5 ms·

The extradition treaty has officially been withdrawn as a result of the protests. That alone should tell you that Hong Kong has been able to maintain substanti

The extradition treaty has officially been withdrawn as a result of the protests. That alone should tell you that Hong Kong has been able to maintain substantial autonomy from the central Chinese government.

pimmen 7y ago
After months of protests. That alone does not convince me. However, the fact that such a self destructive bill is even proposed by the pro-Beijing government in the first place alone convinces me that ”one country, two systems” is being hollowed out.
- UIZealot 7y ago
  > After months of protests. It was suspended almost immediately after initial protests. > self destructive bill That's a stretch. Personally I believe Ms. Lam proposed it out of good faith. It was too naive perhaps, and did not include adequate protection for Hong Kong citizens. It never would have survived the legco anyway, never mind the protests. Regarding one country, two systems. The Chinese government, to its credit, has largely kept its end of the bargain and allowed Hong Kong to govern itself, aside from making sure that the chief executive isn't actively anti-Beijing. Hong Kong people had never enjoyed as much freedom and autonomy as they do today, not under British rule, not ever. Some people are just too blinded by ideology to see that.
  - spacehunt 7y ago
    I'm sorry but: - The last round of Legislative Council elections during British rule was effectively by universal suffrage.[1] No LegCo elections after the handover have been comparable. - During British rule, there were also municipal councils and again, council members were eventually elected by universal suffrage. After the handover the entire municipal council system was abolished. - Also during British rule, the Public Order Ordinance was found to violate the Bill of Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, especially regarding freedom of expression and assembly, and was amended accordingly. After the handover the amendments were repealed, resulting in a reduction of freedom of expression and assembly.[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Hong_Kong_electoral_reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Hong_Kong_electoral_refor... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Ordinance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Ordinance
    - UIZealot 7y ago
      Any broadening of rights after the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is suspect. These are ploys to alienate the Hong Kong people from China (離間計). They are what we call 陽謀, ploys we will nevertheless fall for even though we know they're ploys. Know your history. How had the British treated the Hong Kong people throughout its history as a colony? How has China treated the Hong Kong people? Honestly? (EDIT: Honestly, people?)
      - pimmen 7y ago
        > Any broadening of rights after the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is suspect. These are ploys to alienate the Hong Kong people from China (離間計). If you by that mean that giving a place more civil rights and protections against human rights abuses makes it more unlike China, yes, I agree. And as spacehunt said, British established the independent judiciary which the CCP is trying the dismantle now with the extradition bill and the British also made large scale election reforms, which the CCP rolled back out of fear for democracy. And, when the CCP can't do anything with the current laws, they kidnap and imprison people for exercising their free speech in Hong Kong. We've waited quite a while now in Sweden for the release of our countryman, the CCP can lend some faith to their insistince that they support "one country, two systems" by releasing him. Anyday now would be nice.
        UIZealot 7y ago
        > the independent judiciary which the CCP is trying the dismantle now with the extradition bill That narrative is never supported by the facts, and the extradition treaty has been withdrawn. You keep saying it does not make it true. > the British also made large scale election reforms After the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It's like agreeing to sell your company, then doubling the salary of every employee before handing over the company to the new owner. It's reckless, irresponsible, but sadly, very effective. Like I said, a ploy you'd willing fall for, even though you know it's a ploy. > We've waited quite a while now in Sweden for the release of our countryman, the CCP can lend some faith to their insistince that they support "one country, two systems" by releasing him. While I agree the CCP crossed the line in the case of Mr. Gui, and I sincerely hope for his release as much as you do, it by no means indicate the unraveling of one country, two systems. Just like the exile of Edward Snowden by no means indicate the unraveling of freedom of speech in the US.

pimmen 7y ago

After months of protests. That alone does not convince me. However, the fact that such a self destructive bill is even proposed by the pro-Beijing government in the first place alone convinces me that ”one country, two systems” is being hollowed out.

UIZealot 7y ago
> After months of protests. It was suspended almost immediately after initial protests. > self destructive bill That's a stretch. Personally I believe Ms. Lam proposed it out of good faith. It was too naive perhaps, and did not include adequate protection for Hong Kong citizens. It never would have survived the legco anyway, never mind the protests. Regarding one country, two systems. The Chinese government, to its credit, has largely kept its end of the bargain and allowed Hong Kong to govern itself, aside from making sure that the chief executive isn't actively anti-Beijing. Hong Kong people had never enjoyed as much freedom and autonomy as they do today, not under British rule, not ever. Some people are just too blinded by ideology to see that.
- spacehunt 7y ago
  I'm sorry but: - The last round of Legislative Council elections during British rule was effectively by universal suffrage.[1] No LegCo elections after the handover have been comparable. - During British rule, there were also municipal councils and again, council members were eventually elected by universal suffrage. After the handover the entire municipal council system was abolished. - Also during British rule, the Public Order Ordinance was found to violate the Bill of Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, especially regarding freedom of expression and assembly, and was amended accordingly. After the handover the amendments were repealed, resulting in a reduction of freedom of expression and assembly.[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Hong_Kong_electoral_reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Hong_Kong_electoral_refor... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Ordinance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Ordinance
  - UIZealot 7y ago
    Any broadening of rights after the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is suspect. These are ploys to alienate the Hong Kong people from China (離間計). They are what we call 陽謀, ploys we will nevertheless fall for even though we know they're ploys. Know your history. How had the British treated the Hong Kong people throughout its history as a colony? How has China treated the Hong Kong people? Honestly? (EDIT: Honestly, people?)
    - pimmen 7y ago
      > Any broadening of rights after the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is suspect. These are ploys to alienate the Hong Kong people from China (離間計). If you by that mean that giving a place more civil rights and protections against human rights abuses makes it more unlike China, yes, I agree. And as spacehunt said, British established the independent judiciary which the CCP is trying the dismantle now with the extradition bill and the British also made large scale election reforms, which the CCP rolled back out of fear for democracy. And, when the CCP can't do anything with the current laws, they kidnap and imprison people for exercising their free speech in Hong Kong. We've waited quite a while now in Sweden for the release of our countryman, the CCP can lend some faith to their insistince that they support "one country, two systems" by releasing him. Anyday now would be nice.
      - UIZealot 7y ago
        > the independent judiciary which the CCP is trying the dismantle now with the extradition bill That narrative is never supported by the facts, and the extradition treaty has been withdrawn. You keep saying it does not make it true. > the British also made large scale election reforms After the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It's like agreeing to sell your company, then doubling the salary of every employee before handing over the company to the new owner. It's reckless, irresponsible, but sadly, very effective. Like I said, a ploy you'd willing fall for, even though you know it's a ploy. > We've waited quite a while now in Sweden for the release of our countryman, the CCP can lend some faith to their insistince that they support "one country, two systems" by releasing him. While I agree the CCP crossed the line in the case of Mr. Gui, and I sincerely hope for his release as much as you do, it by no means indicate the unraveling of one country, two systems. Just like the exile of Edward Snowden by no means indicate the unraveling of freedom of speech in the US.