Your anecdote says nothing about what happens in the large. In any case, do you deny that the Tiananmen Square massacre is censored in China? Do you deny that many people don't know about it?

It may take some introspection, but please try to understand that your experience is not universal.

1. It depends on what you mean by censored. If by "censored" you mean a simple search, then yes, I agree. But as far as I can tell (and I'm fairly certain albeit with no way of verifying that I have better information about this than you do), VPNs are commonplace enough in China that this isn't a issue.

2. I don't have any numbers, and I doubt you do either.

In any case, your cute platitude of "you can't learn from history if you don't have the opportunity to learn the history in the first place" is incorrect in implying that Chinese people have no way to access this information and general in such a way that it suggests that you are indeed uninformed (or else you would never make such a sweeping statement). While my anecdote is indeed not representative of what happens at large, I believe strongly that I have better information about this than you do, and would bet everything I have that I've discussed this issue with more Chinese people affected by this than you have.

But I supposed this is a pointless argument (since you/I have no way of verifying any of this). I only ask that you think a little next time before irresponsibly spreading misinformation about a group of people that I suspect you've probably never meaningfully interacted with, as this particular post gives the impression that Chinese people are helpless enough in the face of censorship that they don't know their own history.

Again, my whole argument is predicated on the assumption that I have better information than you do based on my experiences, but if you have better information, please show me as I'm pretty curious about this myself.

> 1. It depends on what you mean by censored.

There is no "depends".

> 2. I don't have any numbers, and I doubt you do either.

https://newrepublic.com/article/117983/tiananmen-square-mass...

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/03/world/asia/china-tiananmen...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tiananmen-squa...

https://www.vox.com/2014/6/3/5775918/25-years-after-tiananme...

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/04/opinion/tiananmen-forgott...

> I suspect you've probably never meaningfully interacted with

Your suspicions are irrelevant.

Unless you think VPNs don't exist in China, then of course your use of the word "censored" needs to be qualified.

Did you read these links yourself? One of the your links only mentions that it's not taught in school, others are also based on anecdotal evidence (some of which express that it's sometimes taught in schools and that some people know but don't care). The one statistic that I found in your articles asked about the tank man and not the event itself, and even then their number was 15/100, which is low but not zero.

I don't disagree with what's expressed in these links. I disagree with your characterization of people in China having zero access to this information. If you find my opinions/suspicions/admonitions irrelevant, that's a personal issue. I'm good as long as it's been communicated to you (apparently it has).

> Unless you think VPNs don't exist in China

Your condescension is tedious in the extreme.

> Did you read these links yourself?

Did you? Read some more:

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/06/01/317397569/...

> If you find my opinions/suspicions/admonitions irrelevant

Show me some data to back your assertions. If you cannot then your opinions/suspicions/admonitions and anecdotes are irrelevant.

> I'm good as long as it's been communicated to you

Nothing has been communicated but your lazy outlook. I suspect you lack seriousness.

That NPR link doesn't contradict anything I said. Tedious sure, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't qualify the words you use. But good to know that you read what I wrote! How you choose to process it is up to you.

There's nothing to process. Show me data to back your claims. If you cannot then your claims are irrelevant.

Replying to the thing below: I claimed that your insinuation that no one in China knows about June 4 because of censorship is false. The small-sample survey cited by the Vox and NPR links that you sent support my claim.

> I claimed that your insinuation that no one in China knows about June 4

I insinuated no such thing. Re-read what I have written. Do it carefully this time.

As I suspected, you lack seriousness.

You should re-read what you've written. No qualifications for generalizing statements, so it sounds like you're insinuating what I'm saying you're insinuating.

Good grief this is pointless. Your claims are profoundly dishonest. Find some better honesty.