|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
155118
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Swidden cultivators in the Southeast Asian highlands may work far from lowland centres, but certain crops attract powerful interests. During the First Indochina War (1946–54), French and Vietnamese political actors climbed the hills in pursuit of the Black River region's opium production and trade. Even after combat formally ended, opium contests continued into an independent Vietnam, intersecting with larger struggles over ethnic difference, state resource claims, and market organization. Using upland cultivators to examine post-colonial statemaking, this article tells a new story about opium's tangled relationship with socialist rule in Vietnam. Drawing on French and Vietnamese archival records, it traces the operation of successive opium regimes through war and into restive peace. Based on evidence of opium tax and purchase operations conducted by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV) from 1951 to 1960, it argues that regulating the commodity sensitized cultivators to their long, fraught relations with state power. Far from passive, cultivating subjects animated revolutionary ideals, engaged smuggling networks, negotiated resource rights, and mounted an oppositional social movement. Peaking in 1957, the movement and subsequent crackdown illustrate tensions embedded in post-colonial relations of exchange and rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
142775
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The shooting ended forty years ago but American scholars still fight over how to interpret the Vietnam War. Historians, especially, continue to debate the meaning, significance, and experience of the Second Indochina War. Skirmishes in 2011 over a college textbook pitted conventional US-centric narratives emphasising American actors against Vietnam-centric narratives stressing the other side.1 In 2014, critical portrayals of US military conduct in Vietnam stirred old battle lines arraying hawks versus doves, many of whom have one eye trained on ongoing interventions in the Middle East.2 Such polarised debates often reproduce simplistic, binary representations of what was, in fact, a complex Cold War conflict unfolding through a hot civil war. They do so to the neglect of the everyday experience of people who lived through it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|