Why are Hong Kongers all of a suddenly protesting for democracy when they were never a democracy?

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,829
do not use your prejudiced idea to try to understand chinese rules.
remember china has the longest history of bureaucratic system, which you cannot expect to be all function in the way you are familiar with.
China also has an equally long history of stories rank injustice, people railroaded using legal formalities by corrupt officials.

China then also has an equally long tradition of uprisings and rebellions, also sometimes successfully, against corrupt rulers. But that's clearly not going to be allowed on the CCP's watch.
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,829
What other manisfestation of public opinion do the Hongkongers not have? Give a specific example. Are you claiming HK people aren't allowed to talk about it,, write about it, put up fliers about it, but they're allowed to protest about it?
That doesn't matter. It leads nowhere. No one in any position of political power in HK needs to give a fig about any of that because of HK is run, how the political system is set up.

HKers have spent years stating their opinions, and no one that matters cares, not in HK, certainly not i Beijing. After years of this it is palpably clear that the opinions of the HK public means nothing, in either HK itself, much less in China.

The only way to make it matter is to begin being directly disruptive, which means taking it to the street. Which is why things have progressed to what it currently is.

The HK protesters think they deserve direct influence on how HK is run – much as local politics in any representative system – and you may disagree with that.

Anyone can have and express any opinion in China as long as no one listens and it doesn't matter. The HKers want it to matter. You might not.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,557
China
China also has an equally long history of stories rank injustice, people railroaded using legal formalities by corrupt officials.

China then also has an equally long tradition of uprisings and rebellions, also sometimes successfully, against corrupt rulers. But that's clearly not going to be allowed on the CCP's watch.
original context:


Carrie Lam was nominated by the election committee of hk
"by china" is vastly a meaningless term as it refers to nothing. for example, powers are dived in china, the central government, the people's congress, military commission and the president are all divided.
here nomination of carrie lam was not done by central government or military commission/president.
nomination rights is granted by the people's congress, the election committee (of 1200 people) of hk is permitted to carry out nomination on behave of people's congress.

the nomination generates more than 1 person for election. and all joins in debate in public, broadcast via TV, before voting

the the elected chief is then given appointment to the one win the voting. the appointment is carried out by the central government on behave of the people's congress. the hk special administrative region is an extension of the central government. this appointment is an approve of the extension, for that, the central government is allowed to propose objection about the candidate in the people's congress

throughout the whole procedure, it is mainly about people's congress and central gov, president and military commission almost do not join.

if anyone not familiar with chinese administration system, one should learn the shift of chinese governments, especially on the shifts happening among song, yuan and to ming time.

i have presented discussions, at least corrected a wrong number from 800 to 1200 people about the election committee

for that, i believe i gave something valuable


what is your value except throwing out context-less assertions, and clueless sentences?


if you are just about to make a negative speech about china, DO NOT bother me by quoting my post. i hope you understand
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,557
China
this is worth watching

the quoted article mentioned several points.

1. china should not blame UK did not give HK democracy

well, it is indeed true UK failed to give democracy

and china does give HK democracy, for a start, the chief is a HK person.

it is the people's congress in the 00s urged HK Legislative Council to carry out general elections ASAP.
however, let us notice, it was the ones backed by foreign powers vote down the plan in the council, for they refuse to acknowledge it is necessary to vow loyalty to the China Nation.

the chinese people will not in any moment tolerate such a behavior. if they intend to obstruct the general election, let it be, it is their choice.


2. washing white Patten's role in riots

very frankly, he is no longer legal to influence HK politics in anyway in anytime.

he was a former colonizer master, "former", very plain word, as he should take as an adult.
neither he or UK, has any remaining rights on HK

he should be grateful, for that chinese people did not sue a huge rent fee for HK
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,829
original context:





i have presented discussions, at least corrected a wrong number from 800 to 1200 people about the election committee

for that, i believe i gave something valuable


what is your value except throwing out context-less assertions, and clueless sentences?


if you are just about to make a negative speech about china, DO NOT bother me by quoting my post. i hope you understand
Well, you're trying to base an argument on authority here, while denying me any.

Which is frankly the problem with the mainland Chinese approach to the Honkong protests. Arguments form authority won't work and is what got China and HK into the mess in the first place,

I listen to what's reported out of HK from the protests. It relies on paying attention to how the protesters, who are the ones keeping the situation going, frame the situation and their actions.

The relevance of this is in fact quite high precisely because HK is still a mostly free and open society. Which ensures good representativity and relevance of the info that CAN come out of HK. Mainland China is MUCH worse in that regard.

And the conclusions I have presented make perfect sense – it's just that it means things are almost impossible for Beijing to fix – especially when trying to do it on a simple basis of authority. The HK protestesters do not recognize that authority.

The problem is that in HK China has a society that ALLOWS the free formation of opinion – unlike on the mainland – but then, when opinion has formed, it has bugger all places to go. It's just dead in the water. There is simply no mechanism for how to transform HK public opinion into HK political actions — do it like it is currently done, and China deems it illegal – but if they don't, then there is simply no mechanism for transforming it into legitimate political actions. So the streets it is. And you may disapprove, but you also won't get why this goes down in HK, the way it does, now.

So you can refuse to accept the analysis. Preferring to construct an argument on a presumed basis of you having authority by being Chinese, and my argument having no value, on the basis of me not being Chinese. At least it is consistent on the line of arguments presented by the Chinese government, in relation to the HK protesters and the rest of the world as well.

However, is it working?

The protests in HK continue.
 
Last edited:

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,557
China
Well, you're trying to base an argument on authority here, while denying me any.

Which is frankly the problem with the mainland Chinese approach to the Honkong protests. Arguments form authority won't work and is what got China and HK into the mess in the first place,

I listen to what's reported out of HK from the protests. It relies on paying attention to how the protesters, who are the ones keeping the situation going, frame the situation and their actions.

And the conclusions I have presented make perfect sense – it's just that it means things are almost impossible for Beijing to fix – especially when trying to do it on a simple basis of authority. The HK protestesters do not recognize that authority.

So you can refuse to accept the analysis. Preferring to construct an argument on a presumed basis of you having authority by being Chinese, and my argument having no value, on the basis of me not being Chinese. At least it is consistent on the line of arguments presented by the Chinese government, in relation to the HK protesters and the rest of the world as well.

However, is it working?

The protests in HK continue.
first of all, your quotation in #182
completely has nothing to do with the quoted words of mine from #179
quotations should be made when there is formally a logic connection, you understood.
values become void, even if there had been any, when you failed to establish the logic connection of the quotations.

you are free to refute or support in anyway you like about words of mine being quoted.
however, you are not expected to provide your "analysis" which is irrelevant to my comment.
if you are about to provide such "analysis", just plainly write a post, without quotation.
stop harass by irrelevant quotations, okay?
 
Last edited:

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,829
I'm stating my opinion on the situation in Hongkong, and why it has turned out like it does. You don't like it, and you don't have to like it. (I of course think you should pay attention, because in my opinion there is something there that is highly relevant to understand the situation.)

I am also free to state my opinion, including an attempt at analysis of the structure behind your arguments – whether I am right or wrong – and you are of course free to violently and fundamentally disagree with me.

But what you are again trying to do now looks more like wanting to shut down debate by arguing to authority.

Which, as I have already stated, I think has a nice parallell to how the Chinese government tries to argue the situation in HK.

And it's not working, and the protests in HK continue.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,557
China
I'm stating my opinion on the situation in Hongkong, and why it has turned out like it does. You don't like it, and you don't have to like it. (I of course think you should pay attention, because in my opinion there is something there that is highly relevant to understand the situation.)

I am also free to state my opinion, including an attempt at analysis of the structure behind your arguments – whether I am right or wrong – and you are of course free to violently and fundamentally disagree with me.

But what you are again trying to do now looks more like wanting to shut down debate by arguing to authority.

Which, as I have already stated, I think has a nice parallell to how the Chinese government tries to argue the situation in HK.

And it's not working, and the protests in HK continue.
I DON't like be harassed by irrelevant quotations

quotation is NOT a tool you used to get attentions from another poster.

quotations are supposed to establish logic connections, and to provide contexts!

do not put your words in my mouth

my suggestion has been given to you:
if you are just about to make a negative speech about china, just plainly write a post, without quotation.
 
Last edited: