pulace of Taiwan were surprised to see a large cross at the head of the funeral cortege, and to read at the opening of his will that he had been “a follower of the Three Principles of the People and of Jesus Christ from his youth,“ those who had known Chiang were struck by his personal inconsistencies.
On the other hand, some of his ideas, actions and personal characteristics seem to belie the depth of his faith, or at least its impact upon his conduct. Chiang read widely in the Confucian classics and in Chinese history, and believed strongly in the value of China’s cultural heritage, especially Confucianism. His Christian sermons seemed unclear on the distinctions between personal salvation and national recovery.
His long and consistent alliance with the Shanghai underworld made him complicit, at least to some degree, in their corruption and cruelty; likewise, his reliance upon his own secret police, which engaged in countless acts of brutality.
Reports of corruption on a grand scale by his wife’s family call his own integrity into question, though he had no power to control them; still his nepotism is undeniable. His decision to breach the levees of theYellow River in order to stall the advance of the Japanese, and then again to halt the Communists, led to the deaths of thousands and deprived many more of their homes and livelihood. Though his role in the military suppression of Taiwanese dissent in the infamous February 28 incident is unclear, his active oversight of the ensuing White Terror is well established.
Chiang’s positive character traits included extraordinary personal courage, a huge capacity for work, a very strong will, and immense stamina.
On the other hand, he was notorious for refusing to take advice, or even to seek the counsel of advisers. He brooked no disagreement, and would fly into a rage when criticized. A mediocre military leader, he issued orders from afar without any real knowledge of battlefield conditions, and then altered his plan without notice.
More than once, he ordered loyal tro