Talk:Trotskyism in Vietnam

ANI
I came here from ANI. I do think Cerejota has a point. This page tells us almost nothing about Vietnamese Trotskyism other than the fact that its leaders were killed by the nasty Stalinists led by Ho. I've read the source on which this is based. It gives a detailed acount of the movement and explains the background to the purge - which was an attempt by the Trotskyists to organise an armed uprising. This article gives no information at all about this, creating the impression that they were just rounded up and shot, or arbitrarily assassinated. Also we learn nothing about the intellectual and strategic differences between the groups. The genuinely good principal source is being traduced. Paul B (talk) 10:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I added a few sentences and then added some more references; Look at Google Scholar to find citations for them and write something instead of just complaining. (The Viet Minh executioners worried about their bad raps would have benefited from the advice of Alan Arkin's psychiatrist character in Grosse Pointe Blank: "If you want to feel better, try to stop killing people!)  Kiefer .Wolfowitz 11:46, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, The Trotskyist leaders were killed by Stalinists (who were nasty). Perhaps Salome and Pontius Pilate didn't get a fair shake in history either, because each is remembered chiefly for expediting executions. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 12:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The entry is "OK" as nothing is inaccurate except I don't believe the two groups ever fused as implied hey did. ANI...The Trotskyists attempted first of all to organize *the class* as a whole to resist the re-occupation of *their country* by the British as a holding action to allow the French to retake their colony back *from the Vietnamese* This was all agreed to by the USSR and UK and France (oddly, not the US which remained neutral). What the Trotskyists tried to do was organize not a 'rebellion' but an "invasion" by the British, attempting to get the working class and peasantry (they were influential among both classes) to go to down to he beaches and harbors and *resist* the re-colonization efforts. This was not an 'armed rebellion' against the defacto coalition gov't of the Viet-Mihn.

Sources: there are lot better sources that Alexander as is noted below. Revolutionary History magazine has the best collection of sources in their Vietnam issue. In fact the whole issue is a 'source' in many respects. The history is a lot richer that you give it, albeit this is a good first attempt. I'd expand it out a lot. Here is the link to the RH issues: http://www.revolutionaryhistory.co.uk/rh03/rh0302.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMIA (talk • contribs) 20:14, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Revolutionary History seems to be a Trotskyist magazine (with a link to the 4th international), with less academic qualifications than say New Politics or even (ugh) Monthly Review. I doubt it would be a reliable source, and so extreme caution should be exercised with it. Please note how I flagged the New Politics article on this talk page as a possibly unreliable source. (Some Trotskyists may view these comments as unfair and ideologically tainted ....) Kiefer .Wolfowitz 12:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

RH might be partisan, but since it is a multisectarian Trotskyist journal it tends to be reliable when talking about Trotskyists. Other topics or third parties however, are treated It is as reliable as Alexander, if not more, because while Alexander is one person speaking for himself, RH is more like a peer reviewed journal subjected to an editorial board.--Cerejota (talk) 17:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response, which corrects my misunderstanding. In my ignorance, I would have classified "multisectarian Trotskyist" as a contradiction in terms. ;)
 * Alexander was a Rutgers professsor in 2-3 departments. I suspect that it would be difficult to fault his writings as unreliable sources. Please correct errors with reliable sources whenever you can.  Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:14, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually I disagree, reliable sources often need verification, and furthermore, in highly partisan environments (Such as the history of a political movement) often contradictory information is presented. Furthermore, while Alexander is not required to write WP:NPOV, and hence can take poetic licenses in the use of language, we are not allowed to take such licenses. Even if a source states a fact, we are not required to use the same florid language. Its really that simple.--Cerejota (talk) 19:34, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Merge
This page should merged into Communism in Vietnam, they cover much of the same material and the latter could benifit from more information. Charles Essie (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Flag of the Struggle Group.svg

Article is in need of Restructure.
this article is hard to read. i surgest formating the article into a more readable manner. Rebelgender (talk) 00:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)