Date of 4 June remains one of China’s strictest taboos, with government using increasingly sophisticated tools to censor its discussion

There is no official death toll but activists believe hundreds, possibly thousands, were killed by China’s People’s Liberation Army in the streets around Tiananmen Square, Beijing’s central plaza, on 4 June 1989.

The date of 4 June remains one of China’s strictest taboos, and the Chinese government employs extensive and increasingly sophisticated resources to censor any discussion or acknowledgment of it inside China. Internet censors scrub even the most obscure references to the date from online spaces, and activists in China are often put under increased surveillance or sent on enforced “holidays” away from Beijing.

New research from human rights workers has found that the sensitive date also sees heightened transnational repression of Chinese government critics overseas by the government and its proxies.

  • Corn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    At no point did I try to justify any atrocity, I simply supplied context that pissed off liberals because it required more nuance to interpret than their thought-terminating clichés supplied. Which really was rude, feel free to ignore me and go back to “china ran 100,000 people over with tanks for peacefully asking for freedom like we have, because thats just what terrorists authoritarians do.”

    • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      What fucking context lmao? You literally provided nothing. There’s no sources, no arguments, no explanations, no points, absolutely zero context was provided. The only things you did do was make false assumptions and use fallacious reasoning to justify using logical fallacies. That’s not context, that’s trying to justify poor critical thinking skills.

      • Corn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The context that the reason this is promoted multiple times a year as opposed to any particular atrocities committed by western media that this can be used to justify further hostile action against a foreign nation.

        If you still use the word “authoritarian”, You’re not ready to have a meaningful discussion on the event anymore than a zionist screeching about “terrorists” is capable of discussing Oct 6th.

        • Gorilladrums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The context that the reason this is promoted multiple times a year as opposed to any particular atrocities committed by western media that this can be used to justify further hostile action against a foreign nation.

          Here you are at again, this is NOT context. Context is when you add relevant information to a topic in a discussion. What you’re doing here is the tu quoue fallacy. Do you understand why the fallacy you’re using is just that? Do you even understand why fallacies are considered bad to begin with? We can’t have an honest discussion if you can’t comprehend this.

          If you still use the word “authoritarian”, You’re not ready to have a meaningful discussion on the event anymore than a zionist screeching about “terrorists” is capable of discussing Oct 6th.

          What other word would you use to describe it? You have a very big government that tries to control every aspect of society at the expense of the freedoms and rights of its citizens, it places a lot overbearing rules that are enforced very strictly, and those who break these rules receive punishments that disproportionately exceed the crime. In this case, the CCP is a tyrannical government that ordered soldiers to kill students for the crime of peacefully protesting. That’s the textbook definition of what authoritarianism is. How am I, or anyone, supposed to take you seriously, when you can’t even admit a basic fact like the CCP is authoritarian? Even they don’t deny it.