-1
Why does it say nothing about the 1989 protests on Tiananmen Square, Beijing? (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/comradeship@lemmygrad.ml
66 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In this article on baidu, there is a gap between 1988 and 1999, why is there nothing about some kind of protest that everyone keeps telling me about?

Edit: Thank you for responding, you have taught me a great deal about the usage and necessity of propaganda, counter-propaganda and censorship in a Marxist-Leninist state like China. Although some relied upon lies and insults as a means of trying to win an argunent, I got actual contentful theoretical education out of this, thanks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I think the bigger question is if this is mostly for a Chinese audience why do they need to mention the event everywhere? How long do they need to keep self flagellating until they have made penance and will be forgiven for whatever transgressions occurred?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] -11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    It is not only for a Chinese audience, no. It is about a government's lack being being able to admiss guilt, countered with censorship to forget that mistakes ever happened, instead of trying to learn from past mistakes.

    "In opposing subjectivism, sectarianism and stereotyped Party writing we must have in mind two purposes: first, "learn from past mistakes to avoid future ones", and second, "cure the sickness to save the patient". The mistakes of the past must be exposed without sparing anyone's sensibilities; it is necessary to analyse and criticize what was bad in the past with a scientific attitude so that work in the future will be done more carefully and done better." - Mao Zedong, ["Rectify the Party's Style of Work" (February 1, 1942), Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 50.*]

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    The Government is spoken for:

    中央政治局在邓小平和其他老一辈革命家坚决有力的支持下，依靠人民，旗帜鲜明地反对动乱，并采取果断措施，在6月4日一举平息反革命暴乱，捍卫了社会主义国家政权，维护了人民的根本利益。

    Rather than taking it as a difficult but decisive course of action, your comment implicitly accepts Western recreations that it was entirely a mistake, and something worthy of guilt.

    I reiterate my previous point that these interpretations of the event are understandable, given the absence of ready access fulsome documentation from China's side. I think China is or will soon be strong enough to publically face these histories online with maturity and nuance. Though currently with intense USA muck raking it may still be iffy.

    Like you, I find the deaths surrounding 6/4 in whatever quantum regrettable. However I reject that you appear to be accepting the outsider perspective of the events seemingly whole cloth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I will maybe try to be less "rebellious" next time I ask a question, I am sorry. You are like the only person here who is able to write senseful answers and educate, instead of just resolving to petty insults like other accounts here. Thanks.

    I have to live with constant counter propaganda, so it is not that easy for me, I have to question every single bit of info about socialist countries to be able to filter all propaganda.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    instead of just resolving to petty insults like other accounts here

    At the risk of pointing the finger, calling us 'wumao' doesn't help either. It is easy to devolve into petty squabbles, so thank you for having the presence of mind to reflect on this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Baidu baike is not owned by the government though

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It has to obey the country's laws, as any company in any country would need to. China is a socialist country, so the state has the information monopoly, for effective agitprop etc, which also has many different positive sides for the worker's class! But it also has problems, which need to be pointed out and fixed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That's a mischaracterisation of China; even state owned media (not sure baidu baike falls under media or news) has a lot of leeway to choose what they publish without CPC interference. Plus I don't think there's any law that says you can't talk about 6 4 or the Beijing protests, seeing that gov.cn has a declassified report on it made at the time.

    I think its much more likely that people don't really care to talk about it. Have you searched for Beijing riots or Beijing protests?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    yes I was trolling, sorry. I just want to know one more thing, does this censorship to protect china from outside propaganda also affect prolewiki (since you are working on that project), or is this really just inside china? Because other people, like libs for example, could unironically have some kind of possible opinion that I have portrayed here, so I want to learn counter arguments in action

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    Libs will believe whatever feels right. If you praise a country but then give the slightest criticism of it, they will focus on that criticism and forget everything else. And they'll still call you tankies even if you try to appeal to them.

    You can lead the lib to water but you can't make him drink.

    Like all communists, we reject that AES states have committed atrocities as claimed by bourgeois historians, and not only that, but that they are indefensible. There's context behind everything and if I wouldn't have done better in their situation then I can't criticize a course of action.

    You still seem to be operating under the assumption that the Chinese government has something to hide or is lying somehow about the Beijing riots. But everything is there and the ProleWiki page, while a bit short, has the gist of it. There was no Tiananmen Square Massacre because no deaths occurred inside the square, this is confirmed by people that were there (including student leaders). So the media calling it the TSM is simply wrong and lying. The riots happened throughout Beijing.

    That the CIA also backed the protests is historically attested. That soldiers went there unarmed and were killed by some protestors is also attested historically by pictures. That the protests had slowed down as the CPC was talking to and negotiating with the more moderate, original protestors is also attested to historically on TV. That some protestors had access to weapons is attested to by pictures. That there were two factions of protestors is also attested to -- there are pictures of protestors exchanging food with PLA soldiers just as there are pictures of soldiers being lynched.

    Meanwhile the western media only has the testimony of a British diplomat in occupied Hong Kong (he never went to Beijing during the protests) making grandiose claims that nobody else corroborated.

    We don't need to do a both sides for it on ProleWiki, if they're not going to believe what's written, they're not going to believe it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent