RECTIFYING ERRORS

RECTIFYING ERRORS

By Van Nguyen

To begin a new economic plan, in 1980, Truong  Chinh and his colleague theorists, first, decided to devote themselves to study in depth the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism. This body of precepts provides, in principle, the perfect system of socialism on which other socialist countries are bound to model. While trying to resist growing political pressure from China’s Deng Xiao-ping, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam sought support from the USSR. It was then a propitious time for the country to start change after years of economic hard times. The Soviet Union and Vietnam signed a comprehensive cooperation agreement. The treaty not only brought with it into the country a billion rupees but also large groups of experts to help develop the country’s economy following the Soviet “NEP” model.

NEP is the abbreviation for the Soviet leader Lenin’s New Economic Policy of the USSR during 1921-1929. Instead of requisitioning all agricultural produce above a stated subsistence allowance, the State actuates a fixed proportion of the surplus; the rest could be traded freely by the peasant. The NEP thus reinstated a limited form of free-market trading, although the State retained complete control of major industries.  The NEP was introduced in March 1921 after a series of peasant revolts and the Kroonstad uprising. Aimed at reestablishing an alliance with the peasantry, it began an agricultural measure to act as an incentive for peasants to produce more food.  The policy was ended in 1928 by Stalin’s first Five-Year Plan, which began the collectivization of agriculture.

 Lenin was cited as the supporter of a multi-component economy, including individual and foreign enterprises, The NEP was thus promoted, regardless of possible deviations from orthodox socialism. Nevertheless, the party leadership, Le Duan, Pham Van Dong, and Truong Chinh agreed to accept the new theory, believing it was necessary for a by-passing period to socialism. Collectivization resumes as soon as the economy revives, and private ownership should be exterminated as Marx conceived. Truong Chinh, the Party’s leading theorist made study tours in person to major cities to evaluate the situation to renew measures to disentangle the country’s ailing economy. In July 1981, amid turbulent economic crisis, the Chairman of National Assembly Truong Chinh was appointed Chairman of the State Council. He started his job by revising the economic policy, notably the agrarian reforms programs. By this time, Deng Xiao-ping was keenly interested in dismantling the constraints of economic centralism, using other means to save China from a stagnant economy. Vietnam had better opportunity than ever to help itself out of the critical economic situation

The major problem was how to redress the operation of the agrarian communal system directed by the strict operation of chain cooperatives and the control of communal councils.  Ever since its establishment after the agrarian reforms (1956-1960), the system had rigorously governed the life of the peasantry, depriving their means of production, conditioning their modes of production, and regulating their behavior, economically and politically. The system is mandatory as it is conceived as the preliminary step towards building a socialist State. Every peasant household ought to be a member in it. It is both a duty and an obligation. Only a reactionary is outside of it. Cooperatives are instrumental in operating the system. To the distress of the peasant, the system is incompatible in practice with the needs of the real economic life. It fails to develop the country’s economy; neither did it carry out its function as backbone of collective economy; instead, the system consolidates monopoly of authority and lends a hand to exploitation of labor and corruption.

Having offered the State all their means of production, the peasant became empty-handed. From then on, from irrigation work to crop cultivation, every activity is conditioned by rules and regulations set by the communal cooperatives. Labor production is fixed on labor standards and total revenues of the cooperatives. Payments are fixed by marks of days of work. The system of accountancy is primary, mostly practiced by rules of thumb and actuated on whims and wishes. In practice, a variety of works requires a variety of standards, and thus a variety of payments. Harrowing and sloughing the fields cannot be equated with husking or pounding rice, or spending hours for leisure at the cooperatives’ desks. Worse still, corruption and bureaucracy reign due to abuses of authority. Laborers labor hard and gain the least; the authorities sit for enjoyment but gain the most. At the root of the problem, labor exploitation and dishonesty of communal authorities ruin the system.           

     Output Contracts System

Output contract first appeared to be a predicament in collective farming. On July 27, 1980, The Standing Party Committee decided to apply 100% output contracts for agricultural lands. In the beginning of August 1980, a conference on held in the presence of Party Secretarial Le Duan keenly evaluated the actual practices of cooperatives. Observations revealed the fact that the authority vested in the cooperatives is really “all-powerful.” There should be therefore an alternative system that is effective enough to adapt to the actual conditions of the country’s economy as well as to ameliorate the level of expertise of the cadres to accommodate the cadres. Output contracts are made to profit the labor groups and the labor workers. On 14, 1980, Le Thanh Nghi, Secretary of the Party Central Committee, in a circular, announced new agrarian production rectifications according to which output contracts were made a due practice in the operation of  communal agrarian  cooperatives system. The Party leadership—Party Secretary-general Le Duan, Chairman of State Truong Chinh, and Premier Pham Van Dong- gave consent, officiously.

The reform process was extended over the next few years. Most importantly, from January 1981, a new contract system in agriculture was adopted as a new mode of agrarian reform implementation throughout North Vietnam. This contract system did not become widespread in the South until 1982. It was known as “khoan san pham,” the appellation for product contract system, which had been in operation with success in the pilot collective farms at Tien Lang District, Haiphong. The adoption of this system characterizes a renovation in collective agriculture. Under the new system, productions works, based on specialized tasks, were specified and individual households (or in special cases, work teams) were allocated plots of land by the collective. On these plots, each household or work team is responsible for all works, from sowing, transplanting, and cultivation to harvesting of the crop. Cooperatives remain responsible for recommendation for those areas of works and productions operating under the system’s supervision, especially the works and productions involving the use of collectively owned means of production or advanced techniques--ploughing, insecticide spraying, irrigation, seed propagation and selection of and supply of chemical fertilizer. Collective households sign directly individual contracts with the collective.  Individual households who do farming on private lands as is the case of individual farming in the South sign contracts indirectly with the State. The latter households are not entitled to receive any inputs and services from the collective farm.  Collective farm member receive a fixed quantity of grain, pork, and so on. The prices at which those goods exchange are determined by the State (some examples: 1 kg. of urea--3kgs paddy; 1 liter of diesel fuel--0.8 kg. paddy.)  

Plans for establishment of Russian-type “kolkhois” in Long an, Haiphong, and Vinh Phu, for example, were executed with Soviet financial aids and expertise training, but the expansion found no good soil for development in many other localities. Modes of production remain largely traditional and rudimentary. Collective members are generally doubtful about the State policy. They reluctantly adapt themelves to the new mode of production and  way of living. Silent non-cooperation is pervasive. The cadres are mostly  ili-educated. The same old villain is appointed to the new job. Conditions of work vary from one locality to another. Supplies of necessities are irregular and momentary. Needs for implementation of work are not met. The management is still primary. Most lamentably, abuse of authority, bureaucracy, and corruption persist.

The agricultural measures, contracts on goods system, and expansion of cooperatives farms did not bring good results in the rural areas, at last. The failures of the two waves of forced collectivization in 1978-1979 and 1983-1985 remained the impediments to economic reforms. There were still no effective measures to alleviate the peasantry from slaving for the land production without due compensation. The agrarian economy was again in a shambles. Repeated failures in agrarian economy development led to a police reshuffle. The leadership of the Party, Le Duan, Truong Chinh, and Le Duc Tho forced To Huu, Vice Prime Minister in charge of agricultural reforms, and eight cabinet ministers to resign from office. To dissimulate the embarrassment, the Party leadership sought for alternative measures, again, to pave the way for openness and renovation and consolidate the Party’s prestige.