Is it that difficult a concept that the remnants of the side overthrown in a civil war continued governing in Taiwan that you need to make an analogy to the us in the 1800s with "european monarchs" as guarantors?
this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2026
106 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
759 readers
476 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
it's not even internally consistent : appealing to Union supporters--"wouldnt it be great if the european monarchies were backing you?"
you know, the people that wanted the confederacy to win?
ask the Europeans where their textile mills got their cotton
At the time the Civil War ended, Puerto Rico was still a Spanish colony. So I’m not seeing how the Spanish Bourbons would’ve been cool with the Union just up and taking their colony as a consolation prize.
Eh, it's a decent analogy. Though it would make more sense for the KMT to be the confederates at least because they lost the civil war
It is a common analogy in the ML circles. This person did the switcher to make fascist kmt seem progressive.
Holy shit you're right. It so fucking stupid that my brain corrected it to be the right way around. Incredible.
It's like this: imagine that the Empire fled to the forest moon of Endor, while the Rebel Alliance took over Tatooine
This analogy is actually hurting my head
Yeah "if at the end of the civil war the union fled" why are they fleeing tho?
Even more importantly, why in the hell would the union be fleeing south?
Harder to kill slave owners in the North
In my defense of my fellow Burgerland Liberals I don't think the redditor whose username is 'Pietersielie' is an American but I get it
imagine that China is a burger, the people that wanted to take the burger for themselves fled and the people that wanted to share the burger with all the people stayed, also they had a school shooting to determine who got the burger.
So anti capitalist they can’t see the parallels between the war to end American chattel slavery and the war against the Chinese landlord class
No see, this analogy makes sense because A: The GMD is the older, more established party (uh by a decade or two), and B: the CPC rose up in rebellion against the former (uh, hm, after their leaders started getting arrested and hanged, and their members killed, and their peasant support base also started getting killed) so yeah since the Communists started the civil war it makes sense
Honestly their leaders didn't get hanged as often as beheaded. The pictures from the Shanghai uprising are horrific.
So the CPC fought for slavery?
No? Analogies don’t have to be perfect to be useful.
I'd say there's no perfect analogy where you compare the sides in the Chinese civil war vs. the American one. The ROC was barely a functioning nation when the civil war broke out and never really unified the country completely. There was never a clean split where some provinces sided with either party. The People's republic was proclaimed in 1949 when the civil war war pretty much finished, and the ROC government moved to taipei soon after. As an analogy, the american civil war is just not very useful, and that's not even getting into stuff like which side wanted to keep slavery or landlord rule going.
I recently saw (on here?) a similar analogy that used Hawaii instead of Puerto Rico.
The funniest part is that it works the way he said it when it's switched, since the Confederacy was supported by European monarchs.