←back to thread

Tiananmen Square 1989 death toll was at least 10,000 according to UK documents

(www.bbc.co.uk)
362 points ComputerGuru | 6 comments | 23 Dec 17 12:36 UTC | HN request time: 1.08s | source | bottom
Show context
zizek23 ◴[23 Dec 17 15:01 UTC] No.15994372[source]▶
In a previous naive world intoxicated by dreams of global citizenry and humanism it would be easy to get sanctimonious and posture about evil.

But cultural divides are real and are not going away. And these kind of events and stories simply become opportunities to target other countries weaknesses, reassert a jingoistic sense of superiority and perpetuate existing comfort zones.

Or there would be protests daily in western capitals about the sheer unimaginable scale of destruction, devastation and millions of families destroyed and lives lost in the middle east starting from Iraq to Libya and now Syria done purely to further geo-political and financial interests.

But that is handwaved away as 'necessary' somehow. The fact is people don't even care about the poor and suffering in their own cities and countries, so how can they care about an unknown people in another part of the world? It's posturing, China's problems will be only be fixed by those chinese who truly care for their people and country.

replies(5): >>15994399 #>>15994419 #>>15994507 #>>15994524 #>>15995462 #
glenstein ◴[23 Dec 17 15:07 UTC] No.15994399[source]▶
I don't think whataboutism, or exhortations to appreciate the complexity of global politics carry more value than the basic, straightforward observation that what happened at Tiananmen was horrible and unforgiveable, and should forever be held against China.

People don't have the energy to protest everything, because we're poor, exhausted, distracted, and yes, often confused and hypocritical. It doesn't mean the observations we make about atrocities are insincere or untrue or that they are unworthy of attention. And independently of our sincerity or consistency, I think the observation is simply true on its merits anyway, and it's bewildering (to me at least) why anything other than that should matter.

replies(3): >>15994435 #>>15994517 #>>15994580 #
Fricken ◴[23 Dec 17 15:39 UTC] No.15994517[source]▶
None of the people involved in the decision to use violence against the Tiananmen square protesters are still in power. Who is it exactly that we should never forgive forever? And where are we going to find the energy to hold this grudge along with all the other unforgivable acts throughout history given that we're already so poor, exhausted, distracted and confused?
replies(1): >>15994673 #
1. glenstein ◴[23 Dec 17 16:02 UTC] No.15994673[source]▶
>Who is it exactly that we should never forgive forever?

For starters, whoever decides to delete references to Tiananmen from the Chinese internet, and the surrounding bureaucratic system that permits (or probably demands) it to happen. Whoever orders the media to omit reference to it every anniversary. Whoever continues to order that parents and/or spouses of the victims are placed under house arrest or removed from their homes on the anniversary.

But even replying that way feels kind of absurd, because it individualizes actions that are best understood as expressions the authoritarian regime itself, and it dismisses as a mere "grudge" the kind of thing anyone should remember in the name of maintaining a historical conscience.

We shouldn't forgive because it's not the type of thing that somehow becomes more forgivable with the passage of time. And most importantly of all, we shouldn't forgive because China is largely unrepentant and in every significant way they are still the same regime as the one that carried out the events in the summer of 1989.

edit: And as for who should hold a "grudge," I would say those of us with the energy to participate in these conversations for the purpose of minimizing the historical legacy of Tiananmen have plenty of energy to spare. Both for remembering what it was, and for remembering that the forces that allowed it to happen are still with us in the form of a regime that continues to jail and torture human rights lawyers.

replies(2): >>15994826 #>>15994844 #
2. Fricken ◴[23 Dec 17 16:32 UTC] No.15994826[source]▶
We should forgive. It's not an easy thing to do. The notion of forgiving was a revolutionary idea 2000 years ago, and in spite of lying at the bedrock of western morality, it's still a revolutionary idea today.

The regime in China also brought 650 million people out of extreme poverty in span of a generation. Somewhat unprecedented in world history, and definitely not something that gets dredged up time and time again to reinforce a distorted narrative. Rip the bandaid off that one and there's no wound underneath to pick at :(

replies(1): >>15994982 #
3. ◴[23 Dec 17 16:35 UTC] No.15994844[source]▶
4. glenstein ◴[23 Dec 17 16:58 UTC] No.15994982[source]▶
When some effort is made to stop erasing history and start learning lessons from it, we can talk about forgiveness.

Until then "forgiveness" is an aloof and silly gesture that serves only to whitewash history and trivialize the concept of forgiveness.

Edit (since I can't reply any further): @Fricken: you're right. I feel perfectly comfortable making "overtures" that we not whitewash the massacre of 10,000 civilians. If that's to be redeemed it's going to take a lot more than vague exhortations about how the world is complicated.

replies(1): >>15995226 #
5. Fricken ◴[23 Dec 17 17:41 UTC] No.15995226{3}[source]▶
History is broad and complex and multifaceted. People who dedicate their lives to the study of history still feel like they don't have a clear picture. Yet here you are, acting like your shit don't drink, examining history through a tiny little pinhole, while making overtures about how it's wrong to whitewash it.
replies(1): >>15996446 #
6. cgmg ◴[23 Dec 17 21:50 UTC] No.15996446{4}[source]▶
Nothing glenstein said was incorrect. Why are you reacting in such a hostile manner? You seem to have an axe to grind.