The First Republic of China

Communist and Japs

>empire falls apart
>have about 10 years to bring warlords to heel before the Japs and commies invade

>>2309568
How chaotic was the period of the early Republic for the average peasant in the countryside? Did things continue much as they had in the past or were they pretty fucked?

>>2309560
Yuan Shikai was a mistake

what the fuck is that flag

>>2309560
They Chinese were simply not ready and installed a former Qing general as their first (official) president who promptly declared himself emperor and then died causing the state to split between factions and cliques

>>2309639
Five Races Under One Union
Red stands for Han, yellow for Manchus, blue for Mongols, white for Hui and black for Tibetians

as part of the settlement of the second opium war the british government collected import duties on behalf of China (because supposedly they could do it more efficiently) took a small percentage for themselves then deposited the rest in a bank in beijing.

After the empire fell this practice continued, so china became a contest between warlords to see who could capture Beijing and get their hands on that bonanza.

>>2309568
Chiang did nothing wrong.

>>2309560
>What went wrong?

They betrayed their emperor and got what they deserved.

>>2309663
huh people dont give china credit as a multi ethnic state

why is that?

File: OMaA463_Chinese_Warlord_Armies_1911-30-16.jpg (900KB, 2582x1885px) Image search: [Google]

900KB, 2582x1885px

>>2309560
Basically the revolution failed.

The Nationalist Revolutionaries cut a deal with old-style Chinese Generals (old stye= monarchy & emperor & power for power's sake n shiet). Because the Revolutionary army was shit. Generals- led by Yuan Shikai- went, Ok, so long as I'm first president. And Nationalists went fine.

Generals toppled the Qing dynasty and the Republic was established. However lack of De Facto legitimacy led to that republic being weak and ruled by Generalissimo Yuan Shikai. Yuan Shiggy declared an Imperial Dynasty, but the army talked him out of it. He died in 1916 after a short stint as Chinese Emperor and with the loss of the *only* man powerful enough to keep the military in line, the generals of China carved the republic up and fractured into Dynasty Warriors with artillery, guns, and mechanized war machines..

>>2311104
Because modern china is trying it's best to Han-ify the rest of the country.

>>2309560
>Also, any good scholarly works or first-hand accounts that cover Chinese history that cover the period between 1910-1928?
yes, heres a bibliography on republican china
http://pastebin.com/tuP2w3DA
china and the world, 1900-1949
http://pastebin.com/BCutpP9b
modern chinese political thought
http://pastebin.com/acYNtuMR
fall of the qing
http://pastebin.com/TahG61rv

>>2311104
because its not

>>2309627
Sun-Yat Sen died too soon.

>>2311441
He was overrated 2bh.

>>2312866
he was way better than chiang kai shek. i'm curious to know what would have happened had he overseen the great northern expedition. the success of it is what caused a rift in the movement in the first place. Would sun have ended up disowning the communists? To me that doesn't seem plausible because in these years sun's disillusion with the western powers grew and his admiration and contacts with the communists deepened. So if Sun didn't abandon the communists, then, the next question was whether he would have been able to bridge the gap between them and the chinese elite, maybe by steering the communists in a social democratic direction, or whether the capitalists would have deposed him, with chiang possibly backstabbing him in a secret deal with the green gang and the shanghai elite.

>what happens when Chinese get freedom/don't have functioning state

>>2313041
legalists were right

>>2311147
>why is that?
>>>
> Anonymous 02/03/17(Fri)05:35:40 No.2311147
Where are these series of images from? Are they the same as the medieval ones of a similar layout?

>>2311162
You mean China since 1911

>>2313039
Sadly, he most likely would have been killed within a couple years

This thread really needs to live longer

1910-1928 China gets so little discussion.

One of my pet peeves is the common assumption that the "anti-Chinese traditions" came from Mao and the Communists. In reality, all post (and most pre) Qing ideological forces desired the "modernization" of Chinese culture so that it could compete with the West/Japan.

People don't see Meiji as a "destroyer of Japanese culture" even though from 1868-1875 his government forcefully changed/destroyed a lot of it.
Meiji's "modernization" campaigns/purges actually are a big influence on the early Cultural Revolutions in Qing China.

>>2309560
China's Warlords by David Bonavia is a bit expensive, but is helpful at discussion the collapse of the Republic and the major players in the Warlord Period for those unfamiliar with the era. Yuan Shikai's tyrannical rule as president - and his attempt to make himself emperor - led to the collapse of the Republic and ushered in civil war.

>>2313139
yes that last bit is a good point. the problem is that japan did not have the geostrategic and economic importance. it was also a more compact and already had a legacy of effective centralized government, which the qing was lacking in by the late 18th century. the linguistic and demographic complexity of china made a nationalist project even more mindboggling, all at the same time as western powers dope up your population, take your strategic ports, emasculate your military and seize control of your ports and tariff revenues. then the taiping rebellion was a shitshow for china. it came at arguably the worst time possible.

>1910-1928 China gets so little discussion.
not only is it studied very little in school, but the period is extremely complex and a whole area of study unto itself. the europeans are a menacing force on the periphery of this period, but the goings-on in china proper are just mindboggling not just politically, as the country splintered and dozens of power centers emerged throughout the country, but socially and economically things changed with a mindboggling speed that is hard to fathom.

>>2313244
Pretty much why the CCP is so paranoid about separatism

>>2313181
Would you recommend reading it? Or just Watching a mememetary?

File: IMG_9112.png (311KB, 890x687px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 890x687px

Really makes you think

>bump

>>2311104
Because it's currently a Han supremacist empire.

>>2313181
Yuan Shikai was such a cunt. How can one man ruin modern China? Answer: be stupidly ambitious and start a dumb scheme to put you in place but end up destroying the federal government. What a cunt. Handsome son though.

>>2309574
They stayed the same. Warlord era didnt have all that much actual fighting, and the widespread chaos with robber bands, lack of law enforcement etc. was a remnant of late Qing.

>>2313055
"Freedom was a mistake"
-Zhuangzi

>>2314111
[Citation needed]

>>2314156
[any knowledge of China needed]

File: KUYASHI.jpg (9KB, 302x225px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 302x225px

First was Sun Yat-Sen stepping down so that Yuan Shikai wouldn't crush the fledgling republic.
Second was Yuan Shikai doing exactly what everybody thought he would and attempting to become Big Dick Emperor.
Third was Sun Yat-Sen dying at what must have been the absolute most critical period of the era for China.
Fourth was there being no proper figurehead for the assortment of petty assholes to rally around and stop them from being petty warlord assholes.

The only way things could have gone in any way well, I think, was for the Qing to have crushed the rebellion and subsequently modernized.

>>2314238
>not an argument

>>2314111
>Because it's currently a Han supremacist empire.
There wouldn't be ethnic minorities if this was the case.

>>2314265
The Qing didn't have the political resources needed to modernize though

>>2314275

And thus answers the question of "How could things have gone right in any way, shape, or form?"

>>2309560
Virtual monarchy was replaced by virtual republic. It wasnt changed proportions of real Chinese states, but increased its' struggle.

>>2314274
>supremacist means violent genocide
Nope. The Han run China, refuse to allow other groups to break off, actively seek to ethnically dilute those groups until they exist only as curiosities.

>>2314267
>Stephan "Final Argument" Molyneux

>>2314286
>implying any other country would allow any group to break off

>>2314286
>The Han run China,
By virtue of the preexisting population disparity between the Han and everyone else.

>refuse to allow other groups to break off
How is maintaining territorial integrity even relevant to Han supremacism?

If Taiwan declared formal independence they would be quashed.

>actively seek to ethnically dilute those groups until they exist only as curiosities.
The PRC copied the Soviet system in recognizing minorities and formulating an inclusive multi cultural history.

Han chauvinism is actively discouraged by the government.

>>2314363
>muh ethnic group imposes itself on all others by force of arms while demographically displacing them and has control of the levers of state
>but it's not supremacist, how could non-whites run a racially supremacist empire?

>>2314440
>>muh ethnic group imposes itself on all others by force of arms while demographically displacing them and has control of the levers of state
Only really applicable to the Tibetans/Uighurs.

>but it's not supremacist, how could non-whites run a racially supremacist empire?
>Discouraging ethnocetrism is supremacism.
>Recognizing ethnic minorities and providing economic benefits is supremacism.
>Including non Chinese polities in Chinese history for the sake of promoting a multicultural China is supremacism
If you want historical example of Han supremacism look at the Qing era colonization of Taiwan and how those natives were treated.

File: gulidoitforher.jpg (221KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1024x768px

>>2314506
The situation with Uyghurs is improving over time and they are getting better social status. You'll see more Uyghur celebs in China than you'll see Chinese celebs in the west. Han can't resist them, they are too cute!

>>2314506
That's almost half of China, so yes, it is applicable.
They might discourage some ethnic supremacism, but they hold the reigns and the Chinese identity is still mainly Han. If you're white, you have no chance at being recognised as Chinese. If you're African you're subhuman, if you're Uighur or Tibetan you're regarded as a threat.
I get that it's not 100% black and white, but it's one ethnic group dominating over all others and actively working to destroy the power of other groups in their homelands.
So it's clearly a Han supremacist empire and the definition of Han is mainly racial (an overseas Chinese is Chinese without having to speak Manadarin, but if your facial features don't look Chinese you're out of luck).

>>2314543
>That's almost half of China, so yes, it is applicable.
Conveniently ignore integrated minorities such as the Hui and Manchus or how southwestern China was traditionally ruled by native chieftains.

>and the definition of Han is mainly racial (an overseas Chinese is Chinese without having to speak Manadarin, but if your facial features don't look Chinese you're out of luck).
There's no biological basis for the Han ethnicity,which historically functioned as a cultural identity.

Sinitic speakers from Guangxi and Liaoning are considered Han despite their genetic differences.

>So it's clearly a Han supremacist empire
Enough of your ancedotal evidence. Repeating the same debunked tripe doesn't make it anymore true than your spurious claim.

The government doesn't view itself as a Han nation state nor does it exclude minorities from their national ethos.

What you can argue is the noticeable explicit bias towards Uyghurs and Tibetans.

Very unfamiliar with chinese history, but I read a bit about the Republic once.

Wasn't part of it over-ambition? IIRC the nationalist plan was to unify china and THEN enact reforms. Unifying china is a super hard task, that they could only accomplish on time with the help of warlords, who hindered any meaningful reforms, and coupled with the sheer size of the country, any reforms would be spread too thin.

Then, the communists not having to rely on warlords and being small enough to effectively administer the territory they controled, got the loyalty of the people by enacting meaningful reforms? In addition to Yuan Shit-kai and the other factors mentioned already.

>>2313927
If you can find it at a library that would be best; it's a slim text as far as history books go. It is more focused on the warlords themselves, though in explaining them Bonavia provides detail to their men, fighting tactics, and governance in brief. What is almost better than the book is the references, many of which lead to more specific english language sources. I found a book on Szechwan from 1911-1938 through it, for example.

>>2314746
From my understanding, Chiang Kai-Shek was very inept in both military and governance, and the nationalists were only held together by his ambition and through the efforts of Sun Yat-sen. Once Sun died, it was only a matter of time before their defeat. The nationalist regime galvanized the repressed peasant classes and created the resurgence of the communists who actually tried to enact helpful reform. Many of the warlords, with figures like Feng Yuxiang or Wu Peifu perhaps being exceptions, did not care about the people whom they governed and only saw them as revenue to fuel their military cliques. The promises and achievements of the Communists were the best alternative in the situation.

Republic was too corrupted to be able to deal with the warlords, as shitty as the commies were they at least has the strength to end warlordism.

>>2309560
>what went wrong

Couldn't decide if they wanted to be Romania or Prussia.

>>2314286
>The Nords run Norway, refuse to allow other groups to break off, actively seek to ethnically dilute those groups until they exist only as curiosities.

>>2314543
>That's almost half of China, so yes, it is applicable.
? Where ?

Only two provinces were ever non-Han majority

>>2316007
Han is a meme ethnicity anyway, the Southern Chinese who today are considered Han were originally separate peoples with their own languages and cultures.

>>2315856
Warlords got CULTURAL REVOLUTION'D

>>2316022
Not to mention that Hui, a group sometimes said to be oppressed by Western media (The Economist), is more genetically Han than most of Southwest China.

>>2311344
Thanks, but damn, many are published by Cambridge University and even paperback's are very expensive.
And no, I cannot into library.

>>2313139
>One of my pet peeves is the common assumption that the "anti-Chinese traditions" came from Mao and the Communists.
Sure thing, but it is not okay to use this argument to whitewash the crimes of communists.
And in fact that is false: most negative aspects of forced 'modernization' did indeed come from Mao. They brought the society to knees, which of course would been good (meaning bad for Mao and his merry buddies) for the mainland.

>>2314746
>the communists not having to rely on warlords and being small enough to effectively administer the territory they controled, got the loyalty of the people by enacting meaningful reforms?
You are parroting CCP 'offical' history, which is nothing but lies and myths.
They didn't get any loyalty and how could they when terrorising the population wherever they went. Well-to-do villages were left poor and massacred when communists left.

>>2314799
>From my understanding, Chiang Kai-Shek was very inept in both military and governance,
He could not bring himself to get rid of obvious communist agents and collaborators in his government and military, if he personally liked them.
He had too many changes to destroy all communist bases during the time when hi's forces were large in number and well trained and execute all commie leaders, but he didn't (only few massacres againts communists were ever put to practice, all of which Chiang himself didn't even propose and which obviously was too little).

>>2316597
When did I whitewash these "crimes"?

>negative aspects
Good meme

>>2316638
>They didn't get any loyalty and how could they when terrorising the population wherever they went. Well-to-do villages were left poor and massacred when communists left.
[Citation needed]

>>2316638
CCP official history isn't necessarily inaccurate history.

You /pol/ anons need to learn that just because historical consensus disagrees with your ideology, that doesn't make it "propaganda".

>>2317062
CCP official history pushes the fictional narrative that the KMT military were more interested in fighting against the CCP than against the Japanese during WW2, and that the CCP was really protecting the peasants. Practically the opposite was true, the KMT was bearing the brunt of the fighting against the Japanese and had their strength bled out of them, while Mao and the CCP sat back and did very little preserving their resources for resuming the civil war.

>>2317085
Bias in one respect doesn't mean it's wrong in another.

>>2316573
bookzz.org
libgen.io
you can download a lot of them free on these sites
for free academic articles
sci-hub.cc

>>2318666
The other Anon is right, Anon. The communists spent the entire war biding their time, watching the Kuomintang get weakened by fighting the Japs, and then seized control.

>>2313181
>>2309627
>>2311147
>>2314126
>>2314265
so we can all agree that yuan shikai ruined EVERYTHING. he shitted up the water so badly its so tragic. China really did need a bold leader to lead China into a new future and offer hope but this motherfucker was a selfserving cunt who prostituted the country to get foreign loans to crush the republicans.

>>2314275
they did though. the only mistake that was made was setting up regional assemblies too quickly. had they rolled out a limited constitutional monarchy in a really careful way it could have gone half-decently.

>>2316638
>He could not bring himself to get rid of obvious communist agents and collaborators in his government and military, if he personally liked them.
here's your (you)

BASTARD OF THREE FATHERS

>>2318698
Local Yuan ruins everything

>>2314275

Had Cixi not been an unimaginably shortsighted cunt the 100 Day's Reforms could have proceeded and maybe have given Qing China a shot in the arm.

As it was, the halfhearted attempt to modernize, Boxer Rebellion, and rising anti-Qing public sentiment led to an inevitable collapse.

>>2316022
>Han is a meme ethnicity anyway
Not a meme,the Ming were the one's that decided to apply it to all Sinitic speakers not just northern Chinese.

Han was never based on bloodline but shared elite culture.

>the Southern Chinese
Southern Chinese is an ever bigger meme. A Han from the Jiangsu isn't the same as a Han from Guangxi or Hubei.

>>2316026
>Not to mention that Hui, a group sometimes said to be oppressed by Western media (The Economist), is more genetically Han than most of Southwest China.
How is this surprising? Genetic affinities correlate with geography with the Hui only having minor West Eurasian input.

Same reason why the a non Han ethnicity such as the Tujia is more northern shifted than a Han from Hunan.

Alternatively,some southern Han groups have minor northern Han ancestry and LARP as their purported ancestors(looking at Yue,Kejia and Min speakers).

>>2318684
[Citations needed]

>>2317085
>CCP official history pushes the fictional narrative that the KMT military were more interested in fighting against the CCP than against the Japanese during WW2
[Citation needed]

And it's historical consensus that the KMT chose not to fight the Japanese, but rather the rest of the Chinese, for 7 years straight.

Many contenporary Japanese officers at the time wrote about how cowardly the Chinese/KMT were and how they always fled the battlefield.

>>2320214
Not him but here's a source
https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=DUg2KGMQWHQC&lpg=PA169&ots=R-xZNVQK20&dq=zhou+enlai+secret+report+to+Stalin+January+1940&pg=PA169&redir_esc=y&hl=en#v=onepage&q=zhou%20enlai%20secret%20report%20to%20Stalin%20January%201940&f=false

>>2311147
>and fractured into Dynasty Warriors with artillery, guns, and mechanized war machines..
Sounds fun.

Were the warlord era lives for peasants really shit, even shittier than Mao era, or is that just a commie meme?

>>2320226
>.jp
>file cannot be opened
>Zhou Enlai report
>not even during the war

Oh yes because 1 propaganda report to Stalin proves what "contribution" the CCP made to the Second Sino-Jap war.

>this thread
Fucking Maoists on my /his/.

>>2320272
>not even during the war
1940... not during the war
>Oh yes because 1 propaganda report to Stalin proves what "contribution" the CCP made to the Second Sino-Jap war.
Your propaganda report is false and instead i'll believe the propaganda reports created by the communists after the war

Sometimes i feel bad for humanity

>>2320263
It's a commie meme. The warlords had a vested interest to making sure the smaller area under their control was managed properly, so they didn't crush their peasantry generally. There was no Great Famine equivalent under the warlords. Warlord itself an unfair pejorative term.

File: Yan_Xishan.jpg (15KB, 200x271px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 200x271px

Reminder that this man was the only chance for China to have a model leader.

>>2316026
Did you actually read that article in the Economist?

Because it was specifically about how well the Hui are doing, and how much more amicable the relationship is than with the Uyghurs.

>>2320287
>1940

Please post an actual readable source. I'm not Japanese.

Thought you were referring to Zhou Enlai's famous May 1950 message to Stalin where Enlai discusses China's military capabilities.

You're using the same logical fallacy that people who claim because Zhukov said X once, it must be the reality.

>>2318698
>tfw idolise sun yat sen but realise he handed yuan the power

>>2320347
Ummm yes I did, all 20 of them, and no they are not all specifically about "oh Hui get along so well!"

There's literally one about how the Hui are hated by an "islamophobic Chinese society" and "have surveillance units constantly harassing them".

>>2320355
????
It's a page in an English language book
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674060490/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0674060490&linkCode=as2&tag=thewaspos09-20&linkId=DBCMEWLSAQUZJRKA

Here's an article about it a
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/china-should-come-clean-about-its-history/2015/09/04/8d36c5d4-5254-11e5-b225-90edbd49f362_story.html

>>2320368
These are not the same links

https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=DUg2KGMQWHQC&lpg=PA169&ots=R-xZNVQK20&dq=zhou+enlai+secret+report+to+Stalin+January+1940&pg=PA169&redir_esc=y&hl=en#v=onepage&q=zhou%20enlai%20secret%20report%20to%20Stalin%20January%201940&f=false

The first one you posted clearly has .jp in it

>>2320317
Source?

>>2320368
>Jan 1940
>hurdur the war ended in Jan 1940

It is historical consensus that the CCP had over 500,000 casualties during the war.
The CCP was tiny compared to the KMT. But proportionally, both lost similar amounts of soldiers.

This doesn't even go into the fact
>We got BTFO more so we contributed more to the war effort!
is a fallacy

>>2313139
Because when people criticize mao its not for the Nationalist era politicial discussion about modernizing china, alot of that thought came from chinese nationals/intellectuals who had studied in japan.

Because what was envisaged then was NOT the 60s Cultural Revolution.

>>2320317
>The warlords had a vested interest to making sure the smaller area under their control was managed properly, so they didn't crush their peasantry generally

>For the warlords, the desire to possess power in and of itself was their main motivation and they were devoid of any sort of ideas, principles, values or ideals alongside the corollary that human life counted for nothing.[3] As a reflection of this, the warlords treated both their own soldiers and the Chinese people with considerable brutality.[4] In 1921, the North China Daily News reported that in Shaanxi province: "Violence and robbery stalk abroad. Farmers are afraid to venture out of doors with even a donkey, lest both man and beast be pressed into the service of some warring faction."[5]

>>2320389
>Because what was envisaged then was NOT the 60s Cultural Revolution.

How do you know that?

Read about this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Culture_Movement

>>2320388
>ask for citation
>get bitchy about the citation and start spewing garbage without any citation to refute it

It's like i'm debating with a fucking moron.

>>2311104
let's face it, they all kind of look the same.

Can you tell the difference between someone from the Congo and someone from Uganda?

It's not racist to think that. As a result, people lump them all together as one (chinese, African, Middle-Eastern). Naming them all is just a hassle. I'm from El Salvador (born in the US) and I don't really give a shit if people think I'm mexican.

>>2311104
Because Chinese culture has historically given zero shits about ethnicity and focused on your culture, which is why people will talk about China being a cultural mishmash dominated by Han.

>>2320214
It is generally accepted by most historians that the war was primarily fought by the KMT's NRA.

Communist strength on the eve of the Second Sino-Japanese war was very small. The 4th New Army was around 10,000 troops and the 8th Route Army was around 30,000 troops. By 1940, they had as many as 400,000 troops associated with them: however, this number is inflated by the presence of many loosely affiliated troops, guerrilla units, and other forces. Actual CCP fighting force strength was likely no more than 300,000 troops until 1944. This force, while certainly large, simply did not have the same combat effectiveness of the National Revolutionary Army. As many as 2-4 million men were under arms under the KMT throughout the Second Sino-Japanese War. The official casualty numbers were something like 3 million KIA/WIA for the NRA against around 500,000 for the CCP.

More telling though was the weight of firepower. The NRA severely outgunned the CCP, and proved it by the relative damage inflicted on Japanese formations. The Communist main expedition was the 100 Regiments guerilla campaign, which was considered by Japanese historians to be of limited effectiveness, especially after the retaliatory Japanese reprisal expedition. Actual Japanese field troops suffered primarily minor supply disruptions-which, considering the already extremely stressed logistics of the Japanese army, was still definitely felt.

The Kuomintang, on the other hand, not only had some large artillery and heavier weapons but even a few hundred light tanks and tankettes, to say nothing of aircraft provided by the Soviets during Operation Zet and later the Flying Tigers/14th Airforce of the US. In addition, around 800,000 troops had been at least partially trained or reorganized by German military advisers that had been present since the 1920s and 30s. World War II, 1937-1945
Ienaga Saburo, The Pacific War

(contd)

>>2320461
>>2320214
These troops were able to fight the Japanese to a standstill in Shanghai for well over two months, which was ultimately a failure but nonetheless had quickly dispelled the Japanese presumptions that it would be an easy, quick war.

Not to mention, Chiang detached as many as 200,000 troops in an attempt to help the British defend Burma when the Japanese invaded in 1942. It's important to note that the Japanese had committed over a million troops in China, including 2/3rds of their armor and well over half their land-based aircraft (at the time). If the KMT had avoided battle while the CCP did the brunt of the fighting, it seems illogical that an army with inferior arms, numbers, and discipline would be able to triumph alone.

The reason why the "legend" of the KMT avoiding battle had persisted in the West had to do with a large number of American journalists and state officials who were spurned by the corruption of the KMT (and to an extent the xenophobia as well). One obvious example includes Joseph Stilwell, the American military adviser to Chiang Kai-Shek, who clashed with him frequently, often referring to him as "Peanut" and who was eventually sacked by Chiang in their disputes. Stilwell's dispute was one piece of "evidence" that convinced American officials that Chiang was not interested in fighting the Japanese, and that the Communist Chinese would potentially be a better friend. This was also impacted by several extremely pro-Communist news articles written by American journalists who had seen a more welcoming reception in Communist Yan'an than in Nationalist Chongqing.

Sources:
Harmsen, Stalingrad on the Yangtze: the Battle for Shanghai
Taylor, The Generalissimo: Chiang Kai-Shek and the Struggle for Modern China
Rana Mitter, Forgotten Ally: China's World War II, 1937-1945
Ienaga Saburo, The Pacific War

>>2320461
>>2320464
Interesting stuff

>>2314536
Uyghurs still have a slight stigma (it's less Uyghurs and more Xinjiang people), made worse by >terrorists
To be honest I don't know what to say but "wow that's just real bad luck

>>2320408
You provided me with an irrelevant citation you stupid fuck.

The citation ends in Jan 1940.
The war continued till fucking September 1945.

>>2320461
>>2320464
I agree. But that doesn't mean the CCP didn't do their share of the fighting.
The CCP doesn't claim they were the only one who defeated the Japanese. The Chinese history book currently approved talks extensively about the United Front and the Chinese nationalist war against the Japanese.

I don't see the problem with that history.
Surely a lot is bullshit, but the CCP doesn't claim to be the only force fighting the Japs in China.

Furthermore, the PRC did not begin till 1949.
The PRC inherited the KMT and CCP influence. It's not like all the KMT soldiers fled to Taiwan.
Hence why the PRC does parades where they talk about the CHINESE war against Japan.

>>2320499
>You provided me with an irrelevant citation you stupid fuck.
>The citation ends in Jan 1940.
>The war continued till fucking September 1945.
>32 to 1 losses ratio at the midpoint of the war are irrelevant
haha keep trying retard
You've already started modifying your claims so you look less like an fool. Maybe if we keep this up we'll get you somewhere

File: gulikitty.jpg (23KB, 550x412px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 550x412px

>>2320479
True, I hope the current rise of Uyghur a-list stars will help stymie some of the negative stereotypes.

>>2320535
Not going to happen unless Islam can be stamped out of the region

>>2321358
Chinese people don't mind Islam as a religion that much, so as long as le islamic state stops being a worldwide stale meme they'll probably accept them more easily

>>2321358
What the other poster said, Hui's are basically treated as equals.

>>2321398
Islam is incompatible with a modern society.

>>2321702
And yet it works just fine with the Hui peoples, and indeed with most of the Uyghurs who open up ramen shops in cities, go to prestiguous universities both domestic and foreign, and are gainfully employed by large companies.

>>2321707
This gives me hope

>>2321707
Lesson: Middle Easterners are subhuman

>>2321707
It looks okay now, but look at Malaysia for an example of a country where they started off as a model "moderate" Muslim society tolerant of other faiths and cultures and a secular legal system separate from limited Sharia courts, but are rapidly backsliding into Malay supremacy and Islamic conservatism.

>>2322371
Do you think China is in danger of becoming Islamified?

>>2322375
China has almost no chance of being Islamified. Chinese have the Hui Muslims living in essentially ghettos and do not interfere with the Hui areas. They pacify the Hui by allowing them to have 2 kids instead of 1 and encourage them to own small business so they are wealthier than the average Han. At the same time, they live in ghettos so it's easy for the government to control and left to themselves. However, if there's a riot that gets spilled out or a terrorist attack, the PAP would crack down hard on them.

>>2322388
>ghettos
Lad um have you been there because the places they live are not significantly worse than other relatively backwater areas.
If you just mean in a group that'd be because like every other minority in China, the Hui have their 'ancestral lands' and that's just where they group to. It'll probably be spread out massively by 2030 or 2040 as mobility and incentive to actually move around increases, although I don't expect it to ever fully disappear.

>>2322375
Not a chance, China is way too fucking big. But the local region within which the disease of Islam has taken root and become a majority in its immediate area can only become a breeding ground for radicalism.

>>2322648
Anon China has had Islam in its state area as accepted and tolerated and workable for longer than most countries have existed

>>2322401
No, I mean ghettos in cities. Not the shitty black ghettos you think of in Detroit, but Muslims have essentially their own living areas inside cities for easy management by the central government.

>>2320404
Go and read about the cultural revolution you fucking moron

>>2321702
Not an argument.

>>2324507
OK, how about "Islam contains retarded rules for the running of a society governing everything from finance to slavery to criminal law, which are designed for desert warlordism and incompatible with a modern society, and you only have to look at the ISIS controlled territories for the shithole of a society that strict adherence to Islam produces".

>>2325800
Anon strict adherence to just about any religion is not going to work.

>>2320528
>wow the US only suffered 3000 deaths 3.5 years into WW2!

>>2322710
1. Not an argument.
2. I have.

The policies of the Cultural Revolution didn't just pop up in Mao's head one day.

>>2320528
>You've already started modifying your claims

Here's my claim...>>2320214
>>>2317085 #
>>CCP official history pushes the fictional narrative that the KMT military were more interested in fighting against the CCP than against the Japanese during WW2
>[Citation needed]
A citation you haven't provided.

My claim
>And it's historical consensus that the KMT chose not to fight the Japanese, but rather the rest of the Chinese, for 7 years straight.
1931- mid 1937 the KMT fought Japan a grand total of 3 times when Japan attacked them.

>>2320464
>The Generalissimo: Chiang Kai-Shek and the Struggle for Modern China
Thanks a lot Anon, I already forgot about this book (I bought a copy two years ago, but it has piled under other interesting works). It seems to be - from reviews I've read - the only decent biography-like account of Chiang Kai-Shek.

>>2326240
By the way, this negative - but not relying on facts - image of Chiang pushed by Vinegar Joe becomes evident from the Barbara Tuchman's work 'Stilwell and the American Experience in China' (interesting read nonetheless).

>>2326261
having read Jonathan Spence's in search of modern china this triggered me greatly. I don't think chiang was the greatest leader, but if you read spence's book alone you'd think that he was a miserable human being, as spence basically adopts stillwell's perspective on the state of affairs in chongqing. he doesn't even attempt to assess chiang in a balanced way and you can tell. while I do recommend spence around here because of its broad scope, i think it has some serious flaws and biases, including the poor attention given to republican china and too much attention on individual intellectuals instead of describing the bigger picture.

>>2326312
Even the most recent edition of Spence's work belittle the brutality and human loss of the Leap and Cultural revolution, in a way that basically constitutes whitewash. And wherever possible, any communist crime is 'misunderstanting'.
That is simply unacceptable.

The Cambridge history works on China, which are mentioned on that list Anon posted to this thread, even if only the volumes 12 and 13 about the First Republic, are much, much betterm, even if 'slightly' more reading is needed for basic understanding of modern China.

>>2326365
By the way, do not under any circumstances buy those expensive volumes of Cambridge history of China. They are sold as hardcovers, but they are infact glued, i.e. paperbacks with hard covers and even the gluing is of abysmal 'quality'.
They are available in my backwater country's capital city's library, so I'm fairly sure one can find them in most libraries of the United States and UK too probably.

>>2326365
well, i thought the communist part showed that pretty well with regards to mao's early removal of dissent, the hundred flowers campaign and the chaos of the cultural revolution. there was also the part about the great leap and that excerpt about a girl and her community having to eat, worms, dirt, leaves and ground bark that were chilling. overall, i think its way too much of an impressionistic, anecdotal work. when I finished it i felt like i had a really incomplete idea of 20th century china. On the other hand, Peter Zarrow's China in War and Revolution is a bit denser and not written as smoothly as spence's work, but having read a fourth of it so far i feel like i have a lot better idea of what republican china felt like.

>>2313060
They're from Ospery books. Yes, just a different series.

>>2313943
>warloards

>misspelled also in the info box

>really makes you think

>>2322371
Actually that's related to two pints, one related to Islam in general and one to local politics. Malay supremacism has been championed as a result of perceived domination by the minority Chinese prior to independence and is promoted by the ruling party to maintain power ( think of affirmative action in reverse). Islamic fundamentalism can be squarely blamed on our "allies" the eternal Saudis spending countless oil dollars promoting Wahhabism because they're terrified of a revolt at home. So although Islam is rapidly worldwide becoming synonymous as an anti Western or civilized system or values, it does not necessarily have to be that way

>>2326517
But Islam is an integral part of Malay nationalism, and claims that Islam is being insulted is used to fire up the base against other races.

>>2326138
You're absolutely braindead. The new culture movement modelled itself after the revolution from above of the Meiji Restoration and wanted to discard what was perceived as archaic chinese values and sinocentrism with a cosmopolitan worldview popular with the European great powers.

The Cultural revolution as initiated by mao was the replacement of any and all semblence of culture and society with a cult of personality worshipping mao. They are NOTHING alike.

No doubt the legacy of the new culture movement influenced the communist attempts to stop footbinding etc but to draw comparisons of similarities to the cultural revolution is utterly idiotic

>>2322710
>muh struggle sessions
>muh reactionaries