectivization was accelerated, and the reunification of Vietnam in 1975 prompted the state to enlarge it in the north as well as expand to the south. However, none of them led to increasing production as a result of everyday politics on the ground in response to a failure in meeting political conditions necessary for collective farming. In the end, the state abolished the system, due to persistence opposition from farmers preferring family farming, whilst the initial revision, the product contract system, did not alleviate struggles of farmers. The author shows a significant amount of evidence for how villagers avoided seriously devoting to the system and how national leaders debated over the ineffectiveness on the ground. His approach to state-society relations is akin to that of James Scott’s “every forms of peasant resistance” .
One of the strengths of this book is that the author developed his arguments on the basis of theoretical frameworks. By referring to Bemmett’s work, he applied to Vietnam four conditions essential for sustaining organizations such as common use agricultural organisations. He contends that villagers frequently resorted to everyday politics due to a failure in meeting the four political conditions necessary for durable collective farming.
Another strength is that by distinguishing between three types of politics, “official”, “advocacy”, and “everyday”, he highlights that everyday politics can affect official politics regardless of people’s intention. Based on this theory, the author notes that the authorities in Vietnam made concessions to what everyday politics claimed including permissions of sourcing out to households certain phases of farming.
The final strength is that his work is full of detailed accounts from interviews with farmers and archive official documents to develop his arguments. He gave in detail intense debate over the collective farming in the run up to the demise (p218-228). Moreover, in order to describe how corrupt local officials were and how much farmers struggled over the situations, a number of interesting figures were utilised. Figure 9 depicts struggles experienced by farmers because cooperative officers did not meet their responsibility for supplying necessary materials.
By contrast, there are a certain number of weaknesses with the book. First, whilst it is acknowledged that everyday politics is not the only factor which conditioned the direction of collective farming (p33), there is little discussion on the impact of other elements such as the war against the USA, foreign aid from the Soviet Block and China, and economic difficulties experienced over time. The author argues that debate over collectivization intensified as more and more farmers did family farming; nevertheless, national leaders also should have taken into account the impact of international affairs on agricultural production. For instance, it can be argued that the termination of aid from the west in 1978 and from China in the aftermath of the Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979 contributed to adjustments to collective farming. This suggests that everyday politics against government policies does not always prevail by itself; other factors are equally important to be considered for the success.
Another shortcoming is that the author failed to touch on the reunification of Vietnam, especially the role of the south in the fate of collective farming. As stated by the author, the state intended to expand cooperative farming to the south. On the other hand, it can be contended that the south mutually influenced the north in terms of agricultural matters. It is presumable that the south had agricultural inputs and materials more available, some of which the USA left , and they might have been distributed to the unofficial markets in the north by cadres, which could have discouraged more farmers to participate in collective farming.
The third weakness is that he did not differentiate between provinces and did not show coherent developments of collective farming in the provinces. It seems that he generalizes developments of collective farming across the delta in response to national politics through the book. Nevertheless, each province or district might have some distinct features associated with farming. For example, there might have been more unfarmed fields available in some provinces than the others, which supported villagers in doing more family farming. Furthermore, whilst by and large everyday politics by farmers led to the termination of collectivization in the north, it would be not easy to see consistent developments in each province between the inception and the demise of the system through this book.
Final weakness is that although it is a minor issue, he did not elaborate why the adaptation of the product contract policy resulted in initial success in early 1980’s, while persistent political faults were not tackled under the new system during the rest of the 1980’s. The author (p194) states that ‘that increase in yields was due not to new technologies or seeds, which remained essentially the same, but primarily to better farming’. Still, he did not develop this further.
To sum up, by providing a voice to farmers, he successfully argues that everyday politics affected national politics, which in turn terminated collective farming. His arguments, predicated on theoretical frameworks, were developed in support of evidence. Nevertheless, he fails to provide details of other factors on the fate of collective farming other than everyday politics, and ignores any characteristics of provinces covered which might have influenced the effectiveness of collective farming. Furthermore, there is little discussion on the impact of the south on collectivization after the liberation. Despite these minor issues, there is no doubt that his theoretical frameworks and convincing arguments developed through this book contributed to the understanding of Vietnamese politics.
The state had attempted to reinforce collective cooperatives despite resistance from farmers for first two decade since the inception. Up to the early 1960’s, collectivization was accelerated, and the reunification of Vietnam in 1975 prompted the state to enlarge it in the north as well as expand to the south. However, none of them led to increasing production as a result of everyday politics on the ground in response to a failure in meeting political conditions necessary for collective farming. In the end, the state abolished the system, due to persistence opposition from farmers preferring family farming, whilst the initial revision, the product contract system, did not alleviate struggles of farmers. The author shows a significant amount of evidence for how villagers avoided seriously devoting to the system and how national leaders debated over the ineffectiveness on the ground. His approach to state-society relations is akin to that of James Scott’s “every forms of peasant resistance” .
One of the strengths of this book is that the author developed his arguments on the basis of theoretical frameworks. By referring to Bemmett’s work, he applied to Vietnam four conditions essential for sustaining organizations such as common use agricultural organisations. He contends that villagers frequently resorted to everyday politics due to a failure in meeting the four political conditions necessary for durable collective farming.
Another strength is that by distinguishing between three types of politics, “official”, “advocacy”, and “everyday”, he highlights that everyday politics can affect official politics regardless of people’s intention. Based on this theory, the author notes that the authorities in Vietnam made concessions to what everyday politics claimed including permissions of sourcing out to households certain phases of farming.
The final strength is that his work is full of detailed accounts from interviews with farmers and archive official documents to develop his arguments. He gave in detail intense debate over the collective farming in the run up to the demise (p218-228). Moreover, in order to describe how corrupt local officials were and how much farmers struggled over the situations, a number of interesting figures were utilised. Figure 9 depicts struggles experienced by farmers because cooperative officers did not meet their responsibility for supplying necessary materials.
By contrast, there are a certain number of weaknesses with the book. First, whilst it is acknowledged that everyday politics is not the only factor which conditioned the direction of collective farming (p33), there is little discussion on the impact of other elements such as the war against the USA, foreign aid from the Soviet Block and China, and economic difficulties experienced over time. The author argues that debate over collectivization intensified as more and more farmers did family farming; nevertheless, national leaders also should have taken into account the impact of international affairs on agricultural production. For instance, it can be argued that the termination of aid from the west in 1978 and from China in the aftermath of the Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979 contributed to adjustments to collective farming. This suggests that everyday politics against government policies does not always prevail by itself; other factors are equally important to be considered for the success.
Another shortcoming is that the author failed to touch on the reunification of Vietnam, especially the role of the south in the fate of collective farming. As stated by the author, the state intended to expand cooperative farming to the south. On the other hand, it can be contended that the south mutually influenced the north in terms of agricultural matters. It is presumable that the south had agricultural inputs and materials more available, some of which the USA left , and they might have been distributed to the unofficial markets in the north by cadres, which could have discouraged more farmers to participate in collective farming.
The third weakness is that he did not differentiate between provinces and did not show coherent developments of collective farming in the provinces. It seems that he generalizes developments of collective farming across the delta in response to national politics through the book. Nevertheless, each province or district might have some distinct features associated with farming. For example, there might have been more unfarmed fields available in some provinces than the others, which supported villagers in doing more family farming. Furthermore, whilst by and large everyday politics by farmers led to the termination of collectivization in the north, it would be not easy to see consistent developments in each province between the inception and the demise of the system through this book.
Final weakness is that although it is a minor issue, he did not elaborate why the adaptation of the product contract policy resulted in initial success in early 1980’s, while persistent political faults were not tackled under the new system during the rest of the 1980’s. The author (p194) states that ‘that increase in yields was due not to new technologies or seeds, which remained essentially the same, but primarily to better farming’. Still, he did not develop this further.
To sum up, by providing a voice to farmers, he successfully argues that everyday politics affected national politics, which in turn terminated collective farming. His arguments, predicated on theoretical frameworks, were developed in support of evidence. Nevertheless, he fails to provide details of other factors on the fate of collective farming other than everyday politics, and ignores any characteristics of provinces covered which might have influenced the effectiveness of collective farming. Furthermore, there is little discussion on the impact of the south on collectivization after the liberation. Despite these minor issues, there is no doubt that his theoretical frameworks and convincing arguments developed through this book contributed to the understanding of Vietnamese politics.
Displaying 1 of 1 review