rule

Girl really just riled everyone up and vanished without a trace

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

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).

America's biggest export is their propaganda

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"

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.

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.

Get educated my friend! We're in the midst of the largest propaganda machine the world has ever seen coming from the U.S. targeting their geo-political enemies. The best resource I've found is a since deleted Google doc, saved here on Internet Archive here!

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

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.

Good on you for asking. I don't have time right now but I'm sure others will respond.