Your piece compliments several that I read recently by Cynthia Chung and Matt Ehret.
What you report about Chiang and Bandera is amazing. In broad strokes, China was faced with a civil war between a friend of Bandera and a truer communist than Stalin; all while holding off the Japanese. As we say in more northern climes, that makes for some rough sledding.
Thanks brother! It’s interesting you brought this up — Mao being “ a truer communist, then Stalin.
Fortunately, for Russia defending the motherland during WW II, had it not been Stalin’s socialist reforms away from hardcore bolshevism (a western banking oligarch-sponsored coup and conspiracy, as exposed by Anthony Sutton), Russia would have been ruined — (thanks to your thought-provoking comment) I’m expanding this into another blog re: historical Legacy versus mordern-day myths wrt both Stalin and Mao. Stay tuned…
I did a little research as for how to characterize Chiang and Hitler's relationship. It turns out that the Sino-German relationship was fascinating. It also shows real precedents for the Belt-Road Initiative.
And world history since the 1930s would have been very different if Hitler followed his gut, and listened to his advisors, and stuck with China over Japan. He ended up choosing for allies the two countries that he knew could not be trusted, Italy and Japan. Not that they betrayed him, but the world would have been very different if Germany and China continued to build each other up in constructive ways.
I say this not as a supporter of Hitler, to be sure. But how amazing that he offered to mediate between China and Japan, "since he mediated between Italy and Yugoslavia." Would he have needed to scapegoat the Jews and embark on the Final Solution if a prosperous relationship between China and Germany was maintained and strengthened? (Or was Hitler doomed by personality and other forces?)
“ the world would have been very different if Germany and China continued to build each other up in constructive ways.” — interesting thought but IMHO,
1) the Japanese oligarch-controlled imperialist probably wouldn’t have let go anyway, as their grand plan was discussed in Abrams’ book referred to by this blog
2) assuming Chiang was able to fully illuminate his communist nemesis, and he was almost there in 1936, his nationalist government was corrupt — not really Chiang himself but many in his government and his military, esp 2 in-laws controlling the financial sectors — his brother in law Soong and the husband of his sister-in-law HH Kung.
What’s going to happen are bound to happen — over the past few decades, German industries have been among the most successful in their investments and joint venture in China, much more so than from English, speaking countries (more arrogance). Given the situation in Ukraine and EU, more German companies are voting with their feet.
Re: Chiang — i’m also expanding into another new blog. Thanks
Tiger,
Your piece compliments several that I read recently by Cynthia Chung and Matt Ehret.
What you report about Chiang and Bandera is amazing. In broad strokes, China was faced with a civil war between a friend of Bandera and a truer communist than Stalin; all while holding off the Japanese. As we say in more northern climes, that makes for some rough sledding.
Thanks brother! It’s interesting you brought this up — Mao being “ a truer communist, then Stalin.
Fortunately, for Russia defending the motherland during WW II, had it not been Stalin’s socialist reforms away from hardcore bolshevism (a western banking oligarch-sponsored coup and conspiracy, as exposed by Anthony Sutton), Russia would have been ruined — (thanks to your thought-provoking comment) I’m expanding this into another blog re: historical Legacy versus mordern-day myths wrt both Stalin and Mao. Stay tuned…
I did a little research as for how to characterize Chiang and Hitler's relationship. It turns out that the Sino-German relationship was fascinating. It also shows real precedents for the Belt-Road Initiative.
And world history since the 1930s would have been very different if Hitler followed his gut, and listened to his advisors, and stuck with China over Japan. He ended up choosing for allies the two countries that he knew could not be trusted, Italy and Japan. Not that they betrayed him, but the world would have been very different if Germany and China continued to build each other up in constructive ways.
I say this not as a supporter of Hitler, to be sure. But how amazing that he offered to mediate between China and Japan, "since he mediated between Italy and Yugoslavia." Would he have needed to scapegoat the Jews and embark on the Final Solution if a prosperous relationship between China and Germany was maintained and strengthened? (Or was Hitler doomed by personality and other forces?)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-German_cooperation_(1926%E2%80%931941)
Also https://theoptimisticconservative.wordpress.com/2023/02/27/in-a-new-geo-military-landscape-belaruss-lukashenko-goes-to-china/
“ the world would have been very different if Germany and China continued to build each other up in constructive ways.” — interesting thought but IMHO,
1) the Japanese oligarch-controlled imperialist probably wouldn’t have let go anyway, as their grand plan was discussed in Abrams’ book referred to by this blog
2) assuming Chiang was able to fully illuminate his communist nemesis, and he was almost there in 1936, his nationalist government was corrupt — not really Chiang himself but many in his government and his military, esp 2 in-laws controlling the financial sectors — his brother in law Soong and the husband of his sister-in-law HH Kung.
What’s going to happen are bound to happen — over the past few decades, German industries have been among the most successful in their investments and joint venture in China, much more so than from English, speaking countries (more arrogance). Given the situation in Ukraine and EU, more German companies are voting with their feet.
Re: Chiang — i’m also expanding into another new blog. Thanks