Occupy Central...News, Photos & Videos ONLY!!
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
- Status
@ Mr T
It has already been discussed to exhaustion that Beijing likely does not see it that way.
That is to say, if Beijing goes completely hands off it will allow the city to potentially move towards independence and/or be used as a staging ground for more organised challenges to its power in china. In other words, Beijing likely sees the movement that is simply anti CCP which they're naturally not goon to tolerate.
I can sympathize with some of their motivations but reading their slogans, they've likely alienated the central government
As for Beijing saying HK is part of china/one country, of course it doesn't undermine their argument. When there is a complication in one's house then those in charge have the power to seek a resolution
It has already been discussed to exhaustion that Beijing likely does not see it that way.
That is to say, if Beijing goes completely hands off it will allow the city to potentially move towards independence and/or be used as a staging ground for more organised challenges to its power in china. In other words, Beijing likely sees the movement that is simply anti CCP which they're naturally not goon to tolerate.
I can sympathize with some of their motivations but reading their slogans, they've likely alienated the central government
As for Beijing saying HK is part of china/one country, of course it doesn't undermine their argument. When there is a complication in one's house then those in charge have the power to seek a resolution
solarz
Brigadier
You do know that mainland people require a special visa to travel to Hong Kong, right? Why don't you ask HKers how they feel about removing that requirement?
No, Beijing is not "pre-approving" anybody. Read the actual Basic Law amendments instead of repeating western MSM soundbites.
In the proposed amendment, candidates will be selected by a committee composed of an array representing many aspects of HK society, from Business to Arts to Professional Associations. Just about the only people not represented are high-school students and welfare recipients.
solarz
Brigadier
To be fair, nobody can say how accurate or objective these polls are. If the OC could buy polls to put themselves in a good light, then the Central Government can certainly do the same thing. Truth, as they say, is the first casualty of any war.
Mr T
Senior Member
I wouldn't be surprised if the poll is accurate. The Occupy movement has gone on a long time.
Except that there was no big independence movement in Hong Kong even a few years ago. It is Beijing that has brought about even the possibility of an independence movement by being so obstinate and refusing to give Hong Kongese a real choice. I still don't think there is any majority support for independence. But constantly trying to tell Hong Kongese that Beijing knows best isn't going to go down well.
Arguably Beijing is alienating many Hong Kongese.
How many have been banned from going to HK for political reasons?
Sorry, that's the real smokescreen. The pro-Beijing companies and interest groups still have the superior position. That's why Beijing is so desperate to avoid a more open nomination system, because it wants a veto on candidates it doesn't like.
Otherwise, what's the fuss over? Why dig its heels in so much when all opinion polls in Hong Kong show a majority of people don't want the proposed nomination system?
Except that there was no big independence movement in Hong Kong even a few years ago. It is Beijing that has brought about even the possibility of an independence movement by being so obstinate and refusing to give Hong Kongese a real choice. I still don't think there is any majority support for independence. But constantly trying to tell Hong Kongese that Beijing knows best isn't going to go down well.
Arguably Beijing is alienating many Hong Kongese.
How many have been banned from going to HK for political reasons?
Sorry, that's the real smokescreen. The pro-Beijing companies and interest groups still have the superior position. That's why Beijing is so desperate to avoid a more open nomination system, because it wants a veto on candidates it doesn't like.
Otherwise, what's the fuss over? Why dig its heels in so much when all opinion polls in Hong Kong show a majority of people don't want the proposed nomination system?
Zool
Junior Member
In addition to Solarz comment, the opposition has held up a number of progressive laws the HK Government has tried to pass. This was actually touched on in the earlier thread when events were in the middle of unfolding. You should read up on it Mr T. All of HK ill's cannot be simply laid at the feet of Beijing if looking at the whole story.
Actually it's somewhat ironic that a big advantage China has in it's governing is the one party system, which OC is fundamentally against in HK. For the many goods that can be attributed to Democratic systems, multi-party government has led to paralysis instead of progress around the world in a lot of cases. The initial intent was good, but you now see Opposition for the sake of Opposition due to party politics. It's a road block China has not had to navigate, to it's economic benefit.
solarz
Brigadier
That is demonstrably false. Pre-1997 HK was massively anti-Beijing, hence the whole exodus to Vancouver, etc. Since then, the anti-Beijing sentiment has never gone away, with many demonstrations organized by this movement. The fact that OC is the biggest and longest one yet does not mean nothing existed before.
Plenty. As a mainlander , one has to apply for a HK visa, and the officials are not obliged to state reasons for refusal.
You mean the opinion polls commissioned by the OC organizers?
There is a huge difference between a veto and the power to "pre-approve" (in your own words). For example, the US President has the power to veto legislations, but cannot decide which legislations can be submitted to congress.
The "pro-Beijing companies and interest groups", as you so blithely dismiss them, are composed of these people:
Subsector No. of members
Heung Yee Kuk 28
Agriculture and Fisheries 60
Insurance 18
Transport 18
Education 30
Legal 30
Accountancy 30
Medical 30
Health Services 30
Engineering 30
Architectural, Surveying and Planning 30
Labour 60
Social Welfare 60
Real Estate and Construction 18
Tourism 18
Commercial (First) 18
Commercial (Second) 18
Industrial (First) 18
Industrial (Second) 18
Finance 18
Financial Services 18
Sports, Performing Arts, Culture and Publication 60
Import and Export 18
Textiles and Garment 18
Wholesale and Retail 18
Information Technology 30
Higher Education 30
Hotel 17
Catering 17
Chinese Medicine 30
Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference 55
Employers' Federation of HK 16
HK and Kowloon District Councils 59
New Territories District Councils 62
HK Chinese Enterprises Association 16
National People's Congress 36
Legislative Council 60
Religious 60
Total 1,200
Finally, Beijing refuses to budge from its position because the alternative proposed by OC is utter nonsense.
Mr T
Senior Member
I didn't say Beijing was the cause of Hong Kong's problems. I pointed to the political system.
If it's not the system, how would you propose improving Hong Kong? It's not a collective, it's a city where laws are drafted and enacted by politicians. Those politicians are chosen by the system. Are you suggesting the problem is Hong Kongese, that they're all lazy?
Yeah I'm not so sure the one-party state was a good thing, at the very least until Deng Xiaoping's reforms. It took about 30-40 years for the CCP to realise that capitalism had its uses. That's not exactly efficient governance.
And yet the richest countries in the world (based on per capita) remain democracies. Maybe one day China could get to that sort of wealth, but it doesn't mean we'll be poorer.
Eh? That wasn't being "anti-Beijing", that was fear of what Chinese rule would bring. Besides, don't you think that the ones who left would be the most opposed to change, hence those that stayed behind more willing to give China the benefit of the doubt?
Care to name a few?
If you pre-approve all candidates, you can also veto any you don't like.
Let's look at the results shall we? According to the 2011 election for the election committee, there were 852 seats for the pro-Beijing camp and 173 seats for the pro-democracy camp.
Now compare that with say the popular vote in the 2012 legislative elections where the pro-democracy group got just over 56% of the vote.
If the election committee is such a fair system, why does the pro-Beijing group disproportionately do better than when there's an open vote?
Is that the best you can come up with? Occupy doesn't speak for all of Hong Kong. There have been different methods proposed. Please explain why all of them are a bad idea.
Last edited:
Any choice HK would have must be pre approved by Beijing, if they want an open selection then it is effectively de facto independence. In other words, any HK leader must be subservient to the central government. The selection process can be somewhat different to the mainland, and currently is and will continue to be. But wanting complete severing of the link is not something Beijing will tolerate pure and simple. The same goes for seeking an overthrow of the CCP (which is really what many of the protesters also desire). Your other demands can be as reasonable as you like but once you reach that point, then you are going to be ignored and considered a potential threat. That goes for anyone inside and outside of mainland China. Of course, China has respected HK's relative autonomy and allowed them to go about their anti CCP business more or less without inteference.
If HK could have framed its desire for reform within the context of supporting the central government and willing to operate within its red lines then I suspect things would have been different. And I'm not only talking about this movement, but rather for many years before.
The problem is that HK was always seen as a bastion of potential subversion, for better or for worse. That makes any true dialogue difficult at best.
Basically, if they really want open selection, there needs to be fundamental limits on the degree to which they can challenge Beijing on, i.e.: there needs to be limits. Especially regarding challenging CCP rule, using HK as a formal bed of subversion, independence, changing the 2047 reuniting of HK back to the mainland, etc.
At this stage I've heard no meaningful discussion of self imposed limits on any proposed selection system.
If there are no limits discussed, then yes, they are a bad idea and can be dismissed as utter nonsense.
- Status