4 ms·
But you only got that constitution because the British had to retreat, literally centuries after Locke wrote. Entrenched power had no intentions of giving your
by yourbandsucks 7y ago
But you only got that constitution because the British had to retreat, literally centuries after Locke wrote. Entrenched power had no intentions of giving your people rights before that.
Related, the British ran Hong Kong for over a hundred years. Why wasn't it already democratic, prior to handover, if their values are so great? The limited democracy they have was introduced in the 1990s as the clock was running out.
- rayiner 7y ago> But you only got that constitution because the British had to retreat, literally centuries after Locke wrote. Entrenched power had no intentions of giving your people rights before that. What difference does that make? The fact that the British denied us the “rights of Englishmen” isn’t a reason to deny them to ourselves! That is cutting our nose off to spite our face. Also, what is the alternative? We go back to Mughal law? They were foreign conquerors too!
- yourbandsucks 7y agoI totally agree, I think we're talking about orthogonal things. You're saying that a good idea should absolutely be taken, whichever culture it came from, which I totally agree with -- I was saying that Western powers (all powers) tend to go after their interests first, and any talk of 'promoting our values abroad' should be greeted with skepticism, given the record. Not that I disagree with the values.