I didn't see any posts here about the civil war between Nationalist China(Kuomintang, the Republic of China) and Communist China(People's Republic of China).
So I guess I'll start one myself.

It all happened when Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek of the Nationalists turned hostile to the Communists. The Nationalists killed a lot of Communists in Shanghai. Also, General Chiang used his best troops to fight the Communists when the Japanese were invading China. Chiang was badly criticized for doing that. During the Japanese invasion to Mainland China, the civil war between the Nationalists and Communists ended temporarily, but the Communists got some time to rest and to grow stronger when the Nationalists were desperately retreating further inland. Finally after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing, Nationalist China regained all Chinese territories. The Communists were now stronger than ever, and the people were also beginning to believe their ideas. The Communists then rose up and kicked the Nationalist government out of Mainland China.

Chiang Kai-shek and his men fled to Taiwan, and vowed to invade Mainland China in the future. Nationalist China lost her final chance to invade Mainland China when the world started to recognize Communist China as the rightful government of China.

Generally, there are two Chinas today. The Republic of China in Taiwan, and the People's Republic of China in Mainland China. The President of the Republic of China now is Mr. Chen Shui-bian from the Democratic-Progressive Party, and the President of People's Republic of China is Chairman Jiang Zemin from the Communist Party.

Which China is the rightful government? I would say Communist China because Communist China is obviously way stronger and it controls most of China. However, I personally don't like the people who call themselves Communists when they act like Capitalists.

About Chairman Mao Tse-tung and Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, I would say, Chiang was a better leader. Chiang was maybe a bit too aggressive to the Communists, but he was generally a great leader. Without him, the Nationalists couldn't possibly accomplish the Northern Expedition successfully, because even Dr. Sun Yat-sen himself failed to do it. Some people criticized Chiang in World War II, because he was retreating inland. In fact, the Japanese were much stronger than the Nationalists. If Chiang's troops were mainly used to fight the Japanese, they would be destroyed. Mao was not such a great leader. His two policies, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution both greatly damaged China's economy, education, culture, and etc. It was estimated that 70 million Chinese were killed during Mao's reign. My friends from Beijing don't like Mao Tse-tung, as well as my Mandarin teacher(from China too).

I would disagree on the relative "greatness" of Chiang and Mao. You did not touch on the important issue of corruption in the Kuomintang under Chiang, which has been acknowledged as the major factor in the loss of support from the population at large. When the US poured in aid to the KMT the money lined the pockets of the likes of the finance minister, Soong, who when he saw the writing on the wall fled to the States returning the dough to its source but securely in his own pockets.

China at the time of WWII and after was a country with a large population and immense poverty. You have glossed over the fact that Moa and the communists did much to "normalise" life for the peasants. If one digs enough one will always find negatives in a great man's career but for me the positives definitely outweigh the negatives for Mao and the reverse is true for Chiang.

1) Who were the ten official presidents of Nationalist China?
(Hint: Not necessarily ten persons)

2) What is the currency in Nationalist China?

3) What is the currency in Communist China?

4) Who was the last emperor of China?

5) How many times did the revolutionaries revolt before the Qing Dynasty was overthrown?

6) For number 5, when did it happen?

7) What was the former name for the Kuomintang?

8) How many people were killed after the Rape of Nanjing?

9) Who were the three leaders of Communist China?

10) What are the capital cities of both Communist and Nationalist China?

You are right.
The Kuomintang was very corrupt under Chiang. He was also criticized for his dictatorship. I also forgot to mention that Chiang didn't rule according to Dr. Sun's "Three Principles of the People". But his effort to unify the country at the beginning was significant.

I don't like Communist China for three reasons. First, the Communists changed the Chinese writing. This made it even harder to learn the Chinese language! Second, it was that "Long live Chairman Mao" slogan I heard somewhere. Lastly, Communist China always made false statements and used propaganda to fool the people. Communist China had never had Taiwan in the past, and the Republic of China is still in existence. How could the Communists possibly claim Taiwan? :mad:
This is the reason I don't like Mao, although he contributed much to China.:mad:

Ahh...yes.
Despite the fact that the Kuomintang actually contributed much to China, the Communist government completely neglects the Kuomintang leaders! As for Nationalist China, it now has democracy so I think it's okay.

Originally posted by goododa
Ahh...yes.
Despite the fact that the Kuomintang actually contributed much to China, the Communist government completely neglects the Kuomintang leaders! As for Nationalist China, it now has democracy so I think it's okay. Actually, recently, the CCP is rehabilitiating and recognizing some Nationalist generals for their role in the anti-Japanese war. Like the renaming of some street and mainfares in some Chinese cities after them. Also the CCP is refurnishing Chiang's original mansion somewhere in the Yangzi, to be used as a future museum (?). And like when Marshal Chang (the one who kidnapped Chiang in Xi'an and leader of the Manchurian army in the Nationalist forces) died recently, Jiang Zemin and China were generally full of praise for him and mourned his passing. More so than the Taiwanese did.

Originally posted by goododa
You are right.
The Kuomintang was very corrupt under Chiang. He was also criticized for his dictatorship. I also forgot to mention that Chiang didn't rule according to Dr. Sun's "Three Principles of the People". But his effort to unify the country at the beginning was significant.

I don't like Communist China for three reasons. First, the Communists changed the Chinese writing. This made it even harder to learn the Chinese language! Second, it was that "Long live Chairman Mao" slogan I heard somewhere. Lastly, Communist China always made false statements and used propaganda to fool the people. Communist China had never had Taiwan in the past, and the Republic of China is still in existence. How could the Communists possibly claim Taiwan? :mad:
This is the reason I don't like Mao, although he contributed much to China.:mad: Personally, Chiang wasn't corrupt. However it was cos the Japanese had invaded and uprooted the Nationalists fr its economic stronghold along the Yangzi. The Nationalists lost uncountable nos of good men and women and also its best military units there. When Chiang retreated to Chongqing, he got surrounded by local warlords (who were very corrupt) and things generally went downhill fr there. So blame the monstrosity that's Communist China on the Japanese!

I don't know why you dislike qiandizhi so much; they are much easier to read and write than the older fangdizhi. To the extent Spore (and Msia somewhat) adopted them eons ago. They make learning the Chinese ideograms much much easier. :confused:

'2) What is the currency in Nationalist China?'

New Taiwanese dollar. Yuan in Chinese. Short-form TWD. Or NT$.

'3) What is the currency in Communist China?'

Yuan.

'4) Who was the last emperor of China?'

Pu-yi.

'5) How many times did the revolutionaries revolt before the Qing Dynasty was overthrown?'

Many many times if you count Koxinga, the peasant rebels, the Taipings, Sun's group and so on. I think you mean the modern revolutionaries? Then once or twice I think. Not sure.

'7) What was the former name for the Kuomintang?'

Tung-men Hui.

'8) How many people were killed after the Rape of Nanjing?'

Unknown. The Chinese said 300000. The Japanese said none (some of them) or a lot lesser. Go figure. Who knows?

'9) Who were the three leaders of Communist China?'

Be more precise. I take it you mean at one time. Then Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Lin Piao (or Liu Shaoqi).

'10) What are the capital cities of both Communist and Nationalist China?'

For the Commies, at Beijing always since 1949. For the KMT, at Nanjing till 1949 and then Taipei ever since.

Actually there has been an intense discussion on the Taiwanese question before. At this thread, starting on this page : -

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?threadid=7674

It's buried somewhere inside the thread. Dun ask me why it's there. :)

Also another thread on the civil war betw the Commies and the KMT : -

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?threadid=6508&pagenumber=1

Originally posted by goododa
First, the Communists changed the Chinese writing. This made it even harder to learn the Chinese language!


WRONG. It makes it easier to learn. You know there is a reason they call it "simplify form":p

And you know why it's change? One reason is that it's easier:D


Second, it was that "Long live Chairman Mao" slogan I heard somewhere.


Muhahaha


Lastly, Communist China always made false statements and used propaganda to fool the people. Communist China had never had Taiwan in the past, and the Republic of China is still in existence. How could the Communists possibly claim Taiwan? :mad:


Communist China never had Taiwan = True
Taiwan is part of China = True
It's not about communist, it's about a nation. Idelogy means little here. That's why there is why China has this one country multi government thing. So far it work ok(not perfect) in HK


This is the reason I don't like Mao, although he contributed much to China.:mad:

I don't really like what he did in Big Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, but that's about it. whether he's a righteous man is debatable, he's nevertheless a great leader. He's a good leader because his goal is his people. The reason he failed twice is that he tried too hard without forseeing the consequence



BTW, have a look at my thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7826

and BTW, don't miss up your ideology and history

Communist China won in the nationalist China vs Communist China conflict, since you are talking about a 50 years old conflict

Fact: there were two China before 1972 but now there is only one China

Fact2: every country in some way manipuate citizen's mind, include yours and mine. Maybe you like to call it "propaganda", but I think "media" is more suitable

goododa: where do you live?

My street address is 29** E 1st Ave, Vancouver:p

Currently I'm a senior in Van Tech, next year I'm going to UBC :D

Originally posted by cataclysm
goododa: where do you live?


Burnaby

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
I don't know why you dislike qiandizhi so much; they are much easier to read and write than the older fangdizhi. To the extent Spore (and Msia somewhat) adopted them eons ago. They make learning the Chinese ideograms much much easier. :confused:

I think Simplified Chinese is jiantizi and Traditional Chinese is fantizi...:)
I dislike the Simplified form because I need to learn both forms.
And if I want to visit Chinese sites I need to install both BIG5 and GB codes. It's quite annoying.:mad:
Another reason I dislike jiantizi: The simplified characters were a disaster to Chinese culture...:(
Just like the Libian in Han Dynasty...:(

Originally posted by goododa
I think Simplified Chinese is jiantizi and Traditional Chinese is fantizi...:)
I dislike the Simplified form because I need to learn both forms.
And if I want to visit Chinese sites I need to install both BIG5 and GB codes. It's quite annoying.:mad:
Another reason I dislike jiantizi: The simplified characters were a disaster to Chinese culture...:(
Just like the Libian in Han Dynasty...:( Well, excuse me but I have never learnt Chinese so effectively I am illiterate in Chinese. :) Anyway, it's a matter of getting used to. Most Msians can read both anyway. All you need is practise.

Anyway if you're concerned bout Chinese culture, maybe it'll help if you know there are tens of thousands of characters not used in modern times, although they are commonly used thru out Chinese history (depending). :crazyeyes

What's the Libian in the Han dynasty? :confused:

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon

Anyway if you're concerned bout Chinese culture, maybe it'll help if you know there are tens of thousands of characters not used in modern times, although they are commonly used thru out Chinese history (depending). :crazyeyes

What's the Libian in the Han dynasty? :confused:

Libian means change into Lishu.
During the Han Dynasty, the Chinese writing was changed into Lishu.
But the person who did it (a scholar but I dunno his name) was not so learned, that he messed up with the rules. (The Chinese had certain rules regarding new characters and writings) So the Libian made it harder for the Chinese scholars nowadays to decipher or read ancient documents.:scan:
For example, Chinese never knew the elements on the Periodic Table in the ancient times so obviously there were no appropriate characters to represent the elements, but Chinese scientists could look up the rules, and make new characters according to the rules.
The Simplified characters were indeed easier, but they were even worse than Lishu. The characters were completely different from their original forms, and no longer systematic. This was a major impact on the Chinese culture. Maybe after a few millennia, the scholars would not be able to read ancient writings!

I have to add my voice to the "Simplified Chinese" is easier camp. For the absolute beginner, the task is certainly less daunting and if you only want to visit the Peoples's Republic or read its publications and books, Big5 is not required. For most outsiders, this is the destination of choice rather than Taiwan. Sheer size and numbers I'm afraid. ;)

hehe, image someone who could read acient Chinese writing but couldn't handle modern Chinese writing. That would be cool:D

It will be like understand every line Shakespear wrote without knowing anything on this forum:p

Originally posted by cataclysm
It will be like understand every line Shakespear wrote without knowing anything on this forum:p

Very apt analogy and quite close despite the difference between an alphabetic and an ideographic language. :goodjob:

What does that make Hong Kong then? It is technically part of China, but doesn't exercise communism (thank God)...

Originally posted by rmsharpe
What does that make Hong Kong then? It is technically part of China, but doesn't exercise communism (thank God)... Nowadays esp over the past few yrs, all of China doesn't exercise communism. It's all rampant market capitalism now but w/o strong rule of the law. ;)

My opinion about the writing systems (no one has posted in 7 years!

簡體字 actually is harder to learn in some points because sometimes the characters are so irrational that you have to rely on memorization instead of using your own reasoning to figure out characters. For example the character 愛 (love) was changed into 爱 where the 心 (heart) part was removed, so instead of using your brain and assuming that 心 would be in 愛, you have to memorize 爱. There are many other examples.

Second of all, some of the characters were modified in order to fit Communism. Many characters had a 王 radical changed into 土 which expressed that kings and gods were just dirt, which is a communist idea. It also destroys some of Chinese culture.

Third of all, 簡體字的 merger of characters made it so that it is often offensive to families, or that makes translations difficult. For example 幹 and 乾 and 干 were merged into 干 which makes it 干貨 mistranslated from "dry goods" to "f### goods".

Fourth of all, there really is no point of 簡體字 because literacy is often determined to access and quality of education.

Fifth 繁體字 is so much prettier anyway, which makes it that even the mainland China uses 繁體字 for calligraphy.

There's a lot more but, I won't state them...

And for the 中華人民共和國共產黨 vs. 中華民國國民黨 debate, I have LOTS of opinions, but... I'll save them for later...

Most Singaporeans in their 50's and up know both scripts as they learnt traditional as children and the simplified when Singapore changed its policies.

My mom and Dad believe that the Simplified was a good thing to the Chinese language. It was easier to comprehend

Easier to comprehend? I find the merger of characters confusing.

It's easier for people who weren't born learning Chinese to comprehend :p

However, it seems that it's easier for people who learned Simplified to understand Traditional than vice-versa.

This thread is from 2001. Please look at the dates.

which expressed that kings and gods were just dirt, which is a communist idea

No, that's a pretty good idea. Celestial dictators are delusions of man, kings and tyrants are dirt.

It's easier for people who weren't born learning Chinese to comprehend :p

However, it seems that it's easier for people who learned Simplified to understand Traditional than vice-versa.

I wasn't born learning Chinese, my first language is English, and I still find Traditional less confusing.

This thread is from 2001. Please look at the dates.



No, that's a pretty good idea. Celestial dictators are delusions of man, kings and tyrants are dirt.

well, good point, but I meant it kind of hurts the Chinese culture.

I wasn't born learning Chinese, my first language is English, and I still find Traditional less confusing.

Everybody has their own way of learning?

Please, STOP bumping every single thread involving the PRC or related topics.

Are you kidding? Chiang was an AWFUL leader!!!! HORRIBLE!!! I'm not going to defend Mao either, he was bad too, but Chiang... no. Just no. Here are a short list of his "accomplishments":

-Screwing up the economy by
a) Causing mass inflation, as bad as Germany before WWII
b) Shipping off money to be used for his own comfort
c) Tricking investors many, many times (his economic minister, T.V Soong, was a financial genius, so all the investors trusted him. However, Chiang just wanted money!)
d) Not encouraging development at all by
1. Terrorizing the population with police and the military, both out of control and abusive
2. Failing to control the chaos in China, mass instability
3. Killing civilians and blowing up buildings that "apparently" belonged to "Communists"

-Bumbling the war against Japan, almost causing China to lose by
a) Refusing to work with the Communists, and even when his own followers forced him to work with them, repeatedly betrayed them and attacked them as the Japanese burned the Capital
b) Diverting money that should have been used for the military for his own personal use (the Chinese air force was pathetic, so they begged the US for aid. Where did the aid go? Most think it went to corrupt officials and the Soong family)
c) Allowing the Japanese to capture, bit by bit, parts of China, even Manchuria, without a fight (this is somewhat similar to Germany annexing Czechoslovakia without any action from Britain and France)
d) Being a terrible military commander (In the battle of Nanking, Chinese troops outnumber Japanese by 2 or 3 to 1, yet they just surrendered and fled the city, though they could have won easily)
1. Also, his troops were corrupt and poorly trained, as well as abusive

I can continue. Just ask. But anyways, the main point was, CHIANG WAS ONE OF THE WORST LEADERS IN CHINESE HISTORY. (so was Mao)

To be fair to Chiang, he did not have much to work with, and he had many almost insurmountable problems. He had to deal with the royalists and the warlords in the 1920s, and he did a pretty good job. In the 1930s he had some rather successful campaigns against the communists, and was allowed control most of China.

As for his Japan: Chiang and the rest of China were in no shape to fight a modern enemy such as Japan with antiquated equipment and almost no industry to supply the equipment. He wasn't the best military commander, but after Japan won a few victories they were essentially bogged down in China. His performance in the late 30s and 40s still ensured the defeat of Japan, and was largely done with little Communist support. His biggest mistake was not militarial, but politic, choosing to go after the Warlords instead of the Communists, and that is what finally did him in.

One thing that Chiang should be be given credit for is the miracle pulled in Tiawan. He played his cards right and ensured the survival and the continued success of Tiawan the ROC.

He certainly had the chance for victory, but he certainly can not be considered an incompetent individual.

Taiwan is a smaller space to work with than China... maybe he wasn't good at managing large nations.

Anyway, it there were a KMT China I don't think it's going to stay KMT China, because, you know, democratic nations don't normally have one party (Taiwan now has the KMT and the DPP [gosh I hate the DPP]). I would expect China, if the KMT did win (I don't know how they would win) to carry multple parties (that could get corrupt).

As for the CCP, they are actually doing pretty good right now... RIGHT NOW.... but they could do a little better. They did however, take out some of the culture, but now a days, the "Communist Party" doesn't seem to be achieveing "Communism" so now one of the only problems with them is the lack of freedom.

(When reading this, forget about my username or avatar)

What is to say that if Chiang was left unopposed after WWII and it became democratic after his death such as the ROC has become?

No, if Chiang won via backing from American government, or if the long march never happened, etc. then I don't think that China would have turned out like Taiwan at all. China was far bigger then Taiwan for starters, so it's much easier to govern Taiwan then a chaotic and gigantic country like Mainland China. Plus, in China there were many different political factions, many of them very powerful. There would have been decades of the KMT bumbling the crackdown on their political opponents, and as long as Chiang stayed, China would be backwards and mired in poverty, not to mention chaotic. That was one of the great blessings of Communism in China. It brought stability at last, and quieted all the squabbling and power struggles that had been going on. To be sure, it did happen, but only within the party. And also they screwed up a lot too, but they held the country together. If the KMT won, I'm pretty sure that the country would have been wrent into several pieces, and another civil war would start. Remember, NOBODY liked the KMT, they only held power in Taiwan because Taiwan was so small and thus had little resistance to offer.

So nationalist China was corrupt and LOOK WHO'S corrupt now?! COMMUNIST CHINA! That is a similar case to Vietnam.

I hate communist rescheme. I feel like crushing it. They are tyrants. People's homes were demolished and were not compensated for the olympics, protestors AND the media there were bashed, one had this hands stamped on; they are struggling to clean up their air (as well as their act), the police shoot the Tibetans, one certain punishment is slave labor and they have even a Great FIREWALL of China including having spyware on public computers. That's a f***en disgrace, worse than the Soviets. What's next: actually invade Taiwan?

These Chinese are now even stronger than ever due to their population and industry. A war against them would be so bloody, but no, they influence the global economy.
Ancient China was no different. When the Great Wall was being built, about 25 million people died making it and they were slave laborers. So I would say the Wall is paved with skulls.

What's next: actually invade Taiwan?

No. Both sides know a war over Taiwan is the worst thing that could happen. The KMT is content with the status quo and, for the moment at least, so is the CCP. Economic ties between the two Chinas are closer than most people realise.

The biggest flaw of modern China isn't the censorship, or the labour camps, or even shooting Tibetan nationalists. It's the rampant corruption and incompetency of the local officials, and the government in Beijing despite its anti-corruption stance is either 1) too busy or 2) too powerless to do much about it. It's the single most important factor fuelling the environmental problems, the gap between the rich and poor, and myriads of other social problems in China.

(directed toward sendos- I got a bit carried away)

The Commies were bastards, I'll fully admit that. I'm saying it was a case between picking the lesser of two evils. The Communists obviously won out. There was actually an effort to create a "third" party by Ching-ling (the only non-corrupt, truly patriotic Soong sister) and Dr. Sun Yat-Sen. Sun Yat-Sen was horrible incompetent at politics however, because he was too naive, plus he died early, so the warlord Yuan quickly seized the opportunity and took over Beijing, the seat of "official power" and forced the powerless Sun to give up to Yuan. Afterwards, they continued, but their hopes were repeatedly defeated by Chiang (which ironically ultimately caused his downfall).

I can see that you clearly dislike modern China. I'm not surprised. The way the media twists it, it seems like China is evil, with their "great firewall of China" and their evil prisons and Tibet and ARRG!! I'M GOING TO KILL THOSE SOBS!!

Well, some hard facts (I'm assuming you're American, right? I am too!):
America jails more people than any other country. We have 5% of the world population, but we have 22% of the world's prisoners!
Well, you say, what about China?
The US has 686 inmates per 100,000. China? A mere 111.
Well, there goes the myth that China is a crazy jailer!
Then, you say, China executes more people then anyone else! Right?
While that's completely true, guess who else shares the top 4 list? Good o' US of A!
Plus we run over 20 secret prisons. Everyone's heard of Guantanamo, but that's just the tip of the iceberg!
Not to mention the PATRIOT ACT, phone tapping, the ban on flag burning, the fact that the government can take your property away... and then give it to companies for money, (they exploit a loophole which says private property can be confiscated and compensated if it is used for public purposes. The government says raising money for itself is a "public purpose".

China has good reasons to control it's social freedom while it develops it's economy. If all of a sudden China became a democracy, there would be chaos like never before. It could become as crazy as the great 1920s and 1930s- when the corrupt KMT army massacred innocents for their food, when the political party tore itself apart, where there were shootings between parties every day, as the common people suffered. China is slowly liberalizing itself, slowly but surely. Tian'anmen square massacre would be unthinkable today.

As for China's pollution problems, sure, China just recently surpassed us in emissions, but have you consider the fact that per person, the average Chinese citizen pollutes 25% of what the average US citizen does? I mean, the US absolutely CANNOT take the high ground on pollution- it is the ultimate hypocrisy to point to China and say, Hey! Stop polluting so much! When we pollute 4 times as much as they do! And don't forget, we send our junk over there to China! Have you wondered where your high tech waste goes, yes, the stuff with heavy metals, toxins, and mercury? IT GOES TO CHINA!!! The poor people there are paid to risk their health to disassemble our computers we don't want and throw it away! The soil there had levels of mercury tens of times higher then the acceptable limit... because we treat the rest of the world as our landfill!!

And you think the Chinese history was bloody, vicious, and gory? Wait till you hear about this one! This country was founded by a bunch of people from another continent who wanted a better life. However, there was a problem. There were already people living on where their "own land" was! So, these people found a solution: First, spread deadly diseases to them so our job is easier (obviously this wasn't intentional, but still, it killed millions, so it deserves a mention). Next, lets go and kill them all!! YESS!! KILL! OUR LAND, YOU SOBS!!! GET OFF OUR LAND!!! I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE FACT YOU'VE BEEN LIVING ON IT FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, WE HAVE WHITE SKIN AND YOURS IS TAN, PLUS WE HAVE GUNS!! SO IT'S OUR LAND!! GET OFF!! DIE!! DIE!! DIIIEEE!!!
Guess which country?
Did you know we invented scalping, not the Native Americans? That's right! Plus we had bounties on everyone- Grandmothers, mothers, fathers, youngsters, and even newborns. The horror stories about Native Americans scalping colonists seem more justified now, don't they?
We basically committed genocide! There were millions and millions of Native Americans, and now? Oh, hundreds of thousands, a million at most. But hey! Look at those bloody CHINESE! They built the f&*^ing Great Wall and killed people! Now THEY'RE some REAL BAD PEOPLE!!!

...

I have nothing else to say to you hypocrites

EDIT: Ok, I see your location is Australia. Same things apply: China per person emissions are FAR lower then Australia's. Australia's current inhabitants basically committed genocide in their quest to get rid of the Aboriginals. Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY, can take the high-and-mightily righteous road in history, even Buddhists! (They killed Taoists in China, who killed Buddhists, who killed Taoists,.. you get the idea)

(directed toward sendos- I got a bit carried away)

The Commies were bastards, I'll fully admit that. I'm saying it was a case between picking the lesser of two evils. The Communists obviously won out. There was actually an effort to create a "third" party by Ching-ling (the only non-corrupt, truly patriotic Soong sister) and Dr. Sun Yat-Sen. Sun Yat-Sen was horrible incompetent at politics however, because he was too naive, plus he died early, so the warlord Yuan quickly seized the opportunity and took over Beijing, the seat of "official power" and forced the powerless Sun to give up to Yuan. Afterwards, they continued, but their hopes were repeatedly defeated by Chiang (which ironically ultimately caused his downfall).

I can see that you clearly dislike modern China. I'm not surprised. The way the media twists it, it seems like China is evil, with their "great firewall of China" and their evil prisons and Tibet and ARRG!! I'M GOING TO KILL THOSE SOBS!!

Well, some hard facts (I'm assuming you're American, right? I am too!):
America jails more people than any other country. We have 5% of the world population, but we have 22% of the world's prisoners!
Well, you say, what about China?
The US has 686 inmates per 100,000. China? A mere 111.
Well, there goes the myth that China is a crazy jailer!
Then, you say, China executes more people then anyone else! Right?
While that's completely true, guess who else shares the top 4 list? Good o' US of A!
Plus we run over 20 secret prisons. Everyone's heard of Guantanamo, but that's just the tip of the iceberg!
Not to mention the PATRIOT ACT, phone tapping, the ban on flag burning, the fact that the government can take your property away... and then give it to companies for money, (they exploit a loophole which says private property can be confiscated and compensated if it is used for public purposes. The government says raising money for itself is a "public purpose".

China has good reasons to control it's social freedom while it develops it's economy. If all of a sudden China became a democracy, there would be chaos like never before. It could become as crazy as the great 1920s and 1930s- when the corrupt KMT army massacred innocents for their food, when the political party tore itself apart, where there were shootings between parties every day, as the common people suffered. China is slowly liberalizing itself, slowly but surely. Tian'anmen square massacre would be unthinkable today.

As for China's pollution problems, sure, China just recently surpassed us in emissions, but have you consider the fact that per person, the average Chinese citizen pollutes 25% of what the average US citizen does? I mean, the US absolutely CANNOT take the high ground on pollution- it is the ultimate hypocrisy to point to China and say, Hey! Stop polluting so much! When we pollute 4 times as much as they do! And don't forget, we send our junk over there to China! Have you wondered where your high tech waste goes, yes, the stuff with heavy metals, toxins, and mercury? IT GOES TO CHINA!!! The poor people there are paid to risk their health to disassemble our computers we don't want and throw it away! The soil there had levels of mercury tens of times higher then the acceptable limit... because we treat the rest of the world as our landfill!!

And you think the Chinese history was bloody, vicious, and gory? Wait till you hear about this one! This country was founded by a bunch of people from another continent who wanted a better life. However, there was a problem. There were already people living on where their "own land" was! So, these people found a solution: First, spread deadly diseases to them so our job is easier (obviously this wasn't intentional, but still, it killed millions, so it deserves a mention). Next, lets go and kill them all!! YESS!! KILL! OUR LAND, YOU SOBS!!! GET OFF OUR LAND!!! I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE FACT YOU'VE BEEN LIVING ON IT FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, WE HAVE WHITE SKIN AND YOURS IS TAN, PLUS WE HAVE GUNS!! SO IT'S OUR LAND!! GET OFF!! DIE!! DIE!! DIIIEEE!!!
Guess which country?
Did you know we invented scalping, not the Native Americans? That's right! Plus we had bounties on everyone- Grandmothers, mothers, fathers, youngsters, and even newborns. The horror stories about Native Americans scalping colonists seem more justified now, don't they?
We basically committed genocide! There were millions and millions of Native Americans, and now? Oh, hundreds of thousands, a million at most. But hey! Look at those bloody CHINESE! They built the f&*^ing Great Wall and killed people! Now THEY'RE some REAL BAD PEOPLE!!!

...

I have nothing else to say to you hypocrites

Not everyone disagrees with you.
Anyway, every stage of every civ in the world has done it's own share of bad things.
I'm just really sick of western nations nagging at eastern nations without regard of their history compared to our history.


The world sucks, and we have to deal with it :mad:

Ancient China was no different. When the Great Wall was being built, about 25 million people died making it and they were slave laborers. So I would say the Wall is paved with skulls.

Which Great Wall are you talking about? The one redesigned and improved by the Qin Dynasty, or the new shiny one (relatively) constructed by the Ming Dynasty? Roughly estimated, the Qin Dynasty had a population of around 30-40 million while the Ming had around 100 million.

Unless around 5/6 or 5/8 of the Qin population or 1/4th of the Ming population died on the great wall.... :mischief:

Unless you are referring to not just the major projects but to ALL the dynasties across time who have spent manpower building or constructing portions of the Great Wall...

So what time period are you talking about?

And you obviously don't keep in touch with the scandals of the former President of Taiwan ;)

And you obviously don't keep in touch with the scandals of the former President of Taiwan ;)


Oh yeah. Chen Shui-bian is a total moron.
I am SO happy the DPP is not leading Taiwan anymore. Otherwise, cross-strait relations would be awful, and there would be tons of embezzelment, corruption...

Which Great Wall are you talking about? The one redesigned and improved by the Qin Dynasty, or the new shiny one (relatively) constructed by the Ming Dynasty? Roughly estimated, the Qin Dynasty had a population of around 30-40 million while the Ming had around 100 million.

Unless around 5/6 or 5/8 of the Qin population or 1/4th of the Ming population died on the great wall.... :mischief:

Unless you are referring to not just the major projects but to ALL the dynasties across time who have spent manpower building or constructing portions of the Great Wall...

So what time period are you talking about?

And you obviously don't keep in touch with the scandals of the former President of Taiwan ;)

I'm talking about when the Great Wall was built, not upgraded. I forgot the name of the emperor, I think it was Qin. When China first realized the Mongols were a great Threat. I'm not familiar with China's ancient history, but thanks the "as it happened" war documentaries about China's form of communism, Communist China had a huge army of about 3 million, and lots died whilst walking over those mudplains. That was really stupid when they decided to slide down a mountain on their journey and many died from falling off hidden cliffs.
>now reverting to a calm state about China<
The Chinese have to handle a billion people. Perhaps communism works for countries with a huge population. Their army would be like 100 million people. America believes that democracy is the only government that works, well true, since most of the world is using it. Right now, it feels like there's only 3 types of government:
Democracy: majority of the world
Communism: CHina, North Korea, formerly Russia and Cuba.
Fachism (extreme right wing): not sure which countries.

I'm talking about when the Great Wall was built, not upgraded. I forgot the name of the emperor, I think it was Qin. When China first realized the Mongols were a great Threat. I'm not familiar with China's ancient history, but thanks the "as it happened" war documentaries about China's form of communism, Communist China had a huge army of about 3 million, and lots died whilst walking over those mudplains. That was really stupid when they decided to slide down a mountain on their journey and many died from falling off hidden cliffs.
>now reverting to a calm state about China<
The Chinese have to handle a billion people. Perhaps communism works for countries with a huge population. Their army would be like 100 million people. America believes that democracy is the only government that works, well true, since most of the world is using it. Right now, it feels like there's only 3 types of government:
Democracy: majority of the world
Communism: CHina, North Korea, formerly Russia and Cuba.
Fachism (extreme right wing): not sure which countries.

I like to classify governments by their method of administration, not ideology. IMHO there are four main types - liberal (United States, Australia, etc) and illiberal democracy (Russia, Pakistan, Lebanon etc), oligarchy (PRC, Egypt, Vietnam, etc) and dictatorship (North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc).

The early PLA mainly conducts guerrila warfare, because of the small number of its soldiers and lack of equipments. It was only after World War II that the PLA became something like a regular army. It grew from a million soldiers in 1945 to four million in 1949. I've never heard about PLA soldiers sliding down cliffs but AFAIK the PLA (after 1945) were not too worried about limiting casualties in war due to China's large population - their strength until very recently was almost totally in manpower, not equipment.

And yes, it was Qin Shi Huang who originally ordered the "Great Wall" built. There were already several smaller wall sections along the northern border, to make it harder for northern nomads (who were not Mongols at this time but rather mainly Xiongnu or related tribes) to get into China AND to carry out the booty, to discourage them from invading. Emperor Qin is generally considered to be one of the most ruthless and cruel of all of China's rulers, a paranoid, egoistic tyrant who burned books and buried scholars. Despite all that he's still revered, because he ended the War and unified China. Throughout Chinese history there is the constant struggle for unity and, when that is achieved, stability and security to retain that unity.

Communism perhaps worked (to an extent) for China because Chinese society is traditionally a collective one. There are long lists of popular "revolutionary" peasant rebellions in Chinese history but no real democratic tradition. The current CCP is modelling itself nicely after the traditional Chinese role of the benevolent Emperor with the Mandate of Heaven. China's one democratic experiment during the early 20th century dissolved into a period of warlord rule. This is not to say democracy is incompatible with Chinese society, of course - look at Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore.

I'm just really sick of western nations nagging at eastern nations without regard of their history compared to our history.


The world sucks, and we have to deal with it :mad:
Are you going to now attempt to perpetuate the myth that Western civilization is responsible for all the problems in the world, or even all the problems in the Far Eastern world? :rolleyes:

I like to classify governments by their method of administration, not ideology. IMHO there are four main types - liberal (United States, Australia, etc) and illiberal democracy (Russia, Pakistan, Lebanon etc), oligarchy (PRC, Egypt, Vietnam, etc) and dictatorship (North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc).

The early PLA mainly conducts guerrila warfare, because of the small number of its soldiers and lack of equipments. It was only after World War II that the PLA became something like a regular army. It grew from a million soldiers in 1945 to four million in 1949. I've never heard about PLA soldiers sliding down cliffs but AFAIK the PLA (after 1945) were not too worried about limiting casualties in war due to China's large population - their strength until very recently was almost totally in manpower, not equipment.

And yes, it was Qin Shi Huang who originally ordered the "Great Wall" built. There were already several smaller wall sections along the northern border, to make it harder for northern nomads (who were not Mongols at this time but rather mainly Xiongnu or related tribes) to get into China AND to carry out the booty, to discourage them from invading. Emperor Qin is generally considered to be one of the most ruthless and cruel of all of China's rulers, a paranoid, egoistic tyrant who burned books and buried scholars. Despite all that he's still revered, because he ended the War and unified China. Throughout Chinese history there is the constant struggle for unity and, when that is achieved, stability and security to retain that unity.

Communism perhaps worked (to an extent) for China because Chinese society is traditionally a collective one. There are long lists of popular "revolutionary" peasant rebellions in Chinese history but no real democratic tradition. The current CCP is modelling itself nicely after the traditional Chinese role of the benevolent Emperor with the Mandate of Heaven. China's one democratic experiment during the early 20th century dissolved into a period of warlord rule. This is not to say democracy is incompatible with Chinese society, of course - look at Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore.

I agree with your analogy of government by administration, but I'll need to know more about oligarchy and iliberal governments. I heard that Singapore is non-communist yet they partially have a planned economy.

Are you going to now attempt to perpetuate the myth that Western civilization is responsible for all the problems in the world, or even all the problems in the Far Eastern world?
Well, America has done some pretty awful things, such as nuking Japan and defoliating Vietnam, you gotta agree.

Back to topic: yes, Qui Shi Huang was bloody cruel. Before he died, he wanted his tomb to have a terracotta army to protect him, that was crazy; and when he died, the workers built the tomb and were buried in the tomb as well. Does that sound familiar to communism, regardless that it had not been invented yet? In fact, it relates to dictatorship, which has a few links to communism.
Anyway, how does China grow in population so fast anyway?:confused: It's astonishing...each family must have had about 10 children.

I agree with your analogy of government by administration, but I'll need to know more about oligarchy and iliberal governments. I heard that Singapore is non-communist yet they partially have a planned economy.

http://fareedzakaria.com/ARTICLES/other/democracy.html

Here's an excerpt

Democratically elected regimes, often ones that have been reelected or reaffirmed through referenda, are routinely ignoring constitutional limits on their power and depriving their citizens of basic rights and freedoms. From Peru to the Palestinian Authority, from Sierra Leone to Slovakia, from Pakistan to the Philippines, we see the rise of a disturbing phenomenon in international life -- illiberal democracy.

It has been difficult to recognize this problem because for almost a century in the West, democracy has meant liberal democracy -- a political system marked not only by free and fair elections, but also by the rule of law, a separation of powers, and the protection of basic liberties of speech, assembly, religion, and property. In fact, this latter bundle of freedoms -- what might be termed constitutional liberalism -- is theoretically different and historically distinct from democracy. As the political scientist Philippe Schmitter has pointed out, "Liberalism, either as a conception of political liberty, or as a doctrine about economic policy, may have coincided with the rise of democracy. But it has never been immutably or unambiguously linked to its practice." Today the two strands of liberal democracy, interwoven in the Western political fabric, are coming apart in the rest of the world. Democracy is flourishing; constitutional liberalism is not.

Today, 118 of the world's 193 countries are democratic, encompassing a majority of its people (54.8 percent, to be exact), a vast increase from even a decade ago. In this season of victory, one might have expected Western statesmen and intellectuals to go one further than E. M. Forster and give a rousing three cheers for democracy. Instead there is a growing unease at the rapid spread of multiparty elections across south-central Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America, perhaps because of what happens after the elections. Popular leaders like Russia's Boris Yeltsin and Argentina's Carlos Menem bypass their parliaments and rule by presidential decree, eroding basic constitutional
practices. The Iranian parliament -- elected more freely than most in the Middle East -- imposes harsh restrictions on speech, assembly, and even dress, diminishing that country's already meager supply of liberty. Ethiopia's elected government turns its security forces on journalists and political opponents, doing permanent damage to human rights (as well as human beings).

Naturally there is a spectrum of illiberal democracy, ranging from modest offenders like Argentina to near-tyrannies like Kazakstan and Belarus, with countries like Romania and Bangladesh in between. Along much of the spectrum, elections are rarely as free and fair as in the West today, but they do reflect the reality of popular participation in politics and support for those elected. And the examples are not isolated or atypical.

Back to topic: yes, Qui Shi Huang was bloody cruel. Before he died, he wanted his tomb to have a terracotta army to protect him, that was crazy; and when he died, the workers built the tomb and were buried in the tomb as well. Does that sound familiar to communism, regardless that it had not been invented yet? In fact, it relates to dictatorship, which has a few links to communism.
Anyway, how does China grow in population so fast anyway?:confused: It's astonishing...each family must have had about 10 children.

In Communism, ideally you wouldn't need an army of slave workers to build a mausoleum because they would willingly build one for their deceased demigod. Dictators like Mao Zedong were both feared and loved. No doubt propaganda has done a lot to cover up Mao's mistakes and exaggerate his achievements, but there are people who genuinely admired Mao, even today when the CCP admits he was "30% wrong".

On population, China traditionally has a large share of population because of its geography. There are historical/cultural reasons too. Being a largely agricultural society means large families dominate until recently. Mao Zedong believed large families are essential for economic growth and security and encouraged people to have children. Nowadays China has a One-Child Policy which means people are encouraged/pressured/forced to various degrees to have only one child although there are exceptions (some rural farmers, single children, ethnic minorities).

Well, America has done some pretty awful things, such as nuking Japan and defoliating Vietnam, you gotta agree.
I'm not attempting to whitewash America's record in the affairs of other countries, nor will I try to do so for Europe. But saying that all of the issues that pervade the Far East or have ever done so are the fault of the West is intellectually bankrupt.

As for the decision to nuke Japan, it was probably a lot better for everyone involved than attempting to launch Operation Olympic in 1946 with the attendant huge destruction for both Japan and the United States. The only people who would have really benefited from not dropping the A-bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima would have been the Soviet Union, who could easily have popped in on the sly and snagged Hokkaido and/or the entirety of Korea, not to mention an even more vastly improved position in China.

'm not attempting to whitewash America's record in the affairs of other countries, nor will I try to do so for Europe. But saying that all of the issues that pervade the Far East or have ever done so are the fault of the West is intellectually bankrupt.

As for the decision to nuke Japan, it was probably a lot better for everyone involved than attempting to launch Operation Olympic in 1946 with the attendant huge destruction for both Japan and the United States. The only people who would have really benefited from not dropping the A-bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima would have been the Soviet Union, who could easily have popped in on the sly and snagged Hokkaido and/or the entirety of Korea, not to mention an even more vastly improved position in China.

I disagree. How about requesting a conditional surrender after dropping one Atomic bomb in not so populated region ?

The Atomic bombs was a warcrime.

Ah the old "could've bombed a remote island" argument. No matter how many times it's crushed it always comes back.

Nope, one atomic bomb, even on a mountain wouldn't have worked. Remember, even after the first bomb, even though it obliterated Nagasaki, the Japanese still didn't surrender. They were almost willing to fight to the death, until they found that America had more bombs and could have turned Japan into a glowing wasteland without any harm to themselves. So they surrendered.

And as for the West causing all of Asia's problems, etc. that's definitely not true, but you have to admit history is bias toward the West for sure. I was just really angry with that post because someone accused the Far East of being horrible and bloody, without acknowledging at all the far greater damage the West has caused in some areas (of course, this is open to debate, but I think it is generally agreed that it is so.). In my opinion, the downfall of the East to the West in the 1800s and 1900s was because of (a) bad timing (Qing empire collapsing, Opium, the crazy empress dowager Cixi), (b) because the East was far less competitive and chaotic then the West, which caused the West to develop better military technology (the East had better economic technology, though- the Chinese were self sufficient and the reason why the Brits introduced opium was to make up for their huge losses to Chinese goods, plus the East's economy was larger at the time), and (c) the East reacted terribly to the West, except for Japan.

Ah the old "could've bombed a remote island" argument. No matter how many times it's crushed it always comes back.

yes like your approval for gun "rights" no matter how many times i post those statistics you continue to support your view on it by ignoring whatever i said.

@jungmo the key word here is conditional (surrender).

yes like your approval for gun "rights" no matter how many times i post those statistics you continue to support your view on it by ignoring whatever i said.

Didn't you put me on your ignore list? Or was that Alef?

@jungmo the key word here is conditional (surrender).

But what concessions would you have given Japan? Manchuria? Korea? Taiwan? Let them retain their military machine, their fascist government? Were they willing to give that all up on August 5, 1945? Not quite yet if Tojo was any indication. Of course that all depends on if they are impressed when we blow up an island or whatever with one of only two existing bombs; which I doubt they would be.

Didn't you put me on your ignore list? Or was that Alef? I put you on my troll list , because you admited " I can't discuss anymore now so i am trolling! "

But what concessions would you have given Japan? Manchuria? Korea? Let them retain their military machine, their fascist government? Were they willing to give that all up in August 1945? Not quite I don't think if Tojo was any indication. Of course that all depends on if they are impressed when we blow up an island or whatever which I doubt they would be.

How about Give them a figurehead of an emperor , eh ? It just seems to me that in the scales of things "Showing of our new big toys to the world especially Soviet Union" was pretty high on the Americans scale and reasons for using the bombs. Why don't you admit it ?

http://fareedzakaria.com/ARTICLES/other/democracy.html

Here's an excerpt





In Communism, ideally you wouldn't need an army of slave workers to build a mausoleum because they would willingly build one for their deceased demigod. Dictators like Mao Zedong were both feared and loved. No doubt propaganda has done a lot to cover up Mao's mistakes and exaggerate his achievements, but there are people who genuinely admired Mao, even today when the CCP admits he was "30% wrong".

On population, China traditionally has a large share of population because of its geography. There are historical/cultural reasons too. Being a largely agricultural society means large families dominate until recently. Mao Zedong believed large families are essential for economic growth and security and encouraged people to have children. Nowadays China has a One-Child Policy which means people are encouraged/pressured/forced to various degrees to have only one child although there are exceptions (some rural farmers, single children, ethnic minorities).

Thanks for info on iliberal. I recommend that China should found new towns and cities. Since China, I think, 1/6th of the world's population, spreading the people out would prevent high crime (huge activists and gangs) and it'll clean the streets. Although, the Drawback is that the ecology there would be threatened.

Nope, one atomic bomb, even on a mountain wouldn't have worked. Remember, even after the first bomb, even though it obliterated Nagasaki, the Japanese still didn't surrender. They were almost willing to fight to the death, until they found that America had more bombs and could have turned Japan into a glowing wasteland without any harm to themselves. So they surrendered.

And as for the West causing all of Asia's problems, etc. that's definitely not true, but you have to admit history is bias toward the West for sure. I was just really angry with that post because someone accused the Far East of being horrible and bloody, without acknowledging at all the far greater damage the West has caused in some areas (of course, this is open to debate, but I think it is generally agreed that it is so.). In my opinion, the downfall of the East to the West in the 1800s and 1900s was because of (a) bad timing (Qing empire collapsing, Opium, the crazy empress dowager Cixi), (b) because the East was far less competitive and chaotic then the West, which caused the West to develop better military technology (the East had better economic technology, though- the Chinese were self sufficient and the reason why the Brits introduced opium was to make up for their huge losses to Chinese goods, plus the East's economy was larger at the time), and (c) the East reacted terribly to the West, except for Japan.

Too true. America can get a bit too agressive and to prove it, they've participated in a lot of wars. I'm just appalled when they launched an airstrike in Afghanistan, killing 76 people, 50 of them children. (sarcasm) Well done, America, you've just created more enemies! That mob you saw on TV may become new Taliban recruits. The West is fair to its own people, the East is fair mainly to its neighbouring countries.
Now back to China, their economy is growing rapidly by the day. Since their currency is low, they're encouraging money to enter the country. The reason why their economy was so strong back to the Ancient times was because of the Silk and Spice trade routes into China. If we, pro-democrats, wage war on China, global economy shall fall.
Blame Marx for all his smart but tyrannic political invention of communism. If it weren't for him, what would Russia and China (and other countries) become??

Thanks for info on iliberal. I recommend that China should found new towns and cities. Since China, I think, 1/6th of the world's population, spreading the people out would prevent high crime (huge activists and gangs) and it'll clean the streets. Although, the Drawback is that the ecology there would be threatened.

Now back to China, their economy is growing rapidly by the day. Since their currency is low, they're encouraging money to enter the country. The reason why their economy was so strong back to the Ancient times was because of the Silk and Spice trade routes into China. If we, pro-democrats, wage war on China, global economy shall fall.

The Rural-Urban migration in China is MASSIVE. Around 300 million people (IIRC) are expected to move into urban areas. New cities are growing like mushrooms, especially in places like Zhejiang (and which is why I consider things like the Three Gorges Dam necessary evils, because otherwise all these new cities and industries would be powered by coal). The CCP of course also have a policy of colonisation (Tibet... Xinjiang...) and are actively encouraging Han Chinese to settle in those western provinces.

Some history on China's economy: China was pretty much self-sufficient for most of its history. Goods the Chinese would traditionally trade for are spices, some textile products, and horses. When Europeans trade with China they had to pay in silver - the Chinese for the most part wouldn't except the poor goods the Europeans has to offer in exchange for fine silks and porcelain. The Chinese were big in the spice trade in South East Asia and trade with Japan as well (one of only two nations to be allowed to trade with the Tokugawa Shogunate). It wasn't until the 1800s, military and technological superiority and enough opium smuggled into China to make it a country of drug-addicts that the trade balance shifted in favour of the Europeans.

And as for the West causing all of Asia's problems, etc. that's definitely not true, but you have to admit history is bias toward the West for sure. I was just really angry with that post because someone accused the Far East of being horrible and bloody, without acknowledging at all the far greater damage the West has caused in some areas (of course, this is open to debate, but I think it is generally agreed that it is so.). In my opinion, the downfall of the East to the West in the 1800s and 1900s was because of (a) bad timing (Qing empire collapsing, Opium, the crazy empress dowager Cixi), (b) because the East was far less competitive and chaotic then the West, which caused the West to develop better military technology (the East had better economic technology, though- the Chinese were self sufficient and the reason why the Brits introduced opium was to make up for their huge losses to Chinese goods, plus the East's economy was larger at the time), and (c) the East reacted terribly to the West, except for Japan.

The rise of the West in the 18th - 19th century was, as with a lot in history, the result of many important factors happening at once and a lot of luck (or bad luck, in the case of Asia and Africa). There's no denying that by the 19th century China and other Asian countries has stagnated especially in terms of science and technology, while the West was undergoing unprecedented social, technological, military and political changes at breakneck speed. This is a sentiment felt by many reformist Chinese (and Korean and Japanese) at the time who felt that their country has failed and allowed the Western barbarians to overtake them in technology, in which China led the world for thousands of years.

The West causes a lot of Asia's problems, because it was (and still is) more powerful politically, economically and technologically, and could manipulate Asian affairs at their leisure from the Opium Wars until quite recently. To use China as an example, in true imperialist spirit they smuggle drugs into the country, slowly encroach on Chinese territory and sovereignty, manipulate internal affairs, and funds hostile factions against each other. This came about due to Western dominance/imperialism/demands for trade/greed but also Asian weakness/stagnation/incompetence of people in charge. Several states which adapt to the new world situation retained their sovereignty and strong enough to resist European dominance: Japan, and to lesser extent Siam and Persia.

Now there's many people in the West running scared because of the rise of China... I don't blame them at all, though. In my homeland Korea, for example, many people are completely oblivious to the face that China is researching history to try and prove that the old Gochosun kingdom was actually Chinese, not Korean, which makes you suspect that they've got plans for North Korea. Unfortunately, if they successfully invade North Korea after the regime collapses (as it is inevitable, Kim Jong-il's sons are hopelessly incompetent) then nobody will challenge China, even though everyone else knows that the invasion was completely unjustified and that their new "history" is complete BS. We can just hope they stand up to their "peaceful rise" stance. You have to admit that at least they're trying to be peaceful (kind of :P) more so then when other countries rose.

However, to many Chinese, they view the rise of China as reclaiming their rightful title of most powerful country in the world, after the brief setback of the Westerners. It's actually pretty interesting to see how close China could have been to remaining the premier power. I'm reading Guns, Germs, and Steel (an excellent book) which mentions that China had invented a sort of water driven machine (similar to the steam engine, perhaps), were the number 1 clock manufactures (as well as other machines) and even goes as far as to say that the Chinese therefore stepped back from an industrial revolution because the imperial court decreed it so - in the 1300's!! A good half millennium or so before the European industrial revolution, no? Too bad the imperial court didn't have quite the foresight... but once again, this leads to the fragmentation/ unified argument. If China was broken up into several states, competition would have forced industrialization, causing China to become more advanced, etc, etc.

----------------------
In my opinion, China's economic boom right now is because China is ruled by a stable government (VERY important for foreign investment and confidence in the economy), and because China's labor is very cheap, yet also very skilled, partially because of it's history. Plus, people are excited about China, especially after Deng freed a repressed people from Communism (he did a very good job, I might add). In fact, the economic boom is really quite similar to Korea, Taiwan, and Japan's economic boom (Siam did have a boom, but it was really set back and ruined by the Asian Financial Crisis, whereas Korea and Taiwan are back on track). Everyone knows the story of Japan's boom. Lesser known perhaps is Korea's economic boom. Korea was as poor as Bangladesh in the 1940s and 1950s, and then the Korean war came along, devastating the country (2nd worst event in Korean history, first was the Japanese invasion in 1592). Now it's about as rich as Portugal and Spain, and it's predicted to become one of the richest in the world (Hurrah for Goldman Sachs!). Park Jung Hee controlled the economy and turned Korea into an export based economy. He was extremely competent and basically turned Korea into what it is (plus all the factors helping China right now).

Well, anyhow, Korea and Japan were "democracies", but in fact they were controlled tightly by a dictator/ single party. But now, after the development of their economies, they become full-blown democracies. My point is, won't China undergo a similar process as it becomes wealth too? Korea had a dictator as recently as the 1980s. Japan was (and actually still is) dominated by a single party. Taiwan, too, did not become a democracy until recently. The same pattern shows up in all these countries: economic development came FIRST, THEN democracy. (and for all environmentalists out there, clean industry and eco-friendly practices also came after economic development). So I'm sure that a strong economy is a must to create a real, properly working democracy as well as a clean country. So, China must develop it's economy- I think we should wait for it to become a democracy/ have more freedom.


--------------------------
and as for the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings, it was clear that Japan wouldn't surrender no matter what. Japan brainwashed it's citizens into a "never surrender" mentality- all families were equipped with guns to fight for the homeland, they had their kamikaze pilots (showing that they would rather die and cause more damage then survive and cause less), etc. They would rather fight to the death because it was more honorable, and because of that mentality. And give them concessions? After they killed millions? To me, a Korean, the mere thought is ridiculous. And that also begs the question, why wasn't Japan sliced in half like Germany? Why Korea? And why did Japan get far less harsher treatment then Germany? The emperor who ruled during WWII lived until the 1980s for heavens sake! Why wasn't he executed?? Why were so many war criminals just let go?? That's the difference. Japan wasn't made to feel shame, like Germany. Look at Germany today- learning about the Holocaust is mandatory, they erect museums about it, memorials to it, and wholeheartedly regret the terrible crimes of the Nazis, and I fully respect them for it.

Japan? Learning about the Japanese war crimes has been erased from the school curriculum and textbooks, they erect museums to war criminals, worship those bastards, deny the existence of the medical testing centers (where they performed tests on other East Asians, often killing them) and Nanking and even today there are some extreme right wing people who think that the Japanese Empire should be revived! (of course, in Japan, there are plenty who aren't like that. The people who do the above are often the crazy right wingers. I know there are plenty of people in Japan who disagree, so by no means take this as an attack on the Japanese people, just the nutty ones.)