4 ms·

> Because Xi ham-fistedly forced through a badly-written security law [1] and intervened in its politics [2]. It’s like stupid Tiannamen Square. [1] has no men

by hnfong 3y ago

> Because Xi ham-fistedly forced through a badly-written security law [1] and intervened in its politics [2]. It’s like stupid Tiannamen Square. [1] has no mention of Xi. [2] is in 2021, way after the protests/riots. I have reliable sources (not mass media, especially not western mass media) telling me that the security law was championed by the Hong Kong government (Carrie Lam in particular). The Chinese Central People's Government was not actively involved until the whole thing spiraled out of control. I won't/can't tell you how involved I was in the events, but Trust Me Bro ™ I'm not just reading the news and coming to the conclusions that I wrote.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> have reliable sources (not mass media, especially not western mass media) telling me that the security law was championed by the Hong Kong government (Carrie Lam in particular) Sure. This was in the open. That doesn't preclude Beijing's feet on the scales, which from everything I saw, in the open and with Trust Me Bros, what clear as day. There were better ways to handle Hong Kong. Xi handled in a way that made sense for him. It cost China dearly in the medium term, and may prove to have been a geostrategic blunder in the long term.
- hnfong 3y ago
  > That doesn't preclude Beijing's feet on the scales, which from everything I saw, in the open This is what I'm telling you didn't happen. My sources are not public, and you're free not to believe it.
  - throwaway2990 3y ago
    I know you love the CCP and try your best to defend them, doesn’t change the fact that one of the primary reasons for the protests was the security law which came from Beijing.
throwaway2037 3y ago
> championed by the Hong Kong government There was a significant divide within LegCo (local parliment). So no, it was not "championed". For other readers: The head of state (CEO) is hand selected by CCP. (Yes, I know about the elitist voting system to select a CEO, but the choice needs to be pre-approved by CCP.) Saying the person who was pre-selected by CCP is "championing" a proposed law by CCP isn't saying much. That was her job.
- hnfong 3y ago
  The appointment of Carrie Lam was a mistake and I have no idea why the CCP did it. If the original claim is that CCP/Xi was irrational for appointing somebody who had a past record in somehow inciting mass protests (she was responsible for the reform bills in 2014 that sparked protests on similar scale), then yea sure I'll take that. What I was responding to was the claim that "Xi ham-fistedly forced through a badly-written security law". This really isn't the case, and if your argument is that "well, everything done by the government is attributed to Xi personally, I rest my case.", I guess you're right then. Whatever you please.

by hnfong 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> have reliable sources (not mass media, especially not western mass media) telling me that the security law was championed by the Hong Kong government (Carrie Lam in particular) Sure. This was in the open. That doesn't preclude Beijing's feet on the scales, which from everything I saw, in the open and with Trust Me Bros, what clear as day. There were better ways to handle Hong Kong. Xi handled in a way that made sense for him. It cost China dearly in the medium term, and may prove to have been a geostrategic blunder in the long term.

hnfong 3y ago
> That doesn't preclude Beijing's feet on the scales, which from everything I saw, in the open This is what I'm telling you didn't happen. My sources are not public, and you're free not to believe it.
- throwaway2990 3y ago
  I know you love the CCP and try your best to defend them, doesn’t change the fact that one of the primary reasons for the protests was the security law which came from Beijing.

throwaway2037 3y ago

> championed by the Hong Kong government There was a significant divide within LegCo (local parliment). So no, it was not "championed". For other readers: The head of state (CEO) is hand selected by CCP. (Yes, I know about the elitist voting system to select a CEO, but the choice needs to be pre-approved by CCP.) Saying the person who was pre-selected by CCP is "championing" a proposed law by CCP isn't saying much. That was her job.

hnfong 3y ago
The appointment of Carrie Lam was a mistake and I have no idea why the CCP did it. If the original claim is that CCP/Xi was irrational for appointing somebody who had a past record in somehow inciting mass protests (she was responsible for the reform bills in 2014 that sparked protests on similar scale), then yea sure I'll take that. What I was responding to was the claim that "Xi ham-fistedly forced through a badly-written security law". This really isn't the case, and if your argument is that "well, everything done by the government is attributed to Xi personally, I rest my case.", I guess you're right then. Whatever you please.