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.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 23 points 2 years ago (11 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?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 21 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Search for 六四政治风波 (4th of June political disturbances) rather than searching 天安门事件 (Tiananmen Incident). You'll find high level references to the political situation at the time.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Here is a (once again high level) Party summary of the circumstances surrounding the event, and some actions taken including the clearing of Tiananmen square on the morning of the 4th of June.

    Articles I turn up since then appear to simply repudiate the USA's position on the events without further substantiating China's own. This is perhaps an oversight on China's behalf to 'set the record straight' with readily accessible information online. I hope you turn up more information in your research.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Adding to RoomAndBored's comment

    https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/460227

    Even a quick search of this term in Baidu will bring up results with the term 政治风波.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    Here is ProleWiki’s article.

    It might not be mentioned because, although there were protests in the square, all deaths were in streets near the square instead of in the square itself.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (12 replies)
    [–] 11 points 2 years ago (19 children)

    It's probably censored because it's a politically sensitive topic. From my reading, the article is meant to promote tourism and pride in national monuments, not to discuss history in detail. Mentioning those events is seen as encouraging social unrest.

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • load more comments (19 replies)
    [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    How about this, why doesn't it mention the October 28th 2013 terrorist attack? https://baike.baidu.com/item/10%C2%B728%E6%9A%B4%E5%8A%9B%E6%81%90%E6%80%96%E8%A2%AD%E5%87%BB%E6%A1%88/12022667

    On 1989 Political Disturbance: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/1252700

  • source
  • [+] [S] 1 point 2 years ago
    load more comments
    view more: next ›