I’m reading this morning about how President William McKinley handled the Boxer Rebellion. I thought it was worth sharing in light how Trump appears to be inspired by his example.
The following excerpt comes from Robert W. Merry’s book President McKinley: Architect of the American Century
“Hay’s handiwork was soon overtaken by the revolt that enveloped northern China when a call went forth that quickly inspired millions: “Support the Qing; exterminate the foreigners.” It came from yet another secret society, Yi-He quan, translated as Righteous and Harmonious Fists and known among Westerners as “the Boxers.” Like earlier Chinese secret societies, the Boxers emerged almost spontaneously among Chinese peasants, particularly in the fertile, densely populated northern province of Shandong, a strategic expanse that encompassed long stretches of the Yellow River and the Grand Canal and extended to the Chinese coastlands nearest Beijing. The Boxers of Shandong, displaying red sashes of defiance, were out for blood. …
Thus did a combination of developments, social and natural, set off an explosion of anti-Christian and anti-Western savagery. The leaderless and loosely organized Boxer movement spread through the countryside, killing Chinese Christians initially but threatening Westerners with increasing menace …
McKinley understood that events in China contained political and global significance far beyond the fate of Beijing’s beleaguered Westerners. He was responsible for the safety of American citizens everywhere around the globe, and any horrendous outcome in Beijing would undermine his leadership in an election year. Further, not even Hay’s adroit diplomacy could forestall a China carve-up by the Western powers if a massacre should occur. The president’s China policy would be in ruins, along with Asian stability. …
The New York Times, reflecting widespread sentiment among increasingly apprehensive Americans, editorialized, “If the Oriental intellect in its twistings and turnings is capable of comprehending Western ideas set forth in straightforward speech the grave rebuke which President McKinley has found it necessary to administer directly to the Emperor himself ought to serve as an admonition that Chinese ways are no longer to be tolerated.” The hapless emperor and his mother were in a bind, unable to rid their capital of the foreigners who were at the heart of the hostilities; unable to rein in the Boxers, whose fulminations had precipitated the crisis; and unable to stop the multinational foreign army bent on seizing their imperial city. …
Alliance forces reached Beijing on August 15 and pummeled it with artillery fire, but the Chinese army held off the assault with abundant small-arms fire from the big outer walls. Japanese and Russian troops positioning themselves to the northward of the Tung-Chow Canal, while American and British forces occupied the south side. At nightfall the Japanese blew up the two eastern gates of the city, while the Americans and British entered through the two southern gates. Detachments of each contingent, facing heavy resistance, where the parties met and opened up communications. British troops from India entered the British legation grounds at 1 PM the next day, the Americans arrived at 3.”
The Boxer Rebellion was an anti-Christian, anti-Western pogrom by Chinese peasants in 1900. Westerners were massacred in China and were put under siege in Beijing. President McKinley sent American troops into China who fought their way to Beijing with other Western powers to end the siege.
Here is how Google Gemini sums up American involvement in China at the turn of the 20th century:
“During the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, American sailors and marines played a crucial role in defending the foreign legations in Beijing and participated in the international relief effort to lift the siege, ultimately contributing to the suppression of the rebellion.
Here’s a more detailed account of the American involvement:
The Siege of the Legations: In the summer of 1900, foreign diplomats in Beijing’s Legation Quarter were besieged by Chinese imperial soldiers and “Boxers,” members of a secret society opposed to foreign influence.
American Defense:A small international guard, including 56 American sailors and marines, defended the Legation Quarter, communicating with foreign allies via hand signals and fighting fiercely despite dwindling supplies.
Relief Expedition:To lift the siege, the United States, along with other nations, sent additional troops to join an international coalition.
Marine Detachments:Two marine detachments, totaling over 130 men, left Cavite in the Philippines and joined the relief effort near Taku, China.
Battle of Tientsin:These marines, along with Russian forces, engaged Chinese troops near Tientsin (present-day Tianjin) but were forced to retreat after an overwhelming counterattack, suffering casualties.
International Relief Force:The international relief force, including U.S. troops, eventually fought its way to Beijing, lifting the siege and suppressing the Boxer Rebellion.
Key Figures:Marine Private Dan Daly single-handedly defended a critical position on the Tartar Wall, earning his first Medal of Honor.
Lessons Learned:The Boxer Rebellion marked the U.S. military’s first experience with coalition warfare on a global stage and its first encounter with China on the battlefield.
Aftermath:After the siege, the international relief force cleared the outer walls of troops, and American artillery units blasted their way through a series of walls and gates into the Imperial City, halting their advance at the gates to the Forbidden City.
Third Worldists would call this “neoconservatism.”
President McKinley should have allowed Chinese terrorists to massacre Americans, Christians and other Europeans. There is no such thing as legitimate American national interests which might require the use of force like, say, protecting the lives and property of American citizens.
McKinley, of course, wasn’t a “neocon.” He was an imperialist who brought Hawaii, the Philippines, Guam, Cuba and Puerto Rico under American control. The Boxer Rebellion was a foreign policy headache that he had to deal with on his watch. McKinley had no ambition to impose liberal democracy on China. He was protecting American interests in China through his Open Door Policy and the lives of diplomats.
What I sense, is that you’re being pulled in the direction of your target audience, and your audience is so-called “normies.” Normie republicans aren’t anti-war.
I agree that it was not Neo-Klownery. The Righteous and Harmonious Fists were of course reacting to 70 years of the City of London and its puppet-regimes in London and Paris flooding China with Indian-grown opium and using military force to keep the spigot open when the Qing Dynasty tried to close the pipeline. The Boxers’ first targets were Chinese converts to Christianity, next they came for western missionaries – none of whom were involved in the opium trade. Native Chinese warlords and Triad-gangs – who profited off the opium produced on an industrial scale by the British – were curiously left untouched by the Righteous and Harmonious Fists. The corrupt Qing wanted to use the Boxers as a hammer to kick out the foreigners, which included Japan, Germany, Russia and the United States by 1900. McKinley was within his rights to use troops in this situation. None of the Neo-Klown adventures in the middle-east is even remotely parallel to this event.
Major cause—-Georg Maria Stenz was a German Catholic missionary who was serial raping Chinese women.
Hunter read this
https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-vanishing-white-male-writer/
“Third Worldists would call this “neoconservatism.””
No, white nationalists believe that people have the right to rid their land of foreigners, especially foreigners that have intentions to impose their ideologies on said country.
China is a good example how to deal with ruinous foreigners destroying their civilization, it should serve as inspiration, not be condemned with “by jingo” imperialist nonsense.
“President McKinley should have allowed Chinese terrorists to massacre Americans, Christians and other Europeans. There is no such thing as legitimate American national interests which might require the use of force like, say, protecting the lives and property of American citizens.”
This but unironically
Glad we understand where you are coming from
What is this even about? What is the contemporary analogue you are seeing here?
>President McKinley should have allowed Chinese terrorists to massacre Americans, Christians and other Europeans. There is no such thing as legitimate American national interests which might require the use of force like, say, protecting the lives and property of American citizens.
They shouldn’t have been there terrorizing and exploiting the Chinese.
>McKinley had no ambition to impose liberal democracy on China
Attempting to christianize China and force them to open markets so they could be exploited by foreign capitalists was absolutely liberal imperialism and the Chinese Nationalists were right to oppose it. Neocon (((Max Boot))) also looked to the intervention in the Boxer Rebellion as a step towards the New American Century. He writes in the Savage Wars of Peace:
“So, too, U.S. power was ascendant. Ever since the Civil War the U.S. had been an economic juggernaut. But it was a slow process to convert economic carbohydrates into military muscle. Most of the U.S. campaigns abroad in the nineteenth century had been small affairs. That had changed when the U.S. had grabbed the remains of the Spanish empire in 1898. Now something else had changed as well: America had abandoned its old unilateralism. Uncle Sam was now willing to take part in military coalitions with other Great Powers. In this respect the Boxer campaign presaged Washington’s entry into World War I in “association” with the Triple Entente.”
Specifically, the situation with the Houthis.
They weren’t there terrorizing and exploiting the Chinese. It is true that European powers, especially the British and Germans, had carved up Qing China, but we were not involved in that. The Boxer Rebellion targeted all Christians and Westerners including Americans who were besieged in Peking now Beijing. U.S. Marines and Infantry units were sent in by McKinley in a rescue operation.
This was not “neoconservatism.” It was a use of force to protect American interests abroad in this case American citizens at the embassy compound which was under assault by the Boxers. The same thing had been done when Admiral Perry opened Japan in the 1850s. At the time, there was no ambition on the part of Americans to install “liberal democracy” in China or Japan.
The Anglo-American alliance also emerged in these years. Britain had been the great enemy of America in the 19th century. Russia was a sort of unofficial ally.
The Chinese were being exploited by western capitalists and Christians, America was late to the party but they wanted in. These interventions, including that of the Philippines and Hawaii, were the beginnings of the American Empire, something you would think a “paleocon” would look on with horror. Further, there was plenty of talk, particularly from Republicans, of christianizing and civilizing these places (which we call liberal democracy today), which unfortunately they succeeded with respect to Hawaii- now a mongrel American state. While it would be anachronistic to call it neo-conservatism it certainly was liberal imperialism, without which its possible the US wouldn’t have been able to move to war in Europe (twice). Max Boot sees it as such.
For you to use these early American imperial adventures to then justify American intervention on behalf of the Zionist State is right out of the neocon playbook (see Boot). Its not American interests being defended in Yemen. Its Zionist interests. America is killing people in Yemen because Ansar Allah dared to enforce international law against the genocidal Zionist State by means of a blockade.
America did not go into China.
We sent in the Marines to get our people out of a dangerous situation. That’s why we got involved. There have been situations like this throughout all of American history stretching back to the Barbary Pirates.
William McKinley, of course, was an imperialist. He was really the first imperialist president. It doesn’t follow that he was a “neocon.” We didn’t liberate China from the Qing Dynasty and install a liberal democracy there. We didn’t acquire Cuba which was granted independence by the Platt Amendment.
As for Hawaii, I agree there were compelling reasons to acquire it. It was far too valuable in the middle of the Pacific with world class harbors to be allowed to fall under the control of a hostile foreign power like Japan. It was a good thing that we did acquire it. No one at the time envisioned it becoming a state which only happened after racial attitudes changed following World War II. I think taking the Philippines was a mistake and it was hotly contested at the time by Bryan and others.
The term “paleocon” refers to the Old Right or pre-FDR conservatives like McKinley, Taft and Theodore Roosevelt. I think building the Panama Canal was unquestionably a good thing. I’m not opposed to the Inner Empire in the Eastern Pacific and Western Hemisphere. I don’t identify with Muslim terrorist groups like the Houthis or ISIS or al-Qaeda. I don’t want to get involved in the Middle East, but piracy can’t be tolerated either. No American president would ever tolerate terrorist and pirate attacks on the U.S. Navy.
BTW, the Europeans were behind the Yemen strikes.
Philippines kind of fell into our lap along with Puerto Rico as a result of the Spanish American war. It was not a great success story and the military was tied up fighting the moros in the south for over a decade. The Spanish never had much control over the area either – and they even hired Japanese ronin as mercs in the 15-1600s to fight the natives and subdue most of the place. The USA had less of an empire in 1914 than Germany did, and they were late to the game compared to the French and British.
Jeet Driller Vance sent his CIA handler third world brown wife to Greenland to agitate for jewSA imperialism and expansion.
By the way, Inuits of Greenland could easily be considered third worlders.
Christianity with Chinese Characteristics gave China the Taiping Rebellion. The bloodiest civil war in history. Bloodiest war per capita in history. It’s not well known, but China is justifiably suspicious of Christianity. Partly because it’s not compatible with Chinese thinking processes.
The Houthis are anti Israeli. Their beef with Israel need not be our beef.
It’s easy from the perspective of 2025, having enjoyed the benefits that liberalism conferred on the world order for some three generations now, to pass judgement and call involvement in China immoral or misguided. But from the perspective of those times, what you deride as “liberal imperialism” really did serve American national interests.
That said, it’s remarkable that Hunter thinks people won’t notice he’s started singing a very different tune lol. (All because of his distaste for NS types, apparently.)
This happened 125 years ago, so I don’t care about it.
See what I did there?
Mask off moment. That’s just flat-out evil. The NS people actually are as evil as their counterparts, the jews. They’re just frustrated that the Jews have the power and they don’t.
The type of sick immorality displayed in this comment is why “Nazis” are condemned to forever twiddle around on the margins of society, while real White men build and maintain it with pride.
How about European Christians not proselytizing their Levant Abrahamic nonsense to ‘third worlders.’
White Christians should keep their mind virus to themselves, and not being every non-white to “The Good Word.”
If they get beheaded or eaten by spreading the Gospels, they can earn a Darwin Award by FAFO with “heathens.”
McKinley’s imperialism set the stage for a series of disasters for America in the 20th century.
His annexation of the Philippines started an expensive war of conquest, and began the process of chain migration of Philippinos to the USA – part of the reason Whites are becoming a minority in this country.
The “Open Door” policy in China was worse a mistake. We should have been completely neutral in the Chinese wars, and done business with whoever won. Instead, time and again the USA created a worse situation by intervening to maintain the “Open Door”.
During the Russo-Japanese war, the USA favored Japan in various ways incompatible with strict neutrality, especially financing and weapons sales, because at that time Russia was seen as the biggest threat to the “Open Door”. This led to the first major defeat of a White nation by a non-White nation in modern times, to the absolute delight of the incipient “3rd Worldist” movement – but it didn’t ensure an “Open Door”. Instead, it locked China into the Japanese sphere of influence.
Having helped create Japanese hegemony in East Asia, the “Open Door” policy next became a source of conflict between the USA and Japan, leading to American involvement in WW2. Because of McKinley’s foolish imperialism, America began that war with a horrific defeat at the battle of Bataan. The ill considered annexation of the Philippines left an American garrison isolated too far forward to be rescued. Another American garrison in Shanghai, a relic of America’s intervention in the Boxer Rebellion, was also doomed to be captured by the Japanese without any hope of relief.
Destroying the Japanese empire during WW2 created a power vacuum which was filled by Asian communists. The need to contain the communists led to American involvement in the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
If McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt had contented themselves with, at the most, annexing Hawaii and Micronesia (which was part of the Spanish empire in 1898), they would have established a defensible forward position in the Pacific without dragging America into a series of unnecessary counterproductive wars.
By annexing the Philippines, and then trying to extend the Monroe Doctrine umbrella to China with the “Open Door” policy, McKinley and Roosevelt involved America in 4 bloody wars, hampered our exports to Asia, increased Asian immigration to the USA, dealt the first major blow to White supremacy in the Russo-Japanese war, and gave the communists their greatest victory in the Chinese Civil war.