TIME ARTICLE: 1946, Formosan's not happy about new Chinese

time.com/time/magazine/artic … 79,00.html

Read the article above, written in 1946 (just a few months before the 2-28 crackdown in 1947)
Apparently Chinese rule was so bad that Taiwan was threatened under starvation, while just a few years ago was fertile and one of the richest lands in Asia.

Here are some excerpts:

“Formosans complained that the Chinese occupation army was looting stocks, letting crops, refineries, railroads and power plants go to rack & ruin. Just as angry Shanghailanders, who could buy only from the government-backed Formosa Sugar Co., feared that a colossal sugar corner was being rigged in the already disastrous black market.”

“World War II brought B-29 raids to Formosa, and liberation brought the scarcely more welcome visitation of Chinese bureaucracy. (Formosans use the adjective “Chinese” as a synonym for inefficiency and confusion.)”

“The new Chinese Governor Chen Yi found the raid-battered Formosans docile. He promptly put his nephew in charge of the Taiwan Co., which bought coal at 200 yen a ton and sold it at 4,000. Black-market gold sold at 300,000 Chinese dollars an ounce, against $180,000 in Shanghai. Even in fertile Formosa, mass starvation threatened.

"Thoughtful Chinese on the mainland began to agree with the Formosans. Said Ta Rung Pao, China’s counterpart of the New York Times: “Fundamentally speaking, China was not qualified to take over . . . she lacks the men . . . technique . . . commodities . . . capital. She governs, but is inefficient. She takes, but she does not give. This is the government’s shame.”

Most foreign observers in Formosa agreed that if a referendum were taken today Formosans would vote for U.S. rule. Second choice—Japan."

What does this tell us? That the Taiwanese in 1947 were mercenary and devoid of any sort of moral compass? In 1947, the Chinese and much of the rest of Asia weren’t “threatened” by starvation, they were facing it.

Regardless, all of this just reconfirms one statement. For those whom value dollar beyond principle, the most important thing is to offer them more dollars. Give us a few decades, and the Taiwanese will be banging down our doors for reunification.

Actually the was written eight months after V-J Day. I mean look at Iraq 2 years later.

Good point. I wonder how many Iraqis would pick a Baathist government over the Americans.

I like it when you get so cutely defensive. =)

Mercenary how? I suppose Chiang Kai Shek’s troops looting and tearing down what was in Taiwan then makes them somehow mercenary? Devoid of moral compass? Geez, Chiang Kai Shek’s actions weren’t popular by the locals as this article points out. When Taiwan was prosperous, the Nationalists managed to reverse that and bring the threat of starvation into Taiwan as well.

Riiight. Fantasy. Dreaming. Enjoy it. Just 8 years after democratic elections for Presidency in Taiwan, the KMT manages to lose the Presidency and many parts of the government, something it used to own almost all of prior.
Shows that all those years of rule didn’t endear many Taiwanese to KMT rule after all. Amazing. Didn’t even matter if it was 8 months after V-J day, apparently the KMT soldiers were already robbing away.

“She governs, but is inefficient. She takes, but she does not give. This is the government’s shame.”

And a shame it was. The KMT government of the time was notoriously corrupt and incompetent, precisely how it managed to lose the civil war on the mainland as well.

Now if we believe the spin that ends the article (and clearly the spin you’d like to place on this article), that an inefficient government is enough reason to want to be ruled by a foreign power… then that to me clearly reflects a lack of moral compass. What if in the aftermath of Katrina, the people of New Orleans voted for Venezuelan citizenship? Would you have supported such a move?

30年河东,30年河西。

I’m not at all surprised the KMT was booted out of office in 2000. Will they be denied again in 2008? I’m not so sure. And ultimately, do I really care who the party in office is? Not really.

My belief has always been that once Taiwan becomes (economically) equivalent to a mid-level Chinese provinces… a Hebei or Hunan… the prospects for reunification will look very different. I think your article above just re-enforces this statement.

[quote=“cctang”]“She governs, but is inefficient. She takes, but she does not give. This is the government’s shame.”

And a shame it was. The KMT government of the time was notoriously corrupt and incompetent, precisely how it managed to lose the civil war on the mainland as well.[/quote]
Yup, agreed. You support it now because?

Wow, you’re spinning this as well:
There are legal processes for the people who underwent Katrina. Do you think the stranded people during Katrina are going to vote for a Republican for office in 2008? See? We have votes for this. Something the people of Taiwan weren’t given.

Its also funny how you compare the KMT occupation to one of the worst disasters in modern US history.

In fact there is a legal process for states to secede from the union. Apparently there was not much support. See the US military wasn’t running and seizing property or tearing down infrastructure to send to Shanghai.

Right, because everyone knows that Taiwan is far poorer than midlevel Chinese provinces and that all they care about is economics. Remember when all the Chinese were clamoring for unification with Taiwan when they were starving to death under Mao’s policies. Of course. We can see it in history right? /sarcasm.

[quote=“ShrimpCrackers”][quote=“cctang”]“She governs, but is inefficient. She takes, but she does not give. This is the government’s shame.”

And a shame it was. The KMT government of the time was notoriously corrupt and incompetent, precisely how it managed to lose the civil war on the mainland as well.[/quote]
Yup, agreed. You support it now because?[/quote]
Well, first off, it’s the year 2006. There are probably some lessons that we can draw from the year 1947, but political parties change dramatically over time. Do you know what members of the US Democratic Party was doing in the year 1947 (lynching blacks) or 1860 (owning slaves/lynching blacks)?

Second of all, I don’t support the KMT as a matter of rule. I don’t have much input on domestic Taiwanese issues (as I said), and on cross-strait issues I’d love to see anyone in office that gets away from idealism and embraces pragmatism. Anyone that stopped demonizing the Chinese and mainland China; anyone that permits easier travel back and forth across the strait (including for yours truly); anyone that gives the status quo a chance. As I said before, I had hopes that after 2004 CSB would prove to be a moderate. There was some hope even a few months ago that someone in the DPP would step up and offer a different route for the DPP, but so far, it’s the CSB-driven Taiwanese independence show.

If a moderate stepped up from the DPP, I’d absolutely support them.

[quote]In fact there is a legal process for states to secede from the union.

Its also funny how you compare the KMT occupation to one of the worst disasters in modern US history. [/quote]
Not unilateral secession. See: Civil War, 1861.

And no, I compare poor KMT rule to the poor government response that followed one of the worst disasters in modern US history.

Right, because everyone knows that Taiwan is far poorer than midlevel Chinese provinces and that all they care about is economics. Remember when all the Chinese were clamoring for unification with Taiwan when they were starving to death under Mao’s policies. Of course. We can see it in history right? /sarcasm.[/quote]
I can’t figure out what you just said above. Anyone help?

Let’s put this in context, shall we?
time.com/time/magazine/artic … 55,00.html

China and the rest of Asia (and that includes Japan) were bankrupted by War, a War that Japan started, and a War that Taiwanese participated in on the side of Japan, including pillaging and killing on the Chinese mainland and elsewhere in Asia. Now, I’ve made this point before, on this very topic: Taiwan can either be treated as a collaborating aggressor on the Axis side or a Chinese province that fell victim to Japanese imperialism and war. You can’t have it both ways. So which way do you want it?

Lack of moral compass doesn’t even begin to describe it. Think about this one.

[quote=“zeugmite”]Let’s put this in context, shall we?
time.com/time/magazine/artic … 55,00.html

China and the rest of Asia (and that includes Japan) were bankrupted by War, a War that Japan started, and a War that Taiwanese participated in on the side of Japan, including pillaging and killing on the Chinese mainland and elsewhere in Asia. Now, [/quote]
Wait a second, you’re blaming the KMT ripping apart Taiwan’s infrastructure, seizing land, and robbing on the Japanese?

You mean a China that cowardly gave Taiwan ad infinitum to Japan and called Taiwan a “useless province” and that is why it should always be known as a Chinese province despite what the incompetent governments that ruled China calls or does with Taiwan just because you say so?
Or are you saying that Taiwan was a huge aggressor, that it was Taiwanese ships and soldiers which caused the mayhem in China, especially Manchuria?

The crappy multiple choice options you presented in your post makes it seem like you’re saying that the current generation of Japan is the same as those that grew up in Imperial Japan and that they should pay and pay dearly. My god, what sort of brutal idiots would support such a notion… oh… wait.

So here is your answer, choice numero 3) Taiwan, which became occupied and a legal territory of Japan for 50 years was given up and occupied by the KMT. Whatever “sins” the Taiwanese people made were paid back in full and then some by the Martial Law and White Terror that the KMT inflicted upon the Taiwanese people in an effort to “purge the Japanese spies”.

Lack of moral compass doesn’t even begin to describe it. Think about this one.[/quote][/quote]
Right, it was immoral for the Taiwanese not to starve as bad as the Chinese during the time due to mismanagement and the inefficiencies of the government at the time. Lets blame it all on the Japanese instead. No, seriously, what are you trying to say?

ShrimpCrackers, I said nothing about modern day Taiwanese or Japanese. Please lay off the crack. It will help you think more clearly.

Let me also clue you in on a little bit of background. I don’t get the constant false victimhood over the Qing “giving away Taiwan.” While the Qing callously threw away Taiwan and forgot about it, the Chinese people never did, and for that the Qing paid a heavy price: they were overthrown. The loss of Taiwan (and Liaodong, by the way) were the catalyst for a national revolution that eventually ended up with the recovery of Taiwan from Japan. The human and economic costs were enormous. It is precisely because Chinese have never forgotten about Taiwan that they viewed it as a victim of Japanese imperialism, rather than a collaborator of Japan, despite the very real pillaging and killing that Taiwanese volunteers in the Imperial Army conducted against the mainland Chinese people. In 1945, when the world defeated the Axis powers, China, too, was ready to turn the page and begin the recovery from the destruction wrought by war. The initial years were difficult. All Chinese people suffered through it – the Northeasterners, too, who woke up from “Manchukuo” under Japan and the false economic achievements built on the fruits and forced slavery of others.

So why should it be different with the Taiwanese? So you have to share in the common fate of the Chinese nation, for once. So you have to help the Shanghainese with some sugar donations. Is that such a shame? It’s called responsibility. Maybe the responsibility is too costly in your little accounting book, and in that case, cctang’s initial assessment is spot on.

Oh, those Greenies are still worshiping their Japanese masta. I just have to laugh. :roflmao:

So are you saying that some Taiwanese did derserve to die because they were collaborators, thus you have a clean slate in Taiwanese society.

Given this type of sentiment within the Green camp, I wonder when the third purge of Taiwan is going to occur. Will it be a Blue purge as retribution for 228 and White Terror, or a Green purge as a pre-emption against possible terrorism.

So are you saying that some Taiwanese did derserve to die because they were collaborators, thus you have a clean slate in Taiwanese society.

Given this type of sentiment within the Green camp, I wonder when the third purge of Taiwan is going to occur. Will it be a Blue purge as retribution for 228 and White Terror, or a Green purge as a pre-emption against possible terrorism.[/quote]

Not at all, I’m simply saying that Zeugmite shouldn’t blame the Taiwanese people for being Japanese collaborators of anykind. Any suggestion is disguisting.

I also applaud LA’s message. It beings across my message that he still feels a silly grudge against the modern day Japanese people even though they are mostly dead or gone.

Again, entertainment for the masses. By the way, AC, these guys are in YOUR camp.

Well, if you think about who were the bigger aresholes, it does make sense. Schools, hospitals, education and infrastructure vs plundering, looting and shooting. I know what I’d prefer.

And I have to say, despite the change in governent, there’s not been any raft of KMT bodies washing up on my shores.

HG

You’ll presumably use the same generous standard when the Communist Party of China brings peace to your home land as the next province of the Chinese empire.

Time for some real history.

Japan took a lot of money from China and used some of it to develop Taiwan.
The KMT also took a lot of money from the mainland, during the retreat to Taiwan. Some of that money was used to develop Taiwan.

The rest is BS.

Huang Guan Chen, and let us not forget the fact that the KMT ruined the island in the environmental side… But then again, after going to HK and Macau, I still understand why people from China want to visit Taiwan, as this still manages to be less polluted. And that reminds me of the Taipei Mayoral Candidate from the KMT taking a glass of water from the river in Danshui in the publicity. Really, if that crispy distilled water inside that glass came from there, I need to go urgently there. Last time I was there I can swear the pollution was really bad…

You’ll presumably use the same generous standard when the Communist Party of China brings peace to your home land as the next province of the Chinese empire.[/quote]

Well, if that homeland is given away by a central authority that considered it a constant thorn in its side, maybe I would. Then again, I’m not a nationalist. However, I’m just guessing here, but would you perhaps be willing to apply that generous standard to the PRC’s claim on Tibet? You know, that previously evil feudal theocracy, new brooms, new schools, healthcare . . . :laughing:

HG

That was my first thought, actually! And frankly, I wouldn’t. I don’t think the fact that the PRC has done nice things for Tibetans has anything to do with the sovereignty issue, at the end of the day. I think Beijing makes a mistake every time it engages in the debate at that level.

I’d no more sell my country than I’d sell my wife. (Well… make me an offer.)