Hong Kong will now be treated the same as mainland China | Hacker News Reader

Hong Kong will now be treated the same as mainland China

bbc.com

40 pointsmusashiway15 comments

I've been to HK several times for business, always had great conversations with people of HK and enjoyed their vigor for life, freedom and resiliency. They fought hard for a year. I would say the same for China as well, except when I asked people about what they feel about not being able to vote, not being able to criticize the government, I always got "That's something that we don't usually discuss." I asked anyways despite of the taboo, for personal curiosity and understanding China. Probably was rude of me, but I never pressed on.

It is even more chilling to look at the timeline of the fall of HK. In one year, HK changed from caution to complete dismantling of the law. It happened in 1 year long slow motion picture of protests, black umbrellas and tear gas dispersions. Surreal. If someone asked me about the future of HK in 2017, I would have said it is going to take 20 years from now, nothing to worry about it. They've got time.

Taiwan should be extremely cautious and start to prepare for defenses, war and stronger alliedship with its neighbors. Before you know, Taiwan will need to surrender to China in 2023.

Perhaps the most remarkable outcome of last year's protest was this: a government can lose all credibility and social support, and still use law and civil institutions to prop up the hated regime. Isn't this proof that democracy has a huge Achilles' heel?

The way modern democracy works is ultimately easy to corrupt:

- People's power is only exercised once every few years at election time. Weaknesses: Hacking the election process, stacking the field, disqualification of candidates, using the media to spread disinformation.

- Power is concentrated at the top. Once the election is stolen, the "representatives" in parliament and chief executive office can carry out bad agendas to pass evil laws and steal national reserves. There is no longer any effective people's power to restrain them.

- The expression of people's disagreement with the government is normally through free press, arts, civil society interaction, protests, strikes, and petitions. A bad government willing to use police force and ignore international questions can crush dissent.

- Even when the bad government went too far, like in HK, and caused thousands of political victims, it can hide behind the grand facade of "internal affairs". This is a loincloth that no longer has any effective meaning in today's connected, borderless world.

- finally, why are the citizens of a bad country not allowed to obtain help from a third country? The UN's mandate is to set up orderly diplomacy between states, but increasing non-state players also need a voice to be heard at the UN.

Your points are all well and good, but given HK has never been a proper democracy it's hardly an appropriate example. This mixup, willful or not, makes your post come off really weird in my eyes.

Hong Kong is not a democracy. People in democracies can make dramatic changes. Hong Kong was changed by their authoritarian overlords.

I am not even talking about democracy and its pros/cons. Just commenting about the situation and projecting the future of Taiwan.

I respectfully decline to respond.

Please don't start a flamewar about democracy vs. authoritarianism. It is a tiring, exhausting process where there would be no new information or insightful discussion that would emerge out of it.

> Isn't this proof that democracy has a huge Achilles' heel?

Hong Kong was democratic city in a non democratic country, not a country itself. They had no chance and that was clear as soon as China made the decision to push on.

Anybody who thought they could fight this was widly optimistic.

Still, you have to congratulate them for how they tried.

What exactly does the PRC have to do with democracy?

Terrifying time to be a Hong Kong resident.

Hopefully they can afford to leave for the UK.

Or Australia. Which just announced new visa rules and pathways to residency for Hong Kong people.

Gotta wonder how this would have played out if they had an equivalent to the 2nd amendment. HK citizens found in possession of a gun without a license (very difficult to get) could be fined HKD$100,000 and imprisoned for up to 14 years[1].

[1] https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-gun-laws-in-Hong-Kong?sha...

The protests would have been over sooner and would have had absolutely no public support?

You think the Chinese government wouldn’t just have loved shots being fired?

Orval Faubus (governor of Arkansas during the days after Brown v. Board of Education) was said to have asked, "What're you going to do? The Feds have got the bomb?". Obviously the PRC wouldn't use nuclear weapons on valuable property. Still, they wouldn't need to.

Even "well-regulated militia"s have a hard time against trained troops.

I really don't see armed revolt going well in any scenario.

Yea it failed spectacularly with Indian independence from the british and Gandhi's way of peaceful protests prevailed to the point where he became a role model for many others (Mandela, MLK, etc). There was an alternative violent mob in India seeking independence from the British which was unsuccessful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh

The HN headline for a BBC link excludes the key nation; this is about a change in U.S. trade policy towards Hong Kong:

> US President Donald Trump has signed an order to end preferential economic treatment for Hong Kong, after China enacted a new security law there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com