Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Without the various incidents of violence in 2019-2020, there would be no urgent need to have new laws. Hong Kong had been mainly peaceful for more than 50 years since the
Those incidents wouldn't have happened if Beijing respected the opinions of HK people and didn't try to push through extremely unpopular legislation to benefit Beijing.
The core of the problem was always Beijing desire to turn HK into another Chinese province and the protests was just the final pushback. Beijing could then have started to listen to the wishes of HK people or crackdown on dissent and destroy HK. It selfish chose the latter.
Without the various incidents of violence in 2019-2020, there would be no urgent need to have new laws. Hong Kong had been mainly peaceful for more than 50 years since the 1967 riots.
UK, Canada and Australia changed their policies of HK applicants. Now, HK people can move to them much more easier than to the US and before. Before, a HK immigrant would normally need to a large sum of money or good education and fluent in english to migrate. Now people can't speak an english word can move to the UK. In addition, unlike the past, HK students can stay in those countries after graduation. These policies lead to increasing investment, consumption, immigirants and students from HK. The HKSAR gov has measures to attract talents from elsewhere now when other countries are so officially welcoming the immigrants from HK. The official policies of the governments do not mean discrimination against immigrants or Asians by the people do not exist.
The promise about unchanged was before Chris Patten increased the democracy of HK politics. The Basic Law was finalized in 1990 before Chris Patten came to HK. You can do business, pay similarly low tax, trade many things freely in the financial markets and bet on the Jackpot and Horses before and after 1997. Dog owners don't have to worry about dogs being eaten or animals having sex or assaulted by humans because such acts remain illegal in HK. You can still make a film with people nude, obscene jokes, fighting between triads or swear words. That's what the "...party goes on" meant. One Country Two Systems is an official policy of China. The differences lead to foreigners and mainland chinese wanting to visit or invest in HK.
The Exco was dominated by the White British until the final years before 1997 to ensure the policies and laws suit British interests. Pro CCP and KMT were allowed to live in Hong Kong as long as they did not break laws or harm British interests. The implementation of this policy make a smooth transition to Chinese rule possible.
Macao and HK unlike Taiwan, always have a close relationship with Mainland Chinese because most people have relatives in Mainland China. In the past, they would send money to help their relatives. Also many men have went north, dated or married Mainland women since the 1980s. There are many children of HK men born in Mainland.
Those violent incidents were most by SOME but not most young people, and not by the middle and old aged pro western or democracy people. who were allowed to participate in politics for decades as long as they were peaceful.
There is no desire to cancel the One Country and Two System policy and turn HK into a Mainland city because of very important interests. Unknown to most outsiders, most middle and old aged Chinese in HK including poor people and celebrities, actually supported Carrie Lam or were not interested in whatever being discussed in Legco in 2019. You could see many people listening to music, watching movies, checking stock prices and horse bet odds or playing games with their phones at that time instead of political news or current affairs. Many would say as long as activities are peaceful or they will be unaffected, they don't care.
HK always has some people who seldom or never go to Mainland China and more than 50% who go often or annually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
Those incidents wouldn't have happened if Beijing respected the opinions of HK people and didn't try to push through extremely unpopular legislation to benefit Beijing.
The core of the problem was always Beijing desire to turn HK into another Chinese province and the protests was just the final pushback. Beijing could then have started to listen to the wishes of HK people or crackdown on dissent and destroy HK. It selfish chose the latter.
There is no desire to cancel the One Country and Two System policy and turn HK into a Mainland city because of very important interests. Unknown to most outsiders, most middle and old aged Chinese in HK including poor people and celebrities, actually supported Carrie Lam or were not interested in whatever being discussed in Legco in 2019. You could see many people listening to music, watching movies, checking stock prices and horse bet odds or playing games with their phones at that time instead of political news or current affairs. Many would say as long as activities are peaceful or they will be unaffected, they don't care.
HK always has some people who seldom or never go to Mainland China and more than 50% who go often or annually.
If old people loved Cartie Lam then they would not have lost the local election by a large margin and would not have responded by limiting the electorate to 20%. They did that because Beijing lost the support of the whole Hong Kong, both old and young.
And I didn't say they don't want one country two systems, I said they want to turn HK into another province. HK is not the only place in China with another system, Tibet and Xinjiang also have different systems. What the provinces have in common is that they all follow Beijing's guidance and censor any criticism of Beijing. They wanted HK to become the same.
They knew that going too quick will lead to international outrage and lead to businesses leaving HK, which is why they tried to change it incrementally. The people noticed and started to push back, but this was too important for Beijing so they were willing to destroy what made HK great to make it another province.
Those incidents wouldn't have happened if Beijing respected the opinions of HK people and didn't try to push through extremely unpopular legislation to benefit Beijing.
The core of the problem was always Beijing desire to turn HK into another Chinese province and the protests was just the final pushback. Beijing could then have started to listen to the wishes of HK people or crackdown on dissent and destroy HK. It selfish chose the latter.
All I'll say is - if the rioters are so unpopular you would see pushbacks from the everyday people. Nope, for the most part there was lots of tolerance out of sympathy even though many people would not go out there and throw molotovs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident
Democracy is judged by more than legislative elections. And that one cycle of universal election to the HK legislature didn't change the fact that the governor was still selected by a foreign people and government nearly 6,000 miles away. While Hong Kong under PRC rule still doesn't have a truly representative form of chief executive selection, at least the indirect electorate is actually comprised of local Hong Kong citizens and institutions.
True, which is why I noted until the recent PRC crackdown. I've always said that Hong Kong folks have really one of three options:
1) Overthrow the PRC government (fat chance of this happening, especially as most on the mainland seem to like it).
2) Move outside of Hong Kong.
3) Acquiesce to PRC rule.
I wouldn't want to live under PRC rule, but I firmly believe that the PRC has every right to rule Hong Kong as it sees fit without foreign interference.
And people are picking #2. Sure, losing 5% of your population may not sounds like much, but when a large number of those are people in their 20s/30s, that is going to hurt.
For #1 - all I'll say is that as long as people feels the benefit (i.e. more wealth) they care less who is ruling. If the youth unemployment problem stays for another few years in mainland, though, watch out b/c things won't be fun.
For #1 also it's precisely why HK peeps are just not happy - the real estate cartels rule the city, cost of living is insanely high while wages are stagnant, the youth sees zero upward mobility, there is a huge income gap between the haves and have-nots.
It's also why people are so reminiscent of UK colonial rule despite the fact that UK govt are not necessarily better in terms of a democratic society - the 80s/90s HK are truly the golden age of HK where you can find pots of golds everywhere. HK cinemas were at its pinnacles, HK television shows were the K-Dramas of the day.
When they occupied the airport terminal, some western travellers said to them in english the problem is your government, they didnt want to be affected and wished to board their flight on time. There were the western expats and south east asian domestic helpers said the protests affected their planned gatherings and parties. Some japanese and koreans who can speak fluent mandarin dont dare to speak it now in hk. There were the responsible workers and parents saying they dont want to be late when some young people deliberately block the doors of trains and roads. Some people would have no income if cant go to work no matter the reason.
Like now, there were many people living in slums and public rental estates in the 1980s,, mostly less educated people including people born in british hk or immigrants from mainland. Wealth gap has started to widen a lot in the 1980s, before 1997. There was a movie about people living in cage at that time. Many old people in hk have never been rich, have foregin domestic helpers or can buy a property because they were not promoted to high income positions, these were for the people who have education and fluent in english. The public rental estates near the rich Kowloon Tong are a big contrast. In the 1980s they still didnt have their own toilets in their rental apartments. It is not Sweden or Denmark, In the 90s Millions of hk people still could not afford to board the airliners . Those were the days when hk was no better than western countries but much better than mainland china. There have never been an era when most people can get gold. These old people are less anti mainland than younger people.
I recall watching the protest, and the moment I saw U.S. flags being flown and chants for the West to help, I knew it was wrap. What people seem to forget is the Chinese government was going to repeal the law that started the protest. Unfortunately, the protestors got greedy and started demanding more reforms. Really spoke to their youth and inexperience. Now they have nothing.
To a degree I sympathize with the protestors. I don't think their issue was with the CCP per se, but rather they were upset with the income inequality and worsening living standards for the youth. They therefore lashed out at those perceived as being in charge. As to the future of Hong Kong, it's Chinese property. The British could no longer defend it, so it must play by Chinese rules. It is what it is.
When they occupied the airport terminal, some western travellers said to them in english the problem is your government, they didnt want to be affected and wished to board their flight on time. There were the western expats and south east asian domestic helpers said the protests affected their planned gatherings and parties. Some japanese and koreans who can speak fluent mandarin dont dare to speak it now in hk. There were the responsible workers and parents saying they dont want to be late when some young people deliberately block the doors of trains and roads. Some people would have no income if cant go to work no matter the reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice_Major
I recall watching the protest, and the moment I saw U.S. flags being flown and chants for the West to help, I knew it was wrap. What people seem to forget is the Chinese government was going to repeal the law that started the protest. Unfortunately, the protestors got greedy and started demanding more reforms. Really spoke to their youth and inexperience. Now they have nothing.
As you might remember, I was no supporter of the protests at the time, partly because it could lead to a massive crackdown from Beijing.
But that is no excuse for Beijing to completely ignore the wishes of HK residents and reduce the electorate share to 20% and arrest the opposition to prevent the residents from complaining.
Quote:
To a degree I sympathize with the protestors.
You should rather symphatize with ordinary HK people who had to lose their freedom and future prosperity because Beijing caused a protest by not respecting the wishes of the HK people and then decided to crack down.
When they occupied the airport terminal, some western travellers said to them in english the problem is your government, they didnt want to be affected and wished to board their flight on time. There were the western expats and south east asian domestic helpers said the protests affected their planned gatherings and parties. Some japanese and koreans who can speak fluent mandarin dont dare to speak it now in hk. There were the responsible workers and parents saying they dont want to be late when some young people deliberately block the doors of trains and roads. Some people would have no income if cant go to work no matter the reason.
Like now, there were many people living in slums and public rental estates in the 1980s,, mostly less educated people including people born in british hk or immigrants from mainland. Wealth gap has started to widen a lot in the 1980s, before 1997. There was a movie about people living in cage at that time. Many old people in hk have never been rich, have foregin domestic helpers or can buy a property because they were not promoted to high income positions, these were for the people who have education and fluent in english. The public rental estates near the rich Kowloon Tong are a big contrast. In the 1980s they still didnt have their own toilets in their rental apartments. It is not Sweden or Denmark, In the 90s Millions of hk people still could not afford to board the airliners . Those were the days when hk was no better than western countries but much better than mainland china. There have never been an era when most people can get gold. These old people are less anti mainland than younger people.
That's the whole point of people blocking roads, though. Normal rally no longer works, then what? Then it's time for civil disobedience. That still doesn't work? It was then extremism eventually take over.
The protest was nowhere as bad early on - sure, it was ugly on 6/12 but even up to early July, things were largely peaceful and the extremists were a minority.
Plus it is VERY convenient to forget what really turns people against the government - what happened during 7/21 in Yuen Long is still in the mind of many - it was no longer rule of law when the govt let pro-govt thugs just beat up people randomly and not face any repercussions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice_Major
I recall watching the protest, and the moment I saw U.S. flags being flown and chants for the West to help, I knew it was wrap. What people seem to forget is the Chinese government was going to repeal the law that started the protest. Unfortunately, the protestors got greedy and started demanding more reforms. Really spoke to their youth and inexperience. Now they have nothing.
To a degree I sympathize with the protestors. I don't think their issue was with the CCP per se, but rather they were upset with the income inequality and worsening living standards for the youth. They therefore lashed out at those perceived as being in charge. As to the future of Hong Kong, it's Chinese property. The British could no longer defend it, so it must play by Chinese rules. It is what it is.
Well, if it's truly "Chinese (CCP) rule", then maybe HKgov should start acting like that instead of thinking they can fool people with their wishy-washy "Democracy with HK characteristic".
Oh...and look at the LegCo now. Wasn't there a poll like a month ago that shows 90% of HKer can't even name one legislator?
All I'll say is - if the rioters are so unpopular you would see pushbacks from the everyday people. Nope, for the most part there was lots of tolerance out of sympathy even though many people would not go out there and throw molotovs.
And people are picking #2. Sure, losing 5% of your population may not sounds like much, but when a large number of those are people in their 20s/30s, that is going to hurt.
For #1 - all I'll say is that as long as people feels the benefit (i.e. more wealth) they care less who is ruling. If the youth unemployment problem stays for another few years in mainland, though, watch out b/c things won't be fun.
For #1 also it's precisely why HK peeps are just not happy - the real estate cartels rule the city, cost of living is insanely high while wages are stagnant, the youth sees zero upward mobility, there is a huge income gap between the haves and have-nots.
It's also why people are so reminiscent of UK colonial rule despite the fact that UK govt are not necessarily better in terms of a democratic society - the 80s/90s HK are truly the golden age of HK where you can find pots of golds everywhere. HK cinemas were at its pinnacles, HK television shows were the K-Dramas of the day.
what youth unemployment problem are you talking about? do you mean college grats?
there are many considerations for a college grat (probably already somewhat weathly) to take a lesser job in a lesser city, especially if they are a only child.
if it wasn't the one country two systems, the real estate cartels would not rule hk. in fact, it's those real estate cartels that fear the ccp the most.
80s/90s being the golden age of hk is mostly due to the economic reform of china by deng. hk was the middle man that facilitated all the business between the west and china.
I recall watching the protest, and the moment I saw U.S. flags being flown and chants for the West to help, I knew it was wrap. What people seem to forget is the Chinese government was going to repeal the law that started the protest. Unfortunately, the protestors got greedy and started demanding more reforms. Really spoke to their youth and inexperience. Now they have nothing.
To a degree I sympathize with the protestors. I don't think their issue was with the CCP per se, but rather they were upset with the income inequality and worsening living standards for the youth. They therefore lashed out at those perceived as being in charge. As to the future of Hong Kong, it's Chinese property. The British could no longer defend it, so it must play by Chinese rules. It is what it is.
I don't think it was the inexperience of the youth. it's more of a colored revolution planned by the CIA
the law was recalled during the initial stage of legislation, so it can't be repealed.
it was never about the law, it's just an excuse for the US/CIA to use to fuel the "revolution".
The british didn't do much, as they are just a mouthpiece. it was the US that had boots on the ground with congress members and CIA agents.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
