5 ms·

> They "almost" instated it shortly before the handover, but didn't succeed for some reason. Extremely amusing indeed. Perhaps because China declared that they

> They "almost" instated it shortly before the handover, but didn't succeed for some reason. Extremely amusing indeed. Perhaps because China declared that they'd invade if HK was allowed to self-govern? https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/world/asia/china-began-push-against-hong-kong-elections-in-50s.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/world/asia/china-began-pu... "documents recently released by the National Archives in Britain suggest that beginning in the 1950s, the colonial governors who ran Hong Kong repeatedly sought to introduce popular elections but abandoned those efforts in the face of pressure by Communist Party leaders in Beijing. "The documents, part of a batch of typewritten diplomatic dispatches requested by reporters from two Hong Kong newspapers, reveal that Chinese leaders were so opposed to the prospect of a democratic Hong Kong that they threatened to invade should London attempt to change the status quo."

powerapple 6y ago
Grantham convinced London to scrap all plans for political reform on the basis that it did not "interest the British electorate". Later, when confronted by the Hong Kong public, he blamed London.[12] All major democratic reforms for Hong Kong were dropped by British Cabinet decision. In October 1952, the British Colonial Secretary Oliver Lyttelton announced that the time was "inopportune for...constitutional changes of a major character".[16] Of course, British has its own interests, while China also has its own interests. In the end, HK is part of China, and it should be returned to China fully. If British consider Hong Kong's freedom is more important, maybe they should went to war with China instead.
- jbay808 6y ago
  Those numbers in brackets look like citations.[12, 16] What are you citing?
  - hker 6y ago
    The phrase "All major democratic reforms for Hong Kong were dropped by British Cabinet decision." does not lead to any credible source, only some mentions on a small number of websites or Reddit. Compare the Google searches: - "the colonial governors who ran Hong Kong repeatedly sought to introduce popular elections but abandoned those efforts in the face of pressure by Communist Party leaders in Beijing." [1] leads to the New York Times article, which I can follow its references. - "All major democratic reforms for Hong Kong were dropped by British Cabinet decision." [2] does not lead to any credible source. In fact, some of the sites appear to be disinformation campaigns (don’t take my words, judge for yourself). [1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22the+colonial+governors+who+ran+Hong+Kong+repeatedly+sought+to+introduce+popular+elections+but+abandoned+those+efforts+in+the+face+of+pressure+by+Communist+Party+leaders+in+Beijing.%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22the+colonial+governors+wh... [2]: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22All+major+democratic+reforms+for+Hong+Kong+were+dropped+by+British+Cabinet+decision.%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22All+major+democratic+refo...

powerapple 6y ago

Grantham convinced London to scrap all plans for political reform on the basis that it did not "interest the British electorate". Later, when confronted by the Hong Kong public, he blamed London.[12] All major democratic reforms for Hong Kong were dropped by British Cabinet decision. In October 1952, the British Colonial Secretary Oliver Lyttelton announced that the time was "inopportune for...constitutional changes of a major character".[16] Of course, British has its own interests, while China also has its own interests. In the end, HK is part of China, and it should be returned to China fully. If British consider Hong Kong's freedom is more important, maybe they should went to war with China instead.

jbay808 6y ago
Those numbers in brackets look like citations.[12, 16] What are you citing?
- hker 6y ago
  The phrase "All major democratic reforms for Hong Kong were dropped by British Cabinet decision." does not lead to any credible source, only some mentions on a small number of websites or Reddit. Compare the Google searches: - "the colonial governors who ran Hong Kong repeatedly sought to introduce popular elections but abandoned those efforts in the face of pressure by Communist Party leaders in Beijing." [1] leads to the New York Times article, which I can follow its references. - "All major democratic reforms for Hong Kong were dropped by British Cabinet decision." [2] does not lead to any credible source. In fact, some of the sites appear to be disinformation campaigns (don’t take my words, judge for yourself). [1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22the+colonial+governors+who+ran+Hong+Kong+repeatedly+sought+to+introduce+popular+elections+but+abandoned+those+efforts+in+the+face+of+pressure+by+Communist+Party+leaders+in+Beijing.%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22the+colonial+governors+wh... [2]: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22All+major+democratic+reforms+for+Hong+Kong+were+dropped+by+British+Cabinet+decision.%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22All+major+democratic+refo...