The Hidden Masonic History Behind Taiwan, Sun Yat-sen, and Early Modern China

I used ChatGPT to write this as it’s a lot to cover. But it’s an interesting history not commonly known. CKS and the Soong family were probably involved but no direct evidence of them being initiated, but they would have been involved with Chinese masons. Early KMT rituals were similar to Masonic ones. Today, Taiwan is one of the only Asian countries where Masons operate freely.

Most Taiwanese grow up learning the standard story:

Sun Yat-sen overthrew the Qing, became the Father of the Nation, and founded the Republic of China.
The U.S. is the world’s strongest democracy because of the Founding Fathers.
End of story.

But there’s a completely overlooked layer beneath that — one that shaped both early Chinese nationalism and the structure of the modern ROC state:

Freemasonry.

Yes, the same “Free Masons” people associate with strange symbols on the dollar bill or old British gentlemen’s clubs.

This isn’t conspiracy.
It’s an entire chapter of history nobody talks about — not in Taiwan, not in China, and barely in the West.

Let’s break it down.


1. Sun Yat-sen Was a Freemason — Confirmed, Documented, Not Debatable

While studying and fundraising in Hawaii, Sun Yat-sen joined Zetland Lodge No. 525 under the Scottish Rite. Lodge records exist.

Why? Because Freemason lodges in the late 1800s were:

  • the social clubs of wealthy overseas Chinese
  • connected to Western-educated elites
  • safe places to organize without Qing spies
  • full of donors and political sympathizers
  • international, discreet, and highly networked

SYS used this environment to build the revolutionary connections he needed.

This part of his life is almost never taught in Taiwanese or Chinese textbooks.


2. Chinese “Freemasons” Supported Sun’s Revolution

Overseas Chinese brotherhoods like:

  • Hongmen (洪門)
  • Tiandihui (天地會)
  • Chee Kung Tong (致公堂)

were originally Qing-resistance secret societies, but by SYS’s time had evolved into:

  • community power structures
  • mutual aid networks
  • wealthy overseas groups
  • political activists
  • operators of “Chinese Freemason” halls

These groups provided:

  • fundraising
  • manpower
  • smuggling routes
  • safe houses
  • printing presses
  • logistics
  • international cover

Some even rebranded themselves as “Chinese Freemasons” because Western Freemasonry had prestige and protection.

SYS didn’t overthrow the Qing with armies — he did it with networks like these.


3. The KMT Itself Was Built on Fraternal/Masonic Organizational DNA

Early KMT and Tongmenghui structures quietly resembled lodge systems:

  • ritualized initiations
  • oath-taking
  • multi-level membership
  • cell-based units (like lodges)
  • internal ranks
  • structured meetings
  • moral and political lectures
  • codified brotherhood culture

This wasn’t accidental.
It grew from SYS’s time in:

  • Christian missions
  • Western Freemasonic lodges
  • Chinese secret societies

So while the KMT is now a political party, its early structure was basically a hybrid between a revolutionary lodge and a political organization.

No one talks about this, but it’s absolutely true.


4. Why Taiwanese Don’t Know This History

Several reasons:

A. PRC censorship

The CCP declared all secret societies “counterrevolutionary,” including Hongmen and Freemasonry.

Since Sun Yat-sen had ties to these groups, Communist textbooks either:

  • erase the connection
  • downplay it
  • reinterpret SYS in a Marxist lens

B. KMT authoritarian rule in Taiwan

From 1949–1987, the KMT didn’t want to emphasize:

  • secret brotherhoods
  • private networks
  • underground organizing

because they were running a martial-law state.

SYS became a Confucian-Christian patriarch.
The fraternal side of his background vanished from the narrative.

C. Western Freemasonry lost influence

By the late 20th century, lodges became:

  • older
  • quieter
  • charitable
  • less politically important

The mystique faded — so people forgot the historical reality.


5. The U.S. Has the Same “Invisible Masonic Layer” in Its Founding

About one-third of the Founding Fathers were Freemasons:

  • George Washington
  • Benjamin Franklin
  • James Monroe
  • Paul Revere
  • John Hancock

Freemasonry was central to early American civic life. It wasn’t a “secret society ruling the world,” it was:

  • a debating society
  • a moral training institution
  • a school for self-governance
  • a networking hub for elites
  • a proto-civil service

Why is this relevant to Taiwan?

Because SYS admired this system deeply — and literally learned it from inside a lodge.


6. Taiwan Today Still Has Masonic Lodges (Most Taiwanese Don’t Know That Either)

Taiwan has active lodges under several jurisdictions:

  • lodges chartered by the Philippines
  • Scottish Rite bodies
  • English-style Freemasonry
  • mixed-language Taiwanese lodges

They meet mostly in Taipei and Kaohsiung.

The demographic tends to be:

  • businessmen
  • academics
  • doctors
  • lawyers
  • military officers
  • expats
  • Taiwanese who studied abroad

It’s low-key but real.

And it’s one of the few places in Asia where Freemasonry operates freely.


7. Why This Matters

Understanding this hidden layer explains:

:check_mark: how SYS built the networks that toppled the Qing

:check_mark: why overseas Chinese communities were politically powerful

:check_mark: how modern Taiwanese civic culture developed

:check_mark: why the KMT’s early structure looks the way it does

:check_mark: why Taiwanese elites historically had strong international ties

:check_mark: why Taiwan inherited SYS’s legacy more directly than the PRC

And perhaps most interestingly:

:check_mark: Why Taiwanese society feels uniquely “Westernized” compared to China

— the ROC’s founding father was shaped by Western fraternal, Christian, and civic systems.


8. So does this mean “Freemasons ran China”?

No.

Freemasonry didn’t control China.

But it gave early revolutionaries access to tools the Qing dynasty never had:

  • global networks
  • modern organizational methods
  • ideological training
  • secrecy
  • discipline
  • funding
  • legitimacy among overseas merchants
  • access to missionaries and Western elites

SYS wasn’t powerful because he had armies.
He was powerful because he had connections.

And many of those connections lived in halls with square-and-compass symbols.


Conclusion

This isn’t conspiracy.
It’s just a missing chapter of Taiwan and Chinese history — one that explains a lot once you see it.

If you grew up in Taiwan or the West, you likely never learned:

“Sun Yat-sen, the founding father of the ROC, was a Freemason who built his revolution partly through Masonic and Masonic-adjacent networks.”

But it’s true — and it adds a fascinating dimension to understanding why Taiwan’s political culture ended up so different from the PRC’s.

5 Likes

I only got as far as the gangs ran the Freemason halls. I felt like I understood the story at that point

And what part of SYS’ secret society and Masonic background turned him into a Communism touting Soviet lapdog?

Is that your interpretation of what he did.

From what I understand, turning to the soviets in 1923 was the last hail mary for Sun. At that point, he was betrayed multiple times, exiled multiple times, out of money again, KMT was poorly organized.

There was only so far people would fund him after he failed over and over again to bring the type of revolution he envisioned and his network slowly collapsed. The west wanted a warlord with real power like Yuan Shikai.

Yeah, the rest isn’t that important.

It’s just that his start as a revolutionary started with him being a Mason and using that network to build support and funding. Not something often taught in history.

1 Like

The only real betrayal he suffered was when Chen Jongming (陳炯明) chased him out of Guangdong. The rest of the times I think it was SYS who did the betraying. Even for Chen, I think a case could be made that SYS was the one who betrayed Chen first. Though, I guess Chen was the reason for Sun to suck up to the Soviets.

The west much preferred what happened after Yuan’s death. Every colonial power had its very own puppet warlord.

I’m much for forgiving based on the context of his situation. It was the end for him without the soviets, I understand why he made that choice at the time.

It’s easy to look back at mistakes.

Met a Taiwanese company driver who was a freemason. Showed his ring and talked a little about it.

1 Like

So if a Taiwanese politician now decides his political future is on the line and decides to work for the CCP by promising concessions if he succeeds with CCP support, are you going to be equally forgiving?

To gain Soviet’s support SYS promised them claims over Mongolia and railroad rights in Manchuria when the real ROC refused. He also sold out Chinese interests for Japanese support before the Japanese realized Chang Zoulin was a much more useful puppet. In a just world, there is a word for people who sold out national interests for personal political gain and power. That word is traitor.

is like KKK?

Is there a good objective biography of SYS?

2 Likes

I don’t equate the soviets at the time as the same as the CCP.

Firstly, there was nothing to betray. There was nothing, he had 0. What national interests? There was no functioning state and there was multiple versions of national interest at the time of what is China. SYS was trying to build a nation from 0.

The Qing already ceded these to the soviets. Japan controlled Mongolia.

He had no ability to claim these back nor did he actually control them to give. Which was why these were not even binding promises.

Japan, US, Britan, France, all backed different war lords. I find it a bit unfair to criticized him for dealing with the only power that gave him the time of day at that point.

It is wartime diplomacy, not collaboration.

You cannot “sell out” a state that does not exist yet.

Sun was trying to create that state.

3 Likes

I think the fact that there are many different perspectives of him from China/Taiwan/Soviets/US/Japan, he was someone who put on many faces to reach his end goal. And he was probably desperate in many moments.

This is my view.

He wasn’t a simple hero or a simple villain.
He wasn’t purely democratic or purely authoritarian.
He wasn’t fully Western or fully Chinese.
He wasn’t a communist, but he wasn’t purely anticommunist either.

He had many faces, because he lived in a world full of chaos and he was forced to adapt constantly. The China he lived in was broken and his vision for it was probably way ahead of his time.

Even in Taiwan, there is the Dr. Sun from KMT propaganda and DDP version the minimized him.

4 Likes

Didnt he have many women wives. How come its not allowed today???

https://www.mh.sinica.edu.tw/MHDocument/PublicationDetail/PublicationDetail_616.pdf

There are plenty of academic papers citing declassified Soviet denouements of what SYS promised and enabled the Soviets to do. As stated before, SYS gave the same promises to the Japanese when the Japanese were willing to fund him.

1912年孫中山為籌款應允租借滿洲給日本:1915年孫中山與日本人訂立的<中日盟約>,以及1918年孫中山為取得軍援而答應出讓滿蒙等等
In 1912, SYS promised to give Manchuria to Japan as a Concession. In 1915, SYS signed the China-Japan Treaty (which basically gave Japanese veto power over China cooperating with any other foreign power), and in 1918 SYS promised to cede Manchuria and Mongolia to Japan in exchange for military aid.

So you can claim SYS probably had good intention in mind, and he didn’t mean for any of the concessions to Japan and Russia to happen or be permanent, and they were just ploy to get the aid he needed to create a stronger China, and then fight to take those concessions back. Or you can claim Russia and Japan were going to take what they can anyway, with or without SYS giving them some legal justification. At the end of the day, he did make those concessions, and the aid he received turned into the PLA and overthrew the ROC government, and allowed Russia to make those concessions permanent. I mean, CKS also signed Mongolia away to finalize its place in the Soviets’ sphere of influence. So, I guess SYS, CKS, and Mao had that in common.

SYS definitely had power back in 1912 as the Provisional President for 3 months. Even in 1915, 1918, and later concessions to the Soviets after 1923, Japan and Russia could just take over those regions, claiming to only recognize SYS’ government, which was essentially what they did.

Many of his original followers, people like Huang Hsing (黃興) who were willing to die for SYS, decided SYS betrayed the democratic deals he was touting, and was actually too authoritarian, which might be due to his secret society background.

1 Like

Did he have any legitimate belief in democratic values, do you think? Or was it all an act?

When he founded Tongmenghui, he asked people to pledge loyalty to him personally. He claimed that the problem with China isn’t that there’s no freedom, but there’s too much personal freedom, not enough national freedom (I’m assuming he meant a lack of national autonomy).

Since he had a background in secret societies, and is closely affiliated with Shanghai’s Green Gang (青幫 Qingbang), which was a gang with a nationalistic mob boss, and is originally a branch under Hongmen (洪門), SYS would often leverage Qingbang to conduct hits on his political opponents. SYS definitely arranged for CKS to assasinate Tao Chengzhang (陶成章) through Chen Qimei (陳其美). Doing that job was what gained CKS confidence with SYS.

Whether or not SYS also arranged for the assassination of Song Jiaoren (宋教仁), the OG KMT’s Acting Chairman, is up for debate. Song was assassinated by a Qingbang member, and SYS used the assassination as an excuse to split from the OG KMT, and blamed the assassination on Yuan. I don’t know who actually arranged for Song to be killed, but SYS certainly benefited the most politically from Song’s death, as Song was very critical of SYS.

Is assassinating your political rivals democratic? I guess SYS was influenced by Japan’s reform to remove the Shogan and return power to the emperor, which they also did a lot of assassinations through that whole process?

I mean, SYS was “elected” by the representatives sent by revolutionary provinces to the seat of provisional president. However, can you find any proof that he or his government held actual elections? I couldn’t find any. If someone is really a believer of democracy, you’d think he would have held elections and made a big fuss about it.

1 Like

I really feel like this POV is unfair to Sun.

  1. He offered concessions as bargaining tools while having no real power, and none of those concessions became reality because he didn’t control those territories. Foreign powers already did before he even came into the scene. Multiple Chinese governments existed that all claimed different things.
  2. What power did he have in 2012? He had no army. Yuan did. He didn’t control any provinces. Yuan controlled Beijing. And foreign leaders did not recognize Sun. He was on paper the president for 3 months as you pointed out.
  3. In 1915-18 he also had no power. He had no army, no ability to tax, no territory, nothing.
  4. The PLA did NOT exist until 1927–1930. After the KMT split with the CCP. The Soviets did not intend to create a communist army that would overthrow the KMT. They were trying to turn the KMT into a Leninist-style nationalist party. I think it’s a bit misleading to collapse these events into soviets created the PLA.
  5. As to @tempogain question on if he had legitimate desire for democratic values. I think so. As I mentioned, he was ahead of his time. I think any pragmatic person who wanted democratic values looking at China at the time realized they needed a strong central rule first. China was extremely divided, broken, and corrupt with war lords all fighting each other. You don’t just flip this 1 day and say we are having free democratic elections and think this is going to work. This idea and result is actually inline with what happened to Asian countries that did democratize like Korean and Taiwan.
2 Likes

Korea and Taiwan didn’t create successful democractic societies because of having centralized authoritarian rule, they created successful democratic societies inspire of it.

Being under constant threat and having your protector requesting reforms also helped.

If Russia and Japan didn’t need their encroachment on Manchuria and Mongolia legitimized, they wouldn’t needed to ask SYS to give it to them.

One school of thought is that SYS didn’t really consider Manchus and Mongolians to be Chinese, and therefore didn’t think those territories were of any consequence.

Regardless, when SYS realized anti-Japanese nationalism could be leveraged for political points, he condemned Yuan for being a traitor for making much less concessions than what SYS made to Japan himself.

1 Like

Good find.

1 Like