You must log in or # to comment.
The hawaiian state had banned teaching hawaiian until the 90s
Hawaii has been occupied since the late 1800s
They only recently started teaching in schools that the overthrow even happened
The native Hawaiian military was oppressed so harshly, martial arts in general were declared illegal in Hawaii. The locals worked around it by disguising the basics of their military arts as dance. You might have heard of the hula…
deleted by creator
https://olohe.global/luahistory.html
It’s a bit more complex than I thought. Lua practitioners are expected to know how to hula before they learn any destructive arts. Any male hula dancer you see has a decent chance of also being a hardass martial artist.
shitlibs love posting that picture of the guy standing in front of the tank, as some kind of own, when if that happened in the US the cops would have gleefully run him over and then been made into a celebrity for it
Death to America
Jeff Widener, an American photographer with the Associated Press, won a pulitzer prize for that photo, precisely because it was a still image. He also took a video, but the video tends not to be shown, because it reveals that the man wasn’t run over. Then you have the fact that all the US press corps showed up right as the protests took off, a lot of dark money from NGOs and western think tanks was floating around, and then deliberate conflation of the worker riots (in which PLA troops were lynched outside the square) being confused with the mostly peaceful events inside the square. Then you have that interview with the protest leader where she was crying and basically saying she was trying to provoke a massacre so that the protesters could be seen as martyrs. She got her wish, even if the massacres didn’t actually occur, since that’s how the west depicts those events. Then there the highly suspicious fact that nobody talks about the fact that you had many different types of protester simultaneously. Some were opposed to liberal reforms, privatization, etc, (the workers rioting outside the square) while other protesters wanted more of that stuff (the student protesters inside the square). Then you have some racist elements mixed in with the student protests I’ve heard, i.e. that there were some Chinese who were protesting because they didn’t like the presence of African exchange students at their universities. I don’t know how true that is, but I’ve heard it a few times.
Agitprop repost from the massive china thread done two months or so ago:
- wikileaks published a private diplomatic cable stating that no one was killed in the square itself, although a smaller number of people did die in clashes elsewhere in Beijing, consistent with China’s own official account. (Here’s a Telegraph article on the cables).
- a spanish film crew was in the square all night and filmed people peacefully leaving the square in the early morning, singing the Internationale, here’s footage of a Hong Kong news report that includes the spanish film crew footage, which never appears in western reporting).
- one of the main organizers of the protest, Hou Dejian, states that no one died in the square and calls out other organizers for lying I Interview where Hou Dejian, a Taiwanese national and one of the leaders of the Tiananmen protests, says he was in the square all night and saw no one killed here is a twitter thread covering testimony by various organizers, including Hou Dejian).
- Numerous western media sources have stated that no massacre occurred in the square. (This article links to multiple western sources, including James Miles, attesting that no one died in the square.).
- various western massacre reports cite wildly different death figures, usually with little or no justification for the number.
- An attempt to collect all the names of the massacre victims ended early when they only found 155.
- CIA and NED goons were known to be present in Beijing and involved in the protests. (Here is an article from the Vancouver Sun in 1992, showing western intelligence involvement was known in the west decades ago).
- during most of the protest, protesters were calling for a return to stricter communism, not for liberal market reforms. These were Marxists. Their signs showed Marxist figures and slogans. (This article shows some images of the protesters displaying Marxist slogans and iconography and discusses it a bit — careful linking this site though, some of the articles are pretty dumb).
- tank man: the tanks in the video are leaving the square (you can see this in the uncropped footage) and it is broad daylight, whereas the main violence occurred at night.
- the first violence was against troops, not civilians. On June 2, 1989, two days before the June 4 incident when the main violence occurred, multiple unarmed Chinese troops were burned alive and their corpses hung from nooses in public. ((CW: gore) here is a thread of photos showing dead and wounded troops, some being rescued by civilians. Multiple men were burned to death, others were beaten. Some protesters stole guns from the army and can be seen brandishing them.).
- the violence against troops was uncharacteristic of the previous tone of interactions between troops and protesters in the preceding weeks. Troops and protesters had peacefully coexisted, singing songs and sharing food together. (Here’s an article that goes into it a bit)
somebody actually did splice together the video when the Chinese tank goes around the guy, and the footage on the other side is from the BLM protests when a cop car just drives into the crowd
“Han Chinese are racial chauvinists” /r/politics libs, probably
And the comments would say: He sHoUlD hAVe JuSt CoMpLiEd
sTuPiD gAmEs StUpId PrIzEs
The tank man image is relevant not because of the tanks but because of the dude. He stood up and made the whole line of tanks stop (momentarily). That’s the kind of energy i like in my protesters.
You’re 100% correct the cops in the US would probably just plow into him, though. Hell, they’d swerve to hit him.
momentarily
no, for several minutes: https://nitter.cz/fedurante/status/1533099332496502786
he even climbs onto the tank, the tanks only keep going after other civilians remove him from the way
Also here in the UK a large majority believe that “Empire” was a nice pleasant good thing that did nothing but good to the countries we merely ’looked after’.
We call the ones that haven’t fully told us to ‘fuck off’ the ‘Commonwealth’ and hold lots of PR events like Olympic-esque games and ‘rich monarch waves at people who’s country has a GDP less than their hat largely because we stole all their resources before they could use them to develop’ tours.
Jesus Christ, do not ever tell an English person that you think Winston Churchill was a monster. Worst mistake of my life. You’d swear I’d shat on his mum’s grave.
The guy who famine’d million of indians? Who wanted to use chemical weapons to put down rebellions in Africa?
There’s been a concerted effort to paint him as a heroic figure so that the blitz can be used as a rallying point for British nationalism.
The Welsh curriculum at least taught me about the time he sent the military in to gun down striking miners in Tonypandy. I don’t think the English education system teaches children about any of the shit he did.
The end result is he’s almost become a secular saint for some English.
I remember that old black and white footage of queen whoeverthefuck (victoria?) tossing little pieces of food to the ground for african toddlers to scramble for in the exact same way you or I would feed pigeons in the park.
“Uyghur people are being GENOCIDED simply for their culture of having knifes to demonstrate their manliness (which the CIA used to agitate for terrorist attacks)”
vs
“actually US settlers were right to kill natives because they were scary and had sharp obsidian knives” :scared:
On US education I remember in 8th grade the one thing I learned about Marx was one paragraph and was basically just “he wrote the Communist Manifesto and believed that history was a cycle of conflicts between classes.” And I was just like “Well what is communism? Isn’t that going to be important going forward?” I guess it wasn’t and I never learned what Communism/Socialism actually is or what the USSR did beyond “be authoritarian” until I was an adult.You probably didn’t actually learn what capitalism is either until later, given that Marx is the most comprehensive breakdown of how capitalism functions, so much so that even the economics courses at universities use Marx for that part.
The intentional avoidance of teaching how the system works is essential to making sure people don’t question it. You don’t want your workers knowing how it works, merely accepting it. Understanding how it works is reserved for the ruling class.
I remember I took economics 101 in college. The professor was explaining how growth is required for capitalism. Even as clueless I was back then, I raised my hand and said well nothing can keep growing forever, what happens then? He told me that would be a long time from now and to not worry about it.
I tended to have communism/socialism condescendingly poopooed as “well-meaning” but “never really working because human nature”.
Anyways, time to learn about the french revolution and the reign of terror, which in no way should be viewed as an indictment of liberal revolutions the way the red terror does for socialism.
I remember almost my exact words when I was in high school “communism has a lot of valid criticisms about capitalism but their solutions didn’t work”
I’m convinced all the people saying that America doesn’t teach what happens to the Indians (besides the first Thanksgiving) stopped paying attention in history class after elementary school.
deleted by creator
Yeah, my education didn’t cover who taught whom about corn. It definitely covered reservations and forced marches and murder and sickness. Maybe we can cover all of that in a couple of weeks and forget how much time it took and what was covered?
“this wasn’t my experience, so it didn’t happen”
or you could listen to the people telling you otherwise, but why do that?
My education I got in Ohio was abysmal about this shit. Most of it was just review after elementary. And I say that as someone who would read the textbooks cover to cover.
A people’s history of the US was probably pivotal for me properly turning left, didn’t find it until well afterwards though.
I didn’t even learn about Fred Hampton till I was in my thirties and it was from the Chapo Trap House subreddit
deleted by creator
MOVE bombings, what MOVE bombings? That’s not part of the history curriculum.
US PUBLIC EDUCATION HISTORY CLASS: And today kids, we are going to learn about all of the native indians, the Southwest Indians, the plains indians, AND the forrest indians. Are you excited to learn about all the indians that were here, kids?
“Adobe!”
-Me in fourth grade, demonstrating complete mastery over the curriculum
gold star placed next to your name on the poster of all the kids in the class
I just read to my parents about the Haymarket tragedy and the origins of Mayday, and how the United States freaked out that people all over the world began recognizing that day and in order to cut it off in the US they made May 1st loyalty day and used red scare shit to make sure nobody would demonstrate or do anything on May 1st here lol. They had never heard of any of it.
How is that they never post pictures of the students killed on Kent State
Except very little really did happen in Tiananmen Square, so it’s not really equivalent.
Tulsa What? Kent State Who?
So you tankies agree that Tiananmen Square massacre happened? Good job
yes the tank man at tinyman square from that famous picture got squished like a grape by the tank
Look it’s important that Western countries don’t show the full vid, otherwise their citizens would think they can do the same to cops in the US, can you imagine what they’d do to a guy walking around on one of their armored vehicles?
So that’s why China allows open conversation about the incident right? If it’s all just a big misunderstanding, they should be happy to allow their citizens to share the facts. Certainly they wouldn’t take steps to ban all mention of the incident as if there was something terrible there they wanted to hide.
So that’s why China allows open conversation about the incident right?
This actually gets discussed in Chinese state media. The idea that people get -500 social credit score when they barely mention Tiananmen Square is mostly Western propaganda. Maybe somebody else will link you articles about this from China, i’m not gonna bother because they’ve already been linked ITT and you liberals don’t read them anyway. But of course they’re around.
Your post also shows a vast ignorance about how propaganda even works in the first place, whether we’re talking China or the USA or any other country. That’s because you get your ideas about politics from idiots like the antisemitic snitch and cousin r*pist George Orwell and then you think dictatorships work like 1984 and completely miss that you’re living in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Propaganda is not about hiding things from the public, that simply doesn’t work well enough. You can downplay the truth, but you’ll never get rid of it entirely. We’re one example of that, existing and driving you nuts in spite of the largest propaganda and surveilance apparatus in the world working against us. And the same applies for the smaller, less overarching, less well funded Chinese “intelligence community”, as you’d call their spies and snitches and secret police if they were Western spies and snitches and secret police. For example, anybody in China can install a VPN and look at Western news sources if they care, and a lot of younger people actually do that, just as you can come here and get exposed to facts that counter Western narratives.This is why propaganda works by emphasizing what you want the people to hear to the point were the noise drowns out what you do not want them to hear. By establishing counter-narratives to the truth. For example, you get flooded with the still image of the guy standing in front of the tank instead of the full video. You get fed the story about China somehow wafflestomping 10.000 corpses down the sewer drains by rolling over them with tanks until they’re mush, as if that could even work, even though the only source for this is something 1 (in words: ONE) British diplomat has allegedly heard from somebody in Beijing. But because people like you never actually check their sources, you think there’s hundreds of accounts of that incident just because there’s hundreds of articles citing that one unnamed British diplomat or each other, and that’s all over reddit, that site that has not only ruined your sense of humor and your ability to ever have a good faith discussion with another human being again, but that has also turned you into a mindless drone lashing out at anybody questioning the racist, national chauvinist narratives that have been blared into your ears until you came here 3 months because the pedophile spez threatened to take away the apps that allowed you to more conveniently doomscroll that hellsite on your mobile phone.
What you usually do not get to see in Western media are the Chinese cop strung up on a lamppost and set on fire by the protesters, or that many of the counterrevolutionaries where, what a surprise, reactionaries that earlier the same year took part in riots against African exchange students at Chinese universities.
Anyway, it was fun yelling at you, have a nice day.
My favourite bit about the video is that the tank column is leaving Tiananmen when this guy stops them, and I always get the impression he’s essentially asking the tankers to go back to the Square.
Naturally the lib framing is that he’s blocking them from entering the Square
‘massacre’
What do you think happened exactly?
https://www.liberationnews.org/tiananmen-the-massacre-that-wasnt-2/
Edit: the other source I was looking for
https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_myth_of_tiananmen.php
The thing to get is that there was no massacre on the square, and in fact there’s no verifiable evidence that anybody died there at all that day. Many people did die elsewhere, in street clashes with soldiers, after demonstrators killed and burned a few of them.
I would like to note also that bringing up events like Tiananmen Square, especially heavily propagandized and warped versions of them, without an understanding of the complex political context which led up to them, is not a gotcha, it’s just ignorant. Not saying you’re doing that or that you would do that, but it’s something others do frequently when they invoke it round here.
US Military Pysops Division literally bragged about how successful they were with Tiananmen in this recruitment video
Edit: Found out about this video from this article which was linked on hexbear lol https://www.fridayeveryday.com/how-psy-ops-warriors-fooled-me-about-tiananmen-square-a-warning/
Ah, I remember that. Almost feels like the cocky bastards are mocking us at this point.
With no actual evidence, it just seems like China’s word against the US’s. Neither are sources I trust, and both have motives to lie. I’m just going to assume nothing.
I don’t trust anyone, so i will believe the US
Can you possibly explain why the western diplomats stationed there told their home countries nothing happened in diplomatic cables?
Why would they do that if it was real?
I said there was no evidence that a massacre took place in Tiananmen Square. What actually took place there is well evidenced by eyewitness testimony, a fair bit of which is contained in the two sources I linked.
Edit: I also take issue with the assertion that both the US and China are equally untrustworthy, particularly when the Chinese government freely admits that violent clashes between civilians and PLA personnel took place that day, something they would certainly have incentive to lie about if they were as untrustworthy as all that.
I recall seeing eyewitness testimony supporting both sides. Although, its possible the testimonies I saw were about the clashes that China admits to, and were simply framed as being about a massacre. They didn’t seem very specific or definitive.
Even though the Chinese government admits to those violent clashes, its still very plausible they would lie about a massacre. Its much easier to justify that than it would be an actual massacre, especially when the civilians act violently. Its also possible that admitting some aspect of it would benefit them more than complete denial.
You’d have a point there, if there wasn’t ample photographic evidence which also suggests that no concerted massacre took place, in the square or elsewhere. All available photographic evidence that I’ve seen supports the Chinese government’s version of events: scattered street clashes which unfortunately featured some quite heavy duty violence, but no mass formation of tanks coming in and deliberately schwacking everybody in sight.
