|
Bloodnose posted:Yeah, how you ask the question makes a huge difference. I'd wager a majority of the people who are actually camping out on the street would say they don't support "Occupy Central/佔中." And I can definitely imagine CCTV polling people like "do you support foreign forces causing chaos and instability while ruining Hong Kong's prosperity under the guise of promoting democracy? Y/N?" I don't think the pro-Beijing crowd really believe they have the support of the majority of HK because we can all universally agree that Beijing isn't going to bend over any time soon and that the current system is hosed. Even before 97, it's been pretty clear that Beijing was doing all it can to stack the system in their favour. I think you've hit the issue on the nose when you're saying that people don't realise they're just plain selfish or they openly don't give a poo poo about politics. I live mostly in Australia now only coming back here every couple of months for work and family and I strongly believe in Australia's system of compulsory voting and universal suffrage. Being able to have the same vote in choosing your leaders regardless of your wealth, sex and beliefs is an important driver for social equality. I'm here now and I have Australian colleagues on my team who genuinely don't understand why the students here are protesting despite seeing the benefits of being able to choose your own leaders. All they can see is the MTR running late or not being able to buy that LV bag or Cartier watch because of the large crowds of students. The Pan-Dems still win something like 50%+ of the vote even though they're under represented due to the way Legco works so I do believe the people of Hong Kong want democracy. I'm just not convinced that they want it enough if the process inconveniences them in any minor way. Like most people in the world, it's always going to be a case of 'gently caress you got mine.'
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 13:49 |
|
|
Kegslayer posted:I'm here now and I have Australian colleagues on my team who genuinely don't understand why the students here are protesting despite seeing the benefits of being able to choose your own leaders. First time I've ever heard of Tony Abbott being described as a benefit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
This guy is really dedicated to the police. Hell, he sang them a tribute rendition of You Raise Me Up with the lyrics changed to support the force.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:All they can see is the MTR running late or not being able to buy that LV bag or Cartier watch because of the large crowds of students. I do feel for the taxi and minibus drivers or the truckers, or the horribly underpaid government subcontractor cleaners, who have honestly lost money that they can scarcely afford to lose. It sucks. But they need to realize, and they need to be made to understand, and the movement needs the people more broadly to understand, that this movement isn't just about achieving democracy for the sake of democracy and a nebulous idea of freedom and what's right in the world. It's also about making the government accountable to the people in a way that will reduce the miserable inequality that has ravaged Hong Kong society for thirty loving years. Me and caberham were talking about this one night when it came out that if this movement fails, it's really no skin off our backs. We're in the class of people who benefit from the current system and we can both gently caress off to nice democratic western countries whenever we want. The people who really need change are those minibus drivers and cleaners, who have been scraping by on 12k a month for three decades without a raise as the Lees and Lis, Kwoks and Kuocs take more and more of the pie away from them, mostly because the government keeps handing it to them. And the students of course, who have no prospects beyond earning 12k for another 30 years, while the cheapest prison cell home you can buy will take you 20 to work up the down payment and 70 to pay off. If the movement can somehow reach these people and say "hey, if you want the roads reopened, don't complain to me. Complain to the government. Pressure them along with us. Tell them to back down because you want your roads back. Because you need to make a living. And while you're at it, you'll not only get your roads back, but you'll gain a government that's accountable to your interests. You'll have a government that owes less to the tycoons and more to the people. You'll have a better future for yourself, as well as your children." If the movement could make everyone understand that, these protests would be over tomorrow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79Pw2sfFBZI Hong Kong needs to get rid of these Uncle Toms who keep standing here and telling us what Beijing wants and what Beijing says. It needs a government that will go to Beijing and tell them what Hong Kongers say and what Hong Kongers need. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8QqZTuNRJY Hong Kong is small enough that these kinds of policy issues could easily be determined by referenda. But the stupid government is so afraid of its own damned people that they hold these fake consultations instead that always seem to come up with the idea that Hong Kongers always wanted to do what the bureaucrats planned to do to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
OK, since you understand its a distribution of wealth problem, why do you still want the HK's poor class to fight for democracy for you? Is it because protesting for high real estate price is not cool enough?
whatever7 fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Oct 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:OK, since you understand its a distribution of health problem, why do you still want the HK's poor class to fight for democracy for you? Is it because protesting for high real estate price is not cool enough? You do realise that they are not asking the poor to fight for democracy on behalf of the comfortable, but that they want the poor to be involved in the fight for democracy for everyone, right? I mean it's right there, the whole point is that people transcend boundaries of class to do what is better for everyone, rather than themselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:You do realise that they are not asking the poor to fight for democracy on behalf of the comfortable, but that they want the poor to be involved in the fight for democracy for everyone, right? I mean it's right there, the whole point is that people transcend boundaries of class to do what is better for everyone, rather than themselves. Because these two group of people (OC and poor class) are asking two completely different things. The poor class's enemy are the oligarch families. The poor's enemy is not CCP. HK doesn't pay any tax to Beijing. If HK's basic cost of living is too high, its 100% Hong Konger's own hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Because these two group of people (OC and poor class) are asking two completely different things. The poor class's enemy are the oligarch families. The poor's enemy is not CCP. HK doesn't pay any tax to Beijing. If HK's basic cost of living is too high, its 100% Hong Konger's own hosed up. The enemy of the people is anyone who would stand between them and their freedom. If the CCP won't let its people have freedom, than it is the enemy of its people. You have a point though, if Hong Kongers have a problem, and it's their own fault, what's to be done? The best solution, I would argue, is give them the tools to fix this, like democracy and accountable officials. Beijing has denied them this, and so Beijing is part of the people responsible for keeping things bad. If you are keeping things bad, you are responsible for their continued suffering. There's a great line from somewhere, but the principle applies here for the CCP you are so vehemently defending: "You are guilty of all the good you do not do." Simply put, doing nothing is just as bad as doing something actively bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Going back to the concept of sins of commission being as bad as sins of omission.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
I'd like to think it's fair to hold governments to higher standards than individuals, in this case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:I'd like to think it's fair to hold governments to higher standards than individuals, in this case. Why? Serious question. Governments have huge numbers of external and internal pressures. Governments, measured by the standards of people, are schizophrenic psychotics because of the natural and inevitable effects of having to actually make decisions that literally kill huge numbers of people on a regular basis (I'm not even talking about war but small things like arms control, laws, safety regulations, and whatnot) and the diffusion of responsibility that governments provide, as well as being made up of tons of people with their own agendas. The only pressure that the individual has that the government lacks is a higher power to make you behave by certain rules (the government, for individuals). They have more power, but even authoritarian governments have general issues with deploying their ability to influence the world as freely as a single person can.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
MJ12 posted:Why? Serious question. It's exactly for the reason that their track record is as schizophrenic psychotics that I feel we should hold governments to more rigorous standards. It's a question of responsibility, but also one where pretty much where ruling parties grow complacent and belligerent towards their citizens. China's a great example of this. Because people don't expect much, or hold their governments to any kind of responsible standard of behaviour, the CCP gets away with a lot more than it should. I'm not saying it's easy, or feasible, but I think the aim of holding governments accountable, and punishing them with massive unrest and dissent when they start making GBS threads on their citizens, is a just one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:The enemy of the people is anyone who would stand between them and their freedom. If the CCP won't let its people have freedom, than it is the enemy of its people. You know what, this is bullshit. HK government has more than enough freedom and tools to fix their own problem. At this point blaming any economic issue on Beijing is whining. I don't disagree on the lack of political freedom which I have never disputed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:You know what, this is bullshit. HK government has more than enough freedom and tools to fix their own problem. At this point blaming any economic issue on Beijing is whining. I don't disagree on the lack of political freedom which I have never disputed. If you're not allowed to elect anyone that Beijing hasn't given the OK to, you can't change anything without Beijing's consent. This includes fixing economic issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:It's exactly for the reason that their track record is as schizophrenic psychotics that I feel we should hold governments to more rigorous standards. It's a question of responsibility, but also one where pretty much where ruling parties grow complacent and belligerent towards their citizens. China's a great example of this. Because people don't expect much, or hold their governments to any kind of responsible standard of behaviour, the CCP gets away with a lot more than it should. Can you be more precise about what it 'gets away with'? The reason it can get away with a lack of democracy in Beijing is different from the reason it can get away with stamping all over the Falun Gong which is different from the reason it can get away with oppressing Uighurs is different from the reason it gets away with rampant Japanophobia in its citizenry and education system. They're not really the same cause and there's no real one-size fits-all protest for "stop being awful!" that works, or else we'd have no awful governments. quote:I'm not saying it's easy, or feasible, but I think the aim of holding governments accountable, and punishing them with massive unrest and dissent when they start making GBS threads on their citizens, is a just one. The thing is, in general, 'making GBS threads on your citizens' is something the citizens support just as much as they disagree with it. In general governments are particularly awful against minorities, not the majority of citizens, and this isn't something that is unique to dictatorships. Sure, Uighurs get their faces jackbooted a bunch, but you're not going to get some random guy from Beijing to care much about Uighurs when they have more pressing concerns close to home if you just tell them about it. I think you're focusing too much about the building rather than the building blocks, as it were. Changing the people changes the nature of the government, and changing the people is less risky than forcing them into an antagonistic relationship with the government. America, at least, has a very classic love-hate relationship with government and I'd argue its government is uniquely dysfunctional among first world nations because of that. (And it still oppresses minorities.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/n/2014/1015/c98649-8794824.htmlquote:With the approach of the busy Christmas exporting season, considering the obstinacy and the ill-will of the British and American "players" behind the unrest, Hong Kong is going to lose a lot more yet in this long drawn chaos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
MJ12 posted:Can you be more precise about what it 'gets away with'? The reason it can get away with a lack of democracy in Beijing is different from the reason it can get away with stamping all over the Falun Gong which is different from the reason it can get away with oppressing Uighurs is different from the reason it gets away with rampant Japanophobia in its citizenry and education system. I was aiming more for a generalised "no repercussions for doing things that contribute to suffering" mentality of "getting away with". MJ12 posted:I think you're focusing too much about the building rather than the building blocks, as it were. Changing the people changes the nature of the government, and changing the people is less risky than forcing them into an antagonistic relationship with the government. America, at least, has a very classic love-hate relationship with government and I'd argue its government is uniquely dysfunctional among first world nations because of that. (And it still oppresses minorities.) I'll certainly concede that you can't change a system without changing the participants in it, absolutely. I find we're stuck with a bit of a chicken-egg scenario: Which do (or can) you change first? How? Of course, not being able to change something shouldn't limit us from discussing these things, regardless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
American foreign business ventures; well known for their tendency to forgo profits in the name of supporting Democracy and humanitarianism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:I was aiming more for a generalised "no repercussions for doing things that contribute to suffering" mentality of "getting away with". Well okay. I'm not sure it has no real repercussions though. It's just that sometimes the things they do that contribute to suffering get positive repercussions! Which is the real issue here. A lot of the oppression is stuff that ends up being supported because, well, people can kind of be dicks who are willing to hurt themselves to make people they don't like suffer. quote:I'll certainly concede that you can't change a system without changing the participants in it, absolutely. I find we're stuck with a bit of a chicken-egg scenario: Which do (or can) you change first? How? I think the 'higher standards' are going to be very difficult to do outside of a generalized distrust of government (except when it jackboots people) which leads to the hilarious dysfunction of America. Because as I say above, a lot of oppression is surprisingly popular. People can be dicks to people in their out-group, and the solution to that is to convince them that they're in their in-group, for example. Otherwise, even legal protections are often insufficient because society will find ways around it, including the government itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:American foreign business ventures; well known for their tendency to forgo profits in the name of supporting Democracy and humanitarianism.  could not have dragged america into it better myself. content: http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/n/2014/1016/c90785-8795874.html soooo.. maybe some token progress? TehRedWheelbarrow fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Oct 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Because these two group of people (OC and poor class) are asking two completely different things. The poor class's enemy are the oligarch families. The poor's enemy is not CCP. HK doesn't pay any tax to Beijing. If HK's basic cost of living is too high, its 100% Hong Konger's own hosed up. If you don't see the impact of the Individual Visit Scheme and corrupt money laundering on Hong Kong's cost of living, which are both policies on the mainland side, then I don't know what to tell you. There's a reason why property prices have increased more than threefold since the IVS was implemented.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Bloodnose posted:If you don't see the impact of the Individual Visit Scheme and corrupt money laundering on Hong Kong's cost of living, which are both policies on the mainland side, then I don't know what to tell you. Why don't you just protest for individual visit then? Can you not tell Beijing couldn't care less about individual visit. Letting visitors going to HK and carry back 2 cans of baby formula (or whatever) basically is Beijing giving up the tariff revenue for all the goods carry back by the short term visitors. You guys have a very funny sense of economy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Did you guys know the Chinese used to have latrines that dumped into their pigpens? They fed their pigs their own poo poo. Some places in the countryside still do this. Just in case you were thinking of getting a hotdog in China.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Chickenwalker posted:Did you guys know the Chinese used to have latrines that dumped into their pigpens? They fed their pigs their own poo poo. Some places in the countryside still do this. Energy is energy 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Prude, chauvanist Westerners will take every opportunity to disparage 5000 years of civilization and recycling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Welp, Occupy Mong Kok just got dismantled in about 30 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Forget about the economic issues the bottom line is that it's natural for people to want to have a say in their own destiny. The economics exacerbate that and push people towards more desperate action, but I don't think there is anybody anywhere who doesn't want to have a say in their own futures.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:Welp, Occupy Mong Kok just got dismantled in about 30 minutes. It's really dumb that they keep wasting government resources on this. The guys clearing out these barricades today don't even look like police, they look like contractors. It's a really dumb waste when anybody can just walk into the street in any part of town and block traffic and set up a new camp. There's no point to clearing the camps as long as the grievances between the protesters and the government remain. Alternatively, the clearances could suggest that the government doesn't believe anything will come of the planned talks at all. If they did, they would expect the protesters to just pack up and go home.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Why don't you just protest for individual visit then? Can you not tell Beijing couldn't care less about individual visit. Letting visitors going to HK and carry back 2 cans of baby formula (or whatever) basically is Beijing giving up the tariff revenue for all the goods carry back by the short term visitors. Wow its amazing how little you understand the situation. Beijing is't just some monolithic entity, it is made up of people who have become tremendously wealthy basically by stealing from the Chinese people. Since 1997 that dirty money has been flowing info HK and the elites of HK and the CCP have conspired to make HK a friendly place for that money flow at the expense of the 8 million people who actually live in HK. The corruption of the ccp is driving the massive inflow of wealth to the HK SAR and driving the policies that keep HK citizens down like the property market designed for Hu Jintao's niece to launder money rather than for Caberham to move out of his mom's sky palace. The collusion of Chinese and HK government and economic elites, largely the same people due to plutocracy in HK and massive corruption in the PRC, is the root of the political problem. Beijing might not care, but the people with Zhongnanhai on their address do care because they and their families have personal fortunes being pampered by their cronies' policies in HK SAR.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Hong Kong's government and civil service is deteriorating. All the top heads are replaced by head nodders instead of quality people and from now on talented people will not want to work in the government. There won't be any long term planning or policy which works besides crap made up by Beijing.Arglebargle III posted:Wow its amazing how little you understand the situation. Beijing is't just some monolithic entity, it is made up of people who have become tremendously wealthy basically by stealing from the Chinese people. Since 1997 that dirty money has been flowing info HK and the elites of HK and the CCP have conspired to make HK a friendly place for that money flow at the expense of the 8 million people who actually live in HK. The corruption of the ccp is driving the massive inflow of wealth to the HK SAR and driving the policies that keep HK citizens down like the property market designed for Hu Jintao's niece to launder money rather than for Caberham to move out of his mom's sky palace. The collusion of Chinese and HK government and economic elites, largely the same people due to plutocracy in HK and massive corruption in the PRC, is the root of the political problem. Beijing might not care, but the people with Zhongnanhai on their address do care because they and their families have personal fortunes being pampered by their cronies' policies in HK SAR. The counter argument is that the country is still economically growing and that it's ok for a little bit of irregularities to show up. People submit to the authoritarian government because they believe that the government made the "Chinese Dream" happen. Without CCP's iron grip, China would be split up by foreign powers and stability for economic growth wouldn't exist. For the good of the country, CCP has to stay strong and be in control because Chinese people can't handle democracy. whatever7 posted:You know what, this is bullshit. HK government has more than enough freedom and tools to fix their own problem. At this point blaming any economic issue on Beijing is whining. I don't disagree on the lack of political freedom which I have never disputed. The HK legislative council consists of 70 seats. 35 seats are made up of industry based "functional constituencies" approved appointments by Beijing. Finance gets a few seats, Accounting gets a few seats, Medical gets a few seats etc. And those representatives can be part of a whole bunch of shell companies to create an illusion of consensus. So pretty much pro establishment. What kind of laws get turned down or adjusted? The minimum wage law, setting bank holidays to public holidays are a few glaring examples which affect everyone in HK. What kind of laws get approved or rubber stamped? The Beijing-HK Express rail line costing God knows how many bajillion dollars, development of the North East Territories into a shopping and residential zone for mainland tourists, any infrastructure project really. Unlike other parliamentary democracies, Hong Kong's lawmakers do not have any powers to introduce laws themselves. Only the government can submit laws to legco for approval. Well guess what happens when the seat system is already rigged and democrats just veto all day? Only laws favorable to the government are approved and people lose even more faith in the political system. You turn on the tv, and it's just democrats whining all the time and doing dumb theatrical poo poo. You can argue that the pro democrats can elect all 35 geographic constituencies and call it the day but remember that the pro establishment has a really really big political machine. The DAB makes 101,000,000 HKD last year and they use money to canvass votes, set up NGO's, arrange free bus tours, and brand themselves as the caretakers of Hong Kong who actually do stuff. The pro business groups side with the establishment because they are afraid of pro labour laws and like HK as is (most of the time). The pro establishment don't even need to canvass to win all the votes they can get, they just need 40% of the city's approval. So in general, the democrats normally win 27/35 geographic votes and 27/70 legco votes. Legco is not a representative tool of the people and is broken. The usual 100k protests in a day don't really work as well. That's why people sit in the loving streets because they can't come up with anything else. That's how desperate Hong Kong's situation is right now and most people who show up in the protests see the grim reality. The system is rigged for so many years and continue to be even more rigged.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 02:30
|
|
|
caberham posted:Chinese people can't handle democracy. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
It's true, the CCP said so
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:It's true, the CCP said so It's that or the usual, WELL LOOK AT THE OTHER DEVELOPING COUNTRIES WITH DEMOCRACIES! THEY ARE IN SHAMBLES! People can make lots of reasons defending CCP, it's weird. Even though everyone hates them
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
caberham posted:For the good of the country, CCP has to stay strong and be in control because Chinese people can't handle democracy. Funny how keeping the CCP strong is presented as a reason never to fix problems with the CCP.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
In that paragraph Caberham is describing "the counter argument" that CCP-supporters would express, not caberham's actual beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
Hong Kong's richest man Li Ka Shing told protesters to go home:quote:Li Ka-shing, Asia’s richest man, urged Hong Kong student pro-democracy protesters to return home, saying their message has been heard after a street occupation that has lasted almost three weeks. He normally doesn't talk much about politics but he really should shut the gently caress up. He bought land at bottom prices during 1967 riots. His son developed a tech park turned luxury residential flats called CyberPort during 2003 and made a killing. This man thrives off social unrest and reinforces the status quo for extra profit. Worst of all, HK property developers are moving in to the mainland and exporting the Hong Kong property bubble model to the rest of the country. You see it in all the large cities, malls of the same name, European designer stores, the same kind of restaurants, the same kind of jewelry stores. Where's my loving mountain dew and cheetos, all this development is so loving bull poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
The entire bottom floor of Citymall in Yuen Long is now Jewelry, Bag, Watch shops, and an Apple retailer. Upstairs are drug stores and cosmetic shops. They even closed the yogurt shop to open a jewelry shop. Place is hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Li Ka-shing dropped to 18th? He used to be like 4 or something. No wonder he's panicking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
So this morning parts of MongKok got cleared out and right now the remaining sections are under pressure. I'm heading there. God drat it, why do I always want to get myself involved all the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 13:49 |
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:In that paragraph Caberham is describing "the counter argument" that CCP-supporters would express, not caberham's actual beliefs. Ah, I was on my iPad at the airport and missed this. Was really surprising to me, thanks for clarifying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 06:55
|
|