1949: Shattering the Myth of Winner Takes All

1949: Shattering the Myth of Winner Takes All
United Daily News editorial
A Translation
September 30, 2009

Tomorrow is the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. In two years, it will be the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Republic of China.
1949 was the beginning of divided rule across the Taiwan Strait. The 1949 Civil War marked fact the conclusion of the domestic and foreign troubles that have plagued China since the Opium War of 1840. Among these was the 1912 showdown between the monarchy and the republic. The republic won, only to be plagued by more domestic and foreign troubles. It won a costly victory over Japan. In 1949, capitalism had a showdown iwth communism. The Communist regime occupied the mainland, and the Kuomintang regime retreated to Taiwan.

In essence, 1949 was about military victory and defeat. The KMT's "Three People's Principles" and the CCP of the "Communism" were basically window dressing for a military struggle. The KMT's yet to be implemented "democracy" and the CCP's "Communism" were merely superficial features of the student movement, the labor movement, and demands for the "killing of landlords, and the division of their land." The victory or defeat of the KMT and CCP had little to do with the right and wrong of their "isms." At the time these "isms" were mere slogans. The main reason for the KMT's military defeat was that it was the ruling government of a nation in ruins from endless war, beginning with the Opium War and ending with the Second Sino-Japanese War. The sole task of the CCP, on the other hand, was rebellion.

The struggle between the KMT and the CCP did involve "isms." Their respective battle cries had to do with the question, "Whither China?" The military struggle determined victory and defeat. But it did not determine right and wrong between rival "isms." Ironically, the issue of right and wrong can be seen far more clearly 60 years later.

In fact, the Communists of Mao Zedong's generation never really understood what communism was. They had only a crude understanding of communism, or else deliberately distorted its meaning. The founding of the People's Republic of China government was followed by the Three Antis, Five Antis Campaigns, the Anti-Rightist Rectification Campaign, the Three Red Flags Movement (The General Line, the Great Leap Forward, and the People's Communes), and finally by the decade long debacle known as the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Was this really the meaning of Communism? Was this really how the Communist Party won the war against the KMT in 1949?

Winning does not make one a hero. Winning does not make one right. The Kuomintang lost the mainland for many reasons. For that it must take responsibility. It cannot shift all the blame onto the chaos that began with the Opium War and ended with the Second Sino-Japanese War. Besides, the Kuomintang made more mistakes on Taiwan, including the 2/28 Incident and the White Terror. But it also racked up an impressive record of achievements. These include democracy and the rule of law, direct presidential elections, changes in the ruling party, the criminal prosecution of a former president, and 60 years of free markets. This was the political and economic realm several generations of Chinese sought to achieve since the Opium War, the Self-Strengthening Movement, the Kang Youwei/Liang Qichao Reform Movement of 1898, the 1911 Revolution, the June 4th Movement, and the Chinese Civil War. The Taiwan region achieved free markets at least 30 years before the mainland. The Taiwan region lifted martial law and established democracy at least 20 years before the mainland. Moreover, during the past 60 years the Taiwan region has been on the track towards "progressive democracy." The mainland on the other hand, still has no timetable for the popular election of city mayors and county executives.

Some may say that the Taiwan region is too small. Its achievements count for little. But Singapore is small. Switzerland is small. Moreover, Taiwan's plight for the past 60 years has been difficult. Yet it was able to achieve freedom and democracy. Winning does not make one a hero. Being small does not make one wrong.

Sixty years ago, we decided between military victory and defeat. Sixty years later, we are deciding between political and economic right and wrong. The Beijing regime is now known in the Western world as an "enlightened despotism." For the CCP this is real progress. Homemade blast furnaces do not equal "Mr. Science," and the "Dictatorship of the Proletariate" does not equal "Mr. Democracy." Today those most able to help the Chinese people stand on their own two feet are not Mao Tse-tung's "class struggle" Communists. They are not the Communists who defeated the Kuomintang in 1949 by means of military force. They are Deng Xiaoping and the two generations of Communists who succeeded him. They are the Communists whose political and economic path more and more resembles that of the Taiwan region. In 1949 the KMT and CCP engaged in a life and death struggle over "isms." Today they are moving along the same track towards political democracy and economic freedom. The only difference is that the Taiwan region is a few steps ahead of the mainland. Furthermore, one can safely assert that Beijing must move increasingly toward democracy and freedom. It must increasingly relax its "Four Cardinal Principles." Only then can it truly undergo a "peaceful rise."

1949 was a long time ago. Today cross-Strait issues can no longer be resolved militarily. Internal and cross-Strait issues must be resolved in accordance with the principles of democracy and freedom. If Beijing believes cross-Straits issues are Chinese issues, then it can no longer use military force to determine victory or defeat. It must invoke democracy and freedom to determine right and wrong. By the same token, the public on Taiwan must be realize that when the Taiwan region implements democracy and freedom, its political and economic achievements provide a frame of reference for the whole of China. Taiwan can relate to the mainland on the basis of "neither reunification nor independence / both reunification and independence." It can relate to the mainland on the basis of an "ism," rather than the use of force. Taiwan independence, paradoxically, is the worst possible political strategy.

Tomorrow is the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. The aspect most worth celebrating is the metamorphosis of "Mao Zedong's Communist Party" into "Deng Xiaoping's Communist Party." Democracy and freedom have replaced Communist dogma in cross-Strait relations. The time has come to determine right and wrong, and renounce the use of force.

一九四九年：打破成王敗寇的迷思
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.09.30 04:26 am

明天是中華人民共和國建國六十周年；再過兩年，則是中華民國建國一百周年。

一九四九年，是兩岸分裂分治的開始。一九四九年的國共內戰，其實是一八四○年鴉片戰爭以降中國內憂外患的總結；其中，一九一二年是帝制與共和的對決，共和勝；接下來是內外交煎的民國，苦苦撐持至對日抗戰慘勝，到了一九四九年，則出現民主資本主義與共產主義的對決，結果共產黨政權席捲大陸，國民黨政權撤至台灣。

一九四九年在本質上是軍事鬥爭的勝敗。當年，國共雙方的「三民主義」與「共產主義」在大體上只是裝飾軍事鬥爭的口號；國民黨未行「民主」，共產黨的「共產主義」也只是學運、工運，與「殺地主／分田地」的皮毛而已。國共的勝敗，其實不在「主義」的是非正誤，因為當時兩邊的「主義」皆只是「標語」；主要的勝敗因素在於：國民黨是被鴉片戰爭至抗日戰爭蹂躪得不成形狀的中國之主政者，而共產黨當年唯一的任務就是叛變。

不過，當年國共鬥爭用於號召全民的真正主題，卻是「主義」，也就是「中國何處去」的問題。軍事鬥爭雖分出勝敗，然未在「主義」上分出是非。這個大是大非，反而在六十年後的今天看得比較清楚。

其實，毛澤東一輩的共產黨員，根本不知道什麼是共產主義，或是粗識共產主義而惡意誤用了共產主義。中華人民共和國建政後，三反、五反、反右整風、三面紅旗（總路線、大躍進、人民公社），接著又是十年浩劫文化大革命；試問：這就是共產主義嗎？共產黨在一九四九年就是憑著這樣的共產主義而贏得了國共戰爭嗎？

勿以勝敗論英雄，勿以勝敗論是非。國民黨政權失去大陸當然有諸多必須自負的責任，而不能全盤歸諸「自鴉片戰爭至抗日戰爭」云云，且國民黨在台主政也有二二八及白色恐怖等汙點；但是，現今的台灣在民主法治上的成就，如直選總統、如政黨輪替、如法院對犯罪的總統判刑，以及六十年來始終以自由經濟為主軸，這卻不啻是大致體現了自鴉片戰爭以來，從自強、變法、辛亥革命、五四運動到國共內戰，中國幾代人物所追求的政經境界。台灣在實現自由經濟上較大陸改革開放至少早了三十年，在解嚴實現全盤徹底的民主政治上則至今已早了二十一年，何況六十年來台灣皆在「漸進民主」的軌道上，而大陸連民選縣市長亦尚不知在何年何日。

也許有人說，台灣這麼小，不算什麼；但是，新加坡小，瑞士也小；何況，台灣六十年來的處境如此窘促艱難，卻能實現自由民主。不因勝敗論英雄，當然更不能因形體大小論是非。

六十年前見軍事勝負，六十年後論政經是非。北京政權現在被西方世界喻為「開明專制」，這是中共極大的進步。畢竟，土高爐不是「賽先生」，「無產階級專政」也不是「德先生」。今天真正可能使「中國人民站起來」的不是毛澤東那一批「以階級鬥爭為綱」的共產黨，亦即不是一九四九年以武力打敗國民黨那一批共產黨；而是鄧小平及其後兩個梯隊的共產黨，也就是政經腳步愈來愈像台灣的這個共產黨。一九四九年因「主義」分歧而你死我活的國共兩黨，如今卻皆在朝往政治民主及經濟自由的同一軌道上。只是，在這個方向上、路線上，台灣畢竟比大陸領先了好幾步；而且，應可斷言，北京必須愈來愈朝向民主自由，愈來愈鬆綁「四個堅持」，始有可能真正「和平崛起」。

一九四九年已遠，時至今日，兩岸關係愈發不可能用軍事解決，而必須用民主自由的法則來解決各自內部的問題及兩岸的問題。如果北京方面仍認為兩岸問題是「中國問題」，就不能再以武力論勝敗，而必須用民主自由來論是非。相對而言，台灣方面亦應自覺，當台灣落實民主自由的政經成就，能成為整個中國的參考架構，台灣始可能在兩岸關係中維持「不統不獨／亦統亦獨」，並找到不以武力而以「主義」立足的利基，台獨反而是台灣最脆弱的政治戰略。

中華人民共和國建國六十周年，最值得慶幸的是「毛澤東的共產黨」蛻變為「鄧小平的共產黨」；兩岸關係也因民主自由的思潮取代了共產主義教條，而到了應當訴諸是非、不可訴諸武力的時候。