MILITARISM IN CHINA.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 28 January 1927, Page 5

MILITARISM IN CHINA.

CHINESE PROFESSOR’S VIEWS TWO INTERESTING ARTICLES. SPECIAL TO THE STAR. WELLINGTON, Jan. 28. f ormed with the object of studying all important questions affecting the relations of the countries which face the Pacific, the Institute of Pacific Relations, wiiich has a branch in New Zealand, recently commenced the circulation of its news bulletin, which contains two timely articles on militarism iu China, both written by Chinese professors, who do not take exactly parallel views. Professor T. Chen, of the Tsing Hua College, Peking, contributed a careful survey of the extent- and the motives underlying the militaristic outbreak in his country. He opened with a suggestion that the answers were required to four questions: 1. What are the chiqf characteristics of the military system ?

2. What are its main consequences upon the Chinese people? 3. How is it possible for militarism to continue in operation in China for so- long? 4. What are the possible ways oi eradicating the evil? First of all, writes Professor Chen, Chinese militarism is characterised by lawlessness. It is really a modified form of feaudalism in the sense that the- country is divided up into zones, each zone being under the control of a military leader. He sets up Government- of a sort, administering military as well as civil affairs. His Government is chiefly based upon personal rule, which is rule of thumb and not of law. Militarism knows no due process of lavr. The masses now live in terror, and intelligent classes dare not openly criticise. Discontent and dissatisfaction there must be, but such feelings are not to be publicly expressed. Social tension is very high, and social crises may come at any minute.

UNENDING DEMANDS FORgTAXES

Another dominant feature of militarism is seen in the unending demand for revenue and taxes. Almost all possible ways of money raising have been practised. By far the major portion ol the nation’s revenue is being spent on carrying on civil wars. Chiefly due to repeated contributions and taxes to the army, industry is virtually at a standstill. Chiefly due to diverting educational appropriations for military use, the educational system is shattered. Warfare and preparations for war overshadow everything else in the social fabric of China to-day. As to what militarism lias done for China, two instances should suffice. In a silk manufacturing town in South-eastern China there is a pawnshop of good social standing and economic prosperity. Recently a civil war was waged in the vicinity, and the army needed money. Within a short interval of about twelve months, military officers and soldiers visited the shop one hundred and seventy-five times, demanding money on each occasion. As a result, the shop was closed for business and the proprietor becomes a poor man.

Again, during the recent civil war near Peking, several divisions were stationed in the suburbs of the national Capitol. One division especially provided neither food nor lodging for its soldiers, and the soldiers ate and slept in the peasants’ homes as they went from village to village. In addition, they forced the majority of the villagers to work for the army without compensation. The males attended to manual labour, the females cooked for them, and the children fed their horses. After , the army withdrew, the villagers had practically nothing in the home, and nothing on the farm. Now winter is coining and they are facing cold and starvation.

WHY DO THEY TOLERATE IT? Since militarism has done so much harm to the Chinese, why do they tolerate it, and why don’t they put a stop to it? asked Professor Chen. He suggests two foundamental reasons as answers. First, the Chinese view of liie emphasises the non-mixing of good with evil. The Chinese consider militarism an evil, they despise soldiers. Good citizens will never condescend to become soldiers, and they want to leave soldiers alone. They know militarism is bad, but they want militarism to die of its own accord. What they fail to see, however, is that militarism will not die unless a counter force is being exerted to hasten its death. In other words, what the Chinese overlook is that the evil in society, just like the good, is capable of natural growth. There seems another reason why militarism is allowed an unhampered growth in China, namely, the lack of orgaisation among the civilians, they cannot fight the soldiers because they have neither the means nor the equipment. In this way, the people can hardly do anything else but endure the sufferings of militarism. The Chinese authority concludes on an optimistic note. Militarism, he savs is not likely to perpetuate, itself for ever. Already there are signs of its decline. Among others, there are two special methods which will hasten its death. On© is by a decisive war among the military chiefs result-

ing in the undisputed victory of one faction. In that- case, the favoured faction will gain political and social ascendency. As soon as the other military leaders disintegrate, nationwide propaganda against militarism, as in favour of social reforms should be systematically carried on so as. to make the revival of militarism impossible.

A MILLION CHINESE IN ARMS. Professor Shao Chang Lee, • of- the University of Hawaii, criticises the article reproduced above, declaring that if the Chinese despise soldiers in times of peace, this is not the case in troubled periods. It has been estimated, he says, that there are in China, nearly a million men under arms. If Chinese despise soldiers, surely the fathers would not let their sons leave home for the camps, and wives would not let their husbands go. But they have to! If not permitting them to join the throng of the.militai-' ists, what else can .they do, seeing that they have no soil for them to till, no domestic articles for them to make, and are too proud to let them turn loose to become bandits ? They must eat. They must have clothes to wear. They become restless. They want to do something good or bad. Under economic pressure the view of life' seems to be necessarily changed.

Then there is the group of red-blood-ed young patriots who have received some military training, and who want to do something for their country. They want to help in unifying the nation. Discussing the military leaders, Professor Chang Lee states that for the past ten years the military cliques have been trying to control the central Government at Peking. They have no definite political platforms and policies, but they all try to imitate Mencius by waying what he ouce said: “Heaven does mot yet wish the Empire to enjoy tranquillity and good order. If heaven wishes this, who is there besides me to bring it about?”

WAITING FOR A GENIUS. “That the present military system is an evil,” concludes the writer, “even the militarists themselves do not deny,, out they consider it necessary under the present circumstances. Tney firmly believe that political China, with a population of over four hundred millions and a territory occupying onefourth of Asia, can only be unified bv force. Most of the unpatriotic militarists, who a. few years ago, dared to sell their country’s rights for a mess of pottage have disappeared from the Chinese political arena. It is safe to say that the present group of militarists are patriots who have their country’s welfare at heart, but who are unwilling to give up the rights which they have acquired during these years of overlordship in the various strategic cent ies of the country. They are more or less bigoted, stubborn, and a little bit conceited. They do not realise that alone, not one of them can lift China out of political chaos. Only a composite genius can do this.”