10 ms·

> I don't think Beijing anticipated or endorsed this. This is endorsed and approved by Beijing, she already declared the bill dead this is just a matter of wor

> I don't think Beijing anticipated or endorsed this. This is endorsed and approved by Beijing, she already declared the bill dead this is just a matter of wording. Legally it can be brought back as laws are always evolving and Hong Kong needs an extradition treaty with other jurisdiction including another system in its own country. For Mainland Chinese citizen the narrative will be altered, but will still be seen as symbolic defeat and for Hong Kong Chinese citizens it will be a symbolic win. As it is said in order to win larger battle one needs to lose smaller one, extradition bill was already dead, now it's withdrawn until it's introduced by someone else later. In larger picture it will be sacrificing pawn. If the violent protest continue, then it will be seen as challenging one country two system as the Hong Kong CEO proclaimed in her pre-recorded message. She is just saying in an indirect way this is her last ditch effort to salvage the situation. Hope this brings down the tempers and hopefully this put an end to violent protests, which has destroyed city and society. Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change.

pinkfoot 7y ago
> Violence can never be a solution Clearly you missed WWI and WWII. Violence, sadly, is almost always the solution. A tough pill to swallow.
mrhappyunhappy 7y ago
Actually, violence is at the heart of every revolution and is absolutely the answer when facing tyrants.
anvandare 7y ago
>only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. Utterly false, but persistently preached by those in power to ensure there's never any real threat to their position. "Just lie down while I stomp your neck. Don't resist. We'll discuss your objections later, at a more convenient time." All political power emanates from the barrel of a gun. All civil power emanates from the people's latent threat to revolt and string up the members of an oppressive regime from lantern poles. The Founding Fathers understood that more than anything else. The First Amendment is worthless without the Second Amendment. Violence should never be the first (or even second) answer, but it is the ultimate answer, and should never be excluded on principle.
- jplayer01 7y ago
  The non-violent protest thing seems like a myth that needs to be taken out back and shot, violently. We've seen for decades what they accomplish - absolutely nothing. It reminds me of this. https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-helped-india-break-free-from-colonial-rule-57904 https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-help...
  - devchix 7y ago
    This NPR podcast/article argues different. "...found that major nonviolent campaigns are successful 53% of the time, while violent campaigns are successful only 26% of the time." The Protest Tipping Point (podcast): https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping-point https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping... The Magic Number Behind Protests: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-magic-number-behind-protests https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-...
    - jplayer01 7y ago
      I'll take a look, thanks.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - oh_sigh 7y ago
      That might just mean that violent protests are deployed too widely. It's impossible to say in unique situations whether violence or nonviolence will fare better.
    - vkou 7y ago
      Was the Civil Rights movement in the United States violent or non-violent? MLK may have been the face of it, but the man that really brought the government to the negotiating table was Malcolm X... Because of the implicit threat that if non-violent resistance won't work, here's a guy that is perfectly happy to have his supporters sit outside congress, armed with assault rifles, exercising their second amendment rights. Non-violent protest often wins because the powers that be want to avoid antagonising the violent arm of the movement.
Riverheart 7y ago
"This is endorsed and approved by Beijing, she already declared the bill dead this is just a matter of wording." My understanding is another bill would need to go through the original process that first introduced it which is a longer process.
dirtyid 7y ago
IMO it's endorsed and approved in the sense that Lam left them no choice. Her resignation leak was yesterday, partly to signal to Beijing that ERO will not happen under her watch without an attempt at reconciliation and within 24 hours we get this announcement. 5 days ago, Beijing instructed her not to give a single inch and hinted at ERO was on the horizon. >For Mainland Chinese citizen the narrative will be altered, but will still be seen as symbolic defeat and for Hong Kong Chinese citizens it will be a symbolic win. Any other time and I would agree, but Xi just scored "people's leader" on August 25th, 70th anniversary is on October 1st, "symbolic defeat" is not in the cards. Together with rejection of Lam's proposal and effort to appease protesters as little as last week, I think we can either view this development as Beijing dealing with Lam cracking without warning. Or this as a calculated ploy to justify ERO on the assumption that the olive branch will not be well received by protesters. Lam's speech politely but explicitly said 4/5 demands would not be met.
rayiner 7y ago
> Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. That’s facially not true. The American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Bangladeshi War of Independence, Irish independence, etc. History is full of examples where the right to self determination had to be vindicated with guns. Categorically delegitimizing violence against an oppressive state is a bad precedent. Obviously it should not be accepted as routine. But it is an important safety valve. The Irish won their independence, after hundreds of years of oppression at the hands of the British, by starting a shooting war that the British could not put down while maintaining appearances among the community of nations. If violence had been categorically delegitimized in the early 20th century, the British could have used more heavy handed measures to put down the Irish Revolution while the community of nations looked the other way. Now, whether Hong Kong wants to or has the capability to do that against China is an entirely separate matter.
- bouncycastle 7y ago
  History is littered with graveyards upon graveyards of violent struggles for independance that didn't end up so well. Meanwhile, in the modern times, peaceful protests can being down even nuclear armed superpowers as we've seen in the 80s. Take a look https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebell...
  - mikeash 7y ago
    And peaceful protestors can also be massacred and completely fail to bring about any change. Peaceful protests can work sometimes. Other times they do nothing. Same with armed resistance. Declaring one or the other to be the only possible way to bring about change is in direct contradiction to the facts.
    - rayiner 7y ago
      And protest movements don’t always need to be all violent or all peaceful. School children are taught about Nelson Mandela peacefully bringing down Apartheid. But there is a reason the logo of the ANC is a hand holding a spear and shield. Mandela co-founded the military arm of the ANC: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe.
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
>Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. I think that's the exception rather than the rule. More societies have gained independence through being a perpetual thorn in the side of whoever is subjugating them than any other way. If you make subjugating you an expensive road to nowhere they will eventually screw off. With the unanimity of opposition to mainland rule HK stands a pretty good chance. Imagine the troubles but without local opposition stabbing the IRA in the back at every turn. That's the kind of fight the PRC is in for if the situation spirals into a full blown shooting conflict.
poukofiru 7y ago
How does Hong Kong legislation work? Do all bills need to be individual, separate bills? Or can they sneak in an unrelated bill into a more popular one?
- spacehunt 7y ago
  The Rules of Procedure[0] are available online. The bill in question is now at the Second Reading stage, specifically at the "[Reading] may be resumed on notice by the Member or public officer in charge of the bill" step. The "House Committee" debate was basically skipped. [0] https://www.legco.gov.hk/general/english/procedur/content/partk.htm https://www.legco.gov.hk/general/english/procedur/content/pa...

pinkfoot 7y ago

> Violence can never be a solution Clearly you missed WWI and WWII. Violence, sadly, is almost always the solution. A tough pill to swallow.

mrhappyunhappy 7y ago

Actually, violence is at the heart of every revolution and is absolutely the answer when facing tyrants.

anvandare 7y ago

>only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. Utterly false, but persistently preached by those in power to ensure there's never any real threat to their position. "Just lie down while I stomp your neck. Don't resist. We'll discuss your objections later, at a more convenient time." All political power emanates from the barrel of a gun. All civil power emanates from the people's latent threat to revolt and string up the members of an oppressive regime from lantern poles. The Founding Fathers understood that more than anything else. The First Amendment is worthless without the Second Amendment. Violence should never be the first (or even second) answer, but it is the ultimate answer, and should never be excluded on principle.

jplayer01 7y ago
The non-violent protest thing seems like a myth that needs to be taken out back and shot, violently. We've seen for decades what they accomplish - absolutely nothing. It reminds me of this. https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-helped-india-break-free-from-colonial-rule-57904 https://theconversation.com/the-forgotten-violence-that-help...
- devchix 7y ago
  This NPR podcast/article argues different. "...found that major nonviolent campaigns are successful 53% of the time, while violent campaigns are successful only 26% of the time." The Protest Tipping Point (podcast): https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping-point https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/736007317/the-protest-tipping... The Magic Number Behind Protests: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-magic-number-behind-protests https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/06/25/735536434/the-...
  - jplayer01 7y ago
    I'll take a look, thanks.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - oh_sigh 7y ago
    That might just mean that violent protests are deployed too widely. It's impossible to say in unique situations whether violence or nonviolence will fare better.
  - vkou 7y ago
    Was the Civil Rights movement in the United States violent or non-violent? MLK may have been the face of it, but the man that really brought the government to the negotiating table was Malcolm X... Because of the implicit threat that if non-violent resistance won't work, here's a guy that is perfectly happy to have his supporters sit outside congress, armed with assault rifles, exercising their second amendment rights. Non-violent protest often wins because the powers that be want to avoid antagonising the violent arm of the movement.

Riverheart 7y ago

"This is endorsed and approved by Beijing, she already declared the bill dead this is just a matter of wording." My understanding is another bill would need to go through the original process that first introduced it which is a longer process.

dirtyid 7y ago

IMO it's endorsed and approved in the sense that Lam left them no choice. Her resignation leak was yesterday, partly to signal to Beijing that ERO will not happen under her watch without an attempt at reconciliation and within 24 hours we get this announcement. 5 days ago, Beijing instructed her not to give a single inch and hinted at ERO was on the horizon. >For Mainland Chinese citizen the narrative will be altered, but will still be seen as symbolic defeat and for Hong Kong Chinese citizens it will be a symbolic win. Any other time and I would agree, but Xi just scored "people's leader" on August 25th, 70th anniversary is on October 1st, "symbolic defeat" is not in the cards. Together with rejection of Lam's proposal and effort to appease protesters as little as last week, I think we can either view this development as Beijing dealing with Lam cracking without warning. Or this as a calculated ploy to justify ERO on the assumption that the olive branch will not be well received by protesters. Lam's speech politely but explicitly said 4/5 demands would not be met.

rayiner 7y ago

> Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. That’s facially not true. The American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Bangladeshi War of Independence, Irish independence, etc. History is full of examples where the right to self determination had to be vindicated with guns. Categorically delegitimizing violence against an oppressive state is a bad precedent. Obviously it should not be accepted as routine. But it is an important safety valve. The Irish won their independence, after hundreds of years of oppression at the hands of the British, by starting a shooting war that the British could not put down while maintaining appearances among the community of nations. If violence had been categorically delegitimized in the early 20th century, the British could have used more heavy handed measures to put down the Irish Revolution while the community of nations looked the other way. Now, whether Hong Kong wants to or has the capability to do that against China is an entirely separate matter.

bouncycastle 7y ago
History is littered with graveyards upon graveyards of violent struggles for independance that didn't end up so well. Meanwhile, in the modern times, peaceful protests can being down even nuclear armed superpowers as we've seen in the 80s. Take a look https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebellions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_revolutions_and_rebell...
- mikeash 7y ago
  And peaceful protestors can also be massacred and completely fail to bring about any change. Peaceful protests can work sometimes. Other times they do nothing. Same with armed resistance. Declaring one or the other to be the only possible way to bring about change is in direct contradiction to the facts.
  - rayiner 7y ago
    And protest movements don’t always need to be all violent or all peaceful. School children are taught about Nelson Mandela peacefully bringing down Apartheid. But there is a reason the logo of the ANC is a hand holding a spear and shield. Mandela co-founded the military arm of the ANC: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago

>Violence can never be a solution, only peaceful non-violent struggle can bring about real change. I think that's the exception rather than the rule. More societies have gained independence through being a perpetual thorn in the side of whoever is subjugating them than any other way. If you make subjugating you an expensive road to nowhere they will eventually screw off. With the unanimity of opposition to mainland rule HK stands a pretty good chance. Imagine the troubles but without local opposition stabbing the IRA in the back at every turn. That's the kind of fight the PRC is in for if the situation spirals into a full blown shooting conflict.

poukofiru 7y ago

How does Hong Kong legislation work? Do all bills need to be individual, separate bills? Or can they sneak in an unrelated bill into a more popular one?

spacehunt 7y ago
The Rules of Procedure[0] are available online. The bill in question is now at the Second Reading stage, specifically at the "[Reading] may be resumed on notice by the Member or public officer in charge of the bill" step. The "House Committee" debate was basically skipped. [0] https://www.legco.gov.hk/general/english/procedur/content/partk.htm https://www.legco.gov.hk/general/english/procedur/content/pa...