"《Dawn》 Issue 7
Changing the Anti-Japanese War from 8 years to 14 years is for the Kuomintang; isn’t this too outrageous? The article is very good, but does this sentence have a problem?
"
Normally, you need to introduce yourself before posting, but since you asked this question, I will approve this post for now. Please complete your self-introduction afterward; otherwise, according to the forum rules, you will not be allowed to post again.
6 Likes
Extending the duration of the Anti-Japanese War from 8 years to 14 years mainly involves changing the start date of the Anti-Japanese resistance from the Marco Polo Bridge Incident in 1937 to the September 18 Incident in 1931. The Chinese revisionists claim that starting the resistance from September 18 is to promote the idea that the Kuomintang in Northeast China initiated the anti-Japanese struggle. However, in reality, from 1931 to 1937, the reason Japan was able to occupy Northeast China and establish the “Manchukuo” puppet state was due to the Kuomintang’s surrender and betrayal. The Chinese revisionists incorrectly understand the Northeast Chinese people and wrongly evaluate the Chinese Communist Party, instead glorifying the Kuomintang’s surrender as the beginning of the resistance.
11 Likes
Isn’t it only 14 years if you include the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army?
Indeed, the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army (东北抗联) represents the struggle of the Communist Party and the Northeast Chinese people. However, Zhongxiu’s propaganda does not mention anything about the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army. I looked into Zhongxiu’s history textbooks and found the original text of the new teaching material.
1 Like
The Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army was indeed engaged in anti-Japanese activities, but at that time, the Kuomintang (KMT) prohibited the entire nation from resisting Japan within its controlled areas. The Red Army was still fighting the “encirclement and suppression” campaigns before 1937, as well as during the Long March and the Eastern and Western Expeditions, and had not yet faced the Kuomintang’s anti-communist “encirclement and suppression.” Therefore, from the perspective of most of the country, the main contradiction was not whether to resist Japan or not, but rather whether to fight against Japanese imperialism or to surrender to it. The ongoing struggles were still about “encirclement and suppression” and anti-“encirclement and suppression,” the struggle between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, and the conflict between landlords, compradors, bourgeoisie, and the proletariat and peasantry. This was mainly because the Kuomintang resolutely opposed resisting Japan, even disregarding the objective need for resistance, and insisted on implementing the so-called “first settle internal affairs before resisting external threats” policy, stubbornly waging civil war, and surrendering to Japanese invaders. Therefore, prior to this, the entire country was objectively not engaged in resisting Japan, and it naturally cannot be considered that the Anti-Japanese War had already broken out.
8 Likes
The Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army was a guerrilla organization, and its scale was not large, with limited influence; secondly, it did not represent the Chinese government, nor was it an independent regime. The Second Sino-Japanese War needed a subject, a main actor; war is a struggle between state powers, a continuation of politics, and the most effective means of resolving issues. Your view that “regarding the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army as the main body of the Anti-Japanese War can support the fourteen-year resistance” is not supported by the Chinese Kuomintang, nor does the Taiwanese government see it this way. Marxists, including the former socialist China, have never supported this claim. Certainly, the Chinese Communist Party was anti-Japanese. However, in 1931, the Central Soviet Area government was still in Jiangxi, fighting against Chiang Kai-shek’s bandits in anti-encirclement campaigns. At that time, the Chinese Soviet government had no capacity and was not capable of fighting Japanese invaders in the Northeast; in fact, it was not the main force of the Anti-Japanese War. As a result, the fourteen-year resistance can only be understood in one way: equating the full surrender and sporadic resistance of the Kuomintang government with the so-called Anti-Japanese War.
The core of the argument that the fourteen-year resistance was a true national resistance is to deny that the Chinese Communist Party led the war. The genuine national resistance began in 1937, driven by the CCP’s strategy to pressure Chiang Kai-shek to resist Japan, and through the Long March strategic transfer, it achieved the goal of moving northward to fight Japan. The CCP led the entire nation’s workers, peasants, merchants, and students to protest Chiang’s fascist dictatorship internally and his surrender to foreign invaders externally. Since 1935, when the CCP proposed the slogan of forcing Chiang to resist Japan and led the December Ninth Movement, a real anti-Japanese war in China became possible. Subsequently, under the pressure of the Chinese Communist-led national democratic forces, Chiang chose to continue fighting the Communists, attempting to adopt even more radical surrender policies. This made the issue of whether to continue resistance or surrender the most critical problem at that time. Chiang’s counterattack plans were shattered, and the CCP united even the left wing of the Kuomintang and other progressive forces nationwide, preparing for a full national resistance. This led Chiang to declare a self-defense war after the Marco Polo Bridge Incident and to officially announce the KMT-CCP cooperation after the August 13 Incident. Not only did this push Chiang to resist Japan (despite his continued false resistance and genuine anti-Communist efforts), but the CCP also seized all favorable conditions, successfully leading the border region government and uniting the Chinese people to launch a genuine anti-Japanese war. After October 1938, the war entered a stalemate phase, with guerrilla warfare becoming the main form of combat. Over 70% of the Japanese army and nearly all puppet troops fought against the CCP. The Communist Party became the true leader and backbone of China’s entire national resistance.
20 Likes
Before the Chinese Communist Party’s northward resistance against Japan and the slogan urging Chiang Kai-shek to resist Japan were proposed, the conditions for the War of Resistance Against Japan did not exist at all. Without the pressure of the democratic movement by all progressive people, Chiang Bandit would have surrendered directly, and there would be no possibility of resistance. Moreover, without the Long March heading north to resist Japan and the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army, the CCP would not have had strong support. Without the December 9th Movement, there would be no issue of resisting Japan. The December 9th Movement brought the resistance issue to the forefront of the Kuomintang government, which Chiang Bandit had no intention of solving, hence his urgent crackdown on the Communists. In 1935, two major events occurred: one was the CCP’s relocation to northern Shaanxi, and the other was the Huabei Incident, where the Japanese controlled North China. These two events rapidly intensified the Sino-Japanese national contradictions and laid the objective conditions for a nationwide resistance.
12 Likes
How to delete a post?
This kind of question definitely isn’t just you having it; keeping the post allows others to see it, so there’s no need to delete it.
1 Like
How to private message
The Kuomintang’s revisionism has its own class interests. In distorting, slandering, and belittling the Chinese revolution and Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, as well as in anti-communism and anti-people activities, the Kuomintang and revisionism are aligned.
6 Likes
In fact, the Chinese revisionism itself is fascist dictatorship, serving as the front line of reactionary forces in the world today. For the old generation of comprador bureaucratic monopoly bourgeois Kuomintang regime, it is natural to glorify it in various ways. The real purpose of glorifying the reactionaries of the past is to beautify the fascist white terror regime of the Chinese revisionists themselves.
5 Likes
Why delete the post? It’s also good to discuss the issue openly.
5 Likes
You need to introduce yourself first. Also, is there anything you can’t say publicly?
3 Likes
Everyone won’t mock you just because you have issues, and leaving theoretical questions here is also like planting trees for others to enjoy the shade later, allowing others to learn. I wonder if you have any thoughts after reading Fenghuo’s reply.
First, let’s establish a factual issue: does the so-called 14-year Anti-Japanese War really exist? Historically, it was only in 1937 that the Anti-Japanese National United Front was established in China under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. Before that, resistance against Japanese invaders did exist, but it was not under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. At that time, China was clearly still in the land revolution war stage, with the main force of the Kuomintang (KMT) led by Chiang Kai-shek focused on suppressing the communists, and the Communist Party’s main effort was also on anti-encirclement and suppression campaigns. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that “after the ‘September 18’ Incident… the Chinese Communist Party independently led the entire national resistance.” Even the resistance that did exist was not nationwide.
The reason Zhong Xiu (中修) makes such a statement seems to be to elevate the Communist Party, but in reality, it aims to highlight “the various anti-Japanese forces and armies across China rising to resist,” with the main mention being “the broad patriotic soldiers and officers of the Kuomintang and other anti-Japanese units.” In fact, during the first six years of resisting Japanese aggression, the main battles included the Mukden (Manchuria) resistance led by Zhang Zuolin, the January 28 Incident in Shanghai, the Great Wall resistance, and others (which Zhong Xiu himself also mentions). The leaders of these resistances—Zhang Zuolin, Cai Tingkai, Feng Yuxiang, Fu Zuoyi, Ji Hongchang, and others—became part of the patriotic soldiers and officers of the Kuomintang, and their achievements in resistance were also considered achievements of the Kuomintang’s resistance.
The “14-year Anti-Japanese War” emphasizes the overall resistance of the Chinese people, recognizing and respecting the large-scale anti-Japanese struggles during the period from the September 18 Incident to the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, including the Northeast Volunteer Army resistance, the Shanghai-Hangzhou resistance, the Rehe (Jehol) Great Wall resistance, the Chahar People’s Anti-Japanese Allied Army resistance, the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army resistance, the Rehe Anti-Japanese National Salvation Army resistance, and the Suiyuan resistance. This is to highlight China’s role and importance in the global anti-fascist war.
Zhong Xiu’s intention to gloss over the Kuomintang is very obvious, and his method is to replace class analysis with so-called Chinese people’s resistance. In reality, the Kuomintang government represented the large landlord and comprador classes; their class interests made them more afraid of revolution than of Japanese invasion, so they would not resist Japan. The resistance fighters like Cai Tingkai and others were actually members of the national bourgeoisie whose interests were damaged by Japanese aggression and the Kuomintang’s inaction. They were politically suppressed and marginalized by the Kuomintang government, as evidenced by Cai Tingkai, Ji Hongchang, and others being hunted down or even assassinated by the Kuomintang. However, the Zhong Xiu government completely ignores these facts, thus covering up the truth and portraying the Kuomintang as still having contributed to the resistance.
22 Likes
There was a later claim that the Kuomintang planned to surrender directly to the Japanese invaders and cooperate with them to invade. I don’t know if this news is true. I saw it many years ago. 
Since this post is still in the self-introduction category, wouldn’t it be better to move it to free discussion?
9 Likes
The Chinese Soviet Republic under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party declared war on Japan in April 1932, issuing a declaration of war against Japan, explicitly condemning Japan’s imperialist aggression since September 18, which may also be an important basis for the C Revision Fourteen Year Theory.