4 ms·
> As you mention, the article you link says that the majority of HKers want to be a part of China. That's where I'm getting that from. There's certainly a cont
by tripletao 6y ago
> As you mention, the article you link says that the majority of HKers want to be a part of China. That's where I'm getting that from.
There's certainly a contradiction there. I'd attribute HK public opinion against independence as recognition that they're geopolitically unable to exist as an independent country, and a desire for the perceived next best thing (which they really did have until recently), and not as any actual desire to be controlled by the PRC. How else do you explain public opposition to the national security law?
> I do believe China could do better in terms of securing individual liberty for their citizens, but if that comes at the cost of its sovereignty, then obviously some concessions have to be made.
And I'm not sure how Hong Kong's previous autonomy (or any other freedoms) would come at the cost of the PRC's sovereignty? If the CCP wanted to hold democratic elections tomorrow for all territory within their military control, then they could do it. Inertia being what it is, they'd probably even win! No outside force is preventing the PRC's government from responding to the will of the mainland's or HK's people; but instead, Beijing is transitioning from the pragmatic sort of technocracy that Deng Xiaoping introduced to plain dictatorship. The end of Hong Kong's autonomy is just another step down that path.
Finally, countries express opinions about the affairs of other countries all the time. The USA exists in part because of French meddling in a British colony. Everyone likes to do it, and no one likes it when others do it to them. As long as it's happening openly, I can't get too upset either way. America is certainly flawed in many important ways, but I can express those ways openly without fear for my personal safety, and that free expression has historically resulted in what I consider positive change. Something close to that used to be true in HK, and now it isn't. I suspect that became inevitable with the handover and with Xi's self-coronation, but I think it's a great loss.
ETA: And I'm not sure whether it's by coincidence, but your points closely track Beijing's usual talking points against the USA (sovereignty / "internal matter", incarceration rate, etc.). If you don't mind sharing, where did you develop these beliefs?
- sasum 6y ago>How else do you explain public opposition to the national security law? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Hong Kong benefits immensely from its autonomous position in regards to the Chinese government, so they don't want to disrupt the status quo. The protests have revealed HK to be a national security issue for the Chinese government, so they want to create laws to make sure HK isn't used as a center of political dissent. These two ideas are contradictory with each other, so a law like this was inevitable. >And I'm not sure how Hong Kong's previous autonomy (or any other freedoms) would come at the cost of the PRC's sovereignty? I'm not sure if you understand the original impetus of the extradition bill. Here's a good Twitter thread that details the provisions: https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/1175020345998245888 https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/117502034599824588... To answer your question, if criminals are able to easily escape China into Hong Kong, that fundamentally weakens the justice system. HKers and mainland Chinese move between HK and the mainland constantly. It would obviously be a failure of justice if you could go to a city within your country and encounter the man who killed your daughter. A similar law exists within Puerto Rico, a US territory. This is the bill that originally sparked the protests. Recently Beijing passed the bill we are talking about that also gives them much more power in terms of being able to imprison HKers that try to subvert the government. This can be seen as a response to the protests, whose leaders have been revealed to be funded and supported by foreigners. China's sovereignty is absolutely threatened by protests and riots that seek to destabilize Chinese places of power, like Hong Kong. >As long as it's happening openly, I can't get too upset either way If you can't get upset about the US meddling in Chinese affairs, then you can't get upset about China trying to stop internal subversion. Not to mention, it absolutely doesn't just happen openly. The US has a long history of covert regime change operations. This happens completely undemocratically. Here's a short list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r... I mean, just look at the hysteria surrounding Russian involvement in US elections. Rumors of Trump officials meeting with Russian officials has set public discourse on fire for years. And yet, it's unreasonable for China to oppose Demosisto party leaders who have openly met with US officials. I'm not trying to use whataboutism to deflect, I'm trying to paint an equivalency between the situations of these two countries. >where did you develop these beliefs? I'm fairly left leaning. China is a leftist country. I know China isn't perfect, but you can easily rationalize their decisions as being made by a government that cares about its people, not power-mad evil dictators as most people would have you believe. If you're interested in learning more, I would recommend reading Blackshirts & Reds by Michael Parenti. https://mltheory.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/michael-parenti-blackshirts-and-reds_-rational-fascism-and-the-overthrow-of-communism-2001.pdf https://mltheory.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/michael-parenti...
- tripletao 6y agoSo I've never met anyone who actually believed the PRC's pretext for the extradition bill, and I'm kind of fascinated. What do you think "Chinese [PRC] law" even means? Do you think a judge in China could rule against Xi's wishes? I think the extradition bill means "anyone can be extradited to the mainland at any time, to be punished in any manner for any reason, according to Xi Jinping's personal judgment". Do you disagree? If so, what makes you doubt that Xi has that power? Or do you agree, but think it's good for him to extend that dictatorial power into Hong Kong? Finally, have you been to Hong Kong? To the PRC? How much time have you spent living or doing business there? You have a picture of the region that I'm afraid departs considerably from that lived experience. ETA: And to be clear, you're saying here that you were born into relative freedom, and have chosen to use that freedom to advocate for a one-man dictatorship to impose further control over a precarious quasi-state with elements of democracy and a highly-functioning rule of law. This is apparently because you consider that dictatorship to be "leftist". I hope you're not surprised by the cool reception that you're getting to this.