Blog Nam Hải Trường Sơn Hân Hạnh Đón Chào Bạn



Đối với bạn, nỗi lo lắng của vợ chẳng khác gì bát nước lã—nhạt nhẽo vô vị, chỉ đến khi nhuốm bệnh bạn mới cảm thấy hương nó nồng, vị nó ngọt. Còn niềm ân cần của tình nhân thì giống hệt ly đá chanh—giữa mùa hè một ngày một ly e rằng chẳng đủ để giải khát. Trong khi đó, mối quan tâm của hồng nhan tri kỷ thì thoang thoảng như tách cà phê nóng—làm việc mệt nhoài đến nửa đêm, càng nhâm nhi càng cảm thấy tỉnh táo.
Câu Chuyện... Để Đời
Tuyết rơi tầm tã. Trời đất mông lung sau tấm màn trắng xám. Núi đồi trùng trùng điệp điệp nhưng chẳng thấy bóng chim bay. Vạn nẻo đường đi vắng hoe không một vết chân người. Chỉ có một chiếc tam bản cô đơn... bồng bềnh giữa dòng sông buốt giá.

Eleanor Roosevelt once said, "The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams." It is time for those still intoxicated with power and corruption in Vietnam to sober up and purify themselves to join hands with the flag-wavers ...

Việt Nam: Con Hổ Cùng Đồ Mạt Lộ
Giống như tại Trung Quốc, ĐCSVN cũng bám chặt vào hệ thống xí nghiệp nhà nước để tạo phương tiện áp đặt quyền kiểm soát chính trị vào nền kinh tế. Tuy nhiên tầng lớp quản lý kinh tế có quan hệ chính trị nhưng bất tài lại được phép ...

Ai Sẽ Thống Trị Thế Giới?
Tất cả mọi kế hoạch này đều có thể thực hiện được bởi vì người Hoa Kỳ đã vùng dậy để đấu tranh cho lý tưởng bình đẳng chính trị, và hệ thống chính trị Hoa Kỳ đã triển khai đầy đủ sức bao dung để tạo điều kiện cho họ làm điều đó.

Tán Tỉnh
Này em mình gặp ở đâu
Sao mà như thể quen lâu lắm rồi
À ... ha ... có phải từ hồi
Em sang gánh nước bên đồi thông xanh
Lối về khúc khuỷu tròng trành
Nước vương ướt áo nhìn anh bẽ bàng


Bắc Kinh Là Cơn Ác Mộng Vĩnh Hằng
Bên kia là một thành phố tràn trề tuyệt vọng. Tôi gặp họ trên những chiếc xe buýt công cộng, tôi nhìn vào đôi mắt của họ và tôi thấy họ chẳng ôm ấp hy vọng gì. Thậm chí họ chẳng thể tưởng tượng..


Mẹ Cá Bống
Nhớ thuở lên ba
Mẹ ẳm bồng
Tiếng ru trầm bổng
Vòng tay ấm
Chén cơm hâm nóng
Môi thổi


Khổ Hạnh
Linh hồn anh hấp hối
Giữa vực sâu tăm tối"
Mất rồi, em mất rồi!
Đời còn ai cứu rỗi"
Áo cà sa mặc vội
Cố quên mùi tóc rối



Ngày 18 tháng 06 năm 2013

Wake Up and Dream



Wake Up and Dream

By
Nam Hải Trường Sơn

In contemporary Vietnamese political discourse, when an article begins patronizingly with an imperative like "don't hold on to a dead dream, focus on the present" atop an epigraphical photograph proudly depicting the "red flag with a yellow star" unfurling beneath a beautiful bright sky, the reader has ample reasons to believe it belongs to the communist regime's propaganda machine. The fact that it is written in the native language further bolsters the belief.

But it is not the case, apparently at least, with a recent blog post bearing the same characteristics originally published on Xin lỗi Ông (meaning "Excuse me, Sir" in English) and subsequently re-posted by several popular Vietnamese-language websites, most notably by BBC-Vietnamese under the shortened title of "Đừng giữ một giấc mơ đã chết" (which is, of course, the Vietnamese equivalent of "Don't hold on to a dead dream"). Its author, Jonathan London, is a foreigner, presumably an American, who teaches political sociology at the City University of Hong Kong.

Surprisingly (or perhaps not, if one ascertains his motives from a different perspective), London praised the current regime's flag as "already beautiful and simple" and took issue with those who continue to embrace the old one with unabated passion: "I find it hard to understand when a number of people who support political reforms in Vietnam still want to wave the flag of the Republic of Vietnam." But instead of trying to find out the root causes of the conundrum, as any earnest undergraduate student of sociology would do, the professor chose an easy but unbecomingly pretentious route—to launch a broad-stroked campaign of character assassination.

The Fallacy of Freeloading Labels

The pejorative salvos were aimed not only at millions of Vietnamese (and their friends) abroad who have the freedom to wave the "yellow flag with three red stripes" in the open, but also at millions upon millions more at home who can only do so in the confines of their hearts—for fear of having to follow in the footsteps of Nguyễn Phương Uyên and Đinh Nguyên Kha. It is ironic indeed that, on the very day London published his controversial blog post, these two university students were summarily sentenced to unconscionably long prison terms, to be followed by equally unjustifiable house arrests—as usual, by a party-controlled court. Their "crimes" were nothing more than a peaceful display of different political views and, yes, the "ugly and not so simple" flag.

London's piece is rather short, yet it is rich in freeloading language and sensationalism. To start off, metaphorically or otherwise, how on earth is a "dead dream" possible? But, more importantly, even if this oxymoronic term is capable of making any sense above the derogatory level, does it accurately reflect the true aspirations of the flag-wavers? There is also a gaping hole between waving the old flag and being so backward as to warrant a necessary development of "a brain independent of the past." The gap ought to be filled for the two to connect, otherwise the characterization risks becoming a name-calling insult of the worst kind. In this instance, London failed to provide even a paltry justification for the linkage.

Moreover, this flag-waving activity was then discounted as a form of "regurgitation of the past . . . which is certainly not a road promising a bright future." The disparaging nature of regurgitation, as a metaphor, is less obvious in English as one needs to etymologically deconstruct the word to get to its retch-and-champ image. However, the Vietnamese equivalent used by London—nhai đi nhai lại—literally means chewing the cud, and as such directly conjures up vivid visions of ruminant quadrupeds and glaringly divulges its attendant derogation.

In a follow-up piece titled "A Dark Day, Paths Forward?" (first written in English and later translated into Vietnamese), London tried to soften his stance and convey remorse. Yet, instead of retracting the gist of the argument which induced the onslaught of predominantly negative reactions (and hence his "dark day") in the first place, London doubled down on it with this concluding reiteration: "My post advises Vietnamese to move on from waving opposing flags, to not remain prisoners of history, and get on with the business of pushing forward with real reforms. . ." Here the picture was painted with such broad strokes as to cover an even greater portion of the Vietnamese populace, regardless of their flag affiliations. As if "dead dream holders," "historical cud chewers," and "past-dependent brain-possessors" were not enough to do the trick, London reinforced it with the all-encompassing "prisoners of history" label, again without any evidential persuasion. One cannot help but wonder if his contrition was genuine.

Labels are convenient tools because they do a lot of work for us. But problems will inevitably arise when we let them do too much work for us. To be logically sound, words and terms loaded with evaluative and pejorative freight must be supported by sufficient evidence and justification. London used many highly charged freeloading labels to advance his conclusion but the fact is he never earned the right to rely on them by fulfilling the requisite burden of proof. In logic, as in life, freeloaders rarely get their creators anywhere.

It should also be noted that, in an obvious attempt at damage control, London hastily revised the original post when faced with the fast and furious reactions which had occurred virtually overnight. But what is more troubling is that he then took this post down—together with all of its comments. The quick and complete removal of the post was a clever stroke of gamesmanship indeed, but f
or those who took the time to engage in the discussion (and no doubt for most other readers as well), it was hardly one of sportsmanship. 

The Flags in Contrast

It does not take a vexillologist to figure out that national flags are symbolic of nationhood and identity and that they represent not only the history but also the future of one's nation. The "yellow flag with three red stripes" has a long history, dating back to the first successful resistance movement against Chinese invasion almost 2,000 years ago, under the leadership of the Two Ladies Trưng (Hai Bà Trưng). Riding on the backs of two giant war elephants, the two sisters waved what has since then become known as the Yellow Flag to lead a formidable army of freedom fighters, including a significant number of women, to drive out the Han-dynasty brutish occupiers, and briefly re-established the autonomous state of Vietnam in A.D. 40. Regarded as the most revered heroines in Vietnam's history, the Trưng sisters are powerful symbols of independence, liberty, and egalitarianism.

Moreover, their embodiment in the Yellow Flag reflects a broader worldview that has also stood the test of time. According to the doctrine of the Five Elements, the yellow color corresponds with earth—the fifth element. In Vietnamese culture, the significance of this correspondence can be interpreted in two fundamental ways. The yellow earth not only represents ancestral land—đất tổ or tổ quốc—and its concomitant inviolability of sacred territorial rights. It also symbolizes a universal and all-powerful force that creates, nourishes, sustains, invigorates, ripens, and then re-creates all life forms in cyclic perpetuity. In this latter sense, the Vietnamese notion of motherland—đất mẹ—is virtually synonymous with the terra mater concept in the Western world and that of the divine mother earth or earth mother in other cultures. The yellow color also represents freedom in two different but not unrelated senses. From an earthly or humanistic perspective, it means freedom from domestic oppression or foreign domination; and, in a spiritual or soterial context, it means freedom from worldly worries—a view influenced in part by Buddhism.

In essence, the Yellow Flag thus emblematizes the human ideal of living in harmony not only with one another but also with nature to achieve happiness on earth and beyond. It is no coincidence that a common thread running through the metamorphosis of the final 8 successors of the Yellow Flag in the last 150 years has been the retention of its foundation—the yellow background—both literally and substantively.

It is noteworthy that the flag of the Nguyễn Dynasty from 1890 to 1920 (also known as the flag of Emperor Thành Thái) and the one used by the Republic of Vietnam from 1955 to 1975 are entirely identical. This flag was created by superimposing three horizontal red stripes of equal size on the center of a yellow background (and hence the name "yellow flag with three red stripes"). While the red color signifies beauty, success, and good fortune, the three stripes, as a unit, represent Quẻ Càn, or Qian-gua in Chinese pinyin, the first trigram used in the Book of Changes (one of China's oldest and most influential classic scriptures that contributed in part to the Vietnamese cosmic and earthly outlook). Quẻ Càn is the divination sign representing heaven, strength, expansive energy, fatherhood, and the South. The three red stripes therefore also indicate the vitality of all people living in the three corresponding northern, central, and southern regions of Vietnam. Essentially, taken as a whole, the "yellow flag with three red stripes" stands for the ultimate unity and harmony among the trinity of heaven, earth, and humanity. At least, that is a dream the Vietnamese people (including the so-called flag-wavers, of course) have been trying to realize.

By contrast, what makes the "red flag with a yellow star" loathsome to many Vietnamese is the unpalatable combination of its xenogeny and sanguinary symbolism. Unlike the home-grown Yellow Flag and its offspring, the red flag bears conspicuous marks of foreign origin and influence. It was modeled faithfully on the common format that had created the flags of the "big brothers" heading the international socialist camp, namely the Comintern, the Soviet Union, and the Chinese Communist Party. The red color forming its background has departed from its traditional roots to take on the new meanings of revolution and blood. The yellow pentagram in the middle represents workers, peasants, intellectuals, traders, and soldiers—the five major forces mobilized by the party to fight for socialism (which of course amounts to nothing more than a euphemism for authoritarianism and its own self-interests). For all intents and purposes, this too is another bloody flag of communism and proletarian revolution. It has been built not only with the blood of well-meaning members of those five social groups who were duped by the party into mistaking barbarianism for noble idealism, but also with the blood of millions of innocent people who were—and continue to be—victimized by its totalitarian brutality.

The True "Prisoners of History"

Queerly, in more ways than one, London contended that the era of revolutionary violence has long ended and Vietnamese should find a new road. The implicit suggestion that the flag-wavers are somehow advocating violence is patently false. Flag-waving is, well, just that—flag-waving. In the case of overseas Vietnamese, true, it constitutes an ostentatiously emotional display of patriotism and protest, but it is a far cry from violence-mongering. London did not provide any evidence with regard to their intentions to call for, much less engage in, armed struggle or any other conceivable form of violence. On the contrary, there has been much discussion among Vietnamese political activists, both at home and abroad, about the applicability of the so-called "people power" model—whereby millions of citizens staged non-violent protests nationwide to topple one totalitarian regime after another in eastern Europe during the last twenty years of the previous century. They have also explored the adaptability of certain aspects of Gandhism and shown particular interest in the Orange Revolution in which Ukraine's corrupt and oppressive rulers were overthrown in 2005 by widespread civil disobedience, sit-ins, and general strikes.

On the flip side, has the era of revolutionary violence really ended? The Arab Spring and recent events in the Middle East suggest otherwise. In the case of Vietnam, the savagery has not even subsided. From the bloody land reform campaign in the 1950s to the barbaric Huế Massacre in 1968 to the inhumane re-education camps lasting for 17 years after the capture of South Vietnam in 1975 to the ever-intensified brutality of religious and dissident persecutions of the current two decades (and the recent wrongful convictions of the 14 young Catholic activists in Vinh as well as Nguyễn Phương Uyên and Đinh Nguyên Kha in Saigon are just the tip of the iceberg), the history of the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP), at least for the last 68 years, is littered with evidence of non-stop revolutionary violence. Indeed, the Vietnamese communists have even cultivated the romanticization of mass murders for political purposes, as illustrated by the following stanza, penned by the late politburo member and deputy prime minister Tố Hữu, one of the regime's most decorated poets:

Giết, giết nữa, bàn tay không phút nghỉ
Cho ruộng đồng lúa tốt, thuế mau xong
Cho đảng bền lâu, cùng rập bước chung lòng
Thờ Mao Chủ tịch, thờ Sít-ta-lin bất diệt!
My translation:
Kill, kill more, allow our hands not a moment of rest
For the rice fields to flourish, the taxes quickly done
For the party to persist, march in unison, hearts as one
Worshipping Chairman Mao, worshipping Stalin... forever ceaseless!
In 2006, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (representing 47 member states with over 800 million citizens) passed the historic Resolution 1481 to condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the crimes committed by communists worldwide which it encapsulated as follows:
The totalitarian communist regimes which ruled in central and eastern Europe in the last century, and which are still in power in several countries in the world, have been, without exception, characterised by massive violations of human rights. The violations have differed depending on the culture, country and the historical period and have included individual and collective assassinations and executions, death in concentration camps, starvation, deportations, torture, slave labour and other forms of mass physical terror, persecution on ethnic or religious grounds, violation of freedom of conscience, thought and expression, of freedom of the press, and also lack of political pluralism.
Furthermore, the Council called on all communist or post-communist parties in its member states and in effect around the world "to reassess the history of communism and their own past, clearly distance themselves from the crimes committed by totalitarian communist regimes and condemn them without any ambiguity." Yet, instead of taking heed, Vietnam's communist rulers have shown determination to continue to travel in the opposite direction by clinging to their own sanguinary history and regurgitating the perennially justificative victories—first against French colonialism (the credit for which should also belong to the nationalists) and then against American "neocolonialism" (the significance of which is at best debatable while its costs and consequences are indisputably horrible). They even succeeded at something that Hồ Chí Minh himself never dared to try: the constitutionalization of the absolute, permanent, and sole leadership of their own party based on communist tenets. Article 4 of the current Constitution of Vietnam stipulates:
The Communist Party of Vietnam, the vanguard of the Vietnamese working class and loyal representative of the interests of the working class, the working people and the whole nation, who adheres to Marxism-Leninism and Ho Chi Minh's thought, is the force assuming leadership of the State and society.
Even those formerly belonging to the upper echelons of the VCP's inner circle have come to the realization that theirs is a political system in death throes and appealing to its pseudo-glorious past is certainly no way out. The ruling class, however, is still inebriated, not with revolutionary zeal or even mistaken idealism, but with brutish power, grand corruption, and their forbidden fruit—outrageous opulence. Recently, in an article lamenting the on-going retrogression, Tương Lai, a top adviser to Vietnam's two previous prime ministers from 1991 to 2006, added yet another urgent wake-up call to the dissenting chorus which, by all accounts, has fallen on deaf ears:
Otherwise, if our leaders continue to turn their back on the people, to hide behind the signboards of an outdated ideology, to cling stubbornly to an obsolete model of anti-democratic totalitarianism, and to lead our nation into a dead-end alley, in order to hang on to their crumbling thrones, their demise will be inevitable.1 (My translation.)
Recognizing who the true "prisoners of history" are, therefore, should not be a difficult enterprise even for the uninitiated.

The Dream of Humanity

As a republic in its infancy, South Vietnam was undoubtedly far from perfect by Western standards. However, its history should be viewed as a sociopolitical project in progress. Also, one should not lose sight of the fact that the nation-building process of this nascent democracy was carried out under the most difficult circumstances imaginable. For the entirety of its existence, the Republic of Vietnam was continually fighting a bloody war to fend off the ruthless forces of the invading North Vietnamese communists who acted as surrogates for their Soviet and Maoist patrons to expand communism to Southeast Asia under the disguise of reunification and liberation.

During the initial 12 years, from 1955 to 1967, the Republic of Vietnam was plagued first by autocratic and nepotistic practices under the Ngô Đình Diệm regime (otherwise known as the First Republic) and then by a series of coups and cavalier short-lived military governments. However, a new constitutional framework was put into place in late 1967 to inaugurate the Second Republic, and by the end of the decade, virtually all of the institutions created by the new constitution had started taking determined and relatively solid—albeit still "infant"—steps towards the goal of building a truly free and democratic society under the rule of law.

Take human rights for instance, as the historians who compiled the Pentagon Papers described it, even the Diệm regime "compared favorably with other Asian governments of the same period in its respect for the person and property of citizens. There is much that can be offered in mitigation of Diem's authoritarianism."2 More significantly, not only did it fare better than other political systems around the region, but as Vietnam scholar Robert F. Turner bluntly brought the comparison close to home: "[I]n every category, across the board, it was far superior to what Ho Chi Minh and his comrades were offering in the North."3

With regard to freedom of the press, the following observation reported in 1970 by Dan Sutherland, a Saigon correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor, can shed some light on the truth of the matter:

[U]nder its new press law, South Vietnam now has one of the freest presses in Southeast Asia, and the daily paper with the biggest circulation here happens to be sharply critical of President Thieu. . . . [S]ince the new press law was promulgated nine months ago, the government has not been able to close down Tin Sang or any other newspaper among the more than 30 now being published in Saigon.4
In his report to the House of Representatives, after completing a congressional field trip to South Vietnam in 1974 to investigate the human rights situation there, Congressman Leo Ryan, a strong critic of U.S. policy in Vietnam, provided this fair and accurate assessment:
[T]he worst charges of widespread repression of fundamental human rights are overblown. There is a vocal, operative political opposition and press. It is not doubted that there are some political prisoners, but neither the populace as a whole nor the opposition political leaders appear to be living in fear of government repression.5
Had it not been for the devastating war of aggression carried out by the communist North and its patrons, South Vietnam would have joined the ranks of the "Asian tigers" by now. It is an oversimplification to characterize the Republic of Vietnam as a "failed regime for numerous reasons" without elaboration. Perhaps the biggest failure of all is that South Vietnam placed too much trust in America—an ally who vowed to stand together to fight against the spread of communism but shamefully betrayed the very survival of this young nation to its iniquitous enemies at the halfway point.

True, nostalgia for the "not-so-bad" former regime has naturally been a strong sentiment among the overwhelming majority of South Vietnamese, especially the overseas diaspora. Moreover, given the retrograde state of sociopolitical affairs in Vietnam since 1975, many Northerners have also recognized its value as the first liberal democracy ever created in Vietnam's history and its increasing prospect of becoming the last and only one. But, by and large, they hold no illusions about its genuine flaws, imperfections, and growing pains. It is a simplistic affront to equate their flag-waving (visible or suppressed) with a desire to return to the alleged bad old days. Rather, it represents a yearning to embark on a historic journey back to the future when a purified version of the Republic of Vietnam can be revived. With all those foibles and defects stripped away, what remains is the splendid dream of humanity with a Vietnamese twinkle—the enjoyment of life and liberty in harmony with one another and with nature under the protection of the rule of law and democratic institutions to pursue earthly happiness and, possibly, cosmic enlightenment.

Eleanor Roosevelt once said, "The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams." It is time for those still intoxicated with power and corruption in Vietnam (and their apologists) to sober up and purify themselves to join hands with the flag-wavers in their efforts to turn this beautiful dream into reality. That is what may be termed a bona fide focus of our times.



Notes

1Tương Lai, "Những Bàn Chân Nổi Giận," Đài Tiếng Nói Hoa Kỳ, June 7, 2013. Web accessed June 8, 2013. An English version of this article, titled "Vietnam's Angry Feet," also appeared in the New York Times on the same date. Unfortunately, its translation contains a number of inaccuracies. Take this very quote for instance, literally lost in translation is the key word "tiếp tục" (meaning "continue" in English) which substantially betrays the original intent. What the author tries to convey here is a partial condition based on an on-going ontological fact, whereas the omission of that critical word renders the entire sentence wholly conditional or hypothetical.
2The Pentagon Papers (Senator Gravel Edition, Boston: Beacon Press, 1971), vol. 3, p. 253. Officially titled United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: History of US Decision Making Process on Vietnam Policy, this 46-volume document is a top-secret report on America’s political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967, completed in 1971 by the United States Department of Defense, but not fully declassified and released until June 2011.
3Robert F. Turner, "Myths and Realities in the Vietnam Debate," in The Vietnam Debate: A Fresh Look at the Arguments, ed. John Norton Moore (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1990), 162.
4Dan Sutherland, "Free-swinging Press Keeps Saigon Ducking," Christian Science Monitor, September 18, 1970.
5The United States House of Representatives, Vietnam and Korea: Human Rights and U.S. Assistance, A Study Mission Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs 5 (94th Cong., 1st Sess., February 9, 1975).




25 comments:

Brian Kinsella nói...

A thoughtful and beautifully written essay, turning the tables on Johnathan London with sound logic and solid evidence. Well done, Nam Hai Truong Son!

Nặc danh nói...

Thằng Johnathan London này có học nhưng vẫn vô tri. Bài nó viết bị bề hội đồng nên xóa luôn. Trong bài đó nó nói rõ ý định là không muốn làm bạn với những người vẫy cờ vàng. Bởi vậy mình phải tẩy chay nó -- một thằng ngoại quốc bưng bô cho cộng sản.

Nặc danh nói...

Nó phải nịnh bợ tụi Việt cộng thôi, nếu không chúng không cho vào làm việc với các cơ quan nhà nước để nghiên cứu. Vì cái career nó quậy. Thông cảm cho nó đi các bác. Tôi bỏ vào blog của nó rồi. Chán bỏ mẹ, ý tưởng của nó chẳng có gì sâu sắc.

Nặc danh nói...

The best intellectual defence of the Yellow Flag I've ever come across. Thank you.

Nặc danh nói...

Cái đầu đề mới nhìn qua hình như là mâu thuẫn nhưng đọc xong bài mới thấy ẩn ý. Đòn phản kích của bác Nam Hải Trường Sơn nhẹ nhàng nhưng rất độc và rất thấm thía.

Nặc danh nói...

i know johnathan london from cityu. this guy is full of himself.

Nặc danh nói...

London: Cảm ơn các bạn về những lời bình luận tử tế và không tử tế cho lắm.

Ông chỉ nên cảm ơn những người "tử tế" với ông là đủ rồi, ông ạ. Ông không nên cảm ơn những người đã "bình luận không tử tế cho lắm" làm [...] gì! Mỉa mai vụng về quá, cha nội ơi!

Một vị trí thức [con ...] như ông khi cầm bút mà không có một chút "respect" bên "thua cuộc" - thì quả thật ông cũng chỉ là một kẻ kém văn hóa vậy!

Không sao đâu ông London ơi, chọt tiếp đi....cứ làm cọng nô đi rồi sẽ biết đời.

Nặc danh nói...

Nam Hải Trường Sơn cho J. London đo ván một cách đẹp tuyệt vời. Viết như thế này mới gọi là viết. Viết rồi bị thiên hạ chê cười nên tự động phê bình bài viết của mình là quá dở thì viết để làm cái gì nhỉ?

Nặc danh nói...

Bác Nam Hải Trường Sơn ơi có bản tiếng Việt không bác. Em trình độ tiếng Anh còn hơi kém, có nhiều chỗ không hiểu hết. Cám ơn.

Nặc danh nói...

http://www.danchimviet.info/archives/76067/phan-bien-voi-jonathan-london-ham-nong-giac-mo-la-con-duong-duy-nhat/2013/05

Bob Dubinsky nói...

Excellent analyses as always. This idea alone can form the basis for a Master's thesis: The red-flag-with-a-yellow-star has been built not only with the blood of well-meaning members of those five social groups who were duped by the party into mistaking barbarianism for noble idealism, but also with the blood of millions of innocent people who were—and continue to be—victimized by its totalitarian brutality.

Nặc danh nói...

Bài viết tuyên dương cờ vàng bắng giá trị nhân bản dựa trên truyền thống và lịch sử Việt Nam. Hay, cám ơn Nam Hải Trường Sơn.

Nặc danh nói...

Nam Hai Truong Son makes John London look ridiculously stupid and the best part is (because) he does not use a single label to that effect.

Nặc danh nói...

Bài viết thật hay và có ích, nên có một bản dịch ra tiếng Việt, anh Nam Hải Trường Sơn à.

Nặc danh nói...

Nam hải Trường Sơn nên cho thằng bưng bô cộng sản ngoại quốc ngoại quốc này bằng một đòn tuyệt đẹp. Hiện tại nó đang lân la vào nhiều blog và facebook để gạ gẫm làm bạn cung giống như cách thức của tụi Việt cộng. Nhưng chúng ta chớ quên rằng nó đã từng tuyên bố không muốn làm bạn với người vẫy cờ vàng. Bởi thế mình phải cảnh giác, thằng này là một công cụ tuyên truyền, nguy hiểm hơn bọn cộng sản tóc đen mũi tẹt.

Nặc danh nói...

Nam Hai Truong Son is no slouch at reasoned debating.

Nặc danh nói...

Excellent piece of work!

Henry Chung nói...

Wow, a beautifully written and convincingly reasoned article.

Nặc danh nói...

Bài viết thật công phu và có sức thuyết phục. Nam Hải Trường Sơn cho Jonathan London đo ván bằng những chiêu thức tuyệt vời. Xin phép cho mình đăng lại trên Facebook nhé.

Nặc danh nói...

Hay lắm. Thằng Jonathan London này là tay sai của Việt cọng.

Nặc danh nói...

Excellent essay!

Nặc danh nói...

j london is a VCP apologist. although he has toned down a bit since it's still clear he's a bootlicker.

Nặc danh nói...

Ông Nam Hải Trường Sơn viết rất độc. Cái đầu đề thấy đơn giản nhưng châm biếm cực độ: Hãy thức tỉnh để mà mơ nhé: một cái tát vào mặt J. London rất nhẹ nhàng nhưng đau điếng. Thế nào là tỉnh thế nào là mơ? Giấc mơ của ai đã chết? Chế độ cộng sản độc tài trên thế giới đã chết hết chỉ còn lai mấy meo thôi... Ai vẫn giữ giấc mơ đã chết?

Nặc danh nói...

John London is no match for Nam Hai Truong Son. I've seen John London on BBC many times and his ideas and opinions are stark shallow, to say the best.

Nặc danh nói...

Bài này được đăng lại trên nhiều trang mạng khác. Sao không thấy J. London phản biện .....

Đăng nhận xét

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Bóp Vú, Bóp Trán
Từ cổ chí kim, đừng nói chi bọn phàm phu tục tử, nhiều người trong giới anh hùng (và gian hùng) cũng khó vượt qua cửa ải "mỹ nhũ quan." Nếu không được xử lý thích đáng, tật mê vú có thể dẫn đến những hậu quả nghiêm trọng, chẳng hạn như khuynh quốc khuynh thành, thân bại danh liệt, hoặc làm trò cười cho vạn đời sau. Thời Xuân Thu, Phù Sai để mất nước Ngô chỉ vì đam mê cặp gò chim sa cá lặn của Tây Thi. 2.500 năm sau, Bill Clinton sém bị cách chức tổng thống vì cứ ưa đùa giỡn trên ngọn núi đôi của Monica Lewinsky. Gần đây, cựu thủ tướng Ý Silvio Berlusconi bị tuyên án 7 năm tù vì kiềm chế chẳng nổi khoái cảm mơn trớn bồng đảo của gái điếm...



Từ Chức: Thủ Đoạn Hay Đạo Đức Chính Trị
Trên không gian blog có nhiều người bàn tán xôn xao về cú "coup de pub" này của Dương Trung Quốc, nhưng phần lớn đều dựa vào giả định cho rằng, về mặt lý thuyết, món hàng mà ông nghị rao bán có thể so sánh hoặc đồng đẳng với cái gọi là "văn hóa từ chức" tại các nước dân chủ. Điều mà họ chỉ trích rất gắt gao là tính khả thi hoặc mục đích ứng dụng của nó dưới chế độ độc tài Đảng trị tại Việt Nam. Nhưng cả về mặt khái niệm, cái mà Dương Trung Quốc đề nghị, ngoài tên gọi ra, nội dung chứa đựng một mớ tư duy hàm hồ và tương phản với tinh thần của một nền văn hóa từ chức chân chính.



Ấm Chê Nồi... Đen Thui
Tuy nhiên, việc đối phó với Dương Trung Quốc không dễ dàng như việc đối phó với những kẻ không có thế lực trong đảng hoặc nhà nước nhưng dám "chọc giận" thủ tướng (như Cù Huy Hà Vũ), vì hiện tại mặc dù không phải là đảng viên nhưng Dương Trung Quốc đã trở thành bộ hạ của Tư Sang (kể từ khi đơn đầu kháo của y bị văn phòng thủ tướng bác bỏ vì lý do "tráo trở, không đáng tin cậy"). Đánh chó phải ngó mặt chủ nhân. Hành hung hoặc tống tù là những biện pháp tạm thời bất khả thi. Nhưng nếu đám công (an côn) đồ đàn em được dịp cất dùi cui và còng tay để nghỉ xả hơi thì nhóm thư đồng lại nhận được lệnh thi hành kế hoạch ám sát... nhân cách.



Ai Là Kẻ Chủ Mưu Bán Nước Tại Thành Đô
Tại “thằng” Gorbachốp! Đó là tuyên bố hùng hồn và lời giải thích chính thức đến tận hôm nay 2014 của đảng CSVN, lý giải nguyên nhân phải có Hội nghị Thành Đô của họ năm 1990 trong các hội nghị đảng, chính quyền, đoàn thể từ trung ương đến cơ sở và đến các chi bộ phường xóm, vỉa hè… Câu nói đó thể hiện văn hóa đặc thù của đảng CSVN – hôm qua đảng coi ông là vị Cứu tinh, là Giấc mơ, là Thiên đường mơ ước cho đảng theo, hôm nay ông là tội đồ bắt đảng phải theo mẹ đĩ già TQ!Câu nói đó thể hiện tâm thế hèn kém muôn đời của đảng CSVN, không bao giờ dám đối diện vấn đề và sự thật, chỉ luôn chỉ tay đổ lỗi cho người khác...


Thuở tàn xuân ngày hai buổi đến phường
Yêu quê hương qua tập tem phiếu nhỏ
“Ai bảo bao cấp là khổ?”
Tôi mơ màng hôn tô sắn độn khoai
Những ngày lén đọc
Sách báo "ngụy" vàng phai
Chúng bắt được
Tra tấn tơi bời, vỡ óc!
Có cô bé chuồng bên
Nhìn tôi thầm thổn thức...

"Cải tạo" bùng lên
Rồi "học tập" trường kỳ
Quê tôi đầy bóng giặc
Chúng chụp mũ, lôi đi
Cô bé chuồng bên (chẳng ngờ nghi)
Cũng bị ép bức
Hôm gặp tôi vẫn thầm thổn thức
Mắt sưng bầm (thương... thương... quá đi thôi!)
Giữa cuộc chuyển giao không nói được một lời
Xe tải đi qua, tôi ngoái đầu nhìn lại
Nắng rợp trời nhưng lòng tôi rét mãi...

Cuối cùng tôi trở về đây
Với phố phường xưa, khủng bố, đọa đày
Lại gặp em
Gầy gò chống cây nạng gỗ
Vẫn thầm thổn thức khi tôi hỏi nhỏ
Chuyện tự do... (khó nói lắm anh ơi!)
Tôi nắm bàn tay nhỏ nhắn ngậm ngùi
Em vẫn để yên trong tay tôi giá lạnh...

Hôm nay đến nhận tử thi em
Không tin được dù đó là sự thật
Giặc giết em rồi la: "Tự sát."
Chỉ vì em là ký giả, em ơi!
Đau xé lòng anh, chết cả con người...

Xưa yêu quê hương vì có khoai, có sắn
Có những ngày lén đọc bị còng, tra
Nay yêu quê hương vì sau từng chấn song sắt
Có oan hồn tức tưởi của em tôi!

Nam Hải Trường Sơn
Cuối Tháng 4 Đen, 2014
Nhại-họa thơ Giang Nam, để truy điệu ngày quê hương tàn tạ lần thứ 39

 

Copyright © 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 Nam Hải Trường Sơn