[tw04]

I'm not going to stand here and say China doesn't have a TON of human rights issues. But on what planet can you say "this is the same government that mowed down 10,000 people"?

You might as well say the current government in the US is the "Same government that mowed down innocent college students at Kent State".

It's actually not the same government. Some parts of it are significantly better, some parts of it are significantly worse. Either way, it does the discussion a disservice to call it the same.

[cletus]

Let me try: there has been no acknowledgment, moral reckoning, mea culpa, apology, investigation or national discussion about this by those in power in 1989, nor by any of their successors to date.

In effect the argument is being made that without any of the above successive governments have been complicit during or after the fact.

[piva00]

Because a lot of people from that time are still alive. It's not politically interesting to go against the military, even more if the commanders came from that era.

Unfortunately, they will only recognise and apologise after that generation is long gone, that is the reality of politics.

[lozenge]

It is the same government. Those in power at the time chose who would succeed them, and so on to this day.

[tw04]

Good point, whereas in America the Republican and Democratic parties have since been dismantled and replaced...

Yang Shangkun must have had one heck of an influence if he was able to dictate who would be president of the country 15 years after his death... Of course Yang was forced out of the party in 1993 (the last time he had any influence), but don't let history and facts get in your way.

[mutteraloo]

Xijingping this year heavily emphasized the communist ideals in the country, to a point where the civil servants have to pass tests on the ccp ideals

Also China is still the censoring, authoritarian regime it was before. Look at their citizen scores, monitoring, threatening South Korea, Taiwan, us, Australia, etc

[glenstein]

In a meaningful sense, you can say the Republican party is largely the same today as it was during the Contract With America, and the Democratic Party is largely the party of New Deal programs. Sameness here refers to ideological continuity rather than literal individuals being the same.

[jbooth]

That's not what the person was saying, though. They were saying something much more simplistic.

To your point, I'd say all 3 parties (D, R and CCP) have had slow and continuous ideological drift. All 3 are unrecognizable compared to 1989.

[glenstein]

I think you're right that all three parties have been subject to a certain degree of drift. However, applying that back to the original point (is the current regime the same one that did Tiananmen), to me that's an argument that, for the most part, this is the same regime. And if the original commenter wasn't arguing about a continuity in ideology or personnel, then I'm not sure what they were arguing.

[jbooth]

It's like saying Hollande and Chirac are both part of the 5th Republic regime. Technically true but not indicative of anything and probably a red herring.

[dengnan]

It is the same government because you will still be caught for discussing the TianAnMen square event in public. It is still a taboo topic since 1989 and nothing on this matter changed so far.