The PRC government is the best thing that has happened to China in the past 2 centuri

[emmie]

paenme - Let it go.

It's about time.
Move on to something else.

(And I don't mean to be snarky or unfriendly here.)

[paenme]

paenme - Let it go.

It's about time.
Move on to something else.

(And I don't mean to be snarky or unfriendly here.)

Whether justice was ever served is anyone's opinion, but history should not be forgotten.

[ig.consulting]

KMT would have done that back in 1926 if it weren't for the Japanese invasion. Ultimately China has Japan to thank for the disastrous next 60 years.

the conquest of china by japan began about 1937 as I recall.

the reason china remained so weak is the decision by the Empress Dowager to continue china's isolation

the empress dowager also diverted money intended to upgrade the beiyang fleet into construction of the summer palace.

china's isolation began around 1600, if memory serves, when china decided to abandon an outward view. so this would have a been a Ching Dynasty (Manchurian) mistake

[Freetrader]

That's more or less correct. The decline of China really began once the Ching dynasty cosolidated power. As a true 'minority' government, they tried to run things 'more Chinese than the Chinese' and got mired in ritual and tradition and their sense of Chinese exceptionalism. At least they didn't practice foot binding.

Japan beat China in a war in 1898 or so by which they gained control of Korea and Taiwan. Using Korea as a base, they acquired Manchuria by 1931. Then, as you note, the real fighting began in 1937 with the Marco Polo Bridge Incident and Chiang's announcement that China would resist. Japan hated and feared Chiang since he had the potential, they figured, to unite China, so they did all they could to support any warlord who might oppose him.

[bookblogger]

KMT would have done that back in 1926 if it weren't for the Japanese invasion. Ultimately China has Japan to thank for the disastrous next 60 years.

You could look upon it in a different way. China was riven by warlords from 1911 to 1937. It was only the Japanese invasion that prompted them to unite to defeat the incomers.

That doesn't change the fact the next 60 years were a disaster though.

[paenme]

the conquest of china by japan began about 1937 as I recall.

the reason china remained so weak is the decision by the Empress Dowager to continue china's isolation

the empress dowager also diverted money intended to upgrade the beiyang fleet into construction of the summer palace.

china's isolation began around 1600, if memory serves, when china decided to abandon an outward view. so this would have a been a Ching Dynasty (Manchurian) mistake

Agree that 1937 is the year.

But what are you saying? Any weak country deserves foreign attack and brutality? That is berserk.

How about today's European protectionism? It is line with isolation and outward view abandonment. Should Russia attack Europe at some point? What you are doing is blame the victim and excuse the aggressor. Something we see all over today.

[paenme]

You could look upon it in a different way. China was riven by warlords from 1911 to 1937. It was only the Japanese invasion that prompted them to unite to defeat the incomers.

That doesn't change the fact the next 60 years were a disaster though.

Japanese invasion prompted China to unite? Give me a break.

By 1937 Chiang had defeated the warlords and more or less united China. If it weren't because he had to then turn his attention to fight the Japanese for the next 8 years (Chiang's big dilemma was whether he should fight Japan or the Communists first), he would have been able to spend his energy and resources building China as he did in Taiwan. Japan invasion allowed the Cummies to grow during that time and by 1945 had become a force too big to stop.

[fth]

Perhaps we ought to look at this the other way around, through crass overgeneralization.

In 1960 most Asian countries were tinpot dictatorships, if lucky elective dictatorships (single party democracies).

Most of them had been under military occupation and destruction 15 years previously (unless the USAF were still dropping bombs).

Their economic numbers were comparable to Africa if not below.

Which government outperformed? If so compared to whom?

[Freetrader]

Perhaps we ought to look at this the other way around, through crass overgeneralization.

In 1960 most Asian countries were tinpot dictatorships, if lucky elective dictatorships (single party democracies).

Most of them had been under military occupation and destruction 15 years previously (unless the USAF were still dropping bombs).

Their economic numbers were comparable to Africa if not below.

Which government outperformed? If so compared to whom?

Well, you would have to give high marks to Japan, RO Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, etc., as their massive increases in wealth per capita started in the late '50s and hasn't stopped since. Most of that growth was as a result of export-oriented policies that were made possible, in part, by the openness to import and trade of the US and other Western nations. China, on the other hand, cut itself off from the world and deprived its citizens of at least 30 years of economic progress (to say nothing of the chaos and loss of life of the various bad ideas the CCP promulgated). Luckily Deng came back to power in the late '70s and China turned itself around, instead of remaining, essentially, a large version of North Korea.

The real question is, how much better off would the Chinese be if that had liberalized their economy in, say, 1960, rather than 1980? The CCP has only itself to blame for the poverty inflicted on its people.

Don't get me wrong, the CCP deserves a lot of credit for the past 30 years (especially because it is difficult to turn 180 degrees) but they can't get back the previous 30 years of missed growth; that was clearly the fault of the CCP.

[paenme]

China, on the other hand, cut itself off from the world and deprived its citizens of at least 30 years of economic progress (to say nothing of the chaos and loss of life of the various bad ideas the CCP promulgated).

Q: Why was China in a state of zero growth? A: Communism.
Q: What allowed communism grow to take over China so easily? A: Japan

The real question is, how much better off would the Chinese be if that had liberalized their economy in, say, 1960, rather than 1980? The CCP has only itself to blame for the poverty inflicted on its people.

How much better off would the Chinese be if Japan hadn't invaded and KMT got their chance to shape up the economy in 1937 (which they did just that after arrival in Taiwan in 1945)?

Don't get me wrong, the CCP deserves a lot of credit for the past 30 years (especially because it is difficult to turn 180 degrees) but they can't get back the previous 30 years of missed growth; that was clearly the fault of the CCP.

For all faults of the CCP (and I agree with all of them), the bottom line is most of them were still patriotic and love China. To the Chinese That is the difference between CCP and Japan.