Which China is better?

In what context? Historical? If so both have very bloody histories. Chiang Kai-Shek might be immediately preferred to Mao since Mao is Mao, however that is only because most westerners are blatantly ignorant about his reign. Chiang was a great president fro China in a time were feudalism essentially still existed. He overthrew Sun Yat-Sen's heir apparent, Wang Jingwei, since he had control of the military (for the most part). He then went on to rapidly improve Chinese infrastructure, however he did neglect the peasantry quite a bit. During the Great War of Resistance against Japan, Chiang took a lot of risks that directly effected his own people. For example, he decided that Nanjing, the late capital, simply could not be defended. From a military standpoint this might be true, but he did nothing to help the citizens living in the city and it resulted in catastrophe (see Rape of Nanking). A better example is when the Japanese were approaching his military HQ in the city of Wuhan, Chiang agreed to break a dike that supported the Yellow River so as to create a flood and prevent Japanese advance. Once again, militarily it was successful, but it resulted in 500-800,000 Chinese deaths and a million more displaced by the flood. That is a huge number. And then Wuhan was taken by the Japanese three months later, so was it all for not? Personally I think Chiang Kai-Shek was a strong leader for China in a time when China was on the verge of collapse, however he is not without his enormous faults. I just wanted to give some people a proper background on the Kuomintang's leader before they make any assumptions.

In what context? Historical? If so both have very bloody histories. Chiang Kai-Shek might be immediately preferred to Mao since Mao is Mao, however that is only because most westerners are blatantly ignorant about his reign. Chiang was a great president fro China in a time were feudalism essentially still existed. He overthrew Sun Yat-Sen's heir apparent, Wang Jingwei, since he had control of the military (for the most part). He then went on to rapidly improve Chinese infrastructure, however he did neglect the peasantry quite a bit. During the Great War of Resistance against Japan, Chiang took a lot of risks that directly effected his own people. For example, he decided that Nanjing, the late capital, simply could not be defended. From a military standpoint this might be true, but he did nothing to help the citizens living in the city and it resulted in catastrophe (see Rape of Nanking). A better example is when the Japanese were approaching his military HQ in the city of Wuhan, Chiang agreed to break a dike that supported the Yellow River so as to create a flood and prevent Japanese advance. Once again, militarily it was successful, but it resulted in 500-800,000 Chinese deaths and a million more displaced by the flood. That is a huge number. And then Wuhan was taken by the Japanese three months later, so was it all for not? Personally I think Chiang Kai-Shek was a strong leader for China in a time when China was on the verge of collapse, however he is not without his enormous faults. I just wanted to give some people a proper background on the Kuomintang's leader before they make any assumptions.

Ignore the double post please.

@Atheist-Independent I'm talking about in modern-day context, like whether you'd rather live in Taiwan or the Mainland.

When you say "better" I can't really discern what you meant. Historical background is always useful though.