I think one big difference was that Chiang Ching-Kuo was never aloof compared to his father. Although he did many brutal things to those who purely politically opposed him, he was willing to have technocrats to vigorously debate in front of him on what would be good for the development of Taiwan. He also always tried to make himself approachable when visiting different communities. Even if people in Taiwan didn't completely like Chiang Ching-Kuo, they tolerated him orders of magnitude more than his father and therefore avoid saying anything negative in memory of him.
That being said, my mom was in some shock and fear when she was living in the United States and suddenly heard on the news that Henry Liu was murdered.
@@allentchang well henry liu is something that the US would do. its only big news because it was done by tiny KMT taiwan. Henry Liu, being a former agent of ROC intelligence and defecting to the US with classified info of the ROC intelligence? sure to gain their wrath.
Something that is unclear to me. Before ROC fled to Taiwan, what was the population of Taiwan? Were these native Taiwanese sympathetic to ROC, or were they indifferent? Was the tension or source of division due to between "Taiwan" people and Chiang Kai-Shek/Chiang Ching-Kuo basically the native Taiwan vs fleeing mainland China ROC people ("mainlanders")?
@@lordbacon4972 I wouldn't use the term "native Taiwanese" because that would only cause confusion. Before the ROC fled to Taiwan, Taiwan's population was composed of Hokkien Han Chinese, Hakka Han Chinese, and the indigenous population related to the Polynesians. The majority population was Hokkien and they considered their form of Hokkien language "Taiwanese" just like the Dutch who settled in South Africa called their language "Afrikaans" (to the chargin of the indigenous population of course). Since the Hokkien, Hakka, and everyone else from Taiwan settled in the island at various points of its history, to say that the Hokkien and Hakka settlers weren't originally from the "mainland" would be misleading. Calling the 1949 refugees "mainlanders" is convenient, but confusing. I did see one writer advocating that they should be called the 49ers instead of mainlanders. Many of the mainlanders may have come from the Jiangnan/Shanghai/Jiangzhe region, especially when the ROC capital was in Nanjing before the relocation to Taiwan. Additionally, many of the refugee ships travelled between Shanghai and Keelung (except the ill-fated Taiping cruise liner whose tragedy could be compared to the Titanic in a horrible night to remember).
@@allentchang Thanks for the clarifications! What I'm trying to understand is, were the indigenous Taiwanese pro-ROC or pro-PRC prior to the 49ers arriving? (or neither/indifferent) I'm guessing there was resentment toward Chiang Kai-Shek since the peace/life in Taiwan was ruined by his arrival. And he basically took power of Taiwan by force (no one in Taiwan could challenge his military), and not because he was welcomed there. Hence the reason for the indigenous' dislike of him.
The 228 incident wasn't even necessarily Chiang's fault. Chen Yi, was the one sent to administer the island in 1945 as the Provincial Executive and his policies was what lead to the 228 Incident. After 228, he was dismissed from his position and the provincial executive office was reorganized as a provincial government with a new post of Governor/Chairman to administer the island specifically without any military power. As for elections, Chiang Ching-kuo was not the one who started elections in Taiwan. Chiang Kai-shek was the one who started local elections in Taiwan, to the LARGE DISAGREEMENT by party members. The first elected mayors of Taipei and Taichung were not KMT members. 'National Elections' were also restarted under Chiang Kai-shek in 1966 when the Temporary provisions were amended to allow reelections for delegates in areas under Central Government control. Chiang Ching-kuo only continued and evolved that policy by steadily increasing the representation of Taiwanese delegates in the National Government as the old Mainland delegates retired. People only focus on the national government and ignore the local government elections which were very real from the very beginning. The National Government must be viewed from the perspective that it was legally speaking the government for China as a whole (it was elected by the populace in 1946/1947). It would not be proper to just replace all mainland representatives with just Taiwanese Representatives (Taiwan had its own representatives within the National Government). It was eventually done, but that was because it was necessary to continue effective governance after the original representatives started retiring. You can't run a country with a legislation/national assembly of a couple dozen people. The local governments has always had its own government and elections from the Provincial level and down.
After being dismissed, Chen Yi was placed as chairman of Zhejiang, where he planned to defect to the communist. He was busted, flown to Taiwan, and executed for treason.
@@risannd True, he was executed for treason, but he was relieved of his duties in Taiwan due to 228. The provincial government was also reorganized to try to alleviate the situation. Stirring up dissent was NOT in the interests of the KMT.
228 wasn't chen yi's fault either. The bad guys of 228 were the Taiwan Independence rioters, not the KMT. My great-uncle personally witnessed a lot of massacre of Mainland expat civilians in Taiwan by Taiwan Separatists dressing up as Japanese soldiers before the KMT crackdown came to punish them. These murderers deserved what they got. They weren't innocent protesters as the DPP portrays them. US intelligence documents reveal that these murderers have been consistently sabotaging KMT rule of Taiwan and messing things up since 1945.
People forget that the Chiangs were still fighting the Communists, who by then already established a reputation of being pervasive and sneaky, and assume that going full democracy overnight will solve every and all problems. And saying the above will probably get me branded as an authoritarianism worshipper 😁
@@dy031101 I doubt anyone will a brain will say that,though many fail to understand the cultural differences,some cultures under some circumstances live better under authoritarianism.
All these philosophies of communism have already been proven wrong. China already sees the full benefits of it, and it's fine if they want to be more social. What's left is people at the top want to keep grappling to power. It was still fine when Xi still had term limits and got rid of a whole generation of cronyism, but now that he's the leader for life.... he just ushered in a whole new wave of cronyism.
I don’t see 228 as flaws of chiang Kai shek’s flaws. There’s more to him than 228, which by itself is a very complex issue. He defended Taiwan from the mainland and is my hero.
asianometry That’s fair. I identify more with the military spirit he instilled during my parent’s generation though. The marching songs. The call to arms. Fighting to the death against Japan during the second sino Japanese wR
Not to mention, the 228 wasn't even necessarily his fault. Chen Yi, was the one sent to administer the island in 1945 as the Provincial Executive and his policies was what lead to the 228 Incident. After 228, he was dismissed from his position and the provincial executive office was reorganized as a provincial government.
@@Asianometry my great uncle, a Hoklo of southern taiwan, was there to witness 228. Guess what, it wasn't KMT soldiers massacring Taiwanese opposition. It's the opposite. It was Imperial Japanese Military veterans of Taiwan that went around killing Mainlander civilians in Taiwan first. My great-uncle in the Kaohsiung Railway Station personally saw how these Taiwanese Japan Army veterans would go around, asking everyone they came across if you can speak Hokkien or Japanese. If you couldn't then you were automatically a "Mainlander" and then they stabbed you with a sword. DPP weeps alligator tears crying for how these "protesters" were killed by KMT. Yet, even including those missing and a high compensation incentive for those who speak out, official Taiwanese government statistics today is still only max 858 Taiwanese ppl lost or killed during 228, far from the exaggerated tens of thousands of innocent civilians. Why a few hundred killed? because it was exactly these few hundred that went around committing war crimes by slaughtering civilians.
When I first arrived here in Taiwan (I'm from the UK originally), Chiang Ching-kuo was often called 'The Good Dictator' in the region's English-language news media. But still, democracy is much better. I've also written a book about this process you may be interested in,: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eRu6L5rEMOU.html
Chiang Ching-Kuo was not the man behind Taiwan's democracy. Ching-kuo had no choice since democracy became more and more popular on the island and he was basically forced to give up his power to Lee Teng-Hui, who democratized the nation.
He wasn't forced. He died. He chose Lee because he was fooled by him. Lee undermined Taiwan's democracy by allowing Chen to rig the 2000 election. Lee turned Taiwan into a republic that he could manipulate so that he could be a long term dictator. The only reason he did not run in 2000 was because the US would not allow it.
Actually, he did in fact make a lot of those decisions. Yes, Taiwanese were beginning to push the limits and the writing was the on the wall, but it was Kuo's decision to begin meetings with the Dangwai, lift martial law and restrictions on the media. I'd also note it was Kuo that set Lee up to lead the liberalization process after his death. Had he not made these decisions things could have easily become violent.
@@lerch60 It was his decisions yes, but the situation during Chiang Ching-kuo's rule was very different than that of Chiang Kai-shek's rule. Under Chiang Kai-shek it was still a period of warfare and tensions were high, necessitating Martial Law (There were still large scale fighting over territories in the mainland region throughout the 50s, and conflict along the Burmese border persisted through the 60s). Under Chiang Ching-kuo, cross-strait relations began improving in the 1980s and cross straight travel and correspondence was allowed again. PEACE was what allowed the lifting of Martial Law. If fighting restarted between the two sides, Martial Law would be enforced again regardless who was in office, and that goes for today. Meetings with Dangwai has always been allowed. Elections under Chiang Kai-shek has always allowed for independents, the first elected mayors of Taipei and Taichung in 1950/1951 were all Independents. Many of the 'democraticising' process Chiang Ching-kuo 'started' begun under Chiang Kai-shek. Local Elections were begun in the 1950s, and the Temporary Provisions was amended in 1966 to allow releections in the National Government.
Lee was one of those fools who thought that people will rationally decide what's best for them and compromise with others so that everyone gets what they want in a civilized manner if just completely left to their own devices, which didn't really end up coming to pass as Taiwanese sense of civic duty turned out to be insufficiently developed. Chiang Ching-Kuo thought the lesson of the CCP turning the Mainland Red with the promise of immediate peace and prosperity but ending up giving the Mainlanders the Korean War, famines, Suppression of the "Right-Wing", and Cultural Revolution still remained clear at the time and therefore made the mistake of assuming that Lee knows better than in reality. Instead we ended up with a population that is largely just interested in political dramas and occasional grandstanding. I am frankly less and less sure of Taiwanese ability to distinguish between different political systems but just what "race" is on top.
He may loosen the restrictions on politics due to he realized that democracy is what people want, but he is definitely not the man behind Taiwan's democracy. In 1970s, some political prisoner sent a list via foreigners in Taiwan, that list shocked the free world 'cause it tells people who were prisoned by the KMT, and Chiang Chin Kuo should be responsible for political suppress in the 1950-1960s due to he was in charge of intelligence agencies and killed many innocent people during white terror. He did allow to have wider range of politics, but talked about democracy reform in Taiwan, he's not the one, Lee ting hui and many democratic leader are those who behind Taiwan's democracy.
Though I am a centred leftist and fan of communist stalin marx engels lenin but I admire chiang Kai shek and chiang kuo because of them Taiwan is developed mao is more revisionist than khurschkev because he allied with usa against ussr
If kmt ruled china today it would have been a peaceful place not imperialist india china would have been friends we wouldn't loose aksai chin dalailama would be in china
KMT tried it by policing China with KMT army leading to internal war. KMT did not anticipate the collective power of the peasants where the communists succeeded in to turn them into army of peasants.
@@thornados4969 China was in a state of internal war long before the KMT came into power. The basis for the Warlord Era came into place during Taiping Rebellion when the Qing Government began allowing the provincial governments to raise their own armies.
@@taoliu3949 The China is formed from never ending wars in Chinese history. The territories had been changing from dynasty to dynasty. There were many rebellions against the Qing not only Taiping. But it was the Xinhai Revolution 辛亥革命, a republican revolution which overthrew the Qing dynasty and led to the establishment of the Republic of China. KMT was the ruling party of ROC.
@@thornados4969 Just because there were wars doesn't mean society is unstable. The Qing had a period of political stability and posperity during Kangxi Yongzheng and Qianlong. After Qianlong China began a long period of degration that culminated with the Opium Wars and Taiping Rebellion, during which the weakened Central Government allowed Provincial governments to raise their own armies. This is what created the conditions for further rebellions and eventually the Xinhai Revolution and Warlord Era. And no, KMT wasn't the "ruling party" in 1912. Yuan Shikai and his Beiyang Army was the ruling faction. His downfall and death created a vacuum of power that basically collapsed whatever sense of Central authority that was left in China until the nominal "unification" by the KMT in 1928. And even then, it was still a Warlord system wearing a different dress because you can't just fix what was 100+ years of decentralization and disability in 10. Power was more centralized and the State was more stable compared to the Warlord Era, but still far from even what things were like before the collapse of the Qing. The Communists succeeded for the same reasons why the Qing collapsed. Long years of war and instability (WWII) pushed China again to collapse of whatever level of growth and stability the KMT managed to build during their tenure.
@@taoliu3949 The communists were KMT members too but they betrayed the KMT and its government ROC in China. Treason is a crime if you betrayed the country.
