I don't know why England has never formally apologized for its evil actions that caused this whole HK issue in the first place... If it wasn't for the fact they colonized India to grow opium drugs to force sell to China and then stole the HK land from China none of this would even be an issue in the first place... Why hasn't China asked UK for reparations?
Hong-Kong Protests
- Thread starter Pika
- Start date
I don't know why England has never formally apologized for its evil actions that caused this whole HK issue in the first place... If it wasn't for the fact they colonized India to grow opium drugs to force sell to China and then stole the HK land from China none of this would even be an issue in the first place... Why hasn't China asked UK for reparations?
They not need to do so since the consequences of all there poor actions are going to cause the UK an unending amount of suffering though there pride and arrogance. Also, given that the future of the UK and the US are in the same sort of places given there lack of leadership as of now, there is going to be a lot of problems in the future. This time though, they must face the music and China doesn't really need to go to the trouble of forcing others to apologies since they will ultimately take the time to handle there own nation instead of getting into other countries affairs.
Mr T
Senior Member
That sounds awfully like the CCP getting its way without having to make any real concessions, other than perhaps hollow Chief Executive "elections" where any candidate the CCP doesn't like is disqualified from running.
Recent news supports this view. It wasn't enough for the disqualified candidates/lawmakers to say they wouldn't engage again in the behaviour the HK government criticised them for in their registration letters. In fact, I think they were all disqualified. It seems that the only reason the letters were sent at all was because previously the HK courts said they needed to give candidates the "opportunity" to address concerns before they were disqualified. So they pretended to give the opportunity to the candidates to run for election to avoid another loss in court.
Saying that HK politicians have to be "loyal" to the central government realistically means they have to do what the central government wants. Loyalty for the CCP isn't an issue of technically showing respect, it's about subservience. Even within the CCP you're not allowed to criticise Xi, and there's no reason to believe that will get any better soon. Right, now, the central government doesn't want any change in HK, even if that means stagnation and declining living standards.
We're also in the curious situation where the HK government (maybe or maybe not poked by the CCP) has said that voting against government policy/budgets is a breach of the law, in which case why bother having LegCo at all if it's to be a rubber-stamp legislative.
Trust is usually earned rather than given as an obligation. Right now the CCP is not doing a lot to make HKers trust them. I appreciate that you're wishing for a better future, but as I think most HKers see it they're being forced into submission rather than being reasons for them to choose go along with what the CCP wants.
On a side note, I'm not sure that greater economic integration with the mainland is necessarily a good thing for Hong Kong. If it's to remain a special place it needs to have diverse trade links. If it is fully integrated with the mainland then it just becomes another Chinese city, and quite probably a poor relation to Shenzhen.
Last edited:
In four sentences you've managed to equate the act of showing loyalty to your host nation to submitting to slavery and poverty, planting the idea that the only way to freedom and prosperity is sedition and treason.
Skilfully done. May I suggest your next username be 'Serpent in Eden'?
It is quite sad to see a genuine attempt by a respective member here like @Bltizo trying to reason with another member, and all he get in return is an incoherent reply. Blitzo's post was reasonable to the reality of the situation. ie: They are powerful forces at play. For Hong Kong to prosper, it has to bend with the time and to these powerful forces. Reality is what it is.
And then we get this incoherent reply, sounded very much like .... well just a rant really.
@azuazu
Just saw your post. Couldn't agree more, but didn't want to put it like that in case we get in trouble.
It's strange from someone who expect the highest standards of rule of law from China, yet can be so relax from law-makers of Hong Kong. These Hong Kong law-makers can commit murder, and in his eyes, they are provoke so it's ok.
And then we get this incoherent reply, sounded very much like .... well just a rant really.
@azuazu
Just saw your post. Couldn't agree more, but didn't want to put it like that in case we get in trouble.
It's strange from someone who expect the highest standards of rule of law from China, yet can be so relax from law-makers of Hong Kong. These Hong Kong law-makers can commit murder, and in his eyes, they are provoke so it's ok.
Last edited:
Mr T
Senior Member
If the nation refuses to change its policies to suit the times and needs of the people in question, and also denies the people a straightforward way to select alternative politicians who will bring forward different policies, is that the fault of the populace who ask for change or the central government for refusing to modify its plans?
Hong Kong is colony. It is evident by its government structure. They were formerly a British colony and now they are a Chinese one.
They were given the chance to change their colonial status into something more befitting of a nation state in 2014, but they protested it away, instead of trying for compromise. Since they chose to remain a colony they should strive to be the best colony they can. Instead they are blaming their host for problems created by their own choices.
Also seeing as how the populace has protested away the right to deny citizenship to anchor babies (1999), plans for cheap housing (2003), the chance of cultural integration with their host nation (2012) and the freedom to commit sedition and treason without legal repercussions (2019).. I think its safe to say that the populace doesn't quite know what it wants, is prone to self-harm and requires professional intervention.
HK gov't did modify it's plans (see termination of Extradition bill) but the remaining 4 out of 5 demands are too extreme, including colluding with foreign gov'ts to sanction HK.
You see, your oversimplification of the issue ignores that tremendous hubris of protesters post-extradition bill termination.
Now what is the consequence? HK revocation of special status, US sanctions, and NSL due to collusion with foreign gov't to sanction HK/China. GOOD JOB, that's all I have to say.
Nathan Law is pretty happy in UK while leaving the destruction he created in HK.
Ultimately everything Hongkong does must be for its own country's betterment, that is the one and only bottom line, one that almost all people except a handful of hanjian are fine with.
New York serves the purpose of bettering the United States. Berlin serves the purpose of bettering the Bundesrepublik. Hongkong serves the purpose of bettering the Peoples Republic of China.
In return when the whole country is improved, each city will receive benefits from the total.
In the coming days, Beijing should explore more ways of working with HK to its full potential. Freedom from occupation was the first step. It can be said that last year's battles against foreign funded terrorists was the true end of occupation, not the 1997 so called deal which britain violated with its illegal interference into HK politics.
New York serves the purpose of bettering the United States. Berlin serves the purpose of bettering the Bundesrepublik. Hongkong serves the purpose of bettering the Peoples Republic of China.
In return when the whole country is improved, each city will receive benefits from the total.
In the coming days, Beijing should explore more ways of working with HK to its full potential. Freedom from occupation was the first step. It can be said that last year's battles against foreign funded terrorists was the true end of occupation, not the 1997 so called deal which britain violated with its illegal interference into HK politics.