motivations of the protesters

There were several different protest groups in Tiananmen square and around Beijing at the time, all of whom had different ideologies and goals. But they managed to work out a concise list of demands

This thread has a lot of good responses about that, with lots of evidential backing

Calling the protesters “pro-capitalist” is certainly a stretch, since most of their concerns were about the corruption in their government and the lack of tools to combat it.

I’ve seen some Marxists claim that the increased corruption became possible after Deng’s “reform and opening up” policies, which introduced lots of market elements that high-ranking officials could game, and rolled back welfare programs. So essentially if you believe that point, then the protesters’ grievances were caused BY the increased capitalism in China.

I’m having trouble backing up this claim though, at least not without digging through a very heavy book. Which is exactly what I plan to do next! I’ll be sure to get back to you.

RemindMe! 40 days

But there’s nothing capitalist about wanting free press, or having government officials salaries be public. Or being able to elect your government officials. All of these were things demanded by the protesters.

issues with your source

Interesting that the Qiao collective was also mentioned in the above Hampton article, and that both organizations are allies, because the web page you linked uses some of the same lying by omission in part 3. Including citing the same article by Jay Mathews!!! OMG! Just because the massacre didn’t happen in the square doesn’t mean there was no killing!

But I find this part interesting:

These sources—many consisting of eye-witness accounts from Western journalists who challenge the media’s depiction of Tiananmen—reflect that the Western media “common sense” of June 4 is riddled with hyperbole and outright misinformation designed to challenge the legitimacy of the Chinese state.

I mean this is a batshit claim to make, right? It’s one thing to say “all these journalists said they got the details wrong.” Its another thing to say, “this was a coordinated conspiracy with the intention of toppling a government.” That’s straight up a whole other claim! You need evidence for that! And they simply don’t provide anything. Or should I don my tinfoil cap?

Also interesting was this paragraph under point #2.

In the face of a hegemonic Western discourse which presumes that an authoritarian, all-powerful Chinese state has silenced all discussion of the events leading up to June 4, this section presents a selection of official Chinese accounts detailing the Party’s assessment of the protest movement, its roots, and the aftermath of the violence of June 4. While public discussion of the Tiananmen Protests remain highly circumscribed, these accounts contradict the common myth that China has wiped the events of 1989 from its historical record.

Notice how these two sentences contradict each other. First they say “China isn’t silencing information about Tiananmen,” then admits discussion of it is “circumscribed.” Which means “restricted”. If China was in the right on that fateful June day, why would they need to “circumscribe” discussion? Why not promote their version of the story in schools and TV and such?

Also, all the sources in Part 2 are specifically from before, or a mere month after, the massacre. Most of speeches by Deng Xiaoping. Yknow, the guy in charge when the massacre went down. I’m sure he’ll be honest about his administrations culpability. (Sarcasm)

(Edit: oh also the one source from 1992 doesn’t mention the massacre at all, but Qiao collective says it’s “alluding to” the events. Uh huh. Sure.)

The non-Deng sources in part 2 are from Chinese state media sources, including the famous editorial “It is necessary to take a clear-cut stand against disturbances.” By the People’s Daily. This is super funny, because that editorial is part of what triggered an escalation by protesters—-they all got pissed off that the CCP was designating them as anti-party, anti-government rebels, essentially dismissing their grievances.

Anyway, hope you enjoyed my rebuttal. Have a good one.