<\/p>\n
The coordinated pushback against a Vietnamese influencer who had lamented the passing of a cultural icon shows that while the state values displays of patriotism, but only if such displays toe the party line.<\/p>\n
In the lead-up to Vietnam\u2019s 80th National Day on 2 September, state-led campaigns<\/a> rolled out AI avatars, hashtags, and flag-saturated feeds urging citizens \u2014 entertainers in particular \u2014 to join in the chorus. Tran Thanh, whose career straddles television hosting, film, and music, took to his Facebook account, with 18 million followers<\/a>, to mourn the passing<\/a> of Pham Duc Thanh, an overseas dan bau (Vietnamese monochord) musician associated with Paris by Night<\/a>, a popular diaspora music show in the US. His tribute<\/a> praised the late artist as an icon and lamented whether anyone would carry on those mournful melodies.<\/p>\n The post struck many as out of tune amid the chorus of patriotic fervour<\/a>. The episode illustrated the fact that even in a campaign designed to rally the public behind the flag, coherence and consistency continue to elude Vietnam\u2019s propaganda system, which is fractured between conservative hardliners and reformist pragmatists. Conservative actors have learnt to weaponise and even bend facts into loyalty tests that police the boundaries of acceptable patriotism.<\/p>\n These factional divides<\/a> play out most visibly in narratives around Vietnam\u2019s ties with the US and, more recently, in the tensions surrounding Party chief To Lam\u2019s leadership, marked by his rapid rise and break from the conservatism of his late predecessor Nguyen Phu Trong. That said, reformists tend to pick their battles. With their focus on moderation, economic liberalisation, and international diplomacy\u2014especially with Western partners like the US and the EU, they have left conservatives to set the ideological tone. In the Tran Thanh saga, where conservatives sought to define the patriotic script, reformists likely ceded the ground.<\/p>\n Within hours of Tran Tranh\u2019s post, online outrage surged, quickly hardening into accusations of disloyalty. Ultra-nationalist Facebook pages<\/a> began circulating a line that ricocheted across Vietnamese cyberspace: \u201cYou can\u2019t expect someone of Chinese origin, with a Korean wife, to love Vietnam!\u201d Tran Thanh\u2019s father is of Chinese descent<\/a>, and his wife is a Vietnamese\u2013Korean singer and actress<\/a>. He is a Vietnamese national.<\/p>\n Those accounts also doubled down by claiming that even mentioning Paris By Night and Pham Duc Thanh aligned Tran Thanh with \u201creactionary<\/a>\u201d culture. This view dovetails with Vietnamese hardliners\u2019 entrenched hostility<\/a> toward the show\u2019s mix of diasporic nostalgia and perceived anti-communist themes<\/a>. In reality, Pham Duc Thanh, far from being \u201creactionary\u201d, had earned recognition for promoting Vietnamese heritage overseas<\/a>. He had performed on major stages in Vietnam<\/a> and drew praise from officials, including the late Party chief Nguyen Phu Trong<\/a>, for his cultural contributions.<\/p>\n Intriguingly, the most notable pushback against the nationalist narrative came from Tifosi, Vietnam\u2019s loudest conservative-leaning Facebook group, which had even publicly rebuked To Lam<\/a> earlier this year for his revisionist remarks, which had praised the economic achievements of pre-1975 Saigon. The group\u2019s only post on the episode<\/a> stressed that Pham Duc Thanh, the deceased artist, was indeed revered at home and abroad as a guardian of Vietnam\u2019s musical heritage. This stance was consistent with what appears to be Tifosi\u2019s recent shift toward To Lam. Most recently, it rejected nepotism allegations<\/a> against Lam after the northern province of Dien Bien named a street in August for Ngo Manh Lan \u2014 Lam\u2019s father-in-law and a decorated revolutionary artist \u2014 alongside other national figures. Tifosi dismissed the charges as distortions and disrespect for history.<\/p>\n Despite Tifosi\u2019s intervention and some genuine pushback, these voices were quickly drowned out by the orchestrated nationalist campaign. Under mounting pressure, Tran Thanh, quietly deleted his post<\/a>, and on National Day reappeared with photos of the parade and declarations of patriotic pride<\/a>. The attempt at self-rehabilitation, however, did little to appease his critics.<\/p>\n By privileging patriotic fervor over coherence and consistency, the party-state risks not just baffling the public but undermining its narrative and its authority.<\/p>\n On 3 September, Cong An Nhan Dan, the Ministry of Public Security\u2019s official newspaper, published a scathing editorial<\/a> casting his earlier tribute to the late musician as a \u201cdiscordant note\u201d on a day of joy.\u00a0Praising tens of thousands of condemnations as proof of patriotic vigilance, the column faulted Tran Thanh for \u201ccrying for the world, but not for his country.\u201d It framed the episode as a lesson: in Vietnam, celebrities are expected to place collective pride above private sentiment. The verdict continued to ripple outward: Conservative-aligned actors recirculated the editorial widely<\/a>, and state-run outlets<\/a> echoed the same line.<\/p>\n The timing helps explain why. Vietnam has been ramping up nationalism as the core of regime legitimacy, roping key influencers<\/a> in circulating state-sanctioned messages. In that context, the immediate objective was to make an example of Tran Thanh\u2019s influence, and just as importantly, to set the norm for how other influencers should toe the official line.<\/p>\n The defining feature of the Tran Thanh saga was its scale: a coordinated online barrage reinforced by an equally relentless push through state-controlled media. The strength of the pushback was so strong that even some of Tran Thanh\u2019s naysayers and fence-sitters in this case might have found the narrative excessive, even bordering on absurd. But such excess was precisely the point.<\/p>\n Heavy-handed state messaging aims less to persuade than to demonstrate strength and resolve<\/a>. It also serves to signal what the regime considers its core priorities and red lines. The volume and severity of the vitriol against Tran Thanh telegraphed a stern message: Love for the regime must be performative and \u201cpure.\u201d<\/p>\n But the very same heavy-handedness, when overused to pump up nationalism, can backfire. Mob outrage is fickle; once people grow accustomed to online witch-hunts, they may unleash them for reasons beyond official control<\/a>. \u00a0By privileging patriotic fervour over coherence and consistency, the party-state risks not just baffling the public but undermining its narrative and its authority.<\/p>\n 2025\/296<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n