Letter to Atimes.com
-
Re: Japan's top hawk ruffles China's feathers: the author points out that the Guangming Daily "a popular quality paper among Chinese intellectuals" wrote that one of Japan's newer history textbooks "distorts the antifascist wars by all Asian countries..." I have to wonder which of the Asian countries were conducting antifascist wars? Certainly neither China nor Japan were. Mao Tze-Dong, Chiang Kai-shek, and Japan's Emperor were all heads of fascist imperial regimes, all three of which pushed cults of personality.
-
Given that all three were fascist and engaged in wartime atrocities, then perhaps it's worth looking at which was the least harmful to the common man. If one looks at Japan's colonies, then surely Japan's welfare schemes, respect for private property, reasonably liberal economic policies, and generally incorruptible police forces provided the best in terms of state services for the citizen. And, in Taiwan at least, all persons on the island were eligible for citizen status and given two years to make their decision.
With the entry of Chiang Kai-shek's forces to Taiwan, the almost inevitable massacring of civilians took place; this being de rigeur with Chinese warlords. Following this he deliberately wiped out the local currency and engaged in a massive expropriation of property. This was followed however by installation of a demi-liberal economic regime and forty years of redbaiting, creating a sort of Chilean ambience of climbing prosperity offset by the disappearance of students and dissidents.
With Mao, however, in addition to garden-variety massacres, wiping out the currency, and expropriating everyone's property, there was the addition of the wholesale massacring of social echelons (the landlord class), an economic policy which deliberately impoverished the public, and then massive social upheaval caused by the serial witch-hunts favored by ideologues everywhere (Pol Pot, the Catholic Inquisition, etc).
None of these fascist regimes were optimal, and talk of antifascist wars is lunatic. So surely the positing of China's warlords and emperors-in-training as anti-fascist is a sort of Orwellian humor designed to distract readers from the fascist regime cum oligarchy installed at home in China. And surely the mindless parroting of these and other shibolleths is a sign of a counter-quality paper.
Biff Cappuccino
Given that all three were fascist and engaged in wartime atrocities, then perhaps it's worth looking at which was the least harmful to the common man. If one looks at Japan's colonies, then surely Japan's welfare schemes, respect for private property, reasonably liberal economic policies, and generally incorruptible police forces provided the best in terms of state services for the citizen. And, in Taiwan at least, all persons on the island were eligible for citizen status and given two years to make their decision.
With the entry of Chiang Kai-shek's forces to Taiwan, the almost inevitable massacring of civilians took place; this being de rigeur with Chinese warlords. Following this he deliberately wiped out the local currency and engaged in a massive expropriation of property. This was followed however by installation of a demi-liberal economic regime and forty years of redbaiting, creating a sort of Chilean ambience of climbing prosperity offset by the disappearance of students and dissidents.
With Mao, however, in addition to garden-variety massacres, wiping out the currency, and expropriating everyone's property, there was the addition of the wholesale massacring of social echelons (the landlord class), an economic policy which deliberately impoverished the public, and then massive social upheaval caused by the serial witch-hunts favored by ideologues everywhere (Pol Pot, the Catholic Inquisition, etc).
None of these fascist regimes were optimal, and talk of antifascist wars is lunatic. So surely the positing of China's warlords and emperors-in-training as anti-fascist is a sort of Orwellian humor designed to distract readers from the fascist regime cum oligarchy installed at home in China. And surely the mindless parroting of these and other shibolleths is a sign of a counter-quality paper.
Biff Cappuccino
No comments:
Post a Comment