Conquer Club

GoranZ wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:Not surprised Hong Kong is doing this. Up until recently, they had Western standards of freedom. Now, they're under Chinese rule, and look at Tienanmen Square. Be safe Hong Kong residents.

You mean Hong Kong was under 150 years concession of UK that "recently" ended... That "recently" was in 1997, 17 years ago
Hong Kong is not under Chinese rule... its essential part of China, and in China apply Chinese rules.

I think now China understands why straighten its ties with Russia will bring bigger stability for her.

You say that as if it's a good thing. Why is it reasonable for HK to increasingly resemble the Chinese model of government--when HK's model has produced one of the richest and more free places in the world?

Economically, both China and HK are doing quite good, and hardly which country in the world can compare to their economical success. So both systems create rich people. However demonstrations like the one happening now undermine economic growth in both systems. The conclusion that HK will become less democratic after 2017 is more or less a speculation... Even now HK(or most of the other "democratic" countries in the world) actually dont have democratic system. Only ballot paper with "none of above" in their list can create Democratic system, everything else is a farce(but this is different story).

Your claims are inaccurate if you compare HK's and PRC's GDPs, Freedom Index ranking, freedom of press ranking, etc.

According to the Polity IV rankings of democracy, HK is 'way up there' with the Western European countries and Uhmerica. China is not. There's a big difference. There's more to those democratic governments than a ballot box; otherwise, crummy democracies like Iran and Pakistan would be politically indistinguishable from Western democracies (if we applied your reasoning to the extreme).

So, back to your point: "its essential part of China, and in China apply Chinese rules." It doesn't make sense. It would've been more profitable for the PRC if they simply taxed HK and left them alone. The PRC's constant buggering with HK unsurprisingly results in larger protests.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

GoranZ wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:Not surprised Hong Kong is doing this. Up until recently, they had Western standards of freedom. Now, they're under Chinese rule, and look at Tienanmen Square. Be safe Hong Kong residents.

You mean Hong Kong was under 150 years concession of UK that "recently" ended... That "recently" was in 1997, 17 years ago
Hong Kong is not under Chinese rule... its essential part of China, and in China apply Chinese rules.

I think now China understands why straighten its ties with Russia will bring bigger stability for her.

You say that as if it's a good thing. Why is it reasonable for HK to increasingly resemble the Chinese model of government--when HK's model has produced one of the richest and more free places in the world?

Economically, both China and HK are doing quite good, and hardly which country in the world can compare to their economical success. So both systems create rich people. However demonstrations like the one happening now undermine economic growth in both systems. The conclusion that HK will become less democratic after 2017 is more or less a speculation... Even now HK(or most of the other "democratic" countries in the world) actually dont have democratic system. Only ballot paper with "none of above" in their list can create Democratic system, everything else is a farce(but this is different story).

Your claims are inaccurate if you compare HK's and PRC's GDPs, Freedom Index ranking, freedom of press ranking, etc.

I'm not comparing GDP... or GDP per capita, only comparing the successes in increase of their GDP. On this field both China and HK are quite solid in the last 17 years.

BigBallinStalin wrote:According to the Polity IV rankings of democracy, HK is 'way up there' with the Western European countries and Uhmerica. China is not. There's a big difference. There's more to those democratic governments than a ballot box; otherwise, crummy democracies like Iran and Pakistan would be politically indistinguishable from Western democracies (if we applied your reasoning to the extreme).

So, back to your point: "its essential part of China, and in China apply Chinese rules." It doesn't make sense. It would've been more profitable for the PRC if they simply taxed HK and left them alone. The PRC's constant buggering with HK unsurprisingly results in larger protests.

China needs HK, and HK needs China, I think that China wont drastically change HK's government. For now they probably only want more influence there. If China wanted to extremely change HK they had chance to do that many times but they chose not to. As I said previously Chinese idea is to make HK more Chinese, not more Western, but probably without losing HK's success in many fields.

P.S. In the last 20-30 year China has 1 ruling party, America has 2, but there are countries that have many times more ruling parties then China+America combined together. In really it doesn't matter how many ruling parties are there in one country, it matter how much they listen to the general population and work for its interests.

The United States has the illusion of two "ruling parties"
but it's actually just two cheeks of the same ass.

I worry about the safety of protesters... it took a long
time to drag in military forces from distant provinces
to carry out the Tiananmen Square massacre. The heavy
handed violent response went far beyond the students
and others in the square.

GoranZ wrote:China needs HK, and HK needs China, I think that China wont drastically change HK's government. For now they probably only want more influence there. If China wanted to extremely change HK they had chance to do that many times but they chose not to.

No, they've just chosen not to do it one single instance. They've chosen the piecemeal approach to attempt to make it more palatable probably, since obviously it seems like some are not fond of the changes.


--Andy

Oh, it's being changed, slowly but surely. The national education plan last year was one method to teach (opponents said brainwash) students to be good patriotic citizens. Other moves, like developing new towns near the border with the mainland and connecting Hong Kong and China via high-speed rail are seen by many to be more ways to integrate Hong Kong into greater China. Still other people are upset at immigrants from mainland China moving to Hong Kong and being eligible for government assistance. It's easy enough to change a people's overall ideology if it can be stocked with more citizens who have the right mindset.

Of course, Hong Kong's always been an immigrant city. 150 years ago, this place was just a handful of fishing villages.

Here's a video from traffic cameras at Causeway Bay on Sunday night posted by the South China Morning Post:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10 ... =2&theater

This is what I envision when I think of pro-CPC people:

DoomYoshi wrote:This is what I envision when I think of pro-CCP people:

They make the Russian signs in English?

notyou2 wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:This is what I envision when I think of pro-CCP people:

They make the Russian signs in English?

That was on the Left Coast.

It's been really calm the past few days. The government is playing it smart and ignoring the protesters for the most part.

DoomYoshi wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:This is what I envision when I think of pro-CCP people:

They make the Russian signs in English?

That was on the Left Coast.

That picture started a Google chain reaction. I have been reading and looking at Hanford pictures.

Going to be 60 years since the Manhattan project in 2015.

The guy who does Nukemap has a pretty interesting blog that focuses on nuclear secrecy. Check that out for some cool pics and history, if you haven't already.

muy_thaiguy wrote:

What is the overall gist of the video? For the benefit of those who can't access YouTube.

mrswdk wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

What is the overall gist of the video? For the benefit of those who can't access YouTube.

The people of Hong Kong protest peacefully in huge numbers against the corruption of the government. They want equal rights and a democratic government in Hong Kong that is chosen by the people of Hong Kong. A big thing is that the Chinese government has a thing where any candidate for a government office in Hong Kong has to be "screened" first by the Chinese government. And the people of Hong Kong are worried (rightfully so) that in such a case, the people that pass the "screening" are going to be little more than lackeys to Beijing and continue the corruption of the local government and turning what had been a democratic city for the last 60 years into a place ruled by a dictator.

Welcome to, like, three weeks ago.

What democracy did HK have under the British, exactly?

mrswdk wrote:Welcome to, like, three weeks ago.

What democracy did HK have under the British, exactly?

You know, the ability to vote for the person they want in charge instead of having someone put in office by China. In other words, they do not want cronyism, which is rampant in China.

Oh lawdy, he thinks British Hong Kong held free and universal leadership elections. You are very much mistaken, my friend.

I imagine a city which has never had proper elections, whose last pre-'97 governor was called 'Chris Patten' (good Chinese name, that) and who were passed between the UK and China with absolutely no say in the decision are probably used to cronyism and being treated as mere subjects in someone else's system.

Something else to think about: the current CEO (chosen under the system inherited from the British) is pro-Beijing and in favor of Beijing's plan, so I guess that means (according to your theory of a 'democratic HK') that the people of HK have voted in favor of greater assimilation into the mainland and that the remaining protestors are very much a tyrannical minority and little else.

mrswdk wrote:Oh lawdy, he thinks British Hong Kong held free and universal leadership elections. You are very much mistaken, my friend.

I imagine a city which has never had proper elections, whose last pre-'97 governor was called 'Chris Patten' (good Chinese name, that) and who were passed between the UK and China with absolutely no say in the decision are probably used to cronyism and being treated as mere subjects in someone else's system. And besides, the current CEO (chosen under the same system the British used) is pro-Beijing and in favor of Beijing's plan, so I guess that means the people of HK have voted in favor of greater assimilation into the mainland and that those protestors are very much a tyrannical minority and nothing more.

Except that China agreed to let Hong Kong have free elections for the next 50 years, but are trying to force this cronyism on the people of Hong Kong, which are not taking it laying down (hence the protests which counter your claims anyways). The police are also using tear gas on the peaceful protestors (rather indiscriminately) , despite peaceful protesting being legal in Hong Kong. Let's also not forget China has been moving mainlanders into the Hong Kong region for awhile to sway the vote and popular opinion in their favor (much like what they did in Tibet).

muy_thaiguy wrote:Except that China agreed to let Hong Kong have free elections for the next 50 years

No, China agreed to let HK retain the system it had under British rule for 50 years (after which it can do as it pleases anyway)

meaty_guy wrote:The police are also using tear gas on the peaceful protestors (rather indiscriminately)

1 - Those are HK police acting under the orders of HK's leaders
2 - They stopped using the tear gas fairly quickly
3 - Tear gas was also fired at the protestors who were voicing upset at the shooting of that black kid in America recently. If the use of tear gas on protestors is a sign of oppression under an unaccountable administration then you, my friend, are being oppressed by an unaccountable administration.

why_thai_why? wrote:despite peaceful protesting being legal in Hong Kong.

Blockading the city center and forcing it to grind to a standstill is not legal in HK, just as it is not legal in any country anywhere in the world.

Reds Under The Beds wrote:Let's also not forget China has been moving mainlanders into the Hong Kong region for awhile to sway the vote and popular opinion in their favor.

And now you have well and truly entered the realm of fantasy and propaganda. Any mainlanders who have moved to HK (note: moved, not just travelled across for shopping or giving birth) have done so under their own initiative, and in any case cannot be assumed to be in favor of the mainland's current political system anyway.

mrswdk wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

What is the overall gist of the video? For the benefit of those who can't access YouTube.

Tell us why you can't access Youtube in Beijing please.

PS, are you moving to HK? Bon voyage!


--Andy

notyou2 wrote:

mrswdk wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

What is the overall gist of the video? For the benefit of those who can't access YouTube.

Tell us why you can't access Youtube in Beijing please.

Because my VPN is out of action right now.

mrswdk wrote:

notyou2 wrote:

mrswdk wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

What is the overall gist of the video? For the benefit of those who can't access YouTube.

Tell us why you can't access Youtube in Beijing please.

Because my VPN is out of action right now.

Have you tried rubbing it?

I might give it a few flicks in a minute.