Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 194

Thread: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

  1. #61

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidin View Post
    Look, I really don't care how much the US is encircling China. With how much espionage China is pulling it's fair. And how little China or America can pull on either's aircraft carriers without declaring total war, I'm not sure what you're worried about.

    Or are you not aware of just how much it takes to pinpoint and take down an aircraft carrier? There's actually a find-pinpoint-and-takedown algorithm for this crap. Nevermind the counter.
    If you don't think that the world's hyperpower surrounding and encircling a developing country is a problem, then I think we're done here.


    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    There is a significant difference between Hong Kongers and mainland Chinese that is for sure. But this difference stems from the Communist legacy of China which continues today. That same difference isn't apparent if you compare Hong Kong with Taiwan, Singapore or even Seoul. As for the animosity, you should remember that many in Hong Kong have family who fled China. These people are Chinese, and being Chinese isn't directly related to supporting the CRP, so they can hardly be what you term "race traitors". a term which itself is rooted in hatred of those with different opinions. It's an anachronism, that a Communist modelled government which administers an extreme form of capitalism, can use nationalism as a way to galvanise support amongst certain sections of the populace.
    Then we have a comprehension issue. Hong Kongers are Chinese, but some Hong Kongers, including some of the ones chimping out over a bill they haven't read, don't want to be and prefer to be a British colony. If you're Chinese and you don't want to be Chinese, even working against the interest of your country, you do count as a race traitor.
    You can be Chinese, proud too, and not like the communist party, that's perfectly fine and it's the case with most of the Taiwanese, for example. But if you hate the very idea of being Chinese and you work with the US State Department to tear apart Hong Kong for international drama, we have a problem. This has nothing to do with nationalism, it's about keeping the territorial integrity of the country.
    What you call "nationalism" here is in fact just the common sense of attempting to defend your country from foreign actors.

    That China practices an "extreme form of capitalism" is another falsity that's been going on for decades. The mainland practices a form of state capitalism, the biggest banks, insurance companies and industrial combines (which just so happen to be those unprofitable or barely so, because the focus there is on building infrastructure and providing employment, often lifelong and not short term. The profit-making is left to the private sector, that's their task) are government-owned, and it's through this ownership that the government can direct the development of the country and accomplish its five-year plans even without owning everything. If you own the flow of money, you can give it to anyone at the request that they build what you ask them. China wouldn't be here if its market forces wouldn't be leashed by extremely strong government intervention.
    This is the opposite of an unregulated capitalism and pretty much a heavier form of what Europe had until the '80s. Italy had something like this during the First Republic.


    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Some of the quotes you have me listed as saying I did not say, so not sure where you got them from, it was not me.
    It wasn't implicit anywhere, once again living in the same country means, at the very least, being in a situation in which if the central government says you should hand over a suspect, you do.
    And Hong Kong has signed twenty autonomous extradition treaties with different countries, even if you were to treat it as a semi-country and treat this as the twenty-first, why the fuss over it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidin View Post
    In regard to the agreement, it was implicit in the 2 system setup China agreed to that orople if Hong Kong would not be extradited back to the mainland. If the Chinese bill applied only those who flerhe mainland to avoid punishment, that is one thing, but that does not seem to be the case. Does the bill apply only to those who were not Hong Kong citizens and just fled the mainland to avoid punishment?
    The link to the bill is here in this thread. Read it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidin View Post
    PS - While there were no doubt some.in Hong Kong who wanted to join mainland China, many did not, and it was pressure from China, not demands from the citizens of Hong Kong, which persuaded Britain to turn over Hong Kong to China. It so.ply isn't true that everyone or even the majority of people in Hong Kong demanded to be part of mainland China, it that were the case the 2 system agreement would not have been needed in the first place.
    That is just not accurate.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    I was more alluding to the lack of Democratic representation in general. The Pro-Democracy parties consistently win the popular vote but Pro-China party members keep getting majority of the seats.
    That isn't accurate either, popular vote was won by "pro-Beijing" candidates five years ago. And eight years ago. Etc etc.


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    You mean since 1997? Forgive the skepticism that the CCP will honor democratic norms. From what I understand, the CCP does sign off on the chief executive, implying that they could "not sign off" if they so wished.
    What matters to me is that they don't and haven't so far, knowing full well the extent of the consequences. THAT would trigger legitimate protests.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    You know we are talking about one the most totalitarian regimes in the world, right? Especially in terms of big nations. Good luck speaking out against the CCP any place they have police control.

    Everyone and his mother criticises party rule in China, openly too. People I speak with often even shrug off even the notion they live in a socialist country, which I guess that in your mental image of China would land you in jail for not buying into communist party propaganda or whatever, and yet they're still there, healthy as fishes.

    Complaints exist and can exist, they're a constitutional right that's respected.
    What nobody can do is attempting to overthrow the government which I'm pretty sure would qualify as a felony anywhere. If you have a beef here, you have elections.
    If you have a beef there... you have elections at the lower levels, for villages and townships, and a bright career ahead of you in the party to change it from the inside by working hard to make your points be heard.


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    But we don't even know if the bill was withdrawn from the legislature, Lam won't say. And what do you mean "for only God knows what"? Again, Hong Kong is a democracy with a totalitarian government breathing down their neck. I am sure they have heard what is going on in Xinjiang and Tibet. If you were a Hongkonger who spoken out against the CCP, and they gain the ability to extradite you to the mainland, your life could very well be in danger.
    The bill's extradition cases don't cover "speaking out against the communist party" but very common felonies like murder, arson and so on. Once again, I beg you, read the damn bill.

  2. #62

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    If you don't think that the world's hyperpower surrounding and encircling a developing country is a problem, then I think we're done here.
    .
    We’re certainly not going to leave China to its whims regarding our Pacific alliances no matter what you think about the resulting base locations.

    Your lack of comment on Chinese industrial espionage is noted.

    Your incompetence with forum quoting and crediting me with things I didn’t say is also noted.
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  3. #63
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,866

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Then we have a comprehension issue. Hong Kongers are Chinese, but some Hong Kongers, including some of the ones chimping out over a bill they haven't read, don't want to be and prefer to be a British colony. If you're Chinese and you don't want to be Chinese, even working against the interest of your country, you do count as a race traitor.
    You can be Chinese, proud too, and not like the communist party, that's perfectly fine and it's the case with most of the Taiwanese, for example. But if you hate the very idea of being Chinese and you work with the US State Department to tear apart Hong Kong for international drama, we have a problem. This has nothing to do with nationalism, it's about keeping the territorial integrity of the country.
    What you call "nationalism" here is in fact just the common sense of attempting to defend your country from foreign actors.
    What I'm noticing is going on in China and seldom talked about in the West, is a growing amount of ethnic-nationalism not discouraged by the state, which considers anyone who isn't Han not to be Chinese and equates those who are critical of the PRC system of government as being traitors. It's a curious use of xenophobia by a supposedly Marxist state to deflect criticism and single out those who challenge authority as being disloyal to the Country. A China that seeks to be more of a global player, seeing itself more and more as a single homogenous group exclusively distinct from all others.
    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    China wouldn't be here if its market forces wouldn't be leashed by extremely strong government intervention.
    This is the opposite of an unregulated capitalism and pretty much a heavier form of what Europe had until the '80s. Italy had something like this during the First Republic.
    Capitalism isn't regulated in China. It has one of the the most polluted environments in the World. Whilst it has a huge income disparity between the poor and the very rich, many of which just happen to hold high places amongst the Comunist party elite.
    China’s dirty little secret: its growing wealth gap
    Income inequality worsened for the first time in five years, with the top 1 per cent owning a third of the country’s total wealth
    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/econ...slice-pie-ever

    A study from Peking University last year found that the poorest 25 per cent of mainland households owned just 1 per cent of the country’s aggregate wealth, while the richest 1 per cent owned a third of the wealth.

    “It’s apparent that the wealth is increasingly being accumulated by the rich, who are taking fat gains from capital markets,” Lin *Caiyi, the chief economist for Guotai Junan Securities, said.

  4. #64

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    What I'm noticing is going on in China and seldom talked about in the West, is a growing amount of ethnic-nationalism not discouraged by the state, which considers anyone who isn't Han not to be Chinese and equates those who are critical of the PRC system of government as being traitors. It's a curious use of xenophobia by a supposedly Marxist state to deflect criticism and single out those who challenge authority as being disloyal to the Country. A China that seeks to be more of a global player, seeing itself more and more as a single homogenous group exclusively distinct from all others.
    That's quoted far too often actually and you're repeating absolutely nothing that I haven't heard in dozens of other places. And, of course, it's wrong on countless levels.
    Affirmative action in China is widespread on individual as well as institutional level to make sure that Hans don't dominate in regions historically home to ethnic minorities, a measure that's often resented by Hans as anti-meritocratic, and a bit like in the USSR banners up to provinces can be reserved for one ethnic group even as Hans remain a majority in the area, with notable examples being Inner Mongolia and the countless autonomous prefectures. The idea of China has been equated first with five peoples (Hans, Hus meaning first Muslims in general and then Han-like Muslims, Manchus, Mongolians and Tibetans) and then with fifty-six of them and what keeps together the country is an inclusive nationalism and the idea of China not as a nation-state but a civilization-state, relying on Hans alone would result in the country imploding, and if the implication there is that Hong Kongers are not Han Chinese then I invite you to permanently close your mouth forever on the matter.


    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    Capitalism isn't regulated in China. It has one of the the most polluted environments in the World. Whilst it has a huge income disparity between the poor and the very rich, many of which just happen to hold high places amongst the Comunist party elite.

    Both income inequality and pollution have been side effects of reaching Western-like degrees of industrial and social development in record time, this is a pattern that can be seen (and which, actually, is even accentuated) in most third world countries, where both issues are far bigger than in China. They're essentially natural, and the government has seen an issue with them and has began to fight back.
    The government has made of mass reforestation a point of its plans, has decided to go all-in with electric buses in cities, has built a monster of a high-speed railway network, and has decided to lower the use of coal and seriously improve environmental standards, something which, in the process, will probably force many Western companies to move out of the country because Western countries aren't greener because they're more virtous, just because they decided to move manufacturing and pollution with it to China.
    And then there's the income inequality thing, which has actually been in retreat for 11 years now thanks to massively rising wages and purchasing power (China is the first world economy in GDP per PPP) and also prompted the government to take a harder stance towards billionaires, without any doubt also for political purposes. By 2015, inequalities were already lower than in the United States and, as a matter of fact, one of if not the most inequal places were Hong Kong and Macau SARs, you know the fiscal paradises that retained the role they had during the colonial era.
    Not to mention that environmental standards and income inequalities are not the only standards by which you measure a country since China has also a large and ever-expanding welfare system (much of which also provided by SOEs) and a significantly powerful and growing union movement which, when sending its issue to the government, mostly manages to get the government support if it means sending people back to work.
    A country is capitalist by its commitment to private enterprise and free market, and with a massive amount of state and cooperative-owned enterprises that pretty much decide the direction of the country and a massively leashed market, China's state capitalism is basically socialist compared to the neoliberalism of Western countries.


    I don't know where the idea of hyper-capitalist China comes from when, facts on the ground, while not being a Soviet Union, it's certainly a mega-Norway by the way it works on the way to becoming a USSR long-term (30-40 years) without any of the rusting and obsolete civilian and industrial infrastructure, it only needs about another half a decade to address most of its remaining issues.

    That you even think you're saying anything never heard before, that the media would cover up, is frankly laughable and just shows what kind of programmed drone you are when your talking points are nothing else but stereotypes that have been debunked for at least a decade.
    All that's missing are sweatshops and pandas and I think I'll have drunk enough shots to call in sick at work for the rest of the week
    Last edited by Altzek; August 13, 2019 at 12:19 PM.

  5. #65

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    I’m willing to bet that even if there is a Tiananmen level crackdown, the economics outside of the US are in too fragile a state to even lodge a complaint.

  6. #66
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,866

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Both income inequality and pollution have been side effects of reaching Western-like degrees of industrial and social development in record time, this is a pattern that can be seen (and which, actually, is even accentuated) in most third world countries, where both issues are far bigger than in China. They're essentially natural, and the government has seen an issue with them and has began to fight back.
    The government has made of mass reforestation a point of its plans, has decided to go all-in with electric buses in cities, has built a monster of a high-speed railway network, and has decided to lower the use of coal and seriously improve environmental standards, something which, in the process, will probably force many Western companies to move out of the country because Western countries aren't greener because they're more virtous, just because they decided to move manufacturing and pollution with it to China.
    Pollution is a cost the environment and consequently human health and wildlife, but a financial saving to industry. The Chinese governent choose to ignore the consequences on the air and water of massive amounts of pollution to facilitate industrial investment. There is now only a change in direction because of a growing anger by the popuation of a situation which has caused so much environmental damage and degradation, not just in China but around the world. I don't think anyone can dispute, that this damage has contributed in large measure to Climatic change currently being experienced.

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    And then there's the income inequality thing, which has actually been in retreat for 11 years now thanks to massively rising wages and purchasing power (China is the first world economy in GDP per PPP) and also prompted the government to take a harder stance towards billionaires, without any doubt also for political purposes. By 2015, inequalities were already lower than in the United States and, as a matter of fact, one of if not the most inequal places were Hong Kong and Macau SARs, you know the fiscal paradises that retained the role they had during the colonial era.
    Wage growth may have increased, but so too the difference between those at the bottom and those at the top with little upward mobility unless you have the right connections.

    The Great Divide Between China’s Rich And Poor

    https://zhongguoinstitute.org/the-gr...rich-and-poor/
    China’s wealthiest 100 individuals have more wealth than the poorest two-fifths of the country’s population combined.

    According to Forbes China Rich Lists, in 2018 the wealthiest 100 persons in China have accumulated an incredible wealth of US$643 billion. In comparison, the bottom 40 percent of Chinese households (or around 425 million adults) collectively own just around US$637 billion worth of assets.

    The majority of China’s ultra-rich made their money from industries where they possess considerable monopoly power. A large chunk of them made their fortunes from real estate. In contrast, only a tiny percentage of High-Tech entrepreneurs made it to the top 100 rich lists.

    Measured in terms of the Gini coefficient (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores meaning more income inequality), China reached a score of 49.1 in 2008. Since the GFC, its Gini coefficient has experienced a slight decline. According to an IMF working paper, the decline was mainly due to a drop in the income share of its top 20 percent, rather than an increase in income shares of its poorest households.

    To put it into perspective, China today still has a larger income gap between rich and poor than the United States. And as far as income distribution goes, China is more unequal than some of the world’s poorest nations such as Malawi, Burundi and South Sudan.

  7. #67

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    Pollution is a cost the environment and consequently human health and wildlife, but a financial saving to industry. The Chinese governent choose to ignore the consequences on the air and water of massive amounts of pollution to facilitate industrial investment. There is now only a change in direction because of a growing anger by the popuation of a situation which has caused so much environmental damage and degradation, not just in China but around the world. I don't think anyone can dispute, that this damage has contributed in large measure to Climatic change currently being experienced.

    The financial saving allowed Western companies to move there, and again it's a measure that's been reversed. The argument is just not relevant anymore, not in 2019. Yeah, they moved away from it because the people were angry and because livelihood in the cities was being negatively affected, for what other reasons could they reverse it?
    Again, Western countries aren't greener because they're more virtous, they're greener because they moved manufacturing and pollution with it to China (in the process creating millions of unemployed and social issues, ndr), and by the way when things haven't been business-friendly enough they started moving away from China and into less regulated places like Bangladesh, India and Indonesia.
    And yeah, flash news, when you industrialize a country of a billion plus people and deindustrialize the developed world, you get a rise in CO2 emissions, congratulations you just discovered hot water.

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    Wage growth may have increased, but so too the difference between those at the bottom and those at the top with little upward mobility unless you have the right connections.
    Quote the whole article.

    The Chinese government has recognised the country’s rising inequality, and has implemented a series of policies to curb this problem. Those policies include personal income tax reform, minimum wage increases and the abolition of agriculture taxes. The country also introduced the Dibao (minimum income guarantee) and Yibao (medical care coverage) systems, and it is in the progress of extending 9-year free education to 15-year in selected central and western regions (to include preschool and senior high school)..
    Recent analyses suggest that those policies have achieved moderate success, and there are some encouraging signs that the rural-urban income gap in China is narrowing. On average, urban households in China had 2.7 times the disposable income of rural households in 2016, compared to 3.3 times in 2007. However, this ratio is still much higher than other emerging countries.
    The Gini index can also be found here and, while certainly higher than in Western countries (because flash news, they aren't developing countries and they had seven decades to fix their inequalities while China is, comparably, in a historical period that corresponds to our '60s and '70s), it is receding, the government is actually doing something about it. Not to mention that most of Latin America and much of Subsaharan Africa have higher, sometimes way higher indexes and local government aren't doing anything about it but instead working to aggravate these inequalities. Brazil just got Bolsonaro president and South Africa has been a failed country since the abolition of apartheid, when things were supposed to go better for everyone.
    Finally, that there's no social mobility is a complete falsity, China has lifted and keeps lifting out of poverty hundreds and then dozens of millions of people, and this has also contributed to lowering inequalities.

    You can say that China has its issues but you can't say that they're as bad as a decade ago, or that the government hasn't done its best to tackle them. Overall and compared to twenty years ago, life is immensely better for millions of Chinese, and immensely worse for millions of Europeans.

  8. #68

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    I was talking about the elections for the LegCo, not the District elections. Notice how the Pro-Democracy coalitions consistently win the popular vote (no idea what happened in 2016) but have a paltry number of seats by comparison?


    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    What matters to me is that they don't and haven't so far, knowing full well the extent of the consequences. THAT would trigger legitimate protests.
    I think what matters to Hongkongers is what the PRC is capable of and willing to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Everyone and his mother criticises party rule in China, openly too. People I speak with often even shrug off even the notion they live in a socialist country, which I guess that in your mental image of China would land you in jail for not buying into communist party propaganda or whatever, and yet they're still there, healthy as fishes.
    Are you kidding me? I am not talking about random citizens complaining about how the CCP is late paying them or hasn't fixed a pothole in the street; I mean that if you distribute literature about how China should have more than one political party or that compares Xi Jinping to Winnie the Pooh, you can get apprehended by police and taken for "reeducation". I am sorry, did you think that China had freedom of the press?
    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Complaints exist and can exist, they're a constitutional right that's respected.
    What nobody can do is attempting to overthrow the government which I'm pretty sure would qualify as a felony anywhere. If you have a beef here, you have elections.
    If you have a beef there... you have elections at the lower levels, for villages and townships, and a bright career ahead of you in the party to change it from the inside by working hard to make your points be heard.
    Are you talking about in mainland? There is lots of you can't say (more accurately, distribute literature on) under CCP rule. Do you think news outlets in the mainland are allowed to talk about Xi Jinping probably had political opponents killed? Or how the treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang is creepy human rights violation? Again, the lack of freedom of the press is realllly concerning to people who appreciate freedom, and would be of significant concern for Hongkongers wishing to speak out against the CCP.

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    The bill's extradition cases don't cover "speaking out against the communist party" but very common felonies like murder, arson and so on. Once again, I beg you, read the damn bill.
    Seeing as I am not a legal expert in Chinese law, I am not actually sure of what most the bill is saying or what it actually implies for the legal institutions of Hong Kong. I know that the people there seem very concerned about it, and that the CCP has made clandestine arrests of Hongkongers in the past for selling verboten literature.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  9. #69

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post

    It wasn't implicit anywhere, once again living in the same country means, at the very least, being in a situation in which if the central government says you should hand over a suspect, you do.
    And Hong Kong has signed twenty autonomous extradition treaties with different countries, even if you were to treat it as a semi-country and treat this as the twenty-first, why the fuss over it?
    Yes, it is implicit in the 2 state treaty. China wants the ability to extradite anyone from Hong Kong when it choses, without the ability of local Hong Kong courts and executives to examine the merit of the case and stop it, effectively putting Hong Kong citizens under mainland law. It was to prevent this.kond of thing that the 2 systems government was set up. The citizens of Hong Kong did not want to be under the mainland China judicial system, which had and has a poor reputation. The 50 year freeze clause in the agreement was to prevent something like this from happening. If China can extradite anyone they want,.whenever they want, without the ability of the local Hong Kong to stop it, it undermines the 2 system setup.



    That isn't accurate either, [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Hong_Kong_local_elections"]popular vote was won by "pro-Beijing" candidates five years
    The pro Beijing candidate did not receive all the votes, there were some who voted against the candidate. What you claim that somehow the people of Hong Kong changed their minds when they protested is not necessarily true, the people doing the protest likely were not the same ones who voted for the pro Beijing candidate. There were a large number of citizens in Hong Kong who opposed turning Hong Kong over to mainland China, whether just a large minority or the majority I don't know, but it just wasn't a few.


    The bill's extradition cases don't cover "speaking out against the communist party" but very common felonies like murder, arson and so on. Once again, I beg you, read the damn bill.

    There is nothing to prevent China from fabricating claims of murder or spying to get them extradited, just like China fabricated the spying claims against the 2 Canadians in retaliation for Canada extraditing to the US the Chinese executive .

    By the way, you didn't have a link to the extradition bill in your last post as you said. Does the bill exclude charges of spying in their extradition bill? If not, then the bill would give China a blank check to extradite anyone they want from Hong Kong by just accusing them of being a spy. It seems like China's favorite tactic.
    Last edited by Common Soldier; August 15, 2019 at 10:28 AM.

  10. #70

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    I was talking about the elections for the LegCo, not the District elections. Notice how the Pro-Democracy coalitions consistently win the popular vote (no idea what happened in 2016) but have a paltry number of seats by comparison?
    Because they couldn't win enough functional constituencies (which the British came up with by the way, not the communists. The worst you can say is that the latter were awkwardly okay with them in order to woo the city's businessmen and professionals) and can you blame the electors of these constutiencies (many of them independent, not even affiliated) for being with Beijing? The other side wants to keep the city away from the rest of the country when it pretty much depends on it. The communists could pretty much cut power to the city, seize the ports choking the city's exportations (and livelihood) with them and within a year Hong Kong will return to be the fishing village it was at the beginning. Hell with a GDP of half a trillion dollars it isn't even worth much anymore, the times when it constituted 30% of China's GDP are over. Now that it constitutes no more than 3% of China's GDP, it pretty much survives as an important center just as a favor when Guangzhou and Shenzhen are right across the river as manufacturing giants while Shanghai has the finance sector covered. China doesn't even need Hong Kong, Hong Kong needs China.
    That they began to lose popular trust in the last elections (incidentally, the ones with the highest turnout so far, 58%) is also telling, it means that the people of Hong Kong have finally figured out that they need the rest of the country to survive.
    Who knows, maybe with time, when the patriotic part of the population becomes a visible majority, they'll get what every township on the mainland already has: direct elections with universal suffrage.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    I think what matters to Hongkongers is what the PRC is capable of and willing to do.
    Doesn't seem that willing to me if it hasn't done that yet.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Are you kidding me? I am not talking about random citizens complaining about how the CCP is late paying them or hasn't fixed a pothole in the street; I mean that if you distribute literature about how China should have more than one political party or that compares Xi Jinping to Winnie the Pooh, you can get apprehended by police and taken for "reeducation". I am sorry, did you think that China had freedom of the press?
    Freedom of expression, plenty. Freedom of the press, functionally as much as in the West, with the exception that the censor there is the party in place of big business, and in the worst case you get sent directly to prison instead of being ridiculed and having your character assassinated.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Are you talking about in mainland? There is lots of you can't say (more accurately, distribute literature on) under CCP rule. Do you think news outlets in the mainland are allowed to talk about Xi Jinping probably had political opponents killed? Or how the treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang is creepy human rights violation? Again, the lack of freedom of the press is realllly concerning to people who appreciate freedom, and would be of significant concern for Hongkongers wishing to speak out against the CCP.

    Judging by the anti-corruption campaign and the dozens of thousands of party members arrested for excessive spending and not keeping up with the party's measures against extravagancy and misuse of party resources I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Xi's opponents are in large part crooks, and he's at the very least the lesser crook. What's wrong with getting rid of bad people?
    Also the situation in Xinjiang is more unsubstantiated by any evidence, and there's plenty of documentation to clear up the reasons behind this black legend.


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Seeing as I am not a legal expert in Chinese law, I am not actually sure of what most the bill is saying or what it actually implies for the legal institutions of Hong Kong. I know that the people there seem very concerned about it, and that the CCP has made clandestine arrests of Hongkongers in the past for selling verboten literature.
    You haven't read the bill. Again, read it, it says very clearly what are the cases for extradition. None of them are political, they're all felonies that are such both in the SAR and on the mainland.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Yes, it is implicit in the 2 state treaty. China wants the ability to extradite anyone from Hong Kong when it choses, without the ability of local Hong Kong courts and executives to examine the merit of the case and stop it, effectively putting Hong Kong citizens under mainland law. It was to prevent this.kond of thing that the 2 systems government was set up. The citizens of Hong Kong did not want to be under the mainland China judicial system, which had and has a poor reputation. The 50 year freeze clause in the agreement was to prevent something like this from happening. If China can extradite anyone they want,.whenever they want, without the ability of the local Hong Kong to stop it, it undermines the 2 system setup.

    You haven't read the bill. The extradition case is supposed to be examined by Hong Kong judges first. And let's clean up once and for all what gets you extradited:

    1. Murder or manslaughter, including criminal negligence causing death; culpable homicide; assault with intent to commit murder.
    2. Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring suicide.
    3. Maliciously wounding; maiming; inflicting grievous or actual bodily harm; assault occasioning actual bodily harm; threats to kill; intentional or reckless endangering of life whether by means of a weapon, a dangerous substance or otherwise; offences relating to unlawful wounding or injuring.
    4. Offences of a sexual nature including rape; sexual assault; indecent assault; unlawful sexual acts on children; statutory sexual offences.
    5. Gross indecency with a child, a mental defective or an unconscious person.
    6. Kidnapping; abduction; false imprisonment; unlaw
    ful confinement; dealing or trafficking in slaves or other persons; taking a hostage.
    7. Criminal intimidation.

    8. Offences against the law relating to dangerous d
    rugs including narcotics, psychotropic substances, precursors and essential chemicals used in the illegal manufacture of narcotics and psychotropic substances; offences relating to the proceeds of drug trafficking.
    9. Obtaining property or pecuniary advantage by deception; theft; robbery; burglary (including breaking and entering); embezzlement; blackmail; extortion; unlawful handling or receiving of property; false accounting; any other offence in respect of property or fiscal matters involving fraud; any offence against the law relating to unlawful deprivation of property.
    13. Offences relating to counterfeiting; offences a
    gainst the law relating to forgery or uttering what is forged.
    15. Offences against the law relating to bribery, c
    orruption, secret commissions and breach of trust.
    16. Perjury and subornation of perjury.

    17. Offence relating to the perversion or obstructi
    on of the course of justice.
    18. Arson; criminal damage or mischief including mi
    schief in relation to computer data.
    19. Offences against the law relating to firearms.

    20. Offences against the law relating to explosives
    .
    22. Mutiny or any mutinous act committed on board a
    vessel at sea.
    23. Piracy involving ships or aircraft.

    24. Unlawful seizure or exercise of control of an a
    ircraft or other means of transportation.
    25. Genocide or direct and public incitement to com
    mit genocide.
    26. Facilitating or permitting the escape of a pers
    on from custody.
    28. Smuggling; offences against the law relating to import and export of prohibited items, including historical and archaeological items.
    29. Immigration offences including fraudulent acqui
    sition or use of a passport or visa.
    30. Arranging or facilitating for financial gain, the illegal entry of persons into a jurisdiction.
    31. Offences relating to gambling or lotteries.

    32. Offences relating to the unlawful termination o
    f pregnancy.
    33. Stealing, abandoning, exposing or unlawfully de
    taining a child; any other offences involving the exploitation of children.
    34. Offences against the law relating to prostituti
    on and premises kept for the purposes of prostitution.
    37. Offences relating to unlawful escape from custo
    dy; mutiny in prison.
    38. Bigamy. 39. Offences relating to women and girls.
    41. Offences relating to the possession or launderi
    ng of proceeds obtained from the commission of any offence described in this Schedule.
    42. Impeding the arrest or prosecution of a person
    who has or is believed to have committed an offence described in this Schedule. 43. Offences for which persons may be surrendered under multi-lateral international conventions; offences created as a result of decisions of international organizations.
    44. Conspiracy to commit fraud or to defraud.

    45. Conspiracy to commit, or any type of associatio
    n to commit, any offence described in this Schedule.
    46. Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of, inciting, being an accessory before or after the fact to, or attempting to commit an offence described in this Schedule.
    37 cases out of 46. Exemptions are largely economic crimes, quoting:

    (a)item number 10 - offences against bankruptcy law orinsolvency law;
    (b)
    item number 11 - offences against the law relating to companies including offences committed by officers,directors and promoters; (c)item number 12 - offences relating to securities and futures trading;
    (d)item number 14 - offences against the law relating to protection of intellectual property, copyrights, patents or trademarks; 4With four of them further limited to the extent they relate to those 37 items.7
    (e)
    item number 21 - offences against the law relating to environmental pollution or protection of public health;
    (f)
    item number 27 – offences against the law relating to the control of exportation or importation of goods of any type, or the international transfer of funds;
    (g)item number 35 – offences involving the unlawful use of computers;
    (h)
    item number 36 - offences relating to fiscal matters, taxes or duties; and
    (i)
    item number 40 - offences against the law relating to false or misleading trade descriptions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    The pro Beijing candidate did not receive all the votes, there were some who voted against the candidate.

    Hong Kong's system isn't presidential, you don't get to elect candidates for CO and there's certainly not just two of them, elections are for Legislative Council and district councils, the latter of which are perennially won by pro-Beijing candidates even without the functional constituencies system, with universal suffrage but with usually ridiculously low turnouts. Incidentally, district councils are the functional constituencies with the most seats in the Legislative Council, which means that if the "pro-democracy" electorate would flock out to local council elections more, they could win the district councils and the seats in the Legislative Council with them during the legislative elections, actually concluding something.

    But, generally, that isn't how democracy works, you win when you get the most votes, not all of them. Nobody gets all votes, anywhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    There is nothing to prevent China from fabricating claims of murder or spying to get them extradited, just like China fabricated the spying claims against the 2 Canadians in retaliation for Canada extraditing to the US the Chinese executive .
    Again, more unsubstantiated, paranoid mirror climbing.

  11. #71

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



    Apparently, Pepe the Frog is a symbol of the protests but as you all know, the ADL, SPLC and liberal media had declared it a symbol of white supremacy.

    Which leaves only two possibilities open:
    -HK protests are secretly infiltrated by the Alt Right
    -ADL, SPLC and liberal journos that talked about Pepe are human excrements with poop instead of their brain, pathological liars,dishonest pieces of garbage that should be eradicated from society.

  12. #72

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Because they couldn't win enough functional constituencies (which the British came up with by the way, not the communists. The worst you can say is that the latter were awkwardly okay with them in order to woo the city's businessmen and professionals) and can you blame the electors of these constutiencies (many of them independent, not even affiliated) for being with Beijing? The other side wants to keep the city away from the rest of the country when it pretty much depends on it. The communists could pretty much cut power to the city, seize the ports choking the city's exportations (and livelihood) with them and within a year Hong Kong will return to be the fishing village it was at the beginning. Hell with a GDP of half a trillion dollars it isn't even worth much anymore, the times when it constituted 30% of China's GDP are over. Now that it constitutes no more than 3% of China's GDP, it pretty much survives as an important center just as a favor when Guangzhou and Shenzhen are right across the river as manufacturing giants while Shanghai has the finance sector covered. China doesn't even need Hong Kong, Hong Kong needs China.
    That they began to lose popular trust in the last elections (incidentally, the ones with the highest turnout so far, 58%) is also telling, it means that the people of Hong Kong have finally figured out that they need the rest of the country to survive.
    Who knows, maybe with time, when the patriotic part of the population becomes a visible majority, they'll get what every township on the mainland already has: direct elections with universal suffrage.



    Doesn't seem that willing to me if it hasn't done that yet.



    Freedom of expression, plenty. Freedom of the press, functionally as much as in the West, with the exception that the censor there is the party in place of big business, and in the worst case you get sent directly to prison instead of being ridiculed and having your character assassinated.




    Judging by the anti-corruption campaign and the dozens of thousands of party members arrested for excessive spending and not keeping up with the party's measures against extravagancy and misuse of party resources I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Xi's opponents are in large part crooks, and he's at the very least the lesser crook. What's wrong with getting rid of bad people?
    Also the situation in Xinjiang is more unsubstantiated by any evidence, and there's plenty of documentation to clear up the reasons behind this black legend.




    You haven't read the bill. Again, read it, it says very clearly what are the cases for extradition. None of them are political, they're all felonies that are such both in the SAR and on the mainland.




    You haven't read the bill. The extradition case is supposed to be examined by Hong Kong judges first. And let's clean up once and for all what gets you extradited:



    37 cases out of 46. Exemptions are largely economic crimes, quoting:
    Item 44 conspiracy to commit fraud or defraud is generic and open to to interpretation. Essentially giving the government a blank check to extradite anyone they chose. The government could declare people who say things the government didn't like as "defraduing" and hence liable for extradiction.





    Hong Kong's system isn't presidential, you don't get to elect candidates for CO and there's certainly not just two of them, elections are for Legislative Council and district councils, the latter of which are perennially won by pro-Beijing candidates even without the functional constituencies system, with universal suffrage but with usually ridiculously low turnouts. Incidentally, district councils are the functional constituencies with the most seats in the Legislative Council, which means that if the "pro-democracy" electorate would flock out to local council elections more, they could win the district councils and the seats in the Legislative Council with them during the legislative elections, actually concluding something.
    The pro Beijing sentiment is strong in Hong Kong, and likely represents the majority view. But it is not 100% universal as you like to make out. I am willing to concede that the protestors represent only a minority view, but they represent a not insiginifcant minority view, as the size of the protest show. Clearly, these protestors feel that China is reneging on its 2 system agreement, and the extradiction treaty is a back door attempt to undermine that agreement.

    But, generally, that isn't how democracy works, you win when you get the most votes, not all of them. Nobody gets all votes, anywhere. [/Quote]

    Good democracies protect the rights of minority and those holding minority view points. The majority in a good democracy does not have unlimied right to do what ever they want.

    Again, more unsubstantiated, paranoid mirror climbing.
    A large number of people agree with those views, hence the protest. So far, the Chinese have not come up with any actual evidence to support the charge of spying, and the timing is very supsicios, making it seem that the charges were just trumped up to retaliate against Canada for honoring the US extradition request.

    Your list of crimes in the extradition treaty includes fraud and other crimes which China does not bother to enforce except when it suits their purpose. China is the counterfeiting capital of the world, and China has done virtually nothing to crack down on it except when it serves their self interest. The eecutive responible for poisoned baby food was given a soap on the wrist and has since been promot d..

    And China's claims there were no deaths during the Cultural Revolution simply isn't true. The Chinese government may be slicker with it's propoganda today, but it doesn't mean it is more honest than it was under Mao. Perhaps people's suspicions are unwarranted, but China's behavior in the past.does not inspire confidence. Many in Hong Kong do not trust the Chinese government, hence the protest. Temporarily shelvng a bill is not the same as agreeing to sncel it altogether, which is why the protest continued.

    If China wants the protest to end, they could agree to cancel the bill, and rewrite it with input from the protestors.
    Last edited by Common Soldier; August 15, 2019 at 11:12 AM.

  13. #73

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Item 44 conspiracy to commit fraud or defraud is generic and open to to interpretation. Essentially giving the government a blank check to extradite anyone they chose. The government could declare people who say things the government didn't like as "defraduing" and hence liable for extradiction.

    You're climbing on mirrors here, fraud is a very specific felony. What kind of misunderstanding can there be?


    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    The pro Beijing sentiment is strong in Hong Kong, and likely represents the majority view. But it is not 100% universal as you like to make out. I am willing to concede that the protestors represent only a minority view, but they represent a not insiginifcant minority view, as the size of the protest show. Clearly, these protestors feel that China is reneging on its 2 system agreement, and the extradiction treaty is a back door attempt to undermine that agreement.

    Yeah, and their feelings are unsubstantiated. Can you conceive the idea that the mob can just be riled up with falsehoods to push it to riot like now? Once again, they just haven't read the bill.
    How many people vote parties without even reading their programs?


    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Good democracies protect the rights of minority and those holding minority view points. The majority in a good democracy does not have unlimied right to do what ever they want.

    Nobody's infringing on the right of the minority, it's the minority here that's just ignorant and hasn't read.


    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    A large number of people agree with those views, hence the protest. So far, the Chinese have not come up with any actual evidence to support the charge of spying, and the timing is very supsicios, making it seem that the charges were just trumped up to retaliate against Canada for honoring the US extradition request.
    I suggest you look into the funding of the International Crisis Group, half comes from Western governments and the other half comes from the Open Society Foundation and the Rockefellers, and at least Kovrig worked for these people. Considering what NGOs are up to in Third World countries, it only makes sense that the Chinese government tolerates their activity until it doesn't anymore and takes one of its activists as a bargaining chip.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Your list of crimes in the extradition treaty includes fraud and other crimes which China does not bother to enforce except when it suits their purpose. China is the counterfeiting capital of the world, and China has done virtually nothing to crack down on it except when it serves their self interest.
    More arbitrary claims of arbitrariety. You haven't been backing up any claim at all, by the way, while I'm drowning you in links.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    And China's claims there were no deaths during the Cultural Revolution simply isn't true. The Chinese government may be slicker with it's propoganda today, but it doesn't mean it is more honest than it was under Mao. Perhaps people's suspicions are unwarranted, but China's behavior in the past.does not inspire confidence. Many in Hong Kong do not trust the Chinese government, hence the protest. Temporarily shelvng a bill is not the same as agreeing to sncel it altogether, which is why the protest continued.
    I don't think I've ever heard that claim before, as far as I know the Chinese government considers the Cultural Revolution a catastrophe and it's its effects that prompted the government to move away from its ultra-leftist stance.
    The official stance on Mao is that he was seven times good and three times bad, with the Cultural Revolution and the virtual anarchy that followed it being one of the bad things he was responsible of.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    If China wants the protest to end, they could agree to cancel the bill, and rewrite it with input from the protestors.
    Scrapping the bill is up to the Hong Kong government, not China's, and why should it?
    It would be a show of weakness, why should they bow before a bunch of monkeys who aren't even right?

    If I were Carrie Lam I would move to end the protests one way or another, with the least amount of casualties as possible, and then scrap the bill.


    Honestly, your idea that there is no rule of law or anything in China can all be linked back to a very old racist stereotype, that of the oriental despotism. It's a pervasive idea that the Western media make use of to rile public opinion against rival powers.

  14. #74

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Because they couldn't win enough functional constituencies (which the British came up with by the way, not the communists. The worst you can say is that the latter were awkwardly okay with them in order to woo the city's businessmen and professionals) and can you blame the electors of these constutiencies (many of them independent, not even affiliated) for being with Beijing? The other side wants to keep the city away from the rest of the country when it pretty much depends on it. The communists could pretty much cut power to the city, seize the ports choking the city's exportations (and livelihood) with them and within a year Hong Kong will return to be the fishing village it was at the beginning. Hell with a GDP of half a trillion dollars it isn't even worth much anymore, the times when it constituted 30% of China's GDP are over. Now that it constitutes no more than 3% of China's GDP, it pretty much survives as an important center just as a favor when Guangzhou and Shenzhen are right across the river as manufacturing giants while Shanghai has the finance sector covered. China doesn't even need Hong Kong, Hong Kong needs China.
    That they began to lose popular trust in the last elections (incidentally, the ones with the highest turnout so far, 58%) is also telling, it means that the people of Hong Kong have finally figured out that they need the rest of the country to survive. Who knows, maybe with time, when the patriotic part of the population becomes a visible majority, they'll get what every township on the mainland already has: direct elections with universal suffrage.
    This doesn't really respond to my point. This was about why people in Hong Kong may be upset; I said because they seem to be upset over the undemocratic nature of their executive chief and LegCo. Then you claimed what I said about the popular vote for LegCo was false and linked results of an entirely different Hong Kong elections. Now you are saying it is undemocratic, but that's a good thing. I don't think Hongkongers see it that way, and I believe that the CCP is intimidating enough to warrant fearful reactions by those who enjoy free speech and press.

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Doesn't seem that willing to me if it hasn't done that yet.
    ...Since 1997. Again, you are asking faith in the CCP that I don't think is reasonable to ask for.
    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Freedom of expression, plenty. Freedom of the press, functionally as much as in the West, with the exception that the censor there is the party in place of big business, and in the worst case you get sent directly to prison instead of being ridiculed and having your character assassinated.
    Wtf? You are joking, right? China is NOT the place for freedom of the press or freedom of expression. See, here in the US, you can walk out on the street and shout "Trump is corrupt! Down with Trump!" (you know, our executive leader) and even escalate this to writing it on a sign and waving around or printing flyers to hand out to people and the Federal government would never get involved or claim you were trying to "overthrow the government". You don't get that in China. Ever heard of Liu Xiaobo? The CCP really doesn't like it when you say there should be more democratic representation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Judging by the anti-corruption campaign and the dozens of thousands of party members arrested for excessive spending and not keeping up with the party's measures against extravagancy and misuse of party resources I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Xi's opponents are in large part crooks, and he's at the very least the lesser crook. What's wrong with getting rid of bad people?
    Also the situation in Xinjiang is more unsubstantiated by any evidence, and there's plenty of documentation to clear up the reasons behind this black legend.
    Ohhh, I see, you are an apologist for the CCP and Xi Jinping. That makes these responses much more clear. The reeducation camps Uyghurs are sent to are well documented outside of China; as well as the general religious and ethnic identity crackdown in Xinjang and surveillance state that allows it. This is nothing to say of the testimony of people after they left the camps or the rumors of horrible things that go on in these camps. If you are just going to cycle CCP talking points about how there is nothing to see here, no mistreatment at all, we don't really have anywhere to go from here.

    Also, you may want to scroll down in the wiki article you linked about the "anti-corruption campaign" Xi ran in the CCP; down to the "Political Motivations" section. He maaayyy have used the purge to target some political opponents as well. And given how these anti-corruption charges and proceedings did not involve any form of due process or trial by the judicial system, we will never exactly know who was targeted or why or what kind of representation they received when charged. There is also, you know, that whole "president for life thing" too. This is pathetic, dude, you aren't going to make the CCP seem fair or not-totalitarian.
    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    You haven't read the bill. Again, read it, it says very clearly what are the cases for extradition. None of them are political, they're all felonies that are such both in the SAR and on the mainland.
    Maybe you just didn't read the post you are responding to? I will post that part again so you don't miss it:
    Seeing as I am not a legal expert in Chinese law, I am not actually sure of what most the bill is saying or what it actually implies for the legal institutions of Hong Kong. I know that the people there seem very concerned about it, and that the CCP has made clandestine arrests of Hongkongers in the past for selling verboten literature.
    I have paged through it, and like I said, I don't know all the statutes, rules, and amendments the bill makes reference to. I am not personally familiar with intricacies of Hong Kong criminal codes, law enforcement institutions, or even the accuracy of this English translation from Chinese. If you want to reference specific parts of bill that prove your point I could try to decipher specific parts of it; but if you aren't already personally familiar with current law in Hong Kong, I don't see the value of layman takes on it. I tend to believe that people who live in Hong Kong, who are familiar with law and how it relates to mainland, would not read this bill, realize it is fine and wouldn't cause any problems, and then go out and mass protest anyways. Especially given what the CCP is known for.
    Last edited by The spartan; August 15, 2019 at 03:26 PM.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  15. #75

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    This doesn't really respond to my point. This was about why people in Hong Kong may be upset; I said because they seem to be upset over the undemocratic nature of their executive chief and LegCo.
    So how does it work, first they protest the extradition bill and then when they don't have anything to talk about anymore they backtrack on the system of functional constituencies that the British came up with?
    Which makes me wonder, suppose complete universal suffrage would be actually introduced... would communication with Britain be necessary first? In fact, what would be its reaction, considering that it's its system that would be dismantled. Is this possibility even covered in the agreement signed between the mainland and the United Kingdom?


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Then you claimed what I said about the popular vote for LegCo was false
    Looked pretty false to me considering that the side you don't like won the popular vote in the last elections.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    and linked results of an entirely different Hong Kong elections.
    A misshap, I concede, but it doesn't really change the fact that the pro-Beijing camp has won the LegCo elections and the popular vote. It's a pretty big deal to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Now you are saying it is undemocratic, but that's a good thing.
    Realistically, not any more or less than the Electoral College for the US's presidential elections. I'll leave conclusions to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    I don't think Hongkongers see it that way, and I believe that the CCP is intimidating enough to warrant fearful reactions by those who enjoy free speech and press.
    That damn oriental despotism, amirite.


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    ...Since 1997. Again, you are asking faith in the CCP that I don't think is reasonable to ask for.
    Those are twenty-two years, my man, that's almost a quarter of a century. We're all waiting.


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Wtf? You are joking, right? China is NOT the place for freedom of the press or freedom of expression. See, here in the US, you can walk out on the street and shout "Trump is corrupt! Down with Trump!" (you know, our executive leader) and even escalate this to writing it on a sign and waving around or printing flyers to hand out to people and the Federal government would never get involved or claim you were trying to "overthrow the government". You don't get that in China. Ever heard of Liu Xiaobo? The CCP really doesn't like it when you say there should be more democratic representation.

    Crass misrepresentation of what I said, which was that you could protest in China just the same about the government, you just can't attempt to overthrow it, that gets you to jail everywhere. And it isn't as if every demonstration about the government's performance is an attempt to overthrow it, I'm sure we agree about it. Have you ever been to the Chinese part of the internet? You know, Weibo and so on, you're going to find plenty of criticism of the government, the point is that unlike in the West where the criticism is "You suck and you should get the out" the nature of the criticism in China is "You're doing a terrible job, you should do better and here's how".
    Speaking of which, the Chinese government, according to independent sources (so it isn't Xinhua saying so) is the most highly-trusted in the world, with 79% of its general population putting its trust behind it and reaching as far as 88% for its informed population, page 7.
    I mean you can disagree with the government, it's just that your disagreement isn't going to be very popular.
    Addressing Liu Xiaobo, he was sentenced multiple times (can't say they didn't give him a chance to change) for
    campaigns to end communist one-party rule in China.[2]
    , which considering how the country works essentially amounts to attempting to overthrow the government since the communist party - and the United Front with it - are essentially the government, with its democratic legitimacy being reacquired at every election. It's what "dictatorship of the proletariat" means in Leninist terms, a vanguard party of the working class ruling the country as opposed to business interests.

    And he has a record of quite literally supporting colonialism. Quoting:

    [It would take] 300 years of colonialism. In 100 years of colonialism, Hong Kong has changed to what we see today. With China being so big, of course it would require 300 years as a colony for it to be able to transform into how Hong Kong is today. I have my doubts as to whether 300 years would be enough.[41][42]
    When you couple this with his statement that
    modernization means wholesale westernization, choosing a human life is choosing a Western way of life. The difference between the Western and the Chinese governing system is humane vs in-humane, there's no middle ground ... Westernization is not a choice of a nation, but a choice for the human race."[41]
    you realize that, basically, to him China needs to be forcefully colonized in order to be forcefully westernized, and not being westernized is not an option to him. Sounds like a douche to me, and a traitor.

    Back to the trust thing, Hong Kong's population is also largely in favor of the current government, with a 55% among the general populace rising to 66% for the informed part. Since last year, Hong Kong's government has acquired 10 and 17 points of trust respectively.
    Western governments by comparison are doing rather poorly.


    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Ohhh, I see, you are an apologist for the CCP and Xi Jinping. That makes these responses much more clear. The reeducation camps Uyghurs are sent to are well documented outside of China; as well as the general religious and ethnic identity crackdown in Xinjang and surveillance state that allows it. This is nothing to say of the testimony of people after they left the camps or the rumors of horrible things that go on in these camps. If you are just going to cycle CCP talking points about how there is nothing to see here, no mistreatment at all, we don't really have anywhere to go from here.
    I don't see any brainwashing or anything in those "camps", and the staff was allowed inside in some of these documentaries, starting from the BBC one. Really, if you need commentary that must help you direct your thinking to where the journalists want it to be...
    Personally I just see vocational training camps and group therapy for people in huge need of help, no eradication of Muslim religion or Turkic culture or anything. The conclusions that the journalists reach are just a huge non-sequitur and what I see doesn't back in the slightest the assertions of the press.
    The funniest part may be the part of the BBC documentary in which they state that there's a writing on the bathroom's wall being like "Please help me get out of here"... and they don't show the writing.

    The truth is that China has a Uyghur (and not a general Muslim one. Huis, Muslim Tibetans and just about anyone who isn't Uyghur or to a much lower extent Kazakh are doing pretty good as far as I know. Do we hear of Hui concentration camps in Ningxia?) problem at least in some areas. Radicalization is actually a thing, the USSR supported Uyghur separatism up until the end of its existence and when that support ended with the republic of the Soviets itself, they turned their allegiances to radical Islam and movements like Al Qaeda or the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. A major Islamist formation from Xinjiang is the Turkistan Islamic Party which actually has troops on the ground as far as Afghanistan and Syria.

    That's a real issue they're taking care of.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    Also, you may want to scroll down in the wiki article you linked about the "anti-corruption campaign" Xi ran in the CCP; down to the "Political Motivations" section. He maaayyy have used the purge to target some political opponents as well. And given how these anti-corruption charges and proceedings did not involve any form of due process or trial by the judicial system, we will never exactly know who was targeted or why or what kind of representation they received when charged. There is also, you know, that whole "president for life thing" too. This is pathetic, dude, you aren't going to make the CCP seem fair or not-totalitarian.

    I've addressed this myself when I stated that Xi's enemies are a bunch of crooks so yeah, the political enemies just so happened to be crooks. So what? The party itself has a massive corruption problem at the top and I'm sure you agree with it, why is it wrong to tackle it?
    Who cares about your ulterior motives if the trash gets taken out?
    And especially why do you expect a trial from an "independent jury" (a fable, everywhere. Independent judiciaries are as real as flying donkeys) when what was breached was first and foremost party discipline?

    And he never declared himself president for life, he just removed the five years term. Not that I agree with it, but presidency-for-life is something different.

    Quote Originally Posted by The spartan View Post
    I have paged through it, and like I said, I don't know all the statutes, rules, and amendments the bill makes reference to. I am not personally familiar with intricacies of Hong Kong criminal codes, law enforcement institutions, or even the accuracy of this English translation from Chinese. If you want to reference specific parts of bill that prove your point I could try to decipher specific parts of it; but if you aren't already personally familiar with current law in Hong Kong, I don't see the value of layman takes on it. I tend to believe that people who live in Hong Kong, who are familiar with law and how it relates to mainland, would not read this bill, realize it is fine and wouldn't cause any problems, and then go out and mass protest anyways. Especially given what the CCP is known for.
    I got tired of it and I posted the quote from the bill five posts ago, I'm surprised you didn't notice. I'll quote it again for you:

    1. Murder or manslaughter, including criminal negligence causing death; culpable homicide; assault with intent to commit murder.
    2. Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring suicide.
    3. Maliciously wounding; maiming; inflicting grievous or actual bodily harm; assault occasioning actual bodily harm; threats to kill; intentional or reckless endangering of life whether by means of a weapon, a dangerous substance or otherwise; offences relating to unlawful wounding or injuring.
    4. Offences of a sexual nature including rape; sexual assault; indecent assault; unlawful sexual acts on children; statutory sexual offences.
    5. Gross indecency with a child, a mental defective or an unconscious person.
    6. Kidnapping; abduction; false imprisonment; unlaw
    ful confinement; dealing or trafficking in slaves or other persons; taking a hostage.
    7. Criminal intimidation.

    8. Offences against the law relating to dangerous d
    rugs including narcotics, psychotropic substances, precursors and essential chemicals used in the illegal manufacture of narcotics and psychotropic substances; offences relating to the proceeds of drug trafficking.
    9. Obtaining property or pecuniary advantage by deception; theft; robbery; burglary (including breaking and entering); embezzlement; blackmail; extortion; unlawful handling or receiving of property; false accounting; any other offence in respect of property or fiscal matters involving fraud; any offence against the law relating to unlawful deprivation of property.
    13. Offences relating to counterfeiting; offences a
    gainst the law relating to forgery or uttering what is forged.
    15. Offences against the law relating to bribery, c
    orruption, secret commissions and breach of trust.
    16. Perjury and subornation of perjury.

    17. Offence relating to the perversion or obstructi
    on of the course of justice.
    18. Arson; criminal damage or mischief including mi
    schief in relation to computer data.
    19. Offences against the law relating to firearms.

    20. Offences against the law relating to explosives
    .
    22. Mutiny or any mutinous act committed on board a
    vessel at sea.
    23. Piracy involving ships or aircraft.

    24. Unlawful seizure or exercise of control of an a
    ircraft or other means of transportation.
    25. Genocide or direct and public incitement to com
    mit genocide.
    26. Facilitating or permitting the escape of a pers
    on from custody.
    28. Smuggling; offences against the law relating to import and export of prohibited items, including historical and archaeological items.
    29. Immigration offences including fraudulent acqui
    sition or use of a passport or visa.
    30. Arranging or facilitating for financial gain, the illegal entry of persons into a jurisdiction.
    31. Offences relating to gambling or lotteries.

    32. Offences relating to the unlawful termination o
    f pregnancy.
    33. Stealing, abandoning, exposing or unlawfully de
    taining a child; any other offences involving the exploitation of children.
    34. Offences against the law relating to prostituti
    on and premises kept for the purposes of prostitution.
    37. Offences relating to unlawful escape from custo
    dy; mutiny in prison.
    38. Bigamy. 39. Offences relating to women and girls.
    41. Offences relating to the possession or launderi
    ng of proceeds obtained from the commission of any offence described in this Schedule.
    42. Impeding the arrest or prosecution of a person
    who has or is believed to have committed an offence described in this Schedule. 43. Offences for which persons may be surrendered under multi-lateral international conventions; offences created as a result of decisions of international organizations.
    44. Conspiracy to commit fraud or to defraud.

    45. Conspiracy to commit, or any type of associatio
    n to commit, any offence described in this Schedule.
    46. Aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of, inciting, being an accessory before or after the fact to, or attempting to commit an offence described in this Schedule.
    to be found at page 22.

    Exceptions are:

    (a)item number 10 - offences against bankruptcy law orinsolvency law;
    (b)
    item number 11 - offences against the law relating to companies including offences committed by officers,directors and promoters; (c)item number 12 - offences relating to securities and futures trading;
    (d)item number 14 - offences against the law relating to protection of intellectual property, copyrights, patents or trademarks; 4With four of them further limited to the extent they relate to those 37 items.7
    (e)
    item number 21 - offences against the law relating to environmental pollution or protection of public health;
    (f)
    item number 27 – offences against the law relating to the control of exportation or importation of goods of any type, or the international transfer of funds;
    (g)item number 35 – offences involving the unlawful use of computers;
    (h)
    item number 36 - offences relating to fiscal matters, taxes or duties; and
    (i)
    item number 40 - offences against the law relating to false or misleading trade descriptions.
    at page 6. For the full context,
    11.After taking into account all factors of consideration and views received, we decide that case-based surrender arrangements will only apply to 37 items of offences based on their existing description in Schedule 1 of FOO.4 We will also raise the threshold for case-based surrender arrangements such that only offences punishable with imprisonment for more than three years and triable on indictment in Hong Kong are covered. We believe that the public will better understand the application of the relevant law and mechanism after the mechanism for giving effect to case-based surrender arrangements has been in operation for a period of time. Between March and December 2018, Taiwan had written to the HKSAR Government on three occasions, requesting legal assistance and surrender of the suspect to Taiwan for trial. We have already communicated with Taiwan about its requests. If the proposed legislative amendments are passed before July 2019, we will then have a legal basis to cooperate with Taiwan with a view to reaching a case-based arrangement in tackling the Taiwan murder case.
    On the same page. Finally, polls were also held to ascertain what people wanted. Giving a read to the Public Consultation section at page 11 would help too, considering that polls at hands the bill had the support of most of the public.
    Last edited by Altzek; August 15, 2019 at 08:30 PM.

  16. #76

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    Unsubstantiated claim.
    That's not a claim. I'm mocking your insinuation that not including China in a trade bloc is an offensive move against it.

    No country can get rid of US bases democratically. Italy didn't even want to be your ally but you funded the Christian Democrats for decades to make sure they won elections and kept the "alliance" with you. It's how the US operates, everywhere, it sabotages or ignores democracy.
    This is what happens when people are asked to express themselves on the matter.
    That's not evidence to the contrary, it's evidence that there is a democratic decision making process in Italy. The Okinawa example is a perfect illustration for why national interests supersede local ones. Okinawans may very well want to kick Americans out, but Japan certainly doesn't.



    The article leads to a better source that names names and facts, referring to the Occupy Central protests of five years ago. You only had to read.
    The only people I see violent in principle here are the rioters, not the policemen who are responding proportionately. And I can already guess what happens when the leaders of the tiny parties behind these protests are put under detention, the newspapers would shriek "China arrests leaders of democratic opposition", and you would keep shrieking about human rights or whatever.
    There is no way to win with some people.

    And yeah, the elderly are frankly tired.
    I'm not going to blindly trust what is essentially, a blog. Especially when it contains facts that I am unable to verify. What respected institution is he affiliated with?

    Hong Kong is a liberal democracy, the government is elected and the bill has been scrapped following the protests. I don't know what more do they want, and how is any of this not democratic.
    I think it's quite clear what they want, but you seem to be irked that people dared to challenge the authority of mainland China.

  17. #77
    caratacus's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    U.K.
    Posts
    3,866

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    I've addressed this myself when I stated that Xi's enemies are a bunch of crooks so yeah, the political enemies just so happened to be crooks. So what? The party itself has a massive corruption problem at the top and I'm sure you agree with it, why is it wrong to tackle it?
    Who cares about your ulterior motives if the trash gets taken out?
    And especially why do you expect a trial from an "independent jury" (a fable, everywhere. Independent judiciaries are as real as flying donkeys) when what was breached was first and foremost party discipline?
    Corruption is there because the party system facilitates it. A system which enables individuals to misuse their positions, without being challenged unless from above. Who is the Communist Party representing? If the Party truly feels that it is a "People's Republic", why not facilitate for the people (not party members) to have a greater say in their lives, instead of everything being decided above them. Only when there is transparency and accountability will corruption be eliminated. China has become an oligarchy like much of the world, even those countries with elections. The difference is, that it has a Communist system which facilitates it unchallenged.

    Bad For Business? China's Corruption Isn't Getting Any Better Despite Government Crackdowns
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphje...est-and-worst/
    But the country’s corruption rankings in world surveys suggest that China has become chronically stuck mid-way between very high and very low scores for levels of graft . That’s because of, and despite, five years of stepped-up crackdowns against thousands of public officials since Xi took power in 2012.

    China ranked 77th last year on Berlin-based nonprofit Transparency International’s 180-country “Corruption Perceptions” scale. The widely cited index assigned it a low-ish to mid-range score of 41 last year, barely changed from 39 in 2012 when Xi took office and in every intervening year. China still has room to improve in order to rank alongside the cleanest countries such as New Zealand, Singapore and most of Northern Europe. (Somalia came in last place in the 2017 index.)

  18. #78

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    That's not a claim. I'm mocking your insinuation that not including China in a trade bloc is an offensive move against it.
    By your own admission the commercial bloc is an attempt to "contain" Chinese economic accomplishments. That is an offensive move.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    That's not evidence to the contrary, it's evidence that there is a democratic decision making process in Italy. The Okinawa example is a perfect illustration for why national interests supersede local ones. Okinawans may very well want to kick Americans out, but Japan certainly doesn't.

    It is if foreign countries sabotage from outside that decision-making process, making into winners political factions that couldn't win on their own, and the Christian Democratic rule over our republic is but the tip of the icerberg. The US has staged a season of political terror in this country throughout the '70s and early '80s with the purpose of discrediting any political faction outside of the one supported by it, and then eventually brought about the collapse of the entire First Republic system through Tangentopoli because even the PSI-DC political axis was too independent in foreign policy for the US's tastes, as the crisis of the Achille Lauro and the standoff at Sigonella AFB show.
    The US is the enemy of democracy everywhere, and this is only one country. Then there's Chile, Greece, Korea, Vietnam, how many dictatorships were supported just so that the side they didn't like wouldn't be elected into government?
    By comparison, where is Chinese sabotage of foreign political processes?

    The Okinawa example is the perfect illustration that what people want doesn't count anything under US occupation, their ambitions sacrificed on the altar of "national interest" which anyway isn't even Japan's national interest. What does it gain by keeping a US base there?


    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    I'm not going to blindly trust what is essentially, a blog. Especially when it contains facts that I am unable to verify. What respected institution is he affiliated with?

    It isn't a blog, and if you'd bother to check the redireting links, they provide sources for all statements, never from the website itself and often from the websites of the NGOs themselves that admit to fomenting political unrest for geopolitical gains.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    I think it's quite clear what they want, but you seem to be irked that people dared to challenge the authority of mainland China.

    The only authority they're challenging is that of their own region's democratically-elected government. Again, without a single clue of what they're protesting.


    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    Corruption is there because the party system facilitates it. A system which enables individuals to misuse their positions, without being challenged unless from above. Who is the Communist Party representing? If the Party truly feels that it is a "People's Republic", why not facilitate for the people (not party members) to have a greater say in their lives, instead of everything being decided above them. Only when there is transparency and accountability will corruption be eliminated. China has become an oligarchy like much of the world, even those countries with elections. The difference is, that it has a Communist system which facilitates it unchallenged.

    But they do. Opinion polls have a key part in determining policy - wish they did here - and direct elections take place at the local level (and considering China's de facto decentralized nature, "local" is where it truly matters considering the government's issues in enforcing several pieces of legislation at the provincial level), with more indirect ones taking place for provincial and eventually national bodies. Either way, there is democratic legitimacy to all government bodies because they're all elected by constituencies that begin from below, not to mention the experiments with direct democracy in villages which few countries can really boast of.
    I'm of the opinion that the more democracy the merrier (and if China's direct elections are only local, it clearly needs more of it to make the elections direct all the way to the National People's Congress and the People's Political Consultative Conference. That village and township elections are now a thing show that things are moving in the right direction and, with time and through incremental reforms, we may see the time when all organs of Chinese legislature will be directly elected within our lifetime), but democracy is not in itself the solution to a poor political culture, a strong ("authoritarian"), big and sovereign state, harsher punishment and the enforcement of rigorous moral codes are.
    The one difference is that this thing can be solved in China with a government that's both bigger ("authoritarian" in your lingo) and more democratic, while it is essentially a lost cause in the West because the government doesn't own anything anymore (and by this I mean assets that can allow it to make money without resorting to either taxation or loaning money that will never be repaid except by selling those assets) and has officially surrendered its sovereignty to supranational organizations of both an economic and military/geopolitical nature (EU, NATO, IMF...) and more direct economic interests.
    Italy's so ed that even our damn balance law is decided from outside, not a single one of our policies isn't conceived without thinking "Hmmm, I wonder what would the technocrats in Brussels and Frankfurt think about? Let's ask first or we risk an infraction procedure". When who you vote for isn't able to fulfill its promises despite all of his goodwill because it is held hostage to the whims of outside institutions, what good is democracy? It's a farce.
    Before electing people, democracy is about making sure that the people who are elected do what they promised to do. That doesn't happen here, and it's impossible for that to happen without huge structural changes.


    And you are only quoting an index of perceived corruption which essentially doesn't take into account something as base as cynicism. Realistically, there is no way to independently verify how deep the rot goes except through observation of its mechanism, and the best way to do is to just be a card carrying member in order to be close to everything.
    For as bad as the situation is, there is really no better way to know how bad the situation is than to trust the party itself (with the needed skepticism and always taking things with a grain of salt. Keep some cynicism, but not enough to cloud your judgement like every China-watcher does), which is a lot of things except stranger to self-criticism at the top and at the base. It's mostly the middle management and bureaucracy that needs to be solved.

  19. #79
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    17,268

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Altzek View Post
    The US is the enemy of democracy everywhere, and this is only one country. Then there's Chile, Greece, Korea, Vietnam, how many dictatorships were supported just so that the side they didn't like wouldn't be elected into government?
    By comparison, where is Chinese sabotage of foreign political processes?
    South Vietnam was a democracy. South Korea was never democratic until the 80s. Greece stopped being a dictatorship long ago. Chile you have a point with.

    China is currently sticking its nose into the Kashmir dispute while it has a history of foreign adventures including Kirea and the Sino-Vietnamese war.

    The Okinawa example is the perfect illustration that what people want doesn't count anything under US occupation, their ambitions sacrificed on the altar of "national interest" which anyway isn't even Japan's national interest. What does it gain by keeping a US base there?
    A US military presence to counter China is definitely in Japan's interests.

  20. #80

    Default Re: Hundreds of thousands march in Hong Kong to protest China extradition bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    South Vietnam was a democracy. South Korea was never democratic until the 80s. Greece stopped being a dictatorship long ago. Chile you have a point with.

    South Vietnam was a dictatorship like South Korea and Greece until the uprising of the polytechnic in Athens, in all cases supported by the US to prevent popular anti-US governments to take over. Chile is just another example, certainly not the only one.


    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    China is currently sticking its nose into the Kashmir dispute while it has a history of foreign adventures including Kirea and the Sino-Vietnamese war.

    It isn't "sticking its nose" into anything, it's saying what everyone else has said, that India's abolition of the region's autonomy is going to create issues for the Kashmiris, and Chinese intervention in the Korean War was demanded by the North Korean government in the form of an expedition corp of volunteers from the civil war. Through its intervention in the Korean War, North Korea was preserved (barely, every city was subject to the equivalent of five atomic bombs and by the end of the war almost no building in the north was left standing. The US had made it a point to wipe out the country from the map) and China kept US encroachment to the south. I guess you'll never digest either result.
    In Vietnam it was the culmination of a territorial dispute and an attempt to keep Vietnam out of Cambodia, which failed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    A US military presence to counter China is definitely in Japan's interests.
    There is no need to counter China, you don't get it. It isn't as if China's going to invade Okinawa or anything. It is quite literally encirclement. If you defend this encirclement, you are defending aggression, no ifs and no buts.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •