Talk:White Terror (Taiwan)

Syria

"but has since been surpassed by the Syrian half-century martial law, which lasted from 1963 to 2011." Not only is this claim not sourced but, in my opinion, goes contrary to history itself. The founders of the Ba'ath Party (Syrian) were not military commanders and to say that Syria has been under Martial law since 1963 needs SOURCES. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orasis (talk • contribs) 08:10, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I have found a source and added it to the article. Of course, considering the civil war, the statement may be inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.249.67 (talk) 20:28, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Some links that might be useful for finding references

Outrage over Taiwan 'White Terror' records

White Terror exhibit unveils part of the truth

White Terror Documents and Human Body Parts Found Abandoned

Remembering 2-28

Famous Incidents/Victims

Shouldn't 228 be included in this list? caspar (talk) 08:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)casparlant

• Henry Liu
• Lin Yi-hsiung's mother and daughters
• Chen Wen-chen (陳文成)
• Wu Shu-chen (crippled)

@Casparlant: Probably -- feel free to add it. DrIdiot (talk) 21:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Why "White" Terror? What's white about it?

Equinox ◑ 19:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The term goes back to the russian revolution, white vs red DrIdiot (talk) 12:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

removed line

"Often, after having come unaccompanied to Taiwan, these refugees to Taiwan were considered more disposable than local Taiwanese." Unsourced. Need strong justification that this was actually part of the rationale. DrIdiot (talk) 12:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Republic of China

This is a period in history when the government clearly identified as the "Republic of China". It held China's seat in the UN during most the period. In fact, it is still the "Republic of China" today according to the Constitution, which also actively administers parts of Fujian province. It's not the island of Taiwan only. I'm aware that the main article is named "Taiwan" because it has been taken over by people blind to the facts. However, when it comes to historical events like the White Terror, you can't not admit there aren't inconsistencies and continuity errors with regard to wording. This confuses people. And there's the intention to confuse people, that the "democratic" island has nothing to do with "evil" China. The "Taiwanese culture and mythology" in that video game is entirely Chinese. Real Taiwanese culture is aboriginal. You can't make a cut between the Republic of China and Taiwan, and you can't attribute the White Terror to Taiwan while minimizing the usage of "China" There's no other way to solve this mess than to return to the objective principles.--82.207.237.122 (talk) 01:12, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

lol. this clown is actually trying to get away with a 4-5k death count.

https://phmuseum.com/grants/awarded/24037

https://www.fpri.org/article/2017/02/taiwans-white-terror-remembering-228-incident/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35723603

18-28k. get serious lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanoiGuevara (talk • contribs) 22:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

does white terror include 228?

Sources:

Yes: [1]

No: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]

Anyway, should probably make this clear. DrIdiot (talk) 15:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Comparison with Nazi Germany

How can the article honestly comparse the execution of 4,000 people to the systematic extermination of millions by the Nazis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knoterification (talk • contribs) 00:59, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was the same regime approaching fascism with the continuous revolutionist traits, qualities and ruling style (1928-2000) from China to Taiwan, and actually devoted to maintain the same identity struggling to regain China, which was actually applied to claim its legitimacy to represent the entire China until the UN Resolution 2758 in 1971. It is impractical to consider that the Chiang Kai-shek's government as a different entity after 1949.

You have ignored the fact referred in the sources such as: "...Now this was not just a military situation. Chiang tremendously admired fascism and looked to create a fascist state in China. Also very important, when Chiang had the opportunity to create his own state in Taiwan he most definitely did not create a parliamentary democracy, he created a variation of a fascist state in Taiwan...." The Nazi symbols, dresses, introductive materials, including Mein Kampf were not just legally accessible, but the lasting fashion until slowly faded away after the Martial Law era ended in 1988. Why don't you talk with the German Institute Taipei, Israel Economic and Cultural Office in Taipei and the local Jewish community to see how they have worked hard to educate people about the international laws and humanity for the last 30 years.

"4000" victims in this article was not an accurate count, but still an ongoing disputed estimation among Taiwanese scholars nowadays, for instance: the remaining Academia Historica and Ministry of Justice (Taiwan) show more than 140,000 prosecuted in the historical files, not including the disappeared ones murdered by the secret agents. It is difficult to collect the references after over 70 years, particularly since all the 8 intelligence agencies had executed concrete systematical measures to destroy the dossiers legally when the government ended Martial Law system. Mickie-Mickie (talk) 05:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Fascism is a specific political ideology with a specific tradition in the history of ideas. Most right-wing military dictatorships cannot be correctly placed under that banner, even if they share some characteristics with fascist regimes. The fact that the Kuomintang had a fascist wing in the 1930's doesn't mean that it was wholly fascist at the time, or that it remained fascist. There were also left-wing factions, and it was close to the Soviet Union. Knoterification (talk) 05:37, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

This might be pedantic on my part, but the article doesn't explicitly compare White Terror killings to the Holocaust. Hartnett, Shaou-Whea Dodge, and Keränen describe the White Terror as possessing "brutality so unsettling that comparisons to Nazis and Fascists seem accurate." CJ-Moki (talk) 07:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Even saying that "brutality so unsettling that comparisons to Nazis and Fascists seem accurate." is just a inaccurate exaggeration. Comparing anything to the Nazis is just relativizing the unique horror of the latter. It's absolutely unfair to put any right-wing dictator in the same category as Hitler. This only proves the generalized far-left bias of english universities and wikipedia's editors. Shj648 (talk) 11:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

The Nazi/fascist comparison was made in a reliable source, in this case, a peer-reviewed academic journal. CJ-Moki (talk) 00:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

References

Fascism

The article calls Taiwan under Chiang Kai-Shek a fascist state. While a number of historians consider Chiang to be a fascist many others don't. So we should stay away from explicitly calling the ROC a "fascist" state. 216.208.98.34 (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Not done for now See the previous discussion. If there are published reliable secondary sources disputing the characterization of the ROC under the White Terror as fascist, please cite them. CJ-Moki (talk) 10:33, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It is bizarre why Taiwanese editors seem to view Chiang's regime as almost worse than the Axis powers he fought against, or spend so much of their time and energy complaining about his anti-Communist polices, rather than condemning Mao's far worse atrocities. Also interesting is the fact that they ignore that even under Chiang's White Terror, Taiwan was STILL more democratic during the Cold War than China and other Communist states such as North Korea and Cuba are today (Chiang did legally permit local elections during his rule, even if at first reluctantly).

I just think it is a bit myopic, and lacking foresight and breadth of vision. Morever, repeatedly staining the KMT's legacy is not a positive development for modern Taiwan also...many young people in the West, being sympathetic to socialism due to seeing capitalism's failures and inefficiencies, would likely simply argue why should the West support Taiwan at all if it had such a legacy? Morever, Chiang's KMT seemed to crack down on mainlanders who followed him to Taiwan as much as, if not even more than, the Taiwanese who already lived in Taiwan - in essence, his White Terror was not about anything racial necessarily, but rather purely ideological (rightly or wrongly, he suspected them of harboring sympathies with a hostile subversive state, Mao's Communist government). Being a mainlander and supporting communism certainly was not likely to shield them from the KMT's reprisals.

Rather than strengthen the DPP's image or favourably promote their great cause of "independence", certain users' incessant attacks on Chiang and his government, and efforts to link him with Nazism will possibly destroy Taiwan's image completely. For example, think, would a random young liberal in America or Europe want to travel to China or Taiwan, if Taiwan has such a burdensome and shady history? Support for Taiwan in the West has already been fairly shaky, and there are many pro-socialist young adults in the West who in fact eagerly want China to conquer Taiwan specifically because they read such things about Chiang and the KMT online. My point is, you might feel satisfied tearing apart their legacy, but the weapon used to do serves also as a double-edged sword. But it's your choice, I guess, if that's really what you think is right. Tabusplit53 (talk) 17:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I completely agree with Tabusplit53.

Fascism is a Totalitarian ideology. The Japanese statists who ruled Taiwan before 1945 were totalitarian, but there is controversy over whether they can be viewed as fascists, and I personally don't think 'statists' are fascists. Since 1945, Chiang and KMT have never been totalitarian, unlike the Japanese 'statists' (although they are authoritarian); of course Chiang's rule is never fascism. Calling Chiang's rule "fascists" is no different from calling Augusto Pinochet, Suharto, and Park Chung-hee "fascists"; they were cruel, but they were never fascists. We can write down the individual views of minor scholars who see Chaang's rule as fascist in the article, but we shouldn't make it seem like it's the dominant views. ProKMT (talk) 08:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Sources are being repeatedly removed without any explanation

Why are the sources being removed without explanation? 67.220.13.96 (talk) 19:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

explanation is in the edit summary, which is the basic wiki policies that don't need to be explained via summary anyway (as they are explained in detail in relevant policy pages), do not continue disruption with misleading "without explanation" claims. Tehonk (talk) 20:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

sorry dude, you have not provided ANY explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.220.13.96 (talk) 04:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Fascism?

Is it the mainstream view of academia that Chiang Kai-shek's rule is "fascist rule"?? Not at all. We have to be careful in using templates and categories. Chiang's rule was brutal and authoritarian, but it was never totalitarian, and most fascism is totalitarian. Authoritarian ultranationalism and fascism must be distinguished. Chiang rule is fascist is not an main academic view as a whole, so category/template fascism should not be used.

For another example, the Statism in Shōwa Japan article does not use the category of fascism; Chiang's rule is not "fascist" than Japanese ultranationalist rule. As another example, there is no category/template fascism in the White Terror (Greece), White Terror (Hungary) and White Terror (Russia) articles.

The view that Chiang is a "fascist" has never been mainstream in academia, so while I am not personally opposed to publishing the views of "some" scholars who consider Chiang a "fascist" in the article, using category/template fascism is very seriously wrong.

See Wikipedia:Fringe theories and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Category/Template of fascism within the article should be removed quickly. ProKMT (talk) 07:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categorization includes: Categorization must also maintain a neutral point of view. Categorizations appear on article pages without annotations or referencing to justify or explain their addition; editors should be conscious of the need to maintain a neutral point of view when creating categories or adding them to articles. Categorizations should generally be uncontroversial; if the category's topic is likely to spark controversy, then a list article (which can be annotated and referenced) is probably more appropriate. ProKMT (talk) 07:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

• It is ironical to see this argument coming after the KMT presidential election candidate holding the Nazi salute instead of the conventional oath-taking gesture in front of the media during the capital campaign reunion, and the Swastika flag appearing on a pro-KMT manifestation just last week. It is a syllogism sophistry to declare that "Chiang's rule was brutal and authoritarian, but it was never totalitarian, and most fascism is totalitarian." lol - on the contrary, it has been at least hundreds of Taiwanese civil and government reports and the common newsreports indicating that, such as "...Old cells at the former military court complex in Taiwan, where tens of thousands of political prisoners were taken by the totalitarian regime of Chiang Kai-shek. It has since been converted to the Jing Mei White Terror Memorial museum" - by Helen Davidson, 2022. Particularly on the late years of his policy-making pattern after the people holding different opinions and the foreign influences (British followed by American) were disregarded and removed one by one, embracing the "authoritarian ultranationalism" does not exclude the fact that the KMT regime is practicing the fascism, which depends on the actual governing behavioral pattern and its ideology deeply rooted in the education system. Claiming that "Chiang rule as fascist is not an main academic view" is actually an unneutral assumption against WP:NPOV, an unverifiable advocacy against WP:V and the original research of political propaganda of the pro-KMT factions without valid proofs against WP:OR. The above sample document of Stephen Hartnett, Patrick Dodge and Lisa Keränen pointed by Wikipedian CJ-Moki is just one example, not to mention that pretty much all the Chinese sources from China attributes the KMT behavioral pattern as fascist, while more Taiwanese resources and public opinions are open now after the democratic reform since 1987.
• Criticizing the Japanese Imperialism in WWII and comparing the other countries with the white terror in history as Greece, Hungary and Russia... do not apply to justify the argument on Chiang's KMT government as "less" or "not" fascist-like, because each country has its own different historical background, culture in nature, and development of follow-up strategies, hence cannot be referred by the same definition and pattern of thoughts. This commits the same logical fallacy as Chiang had advocated: "For in Chiang’s mind Japan and Germany together and perhaps Italy and Spain... constituted equally dark examples of what he terms “the ultra-nationalism, racism, and absolutism of atavistic fascism.” In such a reading, Chiang’s harsh though erratic censorship, the mass political rallies held at his behest, the ruthless intelligence services, paramilitary and elitist secret societies, assassinations of political and human rights antagonists, and insistence on the cult of the leader appear to fit within the span of acceptable government techniques." - Jonathan Spence on <The Enigma of Chiang Kai-shek> in 2009 - sounds familiar that Chiang's logical pattern same as Hitler interpreted the Communism on the East, Capitalism on the West, and then his own ideas as a "national socialism"? Please note tht the self-claimed KMT "Centralists" in Chinese grammar does not refer to the "neutral" point of view or attitude on the objective political spectrum, but acturally means to advocate the "centralized" political power control against the other factions interior or exterior the Party, which explained why there were so many assassination cases to secure the dictatorship, radical ideologies to promote the "continous revolution" and the endless civil wars throughout the KMT history... up till June 13 last month, a KMT parliament member still demands the DPP Minister of National Defense to restore the "Re-taking China By Force" Policy (Chiang's plans being deterred by the U.S. government and every presidents to avoid the third world war), with the Republic of China map including Mongolia, parts of Russian Siberia, Kashmir, South Tibet, Indian and Myanmar regions - so much for the nationalistic succeeded Lebensraum theory to revive even in the 21th century.
• WP:Fringe theories is used "in a broad sense to describean idea that departs significantly from the prevailing views or mainstream views" by definition, which does not apply to the fascist conducts during the White Terror era of Taiwan, because there was only ONE view and ONE voice of solidarity as required by the State =< Party =< Fuhrer, with no other different opinion allowed, or else addressed as a threat to the national security =< Party regime =< Chiang leadership, and the citizens' constitutional rights of freedom of speech, assembly, publication and the access to newsmedia are legally suspended indefinitely during the almost 40-year martial law ruling era, then it took another 27 years for Taiwanese to struggle in learning the fundamentals of democracy till today still in constant chaos, as already been well described, stablished and discussed with the due weight and reliable cited sources in this and other articles. Nowadays, more reliable and neutral sources and researches other than the pro-KMI propaganda are available and open to the public as the mainstreams in both China and Taiwan, including most scholars and journalist, particularly among the young generation, consider that tens of thousands of unjustice cases of the White Terror as the fascist misconducts, such as here another classic case of Reverend Wendell Karsen's personal experience with his withness memoir "The Church Under the Cross: Taiwan - The Cross of Fascism" as a missionary to Taiwan, which clearly displays the Fascism conducts. Yet, tt took Reverand 30 years, being silenced and expelled by the official mainstream, to make his testimony heard with an award by "Taiwan Foundation for Democracy" for his involvement in the democracy and human rights struggle of the Taiwanese people in 2003. It is up to the public input in a democratic society to define the "mainstream", not by an editor's personal opinion to make change without consent.
• Wikipedia:Minority opinions is an essay, yet it states the truth of President Truman, an arch-opponent against Chiang's conducts: "In a free country, we punish men for the crimes they commit, but never for the opinions they have." Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia, open for the neutral academic mainstream WP:NPOV such as the 3 scholars' examples presented above for example, not a battleground for repetitive deletion with no presented materials presenting otherwise, but the old official warlord's propaganda in the past and the insisted mindset denial on all the previous discussion by the pro-KMT supporters' subjective opinions, as said: "Don't let an editor's opinions get in the way of their actions." Mickie-Mickie (talk) 22:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

References

Mickie-Mickie (talk) 22:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

There is no mention of "nazi" or "fascist" at all in the first source you presented.

The second source you suggested mentioned the following:

But this affinity for German achievements was not a sign of craven Nazism. Unlike the Japanese, Chiang showed no interest in duplicating the key aspects of Nazi ideology: racial supremacy, territorial expansion, and hemispheric if not world conquest. In his diary he never mentioned, much less welcomed, any of the milestones of the rise of fascism in Germany such as Hitler’s elevation to chancellor, the Reichstag Fire, Germany as a one-party state, or the naming of Hitler as Führer. Chiang was fascist in neither ends nor means. And For in Chiang’s mind Japan and Germany together and perhaps Italy and Spain constituted equally dark examples of what he terms “the ultra-nationalism, racism, and absolutism of atavistic fascism.”

The source you have presented is clear evidence that Chiang Kai-shek's rule is not fascist terror, but non-fascist anti-communist terror. ProKMT (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Authoritarian one-man dictatorship, extreme anti-communist violence does not necessarily mean fascism. Chiang's White Terror, unlike Japan's statists and the German Nazis, is based on ideological motives (anti-communism and opposition to Taiwanese independence) rather than racial motives. ProKMT (talk) 07:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

"Fascism" template removed from the article. Real fascism experts such as Robert Paxton, Roger Griffin, and Kevin Pathmore believe that Chiang's rule is not fascism at all. The sources you have presented are not fascism experts, and KMT's 'White Terror' is not at all the data referred to as 'fascism'. The current article is in serious violation of WP:NPOV. And I'm not an account promoting KMT, I'm not Taiwanese or Chinese. Have you read the books of Robert Paxton, Roger Griffin, and Kevin Pathmore? They never say that Japanese nationalists or KMT was a 'fascist regime'. ProKMT (talk) 11:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I made a proper template to criticise KMT's White Terror even more, while being much more objective than the controversial and NPOV-violating "fascism" template. Once again, I am a CCP-led PRC-hating non-Chinese non-Taiwanese conservative and have no intention of defending the criminal activity committed by the KMT in Taiwan. So please don't call me the KMT "propaganda". (I don't blame the DPP, and the contributions I make regarding the DPP in the WP are more favorable to the DPP than the KMT.) ProKMT (talk) 13:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

So your argument is that the KMT's philosophy wasn't Fascist because its motivations weren't racial? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

That is my view, but not the point. The organizations that Chiang ran were not populist at all, but rather elitist, and Chiang's rule can be compared to authoritarian conservatism such as Metaxism and Japanese statism; it mimics fascism, but not fascism. There is even a view of Chinag as an "anti-fascist".

Right-wing populism is a key element of fascism. Chinag's case was close to an [left-wing] socialist in the 1930s, and he was clearly an anti-fascist in the early-mid 1940s. During Chiang's reign over Taiwan, his ideology was an extreme 'elitist' anti-communism, not national-populism. The reason Japanese statism is not defined as fascism is that they were conservative elitists, not revolutionary populists. ProKMT (talk) 02:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

And how do you square that with the KMT's philosophy in the Chiang Kai-shek being largely race based? Or do you deny that they were Chinese nationalists who defined Chinese in strictly racial terms? I would also note that pre-1945 Japanese statism is almost always referred to as fascist. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Right-wing ultranationalist dictatorship =/= fascism. Even George Orwell, a socialist, didn't agree with Chiang being called a "fascist". If Chiang Kai-shek is "fascist", so United States support the fascist regime in China/Taiwan during WWII and the early Cold War era? Chiang Kai-shek was the most powerful ANTI-FASCIST in Asia during World War II. Chiang is not fascist, but Chiang is ultranationalist dictator. Chiang is similar to Ngô Ðình Diệm, Park Chung-hee or Suharto, not similar to Hitler or Mussolini. (Ngô Ðình Diệm and Park Chung-hee collaborated on Japanese statism, unlike Chiang Kai-shek.) Without using provocative and highly academically inappropriate terms like "fascist," we can be a critic of White Terror. This is why I created Template:White Terror (Taiwan), which is not an issue that favors KMT at all. ProKMT (talk) 07:15, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

How can Japan not have been fascist but Chiang Kai-shek was anti-fascist? Chiang's ultranationalist dictatorship was based on han supremacy in the exact same way that European fascism was based on white supremacy and Japanese fascism was based on Japanese supremacy. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

US Support During that Period

At the very least, this article should provide a link to US military and economic support during that period. Such support is explicitly described at length in the Wikipedia article on the Formosa Resolution of 1955.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formosa_Resolution_of_1955 2403:6200:8856:1ECD:E116:8CB7:C58F:A4AE (talk) 00:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

As far as I know, the support was for defending Taiwan from the communist thread, not for bolstering up the White Terror in Taiwan. Matt Smith (talk) 04:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)