What's new

What would China be like today if the Nationalists had won the Chinese Civil War?

What if questions like that are very hard to answer for current events let alone the historical ones. But entire China would be like a Taiwan hypothesis seems a bit far fetched to me. Taiwan is a glorified city state compared to China. Developing a single island and transforming it into a single sector economy (semiconductor manifacturing and ic design) is one thing, developing a country from deserts of Xinjiang to the Pacific shores is another thing.

I guess If democracy was introduced to China before it's nationalization process had been completed, China would not be able to construct a modern/seculer common ground and culture for it's entire population and most probably would be divided. Even if KMT won the Civil war that would not stop the socialist movements because even if they were to lose the armed conflicts as long as USSR was there, there would be public support for socialist movements. Maybe there would be socialist insurgencies for decades.

On world front, KMT would most probably seek strong relations(and assistance of course) with US to protect itself from the socialist opposition at home. This could very well effect the fate of the cold war.

Too many things would change both in China and in world politics.
 
.
You focus on the Cultural Revolution.

Me focussing on the Cultural Revolution does not imply that I’m saying China had made zero progress during the 50s and 60s. My main point of bringing up the Cultural Revolution is this: it was bad for China. Even @Chinese-Dragon have admitted that it was a mistake and a failure.

And if you were to be honest, you would agree with me that the Cultural Revolution had put a big dent on China’s progress, not just economically, but also socially, intellectually, etc. So I’m not saying that there were zero progress, but that the CR had put a big dent on the progress. The point was that, under the KMT, there would be no CR, and hence, China’s progress would not have taken a hit from the CR imposed on by the CCP.

But what about the industrialization drive of the 1950's and early 1960's that resulted in the nuclear, space and naval programs? What about the mass education and sanitation programs that were carried out by mobilized volunteers, which vastly improved literacy and healthcare? The KMT could not have carried these programs out, since they did not have the ability to organize the population. This was already proven by their past track record; Chiang Kai Shek was even kidnapped by his own generals during the Xi'an incident.

And how would you know the KMT could not have carried these programs out? You are only making a conjecture here since your “proof” and reasoning is unsound. You are fundamentally making a conjecture based on a few past events. Would I be justified in claiming that the CCP can never organize the population based on the historic fact that they screwed up big time with the Cultural Revolution? No I can’t, and neither can you make that claim about the KMT.


KMT had already integrated with the west in 1920's. They failed to extract any benefit whatsoever from that relationship. I don't get why you are so fixated with integration with the West. Even today China isn't really integrated with the West; we have different standards in things ranging from telecom to food labeling that aren't changing any time soon while Taiwan has copied the US down to a tee yet mainland China is surging ahead while Taiwan is stagnating. Coastal Chinese cities already have equal or higher GDP per capita than Taiwan.

I was referring explicitly to “economicintegration, not just any forms of integration. You can’t deny that integrating economically with the West was key to economic development for both PRC and Taiwan. The KMT took this step before the CCP did. And if the KMT were to be in control of the mainland, most likely the KMT would have done the same. It took the CCP much longer to make this decision.

As for the KMT not getting any results from the 1920s, like I’ve said, you have totally ignored the historical context of that time period. China was just recovering from the mess that the Qing got your country into, then they had to struggle in a messy civil war, then faced a brutal war against the IJA. How on earth could you make a fair comparison between the progress and achievements made during this period with those made post-1978? Even comparing it to the 50-60s would not have been fair given the IJA have already surrendered well before that time.

You are still in academia, remember the basic principle ceteris paribus, “all else being equal”. When you are making a comparison between two variables, make sure all the other things are equal. You keep comparing the pre-1949 KMT period which had a significantly different context to the post-1950 CCP period.

Same thing with your other buddy who kept comparing the CCP of the post-1970 period “who lifted 800 million out of poverty” to the KMT of the pre-1949 warring period (or is he comparing the “post-1970 CCP” to the “post-1970 KMT”? which is also ridiculous because the “post-1970 KMT” doesn’t even have a starving 800 million population to begin with).
 
Last edited:
.
KMT had the *DUTY* to fight Japan because they were the government in power. CPC was not in power. They did not command forces of the state. They were legally unable to prosecute a war against Japan because they were not legally authorized to declare war! Only in 1941 did the KMT even declare war against Japan! CPC had absolutely no moral or legal obligation to do anything other than use words against Japan, yet they spent their own money and hundreds of thousands of CPC members died in the war against Japan. It was absolutely irrelevant what the CPC did since as long as they did not engage in operations against the KMT or undermine the KMT economy (they did neither) during the duration of the war, and morally spoke out against the invaders, they had fulfilled all their duties as a party out of power.

You can't equate KMT and CPC of the time. Just as if the PRC was to be at war today, it would be absolutely laughable if the CPC said to KMT - you are a traitor if you don't help. The CPC is the party in power today thus they have the duty to defend the country. The KMT has no legal or moral obligation to physically do anything; they only need offer moral support.

So the CPC was not mobilising against the KMT during the war time? Not doing guerrila attacks during the war time is the question.
Yes I agree, KMT is responsible for the defence of the nation. But when it comes to defence, all citizens of the country must unite against external aggression.
I might be wrong.
Thanks for updating my Chinese history :)
 
.
So the CPC was not mobilising against the KMT during the war time? Not doing guerrila attacks during the war time is the question.
Yes I agree, KMT is responsible for the defence of the nation. But when it comes to defence, all citizens of the country must unite against external aggression.
I might be wrong.
Thanks for updating my Chinese history :)

In the 70s, when Japan and China was reconciling and the Japanese PM was apologizing to Mao for the war...Mao supposedly said something like “No need for you to apologize, you guys destroyed the KMT army”. If this is true, then you know what their attitude was during that war.
 
.
Guys, I don't understand why you bother to waste your time with Nihonjin?

He is a die hard right-wing Japanese who pretends to be friendly with everyone, and he knows that KMT represents the weak China, and all Japanese right-wing members are desperate for a weak China that could let them to rape it again.

CPC has turned China into a strong superpower, and that literally drives every Japanese right-wingers apesh1t crazy.
EXACTLY!! I love how the CPC terrorize and put FEAR into the US and her puppet. LOL
 
.
In the 70s, when Japan and China was reconciling and the Japanese PM was apologizing to Mao for the war...Mao supposedly said something like “No need for you to apologize, you guys destroyed the KMT army”. If this is true, then you know what their attitude was during that war.
How can a single mao word represent all CPC attitude? At 1972, mao is near his death and is senile. You cannot take a old mao's word seriously.
 
.
How can a single mao word represent all CPC attitude? At 1972, mao is near his death and is senile. You cannot take a old mao's word seriously.

OK I can’t take Mao’s words as representative of all CCP members, you are correct. But it still gives me some idea to guess what kind of attitude the CCP leaders had towards their KMT compatriots during that war period.
 
.
Me focussing on the Cultural Revolution does not imply that I’m saying China had made zero progress during the 50s and 60s. My main point of bringing up the Cultural Revolution is this: it was bad for China. Even @Chinese-Dragon have admitted that it was a mistake and a failure.

And if you were to be honest, you would agree with me that the Cultural Revolution had put a big dent on China’s progress, not just economically, but also socially, intellectually, etc. So I’m not saying that there were zero progress, but that the CR had put a big dent on the progress. The point was that, under the KMT, there would be no CR, and hence, China’s progress would not have taken a hit from the CR imposed on by the CCP.



And how would you know the KMT could not have carried these programs out? You are only making a conjecture here since your “proof” and reasoning is unsound. You are fundamentally making a conjecture based on a few past events. Would I be justified in claiming that the CCP can never organize the population based on the historic fact that they screwed up big time with the Cultural Revolution? No I can’t, and neither can you make that claim about the KMT.

The cultural revolution was indeed a huge organization of the population. It was a mass movement towards a single goal; how could it be possibly anything other than organization? That was the opposite of the problem that the KMT had: they couldn't organize and couldn't actually get shit done. The CPC has a past track record of being very successful at organizing the population to do big projects; the cultural revolution is one of these projects, same as the nuclear program, space program and naval program. I might also add the literacy and healthcare programs. The later 5 turned out to be good, the cultural revolution turned out to be bad, but all were based on mass organization. You don't seem to understand what organization is, so you think the Cultural Revolution was because the CPC failed to organize; no, it was that they organized people to do something useless. Doesn't mean they can't organize. No one would deny that coal mine bosses in Victorian England were very organized, yet what did they bring for their workers?

And it is not a few past events. See, you are saying that the KMT era was turbulent and filled with conflict. Fine. The 50's and 60's elsewhere were also turbulent and filled with conflict including in mainland China itself. Why is the KMT excused because of this? And why did those same conditions not reappear during CPC rule? Why was it only during KMT rule that foreigners launched a full scale invasion of China that didn't even appear during the Qing Dynasty?

I use the exact same benchmarks: 20 years after start KMT rule, what has China accomplished relative to the rest of the world? 20 years after the start of CPC rule, what has China accomplished relative to the rest of the world? Actually not so bad compared to European countries going by technological benchmarks and improvements in social indicators. 30 years? Same shit. The KMT in Taiwan didn't even accomplish much until the 80's, after Chiang Kai Shek was dead.

My logic is very sound: at the same time benchmarks, using relative technological benchmarks to other countries, the KMT has never been as relatively successful. That's it.
 
. .
So the CPC was not mobilising against the KMT during the war time? Not doing guerrila attacks during the war time is the question.
Yes I agree, KMT is responsible for the defence of the nation. But when it comes to defence, all citizens of the country must unite against external aggression.
I might be wrong.
Thanks for updating my Chinese history :)

The CPC did absolutely NOTHING to hinder KMT actions against Japan. However, what a political party with no power can do is very limited. Remember that the KMT was reserving its forces to attack the CPC and held back its Lend Lease Act supplies. It was also the KMT who had a traitor faction. Look up Wang Jingwei.

It is also proven that the CPC was the one who actually told the KMT to stop attacking them, and to sign a truce in order to focus on Japan.

Xi'an Incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was the KMT who broke every single truce with the CPC and who attacked the CPC first. I don't know of a single instance where the CPC attacked the KMT first. Under American law and customary international law, the right to self defense is unlimited. You may defend yourself using any means necesssary until the threat has stopped. The Soviet Union applied this principle to Germany. They didn't just expel the Nazis from Russia. They had the right to conquer Germany and punish Germany because simply expelling the Nazis doesn't mean that the threat from the Nazis has stopped.

In 1945 the CPC and the KMT signed their 3rd treaty. In 1946 it was broken by the KMT. So you tell me, who is the aggressor and criminal. Does the CPC not have the right to defend itself then? Remember back in the 1920's, the KMT conducted a purge on CPC members and killed them when they were peacefully practicing their constitutional rights.

I'm speaking plain international English here, it is not difficult for you Indians to understand, OK? Read more carefully.

Also, American General George Stillwell was disgusted by the KMT as well.

Joseph Stilwell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Stilwell was infuriated also by the rampant corruption of the Chiang regime. In his diary, which he faithfully kept, Stilwell began to note the corruption and the amount of money ($380,584,000 in 1944 dollars) being wasted upon the procrastinating Chiang and his government. The Cambridge History of China, for instance, also estimates that some 60%–70% of Chiang's Kuomintang conscripts did not make it through their basic training, with some 40% deserting and the remaining 20% dying of starvation before full induction into the military. Eventually, Stilwell’s belief that the generalissimo and his generals were incompetent and corrupt reached such proportions that Stilwell sought to cut off Lend-Lease aid to China.[38] Stilwell even ordered Office of Strategic Services (OSS) officers to draw up contingency plans to assassinate Chiang Kai-shek after he heard Roosevelt's casual remarks regarding the possible defeat of Chiang by either internal or external enemies, and if this happened to replace Chiang with someone else to continue the Chinese resistance against Japan.[39]"
 
Last edited:
.
Well if KMT somehow won in 1949, Taiwan and China will still be united.

KMT would probably lack legitimacy issues in 1949, they lacked a charismatic leader like Mao who was able to unite a country of 450 million at that time.

First step of order is KMT would be extremely draconian for the first 30 or so years. They will probably send an army to Tibet in 1950 to dispose of Dali Lama, and fight a Cold War against the Soviets over influence of Xinjiang, Mongolia, Manchuria, North Korea.

US would actively fund them to contain the Soviets - this is where hypothetical history becomes unpredictable. It is possible that the coldwar would never form in the first place because US has a strong ally to fight the Soviets prompting the Soviets to be less aggressive. What happens to post war Japan/Germany is less predictable since US doesn't have to soft on them any more. Also, without Cold War, it'll take longer for UK and France to decolonize.

Another possibility is USSR destabilizes China into a modern day Afghanistan, and then US and USSR will fight for colonial rights over China.
 
.
The CPC did absolutely NOTHING to hinder KMT actions against Japan. However, what a political party with no power can do is very limited. Remember that the KMT was reserving its forces to attack the CPC and held back its Lend Lease Act supplies. It was also the KMT who had a traitor faction. Look up Wang Jingwei.

It is also proven that the CPC was the one who actually told the KMT to stop attacking them, and to sign a truce in order to focus on Japan.

Xi'an Incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was the KMT who broke every single truce with the CPC and who attacked the CPC first. I don't know of a single instance where the CPC attacked the KMT first. Under American law and customary international law, the right to self defense is unlimited. You may defend yourself using any means necesssary until the threat has stopped. The Soviet Union applied this principle to Germany. They didn't just expel the Nazis from Russia. They had the right to conquer Germany and punish Germany because simply expelling the Nazis doesn't mean that the threat from the Nazis has stopped.

In 1945 the CPC and the KMT signed their 3rd treaty. In 1946 it was broken by the KMT. So you tell me, who is the aggressor and criminal. Does the CPC not have the right to defend itself then? Remember back in the 1920's, the KMT conducted a purge on CPC members and killed them when they were peacefully practicing their constitutional rights.

I'm speaking plain international English here, it is not difficult for you Indians to understand, OK? Read more carefully.

Also, American General George Stillwell was disgusted by the KMT as well.

Joseph Stilwell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Stilwell was infuriated also by the rampant corruption of the Chiang regime. In his diary, which he faithfully kept, Stilwell began to note the corruption and the amount of money ($380,584,000 in 1944 dollars) being wasted upon the procrastinating Chiang and his government. The Cambridge History of China, for instance, also estimates that some 60%–70% of Chiang's Kuomintang conscripts did not make it through their basic training, with some 40% deserting and the remaining 20% dying of starvation before full induction into the military. Eventually, Stilwell’s belief that the generalissimo and his generals were incompetent and corrupt reached such proportions that Stilwell sought to cut off Lend-Lease aid to China.[38] Stilwell even ordered Office of Strategic Services (OSS) officers to draw up contingency plans to assassinate Chiang Kai-shek after he heard Roosevelt's casual remarks regarding the possible defeat of Chiang by either internal or external enemies, and if this happened to replace Chiang with someone else to continue the Chinese resistance against Japan.[39]"

There is no need to generalise Indians over here. Other than the people in East Asia , the people in other countries doesnt know the truth. Even in East Asia, there are different versions of "truth" over there. So which one does the international lovers of history will believe?
I must say, I am open to learn the Chinese history.
So peace.
 
.
Cultural revolution would have not happened.

Great Leap Forward famine would have not happened.

Tainenman square protests would have not happened.

Chinese would have achieved economic prosperity much earlier.

Xinjiang and Tibet would have been more peaceful.

Current issues of Hong Kong integration wouldn't have happened.

Finally, not to forgot, Taiwan strait crisis would have not happened :D

CPC would be reduced to whining party about China's close relations with USA.

Han nationalism would have been toned down
 
Last edited:
.
Are you so sure? China under the KMT was larger than it is now:

750px-1951map.jpg
Just in map,the central gov cant control the local warlord,they all have their own millitary
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom