Hey there! I would consider myself heavily anti-china, possibly because I spent too much time listening to western anti-china propaganda. Since this community seems to be mainly pro-china, I thought this should be a good place to clear up some misconceptions I might have. There are some issues which are repeatedly used to draw the picture of Chinese dystopia. A few of these points are:

  • The proclaimed genocide of Uighurs in Xinjiang.
  • Heavy restrictions of freedom of speech. It seems really dangerous to be publicly critical of the CCP; There is no chinese newspaper criticizing the works of the CCP, also it is forbidden to access foreign newspapers.
  • Along with the freedom of speech go restrictions of political freedom. "The most recent major movement advocating for political freedom was obliterated through the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989". (Wikipedia quote) There also are many recent examples of people disappearing after publicly expressing differing political views.
  • Mass-surveillance of citizens. Anything the citizens do seems to be recorded. Appearently even saying anything anti-CCP on WeChat can have you imprisoned and a low credit score can make it impossible for you to leave the country (along with other restrictions of freedom).
  • The planned occupation of Taiwan and Hong Kong. At least in the case of Hong Kong there is some justification due to the completely stupid 99-year-lease, but china being so offensive about annexing Taiwan seems odd.

I would be happy to see what the pro-china views on these claims are. I realized that one could argue that claims 1-4 are simply made up or at least presented overly problematic in western media. If this is your whole point, don't bother to answer.

I'm looking forward to your responses!

  • ttmrichter@lemmy.ml
    ·
    3 years ago

    … the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989 …

    Ooh! I missed that one!

    There was no Tiananmen Square Massacre. At all. This is hinted at in the very title of the piece you quoted: 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. There's a few "facts" you're going to find out, to your likely intense shock, surrounding that.

    1. There was no massacre in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

    Citing the same source you quoted:

    Several people who were situated around the square that night, including former Beijing bureau chief of The Washington Post Jay Mathews and CBS correspondent Richard Roth reported that while they had heard sporadic gunfire, they could not find enough evidence to suggest that a massacre took place on the Square itself.

    Taiwan-born Hou Dejian was present in the square to show solidarity with the students and claimed that he didn't see any massacre occurring in the square. He was quoted by Xiaoping Li, a former China dissident to have stated, "Some people said 200 died in the square, and others claimed that as many as 2,000 died. There were also stories of tanks running over students who were trying to leave. I have to say I did not see any of that. I was in the square until 6:30 in the morning."

    Want non-Chinese sources? How about The Columbia Journalism Review? Read that and a few more similar sources (the finding of which is left as a learning exercise) and upon completion ponder this: what other things have you been lied to about over the course of your life?

    2. No matter what you think you remember, Tank Man did not get run over.

    I have met people utterly SHOCKED (indeed shaken to their core) when faced with the evidence that what they "clearly remember"—Tank Man being squished into pulp under the treads of merciless Chinese tanks—never happened, but … it didn't. If you remember seeing Tank Man killed, you are the victim of very skilled propaganda using carefully timed editing, skillfully worded suggestion, and flat-out lies.

    The full video exists showing the aftermath of the famous, iconic shots that shocked the world. It's a good exercise to seek it out. When you do, ponder this: what other things have you been lied to about over the course of your life?

    3. The real story of what went on is far darker.

    Not only because of what it implies for the Chinese people but also because of what it implies for western people. The truth is that there was protests aplenty in Beijing in 1989. And there was a massacre. It's just that the protests the Chinese government was nervous of were worker protests, not student protests. The thing is that the western press didn't want to do the actual work (and dangerous work!) of covering these. The children cosplaying revolutionary were far more photogenic and could be covered within a brief walk from the popular journalist hang-out hotel.

    Further, the corporate masters of most western media really did not want to be broadcasting stories of workers rising in rebellion against cruel masters. It would have struck far too close to home, that would have. Much better to focus on the cute kiddies playing revolutionary! D'aw! They even have a mock Statue of Liberty they call the Goddess of Democracy! Aren't they cute!?

    The real massacre was near Muxidi. It was a massacre of workers who'd finally had enough and snapped. Who'd rioted and attacked police and PLA. Who were subsequently mercilessly gunned down by machine gun, run over by tanks and APCs and generally slaughtered. It was the low point of governance in the modern era of China and it sparked quiet reforms that continue to this day: some good for the people, some ... not so good.

    In retrospect the press story never really made any sense. The students at the protests came from all the top universities in Beijing and environs. They were the scions of the most powerful and wealthy people in China. They were the sons and daughters of Chinese leaders! I know that people have been trained for their entire lives into thinking that the Chinese are unthinking, unfeeling robots, but do you seriously believe it extends to the point that Chinese leaders are going to order the massacre of their very own children!?

    Ponder that for a while, and ponder this: what other things have you been lied to about over the course of your life?

    4. The protests (and suppressions) didn't just happen in Beijing.

    One of the huge problems I have with the ZOMG THEY KILLED ALL THE STUDENTS IN THE SQUARE!!!!!!1111oneoneoneeleventyone!!! narrative is that not only does it suppress the worker uprising and subsequent bloody suppression in Beijing, it also hides the same uprisings and suppressions that happened all over the place! There were protests in Shanghai. In Fujian province. In Hubei province. In all kinds of places. Workers protested. Low-level Communist Party officials protested. PLA SOLDIERS PROTESTED! This was a nationwide political disaster brewing and all of that is erased in the official western record of cute kids cosplaying counter-revolutionary.

    What possible motive could the press have for not reporting this? (It was known to them. You'll find sources detailing that quite easily once you drop down that particular rabbit hole.) Ponder that and ponder this: what other things have you been lied to about over the course of your life?

    5. Things have actually improved since then.

    You don't last as long as absolute dictators as the Chinese government has, over a population as unruly as the Chinese have historically always been, if you're stupid. While the Chinese government did clamp down and clamp down hard (the better term is "brutally") on the uprisings (note the plural) they also recognized what led to them and started to, get this, fix the problems.

    Jackasses from the west bemoan that the locals don't want to talk about 1989 with them. There's three major reasons for this, however.

    1. Nobody trusts the west. There's a long, ignoble tradition of the western press putting sources at risk and then topping it all off by lying. Of fucking course they're not going to want to talk about politically-sensitive issues, knowing that western reporters are sociopaths who'll put them and their families at risk all for the fucking clicks.
    2. Most of the time people use the wrong language. They assume everybody calls it the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre for instance. Which is not the term used here. Quite often, I suspect, the people being asked have no idea what they're being asked. It would be like me going up to an American and asking them their opinion on Santa Anna's Grand Victory or whatever.
    3. 1989 is over 30 years ago. Most of the people being addressed weren't even born for it. Many of the rest were in middle school. They don't know, and don't care, what you're talking about. Kind of like how most Americans alive today don't know or care about the fall of the Berlin Wall.