While several laws pertaining to historical memory have been passed under nationalist regimes in Europe, other authoritarian societies actively use other laws as an excuse to suppress inconvenient historic commemorations, reflecting a broad and growing pattern of subordinating history to power.
The rise of pro-Beijing politicians in Hong Kong has led to increasing reluctance to condemn the Tiananmen massacre. The arrest of protest leaders under the Beijing-backed national security law has further chilled dissent.
After beginning an academic career in east Asian history, Mirsky reported on the Chinese occupation of Tibet and the Tiananmen demonstrations and massacre, letting the facts he observed change his assumptions.
Source: National History Center and Woodrow Wilson Center
Jeremy Brown’s June Fourth takes a historical approach to the events of 1989 in China, arguing that the Beijing massacre was neither necessary nor inevitable, and tracing alternative paths that could have led to different outcomes. He addresses the National History Center's Washington History Seminar on June 1.
On this day in 1989, enormous crowds of Chinese students and new-found supporters marched through major cities in China to fight for democratic freedoms.
Three decades after the Chinese Army crushed demonstrations centered on Tiananmen Square, “Tank Man” — the person who boldly confronted a convoy of tanks barreling down a Beijing avenue — is as much a mystery as ever.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has urged China to disclose the details of people killed, detained or missing during the Chinese military’s crackdown on pro-democracy protesters centered on Beijing’s Tiananmen Square 29 years ago.
Each year, Hong Kong gatherings honor the memory of the students, workers, and bystanders slain near Tiananmen Square. And each year, on the mainland, the anniversary is dutifully ignored.
