647

submitted 1 year ago by FuckyWucky@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

186 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

I recall seeing eyewitness testimony supporting both sides. Although, its possible the testimonies I saw were about the clashes that China admits to, and were simply framed as being about a massacre. They didn't seem very specific or definitive.

Even though the Chinese government admits to those violent clashes, its still very plausible they would lie about a massacre. Its much easier to justify that than it would be an actual massacre, especially when the civilians act violently. Its also possible that admitting some aspect of it would benefit them more than complete denial.

[-] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 39 points 1 year ago

You'd have a point there, if there wasn't ample photographic evidence which also suggests that no concerted massacre took place, in the square or elsewhere. All available photographic evidence that I've seen supports the Chinese government's version of events: scattered street clashes which unfortunately featured some quite heavy duty violence, but no mass formation of tanks coming in and deliberately schwacking everybody in sight.

[-] sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

You make convincing arguments, and I'm sure you are correct to some degree. I do not believe that the dramatized events suggested by the west are accurate. But, I still think it was a disgusting waste of life that could potentially be described as a massacre.

[-] YuccaMan@hexbear.net 25 points 1 year ago

It wasn't nice, to be sure. The workers' protests which happened concurrently with the events of Tiananmen Square were reportedly the source of much of the violence, and it got properly nasty at times. The two events are often conflated though, and I felt it important to draw that distinction. Anyhow, I appreciate your open-mindedness.