solarz
Brigadier
They've been pushing for this for a long time, and they finally got it.
Hong-Kong Protests
- Thread starter Pika
- Start date
They've been pushing for this for a long time, and they finally got it.
Quickie
Colonel
The fact is the HK policemen can easily get killed (with a sharpened metal rod for example) when they let the rioters get to within arm-distance to them.
I believe in most countries the police would have already fired their weapon when the rioters come to within a few steps with dangerous weapons.
It doesn't have to end. As long as it doesn't reach any of the strategic red lines I've stated a while ago, it is not necessarily a bad thing. You have to look at the bigger picture. The West led by the US has long treated any so-called "challenger" civilizations with great suspicion. There are no way for a rising China to evade the scorn and suspicion of the US led West. Especially now, even if China stopped growing, it will still no be enough. For them, they want to see China NEVER again have the possibility of challenging them, ever. Just like how they treated the Russians, after the fall of USSR.
This is why the US led West will pour energy and resources into containing and sabotaging China. Containment alone is extremely difficult in the long run (we can discuss why in another thread). This is why they will put resources into sabotage actions. This is a given, not an if.
Again, the above means that a lot of Western resources WILL BE put into sabotaging China's stability. Since containment alone is not going to work in the long run. In any sabotage mission, Hong Kong would be a low hanging fruit, both for terrorism and for "Occupy"-type of unrest.
Suppose China act immediately on Hong Kong, get the whole thing over and fight the necessary diplomatic battle with the US led West, and get this whole thing over fast. And Hong Kong unrest is put down, and tranquility restored. So what? Does this really cure the root cause of why such an unrest will happened in the first place? IT WILL NOT. Because that which fuels it, is the endeavor by the US led West to carry out sabotage mission to bring instability within China. If such endeavors/intentions do not die, there will always be sabotage to spark unrest. HK is just the low hanging fruit. If even the low hanging fruit become difficult for the US led West to initiate an unrest, what do you think will happened? Do you think they will simply give up? NO, the US led West does NOT give up on such things. In fact, if they faces obvious obstacles, they will pause, rethink, and improve their games. So that the next sabotage mission will be more intense, more effective and more radical. This is not in the interest of China.
This is why I think the best scenario is for Hong Kong unrest is to go on like this, as long as it doesn't cross the red lines. This will become a draining pit for the sabotage mission of US led West. The game of draining pit is difficult, it has to take "the middle route". This means that it has to be sufficiently rewarding to draw the other side in. This is why I think the HK government is correct to show weakness against the protesters. This will draw the US in.
The best scenario is to have no end game: the protest doesn't die down, but the HK government does not cave in like Yanukovych's government in 2014 either. This is the best game for China. Because this is a game that will become a draining pit for the sabotage endeavors by the US led West. What qualifies as a draining pit? A draining pit is something that rewards you with continuous superficial fruitless "victories", so much so that your brain tricks you into thinking that everything is going your way, even when nothing strategic is gained and you are going nowhere.
This game will give Western media endless materials to chew on. They will fill the entire Western world with a false sense of triumphalism, in which they will believe that they are winning one battle after another, even when there are no strategic gain what so ever.
Last edited:
I think you are thinking too high level.
Yes, obviously there is resources put into this unrest by Western governments (just saw more of those slickly produced Britons in HK banners), but I think the large number of these rioters are simply people who "didn't get on the right train" and now they are angry and blaming PRC.
Arts-majors types who increasingly find themselves marginalized by a technocratic society. Happening in the West too (G20 protests, Yellow Vests, Black Bloc vandalism)
Yes, obviously there is resources put into this unrest by Western governments (just saw more of those slickly produced Britons in HK banners), but I think the large number of these rioters are simply people who "didn't get on the right train" and now they are angry and blaming PRC.
Arts-majors types who increasingly find themselves marginalized by a technocratic society. Happening in the West too (G20 protests, Yellow Vests, Black Bloc vandalism)
Riots doesn't matter, because almost countries has riots. The US has lots of riots: the occupy movement, BLM, etc. France has riots: the Yellow Jackets, etc. Russia has riots in Moscow. The UK has riots. Iran has riots. This doesn't matter. What matters is how this particular riot fits in the bigger picture of the geo-strategic contest between China and the West.
I will add my twopeeneth here.
Mrs Sampan and my Inlaws are all Hongers and most of them living in HK.
I was there for a couple of weeks in early June, just as this was starting to kick off.
Firstly, the extradition bill was widely unpopular and this spread throughout all strands of Hong Kong society; old and young, workers and professionals etc, which is why you saw the massive turnouts during those early months.
Many that supported the protest against the bill were however horrified by the violence of the hard core protestors and did not wish to associate with them.
Now the bill is withdrawn, the widespread support has waned considerably and really shrunk back to a radicalised hard core of young protestors.
I do note a worrying sectarian divide in all this. Most of the protestors seem to come from the congregations or schools run by, the many Evangelical style churches that are in Hong Kong and which have specialised in moving into the private education (cramming) system.
Most of those that dislike the protestors are older and tend to be Bhuddists.
Many Hong Kongers are however worried of being swallowed up by the mainland and would like to preserve their rights.
I can think of three obvious solutions.
1) Extend the transition period of one country two systems by at least another 25 years
2) Encourage more young Hk'ers to work and interact more across the border.
3) Tighter control by the HKLC of the activities of these churches.
Mrs Sampan and my Inlaws are all Hongers and most of them living in HK.
I was there for a couple of weeks in early June, just as this was starting to kick off.
Firstly, the extradition bill was widely unpopular and this spread throughout all strands of Hong Kong society; old and young, workers and professionals etc, which is why you saw the massive turnouts during those early months.
Many that supported the protest against the bill were however horrified by the violence of the hard core protestors and did not wish to associate with them.
Now the bill is withdrawn, the widespread support has waned considerably and really shrunk back to a radicalised hard core of young protestors.
I do note a worrying sectarian divide in all this. Most of the protestors seem to come from the congregations or schools run by, the many Evangelical style churches that are in Hong Kong and which have specialised in moving into the private education (cramming) system.
Most of those that dislike the protestors are older and tend to be Bhuddists.
Many Hong Kongers are however worried of being swallowed up by the mainland and would like to preserve their rights.
I can think of three obvious solutions.
1) Extend the transition period of one country two systems by at least another 25 years
2) Encourage more young Hk'ers to work and interact more across the border.
3) Tighter control by the HKLC of the activities of these churches.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
HK police just shot an 18-year-old with live rounds.
This is beyond outrageous; the public will certainly tone up their resentment against the CCP and their military-backed armed apparatus.
Once again, history precedents tend to suggest that single incidents like this one can quickly cartwheel into a major upheaval among the protesters, who up until now have been relatively peaceful in their activities.
This is beyond outrageous; the public will certainly tone up their resentment against the CCP and their military-backed armed apparatus.
Once again, history precedents tend to suggest that single incidents like this one can quickly cartwheel into a major upheaval among the protesters, who up until now have been relatively peaceful in their activities.
I can see where you are coming from. Sure these are good suggestions. But I don't think its meaningful for China. First of all, I don't think PRC really want Hong Kong to be less "Western". The CCP as the ruling body of China has a goal of "Peaceful Re-rise of China". The word "re-rise" is important, because this means that the CCP's ultimate vision is not something radically new, but rather something historical. And if you look at historical China as a civilization, you will notice that China's system is more about creating a sino-centric regional order, rather than sinicization of non-Chinese. In fact, traditional China was very much against sinicization of foreign entities outside of China. Traditional Chinese society actively limit the outflow of books form China to the Steppes, to S.E.Asia via un-official means.
Traditional China is very different from the evangelistic West. Traditional China don't want everyone to be more like China, unless it is faced with a more powerful and advanced nomadic warrior state like the Khitan Liao dynasty and the Jurchen Jin dynasty. With the Khitan and Jurchen, the Song Dynasty has no military mean to deter. This is why the Song reversed previous practice of guarding culture like guarding state secrets, and engaged in massive exporting of culture in books, arts, poetry, cuisine, etc. All these was to neutralize the Khitan and the Jurchen, and those were successful to a certain degree. However, as soon as the Ming replaced the Mongols, the practice of safeguarding Chinese culture and controlling outflows of books resumed.
This is why I don't think China will ever want to end the 1C2S situation. China itself is big enough, and it is a technology-centric society. There are very little incentives to make Hong Kong just another mainland China city, because mainland China already have 10s of huge cities much larger and more advanced than Hong Kong, with much more robust industry and scientific/technological capabilities already greater than Hong Kong. And these cities are growing a lot faster than Hong Kong. In this regard, I think taking back Taiwan and making Taiwan in the same system as mainland are worth much much more than ending 1C2S in Hong Kong. Taiwan has good industry, decent R&D capability and some very specialized industrial know-hows. Hong Kong has none of that.
Last edited: