3 ms·

Where are those handy mainland astroturfers when you need 'em? They weren't fighting for anything. They were unhappy. And people like Lai and others whipped th

Where are those handy mainland astroturfers when you need 'em? They weren't fighting for anything. They were unhappy. And people like Lai and others whipped them up and sent their anger in a direction. And a lot of those kids went to jail. When they could have taken that energy and put it towards building a better tomorrow. In a place with so many opportunities and changing so fast, they bet it all on traditional education when they could have adopted the entrepreneurial spirit of their ancestral geneartions. Their violence only played into the hands of the Central Government to yield all the pretext it needed to enact the very things the "protesters" thought they were against.

Anonyneko 9mo ago
This argument is often brought up against protesters, in Russian circles as well, but we need to remember that it's _the government_ that's jailing kids, not the protesters.
- keepamovin 9mo ago
  Kids, need to remember they're responsible for their choices. The people who manipulated and misdirected their energy to ends that would come with heavy consequences have lots of responsibility, too.
mrkstu 9mo ago
Violence? They poke people with their umbrellas? Seriously, the only violence was that of state suppression.
- keepamovin 9mo ago
  They did a lot of bad things - but I'm not going to bring them up because that's not the point here. The point is their power was misdirected from the purpose they wanted.
komali2 9mo ago
I agree but probably for different reasons. > The sentence "signifies the total destruction of the Hong Kong legal system and the end of justice", Sebastien said. Hong Kong was facing imperialist takeover by the PRC. The people in Hong Kong naively thought they could maintain some measure of self determination through public appeal and law - tools that don't work in the PRC. The CPC is founded on complicity shedding the blood of enemies of the Party, that's the only language it speaks and its default fallback tool. If the Hong Kong protests had continued into insurgency, the CPC would have simply sent in the PLA and massacred people. It would create some legal justification afterwards, of course. In Taiwan, I think we haven't fully reckoned with the reality of dealing with Imperialists. See: Venezuela. If an imperialist country wants to have its way with you, there's basically nothing you can do from a military, political, or legal standpoint to stop it. Non-statist strategies are needed. You could go the way of Mao but I think in the modern era a peasant army simply can't stand up to waves of drones and high accuracy targeted missile strikes. And besides, Mao's revolution became exactly the thing it was meant to overthrow: a capitalist, imperialist, stratified society. This will probably be the same fate of any successful violent revolution (see The Anarchist Cookbook by Keith McHenry for further examples). Anyway, never fight imperialists on their own grounds. I don't know if anything short term could have prevented the PRC's takeover of Hong Kong, but protesting was basically pointless. That time should have been spent setting up alternative channels of communication, alternative means of resource distribution, and perhaps infiltration of same into the territory of the PRC to destabilize the legitimacy of the CPC there.
SilverElfin 9mo ago
You claimed that they were not fighting for anything, but there is a lot of evidence available with a quick search that shows they were fighting for democracy and civil rights that have been a part of Hong Kong life for a long time. That changed when the CCP started intervening in Hong Kong in aggressive ways, in violation of the treaty around Hong Kong. As for violence, clearly, there is no comparison between the violence of the protesters and the violence of the Chinese government. The CCP is literally responsible for tens of millions of deaths. How can people focus on entrepreneurship when they’re facing the loss of basic freedoms and the threat of mass detention and death?
- keepamovin 9mo ago
  Vagueness, misunderstanding. Like so many of the choral voices then and now. Sad. Have some truth, sister: The legco of HK was unchanged until after the protests when they then extented national law into the SAR. Contrary to the Western media propaganda around the protests there was no violation of the "treaty" (joint dec, and basic law) which gave China broad powers to do what it saw fit in terms of national security (read Article 18, everything China did was already permitted by the BL that Britain signed off on.) https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/filemanager/content/en/files/basiclawtext/basiclaw_full_text.pdf https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/filemanager/content/en/files/bas... Western media could have made other criticisms of China wrt HK, but it chose these dumb lies instead. A whole lot of dumb lies went into whipping up the protesters, who then committed crimes and went to jail. As if the entire purpose was to remove from society a lively rebellious element, and misdirect the vital creative energy of a generation to an end that would contribute to their own destruction. Yet those Westerners claiming they "support" this stupidity bc of "freedom and democracy" are just more pawns in that overall game, that they didn't think enough about before joining in. So must bear the responsibility of their stupidity, now. And, hopefully, silence themselves in shame and reflection before adding more stupidity, into the chorus. You could say the people of HK and the people of the West were both made useful idiots by a joint Chinese-Western psyop to fold HK fully into the Chinese model. The Westerners provided the agitators and agitprop, and the Chinese duly responded with legislation. West really helped China advance its interests in HK. Must have been a coincidence, or cooperation, couldn't have just been lies and stupidity. So dumb. Next time something big happens in the world. Stop, observe and think about it. BTW I was there at the significant lead ups to the unrest, both times. I know the place really well, and I loved what it used to be. I don't know what it is now, but I doubt it's same as it was. Different probably. The real issue causes were a weak mentality of younger generations, who grew up after the golden times of 80s/90s when HK was way ahead of most other places in East Asia, and then became too conservative in their ambitions and tactics to get rich and happy. Laziness, arrogance and ignorance, basically - all of which you can see clearly expressed in their 'protest' actions. As well as economic capture by a small wealthy elite that didn't advance great economic policies for the younger generations, while keeping real estate ownership centralized. In other words, the "Freedom and democracy" of HK, didn't handle itself so well, way before China started messing with it. The immaturity is HK wanted to blame outsiders (mainlanders, colonists) for good/bad outcomes, rather than really owning their future. Sad when previous generations of HKers really created stuff with gusto. > As for violence, clearly, there is no comparison between the violence of the protesters and the violence of the Chinese government. The CCP is literally responsible for tens of millions of deaths. How can people focus on entrepreneurship when they’re facing the loss of basic freedoms and the threat of mass detention and death? That's the stupidest reasoning I've ever heard. The people in mainland China managed to do it ("focus on entrepreneurship") pretty well, despite the spectre of the past they themselves created. So did the Japanese, etc. The HK protesters were violent, and why expect them to be different? They're part of the same bloodlines that created and participated in the violence on the mainland. I guess it's just a violent culture. That's been human history. The issue was the HKers didn't properly sublimate their violence into some kind of aggressive creativity and better life seeking, and instead let themselves be misdirected to a useless and self-destructive outlet. That's the bitter pill, that once they swallow and own responsibiltiy for, maybe they can move on. Or you can just keep resisting that idea, and getting mad when you see it reflected - and stay stuck forever. Your choice.

Anonyneko 9mo ago

This argument is often brought up against protesters, in Russian circles as well, but we need to remember that it's _the government_ that's jailing kids, not the protesters.

keepamovin 9mo ago
Kids, need to remember they're responsible for their choices. The people who manipulated and misdirected their energy to ends that would come with heavy consequences have lots of responsibility, too.

mrkstu 9mo ago

Violence? They poke people with their umbrellas? Seriously, the only violence was that of state suppression.

keepamovin 9mo ago
They did a lot of bad things - but I'm not going to bring them up because that's not the point here. The point is their power was misdirected from the purpose they wanted.

komali2 9mo ago

I agree but probably for different reasons. > The sentence "signifies the total destruction of the Hong Kong legal system and the end of justice", Sebastien said. Hong Kong was facing imperialist takeover by the PRC. The people in Hong Kong naively thought they could maintain some measure of self determination through public appeal and law - tools that don't work in the PRC. The CPC is founded on complicity shedding the blood of enemies of the Party, that's the only language it speaks and its default fallback tool. If the Hong Kong protests had continued into insurgency, the CPC would have simply sent in the PLA and massacred people. It would create some legal justification afterwards, of course. In Taiwan, I think we haven't fully reckoned with the reality of dealing with Imperialists. See: Venezuela. If an imperialist country wants to have its way with you, there's basically nothing you can do from a military, political, or legal standpoint to stop it. Non-statist strategies are needed. You could go the way of Mao but I think in the modern era a peasant army simply can't stand up to waves of drones and high accuracy targeted missile strikes. And besides, Mao's revolution became exactly the thing it was meant to overthrow: a capitalist, imperialist, stratified society. This will probably be the same fate of any successful violent revolution (see The Anarchist Cookbook by Keith McHenry for further examples). Anyway, never fight imperialists on their own grounds. I don't know if anything short term could have prevented the PRC's takeover of Hong Kong, but protesting was basically pointless. That time should have been spent setting up alternative channels of communication, alternative means of resource distribution, and perhaps infiltration of same into the territory of the PRC to destabilize the legitimacy of the CPC there.

SilverElfin 9mo ago

You claimed that they were not fighting for anything, but there is a lot of evidence available with a quick search that shows they were fighting for democracy and civil rights that have been a part of Hong Kong life for a long time. That changed when the CCP started intervening in Hong Kong in aggressive ways, in violation of the treaty around Hong Kong. As for violence, clearly, there is no comparison between the violence of the protesters and the violence of the Chinese government. The CCP is literally responsible for tens of millions of deaths. How can people focus on entrepreneurship when they’re facing the loss of basic freedoms and the threat of mass detention and death?

keepamovin 9mo ago
Vagueness, misunderstanding. Like so many of the choral voices then and now. Sad. Have some truth, sister: The legco of HK was unchanged until after the protests when they then extented national law into the SAR. Contrary to the Western media propaganda around the protests there was no violation of the "treaty" (joint dec, and basic law) which gave China broad powers to do what it saw fit in terms of national security (read Article 18, everything China did was already permitted by the BL that Britain signed off on.) https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/filemanager/content/en/files/basiclawtext/basiclaw_full_text.pdf https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/filemanager/content/en/files/bas... Western media could have made other criticisms of China wrt HK, but it chose these dumb lies instead. A whole lot of dumb lies went into whipping up the protesters, who then committed crimes and went to jail. As if the entire purpose was to remove from society a lively rebellious element, and misdirect the vital creative energy of a generation to an end that would contribute to their own destruction. Yet those Westerners claiming they "support" this stupidity bc of "freedom and democracy" are just more pawns in that overall game, that they didn't think enough about before joining in. So must bear the responsibility of their stupidity, now. And, hopefully, silence themselves in shame and reflection before adding more stupidity, into the chorus. You could say the people of HK and the people of the West were both made useful idiots by a joint Chinese-Western psyop to fold HK fully into the Chinese model. The Westerners provided the agitators and agitprop, and the Chinese duly responded with legislation. West really helped China advance its interests in HK. Must have been a coincidence, or cooperation, couldn't have just been lies and stupidity. So dumb. Next time something big happens in the world. Stop, observe and think about it. BTW I was there at the significant lead ups to the unrest, both times. I know the place really well, and I loved what it used to be. I don't know what it is now, but I doubt it's same as it was. Different probably. The real issue causes were a weak mentality of younger generations, who grew up after the golden times of 80s/90s when HK was way ahead of most other places in East Asia, and then became too conservative in their ambitions and tactics to get rich and happy. Laziness, arrogance and ignorance, basically - all of which you can see clearly expressed in their 'protest' actions. As well as economic capture by a small wealthy elite that didn't advance great economic policies for the younger generations, while keeping real estate ownership centralized. In other words, the "Freedom and democracy" of HK, didn't handle itself so well, way before China started messing with it. The immaturity is HK wanted to blame outsiders (mainlanders, colonists) for good/bad outcomes, rather than really owning their future. Sad when previous generations of HKers really created stuff with gusto. > As for violence, clearly, there is no comparison between the violence of the protesters and the violence of the Chinese government. The CCP is literally responsible for tens of millions of deaths. How can people focus on entrepreneurship when they’re facing the loss of basic freedoms and the threat of mass detention and death? That's the stupidest reasoning I've ever heard. The people in mainland China managed to do it ("focus on entrepreneurship") pretty well, despite the spectre of the past they themselves created. So did the Japanese, etc. The HK protesters were violent, and why expect them to be different? They're part of the same bloodlines that created and participated in the violence on the mainland. I guess it's just a violent culture. That's been human history. The issue was the HKers didn't properly sublimate their violence into some kind of aggressive creativity and better life seeking, and instead let themselves be misdirected to a useless and self-destructive outlet. That's the bitter pill, that once they swallow and own responsibiltiy for, maybe they can move on. Or you can just keep resisting that idea, and getting mad when you see it reflected - and stay stuck forever. Your choice.