• We are discussing so-called “Communists” on this platform. You and I both know this place is crawling with history denialists (particularly the events of June 1989). Any “ideology” that is more concerned about preserving the image of the state over accepting responsibility is not an ideology worth my or anybody else’s time. It’s insulting and little and pathetic.

        I’m interested in the merits of communism, but all this platform does is re-hash the same state approved talking points over and over. It’s tiring and isn’t winning anybody with an ounce of morality over.

        • Cowbee [he/they] ( Cowbee@lemmy.ml ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I don’t agree with the idea that “this place is crawling with history denialists.” What it is “crawling” with are people that combat the westernized, atrocity propaganda version of June 4th, 1989, instead contextualizing it with what’s actually confirmed. For example, western myth-making talks about tanks running over everyone on the square, resulting in 10,000 killed, but what actually happened is that dispersal of the square was peaceful, but on the way to the square hundreds of rioters and PLA members died in fighting around Beijing. This isn’t “denialism,” but instead deflecting western atrocity propaganda.

          We do accept responsibility, and aren’t interested in lying, but when we know that the character of events is quantitatively and qualitatively different from the version western anti-communists beat us over the head with, we are forced to confront them honestly. What’s insulting and little and pathetic isn’t the communists combatting misinformation, but the anti-communists less interested in truth and more interested in wielding whatever convenient narrative they can like a club.

          One thing that’s important is that when we talk about communism, honestly judging its merits and flaws, people come to communism. I made an intro ML reading list, as an example, that others seem to like. Also, around the world, communist orgs are growing in membership.

          The point of this all is that you’ve done no real effort to explain how we falsify history, you’ve vaguely asserted it while belittling our efforts. Your citation is that “you and I know this,” which isn’t a source, nor is it accurate, yet you’re using this narrative like a club to try to shut me down, regardless of the truth of the matter. It’s thought-terminating.