Nope. Not doing it. You have demonstrated that you’re not here for a conversation. You’re just here to virtue signal, state your unexamined beliefs as universally accepted facts, and never ever ever engage in good faith. I won’t be dragged into a debate until you address the fact that you pivoted to avoid actual debate. Until then, I have no interest in arguing with you about any topic.

It’s pretty easy to look up China’s terrible early foreign policy. Nearly every Western communist who has done research into China has had to address it.

You think me saying that violence during the Tiananmen Square student protests is “speaking positively” about it? It was a terrible event, it just wasn’t what Western propagandists say it is. It wasn’t a massacre by the government, and it wasn’t the military opening fire on unarmed protestors. It wasn’t tanks crushing human bodies in the stretlet. It wasn’t any of those things. And it was still a bad event. People died, both protestors and security personnel. There was violence. The fact that you think me saying this is “positive” because I reject the propaganda about a massacre for which there is no evidence and against which there is ample evidence even from Western journalists - that’s exactly what I’m talking about when I talk about your beliefs not matching reality.

You’re still incapable of sticking to your original point which is that China is an exceptionally bad actor in taking quotes out of context to create a narrative. Until and unless you are capable of having that discussion, you cannot earn credibility by just continuing to pivot to new topics and demanding that I engage you in debate about historical facts. I won’t do it because you have shown yourself to be unwilling to argue in good faith.