Should We Support The Tiananmen Square Protest?

[The Vegan Marxist]

The reason I'm asking this is because for simple reasons. Let's first understand that of course China started supporting the U.S. over diplomatic reasons, along with others, & that they became quite hostile against such Communist forces such as the Soviet Union & Vietnam. But, despite the fact that China is very much capitalist, they still have socialistic programs being run over there, which really puts in a lot of tension still to the U.S. & their allies. We can see this when, in 1989, the U.S. turned on China by supporting the Tiananmen Square student demonstrations. This became an open attempt to overthrow the Chinese state.

Despite what your feelings were on the incident, there were repeated attempts at a peaceful resolution, but then the Chinese army was forced to break up the student demonstrations, which then became very violent by the students, & of course became supported within its leadership by the CIA. Yes, hundreds of people were killed in the showdown, though half or more of them were government soldiers & police.

By this time, the U.S. media had, of course, launched a fierce attack against them after China had suppressed the counterrevolutionary attempt, in which such claims such as "tens of thousands of students being massacred" were made. So, I'm here to ask, should we really support this, of course, brave attempt by the students to overthrow China, which if they had succeeded then the U.S. would've taken over with full force, or should we see this as a counterrevolutionary attempt through backed U.S. imperialist forces?

[Nolan]

Absolutely. Most of the protesters were pro-socialism but wanted democratic reform. Of course, the western media spun that to mean pro-western "democracy." It was largely a worker's protest against an increasingly reformist, totalitarian regime.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Absolutely. Most of the protesters were pro-socialism but wanted democratic reform. Of course, the western media spun that to mean pro-western "democracy." It was largely a worker's protest against an increasingly reformist, totalitarian regime.

I agree to an extent, but if the Chinese regime was to have been toppled by the protesters, wouldn't this have allowed for U.S. forces to then take control & form a coup, given to how vulnerable China would've been?

[Kassad]

I really don't have much time to post an elaborate comment and I am going out of town tomorrow, but in short, no. Unless the current Chinese government is overthrown by revolutionary socialist forces, it will inevitably lead to imperialist intervention, destruction and a loss of all the massive gains of the Chinese Revolution. The Tiananmen protestors in 1989 were predominantly students, and despite some workers that took part, it was not a proletarian movement by any means.

Until I can give a deeper response, check out some of these links.

'Tiananmen Square and the threat of counterrevolution'
http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=12203&news_iv_ctrl=1040

'PSL response to ISO on China and Tiananmen'
http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=12341&news_iv_ctrl=1261

The second article is very key in observing a true anti-imperialist position against a liberal, anti-communist perspective. I'll be sure to post something more elaborate upon my return.

[Kléber]

But, despite the fact that China is very much capitalist, they still have socialistic programs being run over there, which really puts in a lot of tension still to the U.S. & their allies.
Actually, the capitalist reforms of the 1980's led to immense differentiation between rich and poor, while there was massive corruption, and no democratic channels for redress. That is what led students and workers to protest economic and political conditions in the streets in 1989. Many of them were carrying banners of Mao Zedong and singing the Internationale.


We can see this when, in 1989, the U.S. turned on China by supporting the Tiananmen Square student demonstrations.
The US was in no way responsible for the pro-democracy student movement. Those are the lies of the capitalist Chinese government, which pretends there are no social contradictions within China, so therefore any protest must be the work of the CIA.


should we really support this, of course, brave attempt by the students to overthrow China
Since when did the students want to "overthrow China?" They described themselves as a patriotic movement that wanted to "save China" in the spirit of the May Fourth Movement.


This became an open attempt to overthrow the Chinese state.
Who wanted to overthrow the Chinese state? Nobody at Tiananmen was talking about that.


the Chinese army was forced to break up the student demonstrations, which then became very violent by the students, & of course became supported within its leadership by the CIA.
The police played almost no role, they practically disappeared during the protests. Chinese joked that after the police fled the streets, traffic became more orderly than ever. Some people have even suggested that the police sympathized with the movement and many of them were in plain clothes setting up the barricades to try and stop the army.

Actually very few of the students died. Most of the people engaged in "violence" against the army were workers, often unemployed people angry about the corruption and "reforms," who set up barricadesin the districts leading up to the square because they sympathized with the protesters and wanted to protect them, so they threw rocks and molotov cocktails at the approaching soldiers.


Yes, hundreds of people were killed in the showdown, though half or more of them were government soldiers & police.
There is no way the people on the barricades killed more with their rocks and improvised explosives than the army did with tanks and machine guns.


I agree to an extent, but if the Chinese regime was to have been toppled by the protesters, wouldn't this have allowed for U.S. forces to then take control & form a coup, given to how vulnerable China would've been?
The Chinese regime at the time was pro-US. So are you saying it would be bad to overthrow a pro-US regime because the chaos might allow for another pro-US regime to be installed?


should we see this as a counterrevolutionary attempt through backed U.S. imperialist forces?
There was a lot of political confusion among the protesters, but you can't blame them, it's the fault of censorship for keeping them ignorant. Their demands for democracy, better living conditions and an end to corruption were entirely progressive.

Please watch this (pro-Maoist) documentary to get a different perspective on the protests. As you can see in the footage, even some soldiers left their units and came out to support it.
The Gate of Heavenly Peace (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7ou2-Kv4UA) (Part 1 of 20)


Unless the current Chinese government is overthrown by revolutionary socialist forces, it will inevitably lead to imperialist intervention, destruction and a loss of all the massive gains of the Chinese Revolution.
But unless there is democracy for the workers, no revolutionary socialist forces will be allowed to form into a party under that military dictatorship, and thus the capitalist government will slowly dismantle what little remains of the revolutionary gains until there is nothing left.


The Tiananmen protestors in 1989 were predominantly students, and despite some workers that took part, it was not a proletarian movement by any means.
Actually, the government decided to intervene when workers got involved and took part in a mass march through Beijing. The protests were transitioning into a mass proletarian movement, and almost certainly were crushed in order to prevent such a formation.

China is not an oppressed country anymore, it is a leading imperialist power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Cooperation_Organisation). The Leninist theory of revolutionary defeatism applies.

[FreeFocus]

Plenty of states have "socialistic" programs. The UK has the NHS. Canada has universal health care. Most states have public schooling, many even support students up through college. Merely having "socialistic programs" doesn't make for socialism, and China is a capitalist, imperialist state. It should absolutely be resisted internally and externally. The Chinese state is extremely repressive.

[red cat]

These are the points that I agree with:


Plenty of states have "socialistic" programs. The UK has the NHS. Canada has universal health care. Most states have public schooling, many even support students up through college. Merely having "socialistic programs" doesn't make for socialism, and China is a capitalist, imperialist state. It should absolutely be resisted internally and externally. The Chinese state is extremely repressive.



Actually, the capitalist reforms of the 1980's led to immense differentiation between rich and poor, while there was massive corruption, and no democratic channels for redress. That is what led students and workers to protest economic and political conditions in the streets in 1989. Many of them were carrying banners of Mao Zedong and singing the Internationale



China is not an oppressed country anymore, it is a leading imperialist power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Cooperation_Organisation). The Leninist theory of revolutionary defeatism applies.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Actually, the capitalist reforms of the 1980's led to immense differentiation between rich and poor, while there was massive corruption, and no democratic channels for redress. That is what led students and workers to protest economic and political conditions in the streets in 1989. Many of them were carrying banners of Mao Zedong and singing the Internationale.


The US was in no way responsible for the pro-democracy student movement. Those are the lies of the capitalist Chinese government, which pretends there are no social contradictions within China, so therefore any protest must be the work of the CIA.


Since when did the students want to "overthrow China?" They described themselves as a patriotic movement that wanted to "save China" in the spirit of the May Fourth Movement.


Who wanted to overthrow the Chinese state? Nobody at Tiananmen was talking about that.


The police played almost no role, they practically disappeared during the protests. Chinese joked that after the police fled the streets, traffic became more orderly than ever. Some people have even suggested that the police sympathized with the movement and many of them were in plain clothes setting up the barricades to try and stop the army.

Actually very few of the students died. Most of the people engaged in "violence" against the army were workers, often unemployed people angry about the corruption and "reforms," who set up barricadesin the districts leading up to the square because they sympathized with the protesters and wanted to protect them, so they threw rocks and molotov cocktails at the approaching soldiers.


There is no way the people on the barricades killed more with their rocks and improvised explosives than the army did with tanks and machine guns.


The Chinese regime at the time was pro-US. So are you saying it would be bad to overthrow a pro-US regime because the chaos might allow for another pro-US regime to be installed?


There was a lot of political confusion among the protesters, but you can't blame them, it's the fault of censorship for keeping them ignorant. Their demands for democracy, better living conditions and an end to corruption were entirely progressive.

Please watch this (pro-Maoist) documentary to get a different perspective on the protests. As you can see in the footage, even some soldiers left their units and came out to support it.
The Gate of Heavenly Peace (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7ou2-Kv4UA) (Part 1 of 20)


But unless there is democracy for the workers, no revolutionary socialist forces will be allowed to form into a party under that military dictatorship, and thus the capitalist government will slowly dismantle what little remains of the revolutionary gains until there is nothing left.


Actually, the government decided to intervene when workers got involved and took part in a mass march through Beijing. The protests were transitioning into a mass proletarian movement, and almost certainly were crushed in order to prevent such a formation.

China is not an oppressed country anymore, it is a leading imperialist power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Cooperation_Organisation). The Leninist theory of revolutionary defeatism applies.

Is there a copy of the documentary where the entire thing has english subtitles?

[What Would Durruti Do?]

I'm bumping this to ask for sources on the socialist character of the protests if anyone has any. A friend of mine wanted more information on the subject.

[Coggeh]

I'm bumping this to ask for sources on the socialist character of the protests if anyone has any. A friend of mine wanted more information on the subject.
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/7402

[RedStarOverChina]

No, the protests weren't "pro-socialist". It was neither a socialist movement nor a "democratic" movement. It was in essence, a patriotic movement.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/gate-heavenly-peace-t129886/index.html

The students argued some progressive changes as well as capitalist reforms. My position is that I sympathize with the student (for being shot at), but I don't support their position.

[Coggeh]

They were a confused generation back then. Most of them were nationalist and emotionally pro-socialist. They were anti-corruption, but were also very much influenced by American propaganda broadcasts.

Seriously ? straight from Bejing ?

[RedStarOverChina]

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/7402
I read that article, and to be honest, it didn't make much sense overall.


In true bureaucratic style, Deng Xiaoping, Li Peng, and their henchmen are denouncing their opponents as 'counter-revolutionaries'. Strange counter-revolutionaries who sung the Internationale as the tanks tore into them on Tiananmen Square!They sang the Internationale not because they were socialists, but because that's the song everyone listened to growing up!


The hardliners are reviving the Stalinist language of the so-called Cultural Revolution, during which Deng himself was denounced as a counter-revolutionary and purged by the Maoist faction.Actually, the hardliners accused the students of reviving Cultural Revolution's populist "movements", and genuinely feared the return of another Cultural Revolution.

That, to this day, remains the central justification for the crack-down---To avoid a rerun of the Cultural Revolution.

[RedStarOverChina]

Seriously ? straight from Bejing ?
Every young person listened to Voice of America back then. That was their thing, along with guitar and rock music.

[Coggeh]

I read that article, and to be honest, it didn't make much sense overall.

They sang the Internationale not because they were socialists, but because that's the song everyone listened to growing up!
I'm sure hundreds of thousands of people couldn't think of one other song .



Actually, the hardliners accused the students of reviving Cultural Revolution's populist "movements", and genuinely feared the return of another Cultural Revolution.

That, to this day, remains the central justification for the crack-down---To avoid a rerun of the Cultural Revolution.
Central justification by whom ? im not sure what your getting at .

[RedStarOverChina]

I'm sure hundreds of thousands of people couldn't think of one other song .
I asked one of the top dissidents myself. Trust me, they weren't thinking of Socialism.


Central justification by whom ? im not sure what your getting at .The government and its supporters justifies the massacre this way.

[Glenn Beck]

Sure, let me get my time machine and we'll go support the fuck out of it

[Nolan]

They wanted capitalist reforms? That's what they were getting.

[RedStarOverChina]

They weren't really thinking of socialism when they sang the Internationale. Everyone in China used to sing it, so it was for them, an unifying rallying song rather than a socialist song.

I've had some good conversations with one of former the leaders of the students, Orkesh Dolet, now living in exile in Taiwan. He famously said in 1989 that they wanted a China in which young people could wear Nike shoes. He clearly was not aware that what he was proposing (and what indeed, happened) would bring in Nike sweatshops as well.

They were a confused generation back then. Most of them were nationalist and emotionally pro-socialist. They were anti-corruption, but were also very much influenced by American propaganda broadcasts.
```

[What Would Durruti Do?]

They wanted capitalist reforms? That's what they were getting.

the more I read the more I think these protesters were just highly confused. Can't really blame them when they lived in an authoritarian regime but still enjoy all the great stuff American media/propaganda had to offer.

[Saorsa]

http://revcom.us/a/china/tienamen.htm

Yes, we should support the protests. The Chinese people will not tolerate the counter-revolution forever, and whatever the Marcyites of the PSL etc claim, the counter-revolution has already taken place. China today is a capitalist hell hole, and we support the people's right to rebel. The protests were not explicitly calling for a new socialist revolution, nor were they led by a Marxist organisation... but it's ridiculous to claim that most of the people there were pro-capitalist. The protests were, if anything, triggered by the capitalist reforms of the Chinese govt.

http://revcom.us/i/china/tianm4.jpg
ANTI-GOVERNMENT REBELS IN TIANANMEN SQUARE, 1989. THE MAN AT LEFT IS HOLDING THE RED BOOK OF QUOTATIONS FROM CHAIRMAN MAO TSETUNG

http://revcom.us/i/china/tianm9.jpg
Workers join students at Tiananmen Square. Their banner reads, "We have come!"

[Sam_b]

There is also an article from Socialist Worker that some might find interesting:
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=18040

[RedStarOverChina]

http://revcom.us/a/china/tienamen.htm

Yes, we should support the protests. The Chinese people will not tolerate the counter-revolution forever, and whatever the Marcyites of the PSL etc claim, the counter-revolution has already taken place. China today is a capitalist hell hole, and we support the people's right to rebel. The protests were not explicitly calling for a new socialist revolution, nor were they led by a Marxist organisation... but it's ridiculous to claim that most of the people there were pro-capitalist. The protests were, if anything, triggered by the capitalist reforms of the Chinese govt.

http://revcom.us/i/china/tianm4.jpg
ANTI-GOVERNMENT REBELS IN TIANANMEN SQUARE, 1989. THE MAN AT LEFT IS HOLDING THE RED BOOK OF QUOTATIONS FROM CHAIRMAN MAO TSETUNG

http://revcom.us/i/china/tianm9.jpg
Workers join students at Tiananmen Square. Their banner reads, "We have come!"Even in anti-government protests today, protesters will show up with Mao's picture for protection. More than anything, it's their way of showing off their patriotic credentials.

Yes, the students invoked Mao's image as a powerful symbol against corruption. But they have also repeatedly showed their support for Deng's economic reforms.

In 88' Zhao Ziyang's (Deng's second in command, leader of the reformist faction) economic reforms bottlenecked, causing high inflation and various social problems. That and Zhao Ziyang's failure to deal with corruption led to the protests.

The students and workers were fed up with the injustices that came with the reform, but still saw reform as the right path.

There's no other accurate way to classify their movement other than calling it a patriotic movement.

Both the Western media and Western leftists are trying to label Tian'an'men on their own terms.

But both are highly problematic as they both ignore or fail to understand the social and historic background upon which the protests originated. People seems to have decided that it's "either a leftist movement or a democratic movement". But it's not like that. In fact, the very definition of "left" in China has always been different than elsewhere.

[CartCollector]

What do "patriotism" and "the left" mean in China then, RedStarOverChina?

[RedStarOverChina]

The left in China has traditionally been associated with patriotism. The May 4th Movement which gave birth to the Communist Party was a patriotic youth movement not unlike the one in 89'.

Being a leftist in China has strong correlations with having a sense of "national emergency", the idea that China is, once again, under siege. They hold the idea that China is either besieged by foreign aggressors or corrupt, dictatorial officials---in the May 4th movement, as well as among today's "New Left", it's a combination of both.

In 89', it was more of the latter. Students expressed the belief that corrupt officials' mishandling of the situation was leading to the destruction of China. That was explicitly their primary concern, though inflation, economic hardship and the lack of press freedom certainly inflamed it.

When that kind of "leftist patriotism" gets mixed with the students' confused economic "agenda" (as far as there is one) makes the picture even murkier for foreigners to conceive.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Of course we should support it. They wanted Socialism and recognised China was moving further away from this. They sang the Internationale may I add.

[trying2]

this statement may appear to be ignorant... but the way that I view this situation is as follows.. it appears quite simple to me.. the establishment crushed and killed people who were protesting them.. there for I tend to favor the vast majority who were protesting those in power.. no matter what their cause was.. that many people out, giving a damn about what is going on in their country.. I mean come on..