When History Is Rewritten by the Party

Khải Huyền wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luat Khoa Magazine on March 4, 2025. 

The 2024 monograph The Politics of Memory in Socialist Vietnam is a vital work that sheds light on the censorship of memory in Việt Nam specifically, and in authoritarian states more broadly. Its author, Professor Martin Grossheim, is a German scholar specializing in Vietnamese studies at Seoul National University.

The “Party-ization” of Vietnamese History

In the book's first two chapters, Professor Grossheim underscores the role of history education as a tool of propaganda, used to reinforce the Communist Party’s legitimacy and promote its worldview. The author examines how this official narrative is preserved through subtle yet systematic means. For instance, academic performance in Việt Nam’s education system is assessed not only on scholarly achievement but also on "moral conduct," while research projects are subject to strict censorship, as seen in the cases of the Nhân Văn–Giai Phẩm affair and the writer Nhã Thuyên.

Textbooks, official curricula, and related laws not only convey what the Party wants Vietnamese people to understand about the past and world history—they also shape what the public is not supposed to know.

The state’s explanation for the collapse of the Soviet Union, for example, avoids acknowledging it as a failure of socialism, instead blaming a "flawed model" and emphasizing that Việt Nam should follow China’s path. Promoting an alternative version of history is treated as a challenge to the regime itself, because the Party's legitimacy rests on its absolute control over the past. All other interpretations are labeled as distorted.

This monopoly on the past is a modern phenomenon. During the feudal era, alongside official histories, there existed popular histories written by individuals. Under the current Leninist model in China and Vietnam, however, the Communist Party exercises absolute control over the writing and interpretation of history. State-sanctioned historians often merge national history with Party history, rendering them inseparable, while all modern achievements are attributed solely to the Party’s leadership.

These “red” pages of history actively rewrite uncomfortable events and position the Communist Party as the sole representative of the people. For instance, the disastrous land reform campaign of the 1950s continues to be portrayed as a necessary step, while the 1986 Đổi Mới reforms are framed as a Party-led triumph rather than a correction of its own grave mistakes. 

The operation of this machine is entrusted to the Central Propaganda Department, which reinforces the official narrative by issuing annual guidelines on how to commemorate major national holidays in ways that serve the Party’s interests.

The Impact of Việt Nam–China Relations on Teaching History 

Professor Grossheim argues that the official version of certain historical events—particularly those involving Việt Nam–China relations—is not fixed. When the political context shifts, the Party revises how history is interpreted in textbooks and state media, emphasizing or hiding events to align with current diplomatic interests.

A key example is the period following the normalization of Việt Nam–China relations in 1990. This political turning point led to significant changes in history education, most notably the downplaying or outright omission of the 1979 border war. This historical revisionism is believed to have been one of the conditions China set during the closed-door Chengdu Conference. Similarly, military clashes from 1974 and 1988 were seldom mentioned for many years.

However, this narrative of omission began to shift again following rising tensions in the South China Sea, particularly after the 2014 HD-981 oil rig crisis. With the widespread use of the internet, public pressure mounted, forcing the state to acknowledge these military conflicts with China more openly. Citizens began demanding transparency, insisting that critical events no longer be forgotten or vaguely presented as they had been in the past.

The Enforcers of Official History

Chapter 3 of the monograph analyzes the security apparatus's role in reinforcing and safeguarding the Party’s official historical narrative. This is achieved through a network of legal documents across journalism, cybersecurity, and education that prohibit any version of history deviating from the official account, with corresponding punitive measures for violators. 

Việt Nam has taken cues from China in developing this sophisticated propaganda machine, which pairs the promotion of the state's narrative with punitive actions against those deemed to be distorting history.

The police force plays a key role in defending this official history, operating under a broader mandate to suppress “peaceful evolution,” internal dissent, and ideological erosion within the Party itself. This is put into practice through the active creation and commemoration of “red” events, figures, and landmarks associated with the security sector. In a similar vein, the birthplaces of many Party leaders have been elevated to the status of national heritage sites, a clear effort to physically embed and legitimize the Party’s sanctioned historical narrative across the country.

The Republic of Việt Nam in Official History

In the book's final chapter, Grossheim explores the complex and often contradictory efforts to manage the collective memory of the Republic of Vietnam, using the Biên Hòa Cemetery as a case study. 

He analyzes the campaign to suppress and erase the memory of South Việt Nam's existence in the aftermath of reunification—an effort that ran counter to the official promise of national reconciliation. This included "northernizing" the southern education system, destroying cultural legacies deemed "decadent," and deliberately omitting historical tragedies like the late-1970s food shortages that led to a dramatic increase in the number of people fleeing the country.

While certain leaders, like Võ Văn Kiệt, later took steps toward reconciliation—such as restoring South Vietnamese soldiers’ cemeteries and allowing former boat people to return—the Communist Party of Việt Nam largely continues to uphold a victor’s version of history as sacred and untouchable. The denial of the brutal treatment of those who served the former South Vietnamese regime remains part of a broader campaign of party-prescribed amnesia.

The book sheds light on events entirely omitted from official records—the boat people, re-education camps, and the “Revisionist Affair”—and others that have been rewritten to serve the regime’s interests. Yet, despite the tireless efforts of the Party’s “red historians” or “memory wardens,” they have been unable to fully erase these events from the memories of those who lived through, witnessed, and remember them.