Talk:White Terror (Taiwan)

Syria

"but has since been surpassed by the Syrian half-century martial law, which lasted from 1963 to 2011." Not only is this claim not sourced but, in my opinion, goes contrary to history itself. The founders of the Ba'ath Party (Syrian) were not military commanders and to say that Syria has been under Martial law since 1963 needs SOURCES. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orasis (talk • contribs) 08:10, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I have found a source and added it to the article. Of course, considering the civil war, the statement may be inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.249.67 (talk) 20:28, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Some links that might be useful for finding references

Outrage over Taiwan 'White Terror' records

White Terror exhibit unveils part of the truth

White Terror Documents and Human Body Parts Found Abandoned

Remembering 2-28

Famous Incidents/Victims

Shouldn't 228 be included in this list? caspar (talk) 08:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)casparlant

• Henry Liu
• Lin Yi-hsiung's mother and daughters
• Chen Wen-chen (陳文成)
• Wu Shu-chen (crippled)

@Casparlant: Probably -- feel free to add it. DrIdiot (talk) 21:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Why "White" Terror? What's white about it?

Equinox ◑ 19:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

The term goes back to the russian revolution, white vs red DrIdiot (talk) 12:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

removed line

"Often, after having come unaccompanied to Taiwan, these refugees to Taiwan were considered more disposable than local Taiwanese." Unsourced. Need strong justification that this was actually part of the rationale. DrIdiot (talk) 12:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Republic of China

This is a period in history when the government clearly identified as the "Republic of China". It held China's seat in the UN during most the period. In fact, it is still the "Republic of China" today according to the Constitution, which also actively administers parts of Fujian province. It's not the island of Taiwan only. I'm aware that the main article is named "Taiwan" because it has been taken over by people blind to the facts. However, when it comes to historical events like the White Terror, you can't not admit there aren't inconsistencies and continuity errors with regard to wording. This confuses people. And there's the intention to confuse people, that the "democratic" island has nothing to do with "evil" China. The "Taiwanese culture and mythology" in that video game is entirely Chinese. Real Taiwanese culture is aboriginal. You can't make a cut between the Republic of China and Taiwan, and you can't attribute the White Terror to Taiwan while minimizing the usage of "China" There's no other way to solve this mess than to return to the objective principles.--82.207.237.122 (talk) 01:12, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

lol. this clown is actually trying to get away with a 4-5k death count.

https://phmuseum.com/grants/awarded/24037

https://www.fpri.org/article/2017/02/taiwans-white-terror-remembering-228-incident/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35723603

18-28k. get serious lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanoiGuevara (talk • contribs) 22:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

does white terror include 228?

Sources:

Yes: [1]

No: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]

Anyway, should probably make this clear. DrIdiot (talk) 15:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Comparison with Nazi Germany

How can the article honestly comparse the execution of 4,000 people to the systematic extermination of millions by the Nazis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knoterification (talk • contribs) 00:59, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was the same regime approaching fascism with the continuous revolutionist traits, qualities and ruling style (1928-2000) from China to Taiwan, and actually devoted to maintain the same identity struggling to regain China, which was actually applied to claim its legitimacy to represent the entire China until the UN Resolution 2758 in 1971. It is impractical to consider that the Chiang Kai-shek's government as a different entity after 1949.

You have ignored the fact referred in the sources such as: "...Now this was not just a military situation. Chiang tremendously admired fascism and looked to create a fascist state in China. Also very important, when Chiang had the opportunity to create his own state in Taiwan he most definitely did not create a parliamentary democracy, he created a variation of a fascist state in Taiwan...." The Nazi symbols, dresses, introductive materials, including Mein Kampf were not just legally accessible, but the lasting fashion until slowly faded away after the Martial Law era ended in 1988. Why don't you talk with the German Institute Taipei, Israel Economic and Cultural Office in Taipei and the local Jewish community to see how they have worked hard to educate people about the international laws and humanity for the last 30 years.

"4000" victims in this article was not an accurate count, but still an ongoing disputed estimation among Taiwanese scholars nowadays, for instance: the remaining Academia Historica and Ministry of Justice (Taiwan) show more than 140,000 prosecuted in the historical files, not including the disappeared ones murdered by the secret agents. It is difficult to collect the references after over 70 years, particularly since all the 8 intelligence agencies had executed concrete systematical measures to destroy the dossiers legally when the government ended Martial Law system. Mickie-Mickie (talk) 05:23, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Fascism is a specific political ideology with a specific tradition in the history of ideas. Most right-wing military dictatorships cannot be correctly placed under that banner, even if they share some characteristics with fascist regimes. The fact that the Kuomintang had a fascist wing in the 1930's doesn't mean that it was wholly fascist at the time, or that it remained fascist. There were also left-wing factions, and it was close to the Soviet Union. Knoterification (talk) 05:37, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

This might be pedantic on my part, but the article doesn't explicitly compare White Terror killings to the Holocaust. Hartnett, Shaou-Whea Dodge, and Keränen describe the White Terror as possessing "brutality so unsettling that comparisons to Nazis and Fascists seem accurate." CJ-Moki (talk) 07:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Even saying that "brutality so unsettling that comparisons to Nazis and Fascists seem accurate." is just a inaccurate exaggeration. Comparing anything to the Nazis is just relativizing the unique horror of the latter. It's absolutely unfair to put any right-wing dictator in the same category as Hitler. This only proves the generalized far-left bias of english universities and wikipedia's editors. Shj648 (talk) 11:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

The Nazi/fascist comparison was made in a reliable source, in this case, a peer-reviewed academic journal. CJ-Moki (talk) 00:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

References

Fascism

The article calls Taiwan under Chiang Kai-Shek a fascist state. While a number of historians consider Chiang to be a fascist many others don't. So we should stay away from explicitly calling the ROC a "fascist" state. 216.208.98.34 (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Not done for now See the previous discussion. If there are published reliable secondary sources disputing the characterization of the ROC under the White Terror as fascist, please cite them. CJ-Moki (talk) 10:33, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It is bizarre why Taiwanese editors seem to view Chiang's regime as almost worse than the Axis powers he fought against, or spend so much of their time and energy complaining about his anti-Communist polices, rather than condemning Mao's far worse atrocities. Also interesting is the fact that they ignore that even under Chiang's White Terror, Taiwan was STILL more democratic during the Cold War than China and other Communist states such as North Korea and Cuba are today (Chiang did legally permit local elections during his rule, even if at first reluctantly).

I just think it is a bit myopic, and lacking foresight and breadth of vision. Morever, repeatedly staining the KMT's legacy is not a positive development for modern Taiwan also...many young people in the West, being sympathetic to socialism due to seeing capitalism's failures and inefficiencies, would likely simply argue why should the West support Taiwan at all if it had such a legacy? Morever, Chiang's KMT seemed to crack down on mainlanders who followed him to Taiwan as much as, if not even more than, the Taiwanese who already lived in Taiwan - in essence, his White Terror was not about anything racial necessarily, but rather purely ideological (rightly or wrongly, he suspected them of harboring sympathies with a hostile subversive state, Mao's Communist government). Being a mainlander and supporting communism certainly was not likely to shield them from the KMT's reprisals.

Rather than strengthen the DPP's image or favourably promote their great cause of "independence", certain users' incessant attacks on Chiang and his government, and efforts to link him with Nazism will possibly destroy Taiwan's image completely. For example, think, would a random young liberal in America or Europe want to travel to China or Taiwan, if Taiwan has such a burdensome and shady history? Support for Taiwan in the West has already been fairly shaky, and there are many pro-socialist young adults in the West who in fact eagerly want China to conquer Taiwan specifically because they read such things about Chiang and the KMT online. My point is, you might feel satisfied tearing apart their legacy, but the weapon used to do serves also as a double-edged sword. But it's your choice, I guess, if that's really what you think is right. Tabusplit53 (talk) 17:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Sources are being repeatedly removed without any explanation

Why are the sources being removed without explanation? 67.220.13.96 (talk) 19:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

explanation is in the edit summary, which is the basic wiki policies that don't need to be explained via summary anyway (as they are explained in detail in relevant policy pages), do not continue disruption with misleading "without explanation" claims. Tehonk (talk) 20:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

sorry dude, you have not provided ANY explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.220.13.96 (talk) 04:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)