7 ms·

I've never understood this line of thought. Things used to be bad, and it sucked. Then, they got better and that was good. But now if it gets bad again it'll be

I've never understood this line of thought. Things used to be bad, and it sucked. Then, they got better and that was good. But now if it gets bad again it'll be okay because it used to be bad? Regression away from freedom is always a bad thing.

free_rms 6y ago
I didn't say regression was ok, maybe I should have preempted such an accusation since I was criticizing the West. I pushed back against imperialism dressed up as liberation. Everybody's soooo concerned about Hong Kong civil rights, just like they were about Iraqi civil rights. Other places, where it's not to our geopolitical advantage? Crickets.
- 0xFFC 6y ago
  Yeah, that is the thing, western mindset does not comprehend imperialism.
  - thenewwazoo 6y ago
    I can comprehend imperialism just fine, thanks. In fact I get to see my government do it even today, despite my literal protest.
    - 0xFFC 6y ago
      Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but deep respect for you personally since I don't know you. I was talking about more broad western mindset.
- thenewwazoo 6y ago
  Yes, it would have been better if British imperialists had never decided to stick their swords where they didn't belong, but they did. Whether HK would have been freer today if Britain hadn't done so is conjecture. What we do know is that Britain violently subjugated HK, but before they left they liberalized the place to a greater degree than the CCP would have, as evidenced by the CCP's desire to deliberalize the place. Bringing up "British rule was no panacea" when we're talking about the CCP's efforts to deliberalize a de facto free society reads like you're apologizing for what the CCP wants to do.
  - free_rms 6y ago
    I was responding to a comment that characterized British rule as 'liberal government'. If we're so much better, maybe we can let up on the propaganda and whitewashing of history?
    - thenewwazoo 6y ago
      But it was liberal, except when it wasn’t. It’s not whitewashing to characterize the end result as liberal, and I don’t think it’s necessary or productive to add a disclaimer to every description when the discussion revolves around comparing today’s liberalism (which was a result of British rule) with the CCP’s (which would undoubtedly be less so). (Edited to specify that the end result was liberal, not the whole thing)
  - Normille 6y ago
    >What we do know is that Britain violently subjugated HK, but before they left they liberalized the place to a greater degree than the CCP would have... Funny how Britain was happy to rule over Hong Kong for centuries without introducing democratic reform and then suddenly 'liberalised' things only when they were on the point of handing HK back to China. Almost as if it was done with precisely the intent of leaving the Chinese with as much of a hot potato as possible. They don't call it "Perfidious Albion" for nothing!
    - free_rms 6y ago
      Finally, someone gets it.
    - mannykannot 6y ago
      > Funny how Britain was happy to rule over Hong Kong for centuries... Britain first raised its flag over Hong Kong island in 1842. The New Territories, without which Hong Kong is not a viable independent entity, were leased to Britain under a 99-year lease in 1898. This was a consequence of one of the worst aspects of colonial Britain, the Opium wars, but, as hker points out [1], since the 1960s Britain has attempted to democratize Hong Kong, but was constrained by China's realistic threat of invasion. There's not much credit to any side here, but let's at least get the history right. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23260302 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23260302

free_rms 6y ago

I didn't say regression was ok, maybe I should have preempted such an accusation since I was criticizing the West. I pushed back against imperialism dressed up as liberation. Everybody's soooo concerned about Hong Kong civil rights, just like they were about Iraqi civil rights. Other places, where it's not to our geopolitical advantage? Crickets.

0xFFC 6y ago
Yeah, that is the thing, western mindset does not comprehend imperialism.
- thenewwazoo 6y ago
  I can comprehend imperialism just fine, thanks. In fact I get to see my government do it even today, despite my literal protest.
  - 0xFFC 6y ago
    Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but deep respect for you personally since I don't know you. I was talking about more broad western mindset.
thenewwazoo 6y ago
Yes, it would have been better if British imperialists had never decided to stick their swords where they didn't belong, but they did. Whether HK would have been freer today if Britain hadn't done so is conjecture. What we do know is that Britain violently subjugated HK, but before they left they liberalized the place to a greater degree than the CCP would have, as evidenced by the CCP's desire to deliberalize the place. Bringing up "British rule was no panacea" when we're talking about the CCP's efforts to deliberalize a de facto free society reads like you're apologizing for what the CCP wants to do.
- free_rms 6y ago
  I was responding to a comment that characterized British rule as 'liberal government'. If we're so much better, maybe we can let up on the propaganda and whitewashing of history?
  - thenewwazoo 6y ago
    But it was liberal, except when it wasn’t. It’s not whitewashing to characterize the end result as liberal, and I don’t think it’s necessary or productive to add a disclaimer to every description when the discussion revolves around comparing today’s liberalism (which was a result of British rule) with the CCP’s (which would undoubtedly be less so). (Edited to specify that the end result was liberal, not the whole thing)
- Normille 6y ago
  >What we do know is that Britain violently subjugated HK, but before they left they liberalized the place to a greater degree than the CCP would have... Funny how Britain was happy to rule over Hong Kong for centuries without introducing democratic reform and then suddenly 'liberalised' things only when they were on the point of handing HK back to China. Almost as if it was done with precisely the intent of leaving the Chinese with as much of a hot potato as possible. They don't call it "Perfidious Albion" for nothing!
  - free_rms 6y ago
    Finally, someone gets it.
  - mannykannot 6y ago
    > Funny how Britain was happy to rule over Hong Kong for centuries... Britain first raised its flag over Hong Kong island in 1842. The New Territories, without which Hong Kong is not a viable independent entity, were leased to Britain under a 99-year lease in 1898. This was a consequence of one of the worst aspects of colonial Britain, the Opium wars, but, as hker points out [1], since the 1960s Britain has attempted to democratize Hong Kong, but was constrained by China's realistic threat of invasion. There's not much credit to any side here, but let's at least get the history right. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23260302 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23260302