Hong-Kong Protests


Xsizor

Junior Member
Registered Member
:)
@Brumby.
Not interested in an exchange of ad-hominems. Psychological projection is quite the thing for some people. I've made my points clear.

Back to topic.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

There are strong localist forces who type into
"Cantonese" exclusivity/oppression beliefs. China ought to be handling it with care. One of the reasons why I am not inclined to see HK become a degraded rotting city - as some wants it to become - is in consideration of this.
 

Pika

Junior Member
Registered Member
Is it depressing that it's too political or that it seems that you are deluged by the overwhelming media coverage in support of the riots? Am I misunderstanding you that you hope that the riots can be put down by PAP?
No I'm not hoping for any interventions but initially misreading Beijing govt. I assumed they would intervene with the PAP which is why I made this thread in this first place.

I DON'T SUPPORT ANY SIDES and dislike politics in general, but realistically accessing the situation, the pro-democracy protesters have little chance of succeeding so I don't understand western support for them. Time is on Beijing side.

My regret is not clarifying the purpose of this thread which was to SIMPLY POST BREAKING NEWS ABOUT THE HK PROTESTS (which would include PAP movements).

Of course discussions/questions/inquiry of the posted news on this thread was inevitable. But I never wanted this thread to diverge into politics discussions and personal animosity towards each. Again my fault for not expecting that.
 

KYli

Senior Member
Whilst you may be quoting Article 8 of the Basic law "The common law, rules of equity, ordinances, subordinate legislation and customary law shall be maintained."
you omitted to quote the full provision which include :
“… , except for any that contravene this Law, and subject to any amendment by the legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.”



Cap. 241 Emergency Regulations Ordinance is an archaic law that was enacted on February 28, 1922 and the amendments you referred to in 1999 was solely in respect of penalties with the original provisions untouched. There are two legal reasons as to whether the use of the Cap 241 ERO has constitutional mustard, viz
(1) use of Cap241 generally undermines the joint agreement as there is a Basic Law provisions to Emergency regulations; and
(2) it can be argued that Cap241 specifically contravene Article 8 of the Basic Law
Carrie Lam herself stated the following during the announcement that Hong Kong has not entered into a state of emergency
“Hong Kong is not in a state of emergency and we are not proclaiming that Hong Kong is entering a state of emergency. But we are indeed in an occasion of serious danger,”

Currently her use if the ERO is being legally challenged in the courts and we will have to wait for the judicial process to work through the system.

The merits of the case is decided by the courts and not whether you are from HK or not.
It is funny the way you keep changing the subject and twisting my words. Firstly, I quoted the full provision from my initial response to you. Secondly, I have already stated in my initial response it is up to the court to decide but automatically the NPCSC holds the power of final interpretation. ." Thirdly, I never said that because I am from HK so I get to decide. Don't try to twist the facts. I only said that since I am from HK so I have knowledge about the Basic Law.

You said, "the Emergency Ordinance is already superceded by the Emergency Law as provided in the Basic Law." which I have pointed out it is a complete false statement. The Emergency Ordinance is never superseded by the Emergency Law as these are a complete different thing which shows that you have no idea about the Basic Law. The Emergency Ordinance was amended by the legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in 1999 which means The Emergency Ordinance is perfectly legal. Lastly, you are the one who declared and decided that Carrie Lam invoking the Emergency Ordinance illegal but I on the other hand said, "The only thing the opposition can do is to ask the court to declare the Emergency Law illegal but automatically the NPCSC holds the power of final interpretation."
 

Dolcevita

Senior Member
All threads have to be closed one day. This thread has to be closed too. Now that i think about it...Why not ?

LOL. That is a fatalistic view, It is like saying we will all die one day. Why not now. Just saying how silly this sound.

Anyway, this thread serves a purpose. This is one of the few outlet where western narratives can be challenged. We will never be able to eliminate the lies and prejudice, but I do believe there are many honest member and viewers that are here to learn the truth so elusive in the Anglo controlled media. This is the reason for this thread to remain open and this is the reason why malicious members are so afraid and desperate to close this thread,
 

jimmyjames30x30

Junior Member
Registered Member
Your statement is an example of why I considered it unproductive to engage in a conversation because it is not logical or factual but simply emotional. Yours is not an exception but typical representation where emotions are predominant rather than logic or fact.

"Bashing the CCP is bashing China" is your perception but is not grounded in logic or fact. Your statement lacks truth values. In logic, the CCP is a political entity and China is a country. In logic, they are different entities even if your perception is driven by an emotional attachment. They are not the same. In fact, the CCP has approx. 90 million plus members as contrast to China which has a population in excess of 1.4 billion Chinese. CCP's representation is less than 7 %. That said, because China's political system is a one party state, China's policies are a by product of the CCP. My issue as with others like minded is with the CCP's policies and not China per se. That is a distinction that you are unable to make because you are driven by emotions rather than logic or fact

It is a distinctive point that if you care to remember I specifically made in post #1934 which you were included even though it was not directed to you. This was what I said.
"However do note that in many conversations and in the HK protest, there is a distinction made between contesting the actions of the CCP as opposed to against the people of China. Even Bannon in that interview clearly referenced to CCP. Those HK people who opposed the extradition bill and the associated demands simply do not trust the CCP' as its actions.are always party ahead of the country and that includes HK"
When you talk about these, please remind yourself that you are talking about a subject matter of comparative civilizations. China is not part your western civilizations, it does not want to be, and it never will be. China is not Japan or South Korea. China is China. Don't use the norms of your own civilization as a universal rule, because they are NOT.

China is NOT your typical nation state, which is a concept founded in the history and political science of the Europe. China is China, and China has always been China. Traditionally, China is not called a country, it was called an imperial court "天朝". Read enough Chinese history and literature, and you will know that traditional Chinese do not usually refer to their "country" as a country ("~国"), it was referred to an imperial court, or imperial dynasty. The idea of "country" has always been subservient to the idea of "the imperial court".

I think this is because China has many countries: Wu (吴), Chu (楚), Bashu (巴蜀), Qilu (齐鲁), Qinchuan(秦川), ....etc. These are the countries (国). China is above that. This is not just a simple territorial divide. Without the idea of China above, these "countries" can form their own organic nation states. These don't even have ethnic/racial divides like the Turks or Tibetans. They are all part of China simply because China is not a nation state. China is a civilizational state.

There are no existential conflict between China the civilization state, and the many little Chinas the (could-be) nation states. Because the idea of China is not on the same level of the nation state. Chinese people are born and raised with the awareness that they are sharing country with distinct people they have little commonalities with. I was aware of this as early as in elementary school. I was born in the city of Wuhan, basically in what I would call the Chu (楚) identity. I instant felt foreign when going to Jiangsu (江苏), or Guangdong (广东). But, I didn't feel foreign at all when going to Hunan (湖南) province, or anywhere else in Hubei (湖北) province, or south part of Henan (河南) province. I don't understand Henan or Hunan dialect/languages, or even some local dialects within Hubei province, but I didn't feel foreign there. But for Jiangsu and Guangdong, I did feel foreign there and I don't understand their language/dialect.

Similarly speaking, some neighboring language-culture regions within China forms a cluster, even if people don't typically understand each other's dialect, but they are close enough that they feel akin them. You will see people in Guangxi feeling a lot more kinship with people in Guangdong than the people in Guizhou. People in Fujian would feel a lot more kinship to people in Taiwan than people in Guangdong. This is the idea of the country, the nation state.

China is none of those could-be "countries". For the Chinese to put their Country above the Party (which is heir to the concept of the imperial court), they will only end up destroying China. Because their concept of a country is a bottom up concept, based upon each of their could-be nation states. This is why the Party is above the country. Because the without the Party, there is NO one country of China.
 

jimmyjames30x30

Junior Member
Registered Member
Your statement is an example of why I considered it unproductive to engage in a conversation because it is not logical or factual but simply emotional. Yours is not an exception but typical representation where emotions are predominant rather than logic or fact.

"Bashing the CCP is bashing China" is your perception but is not grounded in logic or fact. Your statement lacks truth values. In logic, the CCP is a political entity and China is a country. In logic, they are different entities even if your perception is driven by an emotional attachment. They are not the same. In fact, the CCP has approx. 90 million plus members as contrast to China which has a population in excess of 1.4 billion Chinese. CCP's representation is less than 7 %. That said, because China's political system is a one party state, China's policies are a by product of the CCP. My issue as with others like minded is with the CCP's policies and not China per se. That is a distinction that you are unable to make because you are driven by emotions rather than logic or fact

It is a distinctive point that if you care to remember I specifically made in post #1934 which you were included even though it was not directed to you. This was what I said.
"However do note that in many conversations and in the HK protest, there is a distinction made between contesting the actions of the CCP as opposed to against the people of China. Even Bannon in that interview clearly referenced to CCP. Those HK people who opposed the extradition bill and the associated demands simply do not trust the CCP' as its actions.are always party ahead of the country and that includes HK"
For example, the concept of national loyalty or patriotism for Chinese people is materialized in the phrase “報國”: to repay the "country" (presumably with one's own life). However, this does not really make sense in context of the phrase itself, because 報 also carries the meaning "to return...". This means that the "country" (國) in this case at least allegorically has a physical body, which somehow gave birth to this individual how wants to repay his life. In Chinese culture, an imperial court or the Party (CCP) can not give birth to anyone, these two concepts has the allegorical the male gender. In Chinese culture, "Country" has the female gender, allegorically.

In Chinese culture, the Imperial Court (which the CCP is heir to) is the Father Figure, and the Country (countries) is the Mother Figure. Chinese traditional culture calls on men to love and obey their father, while protect and take care of their mother. The “Country” represents the physical regions of the earth, which is female (or Yin, 陰).

Another evidence is in poetry. Traditional Chinese poets use the word "country" as a specific region(s) of land within in China. You see them use the term "北國" (Northern Country) or "南國" (Southern Country). These does NOT mean the northern/southern part of the (one) country, rather, these are different countries: the country of the north, or the country of the south. This is because you NEVER encounter even one person who says "eastern country" (東國) or "western country" (西國) to refer to the western/eastern part of China. This is because there are NO real countries in China that could be thought of as the country of the east, or country of the west.

Northern country could trace their roots all the way to Shang and Zhou dynasty, which are in what we call Northern China Plain today. Southern country can trace their cultural root to at least the Kingdom of Chu, which for a the majority of the history of the Later Zhou dynasty, was the emerging power that is a civilizational challenger to the Zhou Court. The southern country is also enriched with waves of migration from the central plain as a result of nomadic invasion for 20 centuries.
 
Your statement is an example of why I considered it unproductive to engage in a conversation because it is not logical or factual but simply emotional. Yours is not an exception but typical representation where emotions are predominant rather than logic or fact.

"Bashing the CCP is bashing China" is your perception but is not grounded in logic or fact. Your statement lacks truth values. In logic, the CCP is a political entity and China is a country. In logic, they are different entities even if your perception is driven by an emotional attachment. They are not the same. In fact, the CCP has approx. 90 million plus members as contrast to China which has a population in excess of 1.4 billion Chinese. CCP's representation is less than 7 %. That said, because China's political system is a one party state, China's policies are a by product of the CCP. My issue as with others like minded is with the CCP's policies and not China per se. That is a distinction that you are unable to make because you are driven by emotions rather than logic or fact

It is a distinctive point that if you care to remember I specifically made in post #1934 which you were included even though it was not directed to you. This was what I said.
"However do note that in many conversations and in the HK protest, there is a distinction made between contesting the actions of the CCP as opposed to against the people of China. Even Bannon in that interview clearly referenced to CCP. Those HK people who opposed the extradition bill and the associated demands simply do not trust the CCP' as its actions.are always party ahead of the country and that includes HK"
No, you are the one who simply repeats things hoping they become true for the sake of repetitive value. I can't count the number of times that different members have explained to you that China and the CCP are one and you cannot support or attack one without doing the same to the other but you all you do is cling to your line that they are separate. This, once again, is a desperately wrong view religiously held by those who hate China because they fear facing its population and like to imagine that they are only facing a small government instead.

Your "logic" for why the CCP is not China is as stupid as saying, "Your brain doesn't work, but that's not an insult to you because your brain is only 3 pounds while your body is 180 pounds so clearly, your brain is not you but represents only 1.7% of you. I have a problem with your brain, not you." That's how stupid you sound. Once again, the CCP is the brain and China is the body; the brain and the body are not technically the same but they are the same person and cannot thrive independently.

That emotion that you are referring to is Chinese people's love and support for a China with the CCP at the helm. That's what matters; that's what we're really contesting; that's what you like to imagine isn't there by claiming "suppression" and "lack of freedom." This is the core issue that you have lost and cannot come to terms with: Chinese people love China and defend the CCP like it is their own soul that you are attacking. And many of these people on this board didn't even grow up in China with some not even able to read Chinese propaganda. Their love came from an independent analysis of the merits and achievements of the CCP while submerged in the environment of constant Western propaganda that they grew up in. Chinese people love China and the love the CCP; your obfuscation is irrelevant.

All the evidence, even analogies have been used for the benefit of your education but you seem like someone brainwashed by a religious cult like Falun Gong and thus incapable of learning. The saddest thing is that you might think you know China better than all the Chinese people trying to teach you about it.
 
Last edited:

Pika

Junior Member
Registered Member
@Bltizo or any mods roaming around.

Will my account be warned or disciplined if this thread gets deleted or locked?
 

Top