111 replies to this topic

[jlaporte]

As for picking Lee Teng Hui, it's his son's mistake. Why blame it on him?

I truly admire Jiang and his son for what they achieved in extremely difficult circumstances. You need a bit of hindsight to judge those great men who contributed to the rise of modern China, including even Mao Zedong.

As for choosing LTH, you know the joke about Jiang Jingkuo on his death bed:

"Mister President, please name your successor for you are dying"

Answer (in a very faint voise with mainland accent) : "你等回"

[naruwan]

I truly admire Jiang and his son for what they achieved in extremely difficult circumstances. You need a bit of hindsight to judge those great men who contributed to the rise of modern China, including even Mao Zedong.

As for choosing LTH, you know the joke about Jiang Jingkuo on his death bed:

"Mister President, please name your successor for you are dying"

Answer (in a very faint voise with mainland accent) : "你等回"

man, you ruined the joke.... and that joke sounded like some kind of communist country joke instead. Chiang didn't pick Lee on his death bed.

The actual joke goes:

During a important meeting, Chiang went to the toilet to take a dump. All KMT people were waiting for Chiang's decision for who is to be the vice president, and they sent his bodyguard to ask for his opinion. Chiang replied "你等會" (Wait a minute). So Lee was picked for vice-president.

Then Chiang died and according to the consititution, Lee became the president.

[jlaporte]

man, you ruined the joke.... and that joke sounded like some kind of communist country joke instead. Chiang didn't pick Lee on his death bed.

The actual joke goes:

During a important meeting, Chiang went to the toilet to take a dump. All KMT people were waiting for Chiang's decision for who is to be the vice president, and they sent his bodyguard to ask for his opinion. Chiang replied "你等會" (Wait a minute). So Lee was picked for vice-president.

Then Chiang died and according to the consititution, Lee became the president.

If both Communist and you agree on the general meaning (not the style), there must be some truth in it! Actually, this is the version I heard from a ROC Army friend (with possible confusion between 會 and 回).

[Yun]

The Chen Shui Bian administration recently decide to remove all bronze statues of the Chiang father and son from all military camps and schools in Taiwan. Annually, during elections or 228 incident anniversary, hardcore independence supporters would protest and vandalise Chiang's statues.

Chiang Kai-shek has recently been identified by the DPP as the one ultimately responsible for the 228 incident.

I feel that Chiang's greatest achievement was the Northern Expedition, but it was immediately stained by his massacre of Communists in Shanghai. No matter how much a threat a group may seem to you, massacring them in that way is never acceptable. Especially when they were still your allies the day before.

Chiang's record of massacring and assassinating Communists makes it not unlikely at all that the 228 incident was directed by him. I believe that had he not stooped to the same level as his enemies, he would have enjoyed a better reputation after his death. As it is, he can only be regarded as a highly ambitious, highly ruthless and highly flawed man, like Mao.

No man who murders the innocent deserves to be called a hero. But it is hypocritical to call him a villain when he was hardly the only one doing it.

[Yasis]

No man who murders the innocent deserves to be called a hero. But it is hypocritical to call him a villain when he was hardly the only one doing it.

Yes, how true.

[naruwan]

No man who murders the innocent deserves to be called a hero. But it is hypocritical to call him a villain when he was hardly the only one doing it.

wait, you mean just because Hitler wasn't the only on who started WW2, therefore he shouldn't be called a villain??

if it's the wrong thing, doesn't matter how many people's doing it, doesn't make it any more correct.

Take double parking or speeding for example.

[Yun]

wait, you mean just because Hitler wasn't the only on who started WW2, therefore he shouldn't be called a villain??

I wouldn't call Hitler a villain just for starting a war of conquest. Most of the countries he conquered had waged wars of conquest too. I would call him a villain for the Holocaust, which was far beyond simple political ambition.

I wouldn't call the Japanese villains for invading China, or for attacking Pearl Harbour. I would just call them imperialists. I would, however, call them villains for their massacres and abuses of prisoners and civilians, which are not a necessary part of wars of imperial conquest.

But you are certainly right that it's hard if not impossible to draw a line. How do you define a villain? A person who causes the deaths of innocents? Then every political leader in the Second World War was a villain. How do you define a hero? A person who tries to make his country powerful? Then every dictator in history is a hero.

I think Bai Yang is right when he says that only scoundrels prove their loyalty by shedding other people's blood and not their own. In the same way, I think a person becomes a hero by shedding his blood for others, and not by shedding other people's blood for himself.

[naruwan]

I wouldn't call Hitler a villain just for starting a war of conquest. Most of the countries he conquered had waged wars of conquest too. I would call him a villain for the Holocaust, which was far beyond simple political ambition.

I wouldn't call the Japanese villains for invading China, or for attacking Pearl Harbour. I would just call them imperialists. I would, however, call them villains for their massacres and abuses of prisoners and civilians, which are not a necessary part of wars of imperial conquest.

But you are certainly right that it's hard if not impossible to draw a line. How do you define a villain? A person who causes the deaths of innocents? Then every political leader in the Second World War was a villain. How do you define a hero? A person who tries to make his country powerful? Then every dictator in history is a hero.

I think Bai Yang is right when he says that only scoundrels prove their loyalty by shedding other people's blood and not their own. In the same way, I think a person becomes a hero by shedding his blood for others, and not by shedding other people's blood for himself.

I believe the soldiers who believed in their cuase to stop Hitler and the Japanese from their masacres are the truth heros.

[Yasis]

Is George W.Bush a villian then, he started the invasion of Iraq based on lies and fraud which killed more than 100,000 Iraqis according to lancet report.

Is USA an evil country because it invades countries and kills people based on lies?

[francotse]

Mao is only revered by ignorant " RED 5 KINDS " peasant class and working people on the mainland to this very day but much lesser extent than decades ago.I live in northern California where we have growing population of new mainland immigrants,some individuals of this background has remnant of Maoism in their head unbelievably to my disbelief.One was trying to convinced me,Mao's banned on lightlife/red-light district and streets " clean-up " project are his minor accomplishments we should known about and praise him for job well done.Often,RED 5 KINDS refused to openingly acknowledge how Mao's evil conducts crippled China which society still feels today.

Mao, though he overthrew the corrupted nationalist gov at the time, he also devestated the entire chinese culture through the cultural rev. he and chiang kaishek are no different, both are power obsessed, even though chiang did so well in united China from the warlords with the northern expedition; mao, as mentioned, kicking out the corrupted nationalist at that time, both damaged China majorly.
to answer the question, why mao s picture is still on tiananmen, and he's still seen as the greatest father of China, we have to approach this in a very Chinese way. Chinese politics is very different from the West. Chinese politics talk about faces a lot, though mao did SOOOoooo bad and ruined China, he is STILL the creator of the PRC, and leaders of the PRC today cannot, CANNOT criticize mao. mao s image of a god is imprinted in the past generation of Chinese. maybe a few more decades, after we see China become more politically open, we can finally see someone criticize mao openly without being thrown in jail, that is one of my biggest hope in China's politically development.

[naruwan]

Is George W.Bush a villian then, he started the invasion of Iraq based on lies and fraud which killed more than 100,000 Iraqis according to lancet report.

Is USA an evil country because it invades countries and kills people based on lies?

I think the line is drawn at "indiscriminate killing". Killing of civilians at large numbers just because they can or that it can benefit one or few people's political agenda. That is the line. Once you cross it, you are a villain.

[Tong]

Sorry maybe i watched Li Au's talk show too much, Chiang will never be a Hero in my book. Flawed personality etc.

I think Japanese failure to conquer the whole of China is partly their own fault, not discrediting Chinese defenders or anything. Isn't it after Xi An incident only then Chiang compromised to work with CCP rather then killing each other while Japanese having zero resistance? And Chiang kept Zhang Xueliang under house arrest for rest of his life.

If Chiang was a military genius he wouldn't have lost the civil war to the weaker eqiupped communists..

Comparing Chiang to Churchill is an insult on the Englishman...

If not for the Cultural Revolution, I will rate Mao as a great leader...

Edited by Tong, 21 March 2006 - 11:17 AM.

[ROC_Citizen]

Chinese politics is very different from the West. Chinese politics talk about faces a lot, though mao did SOOOoooo bad and ruined China, he is STILL the creator of the PRC, and leaders of the PRC today cannot, CANNOT criticize mao. mao s image of a god is imprinted in the past generation of Chinese. maybe a few more decades, after we see China become more politically open, we can finally see someone criticize mao openly without being thrown in jail, that is one of my biggest hope in China's politically development.

This is my biggest hope as well.

[ROC_Citizen]

Sorry maybe i watched Li Au's talk show too much, Chiang will never be a Hero in my book. Flawed personality etc.

I think Japanese failure to conquer the whole of China is partly their own fault, not discrediting Chinese defenders or anything. Isn't it after Xi An incident only then Chiang compromised to work with CCP rather then killing each other while Japanese having zero resistance? And Chiang kept Zhang Xueliang under house arrest for rest of his life.

If Chiang was a military genius he wouldn't have lost the civil war to the weaker eqiupped communists..

Comparing Chiang to Churchill is an insult on the Englishman...

If not for the Cultural Revolution, I will rate Mao as a great leader...

Li Ao had a personal grudge and agenda against Chiang. His views with regards to Chiang and KMT are definitely flawed.

Chiang's policy of xian an nei, hou rang wai is definitely the right one. Throughout chinese history, almost every golden era is built based on this basis. (HanWudi, Kangxi, etc.). I didn't say Chiang was a military genius. He lost the civil war because the KMT forces were already depleted after fighting 8 years with the Japanese.

Statistics speak for itself, 2-3 million KMT soldiers perished during the war while many top generals such as Zhang Zhi Zhong, Dai An Lan, etc were killed during the war. The communist on the contrary, expanded from a mere 10,000-20,000 after their escape to Yenan to a force of 2-3 million after the war. It goes to show that they not really fighting the Japanese at all. Please don't give me the bullshit about how brilliant Mao were in his guerilla tactics as the reason why they could expand and not suffer casualties against the Japanese. How many huge battles were fought with the Japanese as compared to KMT? Can the communist come out with names of top generals perished in the war? How many really perished, fighting the Japanese?

Although the KMT were US-equipped, the communist were not that badly equipped either. They were using surrendered Japanese weapons from the Russians.

Lastly, and most important of all, is the different mentality of the soldiers of both sides during the civil war. The KMT soldiers were instilled with nationalist doctrines and thinking as a form of morale booster in the war against the Japanese. The main idea to them is to safeguard the country and race against foreign invaders. Such doctrine does not work in a civil war. Many soldiers did not want to fight in a civil war as they believe that war against foreign invaders is justfied but not war against their own kind. Chinese should not fight against one another. However, the communist soldiers does not have this problem as they were instill with communist ideology from the very start which is all about class struggle. Class struggle does not have any national or racial boundaries. The communist soldiers deemed it fit to fight against fellow Chinese in the KMT army as they were brain-washed into thinking that killing fellow chinese is fine if they were "counter-revolutionary" or "against the rights of the peasants and workers".

I am not trying to lift Chiang to the heavens, praising him as a perfect leader. He was a ruthless dictator just like mao but I believe history should credit him for his leadership and contribution during the war against the Japanese.

[francotse]

If Chiang was a military genius he wouldn't have lost the civil war to the weaker eqiupped communists..

Comparing Chiang to Churchill is an insult on the Englishman...

If not for the Cultural Revolution, I will rate Mao as a great leader...

strongly agreed, it is Chiang's arrogance which lost the mainland from him.
Churchill is one of my favorite politician, and Chiang is for sure not up there yet in my book.
mao, definately, if he s not that power obsessed, maybe he will be a great leader...