First of all thanks for the reading list, I will read it just to spite you (and certainly not becuase I was already this close to asking you for one already). Alternatively you may believe you are a reverse psychology mastermanipulator.

Initially the rest of this comment was a rant about how bad faith the comments of this community constantly are, but I realized this line will do just fine.

Okay so this is where we will obviously disagree, but I don’t believe those protesters were violent (the chinese ones not the fucking jan6thers - although look at those guys they stormed the capitol, assulted officers and they still all got a due process and all what a weird thing). Surely that’s becuase I have fallen for western propaganda but by that logic you have fallen for chinese propaganda, so discussion basically ends here.

Okay so for one I didn’t say there was propaganda, I said did the user with the china flag pfp plead ignorance, it would have verified that they fell for some kind of propaganda - namely some campaign aimed at restricting knowledge about the incident.

Second, to say it was not an extrajudicial mass killing, you would have to believe one or more of the following:

• A court with sufficient authority ordered the killing of protesters - I don’t know much about the chinese legal system but I doubt such a court exists.
• A law permitting such action was in place.
• There was no mass killing.

The first two may be true (I don’t know if they are) but if so, then it’s probably not something you should support. The last one is not true, even the CCP doesn’t deny there were at least 200 dead.

I mean you can symphatize or not symphatize with the protesters’ cause, but there is not really a situation in which what happened to the unluckiest of them is acceptable. Sure if they break the law apprehend them and put them in front of a judge (this exact solution is what I hinted at by using the term “extrajudicial” btw). 200+ (but more like 0+) protesters dead on the spot is not really justifiable under any system.

I love how when Tiananmen square gets brought up they either had to plead ignorance, which would mean the propaganda has successfully prevented them from learining about it, or they could just endorse the extrajudicial mass killing of protesters and then somehow present that as a sane viewpoint.

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify.

It’s an anomaly in the sense that it was present in high gear for around 70 years in the 20th century and most people (who are likely to read wikipedia) probably don’t live in it right now. That’s my one and only reason for calling it that.

My previous comment was very cynical, but when you think about it communism is the historical anomaly. Sure you can point to the Mass killings wikipedia page, but you can also do that with other topics and they also are separated into “XY under communism” and “XY” articles. XY could be stuff like “Economy”, “Urban development”, “Housing” or “Worker’s rights”. It’s just a convention wikipedia seems to adhere to.

That’s probably because most mass killings under capitalist regimes are just generally called “mass killings”. They are your regular, run of the mill mass killings that aren’t really newsworthy and that we are accustomed to.