[Political Interest]

Was Chiang Kai Shek a Fascist? I ask this quesiton primarily because of his political attitudes, and many factors in his policy which matched Fascist in Europe, and to a great extent also the Fascistic ultra-nationalism of Japan.

These characteristics are:

1. A bitter hatred of the Communists, and intense efforts at the maintinance of the free market system.

2. The Centralised structure of the Nationalist Party, KMT, and the silencing of all opposition. In addition to Chiang wearing the title of Generalissimo, very much in a similar way to other Fascist leaders.

3. A promotion of traditional Chinese values, and excessive amounts of Nationalism.

4. The combination of modern technology with old style values, such as the construction of swimming pools and movie theatres but with the use being in accordance with Confucian values.

With all of these factors, can we not assume that General Chiang was in many ways an example of Chinese Fascism? The wearing of uniforms, and the militristic spirit of his government combined with the anti-Communism, and promotion of old Chinese values in an almost overtly nationalistic manner seems to suggest this. Yet what do we make then of men like the Ayatollah Khomeini? Or Mao Zedong? Or Kim Il Sung? These men did appear to promote to an extent elements of their countries native culture against Imperialism, but is it merely the way by which Chiang's government resembled Fascism in so many other ways which leads me to this conclusion? Remember, Chiang also tried to prolong the peace between China and Japan, and in reality saw the Communists as his biggest enemy. I remember someone even saying that until the Nazi-Japanese anti-comintern pact, Chiang received weapons from the Germans to fight the Communists, and this ended when the Japanese invasion of China became redundant.

[The Immortal Goon]

From my limited understanding of him, he was simply a bourgeoisie nationalist better compared to Cromwell than Hitler.

Fascism has a pretty specific meaning - normally the frenzied attempts of the petite bourgeoisie to reassert itself against labor and (in appearance) against the big bourgeoisie (who they actually aid).

-TIG

[Far-Right Sage]

No, he was a nationalist, an anti-communist, and somewhat of a right-wing authoritarian, but I wouldn't call him a fascist. If you use Mussolini's Italian fascism is a model, there is a large difference in the economic systems. Also, Chiang Kai-Shek was not really a militarist or one who favored aggressive war; an incremental part of the philosophical fascist doctrine.

[Political Interest]

But do you not agree that his party structure, and the way by which he imposed Chinese culture on the native people of Taiwan was somewhat culturally Imperialist?

[Ombrageux]

Fascism isn't a terribly useful concept. Suffice to say he was right-wing, anti-communist, militaristic and authoritarian, that is, shared a good deal with Mussolini and other right-wing reactionaries.

[kami321]

1. A bitter hatred of the Communists, and intense efforts at the maintinance of the free market system.

a. Not only fascists are known for bitter anti-communism.
b. Fascists aren't exactly known for maintaining a free-market system, nor am I sure whether Chiang was a big fan of it.

2. The Centralised structure of the Nationalist Party, KMT, and the silencing of all opposition. In addition to Chiang wearing the title of Generalissimo, very much in a similar way to other Fascist leaders.

Sure, there were fucking plenty of authoritarian regimes on this planet, and there still are, are you going to label them all "fascist"? Chaing's China looked more like a typical military dictatorship to me, much like his warlord allies.

3. A promotion of traditional Chinese values, and excessive amounts of Nationalism.

a. Traditionalism.. hmm, maybe. But that is an aspect of conservatism more so than of fascism I'd say.
b. Ironically enough, compared to his rivals he was actually much LESS nationalistic. It wasn't him who was pushing for war against Japan, it was Mao and chiang's warlord allies who constantly pressured him to declare war. Compared to them, Chiang was such a pacifist...

4. The combination of modern technology with old style values, such as the construction of swimming pools and movie theatres but with the use being in accordance with Confucian values.

Uh oh.. I don't know what modern technology he was trying to use, but it certainly didn't help him win the war against CCP.


To summarize, I think your points are insufficient to call Chiang a fascist leader. I'm going to go ahead and label him a "Paternal Autocrat", HOI2 style



Edit:

But do you not agree that his party structure, and the way by which he imposed Chinese culture on the native people of Taiwan was somewhat culturally Imperialist?

Oh, culturally imperialist? I beg to differ, cultural imerialism is inherent in every powerful and semi-powerful modern state, and it has nothing.... ok, it has very little to do with Fascism.

[Smilin' Dave]

Depending on whose theory of fascism you are using, you also have to note the (as far as I know) lack of glorification of violence, or the appeal to Romanticism.

On the other hand I seem to remember the KMT played with some socialist structures in their social organisation, which could seen as similar to fascist approaches.

[Metal Gear]

Here's the thing. Chaing Kai Chek fought against the AXIS and allied with Mao Tse Tung to do so. I would say that proves he is not a fascist. If he's a Fascist, why did he ally with a Marxist against other Fascists?

[Political Interest]

Here's the thing. Chaing Kai Chek fought against the AXIS and allied with Mao Tse Tung to do so. I would say that proves he is not a fascist. If he's a Fascist, why did he ally with a Marxist against other Fascists?

Because practicality meant that he had to. Mussolini sought an alliance with the British, but because they didnt like his Fascist state they refused and he turned to the Nazi Germans. I will compromise, he was not really a Fascist in the corporate state sense but he was more something similar to Francos Spain. Overall, just a generally right wing nationalist, in deep contrast to Dr. Sun Yat Sen who had a much more revolutionary proletarian aligned policy.

[Potemkin]

Here's the thing. Chaing Kai Chek fought against the AXIS and allied with Mao Tse Tung to do so. I would say that proves he is not a fascist. If he's a Fascist, why did he ally with a Marxist against other Fascists?

That's like asking why Germany and Britain went to war against each other in 1914, if they were both capitalist-imperialist nations? The similarity in their ideologies meant nothing in the face of opposing material interests. Britain and Germany were imperialist rivals, and military conflict was the only way of resolving that contradiction. Likewise, Japan needed access to China's territory and resources if it was to build its East Asian Empire; Chiang's interests were obviously opposed to this. Conflict was inevitable. Ideology always takes a back seat to material interests.

[kami321]

in deep contrast to Dr. Sun Yat Sen who had a much more revolutionary proletarian aligned policy.

Any evidence that Sun was aiming at specifically at proletariat? You make him sound almost like a Marxist. Surely he did have revolutionary social-progressive and economically liberal ideas, and he also recieved a crapload of aid from USSR, but don't make some kind of left-wing extremist out of him. His ideas were revolutionary only in comparison to thousands of years of autocracy that ruled China, other than that, I'd say Sun Yat Sen was some sort of a Social Democrat. IMHO. But actually, I'm not very much of a China-expert, maybe Smilin' Dave knows better on this one.

[Potemkin]

My understanding is that Dr Sun Yat-Sen started out as a bourgeois liberal, which in the China of that time meant being a revolutionary. He later gradually moved leftwards, until by the early 1920s he was effectively proclaiming himself to be a Marxist. By that time, of course, he had lost all political influence and was eventually driven into exile, so it's impossible to say how far his Marxism was merely utopian, or whether he really intended to try to implement it.

[Thoss]

That's like asking why Germany and Britain went to war against each other in 1914, if they were both capitalist-imperialist nations? The similarity in their ideologies meant nothing in the face of opposing material interests. Britain and Germany were imperialist rivals, and military conflict was the only way of resolving that contradiction. Likewise, Japan needed access to China's territory and resources if it was to build its East Asian Empire; Chiang's interests were obviously opposed to this. Conflict was inevitable. Ideology always takes a back seat to material interests.

Truth. Chiang's rightism may have been a relative of the ideological flavour of the 1930s and early 40s, that is, facism or right wing variants, but against regional rivals, ideology goes out the window.

[Far-Right Sage]

Because practicality meant that he had to. Mussolini sought an alliance with the British, but because they didnt like his Fascist state they refused and he turned to the Nazi Germans. I will compromise, he was not really a Fascist in the corporate state sense but he was more something similar to Francos Spain. Overall, just a generally right wing nationalist, in deep contrast to Dr. Sun Yat Sen who had a much more revolutionary proletarian aligned policy.

It's not so much that the United Kingdom disliked Italian fascism. Churchill considered Mussolini a great leader and envisioned Italy as a bulwark against bolshevism in Europe. It's moreso that Italy's colonial wars and territorial claims in East Africa went far beyond anything the British would be willing to tolerate.