Here is a good question. ... On this day in 1943 - Chiang Kai-shek took the oath of office as president of China. ... Do you think he was a good president or a bad president? ... ...

From 1943 up till he was forced to resign, he was a bad president, because he never played the role of a president. All that time he was still the Generalissimo. He was a military general who didn't know how to do much else.

That extended to when he is the president of the exiled ROC occuping Taiwan. His son was a much better politician than him. The other son, perhaps a much better general had him be given the chance.

Can someone remind me, besides the slow and painful North Conquest and married one of the Soong sisters... what did Chiang Kaishek ever do that can be considered a success?

I think Chiang Kai Shek was still a good thing for China until 1949... In the late 1920s and early 30s...He sort of unite the country or at least 70-80% with his ROC by the success of the North Conquest and the many loose aillances with the various warlords supporting his ROC. From 1937-1945...the Japanese would find it much easy to fight against the various disorganised warlords thus conquering the whole mainland Instead the Japanese have to fight a united country under a KMT govt.

Chiang was also a good thing for Taiwan. Wheater the Communists or KMT won in the civil war, Taiwan was still a province of China. But it was Chiang's decision to relocate KMT to Taiwan before the complete Mainland defeat that as good as gave Taiwan "Nation Status" in 1949. It instantly upgraded Taiwan from a province to a nation-state...put Taiwan on the World Central Stage as the struggle between Communism and the Free Western World...and the Mainlanders that came over also did their part into developing Taiwan into a 1st World Country decades later.

Taiwan is not successful because "Mainlander came to develope it".

In fact, if it wasn't for Chiang, Taiwan could have been more successful.

Chiang delayed the progress of Taiwan by at least 20 year. First, by killing off all the Taiwanese elite during 228 and White Terror. Second, well he didn't do anything about developing Taiwan in the first 20 years that he was there.

Chiang is the guy who ordered The Forrest Managing Beural to chop down of ancient forrests and causing so much environmental issues today. (Which, yes, he did know it was a bad thing, even the Japanese knew it.)

Oh really? Then how do you explain Taiwan's ascendance into one of the Four Economic Tigers of Asia during the 60's and 70's, a period where Chiang presided over?

I find it amusing that pro-TI advocates always point to 228 and White Terror as justifications for TI, and nothing else. That's their only ammo. But do they ever think "What are the benefits of TI when Taiwan is already an independently governed island?" Is Taiwan going to gain any tangible benefit by seeking recognition from 100 world countries when it already is a de facto independently governed province of China?

I do not condone what the KMT did in 2/28 or the White Terror. However that is not a valid justification for TI. Sophisticated, rational individuals who do not let irrational, emotional sentiments cloud their judgment, know the flaws of TI sentiments. It is a cheap emotion with the intent of dividing Taiwanese across ethnic lines.

Why do so many Taiwanese benshengren support the KMT? Because they made many Taiwanese wealthy. Just ask my aunt. She was born in Taiwan to benshengren parents, speaks Minnanese as her first language, and supports the KMT.

If you claim that Taiwan is not a province of China, then why did Japanese authorities return the island to the ROC instead of the people of Taiwan after World War 2? The reason is because they took Taiwan away from China in 1895 when the island was part of China for over 200 years since Kangxi's reign.

People only seek independence when something is part of a greater entity. Otherwise what is the point of independence then if you are currently not part of a greater entity?

So much for national identity when Lee Teng-hui, the spiritual father of TI, is dressed in a samurai outfit.

As I said, you are very brain washed by Pro-PRC media. Obvious result from only receiving related information from 1 sided channel.

Address your samuri picture frist. That is a recreation of a famous Japanese Animation. And I am assuming by your logic, if you wear T-shirts and Jeans you are identifing with the United States of America?

To your why did Japanese return the island to ROC question. Japanese did NOT "return" the island to ROC. ROC was ordered from Allied Command to receive surrender of Japanese troops over Taiwan and North Vietnam. Mind you, Russians accepted Japanese surrender in Manchuria. Japan in no valid treaties ever given Taiwan to the ROC. It only surrendered it's ownership over Taiwan.

ROC's declaration of over taking Taiwan is only tolerated because of the international climate of the cold war.

To your Taiwan belonged to China for xxx years therefore blah blah blah point. Taiwan belonged to the Taiwanese people for at least 7,000 years before that. To that note, Turkey had Greece for long period of time, Spain occupied the Philippines for a long time, while England also had India, Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia for a long period of time. Same goes for the Russian occupied lands. China gave Taiwan to Japan permenantly. Just like Spain gave the Philippines to the United States.

Why does so many people support KMT? I don't know... why did so many people support NAZI? or the Cultural Revolution?

228 and White Terror doesn't justify TI. It is only a reminder of the result of foreign occupations. Much like WuShe and Jiaoba Nian commited by Japan, and Lin WenShuang revolution by Qing.

Finally, by the 70s, Taiwanese such as Lee Denghui are working as officials, like I've said previously. My statements before does not contradict the raise of Taiwanese economics in the 70s.

I like seeing you make a fool out of yourself. another evidence of your silly emotional outbursts. sorry but you lose again. American-born, never set foot on PRC, and Pro-ROC.



I figured that an intelligent, well-educated poster would use more well-educated words than "blah blah blah". Perhaps that is a sign of your limited education. Taiwan belonged to the Taiwanese people for at least 7,000 years before that? LOL. PROVE IT. Back it up. I like to see your links and evidence you can come up with. There was no such thing as "Taiwanese people" 7,000 years ago. Of course, only an irrational TI-supporter would think so.

So you're saying that Taiwanese (including benshengren) who support KMT today are equivalent to people supporting Nazis? Ok, you now have over a million people in Taiwan and overseas to explain your silly logic.



Rightfully so since Taiwan was a province of China prior to the Japanese annexation. Regardless of whether ROC was ordered or not makes no difference because Taiwan was involuntarily taken away from China in 1895. That was a principle correctly upheld by Allied Command.

With this in mind, what makes you think the international climate will support a formally independent Taiwan? If you think countries around the world will start recognizing Taiwan as Republic of Taiwan, think again. You're living in a world of fantasy. You got a big uphill battle on your sleeves if that's the case.



Irrelevant to the discussion on hand.

Face it naruwan, you already lost. I find you quite amusing. You have no evidence or proof to back up what you say (7,000 years my a--).

By the way, may I ask you why you are on "CHINA HISTORY FORUM" waging a losing battle with ROC supporters? If you are so anti-China, shouldn't you be in www.forumosa.com? Your buddies are waiting for you there.

I got a new name for naruwan, how about: Naruwan, outcast of KMT

He was a XXth century giant and contributed mightily to the rise of modern China.
The patriots who know better, be they from PRC or ROC, or the rest of the world, can only bow.

How am I not amazed that emotional people calling me emotional on the CHF again?

And please explain how being American born shields you from Pro-PRC propaganda? Most Chinese media are pro-PRC. I get my news from both sides and I understand what both sides of the stories are. I used to be brain washed also, so I don't blame anyone else to be. It's the lack of interest in the FACTS of history in the HISTORY FORUM that i find these kind of distortion distasteful. But we'll get into that line by line now won't we?



How does blah blah blah make anyone less intelligent or less educated? It's interesting that people with your side of the argument often can't find anything thing solid to attack on a statement.

Taiwan wasn't own by Taiwanese for at least 7000 year? Then I guess by your stand point, before Columbus, America also wan't owned by Native Americans? Or that Australia wasn't owned by Australians? Or Hawai'i wasn'ts owned Hawai'ians?

These are plenty of archeology finding that are common knowlege that people lived in Taiwan before the last iceage. 7,000 is a MODERATE estimate.

Of course, you want to see proof. Which I have posted many times before but I'll humor you.

http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?...al.pbio.0030247

How about genetic evidence from a academic paper?

Read it this time. For the love of humanity.



When did I say they are equivalent to people that supports the NAZI? I am simply saying with a little brain washing, even things like NAZI and cultural revolution can happen. KMT brain washed Taiwan for 40 years. I experienced the effect first hand. It took a long time and a lot of self-examination to admit I was brain washed. It is not an easy process. I am sure those who exprienced NAZI or Cultural Revolution will tell you the same thing.




The one people picking a fight is you and the PRC idealogy that you support. Taiwan is a pawn for PRC to balance International and Internal problems. As I said many times before, the real reason for China to claim Taiwan is because Taiwan's the only gateway to the pacific China can get its hands on.



I am on China History Forum by the invitation of General Zaoyun. I am not anti-China. I am simply pro-Taiwan. Thank you for finding me amusing. And I hope you'll still find me amusing after I provided some evidence. I guess now it's your turn. By the way, this is relatively not the thread to discuss issues of Taiwan. If you want to, open a thread. Before you do that, I ask you to visit the thread "About Taiwan" opened by me, as hansioux.

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...topic=2004&st=0

It's find most of the related sources and quote have already been cited. It was very informative thread which contained good arguments from both sides. Unfortunately, it was closed.

You might also want to visit this thread. Which is hosted by a Pro-TI site. However, Professor Sheng has done his part in digging out stastical data which no one I've met can yet dispute.
http://www.taiwannation.com.tw/topic015.htm

Actually your childish use of "blah blah blah" was YOUR attempt to dodge a statement I made regarding Taiwan being part of China since Kangxi's reign. Therefore you used it because you can't find anything solid to rebut my argument.

Therefore I find this statement "It's interesting that people with your side of the argument often can't find anything thing solid to attack on a statement." ironic since it was you who could not find anything solid to attack my statement that Taiwan was a province of China since Kangxi. Therefore your infamous "blah blah blah"

By the way, using it DOES make the person sound uneducated and unintelligible. You my friend fit the perfect example.



Where were the "Taiwanese" 7000 years ago? Still in mainland China? By the way, there is no such thing as a distinct race called Taiwanese. Your ancestors most likely came from the mainland just like pretty much everyone else in Taiwan. Unless you are an aborigine, whom by the way have no say or power in Taiwan politics. So naruwan, were your ancestors aborigines who never migrated from the mainland, unlike most of the Taiwanese today?

Yes America was inhabited by Native Americans, but where are the Native Americans today in American society? The power structure in America is hardly controlled by Native Americans.

Dumb statement regarding "Hawaii wasn't owned by Hawaiians". I assume based on this statement, then we can also say the same of "California being owned by Californians". Anyone can be a Hawaiian or a Californian. Right now If I immigrated to Hawaii today and obtained permanent resident status, I would be called a Hawaiian too. So there is no such thing as Hawaiians owning Hawaii, neither is there such a nonsensical thing as an ethnically distinct Taiwanese owning Taiwan.

So are you saying that children in Taiwan born to waishengren parents are not Taiwanese? Would you call these children Taiwanese?

You seem to be supporting separatist ideas that can be applied around the world. Based on your logic, then Hawaii, California, or New York could be called separate countries since the residents in each are Hawaiians, Californians, or New Yorkers. Pure silly and extremist.

Incorrect. The only people picking a fight are the TI losers like yourself who think one needs to be pro-PRC to oppose TI. Opposing TI transcends across ideological lines, whether it be KMT, DPP, PFP or CCP. Even some DPP members were ticked off by the party's independence platform, and suggest that the DPP drop it. Many of these DPP members had viewed the party's formation as a liberal alternative to the KMT and became disappointed when an independence charter was introduced.

The very idea of a formally independent Taiwan is an insult to the very essence of being Chinese. Taiwan was snatched away from China by Japan at a time when China was brutally humiliated by Western countries and divided up into spheres of influence. To allow a formally independent Taiwan would mean yielding to that century of humiliation, and that would be an insult to Chinese everywhere, regardless of ideological affiliation. 50 years (1895-1945) of being separated from China involuntarily is tough to swallow for many Taiwanese and mainlanders everywhere.

If you are not anti-China as you claim, then you would be able to get that in your head.



That's no excuse for seeking TI. I agree that KMT was politically repressive and I oppose many of the things they did, such as forbidding students from speaking Minnanese. But you have to keep in mind the rational behind the KMT's actions. At that time there was concern that Taiwan could be infiltrated by Communist spies and could be influenced by political ideologies from the mainland. Of course that is not a valid reason for condoning the KMT's actions against political dissent, but that gives you an insight on why the KMT acted as they did.

If Taiwan was politically unstable, that would give the Chinese Communists a suitable environment to spread their communist ideology into Taiwan. Would you prefer Taiwan to fall under communist hands? If Taiwan fell to the communists, then Taiwan would not even become one of the Four Economic Tigers of Asia during the 60's and 70's.

Once Taiwan became economically wealthy (starting from the land reform program) and politically stable, the time was ripe for Chiang Ching-kuo to pave the way for democracy in Taiwan. He abolished media censorship, legalized opposition political parties such as the DPP, and promoted many Taiwanese into his administration.



Sorry but I get none of my news sources from the PRC. All of the news sources in the PRC are government-censored and full of propaganda.

I get mine from the New York Times, the LA Times, Asia Times, AND the Taipei Times, along with other Non-PRC affiliated news sources. In fact I got that famous photo of Samurai Lee Teng-hui in this following article from the Taipei Times, a pro-independence newspaper.

How's this for pro-PRC propaganda: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/arc...1/17/2003211409

There is only one ideology that will bring the ROC, PRC, and the USA into a war, and that ideology goes by the name of Taiwan Independence.

Of course a good president. Which president look so smart in uniforms?

sources say that In the 1970s...when Old Chiang is reaching the end of his life...at times he still ordered his airplanes to fly to the coastal provinces of China dropping millions of leaflets to the peoples.

The leaflets read something like this...
Old Chiang still alive and kicking in Taiwan and the Heroic Republic of China Army will soon reconquer the Mainland, destroy the Communists Bandits and Liberate everybody.

Interesting...

The ROC airforce also flew secret recon missions deep into China for the US, even after US-Taiwan several their formal relations.

That was changed when spy sat. proved to be more effective.

You obviously did not read any of the sources I provided. Especially you didn't bother to read the academic paper.

There's genetic proof that over 80% of Taiwanese people are part Austronesian.

Also it shows that Taiwanese Aboriginals were seperated from China for over 7,000–20,000 years. Pretty much before the last iceage started. Look at the charts yourself. The same conclusion can be drawn from the natural species of animals in Taiwan. Including Elephant fossils.

Not to mention the Puyuma stone houses archeology sites showing culturals similar to existing Paiwan cultures dating back 7,000 years ago.

In fact, if you want to say there is no "Taiwanese" 7,000 ago, then let me ask you, what made you think there was a racial/cultural concept called "Chinese" 7,000 years ago?

If you have read the Taipei Times ariticle that you've posted, you would know it's not a picture of a "samurai"

Instead, he is dressed as the head master of a school in Japanese comic book.

So why would you distort facts just to suit your own purpose?

And what is the point of pasting that link while you obviously didn't even read it?

In anycase, like I said, open your own thread if you want to attack TI. This is not one of those threads.

Re-incarnated in an even better historian

Wow, what took you so long to respond? It's about time.



That quote from the Taipei Times makes me laugh. Photos of a comic book Japanese kendo master used to illustrate Lee's philosophy and beliefs on Taiwan-centered national identification?

As they say, a picture is worth more than a thousand words. TI-supporters should not be able to crack jokes like this on their "national identity" So much for Taiwan national identity when the "father of TI" uses Japanese culture to introduce young people to his beliefs on Taiwan-centered national identification.

Funny how you did not rebut any of my points again, and now you are getting emotionally defensive.

By the way, you never answered my question: Were your ancestors aborigines who never migrated from the mainland?

If you are an aborigine, shouldn't you be speaking your own aboriginal language instead of Mandarin (which you speak) and Minnanese (which you also speak)?

Also you still have not explained your comment regarding Chiang Kaishek setting back Taiwan's economic progress by 20 years.

Naruwan, you have no substance. You could not even come up with anything substantial to respond to my previous post.

This seems a bit preposterous. Although still a rural class, Yuwan Zhu Min also participate in Taiwan modern society. Apart lovely A-Mei, and an equally famous (and equally pretty) Li Fa Yuwan representative, many of them are quite successful.
Mentioning Yuwan Zhu Min reminds me of an awful photograph depicting Japanese soldiers standing proudly next to a heap of heads, following an aborigene's rebellion somewhere in Taiwan mountains. They suffered very much from the 50 years Japanese occupation and must have accepted CKS's land reforms with great relief.
Do you have any info on CKS's policy with regards to minorities?

I also adore A-Mei, and I admire her for having the courage to sing San Min Zhu Yi at the presidential inauguration in 2000.

I have sympathy for aborigines who suffered during the Japanese occupation or who may have suffered under CKS.

What I do not admire is hardline TI extremists who are not objective, who deny the facts, and who use pro-TI sites to try to illustrate their point.

your survey was rather intrique
good means yes ?
bad means no ?
I presume. how about terrible?? heehee Ah Bien looks smart on uniform too.
my remarks on CKS is a crook, opportunist, murderous dictator whatelse?

There are others like you on this forum who though being rude and agressive while not providing and facts means your point is more valid. While that isn't true, frankly I getting used to this kind of attitudes.

You did not bother to read anything that I've posted. I'll say for the last time.

In the links that I have provided, including the academic paper, the previous discussion on CHF on subjects related to Taiwan, I think it's pretty clear that most Taiwanese people are not from China. 80% of Taiwanese are aboriginals or had aboriginal ancesters.

In the link, which I'll post again for you,

http://www.taiwannation.com.tw/topic015.htm

You either want a factual discussion or you don't. If you want to base everything on emotions, then go ahead. Don't read the sources I provide. I won't bother to have this kinds of discussions.

I have mentioned my ethnicity many times on this forum. Frankly I don't even think it matters. You not knowing it, means you didn't bother to go through the forum thread links I provided.

I am Taiwanese. My mother has Siraya and Dutch blood, there are Pingpu aboriginals who were force by cultural and economical reasons to adopt Han identity. My father's side has 1 Hakka ancestor from Fujien 200 years ago who couldn't produce children. So he had his friend in Taiwan sleep with his aboriginal wife to produce a child. Was his friend also from China? My family book didn't say. Funny thing is my family book later forbit decendents to marry any Hakka people. And my family, like A-Bien and Lee Deng-hui's families, forgot how to speak Hakka.

So what am I? I think it'd be simpler to just say I am Taiwanese.

Besides, even if my family were from China? What's your point then?

Chiang Kai-Shek moved important resources into maintaining a army for the purpose of retaking China. While all other nations are building highways, public transportions in the 60s and 70s, Chiang didn't bother to do any of that.

Chiang was focused on building warships, making bullets. Chiang murdered the ancient forrests on the steep mountains to trade for income, while the lost of the forrest brought natural disasters from 87 flood all the way to recent years.

Chiang was against any form of free speech and democracy. The National Assembly didn't get re-elected by the people for over 40 years, even after Chiang died.

You might be able to say Chiang Jin Kou did work to improve Taiwan's economy. Starting with the 10 major infrastructures. But that's already in the 70s. 20 years since ROC occupied Taiwan. Something he could have done if he wasn't so focused on drainning Taiwan's resources to retake China.

By the way, what sources have you used to prove Chiang improved Taiwan' economy during the first 20 years?

Also, that photo is one of many photos taken for that purpose. It also included photos where he dressed as aboriginals, and where he dressed as the Matrix I think. It's been a while. To single out this picture and distort it from a school master to saying that he is a samurai, is distasteful.

It's me being emotional or defensive. It is the truth.

Aboriginals suffered GREATLY under CKS. Including during 228, where a lot of aboriginals took up arms with the Holo and Hakka. Tsou tribe actually took over an military airport. Which after they were defeated, 40 Tsou men went and admitted their crime after political pressure.



The KMT's policy towards Aboriginals is just an extension of the Japanese rule. Forcing them to adapt to Han-names for example. Many older generation have 3 names. One is their real name, one is they Japanese name which Japanese forced upon them, then one is their Han name, which KMT forced upon them.

Just the simple fact that you are not allowed to use your tribe name says enough.

Tthere are many trajedies such as Lesin Wadan, Han name Lin Rei Chang 樂信．瓦旦 (林瑞昌). He was the first Aboriginal Medical Doctor under the Japanese occupation.

When KMT first came, he was appointed government positions. But he suggested to give Aboriginals the right to use tribe names, the right to their ancestrial lands. Where he was then accused of being a communist and killed.

naruwan, it is considered rude to post pro-TI sites and insist on people to read propaganda-influenced material that are not objective.

Here is further evidence of your lies and propaganda:

How did you get from 2% to 80%? An extreme exaggeration on your part. Do your own homework (try searching Google) and quit fabricating stories.


May I refresh you. Here is information from the US State Department, Taiwan's ally:

http://www.state.gov/outofdate/bgn/t/49613.htm

"More than 18 million, the "native" Taiwanese are descendants of Chinese who migrated from Fujian and Guangdong Provinces on the mainland, primarily in the 18th and 19th centuries. The "mainlanders," who arrived on Taiwan after 1945, came from all parts of mainland China. About 370,000 aborigines inhabit the mountainous central and eastern parts of the island and are believed to be of Malayo-Polynesian origin...

During the 1950s, the KMT authorities implemented a far-reaching and highly successful land reform program on Taiwan. They redistributed land among small farmers and compensated large landowners with commodities certificates and stock in state-owned industries. Although this left some large landowners impoverished, others turned their compensation into capital and started commercial and industrial enterprises. These entrepreneurs were to become Taiwan's first industrial capitalists. Together with refugee businessmen from the mainland, they managed Taiwan's transition from an agricultural to a commercial, industrial economy."



This shows your ignorance of economics and on issues of practicality. You are high on emotion, but weak on objectivity.

Naruwan, whatever lies or propaganda you come up with to suit your own agenda, I will still be against TI. Right now I'm having career discussions with a government thinktank in Washington DC that advises the White House on East Asia foreign policy matters. The prospects are looking good and once I'm on board, I will let policymakers know the flaws of TI sentiments. I'll keep a record of this discussion with the infamous, unreasonable TI supporter named naruwan (or should I say hansioux).

May people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait and overseas join together in the fight against Taiwan Independence (from whom?).

Hum...... I must be missing something.
How can you explain then that aborigenes are amongst Soong Chu Yu's most faithful supporters?
(and sorry about the c**k-up with my previous post; it must be old age!
Whao, the software automatically put ** at the right place. This is progress!)

There are plenty of Taiwanese aboriginals who supports the DPP.

For example during the 2004 presidential election, many of the famous Taiwanese baseball players (needless to say, Aboriginals) from Sinon Bulls and Brothers Elephants openly supported DPP.



Funny the one person keep coming up with personal attack insists that the other party is high on emotions.

May I suggest you to read bell hooks Minority and Feminism.

Questions for you to answer:

1. Why is it rude to post pro-TI links when the links themselves contains nothing but statistical data extracted from historical documents? Why can't you look past your bias and look at the facts?

2. Explain how US is an "ally" of Taiwan and not also "ally" of PRC.

3. Explain why you rather base your conclusion on a US government web-site and not facts based on genetics?

4. Explain when have I gone from 2% to 80%. In fact if you search on the web or read the genetic study, the true figure is 88%. Which has been made clear in my "About Taiwan" thread ever since I started discussing the Taiwan issue on this forum. I am understating, not exagerating.

5. Please explain how are land given to the aboriginals? Aboriginals had titles to the land on the mountain. They had their own areas where they can hunt and worship. Since KMT's policy, they assigned a piece of paper to them, giving them less than 5% of their traditional territoy, stripping them the right of hunting and their claims to many ancestrial, spiritual lands. Such as highly valued hot springs and etc. How would you call this a success? Why do you look at everything from the surface and take it for face value, instead of looking into the problem?

6. What part of my consistance stance on CHF is a propaganda?

Naruwan, either you are going to the extreme in taking statistics out of context or you are too reliant on people who do. 98% of the people on Taiwan are Han in ethnicity while only 2% are aboriginals. The data you are quoting refers to small degree of aboriginal contribution in the Han Chinese blood. Needless to say, after numerous generations of interbreeding, most people in Taiwan will have some aboriginal DNA. How you interpret that to mean wholly aboriginal is beyond me. Notice that it is 88% of the Han Taiwanese that you are referring to.

With such unbiased sources, how could you ever lose an argument


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Taiwan

Han: Taiwanese (including Hakka) 84%, mainland Chinese 14%
Taiwanese aborigine: 2%

The human leukocyte antigen typing study and mitochondrion DNA analysis performed in recent years show that more than 88% of the native Han Taiwanese population have some degree of aboriginal origin.

bhchao, please don't use personal attacks.



I agree with Mr. Khan. I'm certain a lot of Southern Minorties in China have blood other than Han.

look at it this way... The ROC retreat to Taiwan was the best thing that can happen to Taiwan. If the Communists had "completely" won the war ( mainland + take over taiwan ) It couldn't have been much better either. The CCP would probably have neglected Taiwan and some of Mao's stuffs like " Great Leap Forward " in the 60s are many times worse than KMT's white terror.

If the KMT had defeated the Communists...they would probably devote all their resources to the Mainland and pay no attention to Taiwan. Neither the CCP nor the KMT will give Taiwan independence at that time and Taiwan was destined to be a part of many provinces of China.

But It was the KMT defeat in China and retreat to Taiwan that gave Taiwan "Nation-Status" in 1949...a province upgraded to a nation-state which is Republic of China Taiwan. and If Taiwan ever discard it's formal title and have a Republic of Taiwan. It was this incident that make it possible - ( the retreat of KMT to Taiwan that first started the separation of the island from the Mainland )

Imagine what if It was the CCP who lost the civil war and was forced to relocate to Taiwan

~ Some more fuel for this low burning fire.
~ The first time a dynasty from the mainland conquered/claimed the Island of Formosa was with the collapse of the Ming and the establishment of the the Ch'ing apartheid regime. Piracy and attempted rebellions out of the Formosa lead to the conquering of Taiwan for the first time in History. The Japanese took the island away from the Ch'ing apartheid regime in 1895 and held it until the US whooped their in 1945. At that time it was given to the Chinese under the Nationalist. This is the first time in history that the Chinese ever controlled Taiwan. Before that it was independent, then controlled by the Manchu/Tartar/Mongols and Japanese.
~ For the criminals in Beijing to claim the Island as part of China is akin to the current government of South Africa claiming the entire territory of Namibia because the Apartheid regime of South Africa occupied it for decades.
~ Continue to discuss amongst yourselves.

Peace,

Leimeng

Flatulo Ergo Sum ~~~

Fan Gong Chu Guo ph43r:

(***Insert Personal One Liner Here***) :

Nonetheless, the Republic of China census (Taiwan) says over 97% of the Taiwanese are various Han Chinese groups. In the PRC,
even the various Han groups are mixed. Same for Japan's various groups, same for Korea's realatively homogenous groups. No one is 100% pure of a single ethnic group.

This is off topic, but just to answer your question concerning Native Americans...

From Wikipedia,

This is a list of Native American politicians

This list is incomplete.

Ben Nighthorse Campbell, former United States Senator, Northern Cheyenne Indian, represented Colorado.
Tom Cole, current U.S. Representative for Oklahoma's 4th district and an enrolled member of the Chickasaw Nation. He is currently the only Native American serving in Congress.
Charles Curtis, former U.S. Vice President and Senator, 1/8 Kansa/Osage Nation Indian, represented Kansas.
Brad Carson, former Congressman, Cherokee Indian, represented Oklahoma.
Hiram Rhodes Revels, former U.S. Senator, African American and Lumbee Indian, first black in the Senate, represented Mississippi.
Larry EchoHawk, former Idaho Attorney General, Pawnee Indian
Ely Parker, held senior posts in the Grant administration
Representative Scott BigHorse House District # 36 Oklahoma House of Representatives elected Nov. 7th 2006

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Native_American_politicians"

It's true that there aren't many Native Americans holding office in the US government at the moment, but, they are there! Not to mention all of the men and women who have some partial make up of this particular heritage. Plus, all of the people who are leaders in education, technology, etc.



I think naruwan was referring to the Polynesians who lived in Hawai'i before Europeans came to the islands. Yes, of course, now that it's the 50th state of the US, once you settle there and become a citizen, you become a Hawai'ian just as I have become a New Jerseyite, because I now live here in NJ.

As far as how I feel about Chiang Kai-Shek... I'm afraid the jury is out on this one. I used to be a big fan of the man... because studying history in school in this country can be very one-sided. He commanded the Northern Expedition to unify China against the warlords and emerged victorious in 1928 as the overall leader of the Republic of China. Pretty impressive. He saved precious cultural artifacts and artworks from destruction when he and the KMT fled to Taiwan. The ultimate goal of the Kuomintang revolution was democratic rule, which was highly attractive to the US. The United States China Lobby saw in him, and his wife, the hope of a Christian and democratic China. However, Chiang Kai-shek's policies were far from democratic, but this remained unknown to the U.S. public due to strong state-imposed censorship in China and self-imposed censorship in the U.S. during the war years and after. He seemed an ally of the US, and of course, we're going to speak of only his good deeds in our history books.

But after visiting CHF and looking deeper into his life and actions taken, and hearing accounts of his deeds... I've discovered that he wasn't the great man I thought he was. There were a lot of very bad things he did, too, including 228 and more. So as I said before, I'm still pondering on how I feel about him.

Although, good or bad, yes, he did look great in his uniform.

Kimchee

Old Chiang was quite unlucky that the Sino-Japanese war from 1937 virtually saved the Chinese Communist Party from being vanquished while the following 8 years war did more damages to KMT and allowed the CCP to regroup and rearm.

The current CCP leadership instead of blasting the Japan Govt for WWII every now and then should thank them instead as it was the Japanese who indirectly saved their party.

May I question you how did old Chiang ruled China before Japanese invasion and after? He's virtually ruled as a dictator in mainland and Taiwan. If I were to decide if whethere he' a good or bad president, I think he's more as a tyrant than a real preisident in today's modern sense.

Did old Mao's not indirectly (or directly) thanked Japan for the invasion for the establishbent of today PRC and established good relations with Japan in the 80's where things started smoothly until the recent years where Japan openly provoked China with political and history issues? Who should thank who now I wonder?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People label Chiang Kai shek a dictator. But in those times any leader than hoped to grab power would have to be ruthless and roll heads. Political power does not come from dinner parties and being nice. The warlords in those days routinely chopped heads off of students, demonstrators, turncoats, patriots, you name it. Anybody that was a threat got the sword. And with China's feudalistic and imperial background, how else can a leader expect to rule ? Democracy took hundreds of years and bloody revolutions in France before it took hold. By mid 20th century you expect the Chinese to learn how to vote a president into office, including mayors and governors and senators ? China is not the United States, FRance or the UK. Change comes slowly.
I hear people in Taiwan accusing CKS of killing people (sha ren), and being the chief criminal in the 2/28 massacre of Taiwanese (yuan shung). Give me a break. CKS killed more people on the Mainland than he ever did in Taiwan. He's no angel, but he was no traitor to his nation, unlike Lee Ten Hui. I regard CKS as a true patriot. His only crime was losing the Mainland. It may have been his fault, or it may not have been. I regard him as a victim of history and circumstance. Mao brought more bloodshed and tears to the Chinese than CKS ever did.
I admire Chiang Kai Shek. I feel he was a giant of this time. He kept the country together during the very difficult war against Japan. Who else could have led the country and not let China become a colony of Japan ?
Show me a political/military figure from the early days of the Republic that didn't have blood on his hands. Perhaps Sun Yat-Sen didn't , but my opinion of Sun is that he merely a loud cannon (Sun Da Po). Had Sun lived another 10 years he may have not amounted to much.

Boarhuntr

I'm looking this from the big picture. Sure China can't have democracy right away because implenting a new form of government takes time. However, that doesn't give any reason why Chiang isn't seen ruling as a monarchy. He betrayed Dr. Sun ideologies by ruling people with an iron fist -so much for what Dr. Sun had undertaken him. Yet, during his rule, China was in great povery, corruptions was rampant is his governance. He himself accumulated innumeralbe amount of wealths along with his cronies and foreign aids, while the public are left to themselves. If that doesn't clearly define his ruling as a dictactorship then I don't really know what it is. You also said Chiang was a patriotic, guess what? Prior to his flee to Taiwan during the last few years of the civil war, Chiang basically sellout mainland by secretly giving congession to the U.S. To put it short, Chiang is no any different than a puppet government manipulated by the U.S. after fleeing to Taiwan to push for Taiwan Independence.

Don't know him to talk bad about him... as for his actions, would anyone in his postion do anything different?


------

Need to edit this to read as:

I don't know enough of CKS to comment about him. Just that if anyone is in his position, would he have done what he have done - given same backgrouns and same situation?

Chiang Kai Shek's rule of China in his peak even at 1931-1937 was very fragmented - basically a loose coalition of his party + the numerous warlords flying the republican flag. Chiang's strong influence was restricted to Zhejiang and the capital Nanjing.

If Chiang had won control of China, the mainland would probably end up the same way as today with maybe a bit more political democracy ( like India ). Chiang would probably kill less peasants from 1950-70s than Mao Zedong who massacred his countrymen in millions during de iure peace time.

But one can argue that China after those disastrously decades of war need a complete national evolution. Chiang wasn't a strong enough leader for that job, Mao was mad enough to do it.

I always am amused by these kinds of threads. May I be so bold as to ask—all the folks in this thread who had an opinion—
1. how many of you live here in Taiwan now?
2. How many of you lived here in Taiwan under Chiang?

I suspect the answer to both of those questions is "very few", or more likely, "none of you at all" (I am not saying that for sure—I do not know any of you personally). And the reason it matters is because people who do not live here have very distorted ideas about this place...and I include Taiwanese Americans in that.

I have lived here in Taiwan for 14 solid years, paid my taxes, put food on the table for my family. So even though I am a white American I am in a position to have a moderately well informed view. Now as to the question, Chiang Kai Shek was both of these things:

He was a ruthless dictator who cared nothing for human life.
He was also the single man most responsible for keeping Taiwan free.

He achieved item two by virtue of item one.
And that is it.

Take care,
Brian
p.s. I should mention, I have no bias one way or the other; I despise both camps of Taiwanese politics. The DPP is the KMT without the brains. The KMT sole everything they could lay their hands on and then ran off to American or Europe. The DPP steal stupidly, like children running into a candy store and just grabbing a handful of candy and running out. And neither side, the DPP nor the KMT, have anything even vaguely resembling "a plan" for Taiwan. Both sides busy themselves stealing everything that is not nailed down, cheating on their wives and acting like sub-human animals over at the Legislative Yuan. I presume everyone heard about the City Council guy down in Tainan who threw the human feces ("****" to put it more graphically) on the other politico. It was at the city council meeting if I remember right.
Well enough on all that.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China was in great poverty during CKS 's rule because the Republican government inherited a bankrupt nation from the Manchus. Don't forget that by the end of the Manchu dynasty China was paying huge war indemnities to foreign nations. I recall at least one case where reparations to England would have taken China about 4 decades to pay off. After the Boxer rebellion China had to pay indemnities to 8 nations. Averaging that out, it must have taken China close to 200 years to pay off those reparations. That was why one of the chief goals of the Republican government was to negotiate to nullify those "Unequal Treaties". Chiang did not cause China's poverty. He inherited it.
Also look at the timeline of his reign. He had to fight the warlords during the Northern Expedition. He had to fight or negotiate with several seceding factions of the Republican government. I don't recall the exact details, but during the early Republican era there were at least 3 or 4 competing "governments", in places like Guanxi province, the city of Wuhan, and other places. Then he also had to purge the Guomindang party of Communists. Everybody was suspect because everybody in power negotiated with foreign nations to get support for things like military hardware, or cash in exchange for railroad or port concessions. Everybody was suspected of "selling" out China to gain the upper hand. This kind of thing even happened as far back as the Taiping rebellion. Chiang did not do anything that people like Hong Shiu Chuan, or Li Hong Chang or Yuan Shi Kai did. Li ceded to the Russians the territory north of the Heilongkiang; Hong negotiated w/ the British for arms; Yuan signed secret concessions with the Japanese. So why single Chiang Kai Shek for making concessions with the U.S. ? It was a matter of stark reality. If you did not have arms or money you could not survive. And it was the foreigners who had the capital to invest in China, regardless of what faction wanted the aid.
All politicians have to raise money. And any politician that raises money who does not "benefit" personally is either a fool or not good at the game. As far as corruption goes, Chiang was an angel in comparison to the likes of Chen Shui Bian and his cronies. Chiang did not squirrel away millions of dollars for his private account and flee into a comfortable exile in a foreign country. If he had money it was because Soong Mei Lin had money. Chiang could have thrown up his hands and fled to New York and lived a very comfortable life in exile. Yet during his diaspora in Taiwan he vowed never to set foot outside the country. And he kept his word. Look at the other dictators of the world. The Shah of Iran fled to the U.S.; Marcos of the Philippines fled to New York. Li Zhong Ren, who was vice president of the ROC fled to the U.S. when the commmunists took the Mainland. Chiang swallowed his pride and laid the groundwork for Taiwan to become a prosperous nation.
Chiang was no two bit tin horn dictator. And to me the label of "dictator" is not necessarily bad. Dictators sometimes get things done. Sometimes democracies have so much infighting among factions that nothing gets accomplished . Look at the sorry state of Taiwan's economy; look at its brawling legislature. Democracy in Taiwan has actually turned back the clock.

Boarhuntr

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mao unified China because he was both mad enough and ruthless enough to do it. Chiang at least let the average family live their lives freely. Mao reigned by terror. Every neighborhood had its watchdog or snitch. People could not travel without approval or permits. Children snitched on their parents; co-workers reported each other. Nobody trusted each other. Chiang did not do any of that. If he had survived on the Mainland the economy would have taken off decades earlier, and the Chinese century would have arrived at least 30 years earlier, without all the bloodshed and grief like the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution.
I speak about Mao's China from a very reliable source, not from books or movies. My wife's sister grew up in China after her parents fled to Taiwan. In her teen age years she was sent to the countryside to farm (shia fang). She reports her children crying because they didn't have enough food to eat, and the only thing she could do was tell them to go to sleep early so they would not feel their hunger pains. She reports being blackballed and persecuted because her father was a Nationalist air force officer. Basically she reports having lived through hell.
China is now strong and prosperous. But I believe that Mao's reign of terror was totally unnecessary and set China back decades.
The Chinese people are smart, hard working, and resilient. Given enough time and peace they would have dominated the world anyway, eventualy. Mao's reign was a dark spot in China's history, and I am sure historians will not be kind to him.
On the other hand Chiang Kai Shek was a much more benign person. Sure he killed people, and sure I don't doubt he might have been somewhat corrupt. But what Chinese leader wasn't "corrupt" ? The way the Emperors in the old days lived, they lived off the sweat and labor of millions of peasants. That is true corruption . I don't see Chiang Kai Shek living in a thousand room palace, having 500 concubines, or going skiing in Europe ? He was actually quite a frugal man. And as an aside, his son Chiang Ching Kuo was even more frugal.
On the scale of corruption I rate the Chiang's as being low on the scale. Much more benign than other people.

Boarhuntr

You are contradicting your own statement. Secretly making congessions and allowing foreign to station troops? what's the difference.



An very good excuse. Blame it all on Soong Mei Ling because she was the wife of CKS. How do you explain the 20 billion worth of cash accumulated into the Chiang's family prior fleeing to Taiwan (not to mention all these national treasures and foreign aids)? I guess, if that were your excuse excuse, I guess Chen Shui Bian could said the same thing that it's his wife thats corrupted, not him.



Did he kept his word that he'd be back in 3 years? No. A big reason why CKS never fled to the U.S. was because of the hatred he had when the U.S. try to force him to allow Taiwan Independence. I can't say the same for his wife though, becuase she insist she's an American rather than an Chinese.


Yes, at the expense of the mainlaind in ruins. Taiwan should be grateful to Chiang's for his accumulated wealths brought over from the mainland.



Again, here you are contradicting your own statements, you now admit now CKS's a dictator. Anyway, to further prove CKS was ruling as a monarchy, in 1947 KMT's patriots founded a party called China Kuomingtang Revolutionary Committee to oppose CKS monarchy rule.



All of that is based on what if? Sure Mao's did some very bad things late in his life and I don't agree with it, but looking from the bigger size of the picture, my evaluation among many others is that Mao did more good than bad for China.

And how did I contradict myself ? I did not say CKS was "not" a dictator. Rather I said, or meant that not all dictators are bad. Sometimes a democracy engages in so much factional fighting that the country goes backward and the economy suffers. That is what is happening in Taiwan now. During the Ming dynasty there was so much infighting that one historian, Raymond Huang, said that it's almost like the entire Ming dynasty history was about petty squabbles. In the latter part of the Ming dynasty the Emperor didn't really have much power. Consequently many local officials, principally the censorium officials saw fit to criticize the Court for every little thing. There was a memorium to the Emperor Wan Li from an official in Zhejiang of Fujian province criticzing the Emperor because he did not take care of his father's tomb, and consequently the tomb was damaged by water leakage. Because censorium officials were immune from prosecution, many censoriums used their immunity to continually criticize the court in order to enhance their own reputation. But I digress. Look at Taiwan, a burgeoning democracy. Look at all the petty squabbles and juvenile behavior. Taiwanese are just asking for a coup d'etat to clean up the country and bring the economy to order. Taiwan was once one of the four Asian Tigers. Now they talk about the 3 Asian Tigers, and Taiwan is no longer on the list.

Boarhuntr

Oh come on, it's far more complicated than that. You can't say someone was "good" or "bad".

I would say he both succeeded and failed in many ways. He held off the Japanese from conquering the whole of China (even with Allied help) and was able to mostly unite what was a very disparate region at the time. If the Communists hadn't caused so much trouble doubtless he would have been able to unite the whole place.

However he failed to do that and lost the Civil War. He failed to sufficiently deal with corruption either in China or Taiwan and imposed a rather horrible regime in the latter. I would certainly not view him as a "nice guy" in the way he ruled, but then again he was a dictator like Mao so it was rather inevitable (sadly).

I know that's a rather brief and superficial view!

With due respect, please appoint someone else to design these polls.

Unfortunately, for most things in life, there is NO black and white answer. Perhaps we should have no polls at all?

Against tremendous odds from the USA, UK, Russia, CCP and even in his own ranks he stand tall and taugh he hang in there, I would say he was a good president because he was able to implement and showcase to the CCP and the world that Sun Yet Sen's prinicple does work......Taiwan or the Republic of China became prosperous, Chinese culture was save.

Chiang and Mao lived out their political life in early 20 century - the Chinese mainland was a chaotic world of betrayal and deception, Warlordism, where democracy / civilian rights are unknown while gunpowder ruled above all.

one's circumstances often decide what action he will seek

felt that it's hard to judge Chiang or Mao political career/decisions in that era by today world's moral righteous standard.

If you fight communists, you have my utmost respect.* He might have been a ruthless dictator, yes, but I'd take him any day over any man in the Jiangxi Soviet.

* There are exceptions to this - foremost among them, Hitler.

What is Jiangxi Soviet?

I do not like Mao because of the deaths he caused senselessly. I also do not like CCP because the CCP leaders' behaviors did/do not match with the Communist principles. They really remind me George Owell's book, the Animal Farm, and it sickens me when I think about the unmatched words and deeds of those CCP leaders, and I want to throw up every time I read the overflowing praises of Mao and some of those CCP leaders (Deng and Zhou and that general who spoke truth to Mao are exceptions). I don't mind CCP took over mainland China as long as they truly bring happiness to all the Chinese people. However, I only saw 30+ years of poverty and pains. Although China is getting better today, the living standards of the common people (I mean the lowest level of people) are way below some of the rich and powerful people in the same society. I saw people spending $10000 for their birthday or holiday parties in one night while I saw some lowly laborers who can't aford to spend more than $2-3 per day and poor Chinese college student(s) starved to death of malnutrition because they tried to save their food money for tuitions (I heard at least two cases of starved to death students: One from a Chinese newspaper, and one from my friend from mainland China)!!! This situation is today, and not under Mao's time either!!!

Chiang might be a dictator, but he did his things like most of the other traditional Chinese rulers. He was actually not particularly cruel or tyranical if he was a real Emperor. However, this is the time of the Republic, and he was only a President, so people feel that he was bad. He was a typical case of born in the wrong time. His methods and personality were a bit out dated. I feel he was also ruled or at least strongly influenced by his wife, Madame Song. There were a lot of corrupt people among her family members and her favorites. Therefore, they caused a lot of problems for Chiang. Chiang was also not a very strong ruler. Most of his supporters were more like his alliances and easily turned against him, so he couldn't really control them and their behaviors -- thus, the corruptions and the rapes and the bad morale of KMT armies (more like his alliances' armies than under his direct controls). When his alliances caused problems, Chiang had to take the blames and clean up his subbordiantes' mess like a good leader. In fact, a lot of those evil KMT actions might not even known to Chiang and probably not ordered by Chiang at all. I think the people around Chiang were very good at hiding things from him, and they made the actions of deceiving Chiang into a science when they get to Taiwan and during Chiang's old age. I think he did eventually incur genuine love from his subbordinates (he had a temper, but he treated his subbordinates well and protected them when they served him well). I remember hearing and reading about people who were closed to him remembered him fondly.

I think Jiangxi Soviet mean this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Soviet_Republic

Exactly what I mean.