New book reveals Tiananmen square massacre, others fabricated by US
A new book reveals that numerous atrocities that the United States had alleged to have been committed by its foes never happened to begin with.
You're viewing a single thread.
Coming even from from an anarchist (i.e. someone who is also distrustful of government, media, etc), this type of stuff makes you guys sound crazy. In 2023 saying Tiananmen Square massacre never happened is an extraordinary claim and therefore is going to require extraordinary evidence for effective persuasion. You behave like Chinese state apologists to most people.
Now maybe you're right, TBH I can't claim to know for certain, but if you actually want to convince people you need to do more than point to documents I have no more reason to believe than the pictures and documents I've already seen. Why should I believe your sources vs what as far as I can tell is the rest of the academic world that doesn't agree with you? Especially when it seems apparent that current Chinese leadership has an obvious authoritarian quality and ends justify the means type of attitude. You may deny this but all it takes for me to believe it is to see the fear in the faces of Chinese people when asked certain questions.
No ML denies that China is 'authoritarian'. They argue that all states are.
Almost everything Marxists say is poorly understood by their detractors and framed in a negative light in one way or another.
what as far as I can tell is the rest of the academic world that doesn’t agree with you?
This makes it seem as though you haven't read the literature and arguments of either side. If that's the case you shouldn't be coming to any conclusions at all, especially to dismiss one side outright for being unorthodox. By definition, the counter narrative is going to sound unorthodox in light of the orthodox claims. The correct approach is to read the source and judge it on its own merit and in light of other known facts.
"No investigation, no right to speak"
-a quote from an EVIL AUTHORITARIAN!
Same energy as saying that Soviets 'pressed' women into science careers in the same era as liberals were paying Nazi fashion designers (Dior) to design clothes for women (the 'new look') that made working almost impossible, so as to force them back into the home after their taste of (relative) freedom during the war years.
(To be fair to Dior, his sister was based and he apparently named a perfume after her but my source for this is rather cleansing (Wikipedia) so who knows how true that is.)
This makes it seem as though you haven’t read the literature and arguments of either side.
Correct, I have not studied this event.
If that’s the case you shouldn’t be coming to any conclusions at all
You'll notice I didn't come to a conclusion.
dismiss one side outright for being unorthodox.
Your position is in fact unorthodox in my culture (U.S.) -- that's what I'm saying. If you have a non-standard position, if you actually want to convince people you need to make the information accessible and give people a reason why they should believe it over their normally acceptable sources. Making fun of them is probably counter-productive (even if it is fun).
You're proudly proclaiming that you know little about the subject? Yet you still felt like joining in, because...?
Not to mention the fact that you're essentially asking that people chew up this complex topic and regurgitate a dumbed down version... because you're a yank and being uneducated is part of your "culture"?
You can read, and you have a mind, it's up to you to put those two things together to inform yourself and form opinions.
because you’re a yank and being uneducated is part of your “culture”?
Why did you paraphrase culture, it's true 😬
Anti-intellectualism and proud ignorance is one of the cornerstones of American culture.
Nope, I'm assuming y'all want to get people on your side right? I was just giving an example of what people outside of your bubble see when they see posts like this. No need to get your panties in a bunch.
Ah okay you're a pinniped, that makes sense
To clarify for some of us that don't understand, are you saying the poster is sealioning or engaging in bad faith? I haven't ever seen this word and I'm not sure if there's some specific reference I am not getting.
Thats what I'm saying yeah, just trying not to let my undergrad zoology go to waste
I avoided plant bio and animal bio for as long as I could. I have to take them soon, wish me luck!
Rare to see an anarchist one. Though I'm guessing this one is "anarchist" because they have a Rage Against the Machine tattoo and went to a BLM protest once (But left early because some of the other protesters made them feel uncomfortable.)
"In 2023 saying Tiananmen Square massacre never happened is an extraordinary claim" is a conclusion. If you publicly claim that something happened, you should be prepared to provide some kind of evidence, even if it's flimsy. If you're actually willing to learn, read section 3 of this article
Your position is in fact unorthodox in my culture (U.S.) -- that's what I'm saying.
In Nazi Germany in 1944, I think it would be regarded as an unorthodox position that Jews aren't specifically inclined towards greed and evil conspiracy to destroy the Aryan race. By your epistemology, wouldn't it be true that the person defending the Jews is the one that has the burden of proof and not the people who cling to antisemitic conspiracy theories?
Correct, I have not studied this event.
To paraphrase comrade Mao; no investigation, no right to speak
To be clear, I'm not speaking of this event, I never made any claims of knowledge about this event.
you're just loudly denouncing everyone who has investigated the event in question as wrong because they go against your (admittedly) ignorant view of reality
you actually want to convince people you need to make the information accessible and give people a reason why they should believe it over their normally acceptable sources. Making fun of them is probably counter-productive (even if it is fun).
Says an "anarchist"
On a post
About a book
That's is literally the source of the information in which you say we should be proving.
You not only have no right to complain about being made fun of and harassed but deserve it. lol
Do you expect everyone to read your book? How credible is this author? What about this book makes a true understanding of the events accessible rather than just being another person voicing their opinion of evidence the choose to accept?
this is pure JAQing off. you'd have answers to your questions if you spent more time investigating and less time regurgitating state department propaganda
expecting everyone to do the work for you because you're too lazy is
shitWe always do the work for them anyway and it's still not enough to permeate the thick lib brain barrier.
y'all are doing god's work out there comrade. even if no known substance can pierce their ultradense skulls you might still catch someone who can be saved, and that's worthwhile
lol nice
bro, just go read the book, or at least parts of it and skim for quotes to smack us down with, if its really that flimsy fucking get us for it!
"I could beat you up if I wanted to but I don't so I won't waaaaaaaa"
Could you do me a favor and kindly add this to your reading list?
"anarchists" please stop believing state department propaganda
Do you think we went to the moon?
If I had a sufficiently powerful laser I could point it at one of the retroreflectors they put up there and get a reflection back, there is actual proof, and the fact that the Soviets even acknowledged it says a lot about its veracity. Do you think that just because some of the stuff that the US says is true that I'm to take the other things at face value without proof? If NBC cites CBS cites AP cites Reuters cites CBS cites NBC... am I supposed to just be like oh well there's a lot of citations so clearly it must be true? Please try to challenge this "west good by default" mindset that you have, it clouds your judgment.
Oh, good response. I should keep this in mind in the future when people try to call us "conspiracy theorists." Establishing that we believe in things that have evidence behind them, and don't just say everything the US says is a lie.
Many leftists conspiracy theories are just "Yeah, the US toppled this government and slaughtered a huge number of people. Here's the CIA written article on the CIA website where they admit to it".
I guess that's why people never listen to us. Our conspiracy theories are boring. They're all "shady government agents doing exactly what you'd expect them to do."
We don't get any fun stuff like secret cabals or lizard people or hologram moons. It's all just real world espionage shit, which is much less fun and exciting than James Bond.
Just came from a forum thread where OP was like "i don't want to be a conspiracist but I think tech companies are working together to suppress tech workers!" And I had to be all yeah bruh they go caught ten years ago and had to pay some fines and pinky promoise not to get caught again. Shit's exhausting I hate it here I wanna go live in Tamriel.
That guy probably believes Iraq had weapons of mass destructions.
Of course they did! They bought them from the French and used them with the knowledge and support of the US in the Iran-Iraq war!
They didn't have any weapons of mass destruction in 2003, of course.
This is all silly! The moon landings were faked. They had Kubrick film it! Of course Kubrick being Kubrick he insisted on filming on location...
My favorite "The moon landings were faked" is the old 90s game Battlezone. In Battlezone the moon landings really happened... but they were a cover up because the US sent a secret army of advanced hover-tanks to the moon to gather a nigh-magical unobtanium resource as part of their solar-system spanning secret war with the Soviets. In the first cut-scene the camera pulls back from the Apollo site to show the secret high tech US army base. It was a fun game. Shame about the anti-communsit brainworms. A hybrid FPS/RTS vehicle sim. Cool concept, if a little clunky.
I loved that game.
Yes
all it takes for me to believe it is to see the fear in the faces of Chinese people when asked certain questions.
The "I talked to one person so now I'm an expert on the situation" school of historical anyalysis.
I too would be scared talking to a patchouli oil scented, dreadlocked white boy anarchist.
If some tourist also asked me about some shootout that happened in my country I would bail ASAP too. Serial killer shit lol who begins a convo with "so what about that time yall killed students"
Imagining a scenario where a Chinese tourist randomly brings up the Columbine massacre while they're visiting
"Hey, what do you think about the 2020 antifa uprising where the antifa burned all America's cities down and executed white parents and small business owners?"
"I think you're a cop".
My understanding is that most people in China don't really care about the 1989 unrest and are perplexed as to why westerners make such a huge deal of it.
The country that says Iraq had WMD said China did a thing that wouldn't make any sense for them to do. That is the extraordinary claim. Why do you feel that a claim made by the US, who has only ever lied to you, is a reasonable starting point?
Do you think the U.S lies a whole bunch but other countries don't lie or only a little?
I think the US verifiably lies more than other countries, and has international publishing efforts that make it harder for other countries to lie like we do. Being the hegemony and the long time sole superpower does put you in unique positions
extraordinary claim and therefore is going to require extraordinary evidence
All it takes to prove that the massacre did happen is evidence. Where is this extraordinary evidence?
Proving that something doesn't exist is much harder. There was a liberal in here earlier though that was also saying that we're a bunch of conspiracy theorists. I gave him links, you can see them below. First hand reports from people who were actually there say that there was no massacre. This includes a CBS reporter and a Latin American diplomat.
First hand reports from people who were actually there say that there was no massacre.
In the square itself, maybe, but all eyewitnesses agree that the PLA shot and killed many hundreds of protesters in Beijing during the protests, which had been (until that point) largely peaceful.
So while you at the author of this article might be correct to say that there was no actual massacre in Tiananmen Square itself, there certainly was a massacre going on around it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8057762.stm
correct me if I'm wrong, but skimming through this drivel, I'm left with the impression that the author never actually saw anyone get shot
That was my analysis as well. It's really hard to tell where his seething hatred for China (and really all of Asia) ends and the truth begins. There's very little actual substance.
it's filled with gems like "Emperor Deng"
This line cracked me up:
Asians have an incredible and perplexing capacity to absorb monstrous events and get on with life anyway
holy shit that is so selfawarewolves territory
what the fuck lmfao
Reputable journalism indeed
Gold star for you! This is significantly better than the usual nonsense that's pushed. But after having claimed a massacre for so long, this still seems like damage control to me.
Do these photos look like the aftermath of a massacre to you? Or do you think that the CPC account of the situation might be closer to reality? They claim that after the protest was broken up, some violent instigators began attacking the military in the area around the square. And yes, hundreds died, and many of them were soldiers.
Do these photos look like the aftermath of a massacre to you?
Yes, they do. The term "massacre" doesn't necessarily imply that the protestors didn't fight back after the PLA started killing them.
I might suggest you read this then. It's by a reporter for the Washington Post, who was in the city reporting on it at the time.
There was a massacre that morning. Journalists have to be precise about where it happened and who were its victims, or readers and viewers will never be able to understand what it meant.
Again, the reporter's point is not that "there was no massacre"; it just didn't happen in the square.
Yep. Even after being forced to admit that he made it up, he's still reporting about things he admits he never saw. Which I have to admit, is a pretty bold move.
So you initially linked it as a source and now you've realized what it actually says, it's unreliable and worthless?
Seems par for the course around here, tbh.
I'm really confused by this one. He admitted he lied, and so did many of his colleagues. But you believe that he's still telling the truth about the massacre?
Look, we don't know exactly what happened there that night. But it's clear that the west lied through their teeth about the entire thing, and the lies are self perpetuating at this point. China's story seems to check out. You HAVE to see that.
Furthermore, why is this event of a couple hundred casualties pushed so hard by the media as proof of China's evilness, when Mai Lai or the 228 incident are barely talked about? This is 100% pure propaganda, and it's mostly, perhaps entirely untrue.
It's hard to know exactly what happened, of course, but the facts of the matter are that even the CCP themselves acknowledged the fact that hundreds died and all the Western journalists who were there confirmed that the PLA shot and killed hundreds of protestors.
Also, while it's true that Western journalists may have been biased, it's also certainly true that China's authoritarian and notoriously opaque government cannot be trusted to tell the truth either, especially if they were responsible for the deaths of many civilians.
While the extent of the massacre in Beijing may be contested, it seems incontrovertible that it did occur.
Furthermore, why is this event of a couple hundred casualties pushed so hard by the media as proof of China’s evilness, when Mai Lai or the 228 incident are barely talked about?
Asides from the fact that this is classic whataboutism, you are categorically wrong to suggest that the My Lai massacre is portrayed in Western media today as anything other than a horrific attack upon civilians.
It is perfectly possible to deplore both massacres, in Beijing and in Mai Lai. This is not a simple zero sum contest between China and the US where one must be the good guy and the other the bad guy.
Also, for reference, here are photos from a massacre that actually did happen.
Never noticed that the upper estimate is almost twice the body count of the June 4th incident.
And the only military casualty was friendly fire.
Why would I believe your sources over others? Especially when there are what appear to most people to be pictures of the Chinese state using lethal military force against protesters and dead bodes on the ground. Are these fake pictures?
Again, fantastical claims. Where are these pictures?
Edit: I love that this is the second person to come in here who gives us shit for being conspiracy theorists, disregards first hand eyewitness accounts, and runs away when pressed for evidence. Murder trials in the US must work very differently than I've been led to believe.
You mean thr picture of a few people lying on the ground clearly alive near a bunch of what are quite clearly bicycles?
Do you believe we went to the moon? If so why? If not why?
Do you believe human caused climate change is a thing? Why?
You're believing somebody, why do you believe those people?
Do you believe in Last Thursdayism? I choose not to because reality has no meaning that way and the consequences are still the same.
Do you believe in your own birth? After all, you couldn’t possibly remember it. How do you know aliens didn’t just materialize you out of nothing? Again, I choose not to subscribe to the alien-materialization theory because there’s a much better hypothesis that seems to make a lot more sense.
Do you believe your eyes and ears, or has
the party already commanded you to disregard their evidence?Honestly, you want a simple, widely accepted, heavily west-biased source? Literally just read the wikipedia article.
"[CBS and WP journalists] could not find enough evidence to suggest that a massacre took place on the square"
"cables from the United States embassy in Beijing agreed there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square"
Nobody here is denying there were protests, or that a limited number people died in clashes with police across the country. But literally no reputed source, western lib or otherwise, claims that the government was out in Tianenmen killing civilians in major numbers.
I didn't wish to see that �*
i'm sorry you ended up as collateral damage
Another name to the victims of communism memorial.
noooooooo\ not\ the\ PPB
Communism evolved in to the Xeelee, killed everyone in the universe, and then went back in time to the beginning of the universe again to kill everyone in the univserse again 69 times! Checkmate, socialists!
Welcome to the federation
here's some brain bleach
Anarchists and illiteracy, name a more iconic duo.
It's a clickbaity title, and it's disappointing to see people engaging with it on the grounds of contrarianism, I guess.
The truth is (which I would assume/hope many here agree with) is that the violence associated with the protests was very real. It was , however, greatly exaggerated by western media in many cases. This has been known for decades, I'm not sure what this book offers that would change that at this point (no, I'm not going to read the article)
Coming even from from an anarchist (i.e. someone who is also distrustful of government, media, etc), this type of stuff makes you guys sound crazy.
It only sounds crazy if you assume you cannot possibly be a victim of a propaganda campaign, which I get it it's uncomfortable to think about but consider it and do your own research.
