Hong-Kong Protests

jimmyjames30x30

Junior Member
Registered Member
1C2S was always meant to favour China, no matter which of your scenarios came to pass, of course DXP knew this.

However, the argument about "needing" HK to fail is not proven by your scenarios. After all, Deng modeled Shenzhen SEZ after HK economically. He knew HK had an effective model to build up the economy. HK's issues are not directly related to the governance model, but the entire city's failure to adapt to the changing winds.



I hate to quote myself, but I think it is very relevant to your points. I believe you mentioned it yourself in the past, the need for technical expertise. That's a reason why HK is falling behind, too embroiled in politics. If you were HK'er, and don't care about politics, why would you stay? There are so many opportunities in mainland China.

Too much time in HK Is wasted debating these issues. The anti-mainland groups put up far too much resistance to any projects that bring HK and mainland closer together. Look at the HSR line from HK to GD. It took almost 10 years for only 26km. Protest after protest, dumb issues like mainland officers doing customs clearance on HK side, meanwhile mainland built the line all the way from SZ to Xiamen.

Like you said, there is a need to think strategically and HK did not. You can argue that this is a failure of democracy, but if people were not so poisoned, perhaps the story would be different.

My father was actually among the 2nd group of cadres who formed the management training class (蛇口工业区干部培训班)of the Shekou Industrial Zone Holdings (蛇口工业区) of the China Merchant Group(招商局). He and his comrades works directly under Yuan Geng (袁庚), most of them are in top managerial positions in important Chinese companies today. I am NOT trying to reveal anything. But if you know anything about Shenzhen, you would know what I am talking about. But dude, you don't really know what you're talking.
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
I won't pretend like I have insider knowledge, but Yuan Geng was based in HK for a time and China Merchant was one of the first mainland companies listed on HKSE. Maybe these factors were of limited value, but are you are really going to say early development of SZ has nothing to do with HK? Maybe I just don't know the history as you are rewriting it! Anyway, this is OT
 
it appears someone hit back (I have to leave right after putting links below):

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Government condemns attack on Hong Kong protest leader Jimmy Sham
  • All kinds of violence are unacceptable, says deputy leader, adding that police will bring culprits to justice
  • Civil Human Right Front leader was hit with hammers and spanners on Wednesday night, the second time he was attacked in two months
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

dratsabknihcllik

Junior Member
Registered Member
Unless, it's all intentional.
I have been saying this many times. It does hurt me to say this. I have stated my opinions a long time ago, but it was shot down quite harshly by a lot of patriotic HK'er (i presume) in this forum. I understand their sentiment, and I know this will hurt their feelings deeply.

A person like Deng Xiaoping has gone through a life time of war, be it actual hot war or internal power struggle. He is not stupid to put out the 1C2S system which even an average graduate of a political science master's degree could foresee its fatal flaws. Deng Xiaoping is a military commander and general. He is not an ideologue. He thinks in terms of cold calculated game theory. He thinks in terms of possible scenarios on a strategic level. When he negotiated for the return of HK in the 1980s-1990s, China has yet to even prove itself to be able to sustain its own economic growth. The terms he stated was 50 years. Think about this. On a strategic level, what would be the worst case scenario for China when 50 years passes?

The worst case for China at the 50 year point would be if HK, under the British common law system of governance, was able to sustain much larger growth and advances into a high-tech futuristic city state, while the mainland stagnates and lags behind more and more in every way.
This is because, if HK have been on the trend of surpassing mainland in terms of growth and development for 50 years of 1C2S:
1. The CCP would have lost all legitimacy as a form of governance, it would have proven itself to be ineffective and obsolete,
2. HK would have an even stronger voice and greater influence on the rest of China than Beijing.
3. 1C1S would have been something very unfavorable to the CCP at the 50 year mark. The CCP would either plead to prolong the 1C2S, or to be forced to remodel mainland after HK at the mark.

This is why I think it is in Deng Xiaoping's favor and in China's favor for HK for fail. And use HK as an counter-example to strengthen Chinese patriotism/nationalism and Chinese people's faith in PRC's socialist system, to showcase a failed HK vs a successful mainland. You guys might think this is draconian and cold-hearted. But for a true patriotic leader who love his fellow people and his nation, he would be righteously selfish. HKer's are as much Chinese as mainlanders, in the heart of most Chinese, they do believe this. But political leader don't think this way. HK, which is model after another civilization, with a totally different (and competing) form of governance/political system, will always be considered an outsider by a political leader.

And thank GOD, the democrats in the USA are inadvertently helping China by passing that Law. Because if you read the details of that Law they pass, the only meaningful punishment entailed was to strip HK of its special status in deal with the USA. This will further reduced HK's comparative advantage, which will see the city drop lower and lower, falling more and more behind.

Recently I read some Chinese articles which actually spelled out the same points I made. One of those made a very good analogy. The author says that HK is pretty much a "Honeypot", a terminology in computer security.
Finally someone has nailed it.
A shattered Hong Kong is a boon for Shanghai and PRC.
 

dratsabknihcllik

Junior Member
Registered Member
1C2S was always meant to favour China, no matter which of your scenarios came to pass, of course DXP knew this.

However, the argument about "needing" HK to fail is not proven by your scenarios. After all, Deng modeled Shenzhen SEZ after HK economically. He knew HK had an effective model to build up the economy. HK's issues are not directly related to the governance model, but the entire city's failure to adapt to the changing winds.



I hate to quote myself, but I think it is very relevant to your points. I believe you mentioned it yourself in the past, the need for technical expertise. That's a reason why HK is falling behind, too embroiled in politics. If you were HK'er, and don't care about politics, why would you stay? There are so many opportunities in mainland China.

Too much time in HK Is wasted debating these issues. The anti-mainland groups put up far too much resistance to any projects that bring HK and mainland closer together. Look at the HSR line from HK to GD. It took almost 10 years for only 26km. Protest after protest, dumb issues like mainland officers doing customs clearance on HK side, meanwhile mainland built the line all the way from SZ to Xiamen.

Like you said, there is a need to think strategically and HK did not. You can argue that this is a failure of democracy, but if people were not so poisoned, perhaps the story would be different.
I am afraid you haven't got the memo. Please introspect, what can HK give that cannot give any other major Chinese city?
It is in China's interest to hollow out HK financial services sector and try settle them in mainland. Let HK have its freedom.
 
1C2S was always meant to favour China, no matter which of your scenarios came to pass, of course DXP knew this.

However, the argument about "needing" HK to fail is not proven by your scenarios. After all, Deng modeled Shenzhen SEZ after HK economically. He knew HK had an effective model to build up the economy. HK's issues are not directly related to the governance model, but the entire city's failure to adapt to the changing winds.

I hate to quote myself, but I think it is very relevant to your points. I believe you mentioned it yourself in the past, the need for technical expertise. That's a reason why HK is falling behind, too embroiled in politics. If you were HK'er, and don't care about politics, why would you stay? There are so many opportunities in mainland China.

Too much time in HK Is wasted debating these issues. The anti-mainland groups put up far too much resistance to any projects that bring HK and mainland closer together. Look at the HSR line from HK to GD. It took almost 10 years for only 26km. Protest after protest, dumb issues like mainland officers doing customs clearance on HK side, meanwhile mainland built the line all the way from SZ to Xiamen.

Like you said, there is a need to think strategically and HK did not. You can argue that this is a failure of democracy, but if people were not so poisoned, perhaps the story would be different.

I don't know if some of these other posters are deliberately trying to sow discord between mainland and HK Chinese for ulterior motives or if they are projecting their hatred for the rioters and conspirators on to all of HK or if they are simply prejudiced against HK for some other reason, either way their take that China is out to "ruin" HK is inaccurate. HK needs to diversify away from international finance anyways, being "forced" by these circumstances to do so is as good a reason as any and actually saves China effort in improving HK.
 

jimmyjames30x30

Junior Member
Registered Member
I won't pretend like I have insider knowledge, but Yuan Geng was based in HK for a time and China Merchant was one of the first mainland companies listed on HKSE. Maybe these factors were of limited value, but are you are really going to say early development of SZ has nothing to do with HK? Maybe I just don't know the history as you are rewriting it! Anyway, this is OT

That's quite slippery of you. Remember your own words in a previous quote:
1C2S was always meant to favour China, no matter which of your scenarios came to pass, of course DXP knew this.

However, the argument about "needing" HK to fail is not proven by your scenarios. After all, Deng modeled Shenzhen SEZ after HK economically. He knew HK had an effective model to build up the economy. HK's issues are not directly related to the governance model, but the entire city's failure to adapt to the changing winds.



I hate to quote myself, but I think it is very relevant to your points. I believe you mentioned it yourself in the past, the need for technical expertise. That's a reason why HK is falling behind, too embroiled in politics. If you were HK'er, and don't care about politics, why would you stay? There are so many opportunities in mainland China.

Too much time in HK Is wasted debating these issues. The anti-mainland groups put up far too much resistance to any projects that bring HK and mainland closer together. Look at the HSR line from HK to GD. It took almost 10 years for only 26km. Protest after protest, dumb issues like mainland officers doing customs clearance on HK side, meanwhile mainland built the line all the way from SZ to Xiamen.

Like you said, there is a need to think strategically and HK did not. You can argue that this is a failure of democracy, but if people were not so poisoned, perhaps the story would be different.

You repeatedly stresses that
Deng modeled Shenzhen SEZ after HK economically.
That is as much of an outsider's view as it can be. Because Shenzhen wasn't modeled after Hong Kong at all. Now you try to support your argument by saying
Yuan Geng was based in HK for a time and China Merchant was one of the first mainland companies listed on HKSE.
Lol, are trying to imply that every Chinese cadre who has worked/based in a place outside of mainland China necessarily modeled their reform project after the place they temporarily based on? Are you also trying to imply that any Chinese company that listed (or be one of the first to be listed) on a stock market outside of mainland China necessarily does everything subsequent project modeled on the country/territory where they listed.

You are full of crap. Sure, Shenzhen was a giant step toward a more market-oriented economy, that the rest of China held off on for a while. But Shenzhen is first and foremost a command economy that has an open market. Shenzhen is still a command economy. HK is NOT. Shenzhen has five-year plans, and Shenzhen's economy is NOT dominated by private capital. Never was, and never will be.

Shenzhen is a Hi-technology R/D and manufacturing services oriented economy. It is planned by the Chinese government to be such. This is not determined by private capital.
HK is a services-oriented economy dominated by financial services. The HK government has NOT power nor intention to plan for HK to be anything but. HK's economical structure is determined by capital, NOT planing.

HK is NOT a command economy, it's a total free and open market, dominated by private capital. SZ is a command economy with an open market. it is NOT dominated by private capital, but by state capital.
 

dratsabknihcllik

Junior Member
Registered Member
If we look at the possibilities-

1. China intervenes in HK
2. China doesn't intervene in HK

In case 1, China will not only face more media outrage she may also face a massive economic sanction. Neither is a desired outcome for China.

In case 2, HK (probably supported by pro Chinese citizen) faces the protesto-rioter onslaught-

Now if we break down case2-
A. HK authorities prevail- no sign as of now. More importantly we don't see massive pro Chinese rallies in HK even after all these violence. The battered Venezuelan government had more visible support from the populace than HK with its apparently fed up society has.

B. HK fails to reign in the protesto-rioters. Massive economic loss along with loss of reputation.

Now if we think from Chinese perspective (not Chinese grown up or living in western societies for decades) HK or majority of its supposedly neutral populace hasn't shown any sign of tackling the issue.

HK simply doesn't deserve the connectivity to Chinese market. It's in the best interest of Chinese authorities to lure as many bfsi farms as possible to relocate to the mainland.

It may sound harsh but it's the best solution.
 
Top