Examples:

Don’t exist: [2] https://www.mango-press.com/the-tiananmen-square-massacre-the-wests-most-persuasive-most-pervasive-lie/

Can’t be verified: [1] Vancouver Sun, article written in a google doc, authenthiticity can’t be proven, source of source in bottom is a link that doest not work.

Contradicts the Prolewiki article: [13] CBS News,

Quote: “But there’s no question many people were killed by the army that night around Tiananmen Square, and on the way to it — mostly in the western part of Beijing. Maybe, for some, comfort can be taken in the fact that the government denies that, too.”

Hyperlink in quote leads to dead page, so archived link: https://web.archive.org/web/20090606124946/https://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/04/world/worldwatch/entry5061564.shtm l: "We could hear shooting. A large group of students and civilians at this corner of Tiananmen Square were facing lines of soldiers.

We could see burning vehicles on the Square and we tried to approach discreetly, but were told the soldiers would certainly shoot."

Quote from ProleWiki article: “Around 5:00 am on June 4, the 3,000 remaining protestors peacefully left the square. No one died in the square during or after the protests and most deaths were caused by the foreign-backed faction of students.”

You see? The sources are very bad, their contents also twisted around, like in [13]; the source was used to “proof” that “[n]o one died in the square […]” and “[…] deaths were caused by the foreign-backed faction […]”. If you would use this kind of sourcing in any scientific work, everyone would laugh at you.

Don’t let yourself be blinded by the ‘truth’ that sounds the most comforting

Most of the sources there cant be verified, don’t exist or contradict the article

Is this an onion article hahahha

Either multiple users or hide my applist lsposed plugin with all data isolation enabled idk

Out of sight, out of mind

Sorry for the late reply. She and Alice Schwarzer (a prominent TERF) protested on February 25 2023 together with members of the AfD.

That is true, but her supporting Nazis is not an opinion you can have

Ah okay, sorry. Here: SPD: Social Democratic Party of Germany, CDU: Christian Democratic Union (=Conservative, CSU is their Bavarian branch, which has been even more conservative historically). Grune: Green Party, started off from ‘Maoist’ extra-parliamentary movements, but has since become a neoliberal party that makes the poor pay for their climate programs instead of the rich, FPD: Free Democratic Party, Neoliberal, they like the taste of US’ imperialist boots, AfD: Alternative for Germany, right-wing populist to neo-nazi party, has radicalised a lot since 2020 Die LINKE; The LEFT, Marxist, democratic socialist party, largest left wing party that is not offically surveilled by the intelligence, has been losing a lot of votes since Sarah Wagenknecht went crazy.

many reactionary / conservative newspapers, large amount of anti-socialist propaganda, voters only care about identity politics and who can bash who the most, large conspiracy theory movements, east germany gets constantly exploited since 1989 by west german capitalists and news outlets have stirred a large amount of hatred for east germans, so that noone could think for one second that socialism is good -> resulted in hatred for the government in east germans and west german fascists taking control of said hatrid, immigration caused by US imperialist wars has brought up an easy target for bigots to say immigrants are the problem, government fails to stop alt-right movements and is generally incapable of governing, people misinterpret the real causes of late capitalism, etc etc etc, you get the idea, its generally the same as everywhere else in the western world.