Context: The National Liberation Front
There are several events, decisions, and relationships that may be disputed regarding the National Liberation Front and its role in the Second Indo-China War, one statement that is not would be that the NLF and its strategists were vital in the liberation of Southern Viet Nam and ousting of the Americans.
One part of this NLF story that is inconclusive and often debated is how influential were the communist leaders of the Lao Dong on the actions of the NLF. It is indisputable that the NLF was the brainchild of Lao Dong leaders in 1960. What does remain in question is exactly how much weight the Lao Dong pulled in NLF actions. While it seems the Lao Dong viewed the NLF as their chief source of Propaganda and comrades in the South. The U.S. repeatedly attempted to link the NLF to the communists in Hanoi. While several high ranking NLF officials were communists, many were not. Brigham walks a tightrope on this topic stating, “the Front was neither a puppet of Hanoi, nor an autonomous organization.”
Another topic up for debate could be the NLF’s reason for abandoning of its neutrality policy. Brigham credits northern communists for this change because the Lao Dong apparently felt that the NLF had gotten too western diplomatically. This could be due to his research with mainly communist documents. A counterpoint to Brigham’s argument could be formed regarding the massive 1965 American increase in troops and aid to the DRVN.
A third event that remains controversial is the relationship the Lao Dong and PRG had with Southern elites who supported the NLF. After the successful ousting of Diem and the capture of Saigon, a new government was quickly formed under military control. On the list of leaders which the communists released not one southern nor one non-communist appeared. This would seem to prove that Hanoi forged relationships with well-off southern communists and had no interest in including them in the ante-bellum regime. Experts believe these southerners were mainly excluded because they engaged in Capitalism and not because they hailed from below the 17th parallel.
3 comments:
After reading your context part I feel as if some parts are not fully explained. For instance I think if you gave some more details into what exactly the NLF was and what exactly the Lao Dong was. If you gave some more details as how the Lao Dong and NLF were related and also what were the key moments in the formation of the NLF and maybe explain where the NLF gained their roots, in other words, is their a history of the formation of the NLF as in was this an ongoing formation to create the NLF or did it just suddenly spring up out of nowhere.
I think it would be interesting if you gave some more overall details of the impact the NLF had in the war and if so, explain what those impacts were and how they differed from the impact of the North Vietnamese army in the war.
You should probably, I say the main point, is to give a general understanding of the NLF and its impact, by not fully explaining what the NLF was or what Lao Dong had to do with this group I feel like some readers may become confused. Just flesh out your overall theme and give the background of the situation so an average reader could sit down and understand fully the two groups of the Lao Dong and NLF.
Reply: Context: The National Liberation Front
Is the Second Indochina War the Vietnam War(1955-1965)? I have never heard of the Vietnam War being called the second Indochina War. Maybe say "The Second Indochina War aka The Vietnam War
(1955-1975)". What are some events, decisions, and relationships that maybe disputed with the NFL and its role? I would like to know. What is the Lao Dong? Maybe introduce the Lao Dong first, then state why the NLF was the brainchild of the Lao Dong. It seems as though when I read this passage I do not even know what exactly the NLF or Lao Dong is. What is the PRG? Also, put a comma right after South in the second paragraph, it would sound better. Instead of "Another topic up for debate could be", say this, "Another topic up for debate is". Be assertive and stand up. Instead of "gotten too western diplomatically", say this, "The NLF was percieved by the Lao Dong to have been significantly influenced on how the west handled diplomacy".
Instead of how an argument "could be" say "an argument can be". Be assertive. I like your conclusion. I feel it is your strongest paragraph. In your last paragraph your are the most assertive. Make the rest of your passage similar to the the tone you carry in your last paragraph. You come out shooting guns at a local bar in the old west and I like that. Just take out your "seems", your "could", your "may", and be more assertive and stand up. I like the way you grab my attention, just some more straight history info on the topic you are talking about that way a person has an intro before you introduce any agruments or controversies. Writing is hard, but keep it up. You are the NLF historian.
One of the only things I think you need are examples of how the LAO Dong had so much to explain or even show the reader what kind of power the NLF was dealing with. Also, maybe some other examples in the other topics you touched on. I did enjoy the paper and the topic I had known very little about the NLF and what they did. After reading this you did explain and hit on some major controversial topics that are still questioned today. I think if you added more to the paragraphs and better explain your stance on it or maybe give some examples to explain why you feel that way. I could just be speaking out of line, but I think if you gave your opinion if this would have changed what would of happened: or what would you change that the NLF did in its time of rein. I liked reading about the topics you brought up because I often wondered what was going on with the NLF in Hanoi. I appreciated the amount of time and research you put into your topic. I think a lot of other readers will obtain a lot of information after reading your paper. It was nice to see someone passionate about a topic as you were.
Post a Comment