I think Ayn Rand would disagree.
not aghast, admiring.
You are one-sixth correct, bigot; but hey, your lord and master is bromancing Kim, and even winked at Xi a few times.
So why should they do what they did, and why should China oppress its Muslims?I could care less if ALL SYRIANS die after they KILL ALL MUSLIMS
I think an interest in world events is good. Why do you cheer-lead for Trump? What will it get you, bigot?
Go back to sleep, bigot.~yawn~
china is trying to tell their population to 'forget' about Tiananmen... yeah, just try forgetting a country happily mowed down its own teenagers in the name of suppressing protest against wrongs. if being 'strong' means taking tanks and running over the next generation who dared speak out against those in power, then, yes, china was strong. go china, yay.
ten. thousand.
#punchNazis.
you're a very weird person to think that, let alone state it.
Rand stood for the individual, particularly when he/she was right when the majority was wrong.
Probably because it's the case.
What are you talking about?
Here, here.
I wonder if the left understand that the perpetrators of the T-square massacre are good comrades like themselves and that the protestors were "alt right" Trumpsters
If I understand your question correctly, yes—and I'll add whether those diplomats include Trump (at least as a world leader) and those representing leftist governments. I support trade with China and sensible relations, but all this fawning has to stop, and if such cost Xi's hurt feelings, so be it.
As they're somewhat wordy, I'll probably read them later. My compliments to whoever drafted them.
This is where things like left and right get weird. Mao and Deng: who was more left-wing? Deng's pragmatism was certainly less murderous than Mao—Fareed Zakaria, in a debate about if Muslims were dangerous, cited that Mao said he'd rather see half the world burn if it meant the other half became socialist—yet it was Deng who's responsible for the massacre and a continued crackdown. Xi is raising it up. Papa Bush, for whatever his big faults were, didn't suck up to Deng as much as Trump does Xi, and many conservatives/rightists, regularly—to their credit—criticized China on human rights, including about Tianamen, in them days. Our former Conservative PM Harper, for whatever his big faults were, meet the Dalai Lama however it might have ticked off the Chinese.
I'd say that's true with some elements of the American left, and though I readily admit my ignorance of the proportion, I doubt those elements are as big, extreme, and conformist as some rightist and/or conservatives would have us believe.
mostly agree (I'm not sure it was 200 million, though).
a notion I'm not promoting.
Btw, what do you watch/listen to?
)1950: that was almost 70 years ago and almost 40 years before Tiananmen. Some of that warfare was the invasion by Japan and KMT fighting the Communists. It seems that the emperor's autocratic ways didn't help his people (or Chinese people as (I think) he was arguably not Chinese) deal with the 20th century (or any century at that).
Would these be places, like Tibet, that probably should be independent?
Who knows if it's happened already since: peaceful protesters being savagely repressed by the-one-Trump-relates-so-well-with.
as if the alternative to dictatorship, and a Communist one at that, is chaos.
