China has too many people like you. How do you explain the student movement in Chinese history where blood was shed and life was lost? These are not democratic movement?
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : China has too many people like you. How do you explain the student movement : in Chinese history where blood was shed and life was lost? These are not : democratic movement?
There are too few people like me in China, who knows to respect democracy.
movement
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : China has too many people like you. How do you explain the student movement : in Chinese history where blood was shed and life was lost? These are not : democratic movement?
student movement is always unorganized and chaotic in any country or any time in history. students are students. they are not professionals and don' t probably agree on everything. but this can be said about any student movement. if 6.4 is not a democratic movement, then i don't know what is. one can argue that none of these democratic student movements blessed by communist party is a democratic movement because of the flaws you and i know.
【在 L*1 的大作中提到】 : There are too few people like me in China, who knows to respect democracy. : : movement
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : not sure how much you know the movement. if you only getting the news from : the communist party's "throat and tongue", then i forgive your ignorance.
n*3
15 楼
六四有点恐怖运动性质。
C*r
16 楼
领导混乱所致…… 但说恐怖有点过了 民主不民主的,我的印象来自于侯同学。不是我共喉舌。
【在 n*********3 的大作中提到】 : 六四有点恐怖运动性质。
x*u
17 楼
movement Simple answer: No.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : China has too many people like you. How do you explain the student movement : in Chinese history where blood was shed and life was lost? These are not : democratic movement?
x*u
18 楼
don' If 64 student organizations were "democratic", then the red guards in CR were also "democratic".
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : student movement is always unorganized and chaotic in any country or any : time in history. students are students. they are not professionals and don' : t probably agree on everything. but this can be said about any student : movement. : if 6.4 is not a democratic movement, then i don't know what is. one can : argue that none of these democratic student movements blessed by communist : party is a democratic movement because of the flaws you and i know.
y*y
19 楼
so which student movement in chinese history is a democratic movement? point out just one and tell me with a straight face that it wasn't chaotic...
【在 x****u 的大作中提到】 : : don' : If 64 student organizations were "democratic", then the red guards in CR : were also "democratic".
C*r
20 楼
六四不是木有正面的东西。失败了,吸取教训才更重要。
...
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : so which student movement in chinese history is a democratic movement? : point out just one and tell me with a straight face that it wasn't chaotic...
x*u
21 楼
... None of them were really democratic.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : so which student movement in chinese history is a democratic movement? : point out just one and tell me with a straight face that it wasn't chaotic...
okay, if you say, 5.4, 6.4 etc., none of them is democratic movement, then you are at least consistent. don't you think your bar is too high? you may be wrong, but at least consistent. i give you that.
【在 x****u 的大作中提到】 : : ... : None of them were really democratic.
x*u
25 楼
My point is, these movements might have democracy as one of the goals, but the method/organization of the movements themselves are not democratic.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : okay, if you say, 5.4, 6.4 etc., none of them is democratic movement, then : you are at least consistent. don't you think your bar is too high? you may : be wrong, but at least consistent. i give you that.
y*y
26 楼
i think your definition is wrong. by this standard, none could be qualified as democratic movement, period, student or not.
【在 x****u 的大作中提到】 : : My point is, these movements might have democracy as one of the goals, but : the method/organization of the movements themselves are not democratic.
x*u
27 楼
qualified My point exactly. I don't trust any group that couldn't even organize itself based on the principle it espouse to ultimately realize that goal.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : i think your definition is wrong. by this standard, none could be qualified : as democratic movement, period, student or not.
what a bunch of crap? 64严格讲确实不是民主运动? did you do scientific research on that? what is your source of info? did you actually participate? why is your claim of 一小撮人民? how much is 一小撮人民? having a whole city of beijing people behind you is 一小撮人民? are you kidding me? by the 6.4 magnitude, any gov would have been toppled if it were Egypt or any eastern european country. only in china, communist would still survive with tanks and automatic weapons. and yet, people like you and the LZ would somehow "change" the history and be the "throat and tongue" of this brutal regime.
bottom line is the lack of trust of the system......because china doesn't have such a democratic system. on that point, we agree. but a broader point is fundamentally 6.4 started out as student appeal to the gov for a free press, against corruption, and more liberty to citizen. basic rights that every citizen in every democracy in the world enjoys...... but still none of which exists today in china. to say 6.4 is not a student democratic movement is almost to say 5.4 is not a student democratic movement.
【在 x****u 的大作中提到】 : : qualified : My point exactly. : I don't trust any group that couldn't even organize itself based on the : principle it espouse to ultimately realize that goal.
C*r
34 楼
there wasn't a democratic process for the mass to express what they want. the movement was badly organized, which was understandable. to give you an example, Ms Chai decided that ppl occupying the square should vote to decide whether to leave. that was probably the closest thing they had to a democratic process. but the problem was many of those who wanted to leave would have left already, so the result of the voting would always be skewed towards staying.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : totally false.
C*r
35 楼
i think u and i agree on these facts you stated. our disagreement lies in the definition of a democratic process.
.. not
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : bottom line is the lack of trust of the system......because china doesn't : have such a democratic system. on that point, we agree. : but a broader point is fundamentally 6.4 started out as student appeal to : the gov for a free press, against corruption, and more liberty to citizen. : basic rights that every citizen in every democracy in the world enjoys...... : but still none of which exists today in china. : to say 6.4 is not a student democratic movement is almost to say 5.4 is not : a student democratic movement.
y*y
36 楼
personally i am not a fan of Chai or several other so called student leaders . they definitely have personal and selfish reasons to join the movement. but look beyond that.....beyond one or two individuals and their limitations . look at the bigger picture. look at the will and aspiration of the majority students and civilians. several petitions to the gov - 1. free press 2. against corruption 3. human rights if you focus on the fundamentals, you would conclude differently. would you believe any democratic movement or student movement free of personal ambitions and interests? i am not that naive. but that should NOT stop you to believe that the whole movement was right and just for the chinese society 24 years ago and still is.
should to be
【在 C**********r 的大作中提到】 : there wasn't a democratic process for the mass to express what they want. : the movement was badly organized, which was understandable. : to give you an example, Ms Chai decided that ppl occupying the square should : vote to decide whether to leave. that was probably the closest thing they : had to a democratic process. but the problem was many of those who wanted to : leave would have left already, so the result of the voting would always be : skewed towards staying.
C*r
37 楼
we both believe the common goals of the mass were good to begin with. but we need to learn from such a failed movement. the lack of a democratic process in the movement itself is fatal and would turn me away from participating in it. it would to naive to replace an existing non-democratic system with a brand new one.
leaders
limitations
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : personally i am not a fan of Chai or several other so called student leaders : . they definitely have personal and selfish reasons to join the movement. : but look beyond that.....beyond one or two individuals and their limitations : . look at the bigger picture. look at the will and aspiration of the : majority students and civilians. : several petitions to the gov - : 1. free press : 2. against corruption : 3. human rights : if you focus on the fundamentals, you would conclude differently.
y*n
38 楼
I think you my re-think your post. Please disregard all your questions, just this line,"by the 6.4 magnitude, any gov would have been toppled if it were Egypt or any eastern european country. only in china, communist would still survive with tanks and automatic weapons". I don't think other tyrants did not have auto weapons or tanks, some Russian communists even took control of the central government and sent the order to their troops. They all collapsed. The reason behind the survival of Chinese communists is those Chinese 64 elites only elites, they are defnitely 一小撮. By end of May 1989, they were there because they wanted to. Students originally sitting on the square left. At end of May, 1989, they had to recruit people to support them. Their way: to send out lies and gossips about communists party's leader would resign. So next day, they lost their left credit.
survive would
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : what a bunch of crap? 64严格讲确实不是民主运动? did you do scientific : research on that? what is your source of info? did you actually : participate? why is your claim of 一小撮人民? how much is 一小撮人民? : having a whole city of beijing people behind you is 一小撮人民? are you : kidding me? : by the 6.4 magnitude, any gov would have been toppled if it were Egypt or : any eastern european country. only in china, communist would still survive : with tanks and automatic weapons. and yet, people like you and the LZ would : somehow "change" the history and be the "throat and tongue" of this brutal : regime.
m*x
39 楼
这些都是很空洞的诉求,根本没有可操作性。唯一有可操作性的就是让李鹏邓小平下台。
leaders
limitations
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : personally i am not a fan of Chai or several other so called student leaders : . they definitely have personal and selfish reasons to join the movement. : but look beyond that.....beyond one or two individuals and their limitations : . look at the bigger picture. look at the will and aspiration of the : majority students and civilians. : several petitions to the gov - : 1. free press : 2. against corruption : 3. human rights : if you focus on the fundamentals, you would conclude differently.
y*y
40 楼
then we are sort of arguing chicken and egg - which comes first. the reason for the movement is precisely because of discontent, unjust in the chinese society and lack of right channel (rule of law) and due process. the important thing isn't really to select a leader, even a wise one, but rather to adopt a system where majority people's opinion is reflected in making the law and governing the country (not just one party's and often it' s the opposite of what's public wanted).
we process a
【在 C**********r 的大作中提到】 : we both believe the common goals of the mass were good to begin with. but we : need to learn from such a failed movement. the lack of a democratic process : in the movement itself is fatal and would turn me away from participating : in it. it would to naive to replace an existing non-democratic system with a : brand new one. : : leaders : : limitations
y*y
41 楼
before you keep arguing it's 一小撮, you should ask the people who lived through 89 and do an anonymous survey on exactly how much. in beijing, it's more than 60-70% easily, either directly participated and got involved in some shape or form. (it's definitely 一小撮 who had nothing to do with the movement at all).
just were survive Russian were
【在 y*****n 的大作中提到】 : I think you my re-think your post. Please disregard all your questions, just : this line,"by the 6.4 magnitude, any gov would have been toppled if it were : Egypt or : any eastern european country. only in china, communist would still survive : with tanks and automatic weapons". : I don't think other tyrants did not have auto weapons or tanks, some Russian : communists even took control of the central government and sent the order : to their troops. They all collapsed. : The reason behind the survival of Chinese communists is those Chinese 64 : elites only elites, they are defnitely 一小撮. By end of May 1989, they were
y*y
42 楼
believe these demands were part of the movement later on in the movement and consequently the crackdown.
lol, may I borrow your time travel device? I need it to run the survey. You know, it was the easiest time in life to run such a survey. People at that time were all active and wanted change. Aslo how did you get your 60%-70% number? My guess is 95% after 6/4/1989, but only 5%-10% actually "participated" before that day. Of course 100% citizens in Beijing were affected, from middle April until early June, 1989. BTW, if you follow your logic on the communists side, all citizen in beijing , supported and cooperated the forcefully suppression of those "elites". Also all people in whole China, including you and me, supported their false claim that the "decision" was right, because no one stood up and disagreed. It's definitely 一小撮 who had disagreed to do that at all。
s
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : before you keep arguing it's 一小撮, you should ask the people who lived : through 89 and do an anonymous survey on exactly how much. in beijing, it's : more than 60-70% easily, either directly participated and got involved in : some shape or form. (it's definitely 一小撮 who had nothing to do with the : movement at all). : : just : were : survive : Russian
x*u
44 楼
.. not The students of 64 demonstrated through their organizations and actions that they don't know what Democracy means. Then to think they are going to be able to drive the political process to achieve democracy is entirely unrealistic. "Asking the blind for directions" is a fitting description. " Ye Gong Hao Long" is another description I would use.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : bottom line is the lack of trust of the system......because china doesn't : have such a democratic system. on that point, we agree. : but a broader point is fundamentally 6.4 started out as student appeal to : the gov for a free press, against corruption, and more liberty to citizen. : basic rights that every citizen in every democracy in the world enjoys...... : but still none of which exists today in china. : to say 6.4 is not a student democratic movement is almost to say 5.4 is not : a student democratic movement.
C*r
45 楼
Then how to express your discontent and reason it appropriately is key. Asking the leadership of a totalitarian government to step down without guns and tanks in your hand is 与虎谋皮
reason it'
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : then we are sort of arguing chicken and egg - which comes first. the reason : for the movement is precisely because of discontent, unjust in the chinese : society and lack of right channel (rule of law) and due process. : the important thing isn't really to select a leader, even a wise one, but : rather to adopt a system where majority people's opinion is reflected in : making the law and governing the country (not just one party's and often it' : s the opposite of what's public wanted). : : we : process
m*x
46 楼
that's my point, 唯一可操作的就是让领导人下台的诉求,表明这些人根本没有底线。
and
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : believe these demands were part of the movement later on in the movement and : consequently the crackdown. : : 台。
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : China has too many people like you. How do you explain the student movement : in Chinese history where blood was shed and life was lost? These are not : democratic movement?
Dude, what matters is the approval rating. Do you agree, during the 6.4 movement, the majority (more than 50% by definition) approved student's peaceful petition and political demand for a more freer press and anti- corruption policy. If it were small number, as you keep saying, beijing cops would have been capable of dealing with the crowd and put the demonstration to the rest. Have you seen anything in this magnitude in any country when a gov needs a formidable professionally trained army with tanks to crack down? Stop the nonsense. It's not minority but majority people were participating and supporting the movement.
You citizens beijing
【在 y*****n 的大作中提到】 : lol, may I borrow your time travel device? I need it to run the survey. You : know, : it was the easiest time in life to run such a survey. People at that time : were all active and wanted change. : Aslo how did you get your 60%-70% number? My guess is 95% after 6/4/1989, : but : only 5%-10% actually "participated" before that day. Of course 100% citizens : in Beijing were affected, from middle April until early June, 1989. : BTW, if you follow your logic on the communists side, all citizen in beijing : , supported and cooperated the forcefully suppression of those "elites".
y*y
55 楼
I agree. But before 6.4, chinese people were told (a.k.a brainwashed) that liberation army is people's army; communist party is people's party. how come people's army turn the guns to the people it supposed to protect? before 6.4, nobody believed the gov could use military tanks to stop a student movement. conversely, if students believed gov could use the brutal force, there would have been no 6.4, period.
guns
【在 C**********r 的大作中提到】 : Then how to express your discontent and reason it appropriately is key. : Asking the leadership of a totalitarian government to step down without guns : and tanks in your hand is 与虎谋皮 : : reason : it'
y*y
56 楼
Don't agree with your first point. Democracy simply means major people rule . It's not that complicated. The complicate part is the how, not the what. How to do it is different from country to country. In the U.S., the founding fathers looked at all democratic systems from ancient Greek to the more recent 16th century systems in Europe before they wrote the constitution and proposed the best democratic system they had in mind. Note that what students asked for isn't a democratic system yet. The movement is asking the gov to have the willingness to move to that direction - such as open the press, fight corruption. In order to achieve full democracy, there must be a more organized approach (like at what the Americans have done). I don't think students had any political or organizational process and model worked out. That's not their demand. They were asking the gov to at least start the basic conversation and allow more free press as tools to fight corruption and injustice, which were among many social and political issues then, and still now. Unrealistic, perhaps yes in hindsight. But to deny the just cause and even deny the demotic nature of the movement, it is indeed very sad. Because the people who died almost died in vain.
that "
【在 x****u 的大作中提到】 : : .. : not : The students of 64 demonstrated through their organizations and actions that : they don't know what Democracy means. Then to think they are going to be : able to drive the political process to achieve democracy is entirely : unrealistic. "Asking the blind for directions" is a fitting description. " : Ye Gong Hao Long" is another description I would use.
y*n
57 楼
Well, does not look like you ever saw those few people there in real life. You lived mostly in campus and rumors. No one knows what those students leaders' demands, they themselves could even agree on those things. It is a small number, but as I mentioned before, Chinese society is hierarchical. So cops would rather stay away from higher class members, and let them do whatever they want. Those students unfortunately a few "elites". No cop likes to deal with them, they failed because of that too. The approval rating is a joke in China. On 1949, evil Maoists got over 50% approval rate, they further boosted the approval rate to 100% in 1950s. Does it make you believe they were legit? One last thing, the students peaceful petition. There was no such thing there at that time. Those students originally on the square on April were not there on June. No one seems to notice that case now as both sides want to hide this. The status of Beijing during those time were anarchic, the government stayed arguing between Zhao and Li people, and student leaders did not even care, they simply wanted more people to watch them while function as human shield.
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : Dude, what matters is the approval rating. Do you agree, during the 6.4 : movement, the majority (more than 50% by definition) approved student's : peaceful petition and political demand for a more freer press and anti- : corruption policy. : If it were small number, as you keep saying, beijing cops would have been : capable of dealing with the crowd and put the demonstration to the rest. : Have you seen anything in this magnitude in any country when a gov needs a : formidable professionally trained army with tanks to crack down? Stop the : nonsense. It's not minority but majority people were participating and : supporting the movement.
y*y
58 楼
don't understand what you are saying
【在 R***s 的大作中提到】 : 进步不等于民主 : : movement
y*y
59 楼
Approval ratings are approval ratings as long as they are accurate. You can 't say they are jokes. Mao of course has high approval ratings and the ratings were legit. Just like Hitler had high approval ratings and Nazi German was a democratic country. They are not jokes. You are arguing different thing - the maturity and ideology of a democracy. Democracy simply means majority people rule. The 6.4 movement had high approval ratings among general public. If it weren 't, it wouldn't even be able to sustain for half long. The majority opinion was open the press, fight corruption, start a democratic dialogue with public on many social issues. If the party respected the majority opinion, there would be no 6.4 massacre.
and ". Does
【在 y*****n 的大作中提到】 : Well, does not look like you ever saw those few people there in real life. : You lived mostly in campus and rumors. No one knows what those students : leaders' demands, they themselves could even agree on those things. : It is a small number, but as I mentioned before, Chinese society is : hierarchical. So cops would rather stay away from higher class members, and : let them do whatever they want. Those students unfortunately a few "elites". : No cop likes to deal with them, they failed because of that too. : The approval rating is a joke in China. On 1949, evil Maoists got over 50% : approval rate, they further boosted the approval rate to 100% in 1950s. Does : it make you believe they were legit?
y*n
60 楼
enjoy your autism world.
can simply weren opinion
【在 y*****y 的大作中提到】 : Approval ratings are approval ratings as long as they are accurate. You can : 't say they are jokes. Mao of course has high approval ratings and the : ratings were legit. Just like Hitler had high approval ratings and Nazi : German was a democratic country. They are not jokes. You are arguing : different thing - the maturity and ideology of a democracy. Democracy simply : means majority people rule. : The 6.4 movement had high approval ratings among general public. If it weren : 't, it wouldn't even be able to sustain for half long. The majority opinion : was open the press, fight corruption, start a democratic dialogue with : public on many social issues. If the party respected the majority opinion,
y*y
61 楼
i thought we were having a debate, not engaging in personal attack and finger pointing. well. seems you don't understand what's a debate and how to debate without bickering and personal attack.
【在 y*****n 的大作中提到】 : enjoy your autism world. : : can : simply : weren : opinion