Half a century after America’s withdrawal, Vietnam has quietly vindicated U.S. sacrifice—abandoning Marxism for nationalism and embracing the very ideals America once defended.
This article argues that, half a century after America’s withdrawal from the Vietnam War, recent developments in Vietnam effectively vindicate the U.S. sacrifice in that conflict. Vietnam’s Communist Party, under General Secretary To Lam, has officially moved away from Marxist-Leninist ideology and embraced Vietnamese nationalism—a decision marked by public speeches and formal party resolutions in 2025.
Key points:
-
Vietnam has shifted its ideology: The Party now emphasizes nationalism and has sidelined Marxist-Leninism, which is portrayed as an imported, neocolonial ideology.
-
-
Economic reforms: Recent resolutions empower private enterprise and guarantee private property rights, signifying a move toward market principles.
-
Democratic aspirations: Official statements now stress democracy, transparency, and national well-being over Communist dogma.
-
Convergence with U.S. goals: The article claims Vietnam’s current path closely aligns with the ideals the U.S. once defended in South Vietnam.
-
Broader implications: The authors suggest Vietnam could serve as a model for China’s potential future transformation. They also argue Americans should feel vindicated in their stance during the Vietnam War, as the Communist government has adopted the values America supported.
-
Critical perspective: Commenters note skepticism regarding the sincerity of democratic reforms, drawing parallels to other Communist regimes that have pursued economic liberalization without embracing full democracy.
-
👇 Leave Your Comments Below!
Michael Tavano, Very interesting look at that country today.
Their economy is hot, we only could dream of a growth of 8.22% (as reported by Reuters this month). I am pleased for them.
I’ve not held any animosity towards the Vietnamese people (with the exception of the atrocities committed by the NVA during and following the war, particularly the genocide of the Montagnard peoples).
This statement is remarkable: “The resolution gave responsibility for national wealth creation to self-management, self-effort, and self-empowerment. The rights of private property will be guaranteed and protected.” I often see evidence where we have moved away from those principles, particularly regarding property rights.
You undoubtedly know my opinion of LBJ and McNamara. I know of no one in our nation’s history more loathsome than LBJ. Lyndon cared for nothing but himself, and was willing to sacrifice anyone and anything to his ego. McNamara may not have been evil, but he certainly promulgated a management style singularly detrimental to successful prosecution of a war.
