*I support it if it can happen without corruption
Hey there, thanks for asking!
I took an ambien a little while ago so I’m gonna keep it short, but I just wanted to make sure you got a deeper response tonight
China is a complex place with its share of problems, but we also have to acknowledge that we’re not getting an honest or unbiased picture in western news media. The same people who manufactured the Iraq WMDs hoax have been controlling China narratives in the west for decades.
In this post I’m gonna focus on Tiananmen because I have bookmarks for it. Hopefully someone else will tackle the Uighur genocide allegations, but in the meantime I can leave you with this page someone sent me with links and info on the Uighur situation in Xinjiang — the short answer is that most of what we hear on Uighurs and Xinjiang is hearsay from sources with demonstrable links to US intelligence agencies, like Radio Free Asia. Anyway, on to Tiananmen.
In short, the Tiananman Square massacre never occurred. Around 200–300 people did die in violent clashes elsewhere in the city (more on that in the next paragraph) but no one died in the square itself. It has been one of the most successful propaganda campaigns in history. Wikileaks published secret diplomatic cables acknowledging that no one died in the square. That was in 2011, didn’t even make a dent. Numerous western journalists, many of whom were in present at Tiananmen, have acknowledged that no one died in the square itself [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and some have expressed regret for their complicity in the false narrative that took hold. Many (perhaps all) of these journalists are otherwise critics of the Chinese government. Hou Dejian, one of the main Tiananmen protest organizers, who was there all night, has acknowledged that no one died in the square, and numerous other organizers have agreed with him. These people are still critics of the Chinese government. A Spanish film crew was present in the square all night and filmed students peacefully leaving the square at dawn. Hong Kong television aired that footage, but to my knowledge western media never has. I don’t imagine this is accidental.
As for the violence elsewhere in the city, it was mutual. Both sides were armed, and both sides suffered fatalities. The fighting actually began two days earlier, when civilians attacked unarmed soldiers. (CW: DEATH, GORE) Multiple soldiers were burned alive and their burnt corpses strung up in nooses. Some soldiers were lynched. Others were beaten (Note: you can’t beat someone up if they have a gun). Vehicles were molotov’d with people still in them.. This was the first violence to occur, and it was committed by the civilians against the soldiers. Other civilians intervened in some cases to drag soldiers to safety. Two days later, similar attacks were carried out, setting fire to vehicles with people in them, only this time the soldiers were armed and prepared to fight back.
I’m about to pass out, but I wanted to at least mention western intelligence involvement before I do. Check out this article showing that even in 1989 journalists knew about CIA and NED involvement in the protests. Their involvement shouldn’t be a surprise. Color revolutions and regime change are one of the main functions of the CIA. I would argue the Tiananmen incident was an attempted color revolution that failed. Pretty sure I have more sources elaborating on this angle but I want to sleep.
Here’s one more article, wasn’t sure where to put it: Tiananmen: the massacre that wasn’t
Here’s a couple wiki pages from r/thedeprograms wiki:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/tiananmen-square-massacre
What human right violation? Give us an example of what it is you’re concerned about, because we can’t debunk a buzzword.
Evil seeseepee forcibly yanked a ton of their people out of extreme poverty
I don’t understand how you tankies can support the C2P after doing such a thing, what about their freedom to be homeless
Okay this one I can confirm is true, how horrific
I often found that libs fall flat when asked for details.
I think you’re being sincere but it’s funny how you format it as “I do support communism but . . .” since that’s sort of the meme. Anyway, I think a couple of other people here are doing just fine but if not, you can let me know and I’ll give explaining it a shot.
Edit: I will say of the Great Firewall that its main purpose isn’t censorship but minimizing the market share taken up by foreign websites like Facebook, Twitter, Google, and so on. Such a thing would represent a serious national security concern, both because of their nature as western corporations wanting to undermine other domestic business and also because they work with western intelligence, along with China just being able to get more money and more development of domestic talent by having its big websites be domestic.
It’s easy to access the outside internet, just use a VPN. The state doesn’t care about your personal internet use unless you’re doing something more overtly suspicious (and I mean like communicating with foreign powers, not posting on Instagram like a normal person).
I agree 100% on the Great Firewall, it’s mostly just an anti-infiltration thing, most people in China have ways around it and don’t get punished
A lot of the “human rights abuses” you hear about in US enemy countries are either blown completely out of proportion, fabricated entirely, or caused by the US directly via sanctions, etc. When it actually happens it’s extremely regrettable, of course, but you can’t believe everything you read on the internet. The US is very good at lying, as I hope you know by now
More often than not when the US points fingers at others they’re just projecting.
also worth pointing out this GitHub repository by @dessalines and others, particularly this document
Girl really just riled everyone up and vanished without a trace
It looks like her account isn’t very active.
On the point of censorship, there is no reason for China to allow it’s foreign adversaries to manipulate it’s information space. The US or any other Western power certainly doesn’t, and we’re now seeing the West recognize this with countries starting to ban outlets and social media platforms like tiktok.
On the point of “human rights abuses”, you’ll have to be a bit more specific.
“If I can’t walk into your house and preach to your kids a bunch of made up bullshit that you are evil and should be executed then you are censoring me and are thus evil and bad.” - the West
I suppose you don’t support any socialist country ever then ? They all had censorship and they almost all got accused of human rights violations. (And except for Cambodia, those have always either been completely false, or gross exaggeration.)
You shouldn’t trust capitalist media, they have a very important incentive to steer people away from anything that would damage their power.
Most of those human rights allegations have been debunked numerous times, by MLs and others. You can find a bunch of them on YouTube pretty easily. BayArea’s video about Xinjiang should still be up somewhere, and I believe BadEmpata did a good assessment of it too, even though he’s vehemently anti-AES and not someone I would usually recommend.
Badempanada debunked the nore egregious claims but then stupidly concluded that declining birth rates mean something bad is happening, as if such a thing was not a consequence of improving material conditions.
He was probably just looking for something bad to say. He’s basically a lib, so he’s undoubtedly a believer that any investigation has to show both sides or smth.
(And except for Cambodia, those have always either been completely false, or gross exaggeration.)
Well, Cambodia was exaggerated too, it just wasn’t false like most stories are. Furthermore I’d add Peru to the list of socialist states (from when it was under Gonzalo) that can be pretty safely denounced, along with Cambodia.
Even in the case of bad leftwing governments like Cambodia and Peru, the truth and the mere actual crimes aren’t enough for the west, perhaps because then they wouldn’t be able to keep up with the imaginary crimes of the USSR, PRC, and DPRK!
No investigation, no right to speak.
Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense?
It won’ t do!
It won’t do!
You must investigate!
You must not talk nonsense!
Edit: changed the pronoun “his” to “their”
Good on you for asking. I don’t have time right now but I’m sure others will respond.
You know, the sad part is, idk if this is supposed to be a parody or not. Is OP making fun of western “socialists” or being sincere? lol
In a nutshell, the censorship (when it’s real) is mostly to counter the massive differential in media and propaganda power between the West and China. The human rights violations are a drop in the bucket compared to what the West is guilty of, and the fact that they don’t seem that way is also a result of the massive differential in media power.
I’ll add this one as a rebuttal to the Great Firewall. Because the firewall is always one. But feel free to point out any soecific issues.
Interestingly, the prediction made in the post-production comment at the end of the video is coming true a lot faster than he predicted.
America’s biggest export is their propaganda
I wanted to come in on this and also ask further questions about this, on the point brought up several people there is a undeniable incentive of capitalist media to sway the narrative on a communist nation. However, the narrative driven by the Chinese government (who i think it’s fair to say have a history of being not the nicest) would benefit themselves from a swayed narrative? While I understand some censorship is inevitable (removal of capitalist propaganda and the such) removal of mentions towards the protests in Tiananmen square* would be a overall negative thing as revising history no matter the side it comes from is bad. I personally consider china a deeply flawed nation that has strayed too far from doctrines that bring us all together. * I’m not sure if the claims of censorship regarding people talking about the Tiananmen square are true or not but I feel the evidence brought forward is quite compelling and should not be dismissed. I think that’s the whole point of my argument here is that things are just not black and white. communists, as history has shown, can be horrible and manipulated by the draw of power as much as anyone. Don’t immediately take one route because it fits your personal narrative better, and i know most people here are not doing that but it’s a fair thing to say I feel. Sorry for long comment just wanted to share.
I hate formatting my comments like this, but in lieu of a theme I’m sort of forced.
who i think it’s fair to say have a history of being not the nicest
You think wrong. You’d have to establish why you believe that without resorting to tropes first.
I’m not sure if the claims of censorship regarding people talking about the Tiananmen square are true or not but I feel the evidence brought forward is quite compelling and should not be dismissed.
I’m quite curious what that evidence is. It’s true that the mention of the 4 June incident is suppressed on the anniversaries, but not on other days of the year and one glance at reddit or twitter should make why it’s suppressed abundantly clear. People gathering on social media to regurgitate what amounts to little more than hearsay.
Your approach makes me question what you actually know about the incident. Are you aware that the protests were going on for almost 2 months before it devolved, or that the army was sent without firearm long before 4 June? Did you read about what the “peaceful” protestors did before the fighting started? Mutilating people and setting them on fire isn’t associated with communist, whereas reactionaries have been known to do that in response to whatever perceived slight. Perhaps most importantly, are you aware that a bunch of the student leaders fled the country and are now living cushy lives in the US?
I think that’s the whole point of my argument here is that things are just not black and white. communists, as history has shown, can be horrible and manipulated by the draw of power as much as anyone. Don’t immediately take one route because it fits your personal narrative better,
This is also a trope. I hope you won’t be offended by my saying so but it’s your one of your last vestiges of liberalism trying to claw through by creating nuance where there isn’t much. Communist leaders are often accused of power hunger, how they sought to aggrandise themselves, empowered the party to their personal benefit and elevated their creatures disregarding the desires of the people or the party. The best remedy to this is to read their actions and their words.
I’d also like to reply to the norion that whatever we say here is said because it fits our narrative. Fact of the matter is that almost everyone here was once a liberal of whatever inclination. For a lot of us, learning that the USSR/PRC were anything less than hellholes or that Lenin/Kim/Stalin/Mao/Ho/Castro etc were decent people and good leaders. We were handed down all manner of liberal narratives and the facts we were provided with didn’t fit any of them. As such it would serve you best to do your investigation and bring whatever facts you believe folks aren’t informed of before making the implication that anyone follows the path of least ideological resistance.
Hi! Thank you for the nuanced response! While it is true my knowledge of the protests in tianaman square is obviously not as most of the regulars here I think my primary point is that things are nuanced, especially when speaking about chinese history. While I understand your take of parts of my comment possibly being taken as straws of past liberalism and while that could be possibly true I just think it’s fair to say that every topic is nuanced and should be discussed deeper in order to better the discussion in the future. While I agree that parts of what I said could be tropes or simple misunderstanding or lack of knowledge about said subject (which i’m more than happy to admit lack there of) it seems rather difficult to say it’s as black and white as you seem to be portraying it as? I apologise if I am misunderstand your point given here but that’s just the way i perceived it. I do stand by my previous statement of not falling onto the side of a story which plays best for your ideological view on things as I think it’s very easy to fall into said conformation bias as I know I have as I think we all have intact. I do wish to learn more about these things it’s just it’s remarkably difficult to take things are face value when capitalist media is coming at you from one angle and media given by leftists is at another, both can be self serving in the end, no? I do apologise if some of this came off as negatively charged or passive aggressive I am almost just thinking out loud on this on. Thank you again for your reply :)
You just need to read more history books, honestly. By saying things “are nuanced” is actually I think an attempt to de-nuance by trying to equate two things (China vs US) which are entirely different.
There is nothing useful by starting from a perspective of trying to equate two things when there is a distinct lack of knowledge/information. This is your own bias coming into play here - you are instantly trying to find some sort of equivalence instead of starting from the real square zero of “wait, I actually don’t know anything about China”.
This is one of the main pitfalls of liberal ideology - to always have to appease two sides to appear to be unbiased. Since I assume you are American, you obviously wouldn’t leapfrog to “both are bad” when cops beat up BLM protestors after protestors looted, right? Obviously there is a real truth to everything and you don’t get there by leapfrogging from zero knowledge to equivalence.
What exactly is it that you are hoping to accomplish by criticizing China, a country that you know ostensibly nothing about (you do not know its language, history, nor do you live there)?
So when framed like that:
-Why exactly does your criticism help you in your goal?
-Why is it worth anything?
-Why should Chinese people care about it?
-Why should countries who are leaving US imperialism care?
-What exactly is imperialism (this one is easy tbh, read Lenin, learn about the role of military, debt, and currency)?
Anyway the purpose of this is to get you to explore the way your own thought process works, as I assume you are a leftist from the west.
I won’t say more on the 4 June incident, I only have two watching suggestions. First is the Gate of heavenly Peace documentary part 1 part 2 which I suggest watching with care. The facts are there, but the narration is dissonant from them and has a lot of sinophobic crap. The second is Tovarisch Endymion’s video, which partially uses the aforementioned doku.
On the subject of chinese history and what license it gives us to say about the PRC, I’ll again caution you to be certain of what you have in mind. If you’re referring to some misdeeds in the CPC era, you should inform yourself on the specific fault you understand them to have. Afterwards we (being this sub, lemmygrad or wherever you choose) could discuss at greater detail.
Finally, the media. It’s completely true that all media has a bias and an agenda. But we ought to approach this scientifically, lest we fall into a liberal trap and accept or reject something we shouldn’t. For example, what is the agenda of Washington Post? This one’s simple, it’s owned by Bezos, so it’ll push whatever he wants. It’ll support rightist deregulation, anti-worker policies without associating much with outright fascists, who might rock the boat and cost mr Bezos a pretty penny. What about BBC? Well, it’s owned and operated by the UK govt, which in recent years has shown the stick vis a vis their funding. As such, they editorially support whatever the Tories do, imperialism and redbaiting anything to the left of Thatcher. Next, the MYT, whose owner I know fuckall about. What I do know is that they’ve been in favour of every single war, intervention and pro-US coup since WW2. This, alogside the fact that they really hate SocDems, not to say a word hpe they feel about actual leftists, should be sufficient. As for CCTV/CGTN, I’m taking the craven route and not saying shit, inviting you to determine for yourself. Read their articles, see what they focus on and what they don’t. Try to look into their editorial independence, and for bonus points, find out how often they contradict the CPC stance. I’m not promising you’ll be enlightened and agree with me on everything, but I expect you to be surprised eith what you find.
yes things are nuanced no socialists country is without blame or a history of sometimes very serious errors and mistakes. but that point is sorta irrelevant socialists countries have historically treated their people and had foreign policy which was so much better than capitalists countries that this nuance mean nothing like china gave the death penalty to a few people who probably didnt deserve it, the west colonized Africa and murdered like half the people living there. China soft censors biased western sources the usa spends billions on non stop propaganda across the entire world. the USSR supported some revolutionaries across the world (which i dont think is bad but its still meddling in other countries) the usa has invaded almost every country on earth tried to overthrow governments in other countries hundreds of times in the past century. there justs isnt a point of comparison here the west is so fucking bad that the things which socialists countries do wrong or we dont like just dont matter atleast not when talking to libs its certainly worth knowing and acknowledging their mistakes but if the question is “AES or the west” the answer isnt “both bad” its “west bad”.
They don’t censor it. They censor the wests made up narrative about it, which, if you actually read the other comments on this post you would understand.
Tbf with how detached from reality the burger regime’s narrative about the event is, maybe they should show people the western version and be all like “get a load of this shit”.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t mention it somewhere when they teach their people about western propaganda. I would have to think they would make it something taught about how insidious the western narratives are about their country.
Hi! I read the other comments and I wished to ask further questions and get further narrative about said events. Censorship is a difficult subject to come at, as shown by my post. I think you seem to think I am swaying it one or the other when I don’t think my post came off that way?
The idea is that, by living in the west, your “neutral position” is probably already being swayed one way without your knowledge.
