3 ms·
I would like to remind you that HK was a British colony for more than 100 years, and there was no democracy or freedom then. They only allowed the first partly
by lossolo 10mo ago
I would like to remind you that HK was a British colony for more than 100 years, and there was no democracy or freedom then. They only allowed the first partly free elections two years before they gave it back to China, in 1995. And not because they suddenly wanted freedom and democracy for HK, but because it would be harder for China and better for their own interests. Hypocrisy all the way.
- Herring 10mo agoThat's kind of misleading. HK had a lot of civil freedoms (rule of law, independent judiciary, freedom of speech). China explicitly blocked earlier democratization. The vote only managed to get through after the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown made HK panic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_Hong_Kong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_Hong_Kong
- lossolo 10mo agoThose freedoms were never unlimited, even under British rule (colonial era sedition laws and public order restrictions existed).
- dash2 10mo agoNo freedoms are ever unlimited, so that's not an interesting point. The question is, were they useful? A lot of HKers seem to think so.
- lossolo 10mo ago> No freedoms are ever unlimited, so that's not an interesting point. Of course no freedoms are unlimited, so I'm not sure why are you reading this literally? > The question is, were they useful? Are we talking about the same thing? I'm talking about the lack of freedom under British rule, and you ask if it was useful for HKers? While there are a lot of people in HK who are not happy about what China is doing now, there is almost no one who would take British rule over that. I actually talked with people about it in person when I was in HK.
- dash2 10mo agoI've heard of loads of people who would prefer British rule over Chinese rule. The reasons are obvious: free press, free speech, fair trials. These things have gone far, far backwards under China.