In Taiwan, the phrase “June 4” is spoken in a hushed tone, like the quiet closing of a window before an incoming bluster of wind. On June 4, 1989, the violent “clearing out” of protesters in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square became a murky river in history, formed from a mixture of blood and smoke.
For China, it represents the shattering of the democratic dream. For Taiwan, it is a mirror no one dare face directly, yet cannot be ignored. Although the Tiananmen Square Massacre did not occur on Taiwan’s soil, it has profoundly shaped the nation’s understanding of peace, expression and political systems.
What kind of writers, mothers or comedians would those whose lives were extinguished on June 4 have become had they survived? Their voices could have become the very texture of the public sphere. Instead, they were left frozen among the smoke and blood-stained white shirts in old photographs. It is not that they did not speak up, but that they were silenced — silenced to the point where it is impossible to even ask how they died.
That silencing continues to this day. Last year, Chinese social media users who mentioned June 4 had their posts deleted, accounts muted and some were arrested on charges of “antagonization” and “subversion.” Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) platforms have been trained not to recognize the iconic image of “tank man,” which features an unknown Chinese man’s face-off with Chinese People Liberation Army tanks as they approached Tiananmen Square. The censorship of language, images and memory has become a form of advanced erasure — history rewritten, as if the massacre never happened.
However, Taiwan is not China. That is not just a declaration of confidence, but a reminder — we must allow this silenced part of history to keep its voice here.
In the 1990s, a detailed documentary about the massacre, titled The Gate of Heavenly Peace (天安門), circulated quietly in Taiwan’s bookstores and reading groups. The images of June 4 live on here, like an open wound reminding us that it is not merely China’s trauma — it is a deep, pulsing scar on the entire Chinese-speaking world that has yet to heal.
If the Tiananmen Square Massacre had never occurred, would China have continued on its democratic path? If so, how would we have come to understand the boundary between authoritarianism and democracy? That is not just a historical question — it is an issue of political consciousness concerning whether we can continue to speak up.
In Taiwan’s education system, the true nature of June 4 is often glossed over with the phrase “1989 pro-democracy movement,” and references to the bloody military crackdown are often vague or altogether absent. Some teachers take it upon themselves to provide additional context, while others remain silent.
However, the very absence of language itself is a political act — not teaching is also a form of teaching.
As former minister of education Ovid Tzeng (曾志朗) once said that education should be a process of cultivating subjectivity, not a gray area of conflict avoidance. If we do not talk about June 4, then we cannot understand the true price of democracy, nor can we fully grasp that fear often originates from the expansion of self-censorship.
Once, while attending a June 4 memorial vigil in Taipei’s Liberty Square, I heard someone say: “We are not only lighting candles for Chinese, we are also keeping vigil for ourselves.” That line pierced deep. As China chooses to forget its own history, Taiwan has become a refuge for memories. That is not out of pity, but out of a strong commitment to the future of the public sphere.
Remembering June 4 is about so much more than honoring the dead. It is an exercise in honing our ability to recognize the truth. Among AI-generated text, Google search results and official government narratives, we must learn to ask ourselves — who has been silenced — and why?
June 4 is not just a singular event, but an ongoing blockade. For China, it is a blockade against historical truths and civil society. For Taiwan, it is a challenge to our memory and moral imagination.
When the hashtag “#RememberJune4” (#記住六四) appears on social media in Taiwan each year, it is more than meets the eye — it is a faint yet firm act of resistance. In this era in which who remembers what is quantified and commercialized, remembrance in and of itself is a form of defiance against the system.
We remember not out of hatred, but to continue the unfinished conversation. As Indian literary theorist Gayatri Spivak argued in her 1988 essay: “Can the Subaltern Speak?” The subaltern should not be spoken over or for, but should be allowed to speak for themselves. What we can do is allow the whispers of history to continue to echo — in writing, in classrooms and in conversations at the dinner table.
Remembering June 4 — even if only in whispers — is enough to ensure that history no longer remains silent.
Liu Che-ting is a writer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou Province, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS