So yeah. Rome Part III is dead. Here's why. I worked on the damn idea for three months, but sometimes these things are just dead ends. ua-cam.com/video/3unEvQ3uKrM/v-deo.html
I'm the guy who suggested if Brennus Sacked Rome, I've got more Alt history ideas for you. What if the Mongols discovered America by going through Russia into Alaska? What if the Rurikids stayed true to Rurik's original goal and never adopted Slavic culture and religion instead trying to Germanify the region and establish an Eastern Norse realm? What if the British Celts defeated the Anglo Saxons? What if Atilla the Hun didn't die early?
I’m about to end these Chinese people on this video 动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution
@@honkamania1174I can't say for younger generations, but I grew up in the 90s and I know all of these fairly well before I went to California for uni. These things are regulated in China in the same way as porns: officially taboo to talk about on the table, but everyone knows and have their own opinions about them.
Yeah because the commies lucked out with japan conducting one of the largest offensives in the Second World War that absolutely shattered nationalist China
@@obijuanquenobi1911 it’s not even the invasion in general although that helped, what I referenced was Japan’s Operation Ichigo (‘First’? Something like that), I point you to Military History Not Visualized’s video on it (search Japans Largest Offensive in WW2 that you’ve never heard of), basically Japan having lost a significant amount of both its military and merchant navy wanted a land route to their holdings in indochina for their resources, of course theres this big China thing in the way, so what did they do? They fucking killed it, absolutely obliterated the nationalist army, the IJA must’ve stepped on a Lego just then because they wasn’t happy, that’s probably the moment the nationalists lost all hope of defeating the commies (that and the whole Manchuria thing), because they had no one left to fight with (essentially)
One thing to add: The Kuomintang was NOTORIOUSLY corrupt. That's largely the reason the communits were able to gather a foothold among the people in the first place. There's no reason to think that a Kuomintang victorious over the communists would be any different. Perhaps, fearing another uprising, they'd add even more brutality to that corruption. I think that really affects the outcome of this sort of timeline.
@@richardlew3667 ever wondered why these prosperous east asian countries are really only that small? Really can't assume that what works in these countries can be replicated in the mainland
@@richardlew3667 China would be similar to Phillipines, Indonesia or at best Brazil. And those others would be also poorer, since their prosperity is directly related to the fear of another South Vietnam style loss.
My great-grandfathers were NRA soldiers who fought for the Nationalists. They fought in the civil war. Great-grandpa on mom’s side, a stretcher-bearer, was at Jinan, the first of the “three great battles”. The commander of the outer defense, Wu Huawen, defected to the communists with 20,000 men. Great Grandpa broke out of the encirclement with his platoon leader and some others and vanished in the night. When Chiang Kai Shek escaped to Taiwan, my grandpa’s name wasn’t on the roster.
the shame is if sun yat sen was alive for a little longer, he'd probably be forced to pick a side despite being the one thing that tied the ccp and kmt together in one party and becomes less of a heralded figure today. Ill still hang the five color flag though
@@bjack8315 Chiang built up his own cult of personality on Taiwan (which was forced on the natives), in spite of the claims that he supposedly hated cults of personality.
I actually have a personal connection to this "What If". My grandfather was actually a Nationalist Colonel during the Chinese Civil War and World War II. If this "What If" happened, my grandfather would have become a General by the 80s. In our timeline, all commissioned Nationalist officers who fled to Taiwan were eventually promoted to General for their war efforts. Sadly, my grandfather fled to Vietnam instead and died there. In this "What If", my grandfather would have remained in China and become a General there and would have lived a much better life there. Speaking of Vietnam, my grandfather would never have found the need to flee to Vietnam after the Chinese Civil War, and instead he would have raised his family in China. That would also mean that I would be born in China instead of Canada: with no Vietnam War to worry about, my family would have found no need to flee the continent and therefore would not have immigrated to Canada. I would never have become a Canadian and I would likely have never known a life in the Western world. It really puts into perspective how world events can change one's life. I really appreciate this "What If": excellently done.
It is just life, nothing you can do about it! Be honest, had you grandpa remained in China, you are probably one of the elites now,. However, reality is your grandpa made decision to leave.
@@eggheadegghead I agree. Interestingly though, I'm actually happy my grandpa made the decision to leave. He would have been executed by the Communists, and I wouldn't have existed. Plus, I'm pretty satisfied with my life in Canada and wouldn't really want it to change any other way. Living as a part of the elite sounds great, but if I lived the life of an elite in China or in any other country (including Canada), I wouldn't have had the same opportunities to grow and develop as I do now.
Fun fact: the MLK Memorial in Washington D.C. at 7:46 was actually designed by a Chinese sculptor Lei Yixin, who had also designed some of Mao's statues
@Freedom AGS "racism" is only bad when its White Europeans looking out for the future of their race, nation, kids, society, morals, values, etc... everyone else its ok for them to show in group preference.
@@480JD oh my god you're so correct, the race that exploited and corrupted the rest of the world for centuries up until extremely recently is the victim and deserves to have their social superiority protected under the guise of "morals, values, and society". what a miracle that human society has happened upon an intellectual powerhouse such as yourself.
Well he ain't wrong. Russia is a 'democracy', they do have a 'divine' leader that somehow maintained a 90% approval rating for decades, and definitely without manipulation of any sort on the voting population. DEMOCRACY amirite
An important aspect that was overlooked here is that Mao had already begun to destroy the feudal structures during the civil war. This approach secured him the support of the rural population. At that time, 90% of the population were tenant farmers who worked on the lands of a few but enormously wealthy large landowners. Many farmers lived in debt slavery for generations. The Kuomintang, on the other hand, was financially dependent on this powerful gentry. However, the abolition of feudal structures is an important prerequisite for an industrialization process. It is questionable whether the Kuomintang could implement such a complex reform (it is actually a transformation) in such a large country. It is more likely that the gentry would have tried by all means to maintain their power and privileges. Under these conditions, civil wars and the country could be divided up again among local warlords. One must also not forget that the Soviet Union was always interested in weakening China and would certainly have interfered in the internal conflicts. The country would not have settled down for a long time and modernization would certainly not have started sooner
and this is why ccp always boast that they had the favour of 'the majority' back then and thus they won peasants were indeed the majority of the population in china, and kmt didn't leave an exactly good impression on them
I wouldn’t be so sure about the "at least there wouldn’t have been a famine" part… Mao’s famine is so infamous that people forget the Republic of China also had several famines with millions of deaths. Without massive foreign help, another famine after the war would have been hard to avoid, communism or not.
Mao’s famine is manmade, totally avoidable. Any leader with a functioning brain would not keep exporting large amount of food to other nation when they are having a famine.
@@VMVXMK2 Stalin did. So did Ireland under British rule. I suspect that you're right, the famine wouldn't have happened, but sadly it's not inconceivable.
the thing is, with kmt in power and anti-soviet, the west would give China massive foreign aids just to keep them that way, similar to how America give Kiang shit ton of stuff to keep them fight mao
@@VMVXMK2 The nationalist part is known for great corruption and instability within government, part of the main reason why the people of China turned on them, so government corruption causing an uneven distribution of resources is not too big a stretch
If China was no communist it would probably have a pretty serious border dispute with Russia/the Soviets. After the revolution, the Soviets helped china find it footing, part of the deal was defining the border between the two. It has not been disputed since, even the Sino Russian relationship turned sour.
China has its own system. The dictatorship and democracy that you are talking about are different. . . It is the only civilized system on the planet that has not been severed. Its text thousands of years ago can still be recognized.
nope it was still disputed en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict Imagine Chiang kaishek demanding all 1 million square km of qing land back
I don't think it would be a major issue, Cold War standoffs not withstanding. Stalin actually wanted the KMT to stay in power right up until 1949 because he didn't support Maoism (which we later saw firsthand in the Sino-Soviet split).
One interesting point in this alternative timeline is the Nationalist government claim to (Outer) Mongolia as well as the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Nationalist China did invent the infamous Nine Dash Line.
"If when I die, I am still a dictator, I will certainly go down into the oblivion of all dictators. If, on the other hand, I succeed in establishing a truly stable foundation for a democratic government, I will live forever in every home in China." *Chiang Kai-shek*
Then maybe something would actually have happened on the 4th June 1989 in Tiananmen Square, since we know nothing happened in Super Happy Fun Time Square under Communist rule.
The man with the groceries just wanted to ask the nice man who was leading the parade which way was the nearest supermarket, and he was so friendly to tell him. What a great and helpful man that tank driver, who is part of the Communist Party of China, was. :)
The Tokugawa Shogunate is on the same boat with the Meiji Reformation: improving Japan's survival rate in this mad colonialism dash. In fact Japan's first industrialization and westernization efforts were made by the Shogunate. The only difference between them is HOW they approach the question of Westernization...
Japan would just become a republic. They would only get rid of the emperor or reduce the emperor power. So in a way, if the shogunate won, they would be the same as what happens when the atomic bomb drop on nagasaki. Which is the present day Japan. When Japan lost the war the emperor lost most of his power and people stop calling him god. Yes, during WW2 Japanese consider their emperor as god.
Then North Korea wouldn't exist anymore. Edit: Any newcomers to this hellhole of a reply section: Ignore the guy with the symbols as his username. It'll help your mental stability.
shuai pan filthy American intervention? You act like North Korea wasn’t being totally propped up by the Soviets and Chinese. My apologies, but we weren’t just going to sit back while our allies got invaded by cultist dictators. We also had to think about the threat it posed to Japan if Korea totally fell.
@@EVOPE haha, your ally like banning export medical supplies to Canada? Learn this: Support a side in a foreign civil war is a tricky diplomatic thing, but direct intervention is totally another level of invasion. This is how international politics worked. If u are so lack of Korean history, let me tell u sth: General Kim of the north were fighting the Japanese for decades before the independence meanwhile Dr. Lee of the south were serving as a veteran in the Japanese government. Before the civil war Dr. Lee assassinated the previous south Koren nationalist leader Mr. Kim. The USA, supported a formal Japanese gov official who become the south leader by assassination. General Kim or Dr. Lee, who do u support if u were a hungry Korean civilian??? Learn more facts before talks, or looks like an illiterate guy.
shuai pan well we’re not going to support the guy who supports fighting the Japanese. Had the entire Korean Peninsula fell that could’ve served as a launch pad for the Soviets to spread Stalinism to Japan. Again, you’re acting like Kim wasn’t also being supported by foreign powers. Neither side in the Korean War was acting solely in the interests of the Korean people, or really acting in their interests at all. We just happened to back the side that wasn’t threatening us or our allies. Also, if you want to bring up leaders taking out rivals in order to assume power, then boy do I have quite the story on General Kim to sell you.
0:17 "The 20th century probably changed no country more than China." UK: gains 1/4 for the world also UK: looses 1/4 of the world in less than 50 years
@Αγαπη Laird thanks to it's empire Britain won the world wars due to having a massive manpower, strategic, and resource advantage English is the lingra franca for international relations And they still have massive influence over fromer colonies, "only reason anyone buys British guns"
Another point of divergence that would likely result in a nationalist victory is to prevent the transfer of Manchuria to communist China. Maybe Japan was nukes earlier. Maybe the Soviets had a slightly worse time against Germany. But something happens that results in Manchuria not being occupied by the Soviets, and instead become a third power or neutral faction under the emperor. A huge part of the ensuing civil war post WW2 happened because of the intact industrial region of Manchuria, and it’s abundant steel resources. Nationalist China after WW2 had lost a lot of their industrial capacity due to the war and were severely lacking equipment. Equipment that the communist could now produce with the help of Manchu industry. Despite this, the nationalists still pushed quite far into Manchu before equipment caught up and they were beaten back. Without Manchu, there would still be no chance the communists could win the civil war.
you're giving manchuria a bit too much credit. you need to understand another 3 reasons why the nationalists one. 1, the Japanese army devastated the NRA which is already very corrupt. KMT/NRA already had a lot of defections to the opposite side, the CPC. Third, CPC participation in the 2nd sino-japanese war helped the PLA developed experience in fighting which happened to defeat the nationalists.
@KrugerderGrosse I wouldn't say that, considering even with Manchuria, the communists still almost lost at the start. The point is, even if Manchuria isn't the biggest factor, it certainly is big enough that not having Manchuria would result in a nationalist victory.
@@redstonehero7944 like i said, nationalists were extremely corrupt. most lower class pesants didn't want t he nationalists in power. most of them sided with communists. this would only prolong the civilwar and not be simply a heavy communist defeat. you need to understand why the communist uprisings succeeded in the first place. it wasn'ty just manchuria but china proper too, xinjiang etc.
@KrugerderGrosse and I'm saying, there were very few resources outside of the Manchuria region available to the communists. Many uprisings around the country were squashed or heavily suppressed. It was through the Manchuria front that the communists broke through. It was with manchu resources that equipped the communist forces. Just because you have support from the poor folks doesn't mean you can transform that into military power. And if the main communist elements were to be defeated, the nationalists would rule with an iron fist. There would be little chance for a popular uprising for a long time.
@ like I said earlier, it was impossible for the Nanjing Government to rule with an iron fist. KMT lost the mandate and the CPC succeeded. The people were on the side of the CPC. Many Nationalists didn’t even want to continue fighting. If you look at a ww2 time lapse, the Soviets didn’t just give Manchuria to the CPC, it was actually partially KMT controlled by they instantly lost Manchuria. How do you rule with an iron fist when you have one of the worst corruption in your government, your army is drained from fighting a foreign enemy. CPC gained combat experience from the Japanese and their troops were better than ever. If Jiang Jieshi wasn’t incompetent, KMT win but with how bad the KMT was, there was no way.
Nationalists: **Defeat the PRC** We won. We have shown we are the true China! None are left standing against us! All the warlord states still sitting there: **Visible confusion.**
*CPC, it was still the CPC and PLA, not yet the PRC. Northern Expedition followed by Central Plains War would destroy all those warlord states save for those loyal to the KMT like Ma Bufang's Xinjiang. Goes down similar to our timeline.
@@Sr_Cozy Not possible at all... After WWII, the economy of the ROC has already heavily broken, apart from the beginning of the Civil War, the ROC government indeed need to force its citizens to go to battlefield to fight the CCP amry, that's also one of the reason why so many ROC soldiers surrender to the CCP during the war.
Video Idea: What if Napoleon wasn’t stopped at Waterloo? What if Napoleon won Waterloo? What would he have done when he won? Napoleon is my favorite historical character so I just really need to know. Thank you!
I know this isn't the answer you were looking for, but if he won at Waterloo he'd just have to fight again on another battle which he would lose. France at the end of the Napoleonic wars was just weak and tired. Remember Napoleon was NOT captured at Waterloo, he escaped. So why did he not raise another army and try again? France just wasn't up to it. The coalition was too much more powerful by then.
"quoting random shit you find to sound cool and smart on the internet just results in a shitstorm comment war on politics and philosophy most of the time because no one is happy when someone else is trying to be a smartass on the internet" - abraham lincoln
@@D00000T lol, it’s an actual quote though, from the game series: “Wolfenstien” it ain’t random shit It’s also technically true though, compare it to energy, it can’t be created or destroyed, it just changes form. It’s like the clone war prequels when the C.I.S and the Republic both fall at the same due to Order 66. The “monster” was the C.I.S and the guy who was planning for the Rise and the Empire (forgot his name). It “changed form” when Order 66 was executed and he turned it into the empire.
I Think My Dog Is a Cat Then you would witness the first total nuclear war in history. Most nuclear shelters in nowadays China are built in those years. One nuclear shelter near my university is now a musical equipment store for underground bands.
@giwrgos kalaitzantwnakis Oh wow, an expert in the chat. He did an episode on what if the snap occurred. That’s not realistic. Also, the Chinese believed that China must control the world and that the Soviets weren’t true communists. This could result in wars in indo-china or an all out war. All I’m saying is that there are many scenarios that could be generated from this idea.
I had a grandpa who fought in this war, he surrendered and then was relocated on a farm for 2 years after he surrendered and my great grandpa, a Nationalist General just cut and run to another province and found a war buddy who joined the communists and became a province governor, who kept him low key and gave his kids an education.
@@therealman2016 ah he was okay he later married had 10 children and died at the age of 96 he was never imprisend or persucted as the government in 1924 a year after the war was over made a general ammrnsty. He did refuse the pension for veterans regardless of witch side they fought for.
Agree with your overall assessment. I think one important piece is it swaps one super power bff with another. Historically, Communist China broke their alliance with USSR minimise the target on her back. Nationalist China had good relations with both USSR and the US, however it would be at risk of becoming a battle ground with the onset of cold war. How China maneuvers between the super powers will define its security and potentially political system.
Mao: Strength: 1 Perception: 1 Endurance: 2 Charisma: 10 Intelligence: 1 Agility: 1 Luck: 10000000000 1 Month Later: People still start arguments over a joke. Society has gone too soft for comedy.
Brad Hill Rich capitalist: Strength:1 Perception:1 Endurance:1 Charisma:1 Intelligence:1 Agility:1 Luck:1 Ability to steal the fruits of workers labour: 1000000000000
"If Nationalist China did rise, we'd see fewer of these state owned companies." Nationalist China: **Laughs in Russian Federation style nationalized industry**
You're absolutely correct. Republic of China would also use some elements of government-lead economy, but they wouldn't be granted this Communist-China bonus which they got by western countries in our timeline. They would have faced the same restrictions and measures which all capitalist nations face, caused by competition.
Russia only operates that way because they filled the power void of totalitarian communist culture with black market criminal underground mafia culture, which is a biproduct of regimes like the USSR. without Mao, Chinese denizens never have to live under the constant threat of being sent to the gulag for overdue library books or social credit systems that oust them from a livable society. No democracy doesn't mean no prosperity, contrary to Cody's video. Hans Herman Hoppe points out the aniquities of democracy to monarchy and even Jean Jacque Rousseau, himself only advocated for democracy on a small scale. Safe to say, China may have actually been better off than the west in a lot of ways and probably more avert to corporatism and crony capitalism like what purveyed in the west and what had brought China down to begin with with the arrival of corporatists from the UK, Portugal and the US
@Ishir Mehra Chiang didn't become the President until after Sun died. Before that he was mentored by Sun to be a future leader. Because of this I do not think it's fair to put Chiang in the same camp as Yuan Shikai; Chiang did still care about the Republic and he wanted to create a modern China as outlined by Sun, but unfortunate circumstances prevented him from ever fulfilling this.
@Ishir Mehra The Yellow River flood was a war time tactic to slow down the encroachment of the Japanese. It caused massive damage to infrastructure and killed many civilians yes, but it was justifiable in the historical context. Flooding has been used as a tactic by many Chinese generals in the past, so it's not like it's a new thing. I agree that Chiang made many mistakes during the Civil War that led to the Nationalist defeat, but some things were also out of his control (e.g. Japanese invasion, Xi'an incident, massive internal corruption, and US interventions to name a few). In my opinion, had Yuan not betrayed the Republic and fractured China, the Civil War would not have started in the first place.
@Ishir Mehra Chiang became a dictator because of his paranoia to Communism within his own party. Chiang initiated Martial Law in Taiwan for this reason. If the Nationalists won the Civil War, Chiang likely would've eventually relinquished power. This is pure speculation though, and neither you or I will ever know. That being said, a Communist regime does have a lot of differences to a Military Dictatorship. For one, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution would never had happened, and China would not have closed off its economy for 30 years.
@@shockwave2291 Wrong, he became a dictator because it was necessary at the time, China was at war with Japan and the Communists. A dictator is necessarily needed in order to lead a nation to victory.
@Ishir Mehra Also, exterminating Communists was the right thing to do, they declared independence from China and had the goals to integrate China to a soviet puppet state. Manchukuo and other Japanese puppets did the same thing of dividing china.
Hoàng Nguyên yep you guys rock at kicking out foreign invasions since WWII ps great job in The Third Indochina War especially with beating the Chinese with their own weapons they gave you
@Hoàng Nguyên actually the north would have fell to a full scale American invasion but that didn't happen because we didn't want to provoke communist China by invading a communist country
@@shadowsafe6329 he's actually quoting something. But his point is that no matter what, eventually every empire or great nation will have its eventual demise to ethier collapse permanently, or at least face revolutionary chaos that turns it into something else.
That's as useful a quote as saying something like "From ashes we came and to ashes we will return." Also, Empires may rise and fall but _Civilizations_ can last eons. China is an example of this.
2:45 ,,But now the Nationalists ALONE have to deal with another enemy.'' *....Saying that as if the Communists contributed into or did anything in the Second Sino-Japanese War.*
@@Owen_loves_Butters Yeah, on paper. Not in actual reality. The Communists only did a few skirmishes and thats it. It was the Nationalists and regional warlords that did all of the fighting, which of course was hard and heavy, and which also made it easier for the Communists to beat them in the following civil war.
I wouldn’t call Nationalist “incompetent” during their struggle against Japanese invader 1. Nanking has no strategic value, therefore the Nationalist withdrew their troops in order to defend the city of Wuhan (Wuhan is also a junction of numerous railroads that stretches into the heart of China, hence its strategic importance) 2. The Nationalist forces did manage to hold off the Japanese onslaught and achieved a strategic stalemate across the frontline around 1941. Their 1945 counteroffensive was largely successful (with American help of course) and the counteroffensive is very well on their way to drove the Japanese out of China if the Americans didn’t drop the atomic bomb and end the war early. 3. Nationalist held off a technologically superior enemy from 1937-41 with little outside help. This is a great and entertaining video nevertheless but I thought it might be a little unfair to label Nationalist “incompetent”. They fought bravely with whatever they had at that time, inflicted heavy casualties on the enemy, and contributed immensely to the Allied war effort.
Exactly. They did make mistakes like the yellow river flood but overall they were quite successful in repelling the Japanese invasion, and certainly did more than the communists who were putting in more effort to recruit soldiers than to fight.
Ng I completely agree with you, Yellow River flood was a terrible mistake indeed. But overall the Nationalist contributed so much more than that other faction that was so obsessed with preserving its own strength for the upcoming civil war.
@@jackuncles6233 Actually it was the nationalists that were preserving their armies to fight the civil war later. Chang kai shek didnt even want to fight the japanese until he was "convinced" into doing so
killer bee I am Chinese and I live in China, that was the typical communist interpretation of the war. In reality, Chiang Kai Shek lost most of his best train and equipped Central Army in the Battle of Shanghai. He did not hesitate to deploy his field armies in massive confrontation with the Japanese throughout the war.
killer bee Communist started with less than 40,000 solideres in 1937, by 1945 their size expanded well over 1,200,000. They DID preserve their strength and barely confronted the Japanese head on.
"Did the kuomintang lose the civil war? "No! "So why are they fleeing to Taiwan now?" "Why don't you ask why the communists fled to the China mainland instead?"
matt there’s a reason why we’re not eating our own pets like Venezuela, or being murdered because of our own faith like the millions of Christians in China, or being persecuted in North Korea. We’re not perfect but I am sure anyone with a little common sense would love to live in America or any other capitalist country
this video ignored one huge problem: the warlords. in the 1930's China is more like a loose confederation than a unified nation. in the year of 1928,after the Japanese assassinated ZhangZuoLin, the warlord of the north east. Zhang's son, ZhangXueLiang decide to obey the ROC government. then the ROC government become the most powerful force among those warlords in china. and unified China ...in name only yet KMT is strong , but not strong enough, those warlords are highly independent from the central government. their allegiance to the central government is in name only. they keep their own army, they issue their own currency and made their own tax policy.(remember Zhang's son? although he clams he obeys to the ROC government, he is still highly independent too!) those warlords like a king in their little kingdoms, the central government have little control in the local. the warlords get support from different foreign power by their own. they even war to others for their own benefit. EX. the Central Plains War (MAY,1930--Nov 4th,1930) even after the 2nd Sino-Japanese war, KMT and CCP annexed most of the remaining warlords, some of them still remains. in the following civil war, they either eliminate or annexed by CCP or escaped to Taiwan with ROC and annexed by KMT. so back to the main topic. when the time KMT launched the purge towards CCP(APR 12th,1927), the CCP didn't have any territory and their own army, but the warlords have territory, the have tax income, they have thier own weaponized army. they are much more strong than CCP. so even KMT could eliminate CCP in 1927,the KMT still have to deal the the warlord problem. it's hard to say what's gonna happen after that. maybe early or late, there still gonna be a civil war. back to reality, so after the 2nd CCP--KMT civil war, does China finally become a unified country? of course not.remember there is still a exile ROC government exist in Taiwan province? and there is no total armistice agreement has been signed between Taiwan and Mainland China. so theoretically, despite the super long ceasefire between Mainland China and Taiwan exists, the civil war is still on going. right?
History tells us that as a huge multi-nation country, 'democracy' is not suitable for China, only leaders (or so-called dictators) that are powerful enough like Mao Zedong can unite China.
@@christlau1233 How about the united states? It is literally a bunch of different countries (states), and it run just fine (i am not saying it is perfect) with democracy. And why must china 'unite' as a single country? How about a confedaracy of different states? Or something like the UK? Or forming a close group that benifit each other like the EU?
@@dickiewongtk Not possible. The only way to unite so many different people of different cultures and race would be by hating on one common enemy. The correct example would be India... they are so diverse and have so many conflicts in history. The only way they are United is due to sheer hatred for Pakistan. Same with Pakistan too. China would be no different.
I think that the authoritarianism would die out around the same time as Taiwan if not sooner. In Sun’s later years he became increasingly pessimistic and so changed the KMT’s goals. The idea was that China wasn’t ready for democracy, at least not yet so a temporary one party dictatorship would be established while the people were educated on how democracy works. Then gradually, opposition parties would be allowed into the government, and finally Democratization. The KMT was authoritarian because that was part of the plan. I would argue that the reason Chiang stayed around so long is because they lost the civil war. It threw a wrench into everything. At that point, they just needed to survive. Democracy isn’t really a priority when your only objective is survival.
I mean rechnically china is democratic. Does having multiple parties really mean one is democratic? Since we are talking china lets use a party memeber. I remember one saying "constitutional governance asserts that power lies in the people, and implements a parliamentary democratic political system. But the real operation of parliamentary democracies is completely grasped in the hands of the bourgeoisie." Members of parliament (or officials in general) are able to contest elections (and win them) only with the support of the bourgeoisie." In essence under liberal democracies you have multiple parties that are bought and funded by capitalists. When popular policy goes against big buisness interests they are shot down. Housing, food, price stabilizations, wage increases all things that are presented in china. From 1970s to now chinese wages rose up drastically. Compared to the usa it has stagnated. China has eliminated abject poverty(its still poor as its a 3rd world country). And it has low hunger rate for a 3rd world country. ranging from 2 percent and 9 percent. While the usa has like 15 percent. China has a 90 percent homeownership rate due to maos land reform. These are things that our democracy yhave failed because parties are owned by corporations. Secondly we can say china undemocratic but its more similar to usa democracy. its a republic. People vote in local lower level politicians who then vote and appoint people in power. So they dont vote in presidents directly but they do vote. Its kinda like how we do it with our supreme justice. Which is kinda undemocratic but i dont think anyone would consider the usa not a democracy. All laws are not voted in by us but by politicians we elect. They either say yes or abstain. And in china unlike the usa they can recall their congress members while we cannot. So in ways its democratic and in others it isnt. Lastly i think mao won because he really did have the pesants on his side. What did he do when he got power? Education, healthcare, He got pesants to kill their landlords and take control over their own land. Got rid of cultural backwardness like banditry and sex slavery and foot binding. It was a feudal society and mao for all of his atrocities was better than the kmt. Im haitian and we all like Jean Jacques Dessalines because he got rid of slavery even if he was an emperor.
@@sungod1384 the democratic part really depends on who you are asking Asking USA? China dictatorship (idk the exact reason but I guess it’s one party state and party power>country power and people really don’t matter in votes) Asking China? China democratic (and USA would be a money-controlled state which is actually not democratic in their eyes) (and Chairmans like Xi Jinping are just „representatives“ of the interests of the people) But you are right, it does have some similarity with the democracy like the us, just that Chinese votes are actually by starting in a random neighborhood and then going 1 stage up until all province representatives vote for one chairman
I don't know how realistic this scenario is, but what if Sun Yat-Sen lived longer and actually managed to create the American-style democracy he wanted to? It would be a big, unwieldy democracy with both main parties being pretty authoritarian.
It would be the single biggest tragedy. Look up the illiteracy rate at the time and think again if democracy is a good idea. Hell, I wouldn’t say it’s a good idea in the u.s. considering almost 30 school shootings has happened this year and literally a million ppl have died to fucking Covid and things are not looking up to change at all any moment soon.
Pretty impossible considering the sheer number of people in China, look at how big a problem political unrest is in the west, imagine the protests, and on rare occasions, riots, but in numbers so large that they could spark civil wars.
The issue with comparing the KMT's path to democracy with other nations or parties is that Taiwan's democracy came about when it did largely due to one man. Chiang Ching Kuo, son of Chiang Kai Shek, banned any members of the Chiang family for running for president and removed restrictions on other parties. He was also known for a large scale crack down on corruption in Shanghai during the last days of the Chinese Civil War.
I'd say about the democracy part probably also are related to America pressure with the Henry Liu incident (He's assassinated by a gangster which was hired by some person related to Taiwanese government member)? unsure about how much the effect has play out.
You make him out to be some sort of hero who brought about democracy after his father’s death. The truth is a lot more complicated. He was far from a perfect guy, evidenced by his tenure as head of secret police. He was also under massive pressure at the time from the public that was getting more and more educated, yet many were still barred from even participating in politics. Of course, there’s also the fact that those that held life-time positions on the Legislative Yuan were all dying out at this point, and that Western support had already mostly run dry due to prolonged lack of democracy and poor ruling. What I’m trying to get at, basically, is that he didn’t just make reforms and inadvertently democratize out of the kindness of his heart. Same story for Lee, to keep any sliver of control he had to concede and reform. Jiang JinGuo only brought about democracy due to a various number of circumstances, and if he was in power in China, without any sort of substantial pressure I certainly don’t think he would have.
If you have any evidence for the existence of social credit system, I would give you $100. Plz plz, as An Chinese, I would really love to know what the hell this is!
@@nickg4564 I’m mainland Chinese but live in London for 10 years, is actually sad that most people outside mainland think that we are so blind and racist, even arrogant just to be patriotic, but the truth is many friends I know from mainland, we all want to watch UA-cam, Twitter without VPN, want to play video games and watch movies without censorship, want to complain the government when there is indeed a problem. But sadly our voice won’t be heard since there’re only a small amount of people know what to use VPN in order to talk to foreigner.
@@nickg4564 Greetings to you as well! I went to Canada for my undergrad degree so I've adopted the more western way of thinking. From my experience in both China & Canada, having been exposed to viewpoints from both sides, I can tell that both sides are being portrayed inaccurately by media from the other. China isn't the poor, closed-minded country with no human right anymore. though a considerable portion of the population are still adhering to the old way of living. I have friends from both countries and I would say I love people from both sides equally, though if I had to pick a side I would still choose my home country, undoubtedly, since that's where my root lies. Nevertheless, I do hope we can all just be friends and never try to harm each other in any way.
some nra soldiers put up a fierce fight (which is why the japanese were angry). Commander tang shengzhi fled and Chiang is a nightmare as a military commander (if you get orders from him, likely these orders will cause you to die. Many generals legit closed their radios to ignore Chiang's military orders).
that's why the PRC never demonize the KMT, Only the KMT DID! Heck they even recognize that without Chiang, there would be no PRC, no United China, Unlike Some Authoritarians States,
It shouldn't be taken for granted that Nationalist China would have had a bad relationship with the Soviet Union. The KMT received Soviet support from the beginning, and Chiang Kai-shek received training in Moscow. Even after the CCP rose to prominence, Stalin, paradoxically, favoured the Nationalists, pressuring Mao to join forces with the KMT, even after the Shanghai Massacre. During WWII it was the Nationalists that received military support from the USSR (Mao got only some propaganda leaflets), and after the war ended Stalin recognised the KMT as the national government of China, and signed a treaty of alliance with Chiang. Throughout the 45-9 Civil War Stalin, who distrusted and disdained Mao, stayed largely on the sidelines, and continued to advocate for China to be ruled by a coalition government. The Americans also, although technically on the Nationalists' side, disliked Chiang, whom they supported only reluctantly, and they too pushed for a ceasefire. So it wasn't as clear-cut as the CCP with the Soviets vs the KMT with the Americans.
KMT was unpopular and ruled by both corruption and incomptence. Stalin preferred Chiang so he could have a capitalist neighbor to trade with. Hell, Stalin hated Mao for not following Soviet communism. The differences of Stalin and Mao could been seen as early as the Korean War where Mao distrusted Stalin for not directly supporting both the PVA and KPA other than advisors, equipment, and volunteers.
I think if KMT weren't defeated and won the Civil war, China would become more neutral third party much like the non-aligned movement in the cold war, which China under Mao was an observer.
A China under KMT would have tried to take Mongolia back. Which could trigger a Soviet invasion. And China would be part of the only superpower on earth today - the Soviet Union.
@@zctao2577 Wrong. "That same year Sun sent Chiang to spend three months in Moscow studying the Soviet political and military system. During his trip in Russia, Chiang met Leon Trotsky and other Soviet leaders, but quickly came to the conclusion that the Russian model of government was not suitable for China. Chiang later sent his eldest son, Ching-kuo, to study in Russia."
Came here to sey exactly that. This whole concept seems rather unrealistic and I'm actually surprised that the author somehow omitted (forgot?) about the fact that the Soviets support KMD till the very end.
SMD sth91 memes are simply jokes, they don’t harm anyone. The internet is used for many things and makes living more convenient. Removing would make the standard of living objectively worse for a lot of people. Smartphones don’t hurt anyone either, they’re simply a convenience item.
Without Mao, Kim il sung would not have attacked south Korea. He specifically waited for Mao to give permission for the fight since the Soviets didn't wanna risk joining themselves wich would agitate the US.
@@warpartyattheoutpost4987 Chaotic Neutrals tend to be the no-fucks-given kind of people. Helping people or making them suffer isn't really important to them as their moral compass is pointed towards "yes" all the time so they just end up doing whatever on a whim, be it good or bad, usually for their own sake and without regard for rules or social conventions.
Can't we all just think of a happy ending where instead of worrying about nukes and politics we will just worry about meteors or aliens. It would be more uniting
you forgot one important detail: the Soviet seized Japanese-controlled Manchuria at the end of WW2. The Chinese Communist Party could be reformed there and new civil war would soon broke out, this time with the Soviet intervened more directly
Soviets also thought that nationalists would have won despite supporting the communists, that's why they made a deal to get Mongolia as a satellite state but the communists won at the shock of everyone
Stalin was never against the KMT. It would have been one dictator supporting another dictator. The KMT would likely have taken Tibet, Xinjiang back as well as Hong Kong in 1997.
This is something most people in the west are not aware of: The Chinese political system and political culture have been staying mostly the same in essence since 250BC (around the time of the Roman Republic). Dozens of major peasant uprisings couldn't change it. The warlords, who popped up once in a while and took over part of the country, couldn't change it. The Mongolians couldn't change it. The Manchurians couldn't change it. The Europeans couldn't change it. The Nationalists couldn't change it. The Communists changed it, and bad things happened so they changed it back.
@@surperian4340 Centralized political power, highly bureacratic, confucianist, local governments in remote areas do whatever they want, so on and so forth.
If the Nationalists did win in the theorized “what if” scenario, I wonder if I would ever exist. My great grandfather was working for city government of Xiamen and had ties with the Nationalists. In post WW2 China, if the Nationalists didn’t embezzle US foreign aid away from starving people to their own pockets, my great grandpa wouldn’t have gone out of his way to expose embezzlement and escape to Singapore, and I will not exist as my grandpa would have not meet my grandma in Singapore. It’s interesting to think how many people including myself would not exist if the Nationalists defeated the Communists.
lol , any "what if" could make you removed from the timeline, and here you are, Imagin what IF your grandpa escaped to other coutries like Malaysia? So don't think IF.
@@RonnalStevens1 Was exposing embezzlement and escaping to Singapore related? As in cause and effect? Because if it is, then Nationalist win will also cause that great grandpa of him to flee to Singapore because of fear of retaliation.
my great grandfather was a NRA chinese soldier. he said that the nationalist wasn't any better. if not worse. and I've been to mainland china on a vacation, saying china a communist country is like saying bruce jenner a woman.
@@fbmw98 They didn’t say Communist, they said authoritarian which is true. Meanwhile, yeah the KMT weren’t a great choice but they definitely wouldn’t have done all the stupid shit Mao did and by the modern era it most definitely would’ve reformed into something like what Taiwan or Korea is now considering both had borderline dictators but eventually became full ok democracies.
@@jerrell1169 Except KMT did exactly what Mao did in Taiwan which is a period called White Terror, it’s basically the reverse cultural revolution so yeah, they are about the same I would say
@@michael1111111100 There is a problem though, and its about the power keg between four collective armies, namely, the Kwei Clique, Jin Clique, Southern warlords, Ma Clique and Yunnan, all of these regions are highly militatized and they can defeat the KMT if possible, if ROC won the war, wouldn't there be more millions to die compare to Mao? ROC would unify China except without Tibet, East Turkestan and Mejiang.
I would honestly recommend Extra Credits History videos not just to anyone that wants to know more about the Chinese Revolution, but as a supplement for anyone who likes this channel. They do a very good job at making very consumable history content.
Well as far as I know they wanted to establish democracy after unifying China and then the war against the Japanese came. So they couldn’t get to it. A shame really
@@SupremeCKS maybe China becomes a Democracy but only after Cheings death or remain a dictatorship one party state like under Cheing or corruption and instability of the Nationalists leads to another civil war
The PRC today isn't much different from the KMT of the 40s, as the video points out. A more interesting question would be "What if Yuan Shikai didn't betray the Republicans and trigger the Warlord Era?"
For ROC had nothing to do with "agriculture, village and farmer" problem, the deepest problem in Chinese civilization. Things would get worse. When Chang Kai-shek left Chinese mainland, he didn't bring more than 300 million farmers but just big capitalists, soldiers and scholars with him, so that he didn't face the problem. Before he failed, it was mess already. If he did win, it would still be a mess in great rural areas of China, since his power could only cover several main cities and many military leaders control their land, making Sun Yat-sen's principles shit.
The first thing after Chiang arrived in Taiwan was widespread land reforms, stripping local landlords of their possessions (to a lesser extent than the communists I'd say). Both South Korea and Japan underwent land reform (and a brutal one in SK), and they were both ruled by right-wing dictatorship (SK) or dominant-party democracy (Japan), which largely resemble the possibilities of a ROC on the mainland in the 50s. Chiang and his allies also didn't shy away from targeting large industrialists who don't support them to the fullest extent. If the problem of severe and widespread corruption was not addressed, the unstable regime under Chiang could very well descend into chaos, forcing Chiang to reform the land policies just to stay In power.
@@lukexu6400 Chiang did that because he learned it from the civil war. learned it from CCP. If he won the war, he might never had the chance to learn it.
The big differences was that the KMT had a close relationship with the US and were open to international trade and food imports. It was the CCP that closed China's borders. If there were famines under the KMT, they could at least solicit food aid in peacetime to prevent the massive death tolls seen under the CCP.
Even a lot movies about Vietnam War like Platoon, Full Metal Jacket or Apocalypse Now would never be made in this alternate timeline. A lot of the vets who fought in it likely would never fight in it.
So yeah. Rome Part III is dead. Here's why. I worked on the damn idea for three months, but sometimes these things are just dead ends. ua-cam.com/video/3unEvQ3uKrM/v-deo.html
Bruh moment right here
Well, at least you told us the truth
You should do an alternate history scenario where Communist China went to war With the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet split.
@Josef Stalin Prepare the Katushas, China’s on their way!
I'm the guy who suggested if Brennus Sacked Rome, I've got more Alt history ideas for you.
What if the Mongols discovered America by going through Russia into Alaska?
What if the Rurikids stayed true to Rurik's original goal and never adopted Slavic culture and religion instead trying to Germanify the region and establish an Eastern Norse realm?
What if the British Celts defeated the Anglo Saxons?
What if Atilla the Hun didn't die early?
Nothing would change about June 5, 1989 because nothing happened on that date in our timeline anyway
Correct
Tank inspection day
I’m about to end these Chinese people on this video
动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution
@@honkamania1174I can't say for younger generations, but I grew up in the 90s and I know all of these fairly well before I went to California for uni. These things are regulated in China in the same way as porns: officially taboo to talk about on the table, but everyone knows and have their own opinions about them.
@@9SS94Cr I mean it makes sense, China's bad but it ain't NK.
Kim Jong Un would work at McDonald's in Pyongyang
And would be fired for stealing all the fries.
Don’t forget about all those burgers. 🍔
LOL.
No. He’d be a viral food eater 🍜
Here's the catch, there is no McDonald's there cus there ain't no food
If this happened in real life and someone made a video „What if Communists won the Chinese Civil War” everyone would call it unrealistic
Yeah because the commies lucked out with japan conducting one of the largest offensives in the Second World War that absolutely shattered nationalist China
Oh boy I hope they include the part where they have a virus outbreak and decided to hide it with the WHO.
@@looinrims Agreed. Honestly, I think if Japan never invaded China or inflicted heavy casualties, the Communists would have lost
@@obijuanquenobi1911 it’s not even the invasion in general although that helped, what I referenced was Japan’s Operation Ichigo (‘First’? Something like that), I point you to Military History Not Visualized’s video on it (search Japans Largest Offensive in WW2 that you’ve never heard of), basically Japan having lost a significant amount of both its military and merchant navy wanted a land route to their holdings in indochina for their resources, of course theres this big China thing in the way, so what did they do? They fucking killed it, absolutely obliterated the nationalist army, the IJA must’ve stepped on a Lego just then because they wasn’t happy, that’s probably the moment the nationalists lost all hope of defeating the commies (that and the whole Manchuria thing), because they had no one left to fight with (essentially)
@@looinrims laughs in Barbarossa.
One thing to add: The Kuomintang was NOTORIOUSLY corrupt. That's largely the reason the communits were able to gather a foothold among the people in the first place. There's no reason to think that a Kuomintang victorious over the communists would be any different. Perhaps, fearing another uprising, they'd add even more brutality to that corruption. I think that really affects the outcome of this sort of timeline.
alas, the dragon slayer ends up being the next dragon
This was the same case for South Korea. One has to wonder if China would have eventually prospered like South Korea and Taiwan.
@@richardlew3667 ever wondered why these prosperous east asian countries are really only that small? Really can't assume that what works in these countries can be replicated in the mainland
@@coriakacoron5851 lamo how is the ccp a dragon
@@richardlew3667
China would be similar to Phillipines, Indonesia or at best Brazil.
And those others would be also poorer, since their prosperity is directly related to the fear of another South Vietnam style loss.
Animation 101 teacher: here’s how to symbolize a character dying, *turns upside down and sets them on fire* perfect!
The perfection way
10/10 way lol
@Jackdab G but, why, I'm at war!
@Jackdab G Free France was at war with germany, the homeland got puppeted by germany as Vinchy France, that's what I mean
Or have them fall over and *thud*
That Korean War animation was pretty cool. The guy who made it must be awesome.
he's a real swell guy.
@zewasplays Nah you suck
@@shinsenshogun900 ?
@@Killerbee4712 Dude I mentioned got deleted, so I won
Anyone know if he makes other videos
Modern China: “I am inevitable”
@LUNAR BLOODDROP Didn't watch Endgame, did you?
I will fix it for you:
America: "And I am... America."
@@georgeghleung putin: and i am the defender of the motherland
*snaps*
@@fetitovolador8147 russian national anthem intensifies
Modern China: “I am inevitable”
America: “And I’m America”
That actually sounds pretty cool and somewhat accurate
Nick Land was right... Neo-China is coming!
My great-grandfathers were NRA soldiers who fought for the Nationalists. They fought in the civil war. Great-grandpa on mom’s side, a stretcher-bearer, was at Jinan, the first of the “three great battles”. The commander of the outer defense, Wu Huawen, defected to the communists with 20,000 men. Great Grandpa broke out of the encirclement with his platoon leader and some others and vanished in the night. When Chiang Kai Shek escaped to Taiwan, my grandpa’s name wasn’t on the roster.
That's interesting, do you know what happened to him?
@@hrub he died. with no child left under his name. RIP
@@lawrance6540 🥱 yeah ha ha 😑
Mao: Left-Wing Authoritarianism with sham democracy
Chiang: Right-Wing Authoritarianism with sham democracy
Sun Yat-Sen: *Spins in coffin regardless*
the shame is if sun yat sen was alive for a little longer, he'd probably be forced to pick a side despite being the one thing that tied the ccp and kmt together in one party and becomes less of a heralded figure today.
Ill still hang the five color flag though
Top comment PLEASE
Mao was totalitarian/AKA: authoritarianism + cult to personality
@@bjack8315 Chiang built up his own cult of personality on Taiwan (which was forced on the natives), in spite of the claims that he supposedly hated cults of personality.
Hahahahahaha Hahahahahaha o yeah.
I've requested this a thousand times! Thank you so much :)
Same here
We all have
You stole my comment. Prepare to be Chinese finger trapped.
I actually have a personal connection to this "What If".
My grandfather was actually a Nationalist Colonel during the Chinese Civil War and World War II. If this "What If" happened, my grandfather would have become a General by the 80s. In our timeline, all commissioned Nationalist officers who fled to Taiwan were eventually promoted to General for their war efforts. Sadly, my grandfather fled to Vietnam instead and died there. In this "What If", my grandfather would have remained in China and become a General there and would have lived a much better life there.
Speaking of Vietnam, my grandfather would never have found the need to flee to Vietnam after the Chinese Civil War, and instead he would have raised his family in China. That would also mean that I would be born in China instead of Canada: with no Vietnam War to worry about, my family would have found no need to flee the continent and therefore would not have immigrated to Canada. I would never have become a Canadian and I would likely have never known a life in the Western world.
It really puts into perspective how world events can change one's life. I really appreciate this "What If": excellently done.
You do have a long family history
It is just life, nothing you can do about it! Be honest, had you grandpa remained in China, you are probably one of the elites now,. However, reality is your grandpa made decision to leave.
I understand. My grandparents also left China after the communist take over and fled to Canada where my family lives and was raised.
Come back home often. You will feel at home.
@@eggheadegghead I agree. Interestingly though, I'm actually happy my grandpa made the decision to leave. He would have been executed by the Communists, and I wouldn't have existed. Plus, I'm pretty satisfied with my life in Canada and wouldn't really want it to change any other way. Living as a part of the elite sounds great, but if I lived the life of an elite in China or in any other country (including Canada), I wouldn't have had the same opportunities to grow and develop as I do now.
Fun fact: the MLK Memorial in Washington D.C. at 7:46 was actually designed by a Chinese sculptor Lei Yixin, who had also designed some of Mao's statues
The Left, BLM, Antifa et al just can't get away from socialist imagery and aesthetics.
@Freedom AGS imagine thinking you're not racist because you hate White Europeans.
@Freedom AGS "racism" is only bad when its White Europeans looking out for the future of their race, nation, kids, society, morals, values, etc... everyone else its ok for them to show in group preference.
@Anitaku anime profile picture, opinion discarded.
@@480JD oh my god you're so correct, the race that exploited and corrupted the rest of the world for centuries up until extremely recently is the victim and deserves to have their social superiority protected under the guise of "morals, values, and society". what a miracle that human society has happened upon an intellectual powerhouse such as yourself.
Cody: "...but gradually shifts to a democracy."
Also Cody: *shows russian elections*
irony, intended pan ?
Well he ain't wrong. Russia is a 'democracy', they do have a 'divine' leader that somehow maintained a 90% approval rating for decades, and definitely without manipulation of any sort on the voting population. DEMOCRACY amirite
@@juliánito59 i kinda like putin tho, he"s a strong leader, just what we need
@@drunkenslav2334 No, no you don't. It may be what you *want*.
The youtube picture
Can we please take a moment to appreciate the soft jazz in the background while he talks about death and destruction.
yah what’s the song
I will. *takes a moment* 🅰️🅰️🅰️H
One of them is called If you're weary
10:44
“But gradually shifts to democracy”
*Shows russian elections*
That’s the humor right here
never change russia never change
@Ethaniel Lim oligarchs dont exist. They're just..... REALLY GOOD FREINDS.......
Democracy is shit
the usa isn't a democracy ether lmao,
@@NeostormXLMAX I don't see them mentioning the USA anywhere, not mentioning that they're american. Maybe I'm just blind then
An important aspect that was overlooked here is that Mao had already begun to destroy the feudal structures during the civil war. This approach secured him the support of the rural population. At that time, 90% of the population were tenant farmers who worked on the lands of a few but enormously wealthy large landowners. Many farmers lived in debt slavery for generations. The Kuomintang, on the other hand, was financially dependent on this powerful gentry. However, the abolition of feudal structures is an important prerequisite for an industrialization process. It is questionable whether the Kuomintang could implement such a complex reform (it is actually a transformation) in such a large country. It is more likely that the gentry would have tried by all means to maintain their power and privileges. Under these conditions, civil wars and the country could be divided up again among local warlords. One must also not forget that the Soviet Union was always interested in weakening China and would certainly have interfered in the internal conflicts. The country would not have settled down for a long time and modernization would certainly not have started sooner
Good insights!
good point
It is wild he does not mention Russia's influence on China at all here.
and this is why ccp always boast that they had the favour of 'the majority' back then and thus they won
peasants were indeed the majority of the population in china, and kmt didn't leave an exactly good impression on them
确实，🇨🇳在初期和中期，俄罗斯的影响不可不提
UA-cam demonitisation: "You had me at Communists"
Get out Green iSorrows man
@Agnostic Imperialist Ultra Nationalist Communist countries don't like gay people. Capitalistic countries do.
You have to be part of the party to gain access to the market. It is the only just way, Comrade Patterson.
elektron117 Is that right, what country first decriminalised homosexuality again?
Agnostic Imperialist Ultra Nationalist imagine actually using triple parentheses, nice crypto-larping dork
Title: "What if the Communists Lost the Chinese Civil War?"
America: *yes*
Yes
Maybe it would be worst possibly for the United States, with greater economic power up to twice the size of US due to the early development.
@@1mol831 why not to be another India??
@@1mol831 so china is bigger and more scary?
@@1mol831 lol,no.
The video was published 30 seconds ago and already has 0 ads on
I got a survey😂😂😂
Chinas gonna strike him
@@mattalluisi3954 not b4 UA-cam does
I wouldn’t be so sure about the "at least there wouldn’t have been a famine" part… Mao’s famine is so infamous that people forget the Republic of China also had several famines with millions of deaths. Without massive foreign help, another famine after the war would have been hard to avoid, communism or not.
Mao’s famine is manmade, totally avoidable. Any leader with a functioning brain would not keep exporting large amount of food to other nation when they are having a famine.
@@VMVXMK2 Stalin did. So did Ireland under British rule. I suspect that you're right, the famine wouldn't have happened, but sadly it's not inconceivable.
the thing is, with kmt in power and anti-soviet, the west would give China massive foreign aids just to keep them that way, similar to how America give Kiang shit ton of stuff to keep them fight mao
@@VMVXMK2 The nationalist part is known for great corruption and instability within government, part of the main reason why the people of China turned on them, so government corruption causing an uneven distribution of resources is not too big a stretch
共產黨造成的饑荒是人為的，是既沒有戰爭也沒有自然災害的情況下，出現了規模空前的饑荒！而中國歷史上的饑荒大多有戰爭和自然災害的因素，而且規模也沒這麼大！抗日戰爭裡死的人數都沒有共產黨餓死的人多
If China was no communist it would probably have a pretty serious border dispute with Russia/the Soviets. After the revolution, the Soviets helped china find it footing, part of the deal was defining the border between the two. It has not been disputed since, even the Sino Russian relationship turned sour.
China has its own system. The dictatorship and democracy that you are talking about are different. . . It is the only civilized system on the planet that has not been severed. Its text thousands of years ago can still be recognized.
nope it was still disputed
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict
Imagine Chiang kaishek demanding all 1 million square km of qing land back
Actually the USSR supported both the KMT and the CCP back then.
China and the Soviets already had border disputes in our time, after the Sino Soviet split relations soured and there were clashes at the border
I don't think it would be a major issue, Cold War standoffs not withstanding. Stalin actually wanted the KMT to stay in power right up until 1949 because he didn't support Maoism (which we later saw firsthand in the Sino-Soviet split).
China had three "great" options, authoritarianism under the KMT, authoritarianism under the Emperor, authoritarianism under the communists, wonderful
The first 2 aren't all that bad... I'm kidding
Stop demonizing autocracy. Democracy is not the only working system on Earth.
@@barongaal2 Democracy doesn't work. Autocracy, theocracy and fascism are way better systems
@@DaFishy2 the "1000" year Reich would like to disagree with you.
@@mannhouse8014 nazism is different from fascism
"That's some nice ad revenue you've got there Cody. It'd be a shame if something *happened* to it..."
One interesting point in this alternative timeline is the Nationalist government claim to (Outer) Mongolia as well as the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Nationalist China did invent the infamous Nine Dash Line.
under help of America
@@user-daliushi31 no, it was always chinese territory which the qing dynasty claimed. dynasty claims past down from one to another.
"If when I die, I am still a dictator, I will certainly go down into the oblivion of all dictators. If, on the other hand, I succeed in establishing a truly stable foundation for a democratic government, I will live forever in every home in China." *Chiang Kai-shek*
Well I guess he died a dictator.
I feel like this can apply to ataturk
@@burhan446 well he and sun had a similar idea, create a one party state and then shift to democracy
@@deelightfullp and destroy the Ottoman Empire
@@averagegameenjoyer4156 /qing
Then maybe something would actually have happened on the 4th June 1989 in Tiananmen Square, since we know nothing happened in Super Happy Fun Time Square under Communist rule.
Of course something happened, it was tank inspection day
change your name to Lord of Whales!
The man with the groceries just wanted to ask the nice man who was leading the parade which way was the nearest supermarket, and he was so friendly to tell him.
What a great and helpful man that tank driver, who is part of the Communist Party of China, was. :)
NOTHING WHAT SO EVER, Hey Chinese Spy? Can i have my family back?
@@The_Gerry_Man *nothing bad
Video idea: What if the Meiji Reformation failed and the Tokugawa Shogunate won?
The Tokugawa Shogunate is on the same boat with the Meiji Reformation: improving Japan's survival rate in this mad colonialism dash. In fact Japan's first industrialization and westernization efforts were made by the Shogunate. The only difference between them is HOW they approach the question of Westernization...
Japan would just become a republic. They would only get rid of the emperor or reduce the emperor power. So in a way, if the shogunate won, they would be the same as what happens when the atomic bomb drop on nagasaki. Which is the present day Japan. When Japan lost the war the emperor lost most of his power and people stop calling him god. Yes, during WW2 Japanese consider their emperor as god.
@@muhammadsyafiq1004 would they still like invade Korea, or?
.... That's a good one.
@@slanderskovly1029 They will, oddly enough...
Nice touch with the calming jazz background
Then North Korea wouldn't exist anymore.
Edit: Any newcomers to this hellhole of a reply section: Ignore the guy with the symbols as his username. It'll help your mental stability.
Not really, it's just would be a facisst country.
@@starman275 Contemporary South Korea isn't fascist, assuming North Korea is destroyed in 1950 and taken over by South Korea
shuai pan filthy American intervention? You act like North Korea wasn’t being totally propped up by the Soviets and Chinese. My apologies, but we weren’t just going to sit back while our allies got invaded by cultist dictators. We also had to think about the threat it posed to Japan if Korea totally fell.
@@EVOPE haha, your ally like banning export medical supplies to Canada?
Learn this: Support a side in a foreign civil war is a tricky diplomatic thing, but direct intervention is totally another level of invasion. This is how international politics worked.
If u are so lack of Korean history, let me tell u sth: General Kim of the north were fighting the Japanese for decades before the independence meanwhile Dr. Lee of the south were serving as a veteran in the Japanese government. Before the civil war Dr. Lee assassinated the previous south Koren nationalist leader Mr. Kim.
The USA, supported a formal Japanese gov official who become the south leader by assassination.
General Kim or Dr. Lee, who do u support if u were a hungry Korean civilian???
Learn more facts before talks, or looks like an illiterate guy.
shuai pan well we’re not going to support the guy who supports fighting the Japanese. Had the entire Korean Peninsula fell that could’ve served as a launch pad for the Soviets to spread Stalinism to Japan. Again, you’re acting like Kim wasn’t also being supported by foreign powers. Neither side in the Korean War was acting solely in the interests of the Korean people, or really acting in their interests at all. We just happened to back the side that wasn’t threatening us or our allies.
Also, if you want to bring up leaders taking out rivals in order to assume power, then boy do I have quite the story on General Kim to sell you.
0:17 "The 20th century probably changed no country more than China."
UK: gains 1/4 for the world
also UK: looses 1/4 of the world in less than 50 years
Lmao so true
@Αγαπη Laird thanks to it's empire Britain won the world wars due to having a massive manpower, strategic, and resource advantage
English is the lingra franca for international relations
And they still have massive influence over fromer colonies, "only reason anyone buys British guns"
Arguably, most of that Empire was gained in the 18th and 19th centuries.
@@CaliCurmudgeon ik but the 20 century was when UK lost nearly all of its empire, besides some islands
@No Name English is the most spoken language at the moment is partly due to the widespread of English colonies.
video idea: What if something actually happened on the 4th of June, 1989?
Too unlikely
Kris Nikolaev nothing happened
Nothing new in the east
Man, what a great and sunny day it was in Tienanmen Square 6-4-89
@@zephyrna6249 a completely normal and uneventful sunny day at that
Another point of divergence that would likely result in a nationalist victory is to prevent the transfer of Manchuria to communist China. Maybe Japan was nukes earlier. Maybe the Soviets had a slightly worse time against Germany. But something happens that results in Manchuria not being occupied by the Soviets, and instead become a third power or neutral faction under the emperor.
A huge part of the ensuing civil war post WW2 happened because of the intact industrial region of Manchuria, and it’s abundant steel resources. Nationalist China after WW2 had lost a lot of their industrial capacity due to the war and were severely lacking equipment. Equipment that the communist could now produce with the help of Manchu industry. Despite this, the nationalists still pushed quite far into Manchu before equipment caught up and they were beaten back.
Without Manchu, there would still be no chance the communists could win the civil war.
you're giving manchuria a bit too much credit. you need to understand another 3 reasons why the nationalists one. 1, the Japanese army devastated the NRA which is already very corrupt. KMT/NRA already had a lot of defections to the opposite side, the CPC. Third, CPC participation in the 2nd sino-japanese war helped the PLA developed experience in fighting which happened to defeat the nationalists.
@KrugerderGrosse I wouldn't say that, considering even with Manchuria, the communists still almost lost at the start. The point is, even if Manchuria isn't the biggest factor, it certainly is big enough that not having Manchuria would result in a nationalist victory.
@@redstonehero7944 like i said, nationalists were extremely corrupt. most lower class pesants didn't want t he nationalists in power. most of them sided with communists. this would only prolong the civilwar and not be simply a heavy communist defeat. you need to understand why the communist uprisings succeeded in the first place. it wasn'ty just manchuria but china proper too, xinjiang etc.
@KrugerderGrosse and I'm saying, there were very few resources outside of the Manchuria region available to the communists. Many uprisings around the country were squashed or heavily suppressed. It was through the Manchuria front that the communists broke through. It was with manchu resources that equipped the communist forces. Just because you have support from the poor folks doesn't mean you can transform that into military power.
And if the main communist elements were to be defeated, the nationalists would rule with an iron fist. There would be little chance for a popular uprising for a long time.
@ like I said earlier, it was impossible for the Nanjing Government to rule with an iron fist. KMT lost the mandate and the CPC succeeded. The people were on the side of the CPC. Many Nationalists didn’t even want to continue fighting. If you look at a ww2 time lapse, the Soviets didn’t just give Manchuria to the CPC, it was actually partially KMT controlled by they instantly lost Manchuria. How do you rule with an iron fist when you have one of the worst corruption in your government, your army is drained from fighting a foreign enemy. CPC gained combat experience from the Japanese and their troops were better than ever. If Jiang Jieshi wasn’t incompetent, KMT win but with how bad the KMT was, there was no way.
UA-cam- what a nice and informative video
DEMONITIZED
UA-cam is paranoid about controversial topics
Henry pickle UA-cam has always demonetized political topics; AHH has had this issue irregardless of the topic
UA-cam:
"Smart Things"
*Demonetized*
"Dumb Things"
*Monetized*
Why should youtube demonitise this video? It's not like they're commies or something.
it's still monetized for me
150 POINTS HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM YOUR SOCIAL CREDIT SCORE
30 HAS BEEN ADDED TO YOURS
Extra Credits did a video on this.
the entire comment section is just memes kek
No bus fo you
Worth it.
(this is a joke)
Nationalists: **Defeat the PRC** We won. We have shown we are the true China! None are left standing against us!
All the warlord states still sitting there: **Visible confusion.**
Also Nationalist army
200000 unit are ready , with a million on its way
*CPC, it was still the CPC and PLA, not yet the PRC.
Northern Expedition followed by Central Plains War would destroy all those warlord states save for those loyal to the KMT like Ma Bufang's Xinjiang. Goes down similar to our timeline.
@@Sr_Cozy Not possible at all... After WWII, the economy of the ROC has already heavily broken, apart from the beginning of the Civil War, the ROC government indeed need to force its citizens to go to battlefield to fight the CCP amry, that's also one of the reason why so many ROC soldiers surrender to the CCP during the war.
只是看着你们讽刺又拿中国没办法的样子真搞笑
@@陈陳-t5c 明明被讽刺最多的是kmt……
Video Idea: What if Napoleon wasn’t stopped at Waterloo? What if Napoleon won Waterloo? What would he have done when he won? Napoleon is my favorite historical character so I just really need to know. Thank you!
I know this isn't the answer you were looking for, but if he won at Waterloo he'd just have to fight again on another battle which he would lose.
France at the end of the Napoleonic wars was just weak and tired.
Remember Napoleon was NOT captured at Waterloo, he escaped.
So why did he not raise another army and try again? France just wasn't up to it. The coalition was too much more powerful by then.
"The monster never dies no matter how many times you kill it. It just sheds its skin and changes form."
- B.J. Blazkowicz
"quoting random shit you find to sound cool and smart on the internet just results in a shitstorm comment war on politics and philosophy most of the time because no one is happy when someone else is trying to be a smartass on the internet" - abraham lincoln
@@D00000T that why abraham lincoln had open minded before his dead
@@D00000T lol
@@dickyfirdausabdulghoniy7462 engrish very so smart
@@D00000T lol, it’s an actual quote though, from the game series: “Wolfenstien” it ain’t random shit
It’s also technically true though, compare it to energy, it can’t be created or destroyed, it just changes form. It’s like the clone war prequels when the C.I.S and the Republic both fall at the same due to Order 66. The “monster” was the C.I.S and the guy who was planning for the Rise and the Empire (forgot his name). It “changed form” when Order 66 was executed and he turned it into the empire.
You should do an alternate history scenario where Communist China went to war With the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet split.
That's a very interesting timeline.
I Think My Dog Is a Cat
Then you would witness the first total nuclear war in history. Most nuclear shelters in nowadays China are built in those years. One nuclear shelter near my university is now a musical equipment store for underground bands.
@Hoàng Nguyên Well, it’s all up to Cody, let’s get his attention so he can do this suggestion!
Thats unrealistic and was never even close to happening , isnt this channel dealing with realistic hypotheticals
@giwrgos kalaitzantwnakis Oh wow, an expert in the chat. He did an episode on what if the snap occurred. That’s not realistic. Also, the Chinese believed that China must control the world and that the Soviets weren’t true communists. This could result in wars in indo-china or an all out war. All I’m saying is that there are many scenarios that could be generated from this idea.
I had a grandpa who fought in this war, he surrendered and then was relocated on a farm for 2 years after he surrendered and my great grandpa, a Nationalist General just cut and run to another province and found a war buddy who joined the communists and became a province governor, who kept him low key and gave his kids an education.
My grandpa almost died in this war
@@rlvideosgunner my great grandfather was in the Irish civil war on the losing side.
@@tiernanwearen8096 sorry to hear that !
@@therealman2016 ah he was okay he later married had 10 children and died at the age of 96 he was never imprisend or persucted as the government in 1924 a year after the war was over made a general ammrnsty. He did refuse the pension for veterans regardless of witch side they fought for.
@@tiernanwearen8096 he sound like a great man ! Peace be on his relatives!
Agree with your overall assessment. I think one important piece is it swaps one super power bff with another. Historically, Communist China broke their alliance with USSR minimise the target on her back. Nationalist China had good relations with both USSR and the US, however it would be at risk of becoming a battle ground with the onset of cold war. How China maneuvers between the super powers will define its security and potentially political system.
Mao:
Strength: 1
Perception: 1
Endurance: 2
Charisma: 10
Intelligence: 1
Agility: 1
Luck: 10000000000
1 Month Later: People still start arguments over a joke. Society has gone too soft for comedy.
Chiang Kai Shek
Strength: 50
Perception: 35
Endurance: 40
Charisma: 15
Intelligence: 60
Agility: 28
Luck: -1000000
What trait perks would they start with?
Who would win
Lmao Zedong
Chiang Kai Shrek
Brad Hill Rich capitalist:
Strength:1
Perception:1
Endurance:1
Charisma:1
Intelligence:1
Agility:1
Luck:1
Ability to steal the fruits of workers labour: 1000000000000
@@joseantonioamayaalvarado6744 >saying Chiang is smart
"If Nationalist China did rise, we'd see fewer of these state owned companies."
Nationalist China: **Laughs in Russian Federation style nationalized industry**
WALN Zell maybe
You're absolutely correct. Republic of China would also use some elements of government-lead economy, but they wouldn't be granted this Communist-China bonus which they got by western countries in our timeline.
They would have faced the same restrictions and measures which all capitalist nations face, caused by competition.
@@kulturbanause9228 I suppose the labour wouldn't be as cheap. Meaning less jobs going overseas.
Russia only operates that way because they filled the power void of totalitarian communist culture with black market criminal underground mafia culture, which is a biproduct of regimes like the USSR.
without Mao, Chinese denizens never have to live under the constant threat of being sent to the gulag for overdue library books or social credit systems that oust them from a livable society.
No democracy doesn't mean no prosperity, contrary to Cody's video. Hans Herman Hoppe points out the aniquities of democracy to monarchy and even Jean Jacque Rousseau, himself only advocated for democracy on a small scale.
Safe to say, China may have actually been better off than the west in a lot of ways and probably more avert to corporatism and crony capitalism like what purveyed in the west and what had brought China down to begin with with the arrival of corporatists from the UK, Portugal and the US
What if the North lost the American Civil War
"OH NO IM MENTIONING SOMETHING CONTROVERSIAL!"
*sighs* "Thanks UA-cam."
Twitter: YOU DARE!?
r/famouslastwords
This is the timeline that we deserved im glad you made this video😢
you would prefer the nationalists feudalists to win?
"Communists" in the title? That's a bold move, Cotton.
"Lets see if it pays of for him,"
So much for freedom of speech
What if Sun Yat Sen live a full life?what would he do to China?🇹🇼🇨🇳?
@Ishir Mehra Chiang didn't become the President until after Sun died. Before that he was mentored by Sun to be a future leader. Because of this I do not think it's fair to put Chiang in the same camp as Yuan Shikai; Chiang did still care about the Republic and he wanted to create a modern China as outlined by Sun, but unfortunate circumstances prevented him from ever fulfilling this.
@Ishir Mehra The Yellow River flood was a war time tactic to slow down the encroachment of the Japanese. It caused massive damage to infrastructure and killed many civilians yes, but it was justifiable in the historical context. Flooding has been used as a tactic by many Chinese generals in the past, so it's not like it's a new thing.
I agree that Chiang made many mistakes during the Civil War that led to the Nationalist defeat, but some things were also out of his control (e.g. Japanese invasion, Xi'an incident, massive internal corruption, and US interventions to name a few). In my opinion, had Yuan not betrayed the Republic and fractured China, the Civil War would not have started in the first place.
@Ishir Mehra Chiang became a dictator because of his paranoia to Communism within his own party. Chiang initiated Martial Law in Taiwan for this reason. If the Nationalists won the Civil War, Chiang likely would've eventually relinquished power. This is pure speculation though, and neither you or I will ever know.
That being said, a Communist regime does have a lot of differences to a Military Dictatorship. For one, the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution would never had happened, and China would not have closed off its economy for 30 years.
@@shockwave2291 Wrong, he became a dictator because it was necessary at the time, China was at war with Japan and the Communists. A dictator is necessarily needed in order to lead a nation to victory.
@Ishir Mehra Also, exterminating Communists was the right thing to do, they declared independence from China and had the goals to integrate China to a soviet puppet state. Manchukuo and other Japanese puppets did the same thing of dividing china.
Basically, the US and friends would've had an easier time in Asia.
Edit: Alright let's stop the mini civil war going down in the comment section.
True
And the bloody coronavirus would have been taken seriously by the government... hopefully
@@凃少麒
Yeaaaa we're all boned
@SMD sth91
Yea china would be a helluva lot more open internationally after the first few decades. But as cody said, the nationalists weren't perfect
Well, taiwan IS a rich country, so why couldn't china be rich too?
„If time is good, people are suffering, if time is bad, people are suffering“
-a quote from idk who I got it from my parents once years ago
Me : nobody won because it didn't end
Cody *hits me with a history book*
I am a Chinese, and I have been wondering about this question ever since I was a teenager
你 have been什么你have been，回家抱孩子去吧你
@@robertedward8688 刘能，你寡不寡（无聊不无聊），跟你有毛关系。你回家抱孩子去吧
neng liu haha 流能
li yaxin 李鸭心？一颗做鸭子的心？菊花万人捅？
neng liu 哈哈哈 你个坐吃等死的loser. Keep on entertaining me.
I have destroyed my social credits by watching this, my final message is **radio message turns into static**
So if the Nationalists won, Vietnam wouldn’t be Vietnam, and more importantly fortunate son wouldn’t be a famous song...
Hoàng Nguyên yep you guys rock at kicking out foreign invasions since WWII ps great job in The Third Indochina War especially with beating the Chinese with their own weapons they gave you
vietnam is really good at defense
and, cody is somewhat biased tbh. if you want a more amerocentric or eurocentric PoV, althub is the place to be.
In fact, Stalin was a friend of Chiang Kai-shek and the Vietnamese communists still received ammunition.
@Hoàng Nguyên actually the north would have fell to a full scale American invasion but that didn't happen because we didn't want to provoke communist China by invading a communist country
”Empires arise from chaos and empires collapse back into chaos. This we have known since time began.”
So,China will fall to civil war again is what you are saying?
@@shadowsafe6329 he's actually quoting something. But his point is that no matter what, eventually every empire or great nation will have its eventual demise to ethier collapse permanently, or at least face revolutionary chaos that turns it into something else.
@@crispyjack428 I see what you mean,but whatever raises from the ashes is not always better,like in this case.
I get what you are saying
That's as useful a quote as saying something like "From ashes we came and to ashes we will return."
Also, Empires may rise and fall but _Civilizations_ can last eons. China is an example of this.
Thanks so much for this video! I've always considered this in history.🇨🇳🇹🇼
2:45 ,,But now the Nationalists ALONE have to deal with another enemy.''
*....Saying that as if the Communists contributed into or did anything in the Second Sino-Japanese War.*
They actually did. When Japan invaded, the nationalists and communists, at least on paper, agreed to team up and fight the Japanese.
@@Owen_loves_Butters Yeah, on paper.
Not in actual reality.
The Communists only did a few skirmishes and thats it.
It was the Nationalists and regional warlords that did all of the fighting, which of course was hard and heavy, and which also made it easier for the Communists to beat them in the following civil war.
I wouldn’t call Nationalist “incompetent” during their struggle against Japanese invader
1. Nanking has no strategic value, therefore the Nationalist withdrew their troops in order to defend the city of Wuhan (Wuhan is also a junction of numerous railroads that stretches into the heart of China, hence its strategic importance)
2. The Nationalist forces did manage to hold off the Japanese onslaught and achieved a strategic stalemate across the frontline around 1941. Their 1945 counteroffensive was largely successful (with American help of course) and the counteroffensive is very well on their way to drove the Japanese out of China if the Americans didn’t drop the atomic bomb and end the war early.
3. Nationalist held off a technologically superior enemy from 1937-41 with little outside help.
This is a great and entertaining video nevertheless but I thought it might be a little unfair to label Nationalist “incompetent”. They fought bravely with whatever they had at that time, inflicted heavy casualties on the enemy, and contributed immensely to the Allied war effort.
Exactly. They did make mistakes like the yellow river flood but overall they were quite successful in repelling the Japanese invasion, and certainly did more than the communists who were putting in more effort to recruit soldiers than to fight.
Ng I completely agree with you, Yellow River flood was a terrible mistake indeed. But overall the Nationalist contributed so much more than that other faction that was so obsessed with preserving its own strength for the upcoming civil war.
@@jackuncles6233 Actually it was the nationalists that were preserving their armies to fight the civil war later. Chang kai shek didnt even want to fight the japanese until he was "convinced" into doing so
killer bee I am Chinese and I live in China, that was the typical communist interpretation of the war. In reality, Chiang Kai Shek lost most of his best train and equipped Central Army in the Battle of Shanghai. He did not hesitate to deploy his field armies in massive confrontation with the Japanese throughout the war.
killer bee Communist started with less than 40,000 solideres in 1937, by 1945 their size expanded well over 1,200,000. They DID preserve their strength and barely confronted the Japanese head on.
Don’t worry Cody, I got an ad just before the video started. Also I loved how he included extra credits.
"Did the kuomintang lose the civil war?
"No!
"So why are they fleeing to Taiwan now?"
"Why don't you ask why the communists fled to the China mainland instead?"
Well said, very well said wong si tu.
@EmerBlox chill man itsa joke
@EmerBlox nigga 💀
EmerBlox u gay
@EmerBlox im a fucking chicken nugget are you blind?
That video absolutely destroyed his social credit lmao
That glorious 17 second intro, ending with " *Millions dont Starve to Death* "
I shouldnt have laughed but I did...
ah yes, because nobody starves to death under *checks notes* ... capitalism... oh fuck wait...
@@DrummerMatt4253 No, they don't..
@@DrummerMatt4253
Definitly less than if they were communists.
matt there’s a reason why we’re not eating our own pets like Venezuela, or being murdered because of our own faith like the millions of Christians in China, or being persecuted in North Korea. We’re not perfect but I am sure anyone with a little common sense would love to live in America or any other capitalist country
@@Arturo.Juarez well judging by his political compass score he doesn't seem to have any common sense he's an anarcho communist
[you've lost 100 social credit points]
this video ignored one huge problem: the warlords.
in the 1930's China is more like a loose confederation than a unified nation.
in the year of 1928,after the Japanese assassinated ZhangZuoLin, the warlord of the north east. Zhang's son, ZhangXueLiang decide to obey the ROC government. then the ROC government become the most powerful force among those warlords in china. and unified China ...in name only
yet KMT is strong , but not strong enough, those warlords are highly independent from the central government. their allegiance to the central government is in name only. they keep their own army, they issue their own currency and made their own tax policy.(remember Zhang's son? although he clams he obeys to the ROC government, he is still highly independent too!)
those warlords like a king in their little kingdoms, the central government have little control in the local. the warlords get support from different foreign power by their own. they even war to others for their own benefit.
EX. the Central Plains War (MAY,1930--Nov 4th,1930)
even after the 2nd Sino-Japanese war, KMT and CCP annexed most of the remaining warlords, some of them still remains.
in the following civil war, they either eliminate or annexed by CCP or escaped to Taiwan with ROC and annexed by KMT.
so back to the main topic. when the time KMT launched the purge towards CCP(APR 12th,1927), the CCP didn't have any territory and their own army, but the warlords have territory, the have tax income, they have thier own weaponized army. they are much more strong than CCP.
so even KMT could eliminate CCP in 1927,the KMT still have to deal the the warlord problem. it's hard to say what's gonna happen after that. maybe early or late, there still gonna be a civil war.
back to reality, so after the 2nd CCP--KMT civil war, does China finally become a unified country?
of course not.remember there is still a exile ROC government exist in Taiwan province? and there is no total armistice agreement has been signed between Taiwan and Mainland China. so theoretically, despite the super long ceasefire between Mainland China and Taiwan exists, the civil war is still on going. right?
exactly
History tells us that as a huge multi-nation country, 'democracy' is not suitable for China, only leaders (or so-called dictators) that are powerful enough like Mao Zedong can unite China.
@@christlau1233 How about the united states? It is literally a bunch of different countries (states), and it run just fine (i am not saying it is perfect) with democracy. And why must china 'unite' as a single country? How about a confedaracy of different states? Or something like the UK? Or forming a close group that benifit each other like the EU?
@@dickiewongtk Remember China got different culture and 1.4 billion people.
@@dickiewongtk
Not possible. The only way to unite so many different people of different cultures and race would be by hating on one common enemy.
The correct example would be India... they are so diverse and have so many conflicts in history. The only way they are United is due to sheer hatred for Pakistan. Same with Pakistan too.
China would be no different.
I think that the authoritarianism would die out around the same time as Taiwan if not sooner. In Sun’s later years he became increasingly pessimistic and so changed the KMT’s goals. The idea was that China wasn’t ready for democracy, at least not yet so a temporary one party dictatorship would be established while the people were educated on how democracy works. Then gradually, opposition parties would be allowed into the government, and finally Democratization. The KMT was authoritarian because that was part of the plan. I would argue that the reason Chiang stayed around so long is because they lost the civil war. It threw a wrench into everything. At that point, they just needed to survive. Democracy isn’t really a priority when your only objective is survival.
I mean rechnically china is democratic. Does having multiple parties really mean one is democratic? Since we are talking china lets use a party memeber. I remember one saying "constitutional governance asserts that power lies in the people, and implements a parliamentary democratic political system. But the real operation of parliamentary democracies is completely grasped in the hands of the bourgeoisie." Members of parliament (or officials in general) are able to contest elections (and win them) only with the support of the bourgeoisie." In essence under liberal democracies you have multiple parties that are bought and funded by capitalists. When popular policy goes against big buisness interests they are shot down. Housing, food, price stabilizations, wage increases all things that are presented in china. From 1970s to now chinese wages rose up drastically. Compared to the usa it has stagnated. China has eliminated abject poverty(its still poor as its a 3rd world country). And it has low hunger rate for a 3rd world country. ranging from 2 percent and 9 percent. While the usa has like 15 percent. China has a 90 percent homeownership rate due to maos land reform. These are things that our democracy yhave failed because parties are owned by corporations.
Secondly we can say china undemocratic but its more similar to usa democracy. its a republic. People vote in local lower level politicians who then vote and appoint people in power. So they dont vote in presidents directly but they do vote. Its kinda like how we do it with our supreme justice. Which is kinda undemocratic but i dont think anyone would consider the usa not a democracy. All laws are not voted in by us but by politicians we elect. They either say yes or abstain. And in china unlike the usa they can recall their congress members while we cannot. So in ways its democratic and in others it isnt.
Lastly i think mao won because he really did have the pesants on his side. What did he do when he got power? Education, healthcare, He got pesants to kill their landlords and take control over their own land. Got rid of cultural backwardness like banditry and sex slavery and foot binding. It was a feudal society and mao for all of his atrocities was better than the kmt. Im haitian and we all like Jean Jacques Dessalines because he got rid of slavery even if he was an emperor.
@@sungod1384 the democratic part really depends on who you are asking
Asking USA? China dictatorship (idk the exact reason but I guess it’s one party state and party power>country power and people really don’t matter in votes)
Asking China? China democratic (and USA would be a money-controlled state which is actually not democratic in their eyes) (and Chairmans like Xi Jinping are just „representatives“ of the interests of the people)
But you are right, it does have some similarity with the democracy like the us, just that Chinese votes are actually by starting in a random neighborhood and then going 1 stage up until all province representatives vote for one chairman
@@sungod1384 and man you have written a whole novel for this
I don't know how realistic this scenario is, but what if Sun Yat-Sen lived longer and actually managed to create the American-style democracy he wanted to? It would be a big, unwieldy democracy with both main parties being pretty authoritarian.
It would be the single biggest tragedy. Look up the illiteracy rate at the time and think again if democracy is a good idea. Hell, I wouldn’t say it’s a good idea in the u.s. considering almost 30 school shootings has happened this year and literally a million ppl have died to fucking Covid and things are not looking up to change at all any moment soon.
Pretty impossible considering the sheer number of people in China, look at how big a problem political unrest is in the west, imagine the protests, and on rare occasions, riots, but in numbers so large that they could spark civil wars.
Ultimately that’s 1 billion population forces it into a dictatorship
E
Then it would just be another india
This video concept gets a like from me, of course!
Hey! your the guy who makes battle world map videos! Love your content, keep it up
Hello again
Shanxi King
姓阎的山西省主席....
The issue with comparing the KMT's path to democracy with other nations or parties is that Taiwan's democracy came about when it did largely due to one man. Chiang Ching Kuo, son of Chiang Kai Shek, banned any members of the Chiang family for running for president and removed restrictions on other parties. He was also known for a large scale crack down on corruption in Shanghai during the last days of the Chinese Civil War.
Totally underrated comment! Good on you.
So I guess China could possibly still be a democracy if nationalists one.
Ok boomer
I'd say about the democracy part probably also are related to America pressure with the Henry Liu incident (He's assassinated by a gangster which was hired by some person related to Taiwanese government member)? unsure about how much the effect has play out.
You make him out to be some sort of hero who brought about democracy after his father’s death. The truth is a lot more complicated. He was far from a perfect guy, evidenced by his tenure as head of secret police. He was also under massive pressure at the time from the public that was getting more and more educated, yet many were still barred from even participating in politics. Of course, there’s also the fact that those that held life-time positions on the Legislative Yuan were all dying out at this point, and that Western support had already mostly run dry due to prolonged lack of democracy and poor ruling. What I’m trying to get at, basically, is that he didn’t just make reforms and inadvertently democratize out of the kindness of his heart. Same story for Lee, to keep any sliver of control he had to concede and reform. Jiang JinGuo only brought about democracy due to a various number of circumstances, and if he was in power in China, without any sort of substantial pressure I certainly don’t think he would have.
Your animation keeps getting better
*Cody’s social credit score plummets*
@Pink Panther please leave chinese spy
Pink Panther what ever you say Xi jinping
@Pink Panther Any real Scottish person could spell "please" correctly.
If you have any evidence for the existence of social credit system, I would give you $100. Plz plz, as An Chinese, I would really love to know what the hell this is!
I'm a mainland Chinese and I agree with almost every word you said in this video
It's interesting to get a mainland Chinese person's point of view. Greetings from the US!
@@nickg4564 I’m mainland Chinese but live in London for 10 years, is actually sad that most people outside mainland think that we are so blind and racist, even arrogant just to be patriotic, but the truth is many friends I know from mainland, we all want to watch UA-cam, Twitter without VPN, want to play video games and watch movies without censorship, want to complain the government when there is indeed a problem. But sadly our voice won’t be heard since there’re only a small amount of people know what to use VPN in order to talk to foreigner.
@@nickg4564 Greetings to you as well! I went to Canada for my undergrad degree so I've adopted the more western way of thinking. From my experience in both China & Canada, having been exposed to viewpoints from both sides, I can tell that both sides are being portrayed inaccurately by media from the other. China isn't the poor, closed-minded country with no human right anymore. though a considerable portion of the population are still adhering to the old way of living. I have friends from both countries and I would say I love people from both sides equally, though if I had to pick a side I would still choose my home country, undoubtedly, since that's where my root lies. Nevertheless, I do hope we can all just be friends and never try to harm each other in any way.
@@JayJay-wf2oe I agree, I hope both countries can learn to get along some day.
@@Kylesaystuff You don't want Twitter, trust me. Neither a communist governm... wait you have that. Don't worry you'll liberate yourselves one day.
The nationalists actually held Nanjing for 3 months against overwhelming odds....they didnt just run away
It was held by a patriotic holdout who was left for dead after Jiang evacuated all the arms and wealth they could
some nra soldiers put up a fierce fight (which is why the japanese were angry). Commander tang shengzhi fled and Chiang is a nightmare as a military commander (if you get orders from him, likely these orders will cause you to die. Many generals legit closed their radios to ignore Chiang's military orders).
that's why the PRC never demonize the KMT,
Only the KMT DID!
Heck they even recognize that without Chiang, there would be no PRC, no United China,
Unlike Some Authoritarians States,
Ye and the river thing was a sacrifice that was worth it they stopped the Japanese for a little while
@@testtestman2355 Bias level 1000%
Look at this man giving up 999999 of his social credit just for a video, what a madlad.
It shouldn't be taken for granted that Nationalist China would have had a bad relationship with the Soviet Union. The KMT received Soviet support from the beginning, and Chiang Kai-shek received training in Moscow. Even after the CCP rose to prominence, Stalin, paradoxically, favoured the Nationalists, pressuring Mao to join forces with the KMT, even after the Shanghai Massacre. During WWII it was the Nationalists that received military support from the USSR (Mao got only some propaganda leaflets), and after the war ended Stalin recognised the KMT as the national government of China, and signed a treaty of alliance with Chiang. Throughout the 45-9 Civil War Stalin, who distrusted and disdained Mao, stayed largely on the sidelines, and continued to advocate for China to be ruled by a coalition government. The Americans also, although technically on the Nationalists' side, disliked Chiang, whom they supported only reluctantly, and they too pushed for a ceasefire.
So it wasn't as clear-cut as the CCP with the Soviets vs the KMT with the Americans.
KMT was unpopular and ruled by both corruption and incomptence. Stalin preferred Chiang so he could have a capitalist neighbor to trade with. Hell, Stalin hated Mao for not following Soviet communism. The differences of Stalin and Mao could been seen as early as the Korean War where Mao distrusted Stalin for not directly supporting both the PVA and KPA other than advisors, equipment, and volunteers.
I think if KMT weren't defeated and won the Civil war, China would become more neutral third party much like the non-aligned movement in the cold war, which China under Mao was an observer.
A China under KMT would have tried to take Mongolia back. Which could trigger a Soviet invasion. And China would be part of the only superpower on earth today - the Soviet Union.
@@zctao2577 Wrong. "That same year Sun sent Chiang to spend three months in Moscow studying the Soviet political and military system. During his trip in Russia, Chiang met Leon Trotsky and other Soviet leaders, but quickly came to the conclusion that the Russian model of government was not suitable for China. Chiang later sent his eldest son, Ching-kuo, to study in Russia."
Came here to sey exactly that. This whole concept seems rather unrealistic and I'm actually surprised that the author somehow omitted (forgot?) about the fact that the Soviets support KMD till the very end.
What if Google never bought UA-cam
*This comment has been removed by Google*
@@qwerty_1871 YEAH gEt DuNkEeEeD YoUTuBe
What if the world was objectively better
SMD sth91 that would be “what if the world was objectively worse”
SMD sth91 memes are simply jokes, they don’t harm anyone. The internet is used for many things and makes living more convenient. Removing would make the standard of living objectively worse for a lot of people. Smartphones don’t hurt anyone either, they’re simply a convenience item.
About time cody, and the timing is perfect (u know HK)
Great video. Very interesting.
Eyy early notification 1 view squad, thanks for doing this long awaited scenario.
Do an alternative history video on if something were to happen on June 4th, 1989
I am proud to be this comment’s 69th like
Without Mao, Kim il sung would not have attacked south Korea. He specifically waited for Mao to give permission for the fight since the Soviets didn't wanna risk joining themselves wich would agitate the US.
It was Stalin who gave him permission
*Stalin
Mao was more preoccupied with Taiwan prior to Kim Il-sung's little adventure
@GENERAL KIM JONG UN he was not a coward if he joined in it, itwould be ww3 lol.
@@diegopills yes it was Stalin, but only after repeatedly harassing him for the go-ahead. The Soviets were not happy to be in Korea.
Kim Jong Un would probably still live in Switzerland if this were the case
There would’ve been a video called “what if the communists won the civil war”
Me and the boys before communism: ADS
Me and the boys after communism: NO ADS
We''' redistribute the ads that we've got to ensure everyone is equally prosperous (dead)
Even when we destroy it, Communism still takes our food.
Imagine UA-cam without cancerous Prageru ads.
Hell yeah an Extra Credits and Alternate History Hub crossover episode!
1:32-1:37 "For this alternate timeline, what's the decisive moment that everything changes?"
Me, in my head: "When the Fire Nation decided to attack?"
What's the decisive moment everything changes
Everything changed when the fire nation attacked
So in short, Chiang Kai Shek is simply the lesser of two evils.
I'd settle for that.
I really like this video! Right now I'm studying the Chinese Civil War, and your video was thought provoking and informative. Thumbs up.
*sees China is chaotically neutral*
*remembers dnd*
Oh no
SirisTheSlayer *Screams in Lawful Evil*
(Cough)... what's wrong with being chaotic neutral? I'm just asking on behalf of a friend. I promise.
@@warpartyattheoutpost4987 Chaotic Neutrals tend to be the no-fucks-given kind of people. Helping people or making them suffer isn't really important to them as their moral compass is pointed towards "yes" all the time so they just end up doing whatever on a whim, be it good or bad, usually for their own sake and without regard for rules or social conventions.
As a DM I can confirm
Thank goodness 5th ed gives players more scaffolding to build a character's social outlook on than a single Alignment category.
Can't we all just think of a happy ending where instead of worrying about nukes and politics we will just worry about meteors or aliens. It would be more uniting
you forgot one important detail: the Soviet seized Japanese-controlled Manchuria at the end of WW2. The Chinese Communist Party could be reformed there and new civil war would soon broke out, this time with the Soviet intervened more directly
honestly stalin MIGHT just let chiang rule everything provided that he goes neutral for the upcoming cold war
I still think Stalin would just support the Nationalists by giving them control of manchuria and put an end to the Civil war once and for all.
Soviets also thought that nationalists would have won despite supporting the communists, that's why they made a deal to get Mongolia as a satellite state but the communists won at the shock of everyone
Stalin was never against the KMT. It would have been one dictator supporting another dictator. The KMT would likely have taken Tibet, Xinjiang back as well as Hong Kong in 1997.
Cody "oh no Im mentioning something controversial!!!!"
UA-cam. DEMONITIZED!!
cody: *sighs* "thanks UA-cam...."
UA-cam demonetizes anti-China video, UA-cam supports China, UA-cam guilty of treason.
I just got an ad at the start of this video!
This is something most people in the west are not aware of: The Chinese political system and political culture have been staying mostly the same in essence since 250BC (around the time of the Roman Republic). Dozens of major peasant uprisings couldn't change it. The warlords, who popped up once in a while and took over part of the country, couldn't change it. The Mongolians couldn't change it. The Manchurians couldn't change it. The Europeans couldn't change it. The Nationalists couldn't change it. The Communists changed it, and bad things happened so they changed it back.
Mandate Of Heaven best system confirmed.
@@PitLord777 best by Darwinian measures..
What system are you talking about exactly? The communists radically changed Chinese society
@@surperian4340 Centralized political power, highly bureacratic, confucianist, local governments in remote areas do whatever they want, so on and so forth.
@@merdufer this is kinda weak argument. i.e any warlord changed it for a time. Ever heard of Taiwan?
Amazing video, bro sacrificed his social credits for this video
If the Nationalists did win in the theorized “what if” scenario, I wonder if I would ever exist. My great grandfather was working for city government of Xiamen and had ties with the Nationalists. In post WW2 China, if the Nationalists didn’t embezzle US foreign aid away from starving people to their own pockets, my great grandpa wouldn’t have gone out of his way to expose embezzlement and escape to Singapore, and I will not exist as my grandpa would have not meet my grandma in Singapore. It’s interesting to think how many people including myself would not exist if the Nationalists defeated the Communists.
lol , any "what if" could make you removed from the timeline, and here you are, Imagin what IF your grandpa escaped to other coutries like Malaysia? So don't think IF.
"Some of you may die. And that is a sacrifice im willing to make"
How a Nationalist win would prevented your grandpa to flee to Singapore?
@@gorilladisco9108 read this again ´´my great grandpa wouldn’t have gone out of his way to expose embezzlement and escape to Singapore´´
@@RonnalStevens1 Was exposing embezzlement and escaping to Singapore related? As in cause and effect?
Because if it is, then Nationalist win will also cause that great grandpa of him to flee to Singapore because of fear of retaliation.
The fun fact is, Mainland China has been in Authoritarian rule for centuries...
my great grandfather was a NRA chinese soldier. he said that the nationalist wasn't any better. if not worse. and I've been to mainland china on a vacation, saying china a communist country is like saying bruce jenner a woman.
*millennia
@@fbmw98 They didn’t say Communist, they said authoritarian which is true. Meanwhile, yeah the KMT weren’t a great choice but they definitely wouldn’t have done all the stupid shit Mao did and by the modern era it most definitely would’ve reformed into something like what Taiwan or Korea is now considering both had borderline dictators but eventually became full ok democracies.
@@jerrell1169 Except KMT did exactly what Mao did in Taiwan which is a period called White Terror, it’s basically the reverse cultural revolution so yeah, they are about the same I would say
@@michael1111111100
There is a problem though, and its about the power keg between four collective armies, namely, the Kwei Clique, Jin Clique, Southern warlords, Ma Clique and Yunnan, all of these regions are highly militatized and they can defeat the KMT if possible, if ROC won the war, wouldn't there be more millions to die compare to Mao? ROC would unify China except without Tibet, East Turkestan and Mejiang.
I would honestly recommend Extra Credits History videos not just to anyone that wants to know more about the Chinese Revolution, but as a supplement for anyone who likes this channel. They do a very good job at making very consumable history content.
They also compare black people to orcs!
Tolkein's to be precise.
People that watch or recommend Extra Credits as a historical source are historical illiterates and morons that like SJWs.
When Mao laughs he becomes LMao
Both came out of the Civil war as Dictatorships under different veneer, One "Communist", one "Capitalist"
MrHan have you ever heard of democracy?
Edit: fair, kmt wasn’t democratic
Well as far as I know they wanted to establish democracy after unifying China and then the war against the Japanese came. So they couldn’t get to it. A shame really
NomadOfFreedom I think they were being authoritarian for the civil war
@@maxace1078 yeah thats what I meant as well. In this 'what if' scenario I'd definitely say that nationalist China would have become a democracy
@@SupremeCKS maybe China becomes a Democracy but only after Cheings death or remain a dictatorship one party state like under Cheing or corruption and instability of the Nationalists leads to another civil war
The PRC today isn't much different from the KMT of the 40s, as the video points out. A more interesting question would be "What if Yuan Shikai didn't betray the Republicans and trigger the Warlord Era?"
or what if yuan Shikai successfully became the emperor of the china? Emperor Hong Xian
@@aquaswallower988 another North Korea probably
@@aquaswallower988 honestly after being ruled by the manchus i doubt people liked the idea of another imperial dynasty
@@aquaswallower988 Yuan Shi Kai forgot the point of overthrowing the Qing's.
@Your Majesty, because of chiang kai sheng son
plus it was rumored that chiang's wife is a covert spy of USA,
oh well rumor are rumors
For ROC had nothing to do with "agriculture, village and farmer" problem, the deepest problem in Chinese civilization. Things would get worse. When Chang Kai-shek left Chinese mainland, he didn't bring more than 300 million farmers but just big capitalists, soldiers and scholars with him, so that he didn't face the problem. Before he failed, it was mess already. If he did win, it would still be a mess in great rural areas of China, since his power could only cover several main cities and many military leaders control their land, making Sun Yat-sen's principles shit.
The first thing after Chiang arrived in Taiwan was widespread land reforms, stripping local landlords of their possessions (to a lesser extent than the communists I'd say). Both South Korea and Japan underwent land reform (and a brutal one in SK), and they were both ruled by right-wing dictatorship (SK) or dominant-party democracy (Japan), which largely resemble the possibilities of a ROC on the mainland in the 50s. Chiang and his allies also didn't shy away from targeting large industrialists who don't support them to the fullest extent. If the problem of severe and widespread corruption was not addressed, the unstable regime under Chiang could very well descend into chaos, forcing Chiang to reform the land policies just to stay In power.
@@lukexu6400 Chiang did that because he learned it from the civil war. learned it from CCP. If he won the war, he might never had the chance to learn it.
They were less educated than Taiwanese back then tho.
The big differences was that the KMT had a close relationship with the US and were open to international trade and food imports. It was the CCP that closed China's borders. If there were famines under the KMT, they could at least solicit food aid in peacetime to prevent the massive death tolls seen under the CCP.
@@lukexu6400 蒋介石愿意进行土地改革的一大因素是他是在台湾的土地上进行的，而许多国民党的高管政要以及军事将领本身就是大陆的大地主
Even a lot movies about Vietnam War like Platoon, Full Metal Jacket or Apocalypse Now would never be made in this alternate timeline. A lot of the vets who fought in it likely would never fight in it.