1.
As a Canadian, I liked to point out something about what happened in 1989 Tiananmen Square that might not be too obvious to people who lived in NA

Did students demonstrators died? Yes
Did troops and tanks moved in? Yes
Was there some SHORT FLASHES of footages we all saw(a students blocking a tank)? Yes
Was there any human rights in China? No

Ok, now you are all nicely brainwashed by the western media. Case closed


Oh wait, I'm openning it. It surprised me a lot when I heard about what really happended. Whether or not you believe me is your problem, as I know that there will be ignorants:]

1) X amount of students demonstrators moved in, stayed right in front of the government building for a month. Demanded for "changes" in government system.

Now let's discuss the word change. Really, it's a nice subsititude for "revolution". Remember, revolution is almost always accompany by bloodshed. IMHO, China was not really for that kind of change. She just barely got to the point where economic and foreign relationships were stable. For a country that the majority were farmers and peasants, would you think changes demand by 1/XXXXXXXX amount of students were totally reasonable?

2) The internal government conducted intensive resolutions development for a month. No method seem to be perfect. Deng Xiao Ping set the bottom line: the country has to be stable, China can't afford to collapse(hence the communism government can't afford to collapse). Party were split hardliners and members who were more "soft"

3) Just in case of something would go wrong, troops were ordered in to protect the capitals. They WERE ORDERED NOT TO CONDUCT ANY VIOLENCE AGAINST THE STUDETNS. Period

4) Here is what went wrong. Some students became so inpatient that they became real troublemakers. Remember the word some, because the majority students were peaceful and had not much to do with it, but nevertheless they got involved because a few.

Here is what had been done: soliders were murdered in day light(Peoples Liberation Army), tanks were burned(in case you didn't know, the rubber on the tank's track can't take the heat). In extreme cases, some soliders were hang on bridges and made as public display.

Why oh why it seem that no one else in NA seems to know about this?

Why were we present with PARTIAL footage of what was taped, instead of an UNCUT version?

10 soliders were later recieved the National Guard award. They were all dead, horribly. I heard that some were burned alive.

it was gone out of the hand at this point. The army was ordered not to react, they couldn't do a thing. But the boiling point was reached That's when the final decision was made.

5) what were the possible outcomes?

This is totally my view, if there is something you can add or disagree feel free to do so.

1> Everyone's happy, the students willingly end their demonstration. They recieve minor punishments for the deaths of army personels. It could happen this way, except the students didn't want to end the demonstration / violent acts

2> what actually had happened

3> China fall into a chaotic state as a new revolution begun.

If you are the president what would you do?


2.
If you still think the Chinese government's decsion was unacceptable:

I encourage you to think about the word:

KKK

where is it's origin? What's its target? What country was affected? How long did its popularity last? DIDN'T majority white Americans supported them back then??

then think what happend in an uni during the Vietnam war. National Guard shot dead four demonstrators. Can we declare American has no human rights because only of that?



3.
So why did the media only tell you the one-sided story? Does the word communism struke you? Do you really know what communism means? Have you read "Das Kaptial" by Marx? If not then you don't. China and Soviets had never truely became communism. They tried, but Cultural Revolution and the Russian famine in 1922 was the result. Both of them used the same solution: two steps forward, one step backward. But really, right now China is running on capitalism. I think it's human right is all right. It's not democracy yet but it doesn't come over night. Remember that's 1.3 billions people. If everyone has so much power a goverment might had been overthrown 12 times per year. The thing is, it's improving

why did communism failed?
according to Marx, fedualism -> capitalism -> socialism -> communism
it's an EVOLUTION, not a REVOLUTION. It does not happen over night. Captialism prevoides the economic background for a successful communism stage. That's why attempts failed. Communism is suppose to be like anarchism, where there was no government yet everyone is involved in every decision the group makes(mind you it's not!=civil disorder as protaited by Civ3).


I don't understand why Bush treated China as a rival. I mean China can ONLY be a rival if the American made her one. Not the other way around. The last steping stones for peace of mankind is probably when this generation ends and everyone favour $ over difference in nationalities. Then there will be no more war or potential for war except we still got to watchout for terrorists though:D

Why am I posting this on a game forum? :confused:

"Why am I posting this on a game forum?"

Well, you aren't the only one. I find myself giving a long long long lecture on Chinese history for some reason. :lol: Welcome to the club.
Actually, I am amazed that the Chinese govt took so long to respond. Had it been the Soviets of old or the Japanese Imperial Army, they would have responded with overwhelming force within the hour.
Also I think some PLA divisions were beginning to side with the demonstrators and delaying or questioning orders, so the CCP got to react before the PLA splintered. And THAT would probably be the start of a new civil war.

After what Chinese students did in the "Cultural Revolution" I cant blame Deng Xiaoping really (he was arrested at the time IIRC), but I guess pictures of students facing down tanks was too strong an image for the West to have any other impact than it did have.

Originally posted by Crazy Eddie
After what Chinese students did in the "Cultural Revolution" I cant blame Deng Xiaoping really (he was arrested at the time IIRC), but I guess pictures of students facing down tanks was too strong an image for the West to have any other impact than it did have.

that's what got you, and also what got me before I heard more truth behind the simple "man block tank" thing.

Why don't they just show us the next few second of the footages? What mental images did that leave us? I heard(never watch it, but I seriously don't think a person can lie about this) that dead PLA soliders and burnt tanks were shown on Chinese TV during that time. Why is the western country never seem to know about this?

And some PLA siding with students? Jesus, I didn't know that. Image what could had happen,

It was dilemma. I'm not trying to justify the lost of life, but merely states that there are strong reasons for these to happen. Then, we can debate on if there is any other route the government could had take to resolve the event.

Anyways, look what the western government did in response. Trade embargo...... for a short period of time. Ok, that proved they favoured $ over their so call human rights

and one funny thing I heard the other day was that around 1 month ago one of the active leader of those student demonstrators, WeiKingSun(cantoness)? Anyways, he said to the newspaper media something about China is cooperating with Bin Ladden.

That's just sad, a revolutionist as he believed himself to be one could lower himself to such degree........

I woldn't be suprised to see a "Truth behind Tiananmen Square" programme on some Rupert Murdoch network eventually. He's still trying to suck up to the Chinese gov. to sell his sattellite dishes there.

why is it a suck up if it's the truth?:confused: :confused: :confused:

Tiananmen massacre is one of the worst things that happen in Chinese history.Although The govt was left with no choice that they have to shoot down the students after numerous warnings(it was a sad thing),if the riot was not ceased ,Worst thing could happen to China,China will never become superpower,Many people will lose their jobs(they burn down things....),Instabllity could cause the country to be disunited(look at Indoneseia...)!Although the massacre was horrible,I heard reports that thousands of students shot was false news,is the soldiers who died the most,not the students!The students never die so many!Anyway shooting like that was a horrible choice although the riot must be put down whatever it took!

Hello Cataclysm (sp?). Popped by your thread because of the link. Anyway you asked where I got my informaiton regarding labor records in china? I got them from a website at the International Labour Organiztion. There stats are rather conservative. There is a book called Behind the Label: Made in China by Charles Kernaghan that says conditions in China are a lot worse then the ILO suspects. The main reason why China's labour record is so poor is because of the proliferation of Export Processing Zones (China has 124 according to ILO, 400 according to Kernaghan). EPZs are were the most terrible working condions exist, not just in China but around the world.

it was indeed a sad event, the sadest part is even if it repeats again I still don't think the Chinese government has any alternative.

That's how the domination of one party works. And no, if there are multi-party exists in China, matter gets a LOT more complicate and I don't think it will work. Remember China has 1.3 billion people.

Anyways, Fayadi you should becareful of what you said. You can't just pop figures out of what you heard you got to support it with actual facts or support your own statements.

Personally, since I was never in Tiananmen Square during 1989, I will keep myself away from all the death figures, remember if you take a false information your opinion will become bias.


And about labour relation, again, since I havn't seem it in China I would not make comment on it. It's good that what Whiskey said was support by facts. But one thing I would say about it is corruption. Chinese government are just as responsible as any other government to provide a healthy working condition for the workers. But you have seem how communism works from civ3, corruption is a huge problem. Local government is only good if they are "clean". Some do whatever they could to benefit themselves(reminds me of Nike child labour). However I know for a fact that the corruption problem is getting better overtime. It's crazy how many people with power were found guilty. Many were trial and reported nationwide by the media publicly. Isn't that the development of democracy?

Originally posted by Fayadi
Although The govt was left with no choice that they have to shoot down the students...

What? It almost sounds like you're PROUD of what happened. What do you mean they had no choice? I didn't like it when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, but did I shoot him? NO! We have SENSE in America, not like your corrupt and insane government.

Originally posted by rmsharpe


What? It almost sounds like you're PROUD of what happened. What do you mean they had no choice? I didn't like it when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, but did I shoot him? NO! We have SENSE in America, not like your corrupt and insane government.

why don't you suggest a better choice?:eek:
I'm not saying there really isn't any other choice, but I myself can't think of any. And no one is proud of what happened. Why don't we just forget it?

No? How about the death of 4 uni students who were shot by National Guard during a Vietnam War demonstration? Do you get that image everytime you see an American flag?:p No? Then mind your own business. Was it insane? DOES THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU? You could argue the death Tiananmen square weights more than the dead uni students but you can't deny they are the same in some way.

Were the students shot cause the government didn't like them? NO. Please, Please reread my first post. PLA soliders(not one, or two, but many) were killed(and they or most of them did virtually nothing cause their orders was to do nothing). That's when the government finally decided the line was cross

All I want to say is no government or idealism is perfect. When you bash a government, take a look at your own. If you hesitated when your wrote, that means you aren't totally brainwashed. And please don't try to shovel your opinion into others brain, never worked and never will work.

And of course, everyone's bias in some degree including me:p

Right now, I'm kind at mad that my local government of B.C., Canada. They are responsible for the teacher strike we are going to have.

why is it a suck up if it's the truth?
I didn't mean a programme about what really happened would be a suck up, I meant Murdock was a suck up. He got a UK passport when he was building up his empire over here, then a US one when he wanted Fox. Now he's got a Chinese wife I expect he wants a Chinese passport now. The guy is a prick.

I see what you mean:p

"I didn't like it when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, but did I shoot him?"
Let me see, ye must have been all of seven or eight years old :p ;)
They train political assassins young these days...;)

The footage from Tiananmen I'd like to see is what happened to that bloke who stopped the tank column with the flags, after the Western cameras stopped filming- forward, gear change, reverse, gear change, forward....:satan:

I would rather see the whole thing ;)

And Japan says, "Never you mind what we are doing in Nanking. You've done badd stuff too. Mind your own business."

Regardless of the true nature of the events (I haven't seen any back-up info, but that doesn't mean that you aren't correct) the old phrase two wrongs don't make a right is still in effect. The world has learned to its horror what the results of "minding our own business" can be.

I too would love to hear the full story behind the story. Thing is, what do you believe? One thing is certain: In protests things can quickly get out of hand. Tempers flare, and rabble rousers and trouble makers from both sides can start something neither wants. There is also room for honest mistakes and cruel acts of chance. Some or all of this is what happened at Kent State where 4 students were killed. I have seen interviews with protestors and national guard troops that were there. It was an accident. There was never any order to fire, or a larger order to put down the protest. I don't know whether there was such an order at Tienimin square or not, but if there was, it becomes a different type of event.

Obviously there are more sides to this story than what was showed for a few days when it happened. There always is. Fayadi seems to believe that there were more soldiers killed than students. While I doubt this, it is another angle on the subject. It would be interesting to see supporting information to back up the claims made here.

A lots of good points raised by knowltok


Originally posted by knowltok
And Japan says, "Never you mind what we are doing in Nanking. You've done badd stuff too. Mind your own business."

Similar, but not quite in term of importance. The protest transformed from a peaceful reform request into a possible full scale revolution. This is far more than the deny of Rape of Nanking, but closer to the protest of Vietnam War, because it has the potential to torn a nation apart.

[quote][b]
Regardless of the true nature of the events (I haven't seen any back-up info, but that doesn't mean that you aren't correct) the old phrase two wrongs don't make a right is still in effect. The world has learned to its horror what the results of "minding our own business" can be.


Heh, if I can get any actual back-up info I would be writing books. One thing that really bugs me is this:
The use of force to "calm" down the students is NEVER a good solution.
But is the the BEST solution? What else could be done?
And yeah, China probably should be more open about this issue and at least try to reason about it instead of denying any human right concern.


I too would love to hear the full story behind the story. Thing is, what do you believe? One thing is certain: In protests things can quickly get out of hand. Tempers flare, and rabble rousers and trouble makers from both sides can start something neither wants. There is also room for honest mistakes and cruel acts of chance. Some or all of this is what happened at Kent State where 4 students were killed. I have seen interviews with protestors and national guard troops that were there. It was an accident. There was never any order to fire, or a larger order to put down the protest. I don't know whether there was such an order at Tienimin square or not, but if there was, it becomes a different type of event.


I don't believe in anyone. The world is full of BS:D You got a good point about the difference between student shooting/killing. I don't know, honest mistake can lead to cruel act of chance, sometimes. But the important part is, students acted first, then the army reacted after a period.(from my source, could be wrong, but numerous soliders were killed before the final resolution)


Obviously there are more sides to this story than what was showed for a few days when it happened. There always is. Fayadi seems to believe that there were more soldiers killed than students. While I doubt this, it is another angle on the subject. It would be interesting to see supporting information to back up the claims made here.

Heh, no one will know the entiretruth, not even the student protestor, PLA, or the government officials. But we all can grasp on part of the truth. My entire post is just saying that the truth offered from the agnle of western media is way too bias. Oh yeah, there are defintely less soliders killed than students... Tanks got burned though...

as for claims, that's call "classified" materials:D Some people got it but they certainly are hiding them. Just ask the US media to show the entire footage instead of the partial one and we might learn something more;)

Well, don't expect it on the late breaking news with Dan Rather. We may get a more complete story someday when someone does a documentary, but then again, its hard to say if even that will give us the full story. China strikes me as even less likely than the Russians to divulge their dirty little secrets someday.

Good thread.

Seems some in here have the same disease America has been suffering through over the last couple of months.

My side is right.....completely! Your side, not being the side I am on, is thus against mine and, most importantly, wrong! Period.

While I definitely do not believe all I hear and see in the media, I have to say they've done an absolutely amazing job of covering up all these 'truths'! And they've all stuck together on it so well.

Puh-Lease!! :rolleyes:

Fact is, it's probably somewhere in between what you and the Chinese government would call the truth, and what the media calls the truth.

Can a person in China find themselves in trouble for having an opinion that does not fall in line with the government's? What if that person should publish their opinion?

To me, this is a very important freedom. What about religion?

Seems to me that you are trying to spin things your way as bad as those you complain about. How very American of you!

Originally posted by cataclysm
A lots of good points here



Heh, if I can get any actual back-up info I would be writing books. One thing that really bugs me is this:
The use of force to "calm" down the students is NEVER a good solution.
But is the the BEST solution? What else could be done?
And yeah, China probably should be more open about this issue and at least try to reason about it instead of denying any human right concern.



Not sure what you're advocating here, but firing weapons into masses of students is NEVER the right answer. Sheesh.
Now you sound like Reagan and Nixon.....

Originally posted by VoodooAce


Not sure what you're advocating here, but firing weapons into masses of students is NEVER the right answer. Sheesh.
Now you sound like Reagan and Nixon.....

And your suggestion is? So the official should just let the students continue killing the soliders or better yet, let themselves to be overthrown? rolleyes:
And did I ever said it's the right answer? I'm asking if there could be a BETTER solution. I'm striving to find one that. Can you help?


Nixon:D Here we go, please explain why you draw comparision between me and a US president that I found untrustworthy. Was it the Vietnam War protesting killing? Did I supported any of those action? I am justifying it to some degree, perhaps. If that irriates you then just counter my arguments.

And who on earth can define what's wrong and right? Documentary source is reliable in two ways: historical accuracy and the person who wrote it.

You made a funny contradition in these two statments you made:
"My side is right.....completely! Your side, not being the side I am on, is thus against mine and, most importantly, wrong! Period. "
"Not sure what you're advocating here, but firing weapons into masses of students is NEVER the right answer. Sheesh. "

I don't know too much about Reagan other than his policy of rearming and Starwar policy. He was the president before I was born so... Well do a study on him later.

Can a person in China find themselves in trouble for having an opinion that does not fall in line with the government's? What if that person should publish their opinion?

To me, this is a very important freedom. What about religion?


Yes and no, depends on the time period. As we are speaking, the Chinese government is reforming. Even the leader Jiang was questioned by elders for the radical changes that slowly but surely aligning China away from communism.
And oh, on a side note, too bad I lost the link but a journalist was prevented to board a plane and possible face charges because her anti-war attitude. Hmmm..... We can go on forever like this but you should see my point already

Originally posted by VoodooAce
Seems some in here have the same disease America has been suffering through over the last couple of months.

My side is right.....completely! Your side, not being the side I am on, is thus against mine and, most importantly, wrong! Period.

While I definitely do not believe all I hear and see in the media, I have to say they've done an absolutely amazing job of covering up all these 'truths'! And they've all stuck together on it so well.

Puh-Lease!! :rolleyes:

Fact is, it's probably somewhere in between what you and the Chinese government would call the truth, and what the media calls the truth.

Can a person in China find themselves in trouble for having an opinion that does not fall in line with the government's? What if that person should publish their opinion?

To me, this is a very important freedom. What about religion?

Seems to me that you are trying to spin things your way as bad as those you complain about. How very American of you!

just a question, who are you addressing to in this post? And who are you refereing to when you said they covered up the truth?

Altough i'm probably arriving late in this fine discussion (really didn't expect to find this in a game forum:) ), there's some considerations i couldn't help myself making;

I can totally understand the distinction between a "good choice" and the "best choice", i mean, sometimes the best choice is the less horrible one. If someone comes next to me with a firearm and demands my car, i'll choose the best thing - giving the car - instead of the worst thing - getting shot. Not that it means that the my choice was any good.

Now that i made that obvious statement (just wanted to show that i DO get the point that was numerous times repeated and emphasized here), i get to what i wanted to say.

It's true that never real socialism or communism were achieved in the world (i use to say that if Marx were able to see the URSS he would jump from his grave). And the heart of the failure in achieving that is that instead of a less and less powerful government, they were growing stronger and more absolute in that countries.

I think it would be fair to call them a "reverse dictatorship"

Well, dictators have that odd costume of oppressing people. It was a common practice in URSS and also in China, specially right after the party got the power and in early days of cold war.

In fact, the world have seen days where dictatorial governments were in fashion (after all, facism and that aberrant comunism were ruling a large part of the world half a century ago).

The point of all that is: PERHAPS the students had overreacted. But did the government REALLY gave them a chance to express themselves? I mean, even if you are right about the numerous warnings before the armed reaction, can you say that the government is being reasonable just because it isn't gunning everybody?

Let's imagine a cenario: You and your family lives to see the falling of your country into an incompetent and oppresive dictatorship. Population lacks everything. You have no right to free thinking and access to nothing at all but the government propaganda and some old philosophy books hidden in your grandfathers closed with ideals of freedom and political liberty.

You clain to the government that he applies that. The government simply ignores you. You clain again, the same happens.

In the meantime, the conditions keeps getting worse and worse. Even in the sense that the world is getting better and you are not, the indignation and the need for changes grows stronger each passing day.

The fact that the government haven't killed you is the demonstration that it is reasonable? I mean, i give my car to the thieve, he doesn't kill me. Is he reasonable?

I don't know if what the government did was an effective discussion in any sense. Maybe it's idea of dealing with students was ignoring them and let them scream to deaf ears. And so they did until the indignation grew into a riot, and it justifyed (more or less) armed response.

It gets in the heart of the point made in this discussion. If you ask me "did the China government had a better choice?", i reply " "did they try something actually efficient to prevent the situation to outcome that way?"

If you get back to the philosophers, and the government theories, you'll see that it's a long-time recognized right of the citzens to revolt against unworthy governors - that concept was created back in the 17th and 18th centurys.

And the fact that the population is ignorant - peasants and farmers - is no justification. Population is ignorant due to the very incompetency of the government, that was not able to provide their needs (of course there are other historical reasons, but china was once a mighty country and a mighty country depends just on itself to keep that way, unlike a poor 3th world country that needs lots of help and luck).

All revolutuions were always made of an elite leadership and a mob of followers. In fact, even in peace times, all political decisions are made by elites, and there's always the justification that "the people are not ready" to keep it that way.

Now that this point is made, there's a last consideration i'd like to make: Perhaps it's naive to expect the Leaders let their government be overthrown by a number of out-numbered poor armed students.

It's also naive to think that the thieve will allow me to arrest him and carry him to the next police station.

Does it makes each of them any less guilty?

That question i leave to you guys.

Last time I checked, there are things called water cannon and tear gas. Unless someone wants to claim that China does not have fire departments.

As someone who participated, however indirectly, in the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989, I am appalled at the opinions and propaganda that I see expressed here.

Let me give some background to my experience. In 1988-89, the student protestors gathered in Beijing to spread awareness to China and the world that there was more than one option for governing China, and that the Chinese people should have a choice in how they were governed.

Ironically, more people outside of China than within China found out about these protests, because the Communist government stifled all communications within its own country. There were Chinese citizens a hundred miles away from Beijing who had no idea what was going on there.

During this time, one of the few free and uncensored channels of communication between China and the rest of the world was the Internet. The Internet was a lot smaller and less influential in 1989 than it is today, but it was widely used among university research departments, and there were a few connections to China.

That's where a lot of Chinese students studying overseas came in, and where I got to help. I worked for the IT department at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute at the time, and there were many Chinese students there who sent news and messages back and forth so that their friends, relatives, and colleagues could stay informed on the most significant happenings in their country in a generation. Being a supporter of the cause of freedom in any country, I helped in whatever way I could -- tracking down the proper paths to the Chinese universities, letting the students use the school's scanners, even typing in the text of some news articles. I met a lot of very smart, dedicated, and noble Chinese students, and this is where I really started to respect and take an interest in the Chinese culture.

For cataclysm to say that he didn't see another alternative shows either a failure of vision or a willful blindness. The issue in 1989 was that the Chinese Communist Party had a monopoly on political power in China. This was, and still is, wrong. The Communist parties of Europe were toppling like dominoes. The Eastern Europeans were throwing off the yoke of Soviet Russia, and Mikhail Gorbachev was admitting that the Communist Party needed to release its stranglehold on Russia itself. All the Tiananmen Square protestors were asking was that the Chinese Communist Party make the same admission, and let the Chinese people share the power in reality instead of just in words. (The phrase "People's Republic" has always been a sick joke. No country with this name has ever been a true republic, or let the people exercise any power.)

Cataclysm asks, "what were the possible alternatives?" and tries to conclude that the only possibilities were chaos and civil war on the other hand, and the government's bloody crackdown on the other. But Eastern Europe showed us that there could have been other alternatives. Yes, events in China could have turned out like they did in Rumania, with a civil war and the shooting of the dictators. But it could also have turned out like it did in Hungary or Czechoslovakia, with the Communist leaders admitting their errors and stepping down, followed by freedom and prosperity for the people. The Tiananmen Square protestors were not asking for violent revolution. They were not even asking for the mass ouster of the Communist Party. All they were asking for was free elections and an open political system in which all Chinese people could participate. Their crime, in the eyes of Deng Xiaoping and the other hard-liners, was the suggestion that the Chinese people might choose someone other than the Communists to lead them.

Cataclysm also raised the question of whether China could be governed with a multi-party system, given its population of 1.3 billion. Many people believe that it could. Look at India for an example. India has nearly a billion citizens, and greater ethnic, linguistic, and religious diversity than China. Yet it functions as a multi-party, parliamentary democracy. Admittedly, you can also look to India for some of the difficulties of running such a large state as a democracy. But every state is going to have its governmental problems. The question is, would China be better off if the Communist Party surrendered its monopoly on power? I think so. The protestors of 1989 thought so. And many people still think so today.

As far as the allegations that some of the protestors attacked and murdered soldiers in Beijing, I wouldn't be surprised if this is true. Any large protest movement such as this is going to attract some hotheads who will just use the mood as an excuse for violence. Compare it with the anti-Vietnam protests in the US. Many people joined the "movement" and committed assault, destruction, and even murder against the government. That didn't mean that the rest of the protestors shared their views, and it didn't invalidate the basic principles of their cause. The same is true of the Tiananmen Square protests.

Anyone who tries to retroactively re-write the history of the June 4th massacre to make it look like the government was justified doesn't have a moral leg to stand on. The protestors wanted the government to permit pluralism, dissent, and diversity of political opinion. The government's response was to attack, imprison, and kill. These are not, and never have been, justifiable acts by any government.

Looks like we tend to agree.

I also have a hard time believing that the chinese government was all that rightful, specially knowing how the socialist dictatorships used to deal with crowds.

I also believe in the cause of freedom all around the world (although i think each country is free to live in any way it wants).

I also think that the right ofthe students to protest was legitimate.

I also think that even if there were riots, they were likely to be the work of a few hellraisers and not the general group of students (even if it were, the right to protest against a opressor is a legitimate revolution; the opressors armed response is... opression)

Therefore, we have pratically the same opinion.

The only thing i disagree is that you raised doubts about the moral right of people who thinks that the government did right. After all, the defense of people's right to think whatever they wish is the botton line of both our points.

Let's not become what we have condemned:)

I'm not saying that people don't have the right to express those opinions. I'm just saying I think they're totally wrong, and their opinions are morally unjustifiable.

There are some people who have published books, gone on talk shows, and otherwise spoken out in public to claim that the Nazi Holocaust was a hoax. I support their right to say such things (i.e., I wouldn't try to censor them), but I also think that they are factually wrong and morally evil.

There's a difference between opposing someone's opinion and trying to suppress it. And the Chinese government stepped over that line on 6/4/89.