Two American Wars in Asia: Successful Colonial Warfare in the Philippines and Cold War Failure in Vietnam

Abstract

Historians expect interpretations to be revised as a consequence of new information uncovered and new perspectives brought to bear. In an ideal world of scholarship, evidence-based interpretations triumph over less well-substantiated rivals, both within the community of historians and in the public at large. A survey of a few of the rival interpretations of both the American war to conquer the Philippines at the start of the twentieth century and also the later American conflict in Vietnam indicates that the reality of historical scholarship falls far short of the ideal. The difficulty of revising widely held but flawed interpretations raises a number of questions regarding the nature of historical scholarship and has led the author to a rather pessimistic view regarding their answers.