Which one of these two really fought the Japanese?
Neither. Americans did.
>>1052065
Not even during the 4 years that China was fighting Japan prior to America entering the war?
>>1052060
Both of them primarily viewed the other as their real enemy, and the Japanese as an unfortunate distraction from their attempts to exterminate each other.
However, the Chi-Coms realized that one of the best ways to win the support of the Chinese people was to act in a way to protect them from the Japanese threat; they were much more aggressive in taking the fight to the Japanese than the KMT was.
Of course, the KMT had about 5 times as many troops, and a lot of the Japanese deployment was arrayed against them, not the commies. Overall, probably the KMT did more to hold the Japs out, bu the CCP was more invested in actually fighting, not just staring across the mountains at the enemy.
>>1052060
eh they both did, but they were also fighting eachother at the same time
>>1052102
Do you have any relevant sources in regards to this? I'm super interested in the topic and would like to learn more. Basically what I've been exposed to has claimed the opposite, that the KMT was more invested in fighting. Then again it's been mostly statistical sources citing casualty numbers and such
>>1052127
If you want something personal and going into what was going on in the internal KMT regime, I'd actually recommend Barbera Tuchman's biography of Stilwell. I think it's called Stilwell and the American experience in China.
It's not entirely about the war, but it is overwhelmingly about Stilwell and the sort of maneuvering going on in Chiang's "Cabinet" for lack of a better term.
>>1052142
Danka
>>1052060
None of them. But a lot of Chinese people who were not elite parasites did.
The KMT, by virtue of being the ones the Japanese were mainly gunning for and because they had more men/materiel.
>>1052322
How the hell did the KMT lose to the commies when they vastly outnumbered and outgunned them?
Was Chiang Kai-shek a retard?
>>1052791
USA cut their funding after Red sympathizing journalists painted the KMT as satan's hordes rampaging through the east who planned on teaming up with the Nazi's to invade mainland USA.
That's not to say that the KMT were angels or something, they were corrupt warlord supporters, but still.
>>1052791
The CPC had popular support in rural areas because they wanted to redistribute land. This caused the KMT to control urban areas as the urban populations wouldn't benefit from the CPC and the CPC controlled the rural areas. KMT had vastly superior firepower and theoretically more manpower but little strategic mobility because they were constantly harassed by the CPC whenever they want to move.
>>1052791
Because, and I'm not 100% sure myself why this is the case, they were never able to really convert their battlefield victories (when they had them) into greater political control: You'd think it easy, and it's progressed that way in most conflicts historically, but Chiang couldn't pull it off. Even after driving Mao to the north, the success of the 'Bandit Pacification campaign' he still never really could exert control over Fujian and Guangdong.
Fundamentally, the KMT wasn't able to administrate and really rule China, and eventually the country slipped out of their grasp.
>>1052791
The KMT was incredibly corrupt and inefficient. The USA got fed up of throwing sweet dolla in the KMT for their elite to steal it.
>>1052791
The people actually liked the CCP.
>>1052791
Chiang's failure to about-face from fighting the Communists to fighting the Japanese until his kidnapping really did a lot to hurt his image. Chiang was also primarily a military man and a rather awkward individual, especially compared to someone as Charismatic as Mao.
And most of the KMT's successes were in the cities; most Chinese in the countryside saw nothing of the Nanjing Decade's prosperity; for them, the Republic was just a continuation of the Monarchy as far as their lives were concerned. Mao, whose ideology and brand of communism was focused on the Chinese farmers, brought real change, which made a huge difference in winning hearts and minds.
>>1052127
>Basically what I've been exposed to has claimed the opposite, that the KMT was more invested in fighting.
As a percent of soldiers the Commies fought the Japanese more often; and had many important guerilla warfare battles that significantly slowed the Japanese consolidation of North China.
As a Absolute number the nationalists died more often and killed more often.
Throughout most of the unified front period both concentrated almost solely on the Japanese. Only with the entrance of America on the sides of the nationalists in 1942, did the unified front break apart.
>>1052791
Not to mention, Mao is one of the greatest military commanders of all time
>>1052791
In short, yes.
>>1052935
>>>/leftypol/
>>1052914
>Mao is one of the greatest military commanders of all time
You mean Peng Dehuai and Lin Biao.
The KMT did most of the work, they were incompetent.
The CCP did little work, they were the most competent.
The only saving grace for the KMT was that the IJA was the most incompetent modern army after the Italian Army.
>>1052948
>I have no sources except my own emotional right wing conspiracy diatribes
>>1052950
Mao was the greatest revolutionary of all time*
>>1052955
It's ironic how Japan fucked the RoC up so bad by 1945, that the Communists had the upper hand, and now the Japanese accuse Chinese of being subhuman for being ruled by the CCP.
>>1052967
Not any of the people you're responding to, but I'm honestly far from convinced the KMT would have won had the Japanese never invaded. IT would have dragged on for decades, and it might not have been the communists who eventually clawed their way to the top, but Chiang's cabal never really stopped being warlords collecting tribute from other warlords and started being the leaders of an actual, unified China, and didn't seem to have it in them.
As long as they were leaving power vacuums all over the place, someone was going to enter into them and use that to challenge them.
>>1052975
It couldn't possibly have been worse than the Mao years. Could it?
(Zaire 1996-2003)
>>1052890
From what I've read the CCP only really had 1 major fight against the Japanese but also attacked nationalist forces on average. Not that they weren't capable but because Mao apparentently had back room dealings with the Japanese and wanted the nationalist to get to do the brunt of the fighting since it allowed them to be weakened. Chiang lost his best troops that were trained by the Germans to the Japanese early on, and had his only son ransomed in Russia so lighted up on the CCP to appease Stalin. Not to mention a lot of his officers and even people in his intelligence agency were CCP spies with it not even known how wide spread to this day.
>>1052992
>From what I've read the CCP only really had 1 major fight against the Japanese
You read wrong
>but also attacked nationalist forces on average.
Both sides respected the united front by and large. Until you prove otherwise, I'm going with the historical consensus.
>Not that they weren't capable but because Mao apparentently had back room dealings with the Japanese
Source required. And no. One or two minor deals are meaningless. The KMT themselves struck deals, but no one would say that they worked together.
>and wanted the nationalist to get to do the brunt of the fighting since it allowed them to be weakened
Which is extremely logical considering only a few years earlier suspected Communist civilians and the CCP members were being slaughtered like pigs in the cities.
The Communists killed more Japanese as a percent of Communist forces than the nationalists. That's a historical fact.
This meme that the CCP sat back and let the Nips kill the KMT is retarded and a lie. It's literal anti-communist propaganda made up the 50's.
>>1052791
the KMT were literally fucking retarded and basically sold their weapons away and ran at the sight of combat.
cool uniforms though
>>1052065
sonny boy, the japs had been fighting in china since most american GIs were still in grade school
>>1052065
Will /his/ ever get a massive range ban on Yanks?
>>1053022
>Until you prove otherwise, I'm going with the historical consensus.
What historical consensus? The one you pulled out of your ass where the New Fourth Army Incident never existed?
>>1053939
triggered
>>1052102
t. the party
>>1052809
>farmers support CPC
>CPC forces communal farms and causes famine
M A O
A
O
