FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

A Tale of Two Massacres

by

One cannot escape the ample media coverage of the 25th anniversary of what has come to be known as the Tiananmen Square massacre, in which it is estimated that at least 300, and possibly 3000 civilians, were killed by state forces. [1]

Of course, that is a tragedy which deserves remembering and commemorating.  And, this commemorating should be done in an honest way.  Without belaboring this point too much, it is worth noting that there has been much mythologizing about the events in China twenty-five years ago, and I urge readers to check out both the Columbia School of Journalism [2] and Nikolas Kristoff’s New York Times account from that time period.  [3]

Another event, which took place 25 years ago, also deserves commemorating.  This event, which the U.S. media has almost entirely ignored, involved the state murder of hundreds (at least 300), if not thousands (possibly 3,000) of protestors in Venezuela.  [4]  In other words, the estimates of those protestors killed in Venezuela are identical to the estimates of those killed in Beijing.  Of course, given that Venezuela has a tiny population (around 30 million) compared to that of China (over 1 billion), these numbers are proportionately much greater.

And moreover, these events in Venezuela, now known as the Caracazo, led to historic change in Venezuela and Latin America as they would lead to the political rise of Hugo Chavez who opposed the Caracazo massacre and who would become President ten years later in great part due to the population’s reaction to it.  And, as Noam Chomsky has opined, Chavez’s leadership in turn led to “the historic liberation of Latin America” after 500 years of subjugation by the Spanish and the U.S.  [5]  No small feat, indeed!

But again, these monumental events, which began with poor Venezuelans rising up against an increase in fuel prices, apparently deserve no mention, at least as judged by the Western media.

Why this difference in coverage by the U.S. press?  Again, if one were to look at the magnitude of these two events, Venezuela’s Caracazo would deserve as much, if not more, coverage than the killings in Beijing.   However, the killings during the Caracazo were, in the word of Chomsky again, of “unworthy victims,” because these killings were carried out by a government – that of President Carlos Andres Perez – that was aligned with the United States.  And, the David that would bring down this Goliath was Hugo Chavez, a perceived enemy of the U.S.

Moreover, the Caracazo is a problem for U.S. journalists because the number of its victims dwarfs the number of individuals (a total of 42) killed during the most recently months of protests in Venezuela.   And, this 42 includes a sizable number of state security forces and pro-government activists who were killed by violent opposition protestors. [6]  In other words, the reaction of Venezuela’s government, now led by Chavez successor Nicolas Maduro, appears, and in fact has been, much more restrained than that of the pro-U.S. government which preceded Hugo Chavez.  But again, you would not know this from U.S. media coverage of these events.

In short, the Caracazo is an inconvenient event for the U.S. media, for it calls into question the prevailing and ceaseless narrative that the U.S. is on the side of freedom and human rights in the world while its ostensible enemies — like China and the Chavista government in Venezuela — are opposed to these.  Of course, the opposite is many times true, with the U.S. perceived around the world, and quite rightly so, as the greatest threat to world peace.  [7]  But again, you would not know this either from the captive U.S. press and its Orwellian coverage of world events.

The take away from all of this: question your government and the media that is so closely aligned with it if you want to know the truth.

Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

Notes. 

[1] http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-tiananmen-white-house-china-victims-20140604-story.html

 

[2]  http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_myth_of_tiananmen.php?page=all

 

[3] http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/13/world/turmoil-china-tiananmen-crackdown-student-s-account-questioned-major-points.html

 

[4] http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-12593085

 

[5] http://venezuelanalysis.com/video/8695

 

[6] http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/10722

[7] http://bit.ly/1okhlQL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

More articles by:
June 28, 2016
Jonathan Cook
The Neoliberal Prison: Brexit Hysteria and the Liberal Mind
Paul Street
Bernie, Bakken, and Electoral Delusion: Letting Rich Guys Ruin Iowa and the World
Anthony DiMaggio
Fatally Flawed: the Bi-Partisan Travesty of American Health Care Reform
Mike King
The “Free State of Jones” in Trump’s America: Freedom Beyond White Imagination
Antonis Vradis
Stop Shedding Tears for the EU Monster: Brexit, the View From the Peloponnese
Omar Kassem
The End of the Atlantic Project: Slamming the Brakes on the Neoliberal Order
Binoy Kampmark
Brexit and the Neoliberal Revolt Against Jeremy Corbyn
Ruth Hopkins
Save Bear Butte: Mecca of the Lakota
Celestino Gusmao
Time to End Impunity for Suharto’s Crimes in Indonesia and Timor-Leste
Thomas Knapp
SCOTUS: Amply Serving Law Enforcement’s Interests versus Society’s
Manuel E. Yepe
Capitalism is the Opposite of Democracy
Winslow Myers
Up Against the Wall
Chris Ernesto
Bernie’s “Political Revolution” = Vote for Clinton and the Neocons
Stephanie Van Hook
The Time for Silence is Over
Ajamu Nangwaya
Toronto’s Bathhouse Raids: Racialized, Queer Solidarity and Police Violence
June 27, 2016
Robin Hahnel
Brexit: Establishment Freak Out
James Bradley
Omar’s Motive
Gregory Wilpert – Michael Hudson
How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
Leonard Peltier
41 Years Since Jumping Bull (But 500 Years of Trauma)
Rev. William Alberts
Orlando: the Latest Victim of Radicalizing American Imperialism
Patrick Cockburn
Brexiteers Have Much in Common With Arab Spring Protesters
Franklin Lamb
How 100 Syrians, 200 Russians and 11 Dogs Out-Witted ISIS and Saved Palmyra
John Grant
Omar Mateen: The Answers are All Around Us
Dean Baker
In the Wake of Brexit Will the EU Finally Turn Away From Austerity?
Ralph Nader
The IRS and the Self-Minimization of Congressman Jason Chaffetz
Johan Galtung
Goodbye UK, Goodbye Great Britain: What Next?
Martha Pskowski
Detained in Dilley: Deportation and Asylum in Texas
Binoy Kampmark
Headaches of Empire: Brexit’s Effect on the United States
Dave Lindorff
Honest Election System Needed to Defeat Ruling Elite
Louisa Willcox
Delisting Grizzly Bears to Save the Endangered Species Act?
Jason Holland
The Tragedy of Nothing
Jeffrey St. Clair
Revolution Reconsidered: a Fragment (Guest Starring Bernard Sanders in the Role of Robespierre)
Weekend Edition
June 24, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
A Blow for Peace and Democracy: Why the British Said No to Europe
Pepe Escobar
Goodbye to All That: Why the UK Left the EU
Michael Hudson
Revolts of the Debtors: From Socrates to Ibn Khaldun
Andrew Levine
Summer Spectaculars: Prelude to a Tea Party?
Kshama Sawant
Beyond Bernie: Still Not With Her
Mike Whitney
¡Basta Ya, Brussels! British Voters Reject EU Corporate Slavestate
Tariq Ali
Panic in the House: Brexit as Revolt Against the Political Establishment
Paul Street
Miranda, Obama, and Hamilton: an Orwellian Ménage à Trois for the Neoliberal Age
Ellen Brown
The War on Weed is Winding Down, But Will Monsanto Emerge the Winner?
Gary Leupp
Why God Created the Two-Party System
Conn Hallinan
Brexit Vote: a Very British Affair (But Spain May Rock the Continent)
Ruth Fowler
England, My England
Jeffrey St. Clair
Lines Written on the Occasion of Bernie Sanders’ Announcement of His Intention to Vote for Hillary Clinton
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail