Tiananman square massacre is the name for the entire tragedy that took place. You trying to say how people didn’t die at the square itself does nothing.

And it doesn’t matter if they were protesting for more, or less communism. What happened is still an absolute tragedy and disaster and trying to downplay it is pathetic. It was fucked up, how do you expect to learn from the past if you deny it ever happened?

You if anyone need to see the documentation of the events. The tank man got famous because one. It was incredibly brave, it had a good ending with him not ending up in a puddle.

Moat other images and recordings are not very media friendly. Though if you want to see what happened. Here you go.

https://archive.ph/2020.07.12-074312/https://imgur.com/a/AIIbbPs

Are people really ok with this?

What are you gonna do about it?

I can’t answer that. I suggest you ask OP that question instead of me.

He just said it’s not historical in any way.

Even then it’s not true. Sweden and Finland regularly trade first place when it comes to coffee consumption per capita.

So that the US sold be in first is just not true. And if I know for fact that’s not true. I have serious doubts about the rest of his claims

You didn’t say that to be nice. You tried to insult their intelligence by itonically calling them clever. You thinking it’s not a major insult is irrelevant. But when faced with your own hypocrisy you can do nothing but deflect.

You coming in here like “oh insulting someone is the last of my priority” yet it was the first thing you did. Am I wrong?

I’m not up my ass. Just calling out your hypocrisy. I can see you’re taking it well.

I see writing a novel is on your list of priorities though. Thought you were done.

The irony of your response accusing me of all the things you lack and cannot comprehend is so strong I can taste it.

Your first comment to the top one was “thanks sherlock”. You don’t think that’s insulting? Oh right. You’re above that. You don’t insult people by ironically calling them by Sherlock, the master detective.

Pathetic.

If you meant to question the efficiency then that word does not mean what you think it means.

I certainly did not invent the word strawman nor the use of its tactic in debate. The act of making up an argument from the other side and then respond to it. (You have the combined knowledge of the human race at your fingertips. But googling “what is strawmanning” is too complicated?)

My fault this conversation started? How did you come to that conclusion? You chose to respond. With the dumbest response possible. That’s not my fault. That’s entirely on you.

If you think the answer is so simple it should not be said, then it’s not the answer that’s the problem, it’s the question.

Which is another dying way of thinking. Just because the answer is simple and obvious to you doesn’t mean it’s the case for him

You’re not questioning the efficiency of the answer here. You’re questioning the quality.

You don’t even know yourself what it is you want. And please. Stop with the strawman arguments. It’s pathetic.

No one claimed self immolation stoped. Why are you trying to bring it up as if I’ve said otherwise? Same goes with your disgusting paraphrasing. No one said “maybe or whatever” and tried to play it off like that.

It’s very simple. Question: “Does protests work?” Answer: “Sometimes (we won’t know if it will until we try)”

They’re all talking about successful protests. Because unsuccessful protests are rarely something we remember.

It’s a perfectly good, efficient answer. Do they work? Sometimes. It (often) depends on how many people are involved in the protest

I can think of one very successful protest that only involved one single monk

1. Because they’ve given up on life.

2. Because everyone else wear shoes in the office. That being said. I don’t wear shoes in my office. Because no one does. (It’s also a small office)

3. I don’t know why YOU don’t. I don’t Because it’s none of my business and the risk of being wrong heavily outweights the reward of being right.

It’s not arbitrary. If you start wearing shoes inside the floor will get dirtier. And now I can’t not wear them because I will get dirt all over my socks from the dirt the shoe wearer tracked inside.

Office workers might have to move around and walk a lot. Shoes help with that. It’s the exact reason we invented them in the first place.

Just because you don’t know, doesnt mean it’s arbitrary

How about people spend their own money on whatever they want because it’s none of your business

Yes. Definatly. Not necessarily because of the world going one way or another but because our global population is rapidly increasing. 1 decade is enough to increase the global population by 1 billion people.

I agree. Here in Sweden we’ve had a huge surge in online casino ads on TV for the last 5 years. Maybe even more. Super annoying. Everyone hates them. But not much is done despite that.

Reading the comments, smiling at the fact that so much people complaining about is already illegal here and not a problem.

Personally. I’d make it illegal to start small talk about the fucking weather. I can see that’s raining too. Yes that is annoying. Haha, no I won’t put shampoo in my hair on my way home. I don’t know when it will stop. Do I look like a meteorologist?

And when they wear masks and hoodies to prevent being identified?

And when is dark, and no one can be identified on the video. Then what? Congratulations on somehow “standing up to bullies”. Sure showed them who’s the boss with your broken window.

I would highly recommend not fucking with people. It may sound fun, you may think they deserve it. But it’s not going to be equally fun when they return to throw a rock through you window.

These are not normal people. Normal people don’t steal packages from strangers. You don’t know what other instability they have. And you probably don’t want to find out either.

It’s just not worth it.

It’s a very US-centric view because their states seemingly doesn’t enforce rules and regulations while also not having rent control. Creating a situation where landlords can demand pretty much whatever they want in a housing crisis while also not spending their revenue on actually maintaining the apartments they rent out.

The complaint is fair. For them.

No. That is not what I’m arguing. Would you like to read my comment again and apply more than a kindergarten level of reading comprehension?