Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Because this issue is used as a battering ram to weaken the Chinese government. The West keeps talking about there being a ‘Tiananmen Massacre’ where unarmed students were killed even though behind closed doors US diplomats admit there was no bloodshed on TIananmen. It is really hard to defend yourself against those accusations which are false when the other side doesn’t need to produce any evidence whatsoever. What is provable are the deaths of the soldiers and maoists fighting in street battles outside the square but that was not a massacre and funnily enough the West also doesn’t like to talk about those deaths
Alright, I’ll contend that. Your source is thorough enough.
Personally I still see the deaths outside Beijing in the streets to be incredibly problematic and fairly emblematic of the anti free speech/protest position by the government – but I recognize a lot of the specific rhetoric with Tienanman is about killing unarmed students. I see why this is an important distinction, it was just never a real distinction in my mind. Thank you for the clarity.
Because this issue is used as a battering ram to weaken the Chinese government. The West keeps talking about there being a ‘Tiananmen Massacre’ where unarmed students were killed even though behind closed doors US diplomats admit there was no bloodshed on TIananmen. It is really hard to defend yourself against those accusations which are false when the other side doesn’t need to produce any evidence whatsoever. What is provable are the deaths of the soldiers and maoists fighting in street battles outside the square but that was not a massacre and funnily enough the West also doesn’t like to talk about those deaths
Alright, I’ll contend that. Your source is thorough enough.
Personally I still see the deaths outside Beijing in the streets to be incredibly problematic and fairly emblematic of the anti free speech/protest position by the government – but I recognize a lot of the specific rhetoric with Tienanman is about killing unarmed students. I see why this is an important distinction, it was just never a real distinction in my mind. Thank you for the clarity.
deleted by creator