Ideology and historical interpretation in Vietnam : a study of the sociology of consciousness

Abstract

The problem of ideology in historical studies is central to this work. In addressing this problem, I have concerned myself with the task of analysing the nature of ideology through the case study of Vietnam, in which I examine the teaching material used in history curricula in three periods : French colonial (1885-1954), the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (1945-1975) and the Republic of Vietnam (1955-1975). The theoretical framework employed for this empirical analysis is based on the thesis that the dominant ideology in a society -- in its process of diffusion and popularisation (defined here as 'hegemony') - will necessarily pervade that society's interpretation of history, particularly the kind taught in schools. I have demonstrated that within each period under investigation, there indeed emerged a dominant ideology which decisively influenced the historical consciousness of each : colonialism in the French system, foreignism in the RVN and autonomism in the DRV systems. This ideological identification was reached through a procedure based on the examination of the structural relationship between the ruling ideas, practices and social formation within each of these periods. In its study of history, each period selected, included and excluded both sources and aspects of history for emphasis and neglect. According to its own dominant ideology, each defined or redefined the concepts of tradition and nationalism, and projected a favourable image of itself in the future. In this procedure, it also attempted to incorporate opposing views -- which represented an oppositional ideology -- in order to neutralise their effects. I have also found that the immediate origins of the foreignist and autonomist ideologies and their related historiographic campaigns in Vietnam could be traced to the earlier colonialist ideology and historiography. This led me to identify the relationship between 'hegemony', 'para-hegemony' and 'counter-hegemony', and also the particular characteristics of each. On the basis of this empirical study of Vietnam, I launched a theoretical analysis of the working of ideology. In the end, I was able to argue for a materialist conception of ideology which both defines ideology in terms of a growing structure and rejects the conception which confines it to the realm of abstract ideas. I also arrived at a theoretical definition of 'dominant group' within this emergent understanding of ideology. All of this stems from my identification of ideology as 'contextual entity' and 'dialectical struggle' — an identification which is at once intimately connected with the analysis of human interest in its process of acculturation. In an attempt to distinguish different kinds of consciousness, I arrived at the idea that the sociology of consciousness is a more appropriate form of study than what is commonly known as the sociology of knowledge. This finally led to my putting forward some theoretical considerations for the study of education : I attempted in this way to show the complexity of the educational environment and the realities as well as the potentials of education in its dual role as both apparatus and theatre of hegemonic struggle