Hong Kong pro-democracy Stand News shuts down after police raid, arrests(reuters.com)
reuters.com
Hong Kong pro-democracy Stand News shuts down after police raid, arrests
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/hong-kong-police-arrest-6-current-or-former-staff-online-media-outlet-2021-12-28/
73 comments
The big loophole is the provision for China's intervention in matters of "National Security".
This is exactly what has been used to craft very vague language that basically allows authorities to treat anything that goes counter to China's official line as a "threat to National Security".
It's so vague that self-censorship is now omnipresent in what was, just a few years ago, a bastion of freedom of speech in Asia. Newspaper and political figures are afraid of being targetted for their perceived dissent, and there is no real recourse, with pressure on judges to fall in line.
It is a farce of course, but there will be no international action. The British have no recourse to enforce the treaty. China will invade HK with tanks before they release their tightening grip on it, and the world will watch and do nothing of course.
It's not just democracy that is under threat in HK. There never was any to start with. It's plain freedom of speech that is under threat.
This is exactly what has been used to craft very vague language that basically allows authorities to treat anything that goes counter to China's official line as a "threat to National Security".
It's so vague that self-censorship is now omnipresent in what was, just a few years ago, a bastion of freedom of speech in Asia. Newspaper and political figures are afraid of being targetted for their perceived dissent, and there is no real recourse, with pressure on judges to fall in line.
It is a farce of course, but there will be no international action. The British have no recourse to enforce the treaty. China will invade HK with tanks before they release their tightening grip on it, and the world will watch and do nothing of course.
It's not just democracy that is under threat in HK. There never was any to start with. It's plain freedom of speech that is under threat.
Direct military action isn't the only recourse. It would be a pretty dangerous course of action.
There are a lot of Chinese investments in the UK that could be seized, as well as information warfare, travel restrictions, trade restrictions and Cold War style proxy wars.
Also things like giving HK BBO holders a route to British citizenship, which has high levels of support across the political spectrum and could probably be expanded further.
There are a lot of Chinese investments in the UK that could be seized, as well as information warfare, travel restrictions, trade restrictions and Cold War style proxy wars.
Also things like giving HK BBO holders a route to British citizenship, which has high levels of support across the political spectrum and could probably be expanded further.
UK has all means to successfully use force, and secure its gains - that's the military reality on the ground.
It has an amphibious force to land a division, more with requisitioned civilian vessels, and it has thermonuclear weapons to threaten chokepoints — more than enough to get the peninsula.
UK is not a small military. With mobilised territorials, and first line conscripts, it will be as much as 10-12 divisions ready on short order.
It has an amphibious force to land a division, more with requisitioned civilian vessels, and it has thermonuclear weapons to threaten chokepoints — more than enough to get the peninsula.
UK is not a small military. With mobilised territorials, and first line conscripts, it will be as much as 10-12 divisions ready on short order.
During the Yugoslavian war there was a stand-off between the Russians and some American troops around the Pristina airfield.
"The following morning, Sunday 13 June, Clark arrived at Jackson's HQ in Skopje. It was pointed out to Clark that the Russians were isolated and could not be reinforced by air and that Russian support had been a vital part of getting a peace agreement; antagonising them would only be counterproductive. Clark refused to accept this and continued to order that the runway be blocked, claiming to be supported by the NATO Secretary-General.[2] Jackson refused to enforce Clark's orders, reportedly telling him "I'm not going to start the Third World War for you."[5] When again directly ordered to block the runway, Jackson suggested that British tanks and armoured cars would be more suitable, in the knowledge that this would almost certainly be vetoed by the British government. Clark agreed."
What you are suggesting here is that the British would start World War III of their own accord and that Nato would follow them if they did so.
Not a chance.
"The following morning, Sunday 13 June, Clark arrived at Jackson's HQ in Skopje. It was pointed out to Clark that the Russians were isolated and could not be reinforced by air and that Russian support had been a vital part of getting a peace agreement; antagonising them would only be counterproductive. Clark refused to accept this and continued to order that the runway be blocked, claiming to be supported by the NATO Secretary-General.[2] Jackson refused to enforce Clark's orders, reportedly telling him "I'm not going to start the Third World War for you."[5] When again directly ordered to block the runway, Jackson suggested that British tanks and armoured cars would be more suitable, in the knowledge that this would almost certainly be vetoed by the British government. Clark agreed."
What you are suggesting here is that the British would start World War III of their own accord and that Nato would follow them if they did so.
Not a chance.
A trivia of this was that the British soldiers on the ground were led by future famous musician James Blunt. Headline is probably exaggerated, but:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/how-james-blu...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/how-james-blu...
This would be the worst course of action. The Chinese population is propagandized enough and won't hesitate to go to war head-on against the West.
It is an interesting question on how to deprogram the pro-communist party populous. All the brainwashed types I’ve ever spoken to believe the most insane things despite otherwise being intelligent people. E.g. Covid was made by the US to frame China. They also seem to conflate criticism of the CCP with Chinese people in general. I suspect many of the people behind the troll pro-China accounts commenting here are doing this (or they’re just paid). (Guys, CCP is anti-Chinese people. If you love China, don’t support this oppressive regime because one day they’ll come for you and your family.) How do we overdone this?
> All the brainwashed types I’ve ever spoken to believe the most insane things despite otherwise being intelligent people.
This is a general problem, not limited to China. A good percentage of the world population is ready to believe just about anything, no matter how outrageous. Witness the whole COVID denial movement as one example.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-people-fall-for-con...
This is a general problem, not limited to China. A good percentage of the world population is ready to believe just about anything, no matter how outrageous. Witness the whole COVID denial movement as one example.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-people-fall-for-con...
Try convince people vaccine is good/bad for them, you got a ticket for a ride already.
Accept it is a fact that people who you thought is unreasonable thought precisely the same about you.
Accept it is a fact that people who you thought is unreasonable thought precisely the same about you.
Why do people think that Chinese nationalism is a result of communist propaganda?
Why would it be wrong or unexpected for people to go to war if their country was attacked?
The Chinese have seen their country invaded and sold piecemeal and have been striving to 'fight back' and to stand on their own two feet. That reaction started before the communist party was even created and the party is just an expression of it.
Why would it be wrong or unexpected for people to go to war if their country was attacked?
The Chinese have seen their country invaded and sold piecemeal and have been striving to 'fight back' and to stand on their own two feet. That reaction started before the communist party was even created and the party is just an expression of it.
You can check with Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Philipines and other SA countries. I don't see Chile being hostile towards Spanish or Americans. A lot of these countries have in common though. They have different form of government. Perhaps, trying to be peaceful and forgiving would go a long way than trying to be mecha-ultra-vibranium-wolf-eagle?
And risk world war 3, for Hong Kong? Never gonna happen.
A land invasion by the Britain into China would be suicide in modern times lol. I have no doubt they are brave and talented soldiers and they would do some damage but in the end quantity has a quality all its own. NATO would not follow them into that madness.
I am all for it as long as you are in a front line. As far as I remember by your posts you are always itching for action. Do the world a favor. Put your money where your mouth is and sign up for active duty.
You must be joking?! UK to retake HK by force?
[deleted]
The Sino-British declaration was a way for the UK to save face and to sell the handing over of HK. It's naive or disingenuous to claim that China would do anything but whatever they wished to within a Chinese territory.
Ultimately HK will be fully reabsorbed back into the rest of China. That was always the plan and that was always going to happen. That said, HK is still separate so China is still broadly abiding by the declaration.
What the West needs to realize is that China is no longer a pushover that can be bullied at will. There is still a whiff of colonialism when Western media discuss HK.
Ultimately HK will be fully reabsorbed back into the rest of China. That was always the plan and that was always going to happen. That said, HK is still separate so China is still broadly abiding by the declaration.
What the West needs to realize is that China is no longer a pushover that can be bullied at will. There is still a whiff of colonialism when Western media discuss HK.
> The West needs to realize: China does not uphold its own treaties
Does any major power?
Does any major power?
Ask the Native Americans
Or these guys: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/world/asia/white-house-fa...
Or this: https://www.npr.org/2020/01/06/793895401/iraqi-parliament-vo...
Yet just because someone acts badly, doesn’t mean we the People should lower standards for the whole world.
Or these guys: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/world/asia/white-house-fa...
Or this: https://www.npr.org/2020/01/06/793895401/iraqi-parliament-vo...
Yet just because someone acts badly, doesn’t mean we the People should lower standards for the whole world.
Exactly how is this a breach of the agreement? Formally this is done by the HK government/police. Is a breach of the general principle of two systems, or is there a more specific clause that is breached?
champagnois(2)
15-20 years ago I naively thought that many of the Big Tech companies would stand against this type of censorship. Sadly I was wrong and didn’t understand how important it was to have access to the Chinese market and the importance of China’s low-cost manufacturing for these companies as well.
Today, the Big Tech companies might not actively support this kind of censorship, but they aren’t aggressively working against it as I thought they would 15 years ago.
Today, the Big Tech companies might not actively support this kind of censorship, but they aren’t aggressively working against it as I thought they would 15 years ago.
It's not just access to the Chinese consumer market; almost every Apple device is manufactured in China, too.
China has jurisdiction over the factories that make virtually everything that powers the US economy.
China has jurisdiction over the factories that make virtually everything that powers the US economy.
As time goes by it’s going to become clearer and clearer that selling out western manufacturing to exploit cheap Chinese labour - a project endorsed and embraced by both major parties in Washington - was the single worst decision in the history of liberal democracy. It’s hollowed out both middle America and the American middle class, and instead of bringing democracy to China as Neo-liberals predicted, it’s instead enabled and is leading to the hegemony of the largest and most powerful totalitarian regime mankind’s ever known.
Fifteen years ago big tech's bottom line depended on a lack of censorship. Now it depends on censoring in some areas. Treating companies as anything other than barely-restrained sociopaths is always a mistake.
Hong Kong is over. It is quickly becoming a real-estate grab for mainland Chinese. It won't be long before this incredibly rich and deeply unique culture will die off. It really is quite sad. I don't think there is anything that can be done. These people can fight for their rights, but they won't get any help and it will only ruin their lives. Western media will praise these fighters of justice, but will not do anything to help.
In Judo one uses the momentum of the aggressor against them, and I wonder if the west could do something analogous in this situation.
E.g. quietly accept the new oppression, but actively seek out and assist anyone in HK who wants to leave to gain access to high quality human capital and good will.
The resulting collapse of HK as it empties could be shown to everyone interacting with China that this could be their future.
E.g. quietly accept the new oppression, but actively seek out and assist anyone in HK who wants to leave to gain access to high quality human capital and good will.
The resulting collapse of HK as it empties could be shown to everyone interacting with China that this could be their future.
In the book “A blue print for revolution” they described how you can use a regimes paranoia against them.
The best way is through humor. A great example is the Winnie the Pooh meme. The meme wasn’t even that funny but the CCP’s reaction to it is absolutely hilarious. It made Winnie the Pooh an anti CCP symbol and it raised global awareness of the CCP’s authoritarianism.
Winnie the Pooh won’t overthrow the CCP by itself, but the process of revolution is slow and you have to play the long game.
The best way is through humor. A great example is the Winnie the Pooh meme. The meme wasn’t even that funny but the CCP’s reaction to it is absolutely hilarious. It made Winnie the Pooh an anti CCP symbol and it raised global awareness of the CCP’s authoritarianism.
Winnie the Pooh won’t overthrow the CCP by itself, but the process of revolution is slow and you have to play the long game.
I don't like the "pro democrcay" thing... Isn't it more like "pro occidental/western" countries versus "pro chinese/urss/oriental" countries ?
When used that way, democracy sounds like an absolutely good thing which it is not; it's just a way to organize power...
When used that way, democracy sounds like an absolutely good thing which it is not; it's just a way to organize power...
A country can either have a democracy or a dictatorship. Unless you know a 3rd option, I would love to hear it.
And as history has proven many times, dictatorships never end well.
And as history has proven many times, dictatorships never end well.
"Xism is not good or bad; it's just a way to organize power". Excuse me I gotta puke.
Do you have a better alternative?
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time".
Democracy is one of the few things to be an absolute good thing. It have many flaws, but still I would't live in a dictatorship like the one established by URSS or Chinese Communist Party, where you could easily disappear if you say something troublesome for people in power. This is not just power organization, it's plain survival.
Democracy is one of the few things to be an absolute good thing. It have many flaws, but still I would't live in a dictatorship like the one established by URSS or Chinese Communist Party, where you could easily disappear if you say something troublesome for people in power. This is not just power organization, it's plain survival.
The West needs to realize Hong Kong is a part of China, that was leased to the UK for 100 years
The West has no more say in it than China has a say in Catalonia or Scotland independence, Texas or California secession. Or their governing models
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handover_of_Hong_Kong
To the bigger question, since world border defining wars have become an historic unacceptable concept, how much power should be given to smaller subgroups into shaping their own, and the larger group, policy and borders
The West has no more say in it than China has a say in Catalonia or Scotland independence, Texas or California secession. Or their governing models
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handover_of_Hong_Kong
To the bigger question, since world border defining wars have become an historic unacceptable concept, how much power should be given to smaller subgroups into shaping their own, and the larger group, policy and borders
What you say applies to the Kowloon New Territories north of Boundary Street and the outlying islands (and it wasn't 100 but 99 years but I digress).[1] It does not apply to Kowloon south of Boundary Street and Victoria / Hong Kong Island.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Territories
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Territories
>"The West needs to realize: China does not uphold its own treaties"
"The West" had long realized that the might makes right. Once country has achieve certain level of power the only thing that makes those to adhere to some treaty is their mutual willingness. If country does not see any it can and will ignore it. There is no abstract enforcer up above that can make parties of that level stick to the agreement.
"The West" had long realized that the might makes right. Once country has achieve certain level of power the only thing that makes those to adhere to some treaty is their mutual willingness. If country does not see any it can and will ignore it. There is no abstract enforcer up above that can make parties of that level stick to the agreement.
Russia withdraws from Open Skies Treaty after US withdrawal
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/15/russia-withdraws-fr...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/15/russia-withdraws-fr...
hans789(6)
> Hong Kong would maintain its existing governing and economic systems separate from that of mainland China under the principle of "one country, two systems".
The West needs to realize: China does not uphold its own treaties.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration