Is a Modern Day Tiananmen Looming in Hong Kong?

[Guest]

That old saying comes to mind when considering Hong Kong's current political climate. "The more things change, the more they stay the same". 

 

Its unfortunately one of my several homes away from home with family and friends residing there, toying with leaving after some having set their roots there for many years. Kind of hits close to home when you hear what is happening that isn't being shown on the news. I can only imagine how it feels for one who actually is from there. 

 

However, how far will one side push for democracy or the latter push to suppress it?

 

Are we on the verge of yet another catastrophic humanitarian crisis, should martial law be declared? History dictates this is where were headed, however doing so would bear devastating economical consequences.

 

How can you live with laws and liberties, only to have them systematically chiseled away? 

 

What is your opinion on the current situation?

 

Is a modern day Tiananmen looming in Hong Kong?

[RoseGoesToYale]

I think it's a slightly different scenario than Tiananmen, since that was Chinese citizens protesting against oppression from their own government. In this case, it's an entirely different group of people under a different geographical area who are protesting against China as a threat to their own autonomy as a nation. Could a massacre happen? Yes, as always, let's hope not. But it would more likely be the start of some sort of war of secession. The problem is, the protests don't have a clear leader, and Hong Kong doesn't have it's own military, so it'd pretty much be Chinese guns against a lot of angry but poorly armed civilians...

[Yeast]

Well, western democracy is as popular in mainland China as communism is in the US.  I grew up in an era when communism was as much an anathema as terrorism is today. Nobody back then could possibly conceive one that of our major trading partners would be a communist nation. May as well trade with Cuba.  Ironically, the Chinese have permanently adopted the government/industrial system that America had during the second world war. The president took control of private industry and directed it to serve the war effort exclusively.  It returned to civilian production after the war. The government in China apparently allows industry to operate semi-autonomously but can step in at any moment and dictate what it ought to do.  China was once the most technically advanced culture on earth. Isolationism allowed the west to overtake them. The humiliation China suffered with Hong Kong is a memory that will never be erased. Obviously China wants to return to its former glory. The government/industrial complex is China's means of doing so.  Tiananmen was a miscalculation by the government. They had just stepped onto the world stage and didn't appreciate the power of global media. This is what is obviously foremost on their minds these days. A massacre would be bad public relations. Frankly to lead the world again, they need our business. Perhaps to play the devil's advocate, I think there is credible reasons to believe China's assertion that the protests in Hong Kong are fueled by western influences, especially the American sort. We are now experiencing the consequences of meddling in the political affairs of central American nations. The Reagan era saw military assistance offered to generals who opposed socialist regimes. The "banana republics" that resulted were American puppets. We lost interest and corrupt fascist dictators were replaced by gang style war lords. The population was left in a battle zone and now streams towards this country trying to escape the horror and find a better life. Our president spits in their faces. Then to make matters worse, he imposes tariffs on China. He spits in Chinese faces as well.  This only ramps up pressure on the Chinese government. It may be moving towards making a wager that another bloody crack down might be condemned by its other trading partners but won't really influence the relationship it has with its major partner. The Chinese aren't stupid. They know Trump doesn't care. The only thing he cares about is his political base who ignorantly consider the Chinese as backward foreigners. The Chinese know this, too. There one has it. This country subtly trying to remake China in its own image while also assaulting it in terms of the very trade we both rely so heavily on. Therefore, I fault America for the next real crackdown, not the Chinese. 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, RoseGoesToYale said:

The problem is, the protests don't have a clear leader, and Hong Kong doesn't have it's own military, so it'd pretty much be Chinese guns against a lot of angry but poorly armed civilians

Basically, and this can be noted, in China employing some strong armed tactics to instill fear.

 

I.E Parading military vehicles in Shenzhen, across the border. Some armed with powerful water cannons, and ordering an evacuation of the airport which was occupied. This is a show of force, and many bought into it, attempting to flee.

 

They've also hired thugs dressed in white, to beat down protesters in the thousands, then denied any wrongdoing even though if you spoke to any locals--such activities were the norm in mainland "to get the mafia to do your dirty work for you, and absolve yourself of any responsibility". Sends fear down your spine, and keeps you in line.

 

Just like I was on my P's and Q's in finding out I could go to jail for 6 months, for littering (one of my friends witnessed a friend get "raided" by several cops after missing a garbage can with litter, and walking away--literally, arresting them). Guarantee you you're not littering again after that. So there are slight signs you're not in a fully democratic state, everywhere you go.

 

This sends a strong message, as well as planting military or plainclothes police to make thousands of surprise arrests to keep protesters doubting themselves.

 

They are also labeling these protests as "terrorism", to send a strong message a heavy handed jail sentence would be provided to anyone defying orders.

 

We're talking upwards of 10 years in jail, for "rioting", which is hard to prove you were not doing if standing with protesters.

 

I don't think China would risk murdering anyone, but wouldn't be surprised if water cannon trucks were employed if things got too difficult to control. Thing is, these water cannons can cause critical injury.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Yeast said:

A massacre would be bad public relations.

Main reason we're seeing more tough talk and threats, from China.

 

However, they've likely learned their lesson, and would employ a less lethal level of crowd control such as water cannons. Just seeing military deployed with firearms, would be enough to deter many.

 

However, having spoken to some locals. I think China is underestimating how badly locals want their freedom. Once you've experienced it--you're willing to die for it.

 

Something has to give, and China isn't a country known for backing down, and showing weakness.

[Skycaptain]

The biggest losers are the people of Hong Kong, they're losing trade all the while this is going on. 

 

The Chinese are very good at playing the long game, so it rather suits them to be seen to be containing the protests just by displaying force, and "outsourcing" roughing up the demonstrators. 

 

Ultimately there's the trade issue as well. A trade embargo would hurt them much more now than a generation ago. Back then their economy was predominantly internal, now its predominantly international. 

[andreas1033]

Usa, and uk, are the last ones who should be telling hong kong, or china what to do.

 

When have uk, or usa cared about human rights of protesters.

 

Uk had a shoot to kill policy in northern ireland. Uk in northern ireland used gerry mandering to make sure catholics could not get the majority needed.

 

Uk gov has no right to tell china what to do about hong kong. Uks record overall in northern ireland was terrible.

 

Lets look at usa shall we. Usa buys all the drugs from mexico, that empowered teh drug cartels to effectively take over mexico. Mexico today is effectively a hell on earth due to americans buying teh narcotics from mexico. So america has totally destroyed its neighbour country mexico, by the usa population buying all mexico cartels drugs.

 

Usa keeps all the countries south of its border in a hell hole.

 

So america can hardly talk about china, and uk cannot talk about china.

[InDefenseOfPOMO]

2 hours ago, andreas1033 said:

Lets look at usa shall we. Usa buys all the drugs from mexico, that empowered teh drug cartels to effectively take over mexico. Mexico today is effectively a hell on earth due to americans buying teh narcotics from mexico. So america has totally destroyed its neighbour country mexico, by the usa population buying all mexico cartels drugs.

 

Why is that?

 

I don't mean, "Why from Mexico?"

 

I mean, "Why do we buy all of those drugs?"

[FindingTheta]

4 hours ago, andreas1033 said:

Lets look at usa shall we. Usa buys all the drugs from mexico, that empowered teh drug cartels to effectively take over mexico. Mexico today is effectively a hell on earth due to americans buying teh narcotics from mexico. So america has totally destroyed its neighbour country mexico, by the usa population buying all mexico cartels drugs.

NAFTA had more to do with harming Mexico's population than the cartels, especially in agriculture due to American subsidies in crop production, which increased unemployment in the millions. Manufacturing jobs also remained low in pay because Mexico couldn't compete with nations that are able to manufacture more for less. Those on the lower end of the socioeconomic strata have been adversely affected, while those on the upper end made out well. Plus when you factor in another neoliberal act, where there interest in loans couldn't be repaid, then the IMF comes in with their loans and pressures Mexico to privatize their safety nets and government services you have a system ripe for exploitation by cartels.

 

The cartels took advantage of the lack of opportunities from economic disruption in addition to the drug demand up north, but I agree that American drug usage and our ridiculous War on Drugs is a huge contributing factor, though that is a symptom of the disease.

[Guest]

18 hours ago, SkyenAutowegCaptain said:

The Chinese are very good at playing the long game

They are, which is why this is worrisome and many are looking to flee due to this.

 

Some people I know there, are even considering closing their businesses and exploring options in Taiwan, Japan or Korea Etc. 

 

I know a few who did so years ago fearing for future generations with the end of the British treaty in 2045. 

 

Mind you, none could have predicted China wanting to systematically claw away at their liberties this early.

 

It just overall doesn't look good for Hong Kong. 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, andreas1033 said:

Usa, and uk, are the last ones who should be telling hong kong, or china what to do.

I would have to agree, and am glad they have kept their noses out of this situation.

 

Before these protests, the sense of order you find in Hong Kong is something that would embarass both countries. 

 

The only solutions are China making concessions, which is highly unlikely (considering they dug in their heels and aren't known to show any weakness on the global stage) or them ending this by force effectively sounding the alarm of what once was a relatively free Hong Kong. 

[andreas1033]

9 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

I would have to agree, and am glad they have kept their noses out of this situation.

 

I seriously doubt that america, or uk is keeping there noses out of this.

 

Why do you think these protestors have there protest signs in english, if they are protesting the chinese gov? Given that, its only right that the chinese suspect the usa, or uk are getting involved in this.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, andreas1033 said:

Why do you think these protestors have there protest signs in english, if they are protesting the chinese gov?

To send a message globally?

 

This can be the US pulling the strings, as a democratic Hong Kong benefits them and their global influence. 

 

Also keep in mind, many in Hong Kong speak English (I very seldom had to use any Cantonese or one of my friends translating if I was in over my head), and all street signs are translated to English. 

 

To create a global movement, you have to paralyze the city. This garners international attention. 

 

To make sure your message is heard, it must be in English. Especially if at the airport with tourists. 

 

I mean Hilary Clinton almost successfully ousted Putin before he acquired full power by influencing a volatile situation in Russia, that almost snuffed him out of his rise in the ranks.

 

Don't think he forgot about this when the last US elections came about.

 

Eye for an eye, right?

 

If it could be found the US did in fact influence this movement, this looks even worse for Hong Kong. 

[andreas1033]

6 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

This can be the US pulling the strings, as a democratic Hong Kong benefits them and their global influence.

America also may be doing it, to keep china busy, instead of china planning to take taiwan.

 

America may of done this for this reason too, ie to cause problems in hong kong, so it gets chinas energies into hong kong, and away from concentrating on thinking about taking taiwan.

 

Thats a possibility too.

[Skycaptain]

The reason Britain isn't shouting is realpolitik. The British government are hoping that China will bail them out of the Brexit fuckup

[Guest]

5 hours ago, andreas1033 said:

America also may be doing it, to keep china busy, instead of china planning to take taiwen.

There would be military consequences for something like this. 

 

America would not touch Taiwan but can attempt to influence it all it wants. They have a history of political meddling, yet cry fowl when it hurts them. 

 

It would be like Russia going after Guam. 

[LeChat]

8 hours ago, andreas1033 said:

I seriously doubt that america, or uk is keeping there noses out of this.

 

Why do you think these protestors have there protest signs in english, if they are protesting the chinese gov? Given that, its only right that the chinese suspect the usa, or uk are getting involved in this.

Hong Kong used to be a British territory, so that's why English is written and spoken, there.

 

I did come across an article where a protestor said that they wanted to let the world know that they didn't agree with what their government was trying to do (extradite their own citizens to China).

 

Quote

...English is one of the official languages in Hong Kong, and is used widely in the Government, academic circles, business and the courts. All road and government signs are bilingual...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_English

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Hong_Kong

[andreas1033]

I know hong kong was uk owned, and what you mean.

 

I am talking about today, and these protestors want concessions from chinese gov, so why were they writing protest signs in english?

 

No wonder, the chinese gov, thinks uk, usa are involved with these protests.

[LeChat]

I've found these three YouTube videos helpful, in explaining the history of Hong Kong and the resulting confrontation with the mainland Chinese government.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

[SorryNotSorry]

I think that at the end of the day, Beijing's communist-in-name-only party officials will resort to authorizing deadly force if they choose. I mean, of course the people of Hong Kong want to enjoy continuation of whatever freedoms they have, but this is a blow to the party officials' egos (there, I said it). On one side is an irresistible force, on the other is an immovable object. If the protesters in Hong Kong were to win out, the party officials would lose BIG face because they'd be knuckling under. You have to try to see the situation from both sides' point of view to understand it.

[uhtred]

I think the protesters need a set of demands that Beijing can accept. Pushing the Chinese government too far could get very ugly for a lot of people.  The protests had a victory - stopping the original extradition legislation.   They should have celebrated, then later started on another issue.  As it stands, its not clear what will satisfy them except independence - and China can't allow that - next it would be Xinjiang and TIbet. 

 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, uhtred said:

stopping the original extradition legislation

Carrie Lam only shelved the bill. Never formally canceled it. 

 

She could easily reinstate the bill in less than 24 hours. This bill is thus still on the table even though she states that it is "dead". 

 

That's like you seeing your car warranty is expired on a car you just bought. Only for the dealership to type up a new warranty which is just "like a real one".

 

She underestimated the people of Hong Kong, as she doesn't represent them. She wasn't even voted in by them. This isn't even her first time doing this.

 

The fact she felt this would go down, showcases how out of touch that she is.

 

It's why in refusing to step down, she is getting full backing from Beijing as in doing so--is representing their resolve and voice. 

 

There are zero victories for the people. She didn't give up any ground, and her trying to end these protests was her stating there would be zero concessions and even condemned the protesters actions. 

 

The situation went from manageable, to out of control due to her piss poor handling of the situation. 

 

This is why the protesters demands are now unrealistic so there is no sign they will end anytime soon. 

 

The only realistic way, is plain clothes police heavily performing mass crack downs and arrests until most are too afraid to show up and protest. 

 

Due to volume of protesters, this would be ineffective. 

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Woodworker1968 said:

I think that at the end of the day, Beijing's communist-in-name-only party officials will resort to authorizing deadly force if they choose

That would leave a black eye on not only China, but on humanity. 

 

I don't think China would be this foolish, having spent decades growing in influence and in standing as a global leader. 

 

It would be a foolish political move. 

 

However they refuse to accept the liberties Hong Kong is demanding. 

 

I just couldn't picture Hong Kong without those liberties. 

 

Without them, you pretty much remove that city's pulse.

[uhtred]

14 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Carrie Lam only shelved the bill. Never formally canceled it. 

 

She could easily reinstate the bill in less than 24 hours. This bill is thus still on the table even though she states that it is "dead". 

 

That's like you seeing your car warranty is expired on a car you just bought. Only for the dealership to type up a new warranty which is just "like a real one".

 

She underestimated the people of Hong Kong, as she doesn't represent them. She wasn't even voted in by them. This isn't even her first time doing this.

 

The fact she felt this would go down, showcases how out of touch that she is.

 

It's why in refusing to step down, she is getting full backing from Beijing as in doing so--is representing their resolve and voice. 

 

There are zero victories for the people. She didn't give up any ground, and her trying to end these protests was her stating there would be zero concessions and even condemned the protesters actions. 

 

The situation went from manageable, to out of control due to her piss poor handling of the situation. 

 

This is why the protesters demands are now unrealistic so there is no sign they will end anytime soon. 

 

The only realistic way, is plain clothes police heavily performing mass crack downs and arrests until most are too afraid to show up and protest. 

 

Due to volume of protesters, this would be ineffective. 

She could, but then the protests could start again. 

 

The problem now is that while all the reasons you give are true, I don't see the Chinese government bowing to this sort of pressure. 

 

You missed a couple of options for the government:

1) send in mass police after the protests to arrest people based on surveillance photos.  Probably wrong 20% of the time but... China

 

2).  Just send in the army, round up or shoot everyone and send the survivors to be re-trained in Xinjian (where rumor has it that a somewhere between 10s of thousands and a million Uhigers are being held in camps).

 

The Chinese government doesn't need to play by western rules.  They control their internal media an the outside world isn't in a position to do much. Heck President Trump might praise them for it - he likes authoritarian governments. 

 

 

[uhtred]

News from Hong Kong has been very quiet the last 24 hours. 

[Alawyn-Aebt]

China is very good at focusing on the long-haul, but they do have weaknesses. Hong Kong is one of their weaknesses. One China-Two Systems will come to a close, and one can be sure China wants it to come to a close sooner rather than latter. China is, at present, an economic time-bomb. Their economy is stable at present, but those factors concerning its economic stability could change quickly. I have a feeling me launching into an essay-long explanation of my reasoning would be excessive, but population factors, political factors, consumption factors, capital production factors, service-sector factors, and the good-reward but risky practice of a massive state-operated shadow banking system are all dangerous. If the economy of China collapses, there will be issues for the political leaders. Very much a case of, "As long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance." The Chinese Government is still dancing. As China needs to transition economically, and transition quickly for such a major central-command nation.

 

In the interests of the present Chinese leaders they need to both not rock the boat too much but retain firm control of the situation. They cannot back down unless under substantial pressure, which Western nations do not seem to be applying, yet they cannot risk a major rocking of the boat. China has been trying to undermine Hong Kong since they took control of it, it is dangerous in the long-run for the leadership of China to grant Hong Kong the privileges it presently grants. They have been chipping away slowly and now I fear they may have chipped away enough to make it modern-day Tienanmen Square without rocking the boat too much.

[SorryNotSorry]

19 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

That would leave a black eye on not only China, but on humanity. 

 

I don't think China would be this foolish, having spent decades growing in influence and in standing as a global leader. 

 

It would be a foolish political move. 

 

However they refuse to accept the liberties Hong Kong is demanding. 

 

I just couldn't picture Hong Kong without those liberties. 

 

Without them, you pretty much remove that city's pulse.

Like I said, one's an irresistible force, the other's an immovable object.

[Skycaptain]

Cathay Pacific have been told, by the Chinese government, to fire any employee who has taken part in the demonstrations. So far four have been sacked according to the published information. The company chairman has "resigned", but fall or pushed? 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SkyenAutowegCaptain said:

Cathay Pacific have been told, by the Chinese government, to fire any employee who has taken part in the demonstrations. So far four have been sacked according to the published information. The company chairman has "resigned", but fall or pushed? 

Wow. Crazy. 

 

This a rumor or something that actually was ordered? 

 

As my friends in Hong Kong were showing me pictures on light posts stating that martial law being declared was imminent. 

 

However, was hard to see where this was the case in actuality. 

 

Propaganda for the latter scenario from what I have seen.

[Guest]

So much for opening a business there o_O

 

It was a hot spot due to the non taxes that you technically paid for anyways into your property taxes for land that is government owned. 

 

Very thankful I went there earlier this year as I don't think the Hong Kong I will visit will ever be the same again, sadly.