Jim D mentioned the key reason why: Chiang's bedrock of support was the landed gentry. Without the commies' threat of actually carrying out land reform, there was no reason for Chiang to. China under Chiang wouldn't have been like the ROC. A much better example would be the Philippines post WWII.
Cheers,
Jonathan
At 17:20 2003-9-22, you wrote:
>From: "Jonathan Lassen" <jjlassen at chinastudygroup.org>
>
> > (yes to all the reasons that Jim just posted, and...) Because Chiang's
> > track record on the mainland up to that point was horrible. No Cold War,
>no
> > US aid, no open door to exports, and no stunning Taiwan miracle.
>
>And this shows us that, under Chiang, China wouldn't have advanced as much
>as it has to date? And although I don't know much about Chiang's track
>record on the mainland (though I do know the even conservatives allow that
>it was pretty bad in many ways), it would seem unreasonable to expect many
>substantial advances during the mass tumult of the '30s and '40s.
>
>-- Luke
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk