AXIS VICTORIOUS!!!! What happens to Pu Yi, and Manchukuo?

[Incanian]

So in an Axis victory, what would be the fate of Pu Yi, and Manchukuo. I was always thinking Pu Yi would have the ambition after the Japanese victory to try to unify China under the Qing, as a sort of Qing restoration. that's just my opinion.

But in an Axis victory, what do you think would happen to Pu Yi and Manchukuo?

 

[trurle]

So in an Axis victory, what would be the fate of Pu Yi, and Manchukuo. I was always thinking Pu Yi would have the ambition after the Japanese victory to try to unify China under the Qing, as a sort of Qing restoration. that's just my opinion.
But in an Axis victory, what do you think would happen to Pu Yi and Manchukuo?

Likely suicide at some point few years later. Ambitions are one thing. Capability to bring these ambitions to fruition is another. Manchukuo is kept nominally as a dependent state for several decades, and then given the independence separately from other parts of China. De-colonization was the major trend, regardless of the fortunes of the WWII.

 

[Incanian]

Likely suicide at some point few years later. Ambitions are one thing. Capability to bring these ambitions to fruition is another.[/QUOTE

Could I ask why he would Commit suicide? I just think Pu Yi has a way better chance at being accepted to possibly unify China, as an alien Manchukuo is better than a vile Japanese ruler.

 

[trurle]

Could I ask why he would Commit suicide? I just think Pu Yi has a way better chance at being accepted to possibly unify China, as an alien Manchukuo is better than a vile Japanese ruler

Because of constant Japanese interference in the internal affairs of Manchukuo.

 

[Incanian]

Because of constant Japanese interference in the internal affairs of Manchukuo.

I don't think that would make him kill himself. That would probably just inspire him to plot against the Japanese.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

I don't think that would make him kill himself. That would probably just inspire him to plot against the Japanese.

... which would drive him to tearing out his hair in frustration, essentially, due to the futility of any plans he might come up with due to lack of real power, resources, connections to influential people ect. outside his connections within his Japanese handlers, or Chinese Nationalists who are just as hostile to his Manchu people's and state's seperate identity and autonomy as the Japanese are.

 

[Incanian]

... which would drive him to tearing out his hair in frustration, essentially, due to the futility of any plans he might come up with due to lack of real power, resources, connections to influential people ect. outside his connections within his Japanese handlers, or Chinese Nationalists who are just as hostile to his Manchu people's and state's seperate identity and autonomy as the Japanese are.

Well, he doesn't exactly have to take on the Japanese on his own. Since Japan isn't colonizing all of China, the rest of the Independent Chinese fragments I'm guessing will unify and could conspire with Pu Yi against the Japanese under the Idea Manchuria is under the newly created Qing Dynasty reformed.

I mean, basically everyone on this site have different opinions on an Axis victory, but I'm thinking, after a few decades in an Axis Victory, Pu Yi is probably not gonna want to be a puppet of the Japanese.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Well, he doesn't exactly have to take on the Japanese on his own. Since Japan isn't colonizing all of China, the rest of the Independent Chinese fragments I'm guessing will unify and could conspire with Pu Yi against the Japanese under the Idea Manchuria is under the newly created Qing Dynasty reformed.

I mean, basically everyone on this site have different opinions on an Axis victory, but I'm thinking, after a few decades in an Axis Victory, Pu Yi is probably not gonna want to be a puppet of the Japanese.

... so, they fragment to get local power and control under the Japanese umbrella; a Japan who's economy they're going to get increasingly integrated with over the years and who has a far greater ability to inflict harm on them for too much misbehavior, not to mention legitimacy and a reputation of accomplishing its goals, only to hand that autonomy to a throughly de-legitimized dynasty who's power is built on its connections to Japan and just as vulnerable to its power and influence as they are. What Pu Yi WANTS is irrelevent; his goal is unacheivable with the resources he has on hand if its contradicts with the goals of the Japanese State, who are not without resources, skills, the ability to react, ect.

Pu Yi is not a human player running a game against a mediocre AI on a moderate difficulty.

 

[Deleted member 97083]

Likely suicide at some point few years later. Ambitions are one thing. Capability to bring these ambitions to fruition is another. Manchukuo is kept nominally as a dependent state for several decades, and then given the independence separately from other parts of China. De-colonization was the major trend, regardless of the fortunes of the WWII.

I doubt that decolonization happens inside the Axis empires after an Axis victory without the collapse of those regimes as a whole.

Britain and France, despite having colonial empires, saw themselves as politically and economically liberal, and by the standards of what liberalism was at that time, they were. They had democratically elected governments, and they saw at least some value in the idea of self-determination, and had a press that could criticize the actions of the government.

Colonialism was an inherent contradiction with the liberal political systems of Britain and France, and decolonization was the obvious resolution to this contradiction.

On the other hand, Nazi Germany, and the Empire of Japan in the era of pre-1945 Shōwa statism, rejected the idea of political liberalism entirely. The philosophical/social background behind decolonization doesn't apply to the Axis powers.

In the case of the Empire of Japan during WW2, I don't see a way that they can turn back from their increasing militarization and nationalism, especially when military officers had difficulty even controlling the actions of their subordinates. If the Empire of Japan actually carves out a successful "Co-Prosperity Sphere", then they now have a bunch of vested military interests and economic interests in maintaining these colonies. They will only be forced out at gunpoint or if the Japanese themselves mass revolt against conscription making maintaining the territory untenable.

Of course it is unlikely that they actually conquer China in the first place and it would likely be a chaotic territory with communist guerrillas behind the lines everywhere. But if the conquest of China has somehow already happened, then I don't see how it's undone as long as the military dictatorship continues.

 

[trurle]

I doubt that decolonization happens inside the Axis empires after an Axis victory without the collapse of those regimes as a whole.

Britain and France, despite having colonial empires, saw themselves as politically and economically liberal, and by the standards of what liberalism was at that time, they were. They had democratically elected governments, and they saw at least some value in the idea of self-determination, and had a press that could criticize the actions of the government.

Colonialism was an inherent contradiction with the liberal political systems of Britain and France, and decolonization was the obvious resolution to this contradiction.

On the other hand, Nazi Germany, and the Empire of Japan in the era of pre-1945 Shōwa statism, rejected the idea of political liberalism entirely. The philosophical/social background behind decolonization doesn't apply to the Axis powers.

In the case of the Empire of Japan during WW2, I don't see a way that they can turn back from their increasing militarization and nationalism, especially when military officers had difficulty even controlling the actions of their subordinates. If the Empire of Japan actually carves out a successful "Co-Prosperity Sphere", then they now have a bunch of vested military interests and economic interests in maintaining these colonies. They will only be forced out at gunpoint or if the Japanese themselves revolt against conscription making maintaining the territory untenable.

Of course it is unlikely that they actually conquer China in the first place and it would likely be a chaotic territory with communist guerrillas behind the lines everywhere. But if the conquest of China has somehow already happened, then I don't see how it's undone as long as the military dictatorship continues.

Japanese social peculiarities of WWII period already cost them dearly in industrial and scientific productivity. I think the situation will become worse over time in case of Axis victory, until keeping (hostile) colonies will be simple impossible. The colonies were originally devices to provide goods for founders - if they become net negative (as happened IOTL due advances in transport technology), even strongest political motivations will only delay the inevitable independence.

 

[David T]

So in an Axis victory, what would be the fate of Pu Yi, and Manchukuo. I was always thinking Pu Yi would have the ambition after the Japanese victory to try to unify China under the Qing, as a sort of Qing restoration. that's just my opinion.

But in an Axis victory, what do you think would happen to Pu Yi and Manchukuo?

Pu Yi would have to confine himself to being puppet Emperor of Manchukuo. The Japanese do not want a strong and united China (that would include Manchuria)--not under him, not under Wang Jingwei. They feel they have special interests in Manchuria that require keeping it separate from any Chinese regime, however subservient it may seem.

 

[Deleted member 97083]

The colonies were originally devices to provide goods for founders - if they become net negative (as happened IOTL due advances in transport technology)

What year of the war did this become the case? Losing 8 million tons of merchant shipping vessels may have played a role as well.

 

[trurle]

What year of the war did this become the case? Losing 8 million tons of merchant shipping vessels may have played a role as well.

I rather refer to about 1930. The same naval technology which make possible Japanese initial conquests, made them meaningless too. Colonies are meaningless if your naval transports can have enough range to reach Earth`s antipodal point on single fuel load. With extended range, it is more profitable to trade with extended set of ones willing to trade and ignore idiots who try to build their enclosed trade networks (colonial empires). Japanese were just too slow to understand the shift of the balance..

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Japanese social peculiarities of WWII period already cost them dearly in industrial and scientific productivity. I think the situation will become worse over time in case of Axis victory, until keeping (hostile) colonies will be simple impossible. The colonies were originally devices to provide goods for founders - if they become net negative (as happened IOTL due advances in transport technology), even strongest political motivations will only delay the inevitable independence.

What year of the war did this become the case? Losing 8 million tons of merchant shipping vessels may have played a role as well.

The implementation of the global free trade order/Breton Woods was also a hugely important element in terms of making colonies a net drain, since it split economic access from geo-political influence/control. The pre-WW II economic systems of protectionism, the need to support the required industrial bases to support the Imperial war machine in every country meaning you wanted guaranteed access to raw materials and strategic basing positions, ect. meant that having top access to the markets of, say, India meant YOU had to have political dominance over India and the ability to defend and escort the commerce with your own military might rather than counting on Uncle Sam or Joe either directly or indirectly (by keeping sufficent international stability to lower/eliminate the risk of a war that would shut down said commerce) to do it for you. Post-WW II, Free Trade removed that risk, turning the overhead/bidding war of the cost of colonization unessicery overhead. The Axis states, on the other hand, were dedicated to the concept of Autarky and the closed economy; inside such a system, colonies make financial sense, as can be seen IOTL by the push by Japanese industries to exploit the raw materials of its puppets and insure a steady flow of rice by loyal farmers from the mainland to feed the Home Isles.

Both Japan and Germany had experiances that showed just how vulnerable their economies were to the whims of external powers in the form of blockades, embargos, the need to bargin to get vital raw materials, ect. to act independently. Its going to be hard to convince them to let go of those systems in the face of the existance of rival power blocs.

 

[trurle]

The implementation of the global free trade order/Breton Woods was also a hugely important element in terms of making colonies a net drain, since it split economic access from geo-political influence/control. The pre-WW II economic systems of protectionism, the need to support the required industrial bases to support the Imperial war machine in every country meaning you wanted guaranteed access to raw materials and strategic basing positions, ect. meant that having top access to the markets of, say, India meant YOU had to have political dominance over India and the ability to defend and escort the commerce with your own military might rather than counting on Uncle Sam or Joe either directly or indirectly (by keeping sufficent international stability to lower/eliminate the risk of a war that would shut down said commerce) to do it for you. Post-WW II, Free Trade removed that risk, turning the overhead/bidding war of the cost of colonization unessicery overhead. The Axis states, on the other hand, were dedicated to the concept of Autarky and the closed economy; inside such a system, colonies make financial sense, as can be seen IOTL by the push by Japanese industries to exploit the raw materials of its puppets and insure a steady flow of rice by loyal farmers from the mainland to feed the Home Isles.

Both Japan and Germany had experiances that showed just how vulnerable their economies were to the whims of external powers in the form of blockades, embargos, the need to bargin to get vital raw materials, ect. to act independently. Its going to be hard to convince them to let go of those systems in the face of the existance of rival power blocs.

The colonial system was already showing severe signs of falling apart by 1937. The wages in the colonies steadily increased, trade margins of profit shrunk, and both India and Philippines were already on the path to independence. The problem with the Germany and Japan was what they have failed to extrapolate the most recent trend.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

The colonial system was already showing severe signs of falling apart by 1937. The wages in the colonies steadily increased, trade margins of profit shrunk, and both India and Philippines were already on the path to independence. The problem with the Germany and Japan was what they have failed to extrapolate the most recent trend.

Failed to extrapolate due to differing circumstances, priorities, and experiences. I'm certainly not saying the colonial system wasen't already on its way out by the 1940's; merely that like improving transportation technology, Europe's massive lost of relative-advantage, cost-reducing capital and manpower to the great fires of war, ect. drastically sped things up by taking another chunk out of the gap between the benefits and costs of maintaining the colonies. Unlike the factors you listed though, the rapid total restructuring of the global financial system took out that entire chunk at once, rather than having it seep away, which moved ahead and condensed the timetable. In an Axis victory world, the lose would be drawn-out and more subtle and the indirect benefits (Power projection, captive markets, ect.) more salient to the pre-existing colonial powers, so decolonization is a policy governments are far less likely to embrace since the immediate lose in most cases would outweigh any short-medium term benefits. Hence, unlikely to occur peacefully and likely to lead to a collapse of the Axis regiemes in the event of its (dramatic) success via local resistance.