this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
357 points (100.0% liked)
HistoryPhotos
1325 readers
332 users here now
HistoryPhotos is for photographs (or, if it can be found, film) of the past, recent or distant! Give us a little snapshot of history!
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
- No genocide or atrocity denialism.
- Photos MUST be at LEAST 10 years old, and ideally over 20. We appreciate that we are living through events which will become history, but this is ultimately not a comm for news or current affairs, but events which have occurred some time in the past.
Related Communities:
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !historymusic@quokk.au
- !historygallery@quokk.au
- !historymemes@piefed.social
- !historyruins@piefed.social
- !historyart@piefed.social
- !historyartifacts@piefed.social
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My understanding of the ML-version of events is that there were different protests happening at the same time. One was led by the students but there were others led by farmers, workers, etc in the same vicinity. The students are depicted as generally Marxist while the workers were asking for liberal reforms and they were the ones that got massacred. Without an independent media on the ground it is hard for me to know what's what though. Point is, this image doesn't contradict with the ML-version of events.
Not that that the notion of two protests (instead of one protest with multiple groups) has any relation to reality, but... holy fucking shit, how would that be better?
There was independent media on the ground at the time. There are numerous eyewitnesses. There is ample photographic evidence.
The ML version of events that you presented, which, what, swaps out a massacre of student protesters for a massacre of workers?
The People's Tank Treads.
🤣 Exactly what I was asking myself. If their justification is "this group wasn't massacred, this group was instead", how the fuck is that better? I never understand how people can be so willing in justifying authoritarian regimes and massacres...
how about the version where they bought in rural soldiers to come in to kill the protestors when the urban soldiers refused?