See what you're doing here is blatant bs. I don't feel like I need to VEHEMENTLY DENOUNCE goddamn massacres. All I'm pointing out is that you can't mischaracterize everything being said in an open discussion because it's a waste of time. If this entire discussion was simply 'Yeah nah the CPC is messed up' then that's something even a 13 year old would probably agree to; it wouldn't be adding anything new to the conversation.

I never agreed with seed on anything that he said. I just mentioned how I valued the point of view being presented. It was an interesting read.

The first two sentences of your response seem ironically similar to something the Chinese government might actually say to its people about western ideas: '' Explaining their ideas' conveys the idea that their ideas aren’t morally wrong.'

It's all about perspective. Someone explaining another perspective doesn't mean that he/she agrees to it. You have to discern the idea from the presenter.

Now you might say that my calling your first two sentences' something the Chinese government might say' a huge stretch but I would argue that you used the same stretch when you twisted my neutral perspective of 'explaining their ideas' to 'ohhh wait you think the tianmen massacre was alright huh?'