NGUYEN AN NINH'S PERSPECTIVE ON THE PARADOX OF FREEDOM IN CULTURE AND POLITICS

Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 175 ISRG PUBLISHERS Abbreviated Key Title: ISRG J Arts Humanit Soc Sci ISSN: 2583-7672 (Online) Journal homepage: https://isrgpublishers.com/isrgjahss Volume – III Issue -VI (November-December) 2025 Frequency: Bimonthly NGUYEN AN NINH'S PERSPECTIVE ON THE PARADOX OF FREEDOM IN CULTURE AND POLITICS Le Ngoc Hien1*, Nguyen Thi Nhu2 1 Ph.D candidate in Philosophy, VNU University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Hanoi, Vietnam 2 Ph.D. in Philosophy, VNU University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Hanoi, Vietnam | Received: 07.11.2025 | Accepted: 11.11.2025 | Published: 13.11.2025 *Corresponding author: Le Ngoc Hien Ph.D candidate in Philosophy, VNU University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Hanoi, Vietnam 1. The Paradox of Order and Disorder The context of Vietnam in the early 20th century, especially in 1923 - 1928, was full of potentially pivotal elements. Political fluctuations in various countries significantly impacted the media system and, along with it, the prominent views and topics of contemporary Vietnam. A series of economic, political, cultural, and social events, etc., provoked incessant debates about how to understand order and disorder in colonial society. The debaters were not purely French journalists and political activists (including Abstract Freedom, despite the countless debates and discussions held about it in various forms, remains a historical subject impacting both culture and politics. When defining how freedom affects individuals and communities, even the most complex interpretations become rational and relatable. This is because freedom and its inherent meaning are always default in every person's thoughts and emotions. Although freedom is conventionally regarded as a concept whose success is accompanied by the immense influence of Western philosophy, freedom and its paradoxes hold an unusual destiny within Vietnamese history. The years 1923 - 1928 witnessed major colonial political events in Vietnam, where national and democratic consciousness, along with a series of struggles for freedom, led to the birth of political organizations and tendencies. Based on the foundation of freedom's value in the Oriental value system, and through contact and adaptation of the freedom perspectives from Western philosophical thought as well as socialism, Nguyen An Ninh (1900 - 1943) launched a public struggle in the fields of ideology and action to decode the paradoxes of freedom that had inhibited the strength of the Vietnamese nation in the fight against the colonial regime, thereby contributing to changing Vietnamese history in the 20th century. Keywords: Nguyen An Ninh, paradox, freedom, culture, politics. Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 176 those of purely French descent and those of mixed FrenchVietnamese blood, such as Eugene Dejean De La Batie) but also saw the increasingly fierce participation of Vietnamese people during the volatile years of the 1920s. Nguyen An Ninh initiated the argument about the paradox of order and disorder as a test for the process of understanding the paradox of freedom within the constraints of the colonial regime. In his lecture The Ideal of the Youth of Annam, Nguyen An Ninh started from a state of spiritual crisis that the Vietnamese people were facing. The colonized person was exposed to many new values, interwoven with the old values inherited from the remnants and existence of periods now gradually called the past. But in reality, the adoption of the new was not entirely a complete freedom for the entire populace. Ultimately, although the person bears the title of subject of their own life, they are an ―estranger‖ in every corners of the nation – a place used to be a homeland that gave birth to them. This otherness is not simply due to the common fate of an entire Vietnamese nation seeking national recognition under the yoke of a system of colonial states, but it also arises from the regulation and coercion of the colonial regime in the name of socalled ―civilizing values‖. Nguyen An Ninh's presentation on the spiritual tragedy of the Vietnamese people does not stop there. He directly challenged the colonialists: ―People often talk about ingratitude, immorality, disorder, but we don't care about all those reactionaries, those poisoners. Do they deserve our gratitude, those people who boast of their merits?‖ (1). Immediately, Nguyen An Ninh performed an exchange of political characteristics and even political status. He placed the position of the colonial rulers as "others" (người ta) - a designation for a dehumanized other - indicting the rulers for the first time as the perpetrators of the very crimes the colonial regime sought to pin on the innocent, suffering populace. Not stopping there, Nguyen An Ninh used a question to challenge the audience, aiming to awaken in them the resurgence of the spirit of freedom against oppression and asserting that the people need not offer ―gratitude‖ to those who have wrongly condemned their existence. Order, in Nguyen An Ninh's view, contained elements that could not accept freedom as a factor of rationality. Because he pointed out the bitter truth that what is called order is merely the exploitation by the rulers to enslave the society they govern. According to common understanding, order brings stability and harmony between the combination of natural elements, between the individual self and the external world, etc. Furthermore, order is always accompanied by moral values such as respect, a high degree of commitment to minimal regulations for optimal results and goals of individual and social life. However, Nguyen An Ninh consistently maintained that the order of the colonial regime could be nothing other than a regime that ―hinders the upward life, destroys the source of vitality of others‖ (2). To refute the French colonial argument that they established a ―stable order‖ to end the ―disorder‖ in the colony, Nguyen An Ninh generally argued that traditional Vietnamese social order was different from colonial order. From the individual level to the family and village levels, Vietnamese social order expressed a form of cultural and political freedom for the Vietnamese people. Accordingly, the Giao Chi people (the ancestors of the Vietnamese), like so many other peoples in the world, once had a primordial time of ―living nomadically, here today, there tomorrow‖ (3). Once they reached a certain area, the first Vietnamese people ―only had a common link: the necessity to help one another, to rely on each other to live, to join forces and strive to fight‖ (4). The spirit of freedom of the Vietnamese originated from the necessities of life, leading to mutual assistance, compassion, and solidarity to confront the challenges that threatened their freedom. The freedom of the Giao Chi people shaped their daily life and production in new lands, made them aware of ―a happiness found and stabilized‖, and the fortunes of life that the land had brought them. According to Nguyen An Ninh, those things created the bond ―between the Giao Chi people and the land‖: the stronger the bond, the greater the consciousness of embracing and striving to protect their place of residence, and the tighter, deeper connection established within the institutions of village (the next level of Vietnamese society). The existence of village conventions (hương ước), in Nguyen An Ninh's thought, was the foundation for the production of Vietnamese culture and simultaneously an expression of the spirit, as Nguyen An Ninh wrote, of ―loyalty to the homeland of the ancestors‖ (5). In his thesis The Democratic Nature of Annammese Villages, Nguyen An Ninh asserted that ―the village institution is the basic social organization of An Nam. It is a republican base, with a council of village dignitaries (ban hương chức hội tề) elected by the people, and an internal governing organization in which every citizen has a responsibility, a duty with its own budget‖ (6). The village was a living space that allowed ―the populace to breathe easily, even with the power of the king‖ (7), related to another Vietnamese proverb that ―The King's law yields to the village's custom‖ (Phép vua thua lệ làng). Nguyen An Ninh took a further step by comparing the Vietnamese village with the city-republics in Italy. Both forms of social organization, according to Nguyen An Ninh, thwarted the desire of the feudal regime to expand its power in both Vietnam and Italy. Regarding the family element in the dimension of Vietnamese culture, Nguyen An Ninh stated that ―the family is a true type of republic, in which affection and blood ties maintain harmony and mutual respect for a long time‖ (8). This is because, from ancient tradition, when the first Vietnamese communities established basic levels of social organization (including family and village), each Vietnamese family set up general rules and principles applied within the family living space, called ―family law‖ (gia pháp). Because they had their own family law, even if incidents occurred in family life, the family law was used immediately to handle them, and "the king's law had to stop outside the door and could not interfere with the internal affairs of each family‖ (9). This shows that the traditional family life of Vietnamese culture was built on the foundation of mutual respect, love, forgiveness, and a continuous effort towards harmony, with no obligation or constraint to necessarily maintain the family in a state of tension. As Nguyen An Ninh began the section on the family element, he found that ―there is no need for a lengthy discussion about the disintegration of the institutions for the family that once gave the family a cohesive strength‖ (10). He saw aspects of freedom in the principles of traditional Vietnamese marital and family life. Children, whether they had the same parents or not, ―all had the right to be acknowledged as children‖ (11). Second wives were also ―respected by society as much as the husband, their circumstances considered more honorable than those of female servants‖ (12). In the case of divorce, the husband was ―not compelled to prove the wife's fault‖ (13), aiming to avoid unnecessary conflicts and simultaneously create conditions for Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 177 both the husband and wife to ―build a new family‖, quickly stabilizing the order in each person's life and, on a higher level, in society. Finally, Nguyen An Ninh mentioned the element of Ancestral Worship (Sự thờ cúng người đã chết) as one of the three elements of traditional Vietnamese culture. Ancestral worship, or the belief in ancestor veneration, is one of the traditional features of Vietnamese culture. Nguyen An Ninh affirmed that ancestral worship ―holds an important position‖ in Vietnamese society, even ―not unlike God in France‖ (14). Indeed, ancestral worship became ―a part of the activities of the state‖, ―the highest concern of the family‖. At the same time, ancestral worship, as Nguyen An Ninh asserted, plays a vital role in the education of every individual from a young age, contributing to character formation. Not only that, ancestral worship is precisely the condition for everyone to constantly recall memories, loved ones, and ―what the predecessors have gathered and accumulated is not lost‖. Thanks to this, people find spiritual solace ―to soothe the hardships, anxieties of the present generations‖ (15). In Nguyen An Ninh's thinking, ancestral worship is not merely a remembrance of the deceased but also an invisible link where ―the dead live with the living‖ contributing to the expansion of the defined space of life which is inherently infinite. For the living, according to Nguyen An Ninh, have a ―sense of connection‖ (16) with the departed, those who have left the mortal world by completing the cycle of birth – aging – sickness – death. Even the famous or the anonymous, when they pass away, are still subject to history's judgment, and then reappear in the memories and longings of the living. From this, Nguyen An Ninh concludes that ―the present lives by the past" is the state and mindset of the Vietnamese people as they live simultaneously with the present and also the memory, tradition. 2. The Paradox of Individual Freedom in Relation to Oppression Nguyeễn An Ninh was always preoccupied with the thing that continually troubled him: the investigation, experience, analysis, and evaluation of the complex, agonizing nature of the paradox of freedom in the face of something else. That is oppression, a state that freedom itself, as well as the paradox existing within freedom, cannot simply avoid from another direction. They are forced to confront oppression to prove the existence of the self of freedom. He looked at France, where he had spent time studying and had the opportunity to be exposed to profound philosophical currents as well as diverse political movements, and often contemplated the reality of the Vietnamese nation during the colonial era: ―The repression came to us from France, but the spirit of liberation also came from France‖ (17). For Nguyen An Ninh, individual freedom is a necessary driving force for every individual and the national community to escape the sphere of influence of the colonial regime. He recognized that dreams were no exception, serving as an indispensable factor for the Vietnamese spirit in seeking the vibrant definition of their lives, seeking values that inspire the spirit of individual freedom in their way of life and current knowledge. Nguyen An Ninh saw dreams as the basic reasoning that everyone is a human being with conscience and action, ―strong enough to realize our desires, we must also have the will to strive, with an endless craving to achieve something better, more perfect‖ (18). The contemporary social life situation gave rise to diverse views and approaches from Vietnamese and even French journalists, writers, and political-cultural activists. The example of Tran Huy Lieu (pen name Nam Kiều) is an interesting proof, as he was active at the same time as Nguyễn An Ninh and had a certain interest in individual freedom. Tran Huy Lieu began writing about the topic of individual freedom in his articles in the newspaper Đông Pháp thời báo (Indochina Times). According to the research of scholar Philippe Peycam, the journalist Tran Huy Lieu interpreted the concept of freedom (a moral-philosophical concept) as concretized within the scope of individual freedom. Peycam presented the content of Tran Huy Lieu's interpretation as having ―two contrasting meanings. One he called the 'ghost of freedom' (ma tự do) that would attract selfishness and the need for self-gratification. Often misleading, it would incite people to abandon true freedom, which Lieu called the 'spirit of freedom' (thần tự do)—something that can only be achieved through a moral act where the individual undertakes social responsibility‖ (19). If freedom is conceived as purely ego-centric (duy ngã) while denying the elements of external life and the freedom of others (tha nhân), or other beings/objects, then ultimately, the ego-centric nature of freedom only promotes mental states and acts of oppression. This is the experience of the paradox of freedom and oppression, from the internal perspective of an individual and the perspective of that individual's impact on other individuals and entities. Mortimer Adler, the American philosopher, envisioned the relationship in the crisis situation of individual freedom with the emergence of the form of freedom oppression as follows: ―Because this freedom consists in the performance, in the fulfillment of my desires or wishes, its greatest annulment, that which is contrasted with it, that which prevents it, we call oppression. For when a man is oppressed by physical force he cannot do what he wishes‖ (20). By extension, freedom and oppression also leave marks of subtle theoretical and practical friction through the relationship between one (or more) political regime(s) and the society under its influence. The unwritten rule of all imposing, extreme regimes is that they become beyond the control of the law and manipulate policy by stamping out free will, creating the conditions for the formation of a spirit of resistance and resistant people. Even when those regimes strive by all means to standardize their will through the exercise of existing power, this only further increases the impoverishment of society along with an increasingly deep sense of opposition to the subjective spirit of the ruling class. Although Nguyen An Ninh's words outwardly conveyed his thoughts and hopes to the Vietnamese youth generation (the main audience he focused on in his lecture, The Ideal of the Youth of Annam), he was, in fact, also presenting and listening to the call of the suffering masses under the yoke of oppression and exploitation. The era of Nguyen An Ninh (on a personal level) and of the Vietnamese nation (on a collective level) was not only persistent due to the restrictive consequences of the old society, but also became disoriented and stifling on the very homeland that was still being ruled by colonial forces: ―We were born in a country lacking in all aspects, everything has to be created, born in a time when all intelligent initiatives are hated by others‖ (21). The struggle between the Vietnamese nation and the colonial condition it was enduring is figuratively visualized by Nguyen An Ninh as the conflict between freedom and oppression - two opposing forces: ―One side is weak, trying to find a place under the sun, the other Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 178 side is strong, and yet is still draining resources to the point of exhaustion, in order to support a distant monster‖ (22). For Nguyen An Ninh, people belonging to any social force shared the fate of slaves with slave mentalities in their very existence. The sharp conflict between the Vietnamese nation and the French colonialists did not only begin with the first conflicts in the latter half of the 19th century but also persisted until the 1920s. Under the colonial regime – representing the position of the master and the position of oppression – the Vietnamese people endured the fate of those in servitude, people who had lost and were nearly lost in their rational direction on the path to finding freedom, their bodies and minds heavily weighed down by the suppression of their way of life. He used the following colonial allegory: ―Here one does not hear the footsteps or the voice of the masters. The slaves’ minds are constantly gripped by fear due to the master’s shouting and hand, gradually returning to the land of their ancestors and blending with the soil to revive the memories of the energetic days of their forefathers, when they came to conquer and imbued this land with their whole soul, which now the succeeding generations, due to weakness, foolishness, and ignorance, have failed to protect‖ (23). Nguyen An Ninh also raised a paradox of the people living in the slavery of the colonial regime. That is, the people are forced to deny their own rational capacity, deny the experiences and vibrant knowledge of life and the intellectual-spiritual heritage that shaped their understanding, that named them as a special living entity in relation to external nature. Governor Cognacq's saying ―This country should not have intellectuals‖ struck Nguyen An Ninh's conscience and critical spirit. Not only was he not surprised by the implicit statement of the powerful official, he even attributed the adjectives ―wise, insightful‖ to him, only to then impoverish his ruling status through the very anti-thesis of utterly alienated rationality. No matter how absolute the freedom and how wise the power of Reason (Lý tính), and how much it can liberate people, it will truly be unsettling when Reason is devoid of the necessary Imagination and sharp intelligence - things that occur during the transitional phase to move from ordinary perception to rational insight, to understanding true freedom. Nguyen An Ninh written: ―Intelligence is the Evil. Intelligence is the Serpent coiled around the tree of knowledge, which has made us lose paradise forever. Intelligence is Ivan Karamazov, who, having reasoned too much, declared that 'everything is permissible' and finally died in madness (...) Imagination is disorder, it is chaos, it is freedom that cannot be controlled, cannot be stopped, is without limit. That is the Power that has turned this world into a world full of immortal illusions, full of suffering, full of sighs and weeping, which then leads to the final act entering the play‖ (24). Erich Fromm explained: ―Destructiveness is the consequence of an unlived life. Individual or social conditions that lead to the suppression of life will invariably create and foster hostile tendencies - toward others or toward oneself‖ (25). Nguyen An Ninh shared similar thoughts with Fromm, the philosopher and author of the book Escape from Freedom, which was published a few years after the Second World War. Nguyen An Ninh did not make any prediction about the distant future of a war he did not yet know, but he recognized a surprising and non-mechanical direct proportionality between freedom and oppression/injustice in colonial society. He foresaw a near future where an inevitable clash would occur between Vietnam, a nation fighting to dismantle the paradox of freedom and France, a nation that had become lost and in crisis after being cursed by freedom and imposing that curse upon the Vietnamese nation and other colonized peoples. Given the situation he observed in the 1923–1928 period, this premonition became the call for freedom from both the living and the dead: ―Injustice provokes injustice. Pride provokes pride. Tyranny will lead to uprising. In this country, the invasion is enough to prove the indignation of everyone, because no law allows one nation to torment and enslave another; and if everyone thinks that the invader rarely cares about calming and reassuring the pain in the hearts of the defeated, then uprising must, of course, become a duty for those who still retain a bit of pride‖ (26). 3. The Issue of Revolution and Compromise This is considered a question where Nguyen An Ninh was compelled to choose between the increasingly sharp opposition between these two revolutionary methods of struggle. Revolution and compromise are consequences of a political conception of freedom. The lasting effect of anti-colonial movements from the beginning of the 20th century until the First World War (1914 – 1918) once again posed a challenge to Vietnamese independence activists. The goal of political freedom, one of the objectives that the Dong Du (Eastern Voyage) and Duy Tan (Modernization) intellectual generations, from North to South, failed to achieve during their revolutionary path-finding activities, remained unfulfilled. Nevertheless, revolution and compromise were an absolute imperative when the opposition between them created the paradox of freedom, fueling the consciousness of tens of millions of people in the long struggle for national independence. History, though very objective and always siding with objectivity by simultaneously acknowledging the achievements and losses of both the Dong Du movement (led by Phan Boi Chau, advocating armed violence) and the Duy Tan movement (led by Phan Chau Trinh, advocating comprehensive reform for gradual independence), also witnessed the distinct existence of political tendencies arising after the First World War. Whether officially or unofficially, these political tendencies were significantly influenced by the differences already present since the generation of Confucian scholars who supported the bourgeois democratic trend, with Phan Boi Chau and Phan Chau Trinh being two important figures in modern and contemporary Vietnamese history. After analyzing a series of unsuccessful anti – French uprisings and revolutionary movements, Nguyen An Ninh observed a commonality: the uprisings and movements failed because they were carried out hastily, lacking specific methods and organization. The reasons for failure generally boiled down to the following points: first, the uncompromising repression by the French colonialists against any struggle movement of the Vietnamese people; second, the persistent division within the revolutionary forces; third, the outdated and incomplete methods of struggle; and fourth, the lack of tight organization and correct political lines. In addition, Nguyen An Ninh fiercely criticized the use of magic and charms in the anti-French struggle (evidenced by the 1916 uprising of the Thien Dia Hoi (Heaven and Earth Society) in Cochinchina) because he felt that the masses were forced to ―entrust their destiny to adventurers (...) like Phan Xich Long‖ (27), only to be easily suppressed by the French colonialists. Nguyen An Ninh described the nature of such movements as ―blind violence is only the weapon of despair‖ (28). Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 179 From there, Nguyen An Ninh advocated for the establishment of the ideal of a revolutionary doctrine, because ―Any ideal includes a doctrine. Without a doctrine, the ideal will only be a dream. It is superfluous to say that one must have depth and means to establish a doctrine that people follow‖ (29). Theory is the initial factor to guide the creation of the necessary elements for a comprehensive revolution. The significance of establishing a revolutionary doctrine, according to Nguyen An Ninh, is a crucial step to then focus on establishing a revolutionary organization to realize the revolutionary theory that was initially defined. Reality shows that the anti-French struggle movement in Vietnam from the late 19th century to the early 20th century, at least until 1927 (when Nguyen An Ninh wrote the two articles ―Experience of the Nationalist Party‖), always encountered obstacles so great that they could not be resolved. That was the identification of an ideology (in Nguyen An Ninh’s terminology, a ―revolutionary doctrine‖) to effectively launch the struggle movement. This was evident in the activities of the generation of Phan Boi Chau, Phan Chau Trinh, etc., in the early 20th century. The victories of the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang), with the Three Principles of the People as its ideology, overcame many challenges and difficulties to achieve successes such as: leading the Xinhai Revolution (1911), establishing the Republic of China (1912), launching the National Protection War (12/1915 – 07/1916), establishing the First KMT– CCP Cooperation (1924 – 1927), etc. This was an important testament for Nguyen An Ninh in discovering and persistently following the correct revolutionary theory to turn it into practice. Nguyen An Ninh issued a political declaration in the context of Vietnam still being a French colony: ―To resist a modern oppressive organization, we must have a modern resistance organization‖ (30). Precisely because of the colonialists' reign of terror, he affirmed: ―To oppose one order, one must use another order; to strike back at one force, one must use another force‖ (31). Although propagating and promoting spiritual strength based on revolutionary ideals is important, for Nguyen An Ninh, this is not the totality of factors for a successful revolution. He wrote: ―Having an ideal is not everything. Much more is needed… Finally, to begin, a long-lasting and strong organization is essential‖ (32). First, it is necessary to form a large political-social organization to help the people learn to read and write, acquire knowledge, understand their historical mission, consolidate their forces, and struggle in all aspects (both open and secret), serving as the core for political parties later on (when conditions permit). In 1928, amidst domestic and foreign upheavals, Nguyen An Ninh advocated the formation of a United Front to ―unite in a common effort to fight against colonial tyranny‖ (33). For the success of this unity, it is necessary to have correct and comprehensive assessments of the social forces existing in Vietnam at that time, considering the level and capability of each force to build a broad, strong, steadfast front that maximizes the strength of the entire nation. Nguyen An Ninh addressed Vietnamese intellectuals with the expectation and longing of a soul speaking on behalf of the nation's aspirations. Vietnamese intellectuals should not merely ―enrich the intellectual heritage of the nation‖ (34) but also ―reflect an aspect of the national soul onto their own person‖ (35). The intellectual, in Nguyen An Ninh’s thought, must be a person of talent and competence coupled with the integrity of a scholar (khí phách kẻ sĩ) in the face of current events: ―united, capable of making the fierce, arrogant, and rude bow their heads‖ (36). The destination of the Vietnamese intellectual does not stop at individual living conditions but also progresses to ―improving the living conditions of their compatriots‖ (37). This is because, despite the differences in people, abilities, and competence among intellectuals, they all share common values from the nation's roots: that is the ―indomitable tenacity,‖ the ―glorious and proud bloodline of the ancestors who would never accept anyone trampling or insulting their Fatherland‖ (38). However, he also did not forget to point out the existing limitations of Vietnamese intellectuals. Firstly, there was the arrogant attitude of thinking oneself ―elite,‖ only to degrade one’s dignity and knowledge by begging the protectorate for trivial rights. Secondly, there were quite a few intellectuals who valued degrees over noble ideals; they merely ―specialize in serving as faithful watchdogs for a disgraceful regime‖ (39). Next, he criticized intellectuals who prioritized personal ambition ―and willingly became servants for the wealthy, bourgeois classes‖ (40). Stemming from these limitations, Nguyen An Ninh advocated for establishing the connection of intellectuals with the revolution to strive to become genuine intellectuals. Because, according to Nguyen An Ninh, revolution is the door that opens the prospect of a new society: a place liberated from all oppression, a place that respects human dignity. Furthermore, the commitment of intellectuals to the revolutionary struggle is the condition for them to ―find protection for their human dignity‖ (41). Next, Nguyen An Ninh analyzed Vietnamese workers. Through two stages of colonial exploitation (from 1897 to 1929), Vietnamese workers emerged from large-scale bankrupt peasants who had to leave their homeland to go to urban areas or other regions to survive. They worked for Western employers in enterprises, plantations, etc., under harsh, difficult conditions. According to Nguyen An Ninh, the strike is the strongest weapon workers possess to put pressure on capitalist owners, effectively creating a means to protect their interests. From after World War I (1914 – 1918) to the 1920s, workers worldwide actively campaigned through strikes to demand that employers respect their class's fundamental rights. Nguyen An Ninh cited a number of typical movements such as: strikes in Spain (1917 – 1919), the two-week general strike in Washington and Seattle (1919), the general strike in Havana (Cuba) in 1924 against martial law, etc. The wave of strikes also greatly impacted Argentina and France during the same period, but Vietnamese workers had not yet known strikes. But it was the strike of 400 French sailors in Saigon that helped Vietnamese workers draw two noteworthy factors contributing to the effectiveness of a strike: ―strength lies in the number of participants and in solidarity‖ (42). Furthermore, Nguyen An Ninh also pointed out the failure of the working class was due to ―lack of organization and lack of capable leaders‖ (43). Regarding the choice between violent revolution or peaceful revolution, Nguyen An Ninh advocated choosing violent revolution as the last resort, because ―People only condemn violence when it is not yet necessary. But if it is the only way, everyone must accept it‖ (44). He also quoted Gandhi to justify his choice, stating that ―Where there is a choice between cowardice and violence, I advise using violence,‖ and ―I prefer to see India free by violence rather than chained by the violence of the rulers‖ (45). Nguyen An Ninh identified the path of revolutionary violence as the final path, the final measure when the peaceful struggle movement failed to deter the French colonialists. This is the clearest manifestation that the Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 180 will for independence is the great strength of the Vietnamese people. He saw that the relationship between nationalism and internationalism is necessary. First, nationalism is ―the longstanding past that has created for each nation an atmosphere they are accustomed to living in,‖ a condition to ―gather and utilize all their strength‖ (46). Internationalism, on the other hand, is ―the close connection between nations and the necessity to link peoples for peace and human happiness‖ (47). He affirmed: ―Internationalism cannot exist without nationalism.‖ This is because internationalism cannot develop fully and completely when there are still nations ―forcibly confined to slavery‖ (48). Historical reality vividly proves this point. Since the bourgeois revolutions erupted in Europe (16th – 18th centuries), the system of republics applying capitalist economics has increased, followed by continuous contact (even military conquest) with the East. This led to a major global trend: the narrowing of the isolation between East and West (which existed during feudal times), bringing with it new values in: ethics, natural science, geography, history, trade, etc. Therefore, whether it is nationalism or internationalism, they cannot be separated or divided; ―nationalism or internationalism are not opposed to each other (…) but only contribute to the harmony and embellishment of humanity‖ (49). He warned against extreme nationalism and extreme internationalism because both are detrimental and ―only lead to the paralysis and destruction of the race‖ (50). Conclusion The struggle for independence in Vietnam during the period 1923 – 1928 no longer focused solely on national objectives, but also aimed to identify the paradoxes of freedom within the political movements of colonial Vietnamese society itself. With three fundamental themes (including the paradox of order and disorder, the paradox of individual freedom in relation to oppression, and the issue of revolution and compromise), Nguyen An Ninh clarified the state of impoverishment and alienation of the Vietnamese nation under colonial rule. He advocated for a national revival linking with individual freedom (the high development of will, knowledge, and virtue) with the freedom of the entire nation, fighting to dismantle the colonial regime and build a nation of free people. The issues raised by Nguyen An Ninh, such as the alienation of power, the crisis of knowledge, the nature of freedom, etc., remain relevant to society today. Notes: (1): Nguyen An Ninh (1923), The Ideals of the Youth of Annam, La Cloche Fêlée, January 1st and January 14st, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 74. (2): Ibid. (18): Ibid. 70 (21), (22), (23): Ibid. 72 (34), (35): Ibid. 69 (3): Nguyen An Ninh (1923), Order and Anarchy, La Cloche Fêlée, no. 4, December 12nd, 1923. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 152. (4): Ibid. (5), (6), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12): Ibid. 153. (13), (14), (15): Ibid. 154. (16): Ibid. 155. (7): Nguyen An Ninh (1924), Toward to Indochine, La Cloche Fêlée, no. 14, April 21st, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 317. (17): Authors (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Through the Memoirs of Relatives (Nguyễn An Ninh – Qua hồi ức của những người thân), National Studies Research Center, Literature Publishing House, Hanoi: 126. (19): Peycam, Philippe M.F (2015), The birth of Vietnamese political journalism: Saigon, 1916 – 1930, translated by Tran Duc Tai, Youth Publishing House, HCM city: 222. (20): Mortimer J. Adler (2019). How to Think About the Great Ideas (reference book), translated by Pham Viem Phuong and Mai Son, Hong Đuc Publishing House: 176. (24): Nguyen An Ninh (1923). This land was never meant for the intellectual kind, La Cloche Fêlée, no.2nd – December 17th, 1923. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 125. (26): Ibid. 337 (25): Erich Fromm (2007), Escape from Freedom, translated by Bui Thanh Chau, Từ điển Bách khoa Publishing House: 203. (27): Nguyen An Ninh (1925), France in Indochina, La Cloche Fêlée, no.20 – no. 23, November 26th – December 7th, 1925. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 83. (28), (30), (44): Ibid. (29): Nguyen An Ninh (1927), Experience of Koumingtang (II), L’Annam, no.135th, February 7th, 1927. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 577. (32): Ibid. (31): Nguyen An Ninh (1924), Is a revolution possible?, La Cloche Fêlée, no.15th – May 19th, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 339. (36): Ibid. 340 (33): Nguyen An Ninh (1928), The Problem of National Organisation, L’Annam, no.181th, 1928. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 693. (37): Nguyen An Ninh (1924), The final toll, La Cloche Fêlée, no.19th – July 14th, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 386. (38): Ibid. (50): Ibid. 388 (39): Nguyen An Ninh (1933), Knowledge and Politics, La Lutte, no.2nd – April 29th, 1933. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17838007 181 Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 729. (40): Nguyen An Ninh (1933), After the first round, La Lutte, no.3rd – May 5th, 1933. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 732. (41): Nguyen An Ninh (1936), Free spirits are left to starve, La Lutte, no77th – April 01st, 1936. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 759. (42): Nguyen An Ninh (1926), The Confession of a Slave, L’Annam, no.94th – September 2nd, 1926. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 550. (43): Ibid. 551 (45): Nguyen An Ninh (1925), Annamites with Gandhism, La Cloche Fêlée, no.25, December 14th, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 415. (46): Nguyen An Ninh (1925), Nationalism and Internationalism, La Cloche Fêlée, no.28th – December 24th, 1925. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi: 432. (48): Ibid. (47), (49): Ibid. 433 Acknowledgement: The study is funded by the VNU University of Social Sciences and Humanities within the project of CS.2025.29 REFERENCES 1. Adler, Mortimer J. (2019). How to Think About the Great Ideas, translated by Pham Viem Phuong and Mai Son, Hong Đuc Publishing House, HCM city. 2. Authors (2009). Nguyễn An Ninh – Through the Memoirs of Relatives (Nguyễn An Ninh – Qua hồi ức của những người thân), National Studies Research Center, Literature Publishing House, Hanoi. 3. Fromm, Erich (2007). Escape from Freedom (Trốn thoát tự do), translated by Bui Thanh Chau, Encyclopaedia Publishing House, HCM city. 4. Peycam, Philippe M.F (2015). The birth of Vietnamese political journalism: Saigon, 1916 – 1930, translated by Tran Duc Tai, Youth Publishing House, HCM city, pg. 222. 5. Nguyen An Ninh (1923). "Order and Anarchy," La Cloche Fêlée, no. 4, December 12nd, 1923. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 152–155. 6. Nguyen An Ninh (1923). This land was never meant for the intellectual kind, La Cloche Fêlée, no.2nd – December 17th, 1923. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 125. 7. Nguyen An Ninh (1923). The Ideals of the Youth of Annam, La Cloche Fêlée, January 1st and January 14st, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 69–74. 8. Nguyen An Ninh (1924). Toward to Indochine, La Cloche Fêlée, no. 14, April 21st, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 317. 9. Nguyen An Ninh (1924). Is a revolution possible?, La Cloche Fêlée, no.15th – May 19th, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 339. 10. Nguyen An Ninh (1924). The final toll, La Cloche Fêlée, no.19th – July 14th, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 386 – 388. 11. Nguyen An Ninh (1925). Annamites with Gandhism, La Cloche Fêlée, no.25, December 14th, 1924. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 415. 12. Nguyen An Ninh (1925), France in Indochina, La Cloche Fêlée, no.20 – no. 23, November 26th – December 7th, 1925. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 82 – 83. 13. Nguyen An Ninh (1925), Nationalism and Internationalism, La Cloche Fêlée, no.28th – December 24th, 1925. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 432-433. 14. Nguyen An Ninh (1926), The Confession of a Slave, L’Annam, no.94th – September 2nd, 1926. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 550-551. 15. Nguyen An Ninh (1927), Experience of Koumingtang (II), L’Annam, no.135th, February 7th, 1927. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 577. 16. Nguyen An Ninh (1928), The Problem of National Organisation, L’Annam, no.181th, 1928. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 693. 17. Nguyen An Ninh (1933), Knowledge and Politics, La Lutte, no.2nd – April 29th, 1933. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 729. 18. Nguyen An Ninh (1933), After the first round, La Lutte, no.3rd – May 5th, 1933. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 732. 19. Nguyen An Ninh (1936), Free spirits are left to starve, La Lutte, no. 77th – April 01st, 1936. Cited from: Mai Quoc Lien and Nguyen Son edt (2009), Nguyen An Ninh – Works, Literature Publishers, Hanoi, pg. 759.