• CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.mlM
    ·
    8 months ago

    Maybe you should do your own research. Open report number 590 on this page: https://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2011-11/09/content_1989024.htm

    Oh look, what is it? The report of the State Council published on June 25, 1989 about the protests, from gov.cn themselves!

    saying that Google was banned

    Oh no how horrible, literally 1997. Can't live without my google, especially when I don't have a much better replacement such as Baidu. Nope, don't exist. Only Google. Well, since 1998 only.

    • wtry@lemm.ee
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Are you denying that Google is a repository of information. Even duckduckgo is banned. They're not even close to a monopoly. I'm making the point that they're restricting information. Also I'd be happy to read article 590 if you could provide me with an English translation.

      • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.mlM
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        how is banning Google restricting information and why did you not touch on the State Council report about the 1989 Beijing protests?

        Since there is an edit: you can OCR the document and run it into an online translator. The State Council of the People's Republic of China writes, understandably, in Chinese.

        • wtry@lemm.ee
          ·
          8 months ago

          I was wondering if something like that would lose some meaning as things like that are infamously inaccurate.

          • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.mlM
            ·
            8 months ago

            Would you trust a human-made translation if someone made it? The only people that would care enough to go through the document and manually translate it would be Marxist-Leninists who want to prove a point. I doubt Maoists for example, who consider the Deng government revisionist, would take the time to translate a document that vindicates the 1989 government.