Hi! Thank you for the nuanced response! While it is true my knowledge of the protests in tianaman square is obviously not as most of the regulars here I think my primary point is that things are nuanced, especially when speaking about chinese history. While I understand your take of parts of my comment possibly being taken as straws of past liberalism and while that could be possibly true I just think it’s fair to say that every topic is nuanced and should be discussed deeper in order to better the discussion in the future. While I agree that parts of what I said could be tropes or simple misunderstanding or lack of knowledge about said subject (which i’m more than happy to admit lack there of) it seems rather difficult to say it’s as black and white as you seem to be portraying it as? I apologise if I am misunderstand your point given here but that’s just the way i perceived it. I do stand by my previous statement of not falling onto the side of a story which plays best for your ideological view on things as I think it’s very easy to fall into said conformation bias as I know I have as I think we all have intact. I do wish to learn more about these things it’s just it’s remarkably difficult to take things are face value when capitalist media is coming at you from one angle and media given by leftists is at another, both can be self serving in the end, no? I do apologise if some of this came off as negatively charged or passive aggressive I am almost just thinking out loud on this on. Thank you again for your reply :)
You just need to read more history books, honestly. By saying things “are nuanced” is actually I think an attempt to de-nuance by trying to equate two things (China vs US) which are entirely different.
There is nothing useful by starting from a perspective of trying to equate two things when there is a distinct lack of knowledge/information. This is your own bias coming into play here - you are instantly trying to find some sort of equivalence instead of starting from the real square zero of “wait, I actually don’t know anything about China”.
This is one of the main pitfalls of liberal ideology - to always have to appease two sides to appear to be unbiased. Since I assume you are American, you obviously wouldn’t leapfrog to “both are bad” when cops beat up BLM protestors after protestors looted, right? Obviously there is a real truth to everything and you don’t get there by leapfrogging from zero knowledge to equivalence.
What exactly is it that you are hoping to accomplish by criticizing China, a country that you know ostensibly nothing about (you do not know its language, history, nor do you live there)?
So when framed like that:
-Why exactly does your criticism help you in your goal?
-Why is it worth anything?
-Why should Chinese people care about it?
-Why should countries who are leaving US imperialism care?
-What exactly is imperialism (this one is easy tbh, read Lenin, learn about the role of military, debt, and currency)?
Anyway the purpose of this is to get you to explore the way your own thought process works, as I assume you are a leftist from the west.
I won’t say more on the 4 June incident, I only have two watching suggestions. First is the Gate of heavenly Peace documentary part 1part 2 which I suggest watching with care. The facts are there, but the narration is dissonant from them and has a lot of sinophobic crap. The second is Tovarisch Endymion’s video, which partially uses the aforementioned doku.
On the subject of chinese history and what license it gives us to say about the PRC, I’ll again caution you to be certain of what you have in mind. If you’re referring to some misdeeds in the CPC era, you should inform yourself on the specific fault you understand them to have. Afterwards we (being this sub, lemmygrad or wherever you choose) could discuss at greater detail.
Finally, the media. It’s completely true that all media has a bias and an agenda. But we ought to approach this scientifically, lest we fall into a liberal trap and accept or reject something we shouldn’t. For example, what is the agenda of Washington Post? This one’s simple, it’s owned by Bezos, so it’ll push whatever he wants. It’ll support rightist deregulation, anti-worker policies without associating much with outright fascists, who might rock the boat and cost mr Bezos a pretty penny. What about BBC? Well, it’s owned and operated by the UK govt, which in recent years has shown the stick vis a vis their funding. As such, they editorially support whatever the Tories do, imperialism and redbaiting anything to the left of Thatcher. Next, the MYT, whose owner I know fuckall about. What I do know is that they’ve been in favour of every single war, intervention and pro-US coup since WW2. This, alogside the fact that they really hate SocDems, not to say a word hpe they feel about actual leftists, should be sufficient. As for CCTV/CGTN, I’m taking the craven route and not saying shit, inviting you to determine for yourself. Read their articles, see what they focus on and what they don’t. Try to look into their editorial independence, and for bonus points, find out how often they contradict the CPC stance. I’m not promising you’ll be enlightened and agree with me on everything, but I expect you to be surprised eith what you find.
Hi! Thank you for the nuanced response! While it is true my knowledge of the protests in tianaman square is obviously not as most of the regulars here I think my primary point is that things are nuanced, especially when speaking about chinese history. While I understand your take of parts of my comment possibly being taken as straws of past liberalism and while that could be possibly true I just think it’s fair to say that every topic is nuanced and should be discussed deeper in order to better the discussion in the future. While I agree that parts of what I said could be tropes or simple misunderstanding or lack of knowledge about said subject (which i’m more than happy to admit lack there of) it seems rather difficult to say it’s as black and white as you seem to be portraying it as? I apologise if I am misunderstand your point given here but that’s just the way i perceived it. I do stand by my previous statement of not falling onto the side of a story which plays best for your ideological view on things as I think it’s very easy to fall into said conformation bias as I know I have as I think we all have intact. I do wish to learn more about these things it’s just it’s remarkably difficult to take things are face value when capitalist media is coming at you from one angle and media given by leftists is at another, both can be self serving in the end, no? I do apologise if some of this came off as negatively charged or passive aggressive I am almost just thinking out loud on this on. Thank you again for your reply :)
You just need to read more history books, honestly. By saying things “are nuanced” is actually I think an attempt to de-nuance by trying to equate two things (China vs US) which are entirely different.
There is nothing useful by starting from a perspective of trying to equate two things when there is a distinct lack of knowledge/information. This is your own bias coming into play here - you are instantly trying to find some sort of equivalence instead of starting from the real square zero of “wait, I actually don’t know anything about China”.
This is one of the main pitfalls of liberal ideology - to always have to appease two sides to appear to be unbiased. Since I assume you are American, you obviously wouldn’t leapfrog to “both are bad” when cops beat up BLM protestors after protestors looted, right? Obviously there is a real truth to everything and you don’t get there by leapfrogging from zero knowledge to equivalence.
What exactly is it that you are hoping to accomplish by criticizing China, a country that you know ostensibly nothing about (you do not know its language, history, nor do you live there)?
So when framed like that:
-Why exactly does your criticism help you in your goal?
-Why is it worth anything?
-Why should Chinese people care about it?
-Why should countries who are leaving US imperialism care?
-What exactly is imperialism (this one is easy tbh, read Lenin, learn about the role of military, debt, and currency)?
Anyway the purpose of this is to get you to explore the way your own thought process works, as I assume you are a leftist from the west.
I won’t say more on the 4 June incident, I only have two watching suggestions. First is the Gate of heavenly Peace documentary part 1 part 2 which I suggest watching with care. The facts are there, but the narration is dissonant from them and has a lot of sinophobic crap. The second is Tovarisch Endymion’s video, which partially uses the aforementioned doku.
On the subject of chinese history and what license it gives us to say about the PRC, I’ll again caution you to be certain of what you have in mind. If you’re referring to some misdeeds in the CPC era, you should inform yourself on the specific fault you understand them to have. Afterwards we (being this sub, lemmygrad or wherever you choose) could discuss at greater detail.
Finally, the media. It’s completely true that all media has a bias and an agenda. But we ought to approach this scientifically, lest we fall into a liberal trap and accept or reject something we shouldn’t. For example, what is the agenda of Washington Post? This one’s simple, it’s owned by Bezos, so it’ll push whatever he wants. It’ll support rightist deregulation, anti-worker policies without associating much with outright fascists, who might rock the boat and cost mr Bezos a pretty penny. What about BBC? Well, it’s owned and operated by the UK govt, which in recent years has shown the stick vis a vis their funding. As such, they editorially support whatever the Tories do, imperialism and redbaiting anything to the left of Thatcher. Next, the MYT, whose owner I know fuckall about. What I do know is that they’ve been in favour of every single war, intervention and pro-US coup since WW2. This, alogside the fact that they really hate SocDems, not to say a word hpe they feel about actual leftists, should be sufficient. As for CCTV/CGTN, I’m taking the craven route and not saying shit, inviting you to determine for yourself. Read their articles, see what they focus on and what they don’t. Try to look into their editorial independence, and for bonus points, find out how often they contradict the CPC stance. I’m not promising you’ll be enlightened and agree with me on everything, but I expect you to be surprised eith what you find.