During the 1950’s, Americans lived in terror of communism in the Soviet Union. As China and later Korea became communist, the fear worsened and America began to feel it was their responsibility to stop it from spreading further. In an attempt to contain communism, Americans were willing to sacrifice the people of a foreign country without risking that of their own. This dilemma was represented in Graham Greene’s The Quiet American as two opposing characters, Fowler and Pyle, bickered over whether or not America had the right to get involved in Vietnam. Fowler represented the National perspective and Pyle represented the American perspective. According to Graham Greene’s The Quiet American, Fowler’s perspective was more justified as intervention …show more content…
Despite this, Pyle claimed it could have only done harm. He explained his point of view in opposed to Fowler by stating, “[Fowler] talk[s] as if the whole country were peasant. What about the educated, are they going to be happy?”(Greene 87) Although democracy could offer more freedom of choice and politics, the complexity of the system was insufficient and incompatible with the Nationalistic Vietnamese, which made it an undesirable choice for this country. Despite this, Pyle persisted on forcing it into their country because he could only see how the alternative, communism, was evil and lacked freedom, a conclusion made from negative experiences with poor leaders, not the system itself. The lack of freedom found in communism brought a simple government allowing for change to be made in Vietnam more easily; which provided a safer lifestyle and more food for the people much sooner than democracy would have. By intervening, America only got in the way of Vietnam achieving the lifestyle they wanted. Yet Pyle still believed they killed so many Vietnamese people for the better of their country, which was completely untrue as Fowler explained “you’ve got National Democracy all over your right shoe. Go home and tell Phuong all about your heroic deed”(Greene 154). Fowler accepted how killing people would not have saved them from a life of war, but instead caused one, while Pyle continued to reiterate that the result of the unwanted democracy justified the deaths of Vietnamese people. Most of which were willing to sacrifice to no end for their independence, which was proven by the United States state department who proposed “That the United States - as a great democracy - cannot and must not try to retard this development but rather act in harmony with it.” (“Far Eastern Desk”) By intervening in Vietnam, America was merely