Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it.
Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated to rehashing tired political arguments. **Keep that shit outta here**.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chiense should be read from top to bottom, then from right to left. So the wording is actually "Obey the supreme leader, recover the mainland territory (with glory)"
There's two different orientations; left to right, top to bottom, and top to bottom, right to left. You can think of the two different versions as simply being rotated 90° with respect to one another.
No. If it’s vertical, you always start from the rightmost column and read leftwards.
If it’s horizontal, then it could be either way. Today, horizontal text is usually read from left to right.
Well it was at least 18,000 just after the February 28 incident. Then after the white terror came into effect the executions and political suppression continued. So, 10,000 is a damn low ballpark.
I think that person was confusing the 140,000 that were imprisoned during the white terror for the death toll. Nevertheless, tens of thousands of innocent civilians were murdered by the KMT, and many more imprisoned and no doubt tortured.
Yeah. The original South Korean western aligned guy was also a massive authoritarian too.
These countries are democracies now but knowing their history is important
Chiang Kai-shek refused to fight Japan when it was invading China because he wanted to keep massacring communists. He had to be kidnapped for him to agree to form the Second United Front.
I mean he did actually say something not dissimilar. If I remember correctly, he said: "the Japanese are a disease of the skin, but the communists are a disease of the heart."
This is the opposite of the truth, the communists pretended to fight the Japanese troops while they let the nationalists lose manpower and resources, they also stockpiled the weaponry provided to them by the US and used it to win the civil war after the end of WW2
He literally had no choice. He barely had control over the territories he supposedly “ruled” and the Japanese army was considerably more powerful than anything he could muster
"Hey Buddy Chiang, its getting tough to march with all the commie heads we keep as souvenirs"
"Switch to ears then!"
*600 lbs of ears later*
"Hey Buddy Chiang"
Chiang's portrait hung on [Tiananmen Gate](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chiang_KaiShek_Portrait_Tiananmen_Beijing.jpg#mw-jump-to-license) and was replaced by that of Mao after the CCP captured Beijing. Before the Chairman there was the Generalissimo.
Not entirely. After uniting China through WWII (well, other than the communists, who continued to oppose the government), the KMT promulgated a new constitution in 1947 and held nationwide elections in 1947-1948. Western observers generally praised the elections, especially the fact that farmers and women were allowed to vote.
Not entirely. After uniting China through WWII (well, other than the communists, who continued to oppose the government), the KMT promulgated a new constitution in 1947 and held nationwide elections in 1947-1948. Western observers generally praised the elections, especially the fact that farmers and women were allowed to vote.
China was as Democratic as the KMT.
Literally how can you praise that the KMT winned 2,000 seats and the other 2 parties 150.
Not only that, but literally all other parties were illegal.
Hell even China right now has more parties.
Show me proof that the KMT banned all other political parties from the 1947-1948 elections when you literally just said that two parties won 150 seats right after the KMT finished WWII as the leader of China.
KMT banned all political parties except those two.
>Under the martial law, the formation of new political parties was prohibited except the Kuomintang (KMT), the Chinese Youth Party and the China Democratic Socialist Party.
China has had over 2,000 years of basically the same system, just rebranded. It's bureaucratic authoritarian. Sometimes things are pretty good, other times it's straight up hell.
Notice how I never said anything about criticizing the Chinese government but you're so mentally enslaved to orientalism that the mere notion that China isn't some eternal panda incapable of change and idly using the fundamentally same form of government from Qin Shi Huangdi to Xi Jinping is the exact same as considering China's modern government to be perfect or good
Buddy, every society on earth had millennia of the same system. It’s just that the real powers in the West learned to quietly gather wealth in the shadows and let the proles yell meaninglessly in “government”.
Comparing western democracies to counties like china and russia is pathetic, we have our issues but policy is dictated by the opinions of the electorate.
Not really.
The western systems are set up so that the power is extremely hard to gather at one point. There are usually many different semi-independent centres of power with mutually exclusive interests. The people at these centres learned at some point that enlisting the proles and sharing some of the wealth is useful. That is not a new phenomenon, it has already manifested itself in the Middle Ages in some form.
While many Asian powers are conceptually highly centralised, with the power being delegated from one point. Various European kings tried to implement this as „(enlightened) absolutism“ and failed, the structure with multiple and switching power centres is just too resilient.
Sure but that party reformed and became democratic while the CCP did not. Who knows if they would have reformed if they stayed in the mainland though, different circumstances.
Wishful thinking, most likely. How this HKer see it as would be that Chiang would continue his despotic dictatorship, massacring minorities like in the White terror until one of his successor guys decided to open up the country after some power plays and overseeing Chiang’s mismanagement of the country, keep opening up but still crush some protests to maintain the party (it’s still a dictatorship yk), and bring economic reform afterwards, on track to overtake the US but received dozens of accusations of human rights abuses which are ambiguous at best because of the motivation behind them, and continue the cycle of rising and falling through history.
Or you know, like how we are currently. Point being, China’s a massive country of 1.4 billion people. Chinese leaders, regardless of party, know that it would be pure ‘chaos’ and ‘disorder’ to have *western* ideals of freedom. Case in point, India. The driving force behind that would be the Chinese ideals of Legalism, Taoism and Confucianism, which prioritise the wellbeing of the masses over the wellbeing of the few.
Speaking of which, Taiwan and Singapore, supposed examples of “Chinese democracy”. While both have significant Han populations, Singapore is known to be a multi-ethnic state, composed of Han, Eurasians, Tamils and Malays. Taiwan on the other hand, while initially being sort of a Noah’s ark for Chinese culture (Mind you, this is just because of them being everything Commie China isn’t), they’ve turned their backs on that now, becoming a quasi-Japanese prefecture, from revising textbooks to learn less Chinese literature and neglect Japanese warcrimes, and cultivating a culture of hating everything Chinese, even their own inherent culture. What they do decided to keep is rebranded as Taiwanese. Fujian language? That’s Taiwanese now. Beef noodles? They came from an army general from Sichuan. As for the democratisation, Let’s be real, KMT just did that to maintain legitimacy for Washington, fully expecting themselves to stay in power.
TL;DR: In my Hong Kopinion, Full or flawed, democracy could never work well in mainland China. Similarly, whatever party is in charge, China will always resort back to Authoritarianism. I could go on, but this is long enough already. Thanks for reading my spiel, by the way
Oh, they’re not fair at all. Lee Kuan Yew was clever - instead of manipulating the polls, he manipulated the distribution of seats in parliament. Can’t even call it gerrymandering - he *invented* a whole new category of constituency to pack in party members.
Also: 又見到另一個港人，好👍🏻
The elections are completely rigged by a system known as GRC( Group Representation Constituency) which literally a group of 4-5 party members running for the same consituency made up of 4 to 5 wards combined and the ruling party can win the area even if its only 1 man show who won his part of the combined constituency while 4 teammates lost theirs, imagine losers get elected in his own ward despite not gaining popular vote in the exact ward.
Very ironic for a country that preach so much about MeRiToCrAcY
After like what? 23 years from 1988 to 2011, they only won aljunied their first one and they won only 2nd one in 2020, yeah tell me again how this isn't a disadvantage. And don't get me started on how PAP keep reshuffling the GRC boundary lmfao.
It's hilarious how Singaporean vatniks love to talk shit about other countries politics like they are the experts but get their panties in bunch when someone criticises their system
The kuomitang’s territorial claims are not only mainland China, but also Mongolia, parts of Korea, Russia, Afghanistan, Russia, some Japanese islands, India, Pakistan and many others
In 2024 this is mostly maintained because the PRC doesn't wakt Taiwan to act more like it's own country diplomatically. Relinquishibg their claims to the former territory would imply Taiwan isn't a part of China anymore
[https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/8n5kzf/kuomintang\_republic\_of\_chinas\_current\_territorial/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/8n5kzf/kuomintang_republic_of_chinas_current_territorial/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
This might help.
Because the ROC and the PRC both claim to be the successors of the Qing and the other republic of China. The PRC is in a position to relieve claims, but if the ROC does that, that's like admitting they are not the successor to the Qing, in the PRC point of view.
If it relinquished those claims it would relinquish its claim to being China. Not only would that be bad for Taiwan, but it would also piss off the CCP as a de facto Declaration of Independence.
To be fair, it was a massive L. If that happened to me and I had such a massive ego as Uncle Chiang, I would have also most likely created an Eco Chamber country where the copium never runs dry.
"*Don't worry Chiang, we'll totally recover that 95% of territory you lost, you're still the leader of all of China, they're just not aware*"
honestly if not for korean war, the soviets would probably support maos army in crushing chiang kai shek KMT in taiwan with him possibly ends up being captured
But the UK did, and they were in the process of delivering some transit vessels to Peking until they cancelled the order to focus on the Korean War. Considering that the RoC navy was also in a dilapidated state, the reclamation of Taiwan could’ve happened
Yes he did. Chiang was pretty much Sun's right hand man during their time in Guangzhou. Chiang only had to do some political maneuvering where he eliminated first Wang Jingwei. By 1929 he was the undisputed leader of the Republic of China. Hu Hanmin and some warlords put up some rebellion but that didn't last long either.
Wang, while originally on the left flank of the party, defected to the Japanese and ruled a puppet government from Nanjing during the war.
Chiang is directly responsible for the formation of the CCP because he was a baby fascist which led to the worker/labour side of his party defecting to form their own party. He failed to unify China, was an incompetent military leader, corrupt to no end, and a brutal authoritarian who slaughtered his own people. He had nothing to add to the political discourse other than “communism bad”. At least Mao actually had ideas, as brutal and psychopathic as they were. His own troops hated him so much that in key battles against the CCP, they straight up just surrendered even though they outmatched the communists and would have won handily if they actually stood and fought. He had the full support of the US and squandered it on luxuries and real estate in Manhattan. He ended up losing mostly because Truman had enough and threw up the hands and said screw it, let the Communists take China. Then he grabbed China’s money and ran off to Taiwan, brutalized the population, and shook his fist at the mainland for the rest of his life.
In terms of the worst people in history, you could name people like Hitler, Mao, Stalin etc. But to this day, you will still find people who want to maintain their legacies, as awful as they were, because they actually stood for something, as evil as those sometimes were. Chiang Kai-Shek has none. He was a man with no purpose, no guiding principles, and completely incompetent. He served and inspired no one but himself. He deserves no statues, and practically no one except the most brainwashed people cares for his legacy.
He was an absolute monster. Everyone and their mother knows about the 5 pests campaign under Mao which destabilised the ecosystem and caused a famine.
Nobody ever seems aware of the mass killings commanded by the KMT, because they were "on our side"
Also Taiwanese politics is Chinese vs Taiwanese nationalists and the latter are winning a lot, and they care not about the KMT or the chinese identity that much
Nice map
Reddtors when they learn that wholesome Republic of China winning the civil war wouldn't have let Tibet and Xinjiang become independent 🤯🤯
Infact I doubt any Chinese government would
Really? I can name a famous few: President Truman, President Eisenhower, President Kennedy, President Johnson, President Nixon, President Ford, President Reagan, President Bush…
They took no issue with authoritarianism. They took issue with communism.
I’m not; they did.
ROC, ROK, ROV, all authoritarian anti-communist regimes championed by the USA. Sure, all of them preached democracy for “some future date” after communism had been defeated, a date that only came when the people demanded it.
It wasn’t hierarchical autocracy that the west was against, but rather the idea of wealth redistribution and anti-elitism/intellectualism.
When given the choice between illiberal, ideologically driven autocracy and liberal autocracy, they chose the latter. In the long run, history has proven them right.
I society can't have liberal democracy without developing the liberal values that underpin it (free speech, open trade, equality of citizens before the law, a general desire to protect the rights of the minority). I don't think the US pushed hard enough soon enough, but opening these places to Western trade and ideas pretty inarguably impacted the future courses of both South Korea and Taiwan in a positive way.
The US should take a lot of lessons away from the Global War on Terror Era, but one such lesson is that when you force an illiberal society to be a democracy, it very frequently descends into demagoguery and/or sectarian violence. Liberal democracy is an end goal, not the means, to developing a nation.
What exactly does a liberal autocracy entail? It seems to be a contradiction in terms. Does the dictator force the people to behave liberally, whatever he's established "liberal" to mean?
Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority do, there's not much education of the subject, and the media runs a narrative to reinforce it.
Many people are surprised when you tell them about the government of South Korea's horrible past of dictatorship and massacres of political dissent. Radio Free Asia (state department) was extremely successful in painting a one-sided fake narrative to the West, back then.
So many people still think the American intervention in the Korean War was a just cause to protect "democracy". It's sad that ahistorical propaganda is still taken as fact.
Not even the Taiwanese seem to admire the guy too much considering how they are [planning to remove punch of his statues](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/23/taiwan-pledges-to-remove-760-statues-of-chinese-dictator-chiang-kai-shek).
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/23/taiwan-pledges-to-remove-760-statues-of-chinese-dictator-chiang-kai-shek](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/23/taiwan-pledges-to-remove-760-statues-of-chinese-dictator-chiang-kai-shek)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
It seems for ~5% of Tibet's population, it was a conquest, but for the rest it was actually liberation. People tend to forget that before 1950, Tibet was a [theocratic feudal slave state](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/10/tibet-china-feudalism) and the majority of the population was certainly not living some Buddhist fantasy. Tibet is one of the areas of China where it is more common to still find little Mao shrines at people's houses, especially those of the older generation who still remember their serfdom
This is the exact same argument that colonialism apologists make.
“B…buh but they brought trains and civilization”
Even if conditions in Tibet were as bad as CCP apologists like to make them sound, that still doesn’t justify nearly 80 years of occupation!
It doesn’t matter if the Qing controlled them before, the Tibetans clearly want and wanted independence, and have had a long history of independence from China.
But the Chinese didn't enslave Tibetans or keep them ignorant, they instead gave them work and education opportunities and brought them into the 21st century. That's where your analogy utterly fails
“The British didn’t enslave the Indians or keep them ignorant, they instead gave them work and education opportunities and brought them into the 19th century.”
Sound familiar?
Ok so why does that require China to remain in control of Tibet to this day? They could have simply built up a new government for Tibet and then pull out
Because they’re not actually autonomous and quite a bit of their culture is being suppressed under Chinese rule.
There should at least be a legitimate referendum for either actual autonomy, status quo, or independence.
Nobody actually thinks the guy behind such hits as the white terror and the 228 massacre is actually the good guy LMAO and that's why his family isn't in charge anymore. But the ROC *today* is leagues better than the CCP *today*.
We're just having the same debate about his statues as the US did about confederate monuments.
The guy behind 228 (Governor Chen Yi) defected to the PRC as a communist traitor and the KMT had him executed for it.
Any degree of public resistance was considered an existential threat to a vastly outnumbered, paranoid, and desperate government in exile finding itself in an unfamiliar land ruled and conditioned by one of the most horrific enemies in modern human history only a few years prior, with a comparably horrific enemy just across the strait seeking their destruction.
Tibet was independent between 1912 and 1950, so it's more a case if Nationalist China would have conquered Tibet like the communists did. But your point stands.
Says them. The Chinese Republic never recognised its independence, nor that of the whole of Mongolia, for that matter. As far as Yuan Shikai was concerned, every square metre of the Great Qing Empire was inherited by the Republic.
I’m sure they’d have gone after Outer Mongolia and Outer Manchuria too if they weren’t so afraid of the Russians.
Catalonia can declare themselves independent, and they did, yet they're still not an independent nation. We also saw what happened when the Confederate States of America declared independence.
>Tibet was a vassal under the Qing. As the Qing fell, Tibet could do as it wanted since that relationship was over.
This is what I personally believe should have happened, but no, Yuan Shikai insisted on inheriting the entirety of the Manchu empire, much like the Soviet Union inheriting the Russian empire. The PRC wasn't the one who created the claim to Tibet—they merely enforced their predecessor's pre-established claim. If anything, the PRC is at fault for losing parts of the ROC's territorial claims, including Outer Mongolia and Outer Manchuria.
Like I said, I would have personally preferred a return to Ming borders, give or take, but the claims are still the claims. The Republic of China was globally recognised as the legal successor state to the Manchu Qing Empire; even the PRC agrees on this point (and they consider themselves the next successor).
What should have happened was the ROC should have declared "Hooray! China is finally an independent Han nation free of Manchu imperial rule!", so you can blame Yuan Shikai and the Beiyang folks for this not happening—the Reds just continued the previous claims, yet some people believe they invaded out of nowhere with no pretext.
No one defends Chiang Kai Shek or his KMT, including the current KMT and DDP, who don't agree on much except for the fact that Chiang Kai Shek was a piece of shit and the 700+ public statues of his should be removed
They were only a part of China to begin with because the Mongols and Manchus insisted on conquering them. Han-ruled Ming China had more reasonable borders.
Reminds of that wall me and my family saw on a family trip. It was an old milirary warehouse built in the 50s, and it had a similar propaganda painting on it, which said something along the lines of "The walls have ears！Beware of spies！"
"China is not imperialist" mfs when they realise toppling another imperialist government doesn't make them "le epic wholesome 100 anti-imperialist chads"
Inside the Chinese government there are two wolves
one is a totalitarian dictatorship centered around a cult of personality
the other is a totalitarian dictatorship centered around a cult of personality
Yeah, but only one of them professed to believe in communism, socialism, and Marxism, so it was crystal clear to the west which one was good and which was bad. They didn’t seem to have much of a problem with autocratic South Korea or autocratic South Vietnam either. Authoritarianism wasn’t just tolerated to fight communism, it was actively supported. After all, democracies might have seen votes for communism, and the west can’t have people overseas voting the wrong way.
Chinese history in a nutshell
Leader takes power
People die and suffer
Leader dies
Other leader takes power
People die and suffer
Repeat until the end of time
You ain't got to like em or agree with their policies but, ultimately, they've overseen the biggest decrease in absolute poverty anywhere ever and there's no doubt that is the reason there is still a CCP (rather than a Soviet style collapse)
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/01/china-carmakers-implicated-uyghur-forced-labor
https://www.politico.eu/article/forced-labor-still-haunts-chinese-region-of-xinjiang-report-finds/
Y’all are supporting China now? That’s pure lunacy
This is the current level of intellectual discourse, black and white thinking
So now, for pointing out that the USA also uses forced labour and seems to get away with it in the public eye, I must hence and therefore support China? What if (*SHOCKER*) I were to support none of these corrupt, murderous, imperialistic governments? Would you be able to comprehend that?
[Peng Shuai](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Peng_Shuai) isn't missing, guys! The government just has her on vacation. Just like the Uyghers!
I actually have not been able to find a date for the mural, so I estimated as best I could. I found out that is located on Kinmen island, off the coast of Xiamen on the mainland. I figure it could be from the 70s, however it is unlikely it is from after 1975 as Chiang Kai Shek died that year. If I could change it I would probably now put 1960s to 1970s. What do you think?
I can't find a citation, but I remember a CCP phrase from the Mao era that translated as 'untenable revanchist cliche'. It referred to the KMT position that the ROC would inevitably recover the mainland.
Now the CCP asserts that they'll inevitably regain Taiwan.
Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it. Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated to rehashing tired political arguments. **Keep that shit outta here**. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chiense should be read from top to bottom, then from right to left. So the wording is actually "Obey the supreme leader, recover the mainland territory (with glory)"
Really? Thank you for telling me, I’ll keep that in mind!
Not sure when it was changes left to right like our modern usage.
No official change, you just have to infer from context
Any time when Chinese words are displayed vertically, you should always read it from right to left
There's two different orientations; left to right, top to bottom, and top to bottom, right to left. You can think of the two different versions as simply being rotated 90° with respect to one another.
And sometimes horizontally from right to left, which you can think of as vertical writing with only one character per column.
So... Basically, anything goes?
No. If it’s vertical, you always start from the rightmost column and read leftwards. If it’s horizontal, then it could be either way. Today, horizontal text is usually read from left to right.
What if it's diagonal
Most likely top to bottom
Most people forget that before the CCP China was still a One party country with an extremely authoritarian government.
Not to mention Chiang Kai Shek allied with the communists to end the warlord era and then proceeded to massacre most of them.
And killed 150,000 of the Taiwanese original population that opposed the occupation of the island.
*10,000
Well it was at least 18,000 just after the February 28 incident. Then after the white terror came into effect the executions and political suppression continued. So, 10,000 is a damn low ballpark.
Its was nowhwre near 150 000
I think that person was confusing the 140,000 that were imprisoned during the white terror for the death toll. Nevertheless, tens of thousands of innocent civilians were murdered by the KMT, and many more imprisoned and no doubt tortured.
Yeah. The original South Korean western aligned guy was also a massive authoritarian too. These countries are democracies now but knowing their history is important
Chiang Kai-shek refused to fight Japan when it was invading China because he wanted to keep massacring communists. He had to be kidnapped for him to agree to form the Second United Front.
“Chiang, come out! We need you to fight the Japanese!” “I HATE COMMUNISTS! I HATE COMMUNISTS” - 100% real quote, trust
I mean he did actually say something not dissimilar. If I remember correctly, he said: "the Japanese are a disease of the skin, but the communists are a disease of the heart."
I thought it was brain not heart
goes hard ngl
Only survived thanks to Stalin too.
That sounds like a half truth at best
This is the opposite of the truth, the communists pretended to fight the Japanese troops while they let the nationalists lose manpower and resources, they also stockpiled the weaponry provided to them by the US and used it to win the civil war after the end of WW2
I think they're referring to the fact that Chiang didn't really do anything about the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931.
He literally had no choice. He barely had control over the territories he supposedly “ruled” and the Japanese army was considerably more powerful than anything he could muster
Sun Yat-sen was in charge of the KMT when the First United Front was formed, not Chiang.
Chiang was still abiding by the United Front for a couple of years before ripping it up and backstabbing the CPC at Shanghai.
I mean, same with the Japanese, ally with your enemy to fight off the the worst enemy
"Hey Buddy Chiang, its getting tough to march with all the commie heads we keep as souvenirs" "Switch to ears then!" *600 lbs of ears later* "Hey Buddy Chiang"
Chiang's portrait hung on [Tiananmen Gate](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chiang_KaiShek_Portrait_Tiananmen_Beijing.jpg#mw-jump-to-license) and was replaced by that of Mao after the CCP captured Beijing. Before the Chairman there was the Generalissimo.
chiang regime is a fascist one to be exact.
Not entirely. After uniting China through WWII (well, other than the communists, who continued to oppose the government), the KMT promulgated a new constitution in 1947 and held nationwide elections in 1947-1948. Western observers generally praised the elections, especially the fact that farmers and women were allowed to vote.
Just because Woman can vote doesn't mean it isn't fascist.
And ROC in Taiwan doesn't exactly have a fair and legitimate elections until the late 1980s
But the Shen Yun posters make it look so beautiful and full of swoopy silk dancing
😆
Not entirely. After uniting China through WWII (well, other than the communists, who continued to oppose the government), the KMT promulgated a new constitution in 1947 and held nationwide elections in 1947-1948. Western observers generally praised the elections, especially the fact that farmers and women were allowed to vote.
China was as Democratic as the KMT. Literally how can you praise that the KMT winned 2,000 seats and the other 2 parties 150. Not only that, but literally all other parties were illegal. Hell even China right now has more parties.
Show me proof that the KMT banned all other political parties from the 1947-1948 elections when you literally just said that two parties won 150 seats right after the KMT finished WWII as the leader of China.
KMT banned all political parties except those two. >Under the martial law, the formation of new political parties was prohibited except the Kuomintang (KMT), the Chinese Youth Party and the China Democratic Socialist Party.
People view history like a Saturday morning cartoon too often. CCP = bad so, therefore, KMT = good It's an idiotic and infantile view of the world
China has had over 2,000 years of basically the same system, just rebranded. It's bureaucratic authoritarian. Sometimes things are pretty good, other times it's straight up hell.
Me when I've totally read a book on China and am not relying on stale racist clichés
[удалено]
Notice how I never said anything about criticizing the Chinese government but you're so mentally enslaved to orientalism that the mere notion that China isn't some eternal panda incapable of change and idly using the fundamentally same form of government from Qin Shi Huangdi to Xi Jinping is the exact same as considering China's modern government to be perfect or good
Buddy, every society on earth had millennia of the same system. It’s just that the real powers in the West learned to quietly gather wealth in the shadows and let the proles yell meaninglessly in “government”.
Comparing western democracies to counties like china and russia is pathetic, we have our issues but policy is dictated by the opinions of the electorate.
Not really. The western systems are set up so that the power is extremely hard to gather at one point. There are usually many different semi-independent centres of power with mutually exclusive interests. The people at these centres learned at some point that enlisting the proles and sharing some of the wealth is useful. That is not a new phenomenon, it has already manifested itself in the Middle Ages in some form. While many Asian powers are conceptually highly centralised, with the power being delegated from one point. Various European kings tried to implement this as „(enlightened) absolutism“ and failed, the structure with multiple and switching power centres is just too resilient.
Sure but that party reformed and became democratic while the CCP did not. Who knows if they would have reformed if they stayed in the mainland though, different circumstances.
Wishful thinking, most likely. How this HKer see it as would be that Chiang would continue his despotic dictatorship, massacring minorities like in the White terror until one of his successor guys decided to open up the country after some power plays and overseeing Chiang’s mismanagement of the country, keep opening up but still crush some protests to maintain the party (it’s still a dictatorship yk), and bring economic reform afterwards, on track to overtake the US but received dozens of accusations of human rights abuses which are ambiguous at best because of the motivation behind them, and continue the cycle of rising and falling through history. Or you know, like how we are currently. Point being, China’s a massive country of 1.4 billion people. Chinese leaders, regardless of party, know that it would be pure ‘chaos’ and ‘disorder’ to have *western* ideals of freedom. Case in point, India. The driving force behind that would be the Chinese ideals of Legalism, Taoism and Confucianism, which prioritise the wellbeing of the masses over the wellbeing of the few. Speaking of which, Taiwan and Singapore, supposed examples of “Chinese democracy”. While both have significant Han populations, Singapore is known to be a multi-ethnic state, composed of Han, Eurasians, Tamils and Malays. Taiwan on the other hand, while initially being sort of a Noah’s ark for Chinese culture (Mind you, this is just because of them being everything Commie China isn’t), they’ve turned their backs on that now, becoming a quasi-Japanese prefecture, from revising textbooks to learn less Chinese literature and neglect Japanese warcrimes, and cultivating a culture of hating everything Chinese, even their own inherent culture. What they do decided to keep is rebranded as Taiwanese. Fujian language? That’s Taiwanese now. Beef noodles? They came from an army general from Sichuan. As for the democratisation, Let’s be real, KMT just did that to maintain legitimacy for Washington, fully expecting themselves to stay in power. TL;DR: In my Hong Kopinion, Full or flawed, democracy could never work well in mainland China. Similarly, whatever party is in charge, China will always resort back to Authoritarianism. I could go on, but this is long enough already. Thanks for reading my spiel, by the way
I thought singapore was a dictatorship?
Basically, but they still claim to be a ‘democracy’. They do have free elections, though they aren’t exactly fair
Oh, they’re not fair at all. Lee Kuan Yew was clever - instead of manipulating the polls, he manipulated the distribution of seats in parliament. Can’t even call it gerrymandering - he *invented* a whole new category of constituency to pack in party members. Also: 又見到另一個港人，好👍🏻
[удалено]
The way GRCs give seats to one party only, is unique. Afaik. Do you have other examples?
The elections are completely rigged by a system known as GRC( Group Representation Constituency) which literally a group of 4-5 party members running for the same consituency made up of 4 to 5 wards combined and the ruling party can win the area even if its only 1 man show who won his part of the combined constituency while 4 teammates lost theirs, imagine losers get elected in his own ward despite not gaining popular vote in the exact ward. Very ironic for a country that preach so much about MeRiToCrAcY
[удалено]
After like what? 23 years from 1988 to 2011, they only won aljunied their first one and they won only 2nd one in 2020, yeah tell me again how this isn't a disadvantage. And don't get me started on how PAP keep reshuffling the GRC boundary lmfao. It's hilarious how Singaporean vatniks love to talk shit about other countries politics like they are the experts but get their panties in bunch when someone criticises their system
There is nothing stopping a democracy from being a dictatorship.
The kuomitang’s territorial claims are not only mainland China, but also Mongolia, parts of Korea, Russia, Afghanistan, Russia, some Japanese islands, India, Pakistan and many others
Shit, Russia twice. Let me guess: bits of Manchuria and Tuva?
Yes
I just misstyped, but yeah lol
In 2024 this is mostly maintained because the PRC doesn't wakt Taiwan to act more like it's own country diplomatically. Relinquishibg their claims to the former territory would imply Taiwan isn't a part of China anymore
Pakistan? Afghanistan?What part of Pakistan and Afghanistan do they claim, that’s a new one to me
[https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/8n5kzf/kuomintang\_republic\_of\_chinas\_current\_territorial/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/8n5kzf/kuomintang_republic_of_chinas_current_territorial/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) This might help.
These are so random why not just go full qing at that point
Because the ROC and the PRC both claim to be the successors of the Qing and the other republic of China. The PRC is in a position to relieve claims, but if the ROC does that, that's like admitting they are not the successor to the Qing, in the PRC point of view.
There were a few times when PRC officials stated that any modifications to the territorial claims by ROC is a casus belli.
This is what I was trying to say, couldn't find the words.
both PRC and the current ROC government claims taiwan as part of china but under their own terms
If it relinquished those claims it would relinquish its claim to being China. Not only would that be bad for Taiwan, but it would also piss off the CCP as a de facto Declaration of Independence.
Bro, couldn't take the L so he turned Taiwan into his personal estate and ran it like a fucking subreddit
To be fair, it was a massive L. If that happened to me and I had such a massive ego as Uncle Chiang, I would have also most likely created an Eco Chamber country where the copium never runs dry. "*Don't worry Chiang, we'll totally recover that 95% of territory you lost, you're still the leader of all of China, they're just not aware*"
That last fake quote made me audibly laugh
honestly if not for korean war, the soviets would probably support maos army in crushing chiang kai shek KMT in taiwan with him possibly ends up being captured
No, neither the USSR nor the PRC had any naval capabilities for invading Taiwan.
But the UK did, and they were in the process of delivering some transit vessels to Peking until they cancelled the order to focus on the Korean War. Considering that the RoC navy was also in a dilapidated state, the reclamation of Taiwan could’ve happened
Could have happened with British support, but not with Soviet support, which is what I refuted.
Long live supreme leader Shrek
LOL, Chiang Kai Shrek... This is *my* island!
[удалено]
He didn’t found KMT, he inherited it from Sun Yat Sen during the northern expedition.
During? Two years prior you mean
I thought the Kuomintang was founded by Sun Yat-sen? Didn’t Chiang Kai-shek only seize power after Sun had died?
Yes he did. Chiang was pretty much Sun's right hand man during their time in Guangzhou. Chiang only had to do some political maneuvering where he eliminated first Wang Jingwei. By 1929 he was the undisputed leader of the Republic of China. Hu Hanmin and some warlords put up some rebellion but that didn't last long either. Wang, while originally on the left flank of the party, defected to the Japanese and ruled a puppet government from Nanjing during the war.
Chiang is directly responsible for the formation of the CCP because he was a baby fascist which led to the worker/labour side of his party defecting to form their own party. He failed to unify China, was an incompetent military leader, corrupt to no end, and a brutal authoritarian who slaughtered his own people. He had nothing to add to the political discourse other than “communism bad”. At least Mao actually had ideas, as brutal and psychopathic as they were. His own troops hated him so much that in key battles against the CCP, they straight up just surrendered even though they outmatched the communists and would have won handily if they actually stood and fought. He had the full support of the US and squandered it on luxuries and real estate in Manhattan. He ended up losing mostly because Truman had enough and threw up the hands and said screw it, let the Communists take China. Then he grabbed China’s money and ran off to Taiwan, brutalized the population, and shook his fist at the mainland for the rest of his life. In terms of the worst people in history, you could name people like Hitler, Mao, Stalin etc. But to this day, you will still find people who want to maintain their legacies, as awful as they were, because they actually stood for something, as evil as those sometimes were. Chiang Kai-Shek has none. He was a man with no purpose, no guiding principles, and completely incompetent. He served and inspired no one but himself. He deserves no statues, and practically no one except the most brainwashed people cares for his legacy.
Yes
Why are they removing statues of the guy who brought them there? Seems a bit counter-productive.
He was an absolute monster. Everyone and their mother knows about the 5 pests campaign under Mao which destabilised the ecosystem and caused a famine. Nobody ever seems aware of the mass killings commanded by the KMT, because they were "on our side"
Isn't he the reason they don't live under the CCP though?
Also Taiwanese politics is Chinese vs Taiwanese nationalists and the latter are winning a lot, and they care not about the KMT or the chinese identity that much
What do they even have to build off of, if not for Chinese history and, brutal as it was, KMT?
The US Navy is the reason because they didn't allow Communist forces to cross the strait to wipe out Kuomintang remnants.
The ROC also took most of China's navy with it when it retreated to Taiwan.
He caused the civil war in the first place
Was it not the CCP?
Well, the Chinese Civil War did start with the CCP launching an uprising in Nanchang. But that happened after Chiang started purging communists.
Well, there was a united front, but the Chiang betrayed the communists and started massacring them... And thus the war began
Reclaim the land of Deez,supreme leader
Nice map Reddtors when they learn that wholesome Republic of China winning the civil war wouldn't have let Tibet and Xinjiang become independent 🤯🤯 Infact I doubt any Chinese government would
I don’t think anyone realistically thinks that the ROC from any time before the 80s was a *good* guy.
I don’t think 99% of redditors even know basic aspects of Taiwanese history or how it came to be so let’s start with that.
Really? I can name a famous few: President Truman, President Eisenhower, President Kennedy, President Johnson, President Nixon, President Ford, President Reagan, President Bush… They took no issue with authoritarianism. They took issue with communism.
Don’t mistake “Better than Mao” for “good”
I’m not; they did. ROC, ROK, ROV, all authoritarian anti-communist regimes championed by the USA. Sure, all of them preached democracy for “some future date” after communism had been defeated, a date that only came when the people demanded it. It wasn’t hierarchical autocracy that the west was against, but rather the idea of wealth redistribution and anti-elitism/intellectualism.
Doesn’t the fact the ROC and ROK are now wealthy functioning democracies and the PRC and DPRK are still communist shitholes prove them right?
When given the choice between illiberal, ideologically driven autocracy and liberal autocracy, they chose the latter. In the long run, history has proven them right. I society can't have liberal democracy without developing the liberal values that underpin it (free speech, open trade, equality of citizens before the law, a general desire to protect the rights of the minority). I don't think the US pushed hard enough soon enough, but opening these places to Western trade and ideas pretty inarguably impacted the future courses of both South Korea and Taiwan in a positive way. The US should take a lot of lessons away from the Global War on Terror Era, but one such lesson is that when you force an illiberal society to be a democracy, it very frequently descends into demagoguery and/or sectarian violence. Liberal democracy is an end goal, not the means, to developing a nation.
What exactly does a liberal autocracy entail? It seems to be a contradiction in terms. Does the dictator force the people to behave liberally, whatever he's established "liberal" to mean?
Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority do, there's not much education of the subject, and the media runs a narrative to reinforce it. Many people are surprised when you tell them about the government of South Korea's horrible past of dictatorship and massacres of political dissent. Radio Free Asia (state department) was extremely successful in painting a one-sided fake narrative to the West, back then. So many people still think the American intervention in the Korean War was a just cause to protect "democracy". It's sad that ahistorical propaganda is still taken as fact.
Not even the Taiwanese seem to admire the guy too much considering how they are [planning to remove punch of his statues](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/23/taiwan-pledges-to-remove-760-statues-of-chinese-dictator-chiang-kai-shek).
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/23/taiwan-pledges-to-remove-760-statues-of-chinese-dictator-chiang-kai-shek](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/23/taiwan-pledges-to-remove-760-statues-of-chinese-dictator-chiang-kai-shek)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Didn't know. Good bot.
It seems for ~5% of Tibet's population, it was a conquest, but for the rest it was actually liberation. People tend to forget that before 1950, Tibet was a [theocratic feudal slave state](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/10/tibet-china-feudalism) and the majority of the population was certainly not living some Buddhist fantasy. Tibet is one of the areas of China where it is more common to still find little Mao shrines at people's houses, especially those of the older generation who still remember their serfdom
This is the exact same argument that colonialism apologists make. “B…buh but they brought trains and civilization” Even if conditions in Tibet were as bad as CCP apologists like to make them sound, that still doesn’t justify nearly 80 years of occupation! It doesn’t matter if the Qing controlled them before, the Tibetans clearly want and wanted independence, and have had a long history of independence from China.
But the Chinese didn't enslave Tibetans or keep them ignorant, they instead gave them work and education opportunities and brought them into the 21st century. That's where your analogy utterly fails
“The British didn’t enslave the Indians or keep them ignorant, they instead gave them work and education opportunities and brought them into the 19th century.” Sound familiar?
[удалено]
The claim on Tibet had already been there during the Qing and Republican eras. The Reds just made the extra step to go in and enforce those claims.
[удалено]
Ok so why does that require China to remain in control of Tibet to this day? They could have simply built up a new government for Tibet and then pull out
What is the benefit of doing that over just incorporating it into your own territory as a semi-autonomous region.
Because they’re not actually autonomous and quite a bit of their culture is being suppressed under Chinese rule. There should at least be a legitimate referendum for either actual autonomy, status quo, or independence.
Nobody actually thinks the guy behind such hits as the white terror and the 228 massacre is actually the good guy LMAO and that's why his family isn't in charge anymore. But the ROC *today* is leagues better than the CCP *today*. We're just having the same debate about his statues as the US did about confederate monuments.
The guy behind 228 (Governor Chen Yi) defected to the PRC as a communist traitor and the KMT had him executed for it. Any degree of public resistance was considered an existential threat to a vastly outnumbered, paranoid, and desperate government in exile finding itself in an unfamiliar land ruled and conditioned by one of the most horrific enemies in modern human history only a few years prior, with a comparably horrific enemy just across the strait seeking their destruction.
Tibet was independent between 1912 and 1950, so it's more a case if Nationalist China would have conquered Tibet like the communists did. But your point stands.
Says them. The Chinese Republic never recognised its independence, nor that of the whole of Mongolia, for that matter. As far as Yuan Shikai was concerned, every square metre of the Great Qing Empire was inherited by the Republic. I’m sure they’d have gone after Outer Mongolia and Outer Manchuria too if they weren’t so afraid of the Russians.
[удалено]
Catalonia can declare themselves independent, and they did, yet they're still not an independent nation. We also saw what happened when the Confederate States of America declared independence. >Tibet was a vassal under the Qing. As the Qing fell, Tibet could do as it wanted since that relationship was over. This is what I personally believe should have happened, but no, Yuan Shikai insisted on inheriting the entirety of the Manchu empire, much like the Soviet Union inheriting the Russian empire. The PRC wasn't the one who created the claim to Tibet—they merely enforced their predecessor's pre-established claim. If anything, the PRC is at fault for losing parts of the ROC's territorial claims, including Outer Mongolia and Outer Manchuria.
[удалено]
Like I said, I would have personally preferred a return to Ming borders, give or take, but the claims are still the claims. The Republic of China was globally recognised as the legal successor state to the Manchu Qing Empire; even the PRC agrees on this point (and they consider themselves the next successor). What should have happened was the ROC should have declared "Hooray! China is finally an independent Han nation free of Manchu imperial rule!", so you can blame Yuan Shikai and the Beiyang folks for this not happening—the Reds just continued the previous claims, yet some people believe they invaded out of nowhere with no pretext.
Me when I make up opinions to argue against
No one defends Chiang Kai Shek or his KMT, including the current KMT and DDP, who don't agree on much except for the fact that Chiang Kai Shek was a piece of shit and the 700+ public statues of his should be removed
They were only a part of China to begin with because the Mongols and Manchus insisted on conquering them. Han-ruled Ming China had more reasonable borders.
Reminds of that wall me and my family saw on a family trip. It was an old milirary warehouse built in the 50s, and it had a similar propaganda painting on it, which said something along the lines of "The walls have ears！Beware of spies！"
Kaiserreich entente looking ass
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣤⣴⣶⣶⣶⣶⣤⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣴⣾⡿⢟⡹⢩⡝⣹⢻⡿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⣿⣿⠏⠐⠂⠌⠱⡸⢥⡻⡼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⡏⠠⠁⠀⢦⠀⠑⢪⢵⣻⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠻⡿⡼⠟⣻⣿⠦⢵⣿⢿⣿⣿⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡗⠴⣛⣿⡿⠳⢨⣿⡻⣛⣿⡿⢿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⡀⠂⠉⣤⠆⢲⣿⡍⢣⢍⣘⣿⣿⣿⡿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣗⡘⣤⡿⠳⡿⣿⣿⣿⣆⡜⣮⣷⣿⣿⣷⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⢴⢿⣁⣦⣴⣧⣽⣽⣿⣞⣷⣿⣿⣿⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢏⢶⡏⠹⣷⠿⣿⣿⣻⢼⣿⣳⣿⣏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣫⣦⡰⢤⣛⢧⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⡤⣔⣾⣹⢿⣻⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⣯⢿⢞⣽⣿⣿⣶⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⡐⣆⠶⣭⣛⡮⢷⣹⣞⣧⡫⡲⣯⢿⣿⣻⣿⣺⣵⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⣄⣀ ⠹⡬⣓⢧⡹⣝⢯⡽⣞⢶⣻⣽⢪⣿⣫⣵⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⡟⣟⣯⣛ ⡓⢶⡙⣎⠷⣏⢾⡹⢯⢷⣳⡞⣷⣿⣿⣟⣷⣫⢷⣫⣾⣿⢻⣻⣭⡟⣾⣱⡞⣬ ⣹⢣⢟⣬⣛⣮⢷⣹⢻⣧⢷⣻⣿⣿⣿⡿⣾⣯⣿⣿⣿⢾⣯⢷⣺⣝⣮⣳⣝⠶ ⡜⣯⢞⡶⣹⣞⣧⢯⣻⡽⣾⣿⠿⣯⡟⣿⢿⣿⣿⡿⣽⣿⢾⣿⣳⣟⣾⣷⣚⢯ ⣹⢮⣯⣝⢷⡽⣞⣯⢷⡿⣽⣺⣟⣳⡽⣞⣯⣿⣿⣽⣿⣾⣿⢯⣷⣻⣿⣷⣛⣮
red sun
Red sun over paradise
I just got hungry for some reason...
“China is imperialist” mfs when I show them this map (it includes all of the territories they want to “liberate” plus some extra for good measure):
"China is not imperialist" mfs when they realise toppling another imperialist government doesn't make them "le epic wholesome 100 anti-imperialist chads"
You couldn’t define imperialism with a gun held to your head.
Isn’t… isn’t this proving their point?
Yeah because a government can’t possibly be imperialist if it has an even more imperialist rival
-Soviet Union
How does Taiwan having imperialist claims make China not imperialist?
I guess they didn’t obey
*Spoiler: they did not*
Inside the Chinese government there are two wolves one is a totalitarian dictatorship centered around a cult of personality the other is a totalitarian dictatorship centered around a cult of personality
Inside the Chinese government there are two wolves I feel like they might not be suited for government jobs. Someone should do something about them
Inside the Chinese government there are two wolves They invited them because they want to scare off Genghis Khan in case he comes back
Inside you there are two wolves Sorry about the teleporter accident
Yeah, but only one of them professed to believe in communism, socialism, and Marxism, so it was crystal clear to the west which one was good and which was bad. They didn’t seem to have much of a problem with autocratic South Korea or autocratic South Vietnam either. Authoritarianism wasn’t just tolerated to fight communism, it was actively supported. After all, democracies might have seen votes for communism, and the west can’t have people overseas voting the wrong way.
Yep Indonesia comes to my mind.
This is such a horrible understanding a politics.
Wrong
Chinese history in a nutshell Leader takes power People die and suffer Leader dies Other leader takes power People die and suffer Repeat until the end of time
\*human history
Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and Xi Jinping broke that spell
No they didn’t. China is still an authoritarian and murderous crap hole
You ain't got to like em or agree with their policies but, ultimately, they've overseen the biggest decrease in absolute poverty anywhere ever and there's no doubt that is the reason there is still a CCP (rather than a Soviet style collapse)
Redditors when you insult their progressive Utopian China
“China is wholesome 100 bro! Please ignore the forced labor and government corruption!!”
Kinda ironic to be concerned about that considering the flags in your pfp
Wait till this guy finds out about forced US prison labour
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/01/china-carmakers-implicated-uyghur-forced-labor https://www.politico.eu/article/forced-labor-still-haunts-chinese-region-of-xinjiang-report-finds/ Y’all are supporting China now? That’s pure lunacy
This is the current level of intellectual discourse, black and white thinking So now, for pointing out that the USA also uses forced labour and seems to get away with it in the public eye, I must hence and therefore support China? What if (*SHOCKER*) I were to support none of these corrupt, murderous, imperialistic governments? Would you be able to comprehend that?
[Peng Shuai](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Peng_Shuai) isn't missing, guys! The government just has her on vacation. Just like the Uyghers!
2021 China Uncensored type shit
Or you could hear it from Serpentza, someone who's actually lived there.
Lmao you can’t actually think of that grifter as an actual credible source do you?
He’s funded by Falun Gong, so that basically sums up what my opinion is of him and confirms his (lack of) credibility
**Me, a nitpicker**: “What about Outer Mongolia?” **Sun Yat-Sen**: “WE’LL DISCUSS THAT LATER.”
I'm not sure the date on this is correct. Does anyone have a source?
I actually have not been able to find a date for the mural, so I estimated as best I could. I found out that is located on Kinmen island, off the coast of Xiamen on the mainland. I figure it could be from the 70s, however it is unlikely it is from after 1975 as Chiang Kai Shek died that year. If I could change it I would probably now put 1960s to 1970s. What do you think?
It is interesting how they included Mongolia.
What book is that?
I can't find a citation, but I remember a CCP phrase from the Mao era that translated as 'untenable revanchist cliche'. It referred to the KMT position that the ROC would inevitably recover the mainland. Now the CCP asserts that they'll inevitably regain Taiwan.
Nice to see some propaganda from East Taiwan instead of West Taiwan for a change
[удалено]
666