I was mainly remembering Critique of the Gotha Program, I think

Your position doesn't make sense. We know that testimony on atrocity propaganda is sometimes a complete fabrication:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony

So that is one of the things worth considering, but that hypothesis isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card and needs to be weighed against other factors like the variety of sources and people involved, their history and material interests, etc.

Yes, I am saying things need to be scrutinized instead of just taken at face value if they comport with our prejudices, I apologize if that takes the wind out of your sails, but blind faith won't lead you to good conclusions.

What did they say?

You're just question begging, it gives me very little to engage with.

Do you know what double-think is? Was the military killing armed insurrectionists, or was it all made up? Or were they standing their with tanks and watching the armed insurrectionists kill everyone?

You are underestimating me. There was no killing in the Square itself, but there was fighting all around the surrounding area. The Square was killed with the highest degree of violence being hitting some protestors with batons when they didn't disperse on the deadline after having many hours to comply.

My position is completely consistent.

and more than propaganda recordings from the Chinese government.

It was a documentary made by westerners! The people speaking were student leaders at the protest and all remain Chinese dissidents! What level of being a "friendly source" could even hypothetically meet your standard without agreeing with you? I can dig up literal internal memos from US political actors that were leaked and you would still call it Chinese propaganda!

I can dig it up for you if you'd like, though.

Are you implying that the soldiers with machineguns were ther ebecause Falun Gong members set themselves on fire? And not because

I'm saying there is a history of many violent incidents in connection with the Square and the government doesn't want to let more happen. You literally suggest they are there to wordlessly pressure people into what to think despite that same incident that lead to that conclusion having the opposite effect on you! It's a nonsensical psychodrama, not a cogent political observation.

No you’re right. People can have panic-based hallucinations when tanks open fire

As far as I know, the tanks never opened fire, it was all gunfire from the PLA side. It was an urban combat situation within Beijing (because it wasn't on the Square itself, but slightly more closed areas) so having the tanks fire seems like it would be excessively destructive and hazardous. Then again, I don't know.

And the first thing they’ll do is try to take photos of it. And no matter how hard you try, the photos come out eventually. Let me reiterate, photos of bodies crushed by tanks.

I think you might be thinking of some famous photos of what are clearly bikes strewn about and people taking cover.

I’ve seen photos of the massacre. I have heard witness testimonies that corroborate those photos, and witness testimonies that do not. I am aware of several governments (including my own) that have used false or intimidated witnesses to try to hide an atrocity. Why EXACTLY do you see me as “reaching for excuses”? Do you think I WANT any government to mass-murder its protestors?

I don't know your life, I can't say. You give the impression that you are a sensitive person who was traumatized and now you seek to affirm that trauma, but that's just my impression. Atrocity propaganda is very effective, turns out, and western powers are happy to give you as much morbid slop as you can stomach. If you've seen any photos of people killed on the Square, feel free to reproduce them.

At what point should I throw out every piece of evidence I’ve ever seen in my life and believe this? How would you prove to an outside observer that Tienanmen Denial is different from Holocaust Denial?

[Aside from that being a hysterical comparison] When you speak so strongly about the evidence and then don't produce it, you aren't really giving me a reason to believe you. If I wanted to persuade you on the Holocaust, I'd have plenty of photos that I could show you of mass graves, piles of shoes, piles of gold teeth and fillings, nail marks on the doors of the gas chambers, and notably virtually no one who was kept prisoner in the camps who denied that killing and brutality were taking place! It's not like we have people who were prisoners in Auschwitz saying "yeah, there were no gas chambers, no butchering, it was just a prison." Plenty of Holocaust Deniers say that, but none were prisoners of Auschwitz.

And yet, I can point you to people who were actually at the Square and say no one was killed on it, meanwhile other people who were already gone by that time talk about viscera being washed down gutters. In the video I showed you, two people were there to see it and one person wasn't, and you are literally defending the "witness testimony" of the person who wasn't there! Furthermore, she says in the hotel interview before the Incident that [in so many words] it was her plan to create atrocity propaganda in order to "wake the Chinese people up"! She explicitly wanted stories of bloodshed for the sake of her political goals, to the point of trying to deliberately endanger students who trust her for the sake of them being harmed! What makes you think she wouldn't lie when every fact about the situation also makes it impossible for her to be telling the truth?!

You seem to be projecting a lot of things that don't have a firm basis in external reality. Are the guys with machine guns there to intimidate tourists, or are they there because Tienanmen Square is right in front of the Chinese equivalent of the White House and several other important buildings that require high security? The incident (which, let us be clear, also involved armed insurrectionists with incendiaries and commandeered rifles) wasn't even the last major violent event in the area, as people did die actually in the Square some time later when Falun Gong members set themselves and a small girl on fire in protest of the group being banned!

The thought police you are imagining seem, if anything, to be a much better case for you being wrong. However you might feel intimidated in the moment, clearly once you left you understandably made a firm association between the Square and machine guns!

Furthermore, you're making silly excuses for liars. There were people who weren't even there for the supposed massacre (see the video) who were accounting very peculiar events in lurid detail, like tanks running over inhabited tents and then mulching them and such. Do you think some scared college student is going to have an anxiety-based hallucination that causes them to think they were places they weren't and saw things that have probably never happened anywhere? When does that happen besides severe schizophrenics and children who aren't processing that they just had a nightmare?

It seems to me that you are reaching for excuses, especially since you are disregarding the numerous witness, both domestic and foreign visitors, who all saw that there was no massacre in the Square as the media hysterically portrayed. Leaked state documents over the years (from ambassadors and such) only affirm this further. I can look up some if you like.

Your comment got removed before I saw it. If you'd like to give it another shot, I guess maybe check the modlog to see what rule you broke and reword it a little.

The beliefs of Marxism / Leninism . . . or any of their offshoots (i.e communism / socialism)

I suppose it's just a matter of syntax, but I first read this as a very silly statement wherein "communism" is an offshoot of "Marxism / Leninism".

Anyway, don't worry, I'm familiar with the "real Marxism has never been tried!" line that some people have for various reasons, but I a) can't see how this is particularly useful as a distinction compared to other states and b) don't think this remotely answers my question.

I think you and I both know why the so-called marxists who say "real Marxism has never been tried" exist, or at least our beliefs on the matter are a close enough parallel that it's not a very enticing discussion, but what you have failed to do is explain the basic prompt of why a westerner would support a state like China.

I can give an internally-consistent answer for these groups and yourself coming to their beliefs: You all live to varying degrees in a bubble of western Discourse and pseudo-historical mythmaking.

The "never been tried" Marxist believes everything the State Department says about its enemies but still believes in some sort of ever-failing communism like a good little Trot because they are, for the time being and in part motivated by their social position, appalled by what capitalism has wrought even in the imperial core and want something better even if they struggle to conceive what that could be in practical terms, since every success of socialism has been transmuted into an ultimate failure. Nonetheless, "there must be an alternative," and that possibility, however hazy, is worth fighting for over the corrupt establishment.

The liberal believes everything the State Department says about its enemies and comes to the reasonable conclusion (if we assume the State Department is honest) that socialism has failed its many chances and therefore "there is no alternative". They are more likely to have a higher social position than the previous group because it is much easier to say capitalism works when it works for you.

The "tankie" is typically the worst off of the three groups in social position, with long term prospects that look pretty grim, and this has pushed them into a desperation to find a way to improve their prospects since they can't afford a hazy future and communalist circle-jerking but the invisible hand of the free market would crush them even faster, so they do something that these other groups are not driven to, which is some level of serious research, and by this means they were able to accept that the State Department lies as often as it speaks and that they have been born into the slightly unnerving position of being nestled in the imperial core as the empire runs roughshod over as much of the world as it can. Whether they simply concluded that states like Russia or Iran were plainly the lesser of two evils for their opposition to NATO, or they found a more extreme position like genuinely believing in the project of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, they were able to develop a framework that gives them a path forward where previously they felt they had none.

Of course, various biographical details can also be vitally important, like being the descendant of defectors vs generic diaspora, or knowing people who are. I'm white as the driven snow, but I know Chinese people from both groups. The "tankie" one didn't persuade me on very much (though I learned a lot about the Korean War and various elements of the 20th century PRC) but the diaspora descendant taught me things that I still am trying to process, because they made genuinely ridiculous claims (e.g. Mao burning down libraries during the Civil War) that I have not been able to find repeated by even the most ridiculous anti-PRC rag when I search online. There's a bizarre sort of cult to intergenerational trauma that seems to emerge where stories are embellished and exaggerated over time (deliberately or not) and the truth of these stories cannot be questioned because, in so many words, "it's their truth."

I meant it when I said I'm still processing it, because to me it's in many respects a bizarre behavior even though it's actually not that hard to explain sociologically (view it like religious trauma and it's trivially simple). I think there is more to learn from it, but I couldn't tell you what.

This is a terrible way of persuading people. Better to not respond at all than to say something like this.

Pardon me, I thought you were responding to a different comment (I was replying in my inbox to many different disputes). Seeing the actual context, this is ridiculous. You accuse me of being a paid actor and then say that you have no reason to present evidence of the accusation?

Let us imagine that I was a paid actor and would behave exactly as you expect. Aren't there other people reading the conversation? Wouldn't it be worth proving to them that you aren't just going on paranoid rants because your ideology has no way to deal with the concept of westerners freely disagreeing with you on these issues?

You can visit North Korea and never see their work camps either.

Firstly, there is much more restriction on tourist movement in the DPRK for a litany of reasons, mostly pertaining to national security. Tourists in Xinjiang can move pretty freely, though if they are going all over the place they will cumulatively need to pass through many checkpoints.

Secondly, "work camps" here is what people call prison labor in Bad Country. The DPRK has prisons, certainly, and we can have discussions about penal labor, but it's much less notable than people pretend and much less secretive as well.

Thirdly, "work camps" are not remotely comparable to committing genocide against one tenth of the entire population of the region, which is the claim that was popularly made against Xinjiang before it got walked back to "cultural genocide".

Such fierce condescension and yet you're the one pushing a children's story. All these hundreds and thousands of representatives, all the millions of Party members, are just puppets under the Bad Guy's control. There was no violence to install him, the existing government put him there (since I assume you don't endorse Chinese elections) and then he played an Uno Reverse and now they are all an extension of him, with all of Chinese politics then becoming merely being a matter of how much people chaff under the collars and fetters he fixes to them. When politicians fight each other? When journalists fire back and forth in the papers? When policy goes one way and then pivots? It's all just a Potemkin Village with a few hundred million people as the staff.

So no, "someone like me" cannot understand how such a thing could exist outside of a children's cartoon or a similar sort of story told to an audience that is very much suspending its disbelief.

And yet surely these people must have a reason to believe it, don't they? Even if one assumes they are wrong, this doesn't just come from nowhere, it must have some cause to seem reasonable to them, right? They are like you, thinking human beings, and no progress can be made in understanding the disagreement if you start from them being, in so many words, intellectually inferior to you.

There are literally pictures of bloodshed.

Not in the Square itself, which was the scene of many absurd claims by defectors, like the "tanks crushing people to wash them down the gutters" cartoon bullshit.

Here are interviews with some of the leaders of the protest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu3zmbFGwQA

You say this and yet, what videos? How many have you actually watched vs assumed were there vs read the headline? I've seen a bunch of photos and videos and all of them were either hoaxes (calling normal buildings camps), ridiculous misunderstandings (like saying the screeching of brakes was screaming victims), or gross misrepresentations (e.g. normal prison transfers being a slate of new genocide victims). But if you just skim through what just so happens to trend on Reddit, you'll see atrocity after atrocity and not stick around long enough to see the retraction, or the people in the comments debunking it, and so on.

There's a reason neoliberal outlets walked their claims back to "cultural genocide" over time, because there was nothing there except the testimony of like three people from a region of 15 million.

That claim is mutually exclusive with Taiwan being "its own nation" distinct from China. It is definitionally its own government, but it claims to be a superset of the nation of China (because of also claiming Mongolia and some smaller territories). Nations are a social construct based on historical group identities, so the PRC is the same nation as the ROC was back when the ROC controlled the mainland. The ROC claims to still be that nation (plus Mongolia) which the PRC currently administers.

There's no substance to this, you have no evidence and merely impugn my character.

Of having hysterical bullshit invented about them? True enough. Quick, does every man in North Korea need to have Kim's haircut or is no one allowed to have it?

Mostly they got banned wherever they congregated on Reddit. Not knowing they existed seems like a significant oversight, but to be expected with the way that China is depicted to you.

They just want to remove your agency by calling you brainwashed

Unlike when the liberals in this very thread accuse people of being brainwashed or paid shills, because then it is righteous!

do the sealion “source” thing,

lmao what dastardly trolls they are to care about sourcing

and then ad hominem away any sources you do provide.

Like you'd ever accept People's Daily or whatever. The "tankies" need to mostly rely on liberal outlets because you will discard reporting out of China (etc.) out of hand.

the world deserves a better class of communist.

If we had a better class of communist, you'd hate them too because you'd believe everything you're told about them, just like you do with the existing breeds.