SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
7,178
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 4:
Line 4: − − In 1934, in ''The Mongols of Manchuria'', Lattimore had suggested that [[Sinkiang]], [[Mongolia]] and [[Manchuria]] might be made into a separate empire under Soviet influence, and claimed that the people of Manchuria are not Chinese at all, but Mongolian. But in 1942, after Japan had taken Manchuria, Lattimore reversed himself. In a Foreign Policy Report dated September 1, 1942, titled ''Asia in a New World Order, '' Lattimore abandoned his old line that Manchuria was not Chinese but Mongolian, asserting that it was "95 per cent Chinese" and that it was a mistake, merely because the country was called Manchuria, to think that the people were not Chinese. Line 16:
Line 14: − − During the [[Nazi-Soviet pact]], when the Soviet and Communist Party line was that the U.S. should not interfere in Hitler and Stalin's joint invasion and bloody division of Europe, because the Allies were no better than the Axis, Lattimore agreed. In June 1940, when the UK was fighting for its life virtually alone under the Nazi Blitz, he wrote in ''Political Affairs'' that the war was merely "between the established master races and the claimant master races," and was caused by "the wrongs done to China, Ethiopia, Spain, Czechoslovakia and Albania -- not by Japan and Italy and Germany alone, but by Britain and France and the United States as well." But after Hitler turned on Stalin and invaded Russia, the party line reversed course, demanding immediate U.S. intervention, and Lattimore flip-flopped as well, becoming fanatically pro-war, even joining the U.S. Office of War Information to propagandize for the Allies. + + + +
→Early writings: re-ordered
In the years between 1928 and 1945 Owen Lattimore wrote eight books about Asia and China. In his first book, ''Desert Road to Turkestan'' (1928), Lattimore wrote, "I should be inclined to say that a very strong case can be made out for the Soviet position."<ref>''Desert Road to Turkestan'' by Owen Lattimore (Boston, 1928), pg. 247.</ref> In a later book, ''Manchuria, Cradle of Conflict'' (1935), Lattimore writes, "Russia appears to be the only nation of the modern world that is 'young' enough to have 'men of destiny.' It creates its [[Lenin]] and its [[Stalin]]. . . . Russia, more than China and more than any nation of the West, is launched upon a career of growth"<ref>''Manchuria, Cradle of Conflict'' by Owen Lattimore (Rev. 1935), pg. 293.</ref> China, which was to become the victim of this communist "growth," is characterized by such adjectives as "[[aggressive]]," and "[[expansionist]]." Lattimore depicted China as an aggressor in Manchuria, writing that the [[Soviet Union]], China and [[Japan]] all had ambitions in Manchuria, but that the Soviet Union had more right there than China or Japan.
In the years between 1928 and 1945 Owen Lattimore wrote eight books about Asia and China. In his first book, ''Desert Road to Turkestan'' (1928), Lattimore wrote, "I should be inclined to say that a very strong case can be made out for the Soviet position."<ref>''Desert Road to Turkestan'' by Owen Lattimore (Boston, 1928), pg. 247.</ref> In a later book, ''Manchuria, Cradle of Conflict'' (1935), Lattimore writes, "Russia appears to be the only nation of the modern world that is 'young' enough to have 'men of destiny.' It creates its [[Lenin]] and its [[Stalin]]. . . . Russia, more than China and more than any nation of the West, is launched upon a career of growth"<ref>''Manchuria, Cradle of Conflict'' by Owen Lattimore (Rev. 1935), pg. 293.</ref> China, which was to become the victim of this communist "growth," is characterized by such adjectives as "[[aggressive]]," and "[[expansionist]]." Lattimore depicted China as an aggressor in Manchuria, writing that the [[Soviet Union]], China and [[Japan]] all had ambitions in Manchuria, but that the Soviet Union had more right there than China or Japan.
In July of 1938 IPR obtained a grant of $90,000 (equivalent to about [http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/Data/US-Inflation/inf_calculator.cfm?first=90000&year1=1938&year2=2012 $1.5 million today]) from the [[Rockefeller Foundation]] to perform a study of Asia. Lattimore wrote to IPR President [[Edward C. Carter]], “I think you were pretty cagey to turn over so much of the China section of the inquiry to Asiaticus, Han-seng and Chi. They will bring out the absolutely essential radical aspects, but can be depended on to do it with the right touch."
In July of 1938 IPR obtained a grant of $90,000 (equivalent to about [http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/Data/US-Inflation/inf_calculator.cfm?first=90000&year1=1938&year2=2012 $1.5 million today]) from the [[Rockefeller Foundation]] to perform a study of Asia. Lattimore wrote to IPR President [[Edward C. Carter]], “I think you were pretty cagey to turn over so much of the China section of the inquiry to Asiaticus, Han-seng and Chi. They will bring out the absolutely essential radical aspects, but can be depended on to do it with the right touch."
In 1940, Lattimore characterized Soviet policy in Mongolia as "in the interests of the Mongol people as a whole."
In 1940, Lattimore characterized Soviet policy in Mongolia as "in the interests of the Mongol people as a whole."
Lattimore argued that the Soviet Union had a valid claim to be called a [[democracy]], but that Americans were reluctant to admit it, "even when democratic procedures are as plainly stated as they are in the [[Stalin Constitution]]."<ref>''Asia in a New World Order'', by Owen Lattimore, Foreign Policy Report, September 1, 1942.</ref> Lattimore placed the three principals of [[Sun Yat-sen]], Soviet [[collectivism]] and the [[New Deal]] as all akin to one another.
Lattimore argued that the Soviet Union had a valid claim to be called a [[democracy]], but that Americans were reluctant to admit it, "even when democratic procedures are as plainly stated as they are in the [[Stalin Constitution]]."<ref>''Asia in a New World Order'', by Owen Lattimore, Foreign Policy Report, September 1, 1942.</ref> Lattimore placed the three principals of [[Sun Yat-sen]], Soviet [[collectivism]] and the [[New Deal]] as all akin to one another.
Lattimore recommended highly ''Challenge of Red China'', written by Guenther Stein, a member of Richard Sorge's Soviet spy ring in Tokyo. Of Communist propagandist<ref>Douglas Martin, "[http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/02/world/asia/israel-epstein-prominent-chinese-communist-dies-at-90.html Israel Epstein, Prominent Chinese Communist, Dies at 90], ''New York Times'', June 2, 2005</ref> Israel Epstein's ''Unfinished Revolution in China'' he wrote, "When he pleads his case the arguments pile up like a wedge." When Lattimore resigned as editor of ''Pacific Affairs'', he was succeeded by Michael Greenberg, a Communist Party member. Lattimore then became a member of the editorial board of the notorious journal ''[[Amerasia]]'', in the offices of which OSS agents would find hundreds of stolen US government documents, mostly pertaining to China, many labeled "Secret" or "Top Secret."
Lattimore recommended highly ''Challenge of Red China'', written by Guenther Stein, a member of Richard Sorge's Soviet spy ring in Tokyo. Of Communist propagandist<ref>Douglas Martin, "[http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/02/world/asia/israel-epstein-prominent-chinese-communist-dies-at-90.html Israel Epstein, Prominent Chinese Communist, Dies at 90], ''New York Times'', June 2, 2005</ref> Israel Epstein's ''Unfinished Revolution in China'' he wrote, "When he pleads his case the arguments pile up like a wedge." When Lattimore resigned as editor of ''Pacific Affairs'', he was succeeded by Michael Greenberg, a Communist Party member. Lattimore then became a member of the editorial board of the notorious journal ''[[Amerasia]]'', in the offices of which OSS agents would find hundreds of stolen US government documents, mostly pertaining to China, many labeled "Secret" or "Top Secret."
In 1934, in ''The Mongols of Manchuria'', Lattimore had claimed that the people of Manchuria are not Chinese at all, but Mongolian, and suggested that [[Sinkiang]], [[Mongolia]] and [[Manchuria]] might be made into a separate empire under Soviet influence. But in 1942, after Japan had taken Manchuria, Lattimore reversed himself. In a Foreign Policy Report dated September 1, 1942, titled ''Asia in a New World Order, '' Lattimore abandoned his old line that Manchuria was not Chinese but Mongolian, asserting that it was "95 per cent Chinese" and that it was a mistake, merely because the country was called Manchuria, to think that the people were not Chinese.
During the [[Nazi-Soviet pact]], when the Soviet and Communist Party line was that the U.S. should not interfere in Hitler and Stalin's joint invasion and bloody division of Europe, because the Allies were no better than the Axis, Lattimore agreed. In June 1940, when the UK was fighting for its life virtually alone under the Nazi Blitz, he wrote in ''Political Affairs'' that the war was merely "between the established master races and the claimant master races," and was caused by "the wrongs done to China, Ethiopia, Spain, Czechoslovakia and Albania -- not by Japan and Italy and Germany alone, but by Britain and France and the United States as well." But after Hitler turned on Stalin and invaded Russia, the party line reversed course, demanding immediate U.S. intervention, and Lattimore flip-flopped as well, becoming fanatically pro-war, even joining the U.S. Office of War Information to propagandize for the Allies.
In 1942-43, when the Soviet and Communist Party line was to support the Chinese Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang, in order to keep the Japanese pinned down in China and unable to attack the Soviet Far East, Lattimore found Nationalist China to be "democratic," and Chiang a "genius." In a 1942 lecture at Claremont College, Lattimore said, "we have in Asia a statesman of real genius, in Chiang Kai-shek." In 1943, in ''The Making of Modern China,'' he wrote, "China is a democratic country in the sense that the [KMT] Party and the government represent what the vast majority of the people want." But after the war, when the Party line reversed, labeling the KMT "fascist" and the Communist rebels "democratic," Lattimore reversed too. In 1949's ''The Situation in Asia,'' he denounced "the Kuomintang, a party which owed nothing to elections or to representative forms of government," writing that Chiang Kai-shek was influenced by "Fascist" theories.
In 1942-43, when the Soviet and Communist Party line was to support the Chinese Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang, in order to keep the Japanese pinned down in China and unable to attack the Soviet Far East, Lattimore found Nationalist China to be "democratic," and Chiang a "genius." In a 1942 lecture at Claremont College, Lattimore said, "we have in Asia a statesman of real genius, in Chiang Kai-shek." In 1943, in ''The Making of Modern China,'' he wrote, "China is a democratic country in the sense that the [KMT] Party and the government represent what the vast majority of the people want." But after the war, when the Party line reversed, labeling the KMT "fascist" and the Communist rebels "democratic," Lattimore reversed too. In 1949's ''The Situation in Asia,'' he denounced "the Kuomintang, a party which owed nothing to elections or to representative forms of government," writing that Chiang Kai-shek was influenced by "Fascist" theories.