China doesn’t say nothing happened, what they say is that counter revolution happened, and it was effectively suppressed. Why would you let someone celebrate the equivalent of an extremist movement?
How many colonies does China have? How many countries has it invaded? How many wars has waged?
Fascists like you and followers of the capitalist death cult can only say this: Tibet, because they drove the feudal lords and dalai lama paedophiles; Taiwan, because the bourgeois dictatorship claimed that land as theirs, as if it isn’t historically all one China, a similar story with Malvinas, I guess you also think they belong to the British; Hong Kong, which was a British colony but for some twisted reason you think they should be it’s own thing, because again it historically has not belong to China; the Uyghur thing, which even Western sources deny and/or doubt of its veracity and which was propelled by a right-wing organisation pro US imperialism; and delirious ideas about China being “imperialist” in Africa or South America because it trades with them and builds infrastructure, instead of providing bogus “financial aids” which then end up in the hands of US puppets like you did in Argentina with IMF funds. So basically all of the “imperialism” you claim is China trying to recover its historical territories lost in the process of the proletarian revolution.
Meanwhile, I don’t see any of the likes of you denouncing the plethora of colonies Europe and the US has been having and continue having for centuries. Why are you no so openly in favour of a Hawai’ian independence movement but you are so fervently obsessed with China? I know why, because you have fascists freudian slips and you can’t even realise about it yourself, since you live surrounded by people who justify themselves, and you have never interacted with a person from the Global South that’s not a fascist. By the way, the things I’m telling you, this is not “tankie” stuff, I have Peronists friends, Trotskyists friends, and all over the spectrum in Argentina, and they all know what you people say is complete and utter disgusting, the thought that everyone agrees with this kind of thought is something only maintained in first world imperialist countries. Don’t fool yourself.
Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and Tibet are all Colonies of China, which it treats as Colonial Territories, by -
Forcibly destroying the local culture. Forcefully extracting to harm of the locals. Genocide, abuse, kidnapping, rape.
But there is no point in engaging to you. You are a liar. You know you are. When you deny genocides, you put yourself on the same side as the fascists and reactionaries of the past.
Effectively suppressed by tanks and rifles? What exactly is the problem with acknowledging what happened if it can be seen as a deterent for future counter-revolutionaries?
China didn’t have anti protest gear at that time, that’s why they took tanks over there, there weren’t any of those trucks that shoot water and the like, basically what they had where guns and the military since the police wasn’t that well equipped. And as I said in me previous comment, they do acknowledge it, as a counterrevolutionary movement that must be stopped. Think about it in the same way that how the US handled the Black Panthers, they were basically risking the status quo (the bourgeoisie staying in power) and they effectively suppress them through different means.
Right, the point I was trying to make was; they acknowledge that people died in the protest (300 or whatever it is), so what exactly is the issue and necessity to deny what happened? Why this obsession with “setting the record straight” when there is nothing really to refute?
It wasn’t a massacre of peaceful students, but a skirmish between PLA soldiers and armed detachments from the pro-capitalist / free market reform movement. The protest movement, as evidenced by their own accounts, called for market liberalisation, and free market reforms, rallying around a replica of the statue of liberty. After the movement had been building in the square for seven weeks, unarmed soldiers were sent in to disperse the protesters, after which many soldiers were beaten to death, torched, and lynched. The New York Times death count went from 2600, to many thousands, to 8000, to tens of thousands. In reality only around ~200 (including soldiers) were killed or trampled, in smaller clashes outside the square. The on-scene New York Times reporter disavowed the article, especially about machine-gunning of protesters. A wikileaks cable from a US ambassador to the US state department, confirmed that no killings or machine-gunnings took place in the square.
Well, one could say it doesn’t make sense to let people rally nowadays for this, since there’s probably counter intelligence funding that’s propelling the massification of this news and so on, so why would you let some people go and complain that you suppressed a US coup d’Etat attempt?
So you argue that the massacre makes sense, that it is fair for the Chinese government to kill whoever took part in the protest. I just don’t understand why denying the extent or rationalizing it through ‘they attacked first’, when killing counter revolutionaries seems to be a completely valid reason for killing people who took part
China doesn’t say nothing happened, what they say is that counter revolution happened, and it was effectively suppressed. Why would you let someone celebrate the equivalent of an extremist movement?
Corrupt, murderous dictatorships rarely tolerate accurate recollections of history.
You must have experience with that, it’s what you’ve been doing for the last 200 years.
It’s almost as if Chinese Imperialism, genocide and ethnic cleansing is still bad even if the West built its powerbase on Imperialism.
How many colonies does China have? How many countries has it invaded? How many wars has waged?
Fascists like you and followers of the capitalist death cult can only say this: Tibet, because they drove the feudal lords and dalai lama paedophiles; Taiwan, because the bourgeois dictatorship claimed that land as theirs, as if it isn’t historically all one China, a similar story with Malvinas, I guess you also think they belong to the British; Hong Kong, which was a British colony but for some twisted reason you think they should be it’s own thing, because again it historically has not belong to China; the Uyghur thing, which even Western sources deny and/or doubt of its veracity and which was propelled by a right-wing organisation pro US imperialism; and delirious ideas about China being “imperialist” in Africa or South America because it trades with them and builds infrastructure, instead of providing bogus “financial aids” which then end up in the hands of US puppets like you did in Argentina with IMF funds. So basically all of the “imperialism” you claim is China trying to recover its historical territories lost in the process of the proletarian revolution.
Meanwhile, I don’t see any of the likes of you denouncing the plethora of colonies Europe and the US has been having and continue having for centuries. Why are you no so openly in favour of a Hawai’ian independence movement but you are so fervently obsessed with China? I know why, because you have fascists freudian slips and you can’t even realise about it yourself, since you live surrounded by people who justify themselves, and you have never interacted with a person from the Global South that’s not a fascist. By the way, the things I’m telling you, this is not “tankie” stuff, I have Peronists friends, Trotskyists friends, and all over the spectrum in Argentina, and they all know what you people say is complete and utter disgusting, the thought that everyone agrees with this kind of thought is something only maintained in first world imperialist countries. Don’t fool yourself.
Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and Tibet are all Colonies of China, which it treats as Colonial Territories, by -
Forcibly destroying the local culture. Forcefully extracting to harm of the locals. Genocide, abuse, kidnapping, rape.
But there is no point in engaging to you. You are a liar. You know you are. When you deny genocides, you put yourself on the same side as the fascists and reactionaries of the past.
Yeah, don’t bother. Tankies are red fascists.
Yup, tankies are fascists under a new name.
You are a fascist under no new name, just good old fascist.
@gary_host_laptop @cavemeat I’ll do you one better:
Anyone I disagree with is a fascist.
You’re a racist
Effectively suppressed by tanks and rifles? What exactly is the problem with acknowledging what happened if it can be seen as a deterent for future counter-revolutionaries?
China didn’t have anti protest gear at that time, that’s why they took tanks over there, there weren’t any of those trucks that shoot water and the like, basically what they had where guns and the military since the police wasn’t that well equipped. And as I said in me previous comment, they do acknowledge it, as a counterrevolutionary movement that must be stopped. Think about it in the same way that how the US handled the Black Panthers, they were basically risking the status quo (the bourgeoisie staying in power) and they effectively suppress them through different means.
Right, the point I was trying to make was; they acknowledge that people died in the protest (300 or whatever it is), so what exactly is the issue and necessity to deny what happened? Why this obsession with “setting the record straight” when there is nothing really to refute?
It wasn’t a massacre of peaceful students, but a skirmish between PLA soldiers and armed detachments from the pro-capitalist / free market reform movement. The protest movement, as evidenced by their own accounts, called for market liberalisation, and free market reforms, rallying around a replica of the statue of liberty. After the movement had been building in the square for seven weeks, unarmed soldiers were sent in to disperse the protesters, after which many soldiers were beaten to death, torched, and lynched. The New York Times death count went from 2600, to many thousands, to 8000, to tens of thousands. In reality only around ~200 (including soldiers) were killed or trampled, in smaller clashes outside the square. The on-scene New York Times reporter disavowed the article, especially about machine-gunning of protesters. A wikileaks cable from a US ambassador to the US state department, confirmed that no killings or machine-gunnings took place in the square.
Well, one could say it doesn’t make sense to let people rally nowadays for this, since there’s probably counter intelligence funding that’s propelling the massification of this news and so on, so why would you let some people go and complain that you suppressed a US coup d’Etat attempt?
So you argue that the massacre makes sense, that it is fair for the Chinese government to kill whoever took part in the protest. I just don’t understand why denying the extent or rationalizing it through ‘they attacked first’, when killing counter revolutionaries seems to be a completely valid reason for killing people who took part