Hong-Kong Protests

steel21

steel21

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yes China can use its full resources to surpress HK but to what end? Is China going to build a mass camp for HK because they wanted to have a decent life and hope for the future?

- Nope, Hong Kong is a mass camp in itself. Those that can't seems to see opportunity beyond those walls, deserves their fate. The objective is a peace and prosperity, allowing everyone to seek their full potential, should they pursue it. I think of those protesters much as I do racist MAGA folks, clinging on a past they did not built, wish on a future they do not deserve.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You say China is going to catch criminals. Will China also catch people who have lost any hope and they are abandoned by the society?

- It's not a crime to be a loser. During the protest, what economic policies did they propose? Were there any specific strategic visions regarding development, housing or income disparity? No, all they wanted were the means, without an objective end to endeavor for. Face it, they were losers to begin with, they are losers now, and will continue to be losers based on their inability to understand social economic root cause and the lack of vision to come up with an alternative.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will China also catch people who will have "nothing else to lose" and start protesting?

- No one want to hang out with losers. These guys got no NED cash to hand out, and no chicks wants them. There is no need to catch them and feed them, they will disintegrate on their own.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The more China supresses the protests, the more violent they will become.

- That is an assumption. If you want to take that argument to its hypothetical bitter end, then DPRK would be wrought with terrorism every day, and yet???....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
China if nothing else, always feared its population (as any gov should). While policing and supression was always important, ultimately what set the stage for rebellions, protests, violence etc, is when people became poor, in hunger, no hope, broken promises.

- No, you clearly don't understand governance. Let go with the protester model. If these 20 year old hold power, then the whole place would fall apart and corruption rampant. You only have to understand the history of the Paris Commune and Chicken Farmers of
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tunisia's Ennahda Movement to see how violent extremist play out. Spoiler, they turn on themselves.

This is why for HK the next 2-3 years are absolutely critical. If they continue playing their usual politician games then I fully expect the Central Gov to directly intervene in HK internal politics even more forcefully to quell people's anger.

- Time for game is over. You can already see the central government break ground on housing projects.
 
V

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
steel21 said:
Time for game is over. You can already see the central government break ground on housing projects.
Click to expand...
Amen!
These HK politicians are all snakes. Time for Central Gov to get around them.

Btw lets not forget the Tycoons. I hope they get thrown into prison if they keep delaying housing plans and keep land prices high so that building houses will become expensive.

Central Gov should sent them an ultimatum that its time for "social responsibility", if they keep hoarding land and keep prices high, the Gov should start throwing them into jail for corruption.

Enough of their bs and their lackeys (HK gov and politicians)
 
steel21

steel21

Junior Member
Registered Member
voyager1 said:
Amen!
These HK politicians are all snakes. Time for Central Gov to get around them.

Btw lets not forget the Tycoons. I hope they get thrown into prison if they keep delaying housing plans and keep land prices high so that building houses will become expensive.

Central Gov should sent them an ultimatum that its time for "social responsibility", if they keep hoarding land and keep prices high, the Gov should start throwing them into jail for corruption.

Enough of their bs and their lackeys (HK gov and politicians)
Click to expand...
Tycoon still have a purpose.

The politicians were just front man for the tycoons.

You can't up root the tycoons overnight without creating economic calamity. It has to be done in increments, and also bringing your own Tycoons to profit from their losses.

I imagine that's how it will play out.
 
S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
plawolf said:
I think an honest assessment of HK from handover till now will see it as a colossal strategic mistake by the west.

HK post reunification was an honest and fair experiment by China to see if the western democratic model had any merit that the rest of China could learn from.

The Chinese government gave them extraordinary freedoms and basically did not meddle at all.

But the self hating racists longing for their blonde haired, fair skinned and blue eye master race masters to return just couldn’t help themselves and went out of their way to spit on China at every opportunity and actively courted western malevolent powers while seized upon any and every opportunity to try to change the status quo and move towards independence. This ultimately resulted in a pre-planned and foreign funded and organised colour revolution attempt using the pretext of a pretty standard and innocuous extradition treaty intended to serve justice as some imaginary power grab by Beijing, as if China needed any pretext or cover to do so if it wanted to ( as evidenced by the national security law that ultimately resulted from this).

The colour revolution was destined to fail and never came remotely close to achieve anything of substance in terms of HK independence. All it did was prove unequivocally to China that the western model is nothing but a poison pill Trojan horse.

If you adopt the Western model, you effectively surrender all power to the west as you will be literally playing their game, which they can and will change the rules at will, and they will shamelessly lie and cheap and twist and hide facts to bury you in an avalanche of shit and drawn out the truth, as happens in the west as a matter of course.

That’s not how anyone remotely rational or moral who isn’t totally brainwashed would want their society ran. So all I can say is well done and thank you to the idiot politicians of the west, for so thoroughly and convincingly discrediting their own model within China. As without this lesson, the self hating racists in China would have continue to be able to make a convincing arguments that China needs to move towards the western model and sway many young naive idealists to their cause.
Click to expand...

I agree with the idea that HK was an experiment by China to see what could be gained under a western democratic model.

West was painted into a corner with HK. Thatcher tried her best to hang onto HK, proposing all kinds of left-field ideas like "sharing" HK or making another 99-year lease. These were obviously all rejected. If they didn't handover HK, then basically it proved that they were looking to continue the exploitative colonial economic model. Furthermore, this risked fighting a war, which despite an overwhelming technological advantage at the time, it would be far riskier than something like the contemporary Desert Storm. So as you mention, the best they could do was hand back HK and hopefully HK could act like a Trojan Horse. As you mention, adopting the western model is not simply a matter of "electing government", but rather a general subservience to American interests in exchange for "a cut of the pie".

After the fall of the Soviet Union, there was an overwhelming idea amongst Western intellectuals that the western liberalism "had won". This was popularized by Francis Fukuyama's "The End of History". The fall of the Chinese Communist Party would be inevitable, especially with Tiananmen fresh in people's memory. The entry into WTO would accelerate the decline as it was believed that the government and state-owned industries would not be nimble enough to adapt and compete to the opening up. To be fair, they had plenty of reasons to believe this, productivity, mechanization, technological sophistication were all very low. How could China catch up being so far behind? See Jim Mann's book "Beijing Jeep" to illustrate how most American business people saw China.

So with this backdrop, basically for 20 years, HK was left alone by the Chinese central government and was not an issue for Western governments. There was a still a belief that Russia's struggles adapting to the new global economy would soon play out in China. However, basically when Obama took power, it was increasingly obvious that the system in China was adapting and actually thriving. The country had managed to turn the tide on exploitative manufacturing and was able to innovate in fields like high speed rail. High speed rail would be less polluting (especially with the move away from coal), less dependent on foreign imports (both technological and oil), and cheaper to run per capita. The main downside being slower, but when looking at total travel time (including time to get to the airport and crossing security), you are only losing an hour or 2 for plane trips under 6 hours. Although high speed rail in itself is not anything super special, at this time, Boeing was growing fat and rich from Chinese airline purchases, and by association GE. It was a real wake up call that China was moving forward on its own terms. So you also see very quickly that the western machinery was mobilized against the HSR system at this time. 2011 was the Wenzhou train crash, and all media cried out about officials covering up safety defects, the downfalls of intellectual property theft, etc. etc. The reality is that at some point an accident is inevitable, that is the sad truth.

What is the point of talking about HSR? HSR is the road that leads into the rise of western interference in HK. The timing of the Wenzhou train accident was seen as very fortuitous for western strategists. They seized on the timing as construction had only just started at the time. They quickly mobilized their army of "enlightened intellectuals". According to Joshua Wong himself, this was his first protest. So we can see the younger generation cutting their teeth for their benefactors here. From the safety issues, then they moved onto sovereignty issues. They made a big deal about mainland officers stationed there to do customs clearance. In actuality, this is a very standard practice by the USA itself.

However, I don't think that independence was a serious end goal. The main goal here is to maintain the divide between HK and mainland. The next step was fomenting the Umbrella and Occupy protests and solidifying the newly installed opposition players (Martin Lee and Jimmy Lai were already old). The same thing happened in Taiwan with much greater success for American interests. Ma Yingjeou was about to cap off his presidency with the Free Trade agreement with mainland when it was derailed by the contemporaneous Sunflower protests. Very quickly American interests moved to destroy relations with the mainland which had been on the rise.

These are the hallmarks of typical backhanded American geopolitical moves. First the problem is created by them, then they criticize the affected country for "silencing the opposition" or whatever nonsense. This exact playbook was also seen in Ukraine where US agitation forced a coup, then blamed Russia for destabilizing the region and intimidating Ukraine.
 
Gatekeeper

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
Ted must be a true international citizen — he stands with the Hong Kong citizens, Taiwan citizens, Syrian citizens, Belarusian citizens and Russian citizens but he refuses to stand with the US citizens of Texas during our time of need.
Click to expand...

Yeap. That's our Ted. The man who won't defend his dad's and wife's honour. And flee to hotter climate once the going gets tough back home. And then lies about it until got caught out by his wife's text. And then proceed to use his daughters as excuse. And finally cares about Asians in Hong Kong, but not Asians in America.

Have I left anything out?

FB_IMG_1618667744967.jpg

FB_IMG_1618667739109.jpg



@voyager1

I'm a bit confused where's your stance on all this sxxt in Hong Kong? Are you trolling people here?
 
V

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
Gatekeeper said:
I'm a bit confused where's your stance on all this sxxt in Hong Kong? Are you trolling people here?
Click to expand...
What do you mean what is my stance. People can have a nuanced understanding on many matters. Reality is hardly white and black

HK protests were obviously CIA led but they didn't happen in a vacuum, slowly tension was rising by the years as HK housing crisis was becoming worse. Every thing came to head on the protests, then CIA "captured" it and started the whole HK independence movement.

China fucked up by not implementing the national security law decades ago but at least they played their cards right on the protests situation. They waited for them to become a joke and then justifiably imposed the national security law.

Now, though, by reducing democracy in HK (yes, reducing, spare me the buzzwords. They reduced how many seats are directly elected by the people), the Gov must now prove that it can produce results for HK.

No1 priority is housing. If by 2-3 years HK hasn't moved to solve this issue, then expect protests to start again and become violent.

Basic human history proves that if you offer hope and fail to achieve anything then violence starts

If you have any more questions, please ask
 
Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
supersnoop said:
I agree with the idea that HK was an experiment by China to see what could be gained under a western democratic model.

West was painted into a corner with HK. Thatcher tried her best to hang onto HK, proposing all kinds of left-field ideas like "sharing" HK or making another 99-year lease. These were obviously all rejected. If they didn't handover HK, then basically it proved that they were looking to continue the exploitative colonial economic model. Furthermore, this risked fighting a war, which despite an overwhelming technological advantage at the time, it would be far riskier than something like the contemporary Desert Storm. So as you mention, the best they could do was hand back HK and hopefully HK could act like a Trojan Horse. As you mention, adopting the western model is not simply a matter of "electing government", but rather a general subservience to American interests in exchange for "a cut of the pie".

After the fall of the Soviet Union, there was an overwhelming idea amongst Western intellectuals that the western liberalism "had won". This was popularized by Francis Fukuyama's "The End of History". The fall of the Chinese Communist Party would be inevitable, especially with Tiananmen fresh in people's memory. The entry into WTO would accelerate the decline as it was believed that the government and state-owned industries would not be nimble enough to adapt and compete to the opening up. To be fair, they had plenty of reasons to believe this, productivity, mechanization, technological sophistication were all very low. How could China catch up being so far behind? See Jim Mann's book "Beijing Jeep" to illustrate how most American business people saw China.

So with this backdrop, basically for 20 years, HK was left alone by the Chinese central government and was not an issue for Western governments. There was a still a belief that Russia's struggles adapting to the new global economy would soon play out in China. However, basically when Obama took power, it was increasingly obvious that the system in China was adapting and actually thriving. The country had managed to turn the tide on exploitative manufacturing and was able to innovate in fields like high speed rail. High speed rail would be less polluting (especially with the move away from coal), less dependent on foreign imports (both technological and oil), and cheaper to run per capita. The main downside being slower, but when looking at total travel time (including time to get to the airport and crossing security), you are only losing an hour or 2 for plane trips under 6 hours. Although high speed rail in itself is not anything super special, at this time, Boeing was growing fat and rich from Chinese airline purchases, and by association GE. It was a real wake up call that China was moving forward on its own terms. So you also see very quickly that the western machinery was mobilized against the HSR system at this time. 2011 was the Wenzhou train crash, and all media cried out about officials covering up safety defects, the downfalls of intellectual property theft, etc. etc. The reality is that at some point an accident is inevitable, that is the sad truth.

What is the point of talking about HSR? HSR is the road that leads into the rise of western interference in HK. The timing of the Wenzhou train accident was seen as very fortuitous for western strategists. They seized on the timing as construction had only just started at the time. They quickly mobilized their army of "enlightened intellectuals". According to Joshua Wong himself, this was his first protest. So we can see the younger generation cutting their teeth for their benefactors here. From the safety issues, then they moved onto sovereignty issues. They made a big deal about mainland officers stationed there to do customs clearance. In actuality, this is a very standard practice by the USA itself.

However, I don't think that independence was a serious end goal. The main goal here is to maintain the divide between HK and mainland. The next step was fomenting the Umbrella and Occupy protests and solidifying the newly installed opposition players (Martin Lee and Jimmy Lai were already old). The same thing happened in Taiwan with much greater success for American interests. Ma Yingjeou was about to cap off his presidency with the Free Trade agreement with mainland when it was derailed by the contemporaneous Sunflower protests. Very quickly American interests moved to destroy relations with the mainland which had been on the rise.

These are the hallmarks of typical backhanded American geopolitical moves. First the problem is created by them, then they criticize the affected country for "silencing the opposition" or whatever nonsense. This exact playbook was also seen in Ukraine where US agitation forced a coup, then blamed Russia for destabilizing the region and intimidating Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Thanks for a very interesting and insightful read. Thank you for the book recommendation that I will surely get as part of my educational pursuit of understanding the China vs U.S. rivalry.
 
Gatekeeper

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
voyager1 said:
What do you mean what is my stance. People can have a nuanced understanding on many matters. Reality is hardly white and black

HK protests were obviously CIA led but they didn't happen in a vacuum, slowly tension was rising by the years as HK housing crisis was becoming worse. Every thing came to head on the protests, then CIA "captured" it and started the whole HK independence movement.

China fucked up by not implementing the national security law decades ago but at least they played their cards right on the protests situation. They waited for them to become a joke and then justifiably imposed the national security law.

Now, though, by reducing democracy in HK (yes, reducing, spare me the buzzwords. They reduced how many seats are directly elected by the people), the Gov must now prove that it can produce results for HK.

No1 priority is housing. If by 2-3 years HK hasn't moved to solve this issue, then expect protests to start again and become violent.

Basic human history proves that if you offer hope and fail to achieve anything then violence starts

If you have any more questions, please ask
Click to expand...

No all good. It just the last few post of yours going back and forth with @crash8pilot seem weird. But now it's not so weird. I disagree with your analysis about protest and agree more with @crash8pilot . That's all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top