The late twentieth century was a time of tremendous change. With the weakening of the Soviet Union before the capitalist machine of the United States, the legitimacy of authoritarian regimes was beginning to crumble. To survive the fallout of the Cold War, China implemented far-reaching economic reforms that would create one of the fastest growing economies the world had ever known, lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty, and ending a disastrous era of Maoist rule. However, their path was not taken without protest or violence, and China’s contemporary history is marred with political incidents that the CPC would rather you forget – the events of June 4th, 1989 at Tiananmen Square chief among them.

Post-Mao China was a nation fraught with instability. Rapid modernization had seemingly put an end to the horrors of the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. However, citizen voices remained stifled, and a more liberal market had only led to more socioeconomic inequality between the wealthy few and the poor masses. The Chinese people were caught in the boundary between one age and the next, and the future remained uncertain.

In 1989, these anxieties culminated in student protests that soon grew to encompass hundreds of thousands of citizens from all walks of life, together calling for democratic reform, an end to corruption, and freedom of speech. At its height, the movement put a million demonstrators in Tiananmen Square itself. And on June 4th of that year, in this place of unrest, chaos and above all, hope, the government opened fire on its own citizens, bringing an end to public dissidence – as well as any future hope for further liberation for the Chinese people. The world condemned China for its misconduct, and everybody agreed that it was terrible, and then we all moved on. Yet, in this new decade of (many) trials and (less) tribulation, of pandemics, widespread protests against systemic racism, and Australian bushfires, we can see in America a disturbing parallel to the events of the June Fourth Incident.

A mere three days before the 31st anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, American protestors demonstrating peacefully in Washington D.C.’s Lafayette Square were forcibly removed from the grounds by federal agents. Said removal involved the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and physical violence against demonstrators and media alike. While no massacre took place, the use of violence to obstruct demonstrators from exercising their free speech in the land of the free is disturbing in and of itself.

Throughout history, civil unrest has continued to be a powerful motivator of change. The inherent threat that widespread disobedience can turn to widespread violence is, of course, a concern to any competent government. However, democracies are predicated upon a participatory system that claims to avoid the chaos of the past by providing nonviolent means towards effecting social change. Any move that undermines the ability of citizenry to use these means risks a return to the use of violence as an outlet for the people’s fury. If this continues, the “symbolic content” (as Joe puts it) of the violence of these protests, till now largely limited to the toppling and defacing of statues, may not remain so benign. Worse, this event sets a dangerous precedent for the use of military power to suppress civilian voices in the West – one which must not be repeated if we want to come out of 2020 without a second American revolution.

Bibliography

https://education.seattlepi.com/impact-deng-xiaoping-history-china-5311.html

https://deadline.com/2020/06/donald-trump-george-floyd-demonstrators-lafayette-square-park-1202949717/

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/06/the-semantics-of-tear-gas-versus-pepper-spray/