Avoid confusion between regime nature and specific organizational model
Recently, at the collective meeting of the Hanoi People's Committee, the Working Group for building the "Socialist Commune and Ward (XHCN)" model in Hanoi City in the period 2026-2030 and the following years considered the draft Project on piloting the "Socialist Commune and Ward" model in Hanoi City.
According to the draft, this is an integrated development and management organization model at the grassroots level, in which the government not only performs administrative functions, but directly transforms the goals and values of socialism (CNXH) into specific development results in the area.
The model aims to reorganize the development space, restructure socio-economic activities, innovate management methods, ensure harmony between economic growth and progress, social justice, cultural and human development, and promote the people's right to mastery. Notably, the level of improvement in living quality, satisfaction and happiness of the people is identified as the most comprehensive and important measure.
After the Draft Project was put up for discussion, many concerns have emerged from public opinion. A part of the opinions still does not fully understand the purpose of naming and piloting the "Socialist Commune and Ward" model, so they believe that as a Socialist Republic, "piloting" is not necessary. It is noteworthy that some arguments are distorted, taking advantage of the issue to attribute this policy to being "the disease of dogma" or "a newly officialized injustice". This is no longer an incomplete perception, but a deliberate inference, aimed at causing doubt and distorting the nature of the policy.
The viewpoint that, since it is a Socialist Republic, there is no need to pilot the model of "Socialist communes and wards" has confused the nature of the regime and the specific organizational model. The national name reflects the political nature at the national level, belonging to the category of institutions, the form of the State, affirming the political nature while the commune and ward model is an organizational and operational form at the grassroots level, which is specific, experimental and continuously improved. Therefore, the reasoning "if it is socialism, then all levels are improved" is simple, ignoring the fact that the nature of the regime is correct, but the organizational method still needs to be further improved.
It is not just necessary to name it "Socialist State" that all levels have reached complete standards. This is a static understanding, not consistent with Marxist-Leninist theory and Vietnamese practice, which affirms that socialism is a long-term development process, with differences between goals, nature and level of realization. Therefore, the national name reflects the orientation and nature of the regime, while the model "Socialist Commune, Ward" is a step to concretize those values in the management practice at the grassroots level.
Innovative thinking, respect for reality
The viewpoint that the pilot policy of the "Socialist Commune and Ward" model is a manifestation of "the disease of dogma" or even "a newly officialized injustice" is a one-sided interpretation, lacking theoretical and practical basis. First of all, it is necessary to affirm that dogma is mechanical, stereotypical, and far from reality. Meanwhile, the "pilot model" is precisely a manifestation of innovative, flexible thinking and respect for practice, in order to test and adjust before spreading.
World practice shows that, despite different names and organizational models, many countries around the world have implemented grassroots community development models in a sustainable, modern and people-centered direction. Clearly, the aspiration to a better, more developed community, as a model for other grassroots communities, has reflected the general trend of the whole world towards a democratic, fair, civilized, materially and spiritually rich life.
In Vietnam, the process of building socialism is also being implemented at each level, each step appropriately, so piloting the model is a normal and necessary step. This is a method that has been effectively applied in many major policies of Vietnam, from "breaking the fence" of economic innovation to building new rural areas, all originating from the grassroots level. Therefore, attributing this to being a "prophecy" is a reversal of the nature of the problem.
On the other hand, the argument that this model will "officialize injustice" is completely wrong. The nature of the socialist orientation in Vietnam is to aim for substantive justice, through combining economic growth with social progress and justice, ensuring social security, and narrowing the development gap between population groups.
The construction of the "socialist commune and ward" model is actually aimed at concretizing those goals at the grassroots level, where it directly affects people's lives. If designed and implemented correctly, this model will contribute to improving the quality of public services, expanding democracy at the grassroots level, enhancing transparency and accountability - core factors to limit injustice, not creating injustice.
