Hong-Kong Protests


supersnoop

Junior Member
Registered Member
It’s just tragic. Imagine if people poured into the streets in support of Tung chee-hwa back in the day, or the recent protestors focused their attacks on the HK oligarchy and real estate cartel. We’d have concrete positive changes in the lives of most Hong Kongers by now.

Unfortunately, that’s all water under the bridge at this point. Looks like Beijing’s resigned to empowering the HK bureaucracy while tolerating the tycoons. Not like there’s much alternative, the young and middle class are pretty far gone at this stage.

And I agree with you on Beijing pushing greater Bay Area integration. With politics as it is, it’s untenable for the central government to attack tycoon interests head on, so Beijing’s going to have to work around them through integrating Hong Kong with surrounding territories. Ideally, efficient integration will eventually allow Hong Kongers access to goods and services like housing at better values. Fingers crossed!
I discussed with friends a while ago that Bay Area integration should in theory should help alleviate the housing costs, possibly even boost the economy by increasing other spending. An HSR line is already built. I believe “Return Home” permits are already smart card enabled and only require tap to pass through checkpoint. If you could get from HK central business district to a ML residential district in 45 minutes, it would be true progress. Though the line as built currently does not terminate in ideal areas.

However, it is precisely the West Express Rail Link saga that doesn’t have me optimistic. It is a pure infrastructure project, but it was interrupted and hijacked into a political football. “Mainland border officials!” What a joke, Canada has had US CBP stationed in major airports for 40 years, no one pretends they will enforce US drug laws or whatever. Just a talking point fed to the traitor side by their foreign masters.
 

Biscuits

Junior Member
Registered Member
The support from citizens and the lack of support for rioters once the law has been set imho shows the true situation on the ground

Most people have been against violence and illegal collusion, but because of the foreign sponsored groups' de facto iron grip on the city throughout the last year, they were afraid to speak up. Now, laws that guarantee proportional punishment for treason exist, so people can voice their concerns without being afraid of being doxxed and violently attacked by CIA soldiers that have previously instituted a reign of terror.

The United States and Britain has violated the 1997 agreement by undermining the HK political system. The idea of 50 years without change isn't just a commitment from China's side but also commitment from UK side. It is also not written into law. China should seriously look into probing the UK over it's involvement and if necessary terminate old deals that benefit enemy countries at the expense of own citizens.
 

KYli

Senior Member
I discussed with friends a while ago that Bay Area integration should in theory should help alleviate the housing costs, possibly even boost the economy by increasing other spending. An HSR line is already built. I believe “Return Home” permits are already smart card enabled and only require tap to pass through checkpoint. If you could get from HK central business district to a ML residential district in 45 minutes, it would be true progress. Though the line as built currently does not terminate in ideal areas.

However, it is precisely the West Express Rail Link saga that doesn’t have me optimistic. It is a pure infrastructure project, but it was interrupted and hijacked into a political football. “Mainland border officials!” What a joke, Canada has had US CBP stationed in major airports for 40 years, no one pretends they will enforce US drug laws or whatever. Just a talking point fed to the traitor side by their foreign masters.
In a normal circumstance, a Bay area integration is a great idea and would be beneficial to all participants. However, HK government doesn't have the will to make this works.

For example, HK government was forced to close the border with mainland due to the pressure from the oppositions. If this is unfortunate, then HK government's inability to reopen the border is completely unacceptable. Many Hong Kong people who live in Shenzhen and Guangdong were stuck there. Think about the hundreds of thousands of HK people who can't travel back to HK for their jobs and were forced to be unemployed for four months already and think about those Hong Kong people who can't visit their wife and children in China.

Carrie Lam and her administration is out of touch. I don't recommend a further Bay Area integration til HK has a stronger leadership. It is a shame that Macau has outperformed HK in every area during this pandemic and Bay Area integration.
 

Mr T

Senior Member
The allowance of "real democracy" in Hong Kong for the pro democracy camp was always spoken of in a manner whereby opposition to Chinese geopolitical interests and opposition to the central government and mainland overall was seen like it was a reasonable state of being.
I'm not sure that's actually true. The pro-democracy camp were mostly very restrained and only wanted to improve the situation of ordinary HKers. They didn't have geopolitical goals other than keeping Hong Kong as an international city that was open to all.

It's true that there were groups in Hong Kong that were hostile to the CCP, but democratic reforms were never going to extend towards somehow challenging CCP rule of mainland China. Remember, views of mainland China were fairly decent for a long period of time after the handover. That meant that it would be improbable for a directly-elected Chief Executive to be elected if they were hostile to the CCP, because voters who didn't want a disruption to the stable cross-border relationship wouldn't vote for them.

Basically it was an issue of giving HK "real power" in terms of the ability to influence or threaten Chinese government interests and geopolitical interests, and whether HK's system was "autonomous and equal" to the Chinese government or if HK's system was "autonomous and subordinate".
Perhaps there's an old word in Chinese like autonomy where publicly you're able to do what you like, but in reality you have to obey a particular authority. But in English a "high degree of autonomy" would preclude being subordinate except on the issue of something that doesn't apply to HK like defence or foreign policy.

Also, when the Sino-British Joint Declaration was signed, I expect that Zhao Ziyang and Deng Xiaoping didn't really have the current objectives of Xi and his friends in mind, nor would they have felt nearly as threatened by local HK groups campaigning for better human rights on the mainland. That's why Deng talked about a potential further 50 years of autonomy, because he was alert to the fact that Hong Kong and mainland China might not have aligned politically by 2047, and as he didn't want to forcibly make HK converge.

ironically IMO only if they had pushed harder to be able to manage the local affairs of HK in general to be more in the "one country" side of the spectrum than the "two systems" side. Instead, they chose a middle ground whereby local issues like housing were allowed to fester into something ugly but where locals still blamed the Chinese government for not doing anything.
I think that if the CCP had intervened over issues like housing and made it publicly clear that a long-term plan had to be produced within the then Chief Executive's term, it would have gotten praise from HK residents.

At the end of the day, the CCP made a bad decision by seeking to protect the political status quo and relying on HK elites who have no interest in making housing more affordable or increasing taxes to pay for more public spending. It thought it could freeze the 1997 Hong Kong in place for 50 years, when in reality the city's needs were changing and the political system needed to change at the same time to allow for a more dynamic local government.
 

Weaasel

Junior Member
Registered Member
I'm not sure that's actually true. The pro-democracy camp were mostly very restrained and only wanted to improve the situation of ordinary HKers. They didn't have geopolitical goals other than keeping Hong Kong as an international city that was open to all.

It's true that there were groups in Hong Kong that were hostile to the CCP, but democratic reforms were never going to extend towards somehow challenging CCP rule of mainland China. Remember, views of mainland China were fairly decent for a long period of time after the handover. That meant that it would be improbable for a directly-elected Chief Executive to be elected if they were hostile to the CCP, because voters who didn't want a disruption to the stable cross-border relationship wouldn't vote for them.



Perhaps there's an old word in Chinese like autonomy where publicly you're able to do what you like, but in reality you have to obey a particular authority. But in English a "high degree of autonomy" would preclude being subordinate except on the issue of something that doesn't apply to HK like defence or foreign policy.

Also, when the Sino-British Joint Declaration was signed, I expect that Zhao Ziyang and Deng Xiaoping didn't really have the current objectives of Xi and his friends in mind, nor would they have felt nearly as threatened by local HK groups campaigning for better human rights on the mainland. That's why Deng talked about a potential further 50 years of autonomy, because he was alert to the fact that Hong Kong and mainland China might not have aligned politically by 2047, and as he didn't want to forcibly make HK converge.



I think that if the CCP had intervened over issues like housing and made it publicly clear that a long-term plan had to be produced within the then Chief Executive's term, it would have gotten praise from HK residents.

At the end of the day, the CCP made a bad decision by seeking to protect the political status quo and relying on HK elites who have no interest in making housing more affordable or increasing taxes to pay for more public spending. It thought it could freeze the 1997 Hong Kong in place for 50 years, when in reality the city's needs were changing and the political system needed to change at the same time to allow for a more dynamic local government.

All that is water under the Bridge, with China under Xi, Hong Kong is going to be defacto incorporated as essentially another Chinese province or municipality like Tiajin and Shanghai. The Hong Kong riots last year convinced Xi that Hong Kong had already festered into a bastion of anti Chinese sentiment, and mainlanders are galled to the extent to which so many Hong Kongers identify themselves not even as Chinese already. If the situation is left to fester, pro independence forces will soon hold the upper hand. Hong Kong is going to be dominated by persons of first generation mainland origin who do not have the same sentiment as native born Hong Mongers, and I am sure that Beijing already has plans, which it might already have started enacting, to teach the Hong Kong youth patriotic Chinese history and solidarity with mainlanders, and indeed a sense of identification as Chinese first and Hong Kongers less.
 

ansy1968

Junior Member
Registered Member
A suggestion, why not a mandatory educational tour in the Mainland for student especially to SHENZHEN which is next door. In this way their view of China will change seeing how progressive the city is compare to HK.
 

localizer

Captain
Registered Member
Everything will blow over in a year probably.

People nowadays have short attention spans and information overload.

I saw this in an article:
“very young, less educated protesters had put too much faith in international support, which was often based on foreign governments’ financial interests.”
 

localizer

Captain
Registered Member
Trump speaking today:
“Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children,” Trump said. “Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities.”

He added darkly: “In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance. If you do not speak its language, perform its rituals, recite its mantras and follow its commandments, then you will be censored, banished, blacklisted, persecuted and punished.”
 
Last edited:

KYli

Senior Member
A suggestion, why not a mandatory educational tour in the Mainland for student especially to SHENZHEN which is next door. In this way their view of China will change seeing how progressive the city is compare to HK.
Many HK schools have organized trips to China for various reasons. Many HK youngsters visited Shenzhen for shopping and eating weekly. It isn't going to change these kid's perception when their teachers are feeding them hate and prejudice daily.
 

Top