ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the nature of the relationship between the Vietnamese state and society. The starting point is Kerkvliet’s (2001a; 2001b) excellent review of studies of Vietnam’s political system and state-society relations, which he synthesises into three main interpretations. These he terms: the ‘dominating state’, which stresses the core role of the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP) plus other official organisations and institutions, suggesting that other groups and societal activities have little or no influence in the political system, or over policy; ‘mobilisation corporatism’, which emphasises the role of organisations dominated by the state in mobilising support for state programmes; and ‘dialogue’, which stresses the limits to the state’s authority, and the ways that the state and its policies can be influenced outside formal channels. In the case of ‘dialogue’, policies appear to be the result of forms of indirect negotiation between the central party-state, more localised administrators and functionaries, and the target groups. Kerkvliet (2001b) demonstrates that in most studies there is a dominant interpretation, but in many cases it is accompanied by one or both of the others. He illustrates this even more clearly by applying the three interpretations to four areas where the relationship between the state and society has been problematic: government institutions and processes; mass media; agricultural collectives; and corruption. This revealed that:
Each area has considerable evidence of the ‘dominating state’ interpretation … There is also evidence for the ‘mobilizational corporatist’ interpretation … But individuals, groups and social forces outside of official channels can also affect the political system. This is what the ‘dialogue’ interpretation is pointing out.
