What would China be like today if the Nationalists had won the Chinese Civil War?

[XiaoYaoZi Backup]

Yes, CPC is the nightmare for all China's enemies, that's why they hate it gut.

有些深蓝是具有迷惑性的，别看他们为中国的发展叫好，但心里和老共还是有血海深仇的，恨不得取而代之。

深蓝总是强调老共让老毛带了几十年的歪路，最后的老邓的改革开放只能学习他们走三民主义的路，所以你大陆今天超级大国的地位是他们的三民主义带来的，所以他们才是正统，你大陆只能回来让他们来重新执政。

深蓝说大话的水平和宇宙神油有一拼，没有老毛当时的累积，你拿什么来改革开放？ 一点民族的工业底子都没有到时候一开放又将成为别人的经济殖民地，永远都不能翻身。

这些牛鬼蛇神全都是历史渣滓,迟早彻底被人抛弃.正所谓:人间正道是沧桑,

 

[EAsian]

Okay, let's agree to one thing (to avoid a disagreement; because I want to know your opinion on this scenario):

1. China (KMT&CPC) defeats the Japanese Empire in 1943
   1. Japan sues for peace; China accepts
      1. Japan returns Taiwan
      2. Japan grants independence to Korea
2. KMT & CPC join hands and forge one 'National' Government, fuse the nationalist and socialist ideology into a national preamble and constitution.

China emerges from the war as a powerful nation , with international prestige. Threatened by China's growth, the Soviet Union initiates covert acts to cause riot. China needs a partner to resist Soviet hegemony and domination of Asia. In this case China is the 'Vanguard' against Soviet expansionism.

Do you think :

• China will forge an alliance with Japan?
  
• China will forge a security pact with the United States?

@Chinese-Dragon @Shotgunner51 @Yorozuya @EAsian et al.

I don't think it was possible to form a CPC,KMT joint party.And I don't think ideology matters that much.It is always geo-politics that really matters in international relationship.China and russia are no longer communism countries yet America still look us as threats,so the party that combine CPC and KMT wouldn't change much if we still insist on protecting our national interests.We might be richer if KMT is in charge and China become a lapdog of US like taiwan,also we might loose some territory due to Cowardness deeply rooted in the soul of a southern party KMT.But in the end of the day it was not possible at all.

 

[DD5]

China will be smaller. China will be even more heavily corrupted.

Yes that was my first thought. Chinese history militarily is weak, until the revolution.

 

[zeronet]

I pity the chinese. if we just had half of the power of china, we would have long brought home taiwan.
moreover, we would unite japan,korea and vietnam under one banner. and enslave SE Asia. ups, forget what I said about the latter. Ccp, chinese posters here and elsewhere can only lament.

like i said before, viets r a group of very aggressive people with wild ambitions but very sorry capability, what u said here is just another confirmation on my point. i think SE asian and EA people should thank god u r not china and china is not like viet.

 

[gambit]

Could do, would do.

That is all hypothetical. And hypothetical arguments are endless. The KMT had their chance, and they utterly failed.

No. Taiwant succeeded when your mainland Chinese was starving, figuratively and literally. The KMT was not perfect, but who is ? But for what they did in Taiwan, what make you think they could not do the same for mainland China ?

The Mainland did the most good for the most Chinese people. That is simply a fact.

After how many decades of starvation, poverty, and general oppression ? Care to face those facts ?

Even both your countries USA + Vietnam do not have any official recognition of Taiwan. You abandoned them in favour of relations with the PRC.

By sheer political pressure, nothing more. In the larger schemes of geopolitics, recognizing mainland China as China was inevitable, there was nothing Taiwan could have done. China pressuring other countries to diplomatically disavow Taiwan was nothing but symbolism and really did not economically harmed Taiwan. If anything, when mainland China needed help to lift mainland Chinese out of the economic misery that the CPC created, Taiwan was readied to help, and they did.

 

[cnleio]

TaiWan is a good example, and China lands will be smaller.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

After how many decades of poverty, starvation, and general oppression ? Or are you saying that those conditions are necessary ?


So what ? Those decades of poverty were created by the CPC. That is like me abusing my car then I boast about it after spending a lot of money to fix it. The goal of a good government is to NOT put the country into dire situations in the first place.


Absurd. Taiwan surged ahead of mainland China in every metrics.


Absurd. It was China who bribed and pressured other countries into diplomatic disavowal of Taiwan. Even so, economically speaking, Taiwan continues to prosper. No failure here.


How do you know they cannot do better than Mao for mainland China ?

1. But those were equal or worse under the KMT. Even Lu Xun, one of the most famous KMT era authors, wrote tens of books about the oppression of the KMT during the 1920's. Most importantly it can be seen from the regime's attitude that they didn't give a fk about the regular people as 花园口决堤事件 showed, where they broke the dams on the Yellow River and killed millions to slow Japan down for a few days.

2. Nope. They were created by historical circumstance, colonialism and the incompetence of the KMT. What, you think that the KMT had no responsibility for the state of affairs in 1949 when CPC did not yet have even a single day in power? Really?

3. Nope. Taiwan did not surge ahead in deployment of nuclear power, aerospace technology, agriculture, influence on Chinese literature, automotives or civil engineering. That is not "every metric".

4. China bribed and pressured other countries? How? In 1971 China had absolutely no leverage other than a large population and nuclear weapons. Even US allies like France, Canada, Britain, Italy, Sweden and Norway voted for PRC to replace ROC in the UNSC. What could China have possibly given these advanced, industrialized US allies?

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What could China have possibly given the Soviet Union? Mexico? India?

On the other hand, the list of those who voted against the PRC consist of superpowers and highly respected countries such as:

Liberia. Cote d'Ivoire. Saudi Arabia. Apartheid South Africa. Congo. Chad. Central African Republic.

Seems to me it's clear who was engaging in bribery.

 

[XiaoYaoZi Backup]

I don't think it was possible to form a CPC,KMT joint party.And I don't think ideology matters that much.It is always geo-politics that really matters.China and russia are no longer communism countries yet America still look us as threats,so the party that combine CPC and KMT wouldn't change much if we still insist on protecting our national interests.

CCP has given KMT the chance to establish a coalition government in 1945, but KMT doesn't agree, then the Civil War happened. And then KMT having over four times as many soldiers as the CCP and all the territory of Mainland lost all the Mainland just after the begin of the Civil War. How KMT suck.

 

[gambit]

1. But those were equal or worse under the KMT. Even Lu Xun, one of the most famous KMT era authors, wrote tens of books about the oppression of the KMT during the 1920's. Most importantly it can be seen from the regime's attitude that they didn't give a fk about the regular people as 花园口决堤事件 showed.

2. Nope. They were created by historical circumstance, colonialism and the incompetence of the KMT. What, you think that the KMT had no responsibility for the state of affairs in 1949 when CPC did not yet have even a single day in power? Really?

3. Nope. Taiwan did not surge ahead in deployment of nuclear power, aerospace technology, agriculture, influence on Chinese literature, automotives or civil engineering. That is not "every metric".

I understand you have to spin it to make Taiwan as bad as China, but it will not work, not when there are physical evidences that works against you. The bottom line is that Taiwan fared better under the KMT than your mainland China fared under Mao and his fellow monsters.

4. China bribed and pressured other countries? How? In 1971 China had absolutely no leverage other than a large population and nuclear weapons. Even US allies like France, Canada, Britain, Italy, Sweden and Norway voted for PRC to replace ROC in the UNSC. What could China have possibly given these advanced, industrialized US allies?

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What could China have possibly given the Soviet Union? Mexico? India?

On the other hand, the list of those who voted against the PRC consist of superpowers and highly respected countries such as:

Liberia. Cote d'Ivoire. Saudi Arabia. Apartheid South Africa. Congo. Chad. Central African Republic.

You want to do bidness with China, you disavow Taiwan. Simple as that. It was not outright bribery or threat but enticements that works pretty much the same.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

By sheer political pressure, nothing more. In the larger schemes of geopolitics, recognizing mainland China as China was inevitable, there was nothing Taiwan could have done. China pressuring other countries to diplomatically disavow Taiwan was nothing but symbolism and really did not economically harmed Taiwan.

So it only took a little bit of political pressure, for your countries (USA + Vietnam) to abandon Taiwan, and switch diplomatic recognition to the PRC instead?

They did it willingly and happily. They rushed for it.

... recognizing mainland China as China was inevitable...

That's right, it was inevitable.

Realistically, there is zero chance for the KMT to ever come to power in China. The people hate the KMT.

The Mainland/PRC is the only "realistic" chance to restore the Chinese civilization as a power in this world. And the anti-China crowd knows it very well, which explains all the angst.

 

[EAsian]

CCP has given KMT the chance to establish a coalition government in 1945, but KMT doesn't agree, then the Civil War happened. And then KMT having over four times as many soldiers as the CCP and all the territory of Mainland lost all the Mainland just after the begin of the Civil War. How KMT suck.

No way CCP or KMT would share their power to each other，it was just a show.一山不容二虎。

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I understand you have to spin it to make Taiwan as bad as China, but it will not work, not when there are physical evidences that works against you. The bottom line is that Taiwan fared better under the KMT than your mainland China fared under Mao and his fellow monsters.


You want to do bidness with China, you disavow Taiwan. Simple as that. It was not outright bribery or threat but enticements that works pretty much the same.

What physical evidence lol? You want physical evidence, look at photographs of Shanghai vs. Taipei. Look at the infrastructure. Look at Nature or Science publications. Look at how many satellites are in space (this is an easy one). Look at Taiwan's Navy which still uses some WW2 era ships.

In 1971 China had not undergone market reforms. China didn't do business. Yet almost all the industrialized capitalist countries, as well as all of the more advanced socialist countries, voted in favor of the PRC.

Almost all countries that voted against the PRC were destitute 3rd world dictatorships that were easily influenced by cheap and easy money from certain sources.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

No way CCP or KMT would share their power to each other，it was just a show.一山不容二虎。

KMT is a liability, and CPC will be much better to work alone to make China great again.

 

[gambit]

So it only took a little bit of political pressure, for your countries (USA + Vietnam) to abandon Taiwan, and switch diplomatic recognition to the PRC instead?

They did it willingly and happily. They rushed for it.

Fine...Then do not even imply that it was political incompetence that other countries politically distanced themselves from Taiwan. Admit that it was nothing more than politically bullying by mainland China.

Realistically, there is zero chance for the KMT to ever come to power in China. The people hate the KMT.

The Mainland/PRC is the only "realistic" chance to restore the Chinese civilization as a power in this world. And the anti-China crowd knows it very well, which explains all the angst.

Prove it. Open up the political arena to competing parties.

Oops...I temporarily forgot that you guys are practically terrified of being challenged even on this forum, let alone your country's political system.

 

[William Hung]

1978 wasn't that long ago and the economy was not fully open until 1995 or so.

KMT had 37 years, while CPC had achievements as early as 1959. Indeed, the 1950's saw greater economic growth than KMT times, while social indicators such as literacy rate, infant mortality and lifespan had massive progress even during the cultural revolution. CPC built a hydrogen bomb (1967, months before France) and nuclear attack submarine (1970, 10 years before Rubis) before France, a traditional European industrial power. There was absolutely no instance of the KMT ever having a major technological milestone before another industrial country in all of history, not one.

Here's the difference between KMT in 1945 and CPC in 1978: CPC in 1978 had leverage. KMT had no leverage. There was nothing that the KMT could provide to the West that the West did not already own, so what could the KMT demand in return? It comes back to the question of ownership. As both Adam Smith and Marx noted, it matters little who produces something - it matters who controls the profits and the means of production. KMT had no leverage thus the ownership of profits and technology belongs to foreigners alone. CPC had leverage so the foreigners had to transfer both technologies and profits until 1990 or so.

Also, the KMT started from a very low industrial base: less than 100 tons of steel production per year. With such a low industrial base, the most profitable ventures would NOT be to industrialize. Instead it'd be a focus on raw material export, agriculture and services, then exchanging those for manufactured goods from the outside world. Remember back in the day there was no globalization.

Your comparison is not valid since the KMT and CCP leadership period has different contexts, vastly different contexts. How can you compare the economic progress during the KMT’s period before 1949 with the progress of the CCP period post-1978? like I said, there was the internal civil war and the war against the Imperial Army so its not even fair to compare the economic growth, infant mortality, lifespan and other social indicators between the KMT period and the period post-1949, where the IJA had already surrendered.

The main question of this thread was, what would China look like if KMT was in control? i.e. what would it look like if thw KMT still controlled mainland China post-1949. And I’ll remind you my point was this: this KMT China would not go through the Cultural Revolution and it would integrate itself economically with the west much earlier than the CCP did.

If we agree that the Cultural Revolution was bad for the development of China and that integrating economically with the West was essential for development, then I conclude that the KMT would be better for mainland China on these 2 points.