Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T08:26:24.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Lessons of Defeat: The Reorganization of the Kuomintang on Taiwan, 1950–52*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Bruce J. Dickson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Few political parties have the opportunity to make a fresh start in a new location. An organization is rarely able to leave the environment in which its lessons are learned and apply them in a new one. However, the Chinese Kuomintang (KMT) encountered this situation after its defeat on the Chinese mainland and retreat to Taiwan. From 1950 to 1952, the KMT underwent a thorough organizational restructuring. The result was a renewal of its Leninist origins from the previous reorganization in 1924. During 1950–52, the KMT created a network of Party cells throughout the government, military and society to which each Party member had to belong. The principles of democratic centralism, ideology as guide to policy, hierarchical authority, and Party authority over the government bureaucracy and the military were reasserted.

Type
Research Article
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 133 , March 1993 , pp. 56 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Chou, Yangsun and Nathan, Andrew, “Democratizing transition in Taiwan,” Asian Survey, Vol. 28, No. 3 (03 1987), pp. 277–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cheng, Tun-jen, “Democratizing the quasi-Leninist regime in Taiwan,” World Politics, Vol. 41, No. 4 (07 1989), pp. 471–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tien, Hung-mao, The Great Transition: Political and Social Change in the Republic of China (Stanford: Hoover Institution, 1989)Google Scholar; Cheng, Tun-jen and Haggard, Stephan (eds.), Political Change in Taiwan (Boulder: Lynne Reinner, 1992)Google Scholar.

2. Eastman, Lloyd E., “Who lost China? Chiang Kai-shek testifies,” The China Quarterly, No. 88 (12 1981), pp. 658–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3. Stinchcombe, Arthur, “Social structure and organizations,” in March, James G. (ed.), Handbook of Organizations (Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1965), pp. 168–169Google Scholar.

4. Tuchman, Barbara W., Stilwell and the American Experience in China, 1911–1945 (New York: Macmillan, 1971)Google Scholar.

5. Pepper, Suzanne, Civil War in China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

6. Fewsmith, Joseph, Party, State, and Local Elites in Republican China: Merchant Organizations and Politics in Shanghai, 1890–1930 (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

7. Eastman, “Who lost China?”

8. Introduction to Bendang gaizao an (Resolution on the Reorganization of our Party) (Taipei: Central Reorganization Commission Archive Agency, 1951)Google Scholar, and in Shieh, Milton, The Kuomintang: Selected Historical Documents, 1894–1969 (New York: St John's University Press, 1970), pp. 207–216Google Scholar.

9. Gaizao, No. 11 (1 02 1951), p. 6Google Scholar.

10. Gaizao, No. 14 (16 03 1951), pp. 1–7Google Scholar.

11. Hirschman, Albert O., Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970)Google Scholar.

12. Resolution on Reorganization, p. 11.

13. Gaizao, No. 14 (16 03 1951), pp. 1–7Google Scholar.

14. Hao, Chen, “Guomindang paixi fengpo liushinian (shang)” (“Sixty years of factional strife in the KMT (part 1)”) Shibao zazhi (Times Magazine), No. 228 (11 04 1984), pp. 16–22Google Scholar.

15. Pfeffer, Jeffrey, Organizations and Organization Theory (Cambridge: Ballinger, 1982), p. 229Google Scholar.

16. Krasner, Stephen D., “Sovereignty: an institutional perspective,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1 (04 1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Approaches to the State: alternative conceptions and historical dynamics,” Comparative Politics, Vol. 16, No. 2 (01 1984)Google Scholar. See also Hannan, Michael T. and Freeman, John, Organizational Ecology (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989)Google Scholar.

17. Pfeffer, , Organizations and Organization Theory, pp. 229–230Google Scholar.

18. Fuming, Xu, Zhongguo Guomindang degaizao, 1950–52 (The Reorganization of the KMT 1950–1952) (Taipei: Cheng Chung Book Co., 1986), p. 51Google Scholar, and interviews with former CRC cadres conducted in Taiwan during 1991. Suzanne Pepper has suggested that the demise of the Youth Corps was due to protests by college students against the KMT, not to competition between the Youth Corps and the Party centre, cf. Civil War in China, p. 69, n. 36. Documentary and interview data do not support this interpretation.

19. Hao, Chen, “Sixty years of factional strife in the KMT,” part 2, Times Magazine, No. 229 (18 04 1984), pp. 27–30Google Scholar. Factional strife has also flourished at the local level, but these conflicts have had little or no influence on central policy.

20. Lindblom, Charles, “The science of ‘muddling through’,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 19, No. 2 (1959)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; March, James G. and Simon, Herbert A., Organizations (New York: Wiley, 1958)Google Scholar.

21. Yu, George, Party Politics in Republican China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966), pp. 173–175Google Scholar; and Duan-sheng, Ch'ien, Government and Politics of China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1950), pp. 89–91Google Scholar.

22. Xinsheng bao, 6 August 1950.

23. Duverger, Maurice, Political Parties (New York, Wiley, 1959)Google Scholar. In fact, the organizational structure of the main opposition party in Taiwan, the Democratic Progressive Party, looks remarkably like the KMT's. However, describing the DPP as a Leninist party stretches the definition to breaking point; cf. Xin xinwen (The New Journalist), No. 246 (25 11 1991), pp. 6–7Google Scholar.

24. Ching-kuo, Chiang, “My days in Soviet Russia,” appendix in Cline, Ray S., Chiang Ching-kuo Remembered (Washington, D.C.: United States Global Strategy Council, 1989)Google Scholar.

25. See Hao, Chen, “Sixty years of factional strife, ” and Weisi, Shen, “Qian Tai yilai de dangnei paixi fenhe” (“The division and union of Party factions since the retreat to Taiwan”), in Toushi dangnei paixi (Investigating Party Factions) (Taipei: Fengyun shuxi, No. 3, 1986), pp. 75–78Google Scholar.

26. Gaizao, No. 22 (16 07 1951), pp. 8–11Google Scholar.

27. Kerr, George H., Formosa Betrayed (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1965)Google Scholar.

28. Pfeffer, , Organizations and Organization Theory, pp. 185–86Google Scholar.

29. Jun, Shen, Dangdai Taiwan (Contemporary Taiwan) (Anhui: Renmin chubanshe, 1990), p. 79Google Scholar. The topics covered by these pamphlets were dialectics, cadre education, party work and party building, and the “zhengfeng” campaign; cf. Gaizao, No. 14 (16 03 1951), pp. 8–11Google Scholar. This was not the first time Chiang advocated borrowing from the Communists: he had previously suggested using Communist organizational principles to guide the Blue Shirts in the early 1930s; see Eastman, Lloyd E., The Abortive Revolution: China under Nationalist Rule, 1927–1937 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), pp. 31–84, especially p. 36Google Scholar.

30. “Gaoji ganbu tongzhi yingyou de zeren” (“The proper responsibilities of high-level cadres”), Gaizao, No. 14 (16 03 1951), pp. 1–7Google Scholar.

31. Gaizao, No. 25 (1 09 1951), pp. 10–20Google Scholar.

32. Jacoby, Neil H., U.S. Aid to Taiwan: A Study of Foreign Aid, Self-Help, and Development (New York: Praeger, 1966)Google Scholar; Cheng, Cheng, Land Reform in Taiwan (Taipei: China Publishing Co., 1961)Google Scholar.

33. Xiaozu yewu (The Work of Cells) (Taipei: CRC Cadre Training Commission, 07 1952), p. 20Google Scholar; Gaizao, No. 5 (1 11 1950), pp. 57–60Google Scholar.

34. Gaizao, No. 34 (16 01 1952), pp. 32–35Google Scholar.

35. Dangyuan de jiben renshi (Basic Knowledge for Party Members) (Taipei: Wenwu Gongyingshe, 1950), p. 55Google Scholar.

36. Stinchcombe, “Social structure and organizations”; Duverger, Political Parties.

37. An earlier incarnation of the KMT briefly served as a party in parliament during 1912–14. Before and after, it was a revolutionary party seeking political power primarily through military action. See Yu, Party Politics in Republican China.

38. Eastman, “Who lost China?”; Jun, Shen, Contemporary Taiwan, pp. 76–77Google Scholar.

39. Resolution on Reorganization; and Shieh, , The Kuomintang, pp. 217–224Google Scholar.

40. Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 56Google Scholar.

41. Ibid. p. 54.

42. Resolution on Reorganization, p. 8.

43. Tien, Hung-mao, The Great Transition, p. 67Google Scholar.

44. Biographical information taken from Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, pp. 59–62Google Scholar.

45. Gaizao, No. 5 (1 11 1950), p. 22Google Scholar; Bendang dangwu gaizao fagui jianbian (A Collection of Regulations on the Reform of Party Work) (Yangmingshan, n.p.: 01 1951), p. 15Google Scholar; Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 89Google Scholar.

46. Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, pp. 86–87, 95–98Google Scholar, and interview data.

47. Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 71Google Scholar, and interview data.

48. Weisi, Shen, “Party factions on Taiwan,” pp. 77–78Google Scholar.

49. Zhongguo Guomindang liushinian lai zuzhi zhi fazhan (60 Years of the KMT's Organizational Development) (Taipei: KMT Central Committee, 1954), p. 15Google Scholar. The Party still maintains this label, although its propriety has become a matter of internal debate following the democratic reforms of the mid-1980s. See Ya-li, Lu, “Political modernization in the ROC: the Kuomintang and the inhibited Party center,” in Myers, Ramon H. (ed.), Two Societies in Opposition: The Republic of China and the People's Republic of China after Forty Years (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1991), pp. 117–18Google Scholar.

50. Ch'i-yun, Chang, The Rebirth ofthe Kuomintang (Taipei: China Cultural Service, n.d.), pp. 84–85Google Scholar. According to Fuming, Xu, the methods were revolutionary, but the goal was democracy, cf. Reorganization of the KMT, p. 81Google Scholar.

51. Ch'i-yun, Chang, Rebirth, p. 83Google Scholar.

52. Yumei, Hao, Guomindang timing zhidu zhi yanjiu (The KMT's Nomination System) (Taipei: Cheng Chung Book Co., 1981)Google Scholar.

53. The Work of Cells, pp. 3–5.

54. Ibid. p. 3.

55. Ch'i-yun, Chang, Rebirth, p. 12Google Scholar; emphasis added.

56. Both cases cited in Gaizao, No. 34 (12 01 1952), pp. 1–2Google Scholar.

57. Gaizao, No. 25 (1 09 1951), pp. 46–47Google Scholar.

58. Zhongguo Guomindang gaizao qijian gongzuo gaikuang tukaji (A Pictorial Survey of General Working Conditions of the KMT during the Reorganization Period) (n.p.: 02 1953), p. 51Google Scholar.

59. Resolution on Reorganization, article 30.

60. According to my interviews, these small groups continue to exist today, but are inactive.

61. Gaizao, No. 5 (1 11 1950), p. 20Google Scholar; Jiqun, Zheng, “Zhongguo Guomindang dangzheng xietiao zhidu de yanbian” (“The evolution of the KMT's Party-government co-ordination system”), Renwen xuebao, No. 2 (07 1976), p. 47Google Scholar; Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 103Google Scholar. As mentioned above, reorganization commissions typically became the permanent Party organ of that level.

62. Chen Hao, “Sixty years of factional strife”; see also Jiqun, Zeng, “The evolution of the KMT's Party-government co-ordination system,” pp. 47–48Google Scholar; Qihua, Ma, “Dangzheng guanxi yu juece licheng” (“Party-government relations and the decision-making process”), Zhengzhi Wenhua (04 1985), p. 127Google Scholar.

63. For a discussion of American influence on KMT policy in the early 1950s, see Richard Barrett, E., “Autonomy and Diversity in the American State on Taiwan,” and Simon, Denis Fred, “External incorporation and internal reform,” in Winckler, Edwin A. and Greenhalgh, Susan (eds.), Contending Approaches to the Political Economy of Taiwan (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1988), pp. 121–137 and 138–150Google Scholar.

64. Guipu, Lin, “Analysis of China's Party-government relations,” pp. 68–70Google Scholar.

65. Gaizao, No. 18 (16 05 1951), pp. 78–79Google Scholar.

66. See “Zhongguo Guomindang dangzheng guanxi dagang” (“Outline of Party-government relations”), and “Zhongguo Guomindang dangzheng guanxi dagang shuoming” (“Explanation of the outline of Party-government relations”), in Gaizao, No. 17 (1 05 1951), pp. 69–75Google Scholar. Later, these groups were enlarged to nine members, three each from the Party, government, and legislature.

67. Gaizao, No. 21 (1 07 1951), pp. 70–72Google Scholar.

68. “Explanation of the outline of Party-government relations.”

69. Gaizao, No. 49 (1 09 1952), p. 5Google Scholar.

70. Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 129Google Scholar; Pictorial Survey, p. 54.

71. Yangde, Chen, Taiwan difang minxuan lingdao renwu zhi biandong (Changes in Locally-Elected Leaders) (Taipei: Siji chuban shiye youxian gongsi, 1981), p. 123Google Scholar.

72. Hao Yumei, The KMT's Nomination System; Chen Yangde, Changes in Locally-Elected Leaders; interview data.

73. Jiqun, Zeng, “The evolution of the KMT's Party-government co-ordination system,” p. 52Google Scholar.

74. Hsiao-shih, Cheng, Party-Military Relations in the PRC and Taiwan: Paradoxes of Control (Boulder: Westview Press, 1990), pp. 18–26Google Scholar; Eastman, “Who lost China?”; Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 74Google Scholar.

75. Hsiao-shih, Cheng, Party-Military Relations, p. 25Google Scholar.

76. Wenwu, Zhu-Ge, “Zhengzhan xitong zai Taiwan” (“The political warfare system on Taiwan”) in Investigating Party Factions, pp. 118–123Google Scholar.

77. Tien, Hung-mao, The Great Transition, p. 68Google Scholar.

78. Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, p. 110Google Scholar. In the KMT cadre system, ganbu referred to cadres in a collective sense, and ganbu fenzi to individual cadres. This is thus more similar to the Soviet practice, which also emphasized the collective, than the CCP, which emphasized the individual. See Schurmann, Franz, Ideology and Organization in Communist China, 2nd ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), p. 163, n. 75Google Scholar.

79. Pictorial Survey, p. 36.

80. Gaizao, No. 49 (1 09 1952), p. 3Google Scholar; Fuming, Xu, Reorganization of the KMT, pp. 130–131Google Scholar; Pictorial Survey, p. 41; and interview data.

81. Gaizao, No. 5 (1 11 1950), pp. 57–60Google Scholar.

82. Gaizao, No. 14 (16 03 1951), pp. 8–11Google Scholar.

83. Gaizao, No. 49 (1 09 1952), pp. 2–3Google Scholar.

84. “Zhongguo Guomindang congzheng dangyuan guanli banfa” (“Management methods for Party members in government work”), Gaizao, No. 18 (16 05 1951), p. 75Google Scholar.

85. Gaizao, No. 49 (1 09 1952), p. 3Google Scholar.

86. Mingshan, Jiang, “Dang de jiben gongzuo zhi yanjiu,” (“Some aspects of the basic work of the Party”) Zuzhi yu Xunlian, (Organization and Training), No. 14 (11 1973), p. 88Google Scholar.

87. Mingshan, Jiang, “Some aspects of the basic work of the Party,” pp. 84–85Google Scholar; Nai-teh, Wu, The Politics of a Regime Patronage System: Mobilization and Control within an Authoritarian System (doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1987), pp. 48–50Google Scholar.

88. Gaizao, No. 14 (16 03 1951), pp. 8–11Google Scholar; No. 21 (1 July 1951), pp. 66–70; and No. 36, (16 February 1952), p. 5.

89. Kai-shek, Chiang, “The proper responsibilities of high-level cadres,” pp. 1–2Google Scholar.

90. Basic Knowledge for Party Members, pp. 72–73.

91. Gaizao, No. 19 (1 06 1951), p. 65Google Scholar.

92. Huaien, Peng, Taiwan zhengzhi bianqian 40 nian (Forty Years of Political Change on Taiwan) (Taipei: Zili Wanbaoshe wenhua chubanbu, 1987), p. 72Google Scholar.

93. 60 Years of the KMT's Organizational Development, p. 16. Mary Wright noted that the CCP scholars (one of whom was Deng Liqun) had reached the same conclusion a decade earlier; cf. The Last Stand of Chinese Conservatism: The T'ung-Chih Restoration, 1862–1874 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1957), p. 99Google Scholar.

94. In addition, the KMT claimed to have another 257,000 members in foreign countries; see Pictorial Survey, p. 33.

95. Jun, Shen, Contemporary Taiwan, p. 81Google Scholar.

96. Gaizao, No. 36 (16 02 1952), pp. 3–5Google Scholar.

97. In 1952, Taiwan's population was 8.128 million, of which 7.478 million (92%) were born on Taiwan and 650,000 were born on the mainland; see Jacoby, , U.S. Aid to Taiwan, p. 295, table D.2Google Scholar.

98. Shijie sizhong quanhui yilai Zhongyang Weiyuanhui ge danwei zhongyao gongzuo gaikuang baogao (Report on the Overall Work Conditions of all Units of the Central Committee since the Fourth Plenum of the Tenth Central Committee) (Taipei: Central Inspection and Discipline Commission, 1974), p. 18Google Scholar.

99. Interview data. One former central official joked that it was natural for mainlanders to dominate the central levels: they had been squeezed out of posts at lower levels and there was nowhere to go but up.

100. Xiaoyi, Qin [Hsiao-yi, Ch'in] (ed.), Zhongguo Guomindang jiushi nian dashi nianbiao (A 90-Year Chronology of the KMT's Major Events) (Taipei: KMT Central Committee, 1984), p. 442Google Scholar. Lu Va-li also notes that top Party and military officials swore an oath of loyalty to Chiang Kai-shek in the early 1950s; see “Political modernization in the ROC,” p. 113.

101. Michels, Robert, Political Parties (New York: Free Press, 1962)Google Scholar.

102. On the other hand, an article in Gaizao drew a clear distinction between Leninism and Marxism: Marxism is a theory of economic and social development, but Leninism is equated with military aggression, not organizational principles, as I am using the term. According to the author of this article, capitalism and socialism are both the enemies of Leninism. The author is far more sympathetic to Marxism than to Leninism. He claims the Soviet and Chinese Communist Parties are not Marxist at all, but only Leninist. Leninism is defined in totalitarian terms as the complete domination of society and the goal of global revolution. See Wenqing, Zhou, “Liening zhuyi pipan,” (“A critique of Leninism”), Gaizao, No. 21 (1 07 1951), pp. 26–33Google Scholar.

103. Wade, Robert, Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

104. Interview data.

105. Peng Huaien, Forty Years of Political Change; Winckler, Edwin A., “Institutionalization and participation on Taiwan: from hard to soft authoritarianism?” The China Quarterly, No. 99 (09 1984), pp. 481–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar.