this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2026
71 points (76.7% liked)
Memes
55107 readers
2785 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The difference is that the later is almost always confirmed by the state department 25 years later because of the Freedom of Information Act.
And even then westerners choose not to believe it; but they'll believe the Epstein files. 🤷♂️
And the Chinese not admitting to propaganda due to the lack of a FOIA-equivalent means they don't do propaganda?
This is just a liar thinking that everyone else must also be lying
"Propaganda" is essentially spreading information (true or false) with the intention of steering views for political ends. China does admit to doing so, but this does not mean they aren't more factual in their propaganda than the US Empire is.
More factual according to who?
How do you believe facts are verified? Through vetting, testing, and documenting evidence. Flimsy evidence like anecdotes or "eyewitness reports" are secondary to more hard evidence. An easy example is reporting on the Beijing Riots in 1989, where the west reported that 10,000 people were killed on the square itself, official Chinese sources reported that the square was evacuated peacefully but that clashes between the PLA and rioters around Beijing resulted in hundreds of deaths (largely the rioters but with dozens of PLA members lynched or firebombed), and now the official Chinese story is confirmed and is now largely reflected on Wikipedia.
So verified by the people who put out the propaganda in the first place. Your source "confirming" the story literally came from Beijing, and all the wikipedia page (Hardly an arbiter of objective truth in the first place) states is that the number is and has been in dispute. The source cited for that section of the Wikipedia article is also a Western source titled "Quelling the People: The Military Suppression of the Beijing Democracy Movement" published in 1998 by the Stanford University Press. Something tells me they weren't pushing the CCP line.
So basically your "Easy example" just proves my point: While you chuckle about westerners just believing what western governments said, you're just wholeheartedly endorsing the version of events published by the Chinese government. The west aren't the only ones lying to you, bud, they're just the only ones who will admit it years after the fact.
PUBLIC LIBRARY OF US DIPLOMACY.
Edit:
Thank you for your service as an example for the audience. LMAO
No? The source confirming the official story was a leaked US cable, along with the incredible lack of any forensic evidence backing the western claims. Alan Donald, the originator of the "10,000 killed" claim, was confirmed to have left the square well before he claimed to have seen any killings. The west never admitted they were wrong outwardly, the truth came from a leaked cable.
The west lies constantly, because they need to do so in order to maintain justification for capitalism and imperialism. As a rising socialist country, the PRC isn't in a position where it needs to lie to prop itself up, nor is it constantly trying to make up excuses for war like the US Empire does. I'm under no illusion that the CPC has never lied, but the sheer scale of lies is vastly different.
On the constant lies:
https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-lies-get-so-tedious
Im gonna start replacing "relevant XKCD" with "relevant Caitlin Johnstone"
Extremely relevant!