spacemonkey wrote:It's interesting how much misinformation there is about the Hong Kong protests. The misinformation is serving the political agendas of those spreading it, and many are unwittingly parroting it. Let's take quick look:
1. HK protestors are not secessionists or separatists - nowhere is independence from China on their list of demands. There are *some* who are pro-independence, but they are a scant few, and the overwhelming majority of the protestors you see on the news do not agree with their views.
2. Protestors waved the US flags for the specific purpose of gaining international attention, pissing off China and it's wumaos (the 50c brigade the Chinese government hires to bomb comment sections internet-wide with pro-China rhetoric). It was to increase awareness. At the most recent protests, HK protestors have waved flags of multiple nations - like, 10+. The idea of waving the US flag was to try and take advantage of the US-China trade war, and make Hong Kong a sticking point.
Of course, Trump is a businessman first and foremost, and so it was probably a forlorn hope.
3. Hong Kong protestors are fighting for their 5 demands - one of which has been granted, the extradition law being repealed. The other demands include the current Chief Executive resigning, an independent commission to investigate the rampant police brutality and abuse of power, the exoneration of those arrested and charged with 'rioting' when merely exercising their right to assemble (unless you believe the thousands that have been arrested were all committing acts of rioting), and universal suffrage by breaking down the current legislature and allowing for free elections of representatives.
(Right now, the Hong Kong legislature is dominated by rich, pro-Beijing business interests, and is designed that way. If you are a citizen in Hong Kong, you literally only get to vote for someone who gets to 'vote' for the C.E, which Beijing actually simply vets and implements. Simply put, the people are not properly represented. You, as an ordinary citizen, don't even have "1 vote" - you have a fraction of 1.)
4. Hong Kong is not simply a 'state' of China - as a former British colony, it has a unique cultural heritage, and operates on free market ideology, as well as rule of law. This is very different from China which is heavily-regulated state-sponsored-capitalism wrapped up in a faux-communist rhetoric, with rampant censorship in order to control it's populace, the one and only thing the Chinese government are afraid of.
Rule of Law is important when absorbing the context of the extradition law and the Hong Kong protests - let's dive into it:
The extradition law would allow for a loophole for China to drum up any charge, provide Prima Facie evidence (that is, evidence that is 'reasonable' but cannot be argued against prior to extradition), and then request for extradition. The courts in Hong Kong would have some, but in actuality very little power to fight this.
As many should know, China's judicial system is famously corrupt, acting as nothing but a system by which the CCP can get what it wants done. The conviction rate is ridiculously high, and many methods of ranking global judicial systems rank China as third-world-esque.
Now, we can start to see why HK people had such a big issue with this: being extradited to face a trial in a country where the court only serves the establishment is, how should we put it, less than ideal. In contrast, Hong Kong's judicial system is regarded as one of the best globally, impartial, and with procedure that is appropriate.
Moving toward the present, since that flashpoint of legislation was attempted to be pushed through, protestors gathered in historic numbers -- it is laughable to think that anybody has 'tricked', 'bought', 'stoked', or 'used' nearly 2 million people, or a quarter of Hong Kong's entire population, to take to the streets. Just think about the cost and logistics there for a minute -- I know we're in a re-emergence of a conspiracy-theory age like it's the early 90s all over again, but think about it for just one moment. And that's not even touching on the arrogance of removing all the agency of an enormous number of people.
Beyond that, these protests represent something else in Hong Kong -- a deep-seeded unhappiness and dissatisfaction with the hyper-capitalist system. The gini coefficient for Hong Kong ranks it as one of the most unequal places on earth, and Hong Kong regularly tops the charts for most expensive city to live in. Don't be mistaken - the vast majority are very poor, and have no possible way of leaving the city.
Compound that with a government that has, with increasing frequency, catered to Chinese political and business interests, and ceased representing the people they claim to govern, and you've got a tremendous amount of anger, resentment, and it's coming to a boiling point.
The poster, a 'resident' (let me guess, privileged expat?) that earlier said that China hasn't encroached on the One-Country-Two-Systems Sino-British Joint Declaration is mistaken, simply put. It's not out-and-out obvious, but read between the lines, and you'll see it.
Remember that in 2014, there were the Occupy Central / Umbrella Revolution movements -- their goal was universal suffrage.
What Hong Kong people are fighting for, ultimately, is not secession or independence, but the right to elect their own leaders, something *anybody* from the West should at least be, in theory, sympathetic to.
What we are seeing today is an extension of that 2014 movement, spurred on by a piece of horribly unpopular legislation that the government tried to sneak through on the back of a scumbag murderer, that the government saw, at China's bidding no doubt, a way they could side-load a new law.
Now the Chief Executive of Hong Kong has enacted an emergency ordinance that allows the government to create laws and bypass the legislature - a dangerous precedent, indeed. As of now, Hong Kong has a mask ban, meaning you cannot wear even a surgical mask if you have a cold, while being with a group of people, or you can be charged and prosecuted with a criminal offense.
This all on the heels of the Chief Executive having a sit-down "dialogue" with protestors - another classic case of talking out of both sides of her mouth, and placating the masses before trying something hugely unpopular.
There is a reason Hong Kongers are angry, and there is a reason they are fighting for something. Yes, not everybody agrees - and nobody really knows where the silent majority lie.
But the Chief Executives polling has nose-dived over the last 4 months, so I think it's fairly certain we can all agree on one thing: That nobody in Hong Kong is satisfied with their government.
I definitely appreciated this breakdown.
