More on WWII

By -
Rudy Rummel reports new death-by-government figures for China:
Civil War-Sino-Japanese War 1923-1949 = 3,466,000 murdered
Rule over China (PRC) 1949-1987 = 76,000,000 murdered

Boy, the US sure did the Chinese a big favour by "liberating" them from the Japanese and handing them over to Mao, didn't it?

Comments

  1. Anonymous8:31 PM

    Though I'm far from an expert on the region, I think the US supported the Kuomintang, not the Communists.

    It's possible the peasantry and urban intellectuals would have been better off under the Japanese. But the Japanese didn't look upon either of these groups as equal, so who knows what would have happened in the long term?

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah10:08 AM

    Yes, what I meant was "with the result of handing China over to Mao," not "with the intention of handing China over to Mao."

    And certainly, I can't know the Chinese would have been better off under the Japanese than Mao, but it's seems pretty likely.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous4:31 PM

    I suspect a billion chinese would think you wrong. But, then again, they've been worked over in state learning factories.

    ReplyDelete
  4. gcallah8:44 PM

    And, of course, the 76 million Mao murdered don't get a vote at all, do they?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous10:23 PM

    The dead obviously couldn't vote, but if they could 76 million would still be a minority.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous10:48 AM

    Why can't the dead vote? They do in Chicago.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more