An inspiring collection of photos, but I'd bet it attracts little interest outside a few select, irrelevant circles. One of the most heartbreaking thing about the massacre is not just that the mass murderers who ordered it were never held responsible but that today it barely even tarnishes their reputations, while the memory of their victims has been thoroughly suppressed.
I'm going to take a kind of despicable position. We don't know what would have happened had the protests been allowed to continue. China is a vast country with mostly poor, uneducated people -- especially so in 1989. Look at what happened in Syria. Look at the Arab spring. Is it just to kill hundreds, to prevent the slaughter of hundreds of thousands? If the answer is no, never, I don't see how we can have states at…
> If the answer is no, never, I don't see how we can have states at all.
You're talking about an innocent 100 people right? To save an innocent 1000. Like some sort of hostage situation?
I say no, it's not just. It's wrong to kill except in self defense.
So how does that imply we can't have a state? Can't the state use the same principle? Kill only in self defense?