281:(arrested in 1941 and executed in 1944) was still in existence. Willoughby further claimed the Sorge spy ring had caused the "loss of China" in 1949 and was in the process of steadily taking over the U.S. government. The American Japanologist Michael Schaller wrote that Willoughby was indeed correct on some points as that Sorge was a spy for the Soviet Union and the same was probably true of certain left-wing American journalists who worked with Sorge in Shanghai in the early 1930s, but much of Willoughby's book reflected the paranoid mind of one of the most incompetent military intelligence officers ever in American history.
183:
in the State
Department who have been named as members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring, I have here in my hand a list of 205...a list of names that were known to the Secretary of State and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department". The speech, which McCarthy repeated shortly afterwards in Salt Lake City, made him into a national figure. In the early 1950s, the Truman administration was attacked for the "loss" of China with Senator McCarthy charging in a 1950 speech that "
129:—had been dependable, democratic, warm and above all pro-American. Throughout the great war the United Nations Big Four had been Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin and Chiang. Stalin's later treachery had been deplorable but unsurprising. But Chiang Kai-shek! Acheson's strategy to contain Red aggression seemed to burst wide open. Everything American diplomats had achieved in Europe—the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, NATO—momentarily seemed annulled by this disaster in Asia.
155:, who wrote a number of articles responding to the report. Mao asked why Truman would provide so much support to Nationalist forces if he believed them to be so "demoralized and unpopular." Mao stated that since Truman's position of supporting a demoralized and unpopular Nationalist government was otherwise irrational, Truman must have been acting out of imperialist ambitions "to slaughter the Chinese people" by needlessly prolonging the war.
94:
argues that the president mistakenly thought of China as a great power securely held by Chiang Kai-shek, whose hold on power was actually tenuous. Davies predicted that after the war China would become a power vacuum, tempting to Moscow, which the
Nationalists could not deal with. In that sense, says
256:
In 1949, China declared independence, an event known in
Western discourse as "the loss of China"—in the US, with bitter recriminations and conflict over who was responsible for that loss. The terminology is revealing. It is only possible to lose something that one owns. The tacit assumption was that
182:
In his speech on 7 February 1950 in
Wheeling, West Virginia before the Ohio County Women's Republican Club, McCarthy blamed Acheson, whom he called "this pompous diplomat in striped pants", for the "loss of China", making the sensationalist claim: "While I cannot take the time to name all of the men
215:
were influential in bringing about a change in United States policy favorable to the
Chinese Communists." Although McCarran was careful not to call Lattimore a Soviet spy in his report, which would have allowed him to sue for libel, he came very close with the statement: "Owen Lattimore was, from
199:
had allegedly tolerated, were responsible for the "loss" of China. In a speech that said much about fears of
American masculinity going "soft" that were common in the 1950s, McCarthy charged that "prancing minions of the Moscow party line" had been in charge of policy towards China in the State
265:
criticized the "endless fight over who got it right on China, whatever the
Chinese reality. That is to say, in the peculiar debate on Communist China, the questions asked and the issues debated often reflected American partisan politics and policy spins rather than Chinese reality."
667:
had lost their effectiveness from the day that the
Communists took over in China. I believed that the loss of China had played a large role in the rise of Joe McCarthy. And I knew that all these problems, taken together, were chickenshit compared with what might happen if we lost
147:
with its catalog of $ 2 billion worth of
American aid provided to China since 1946 was widely mocked as an excuse for allowing what was widely seen as a geopolitical disaster which allowed the formation of a Sino-Soviet bloc with the potential to dominate Eurasia.
236:, in the throes of revolutionary pressures and counter-pressures that have been felt the world over. The United States has never at any time been in a position to exercise more than a minor influence on China's destiny. China was lost by the Chinese."
143:, a compilation of official documents to defend the administration's record and argue that there was little that the United States could have done to prevent Communist victory in the civil war. At the time, Acheson's
257:
the U.S. owned China, by right, along with most of the rest of the world, much as postwar planners assumed. The "loss of China" was the first major step in "America's decline." It had major policy consequences.
227:
It was not. China was—and still is—a vast continental land, diverse and disunited, peopled by some half a billion human beings—most of them living at a level of bare subsistence, immemorially exploited by
223:
attacked the thesis "that China was a sort of political dependency of the United States to be retained or given away to Moscow by a single administrative decision taken in
Washington":
90:
would not transform the Nationalist government, adding that Roosevelt's poor choice of personal emissaries to China contributed to the failure of his policy. Historian
474:
386:
82:" who were blamed for the loss of China. While they predicted a Communist victory, they did not advocate one. Davies later wrote that he and the
419:
886:
211:
concluded that China was indeed "lost" because of the policy followed by the State Department, declaring: "Owen Lattimore and
567:
535:
891:
845:
652:
592:
484:
104:
35:
872:. Classroom materials on the question, including a timeline, document sets, handouts, and Historical Thinking Chart.
168:
865:
167:
as an "avoidable catastrophe". It led to a "rancorous and divisive debate" and the issue was exploited by the
83:
27:
95:
Waldron, "the collapse of China into communism was aided by the incompetence of Roosevelt's policy."
252:, has commented that the terminology "loss of China" is revealing of U.S. foreign policy attitudes:
427:
134:
87:
113:
24:
216:
some time beginning in the 1930s, a conscious, articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy."
896:
774:
The Honorable Survivor: Mao's China, McCarthy's America, and the Persecution of John S. Service
342:
274:
164:
86:
officers in China reported to Washington that material support to Chiang Kai-shek during the
75:
55:
291:
507:
Newman, Robert P. (Fall 1982). "The Self-Inflicted Wound: The China White Paper of 1949".
269:
One of the more imaginative and popular books about the "loss of China" was the 1952 book
8:
559:
527:
359:
249:
212:
793:
625:
470:
108:
841:
797:
648:
588:
563:
531:
480:
306:
139:
785:
769:
617:
331:
321:
262:
207:
The report of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1951 written by Senator
192:
680:
349:
296:
196:
172:
59:
452:
415:
188:
176:
126:
91:
67:
31:
835:
789:
684:
880:
316:
278:
175:, who, with his allies, sought scapegoats for that "loss", targeting notably
122:
664:
660:
382:
245:
208:
201:
71:
51:
585:
Perpetuating Patriotic Perceptions: The Cognitive Function of the Cold War
336:
301:
184:
79:
63:
629:
107:
was widely viewed within the United States as a catastrophe. The author
645:
Into the Quagmire: Lyndon Johnson and the Escalation of the Vietnam War
326:
152:
39:
852:
621:
229:
608:
Herring, George C. (1991). "America and Vietnam: The Unending War".
204:
was a "dilettante diplomat who cringed before the Soviet colossus".
739:
Retiring Men: Manhood, Labor, and Growing Old in America, 1900-1960
476:
The Glory and the Dream: A Narrative History of American: 1932–1972
311:
233:
42:
government in 1949 and therefore the "loss of China to communism."
171:
at the polls in 1952. It also played a large role in the rise of
354:
558:. New Approaches to International History series. London, UK:
526:. New Approaches to International History series. London, UK:
387:""Losing" the World: American Decline in Perspective, Part 1"
840:. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
715:
752:
750:
748:
732:
730:
219:
In response to the McCarran report, an editorial in the
111:
remembered the public reaction in 1949 in his 1973 book
745:
703:
727:
612:. America and the Pacific, 1941-1991 (Winter, 1991).
377:
375:
163:
The "loss of China" was portrayed by critics of the
741:. Lanham: University Press of America. p. 145.
556:
The Fear of Chinese Power: an International History
524:
The Fear of Chinese Power: an International History
870:, Truman Presidential Inquiries, National Archives
457:A Conspiracy So Immense: The World of Joe McCarthy
372:
878:
820:. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 156.
811:
809:
807:
587:. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 55–56.
804:
616:(5). Council on Foreign Relations: 104–119.
277:which claimed the Soviet spy ring headed by
509:Prologue (Journal of the National Archives)
426:. Vol. 18, no. 19. Archived from
346:, a 2013 documentary film by Mitch Anderson
469:
447:
445:
261:In a 2010 book review, American historian
179:, an influential scholar of Central Asia.
679:
642:
582:
410:
408:
406:
404:
240:
815:
756:
721:
709:
549:
547:
451:
200:Department while the Secretary of State
66:after the war, along with the U.S., the
859:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
647:. Oxford University Press. p. 25.
607:
459:. Oxford University Press. p. 101.
442:
414:
381:
879:
837:Owen Lattimore and the "Loss" of China
506:
401:
19:In American political discourse, the "
553:
544:
521:
736:
515:
857:America's Failure in China, 1941-50
133:In August 1949, Secretary of State
13:
827:
768:
14:
908:
818:MacArthur the Far Eastern General
105:fall of the Kuomintang government
685:"The New McCarthyism in Academe"
762:
673:
636:
601:
583:Hirshberg, Matthew S. (1993).
576:
500:
463:
62:'s leadership, would become a
58:had assumed that China, under
1:
887:China–United States relations
479:. Little, Brown and Company.
366:
45:
778:The Journal of Asian Studies
158:
7:
864:The Truman Library (2019),
659:As later recalled "I knew
284:
10:
913:
863:
834:Newman, Robert P. (1992).
816:Schaller, Michael (1989).
772:(August 2010). "Review of
389:. Guardian Comment Network
125:'s peasants, rejoicing in
892:1949 in the United States
790:10.1017/S0021911810001658
643:VanDeMark, Brian (1995).
151:The white paper outraged
420:"How China Was 'Lost' –"
16:1949 US political crisis
554:Crean, Jeffrey (2024).
522:Crean, Jeffrey (2024).
271:The Shanghai Conspiracy
114:The Glory and the Dream
98:
25:Chinese Communist Party
737:Wood, Gregory (2012).
343:The Men Who Lost China
259:
248:, a leading critic of
241:Reception and analysis
238:
131:
385:(February 14, 2012).
275:Charles A. Willoughby
254:
225:
165:Truman Administration
119:
76:John Paton Davies Jr.
56:Franklin D. Roosevelt
34:from the U.S.-backed
689:Thought & Action
418:(January 28, 2013).
292:George Atcheson, Jr.
23:" is the unexpected
724:, pp. 110–111.
560:Bloomsbury Academic
528:Bloomsbury Academic
471:Manchester, William
430:on December 5, 2018
424:The Weekly Standard
360:Albert C. Wedemeyer
250:U.S. foreign policy
213:John Carter Vincent
776:by Lynne Joiner".
121:The China it knew—
109:William Manchester
770:Yu, Miles Maochun
569:978-1-350-23394-2
537:978-1-350-23394-2
307:Chinese Civil War
195:, whom President
145:China White Paper
140:China White Paper
88:war against Japan
904:
871:
860:
822:
821:
813:
802:
801:
766:
760:
754:
743:
742:
734:
725:
719:
713:
707:
701:
700:
698:
696:
681:Schrecker, Ellen
677:
671:
670:
640:
634:
633:
622:10.2307/20045006
605:
599:
598:
580:
574:
573:
551:
542:
541:
519:
513:
512:
504:
498:
497:
495:
493:
467:
461:
460:
449:
440:
439:
437:
435:
412:
399:
398:
396:
394:
379:
332:Marshall Mission
322:History of China
263:Miles Maochun Yu
232:and harassed by
193:State Department
912:
911:
907:
906:
905:
903:
902:
901:
877:
876:
875:
867:Who Lost China?
851:
830:
828:Further reading
825:
814:
805:
767:
763:
755:
746:
735:
728:
720:
716:
708:
704:
694:
692:
678:
674:
655:
641:
637:
610:Foreign Affairs
606:
602:
595:
581:
577:
570:
552:
545:
538:
520:
516:
505:
501:
491:
489:
487:
468:
464:
453:Oshinsky, David
450:
443:
433:
431:
416:Waldron, Arthur
413:
402:
392:
390:
380:
373:
369:
364:
350:John S. Service
297:Brooks Atkinson
287:
243:
221:Washington Post
197:Harry S. Truman
173:Joseph McCarthy
161:
101:
84:Foreign Service
78:was among the "
60:Chiang Kai-shek
48:
28:coming to power
17:
12:
11:
5:
910:
900:
899:
894:
889:
874:
873:
861:
849:
831:
829:
826:
824:
823:
803:
784:(3): 880–881.
761:
759:, p. 209.
744:
726:
714:
712:, p. 109.
702:
691:. Campus Watch
672:
653:
635:
600:
593:
575:
568:
543:
536:
514:
511:(14): 141–156.
499:
485:
462:
441:
400:
370:
368:
365:
363:
362:
357:
352:
347:
339:
334:
329:
324:
319:
314:
309:
304:
299:
294:
288:
286:
283:
242:
239:
177:Owen Lattimore
160:
157:
127:the good earth
100:
97:
92:Arthur Waldron
68:United Kingdom
47:
44:
32:mainland China
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
909:
898:
897:1949 in China
895:
893:
890:
888:
885:
884:
882:
869:
868:
862:
858:
854:
850:
847:
846:0-520-07388-6
843:
839:
838:
833:
832:
819:
812:
810:
808:
799:
795:
791:
787:
783:
779:
775:
771:
765:
758:
757:Oshinsky 2005
753:
751:
749:
740:
733:
731:
723:
722:Oshinsky 2005
718:
711:
710:Oshinsky 2005
706:
690:
686:
683:(Fall 2005).
682:
676:
669:
666:
662:
656:
654:9780195096507
650:
646:
639:
631:
627:
623:
619:
615:
611:
604:
596:
594:9780275941659
590:
586:
579:
571:
565:
561:
557:
550:
548:
539:
533:
529:
525:
518:
510:
503:
488:
486:9780795335570
482:
478:
477:
472:
466:
458:
454:
448:
446:
429:
425:
421:
417:
411:
409:
407:
405:
388:
384:
383:Chomsky, Noam
378:
376:
371:
361:
358:
356:
353:
351:
348:
345:
344:
340:
338:
335:
333:
330:
328:
325:
323:
320:
318:
317:Dixie Mission
315:
313:
310:
308:
305:
303:
300:
298:
295:
293:
290:
289:
282:
280:
279:Richard Sorge
276:
272:
267:
264:
258:
253:
251:
247:
237:
235:
231:
224:
222:
217:
214:
210:
205:
203:
198:
194:
190:
186:
180:
178:
174:
170:
166:
156:
154:
149:
146:
142:
141:
136:
130:
128:
124:
118:
116:
115:
110:
106:
103:In 1949, the
96:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
65:
61:
57:
53:
43:
41:
37:
33:
29:
26:
22:
21:loss of China
866:
856:
836:
817:
781:
777:
773:
764:
738:
717:
705:
693:. Retrieved
688:
675:
665:Dean Acheson
661:Harry Truman
658:
644:
638:
613:
609:
603:
584:
578:
555:
523:
517:
508:
502:
490:. Retrieved
475:
465:
456:
432:. Retrieved
428:the original
423:
391:. Retrieved
341:
270:
268:
260:
255:
246:Noam Chomsky
244:
226:
220:
218:
209:Pat McCarran
206:
202:Dean Acheson
181:
162:
150:
144:
138:
135:Dean Acheson
132:
120:
112:
102:
72:Soviet Union
52:World War II
49:
20:
18:
492:October 20,
337:McCarthyism
302:China lobby
273:by General
169:Republicans
137:issued the
80:China Hands
64:great power
36:Nationalist
881:Categories
853:Tsou, Tang
367:References
327:Henry Luce
185:Communists
153:Mao Zedong
123:Pearl Buck
70:, and the
46:Background
40:Kuomintang
798:163027438
668:Vietnam."
393:March 10,
230:landlords
191:" in the
159:Aftermath
855:(1963).
630:20045006
473:(1973).
455:(2005).
434:2 August
312:Cold War
285:See also
234:warlords
38:Chinese
695:July 2,
50:During
844:
796:
651:
628:
591:
566:
534:
483:
355:Venona
189:queers
794:S2CID
626:JSTOR
842:ISBN
697:2012
663:and
649:ISBN
589:ISBN
564:ISBN
532:ISBN
494:2019
481:ISBN
436:2015
395:2012
187:and
99:Loss
786:doi
618:doi
30:in
883::
806:^
792:.
782:69
780:.
747:^
729:^
687:.
657:.
624:.
614:70
562:.
546:^
530:.
444:^
422:.
403:^
374:^
117::
74:.
54:,
848:.
800:.
788::
699:.
632:.
620::
597:.
572:.
540:.
496:.
438:.
397:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.