|
|
You've got to love all the irony of all these Americans and Europeans throwing around accusations that the Chinese government has committed atrocities. You know what they say about people in glass houses.
|
Translation from Blizzard's official weibo:
we would like to express our ‘strong anger and condemnation’ at what happened at the Hearthstone Asia Tournament last weekend. We also strongly object to the spreading of personal political beliefs during any contests. The contestant involved (Blitzchung) will be banned from participating in any contests, and the broadcasters involved will also be immediately stopped from working (under Blizzard). Meanwhile, we will, as always, be determined to defend the pride of the country (China).
https://www.reddit.com/r/Blizzard/comments/dfju24/blizzard_condemning_blitzchung_on_its_offical/
I actually feel a little bit sick.
|
On October 10 2019 04:19 whitehat511 wrote:
You've got to love all the irony of all these Americans and Europeans throwing around accusations that the Chinese government has committed atrocities. You know what they say about people in glass houses.
You do know that we can condemn our government's atrocities and the Chinese government's atrocities too, right? Those aren't mutually exclusive positions.
|
On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system... .... They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement... ....
I went to school with several guys from Hong Kong whose families decided that 1997 agreement was BS. Their families GTFO-ed to Canada as fast as they could.
|
On October 10 2019 03:26 Meta wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese? It's like I'm here to express the thoughts of an ordinary Chinese. Indeed, I feel sad that I didn't learn English well, because what I lost is not a good paper, but an opportunity to communicate with others. Not only Americans can define the world. The pioneers of socialism and communism are Germans and French. Formerly President Roosevelt of the United States was also criticized for socialism or communism. But think about Chinese history, the current development of China, and the past workers of Britain. Some ideological conflicts are unavoidable, especially under the propaganda of some western media, they usually distort the report in order to satisfy their own interests. China does not do very well in many places, but it does not want to do so. No Chinese wants his country to be like India with the same population. (I do not mean to discriminate. Most Chinese want to live a good life first and guarantee everyone the same rights, wealth, rights and status.) In China, it is still possible to elect people who have been upgraded from the grassroots level through examinations and votes, while officials at the grassroots level are also elected. In China, former leaders were even born to poor peasants rather than a billion-dollar owner or equally wealthy political family. Both father and son are presidents. Western media believe that China is undemocratic and not free, and the Chinese believe that they are free and democratic. This seems to be a disgusting tactic. I was disappointed with many of the statements, especially those of the distorted Sixth Fourth Movement (my father was one of the participants, but later they built China into the second largest country in the world), and those who believed that the Hong Kong police should not react to any of the protestors'actions. When commenting, consider that China has 1.4 billion people. This country can not change because of the ideas of more than a dozen people, thousands of people and tens of thousands of people. The most important thing is to ensure that more than a billion people, like other Westerners, can live with wealth and dignity on this planet. I wonder what this guy thinks about the hundreds of students that were murdered at Tienanmen Square in 1989.
And I wonder what you think about the Trail of Tears?
|
On October 10 2019 04:22 whitehat511 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 03:26 Meta wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese? It's like I'm here to express the thoughts of an ordinary Chinese. Indeed, I feel sad that I didn't learn English well, because what I lost is not a good paper, but an opportunity to communicate with others. Not only Americans can define the world. The pioneers of socialism and communism are Germans and French. Formerly President Roosevelt of the United States was also criticized for socialism or communism. But think about Chinese history, the current development of China, and the past workers of Britain. Some ideological conflicts are unavoidable, especially under the propaganda of some western media, they usually distort the report in order to satisfy their own interests. China does not do very well in many places, but it does not want to do so. No Chinese wants his country to be like India with the same population. (I do not mean to discriminate. Most Chinese want to live a good life first and guarantee everyone the same rights, wealth, rights and status.) In China, it is still possible to elect people who have been upgraded from the grassroots level through examinations and votes, while officials at the grassroots level are also elected. In China, former leaders were even born to poor peasants rather than a billion-dollar owner or equally wealthy political family. Both father and son are presidents. Western media believe that China is undemocratic and not free, and the Chinese believe that they are free and democratic. This seems to be a disgusting tactic. I was disappointed with many of the statements, especially those of the distorted Sixth Fourth Movement (my father was one of the participants, but later they built China into the second largest country in the world), and those who believed that the Hong Kong police should not react to any of the protestors'actions. When commenting, consider that China has 1.4 billion people. This country can not change because of the ideas of more than a dozen people, thousands of people and tens of thousands of people. The most important thing is to ensure that more than a billion people, like other Westerners, can live with wealth and dignity on this planet. I wonder what this guy thinks about the hundreds of students that were murdered at Tienanmen Square in 1989. And I wonder what you think about the Trail of Tears?
The Trail of Tears is universally taught as an abhorrent action by the United States government here in the US. It is not celebrated. Its brutal events are condemned by the people and by society. So now tell us what you think about Tienanmen Square in 1989.
|
|
|
On October 10 2019 04:22 whitehat511 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 03:26 Meta wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese? It's like I'm here to express the thoughts of an ordinary Chinese. Indeed, I feel sad that I didn't learn English well, because what I lost is not a good paper, but an opportunity to communicate with others. Not only Americans can define the world. The pioneers of socialism and communism are Germans and French. Formerly President Roosevelt of the United States was also criticized for socialism or communism. But think about Chinese history, the current development of China, and the past workers of Britain. Some ideological conflicts are unavoidable, especially under the propaganda of some western media, they usually distort the report in order to satisfy their own interests. China does not do very well in many places, but it does not want to do so. No Chinese wants his country to be like India with the same population. (I do not mean to discriminate. Most Chinese want to live a good life first and guarantee everyone the same rights, wealth, rights and status.) In China, it is still possible to elect people who have been upgraded from the grassroots level through examinations and votes, while officials at the grassroots level are also elected. In China, former leaders were even born to poor peasants rather than a billion-dollar owner or equally wealthy political family. Both father and son are presidents. Western media believe that China is undemocratic and not free, and the Chinese believe that they are free and democratic. This seems to be a disgusting tactic. I was disappointed with many of the statements, especially those of the distorted Sixth Fourth Movement (my father was one of the participants, but later they built China into the second largest country in the world), and those who believed that the Hong Kong police should not react to any of the protestors'actions. When commenting, consider that China has 1.4 billion people. This country can not change because of the ideas of more than a dozen people, thousands of people and tens of thousands of people. The most important thing is to ensure that more than a billion people, like other Westerners, can live with wealth and dignity on this planet. I wonder what this guy thinks about the hundreds of students that were murdered at Tienanmen Square in 1989. And I wonder what you think about the Trail of Tears?
Can't speak for everyone, but I think it was horrible and the government was extremely shitty for that. But that's the thing though, we learned about these atrocities, the pox blankets, the genocide our people committed on the natives, the internment camp we put the Japanese in during WW2 and many more of our US's shitty past in school. It's taught as wrong. China can't even seem to agree whether or not Tiananmen Square footages were real or if it was from an unreleased movie.
|
On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 02:46 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 02:13 Excludos wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese?. I hope you understand that while this is an interesting conversation, your views are inherently skewed by the propaganda you've been fed every day. We know how the Chinese media works (and it's not just China btw. America has much of the same problems, and most of us here do recognise it as such). You have already made made several false statements and made comparisons that does not make sense (Comparing China to England because England has a mock Queen for instance). As such everything you say will be taken with the biggest grain of salt imaginable I do think it's interesting what the ordinary Chinese thinks, but it truthfully doesn't matter. You don't get to commit human rights violations and consider it ok because "The ordinary Chinese thinks so". Guess who doesn't think it's ok? Hong Kong and its citizens. Very interesting, wrong comparison I just want to show that some forms of democracy and freedom will change, just as discrimination against blacks is definitely not one of freedom of speech in the United States. Although Martin Luther King was killed. Similarly, China's democracy and freedom are not so much the same as the United States, because the so-called autocracy and dictator seem to be like the Queen of England and the Emperor of Japan. And when you talk about it, we should think about Hong Kong and its citizens. I am very eager to ask, do you know how many Hong Kong people participated in this Chinese National Day celebration? Including young people, college students, government officials, police, famous stars, and ordinary people. Do you think we should think about Hong Kong people, then do you know how many people in Hong Kong support the police parade? The police in Hong Kong, the government in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, so many condemns the violent protesters, and the ordinary people, shouting at the bbc reporters, this is Hong Kong, China, the taxi driver who supports the law revision, isn't it Hong Kong? What you see seems to be the collective public opinion of Hong Kong, actually because those people have amplified this reaction through radical methods. Think about it, if it is really a problem of the society and the Chinese government, the Hong Kong government, the ordinary people of Hong Kong (Is it not ordinary people and the grassroots officials?) Are these attitudes still not showing anything? Think about how good the credibility of the Hong Kong government is, and the same group of people are not trusted now. The vast majority of protesters on the streets of Hong Kong are college students, young people, and young unemployed people. Is this a normal antibody or a collective carnival of young people, like an American youth who likes to take drugs? China has experienced two very painful students, and the young people have dominated the political violent protests, almost smashing the entire country. However, these protests did not make more than a billion people ignorant, and the ordinary Chinese who were at a loss knew how to live well. The Chinese have supported all the legal acts of Hong Kong and have wanted to split China and Hong Kong for many years. There is nothing too fierce. We support Hong Kong, support democracy, support freedom, and even to some extent, support universal suffrage in Hong Kong. However, what you have to understand is what is the slogan of Hong Kong's independence and violence? This is what the Hong Kong player and the NBA rocket manager said. This is also why the Chinese currently call it a terrorist, because terrorists in the Middle East often call themselves freedom fighters. If Hong Kong, China, is not dominated by the majority of Chinese people and by the majority of Hong Kong people, then who will decide? Can Texas and California declare independence today and expel all blacks and people from other states？ So，why China give up HK？and Violent protestors demanding the expulsion of mainlanders？ In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons。 (you can find it in many Hong Kong movies，In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons (you can find out from many Hong Kong movies, including asking mainlanders if they have seen Apple phones made in China, and mocking the mainland for lack of high-rise power and modern technology, the same thing is still happening to Chinese people in Europe, the United States, etc.)It used to be Korea and Japan.). You bring up valid points, but what you seem to miss out on is how this all started in the first place. There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system, a clear infringement of the agreement. Since China agreed that HK could remain autonomous and have authority over their own government, then why is China screening candidates for HK's Chief Executive? This started around 2014 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests), and afterwards the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat this declaration as void. You say China support HK's democracy, then why not let the HK'ers elect who they want, instead of screening who they want the HK people to elect? The HK'ers are upset because they were promised 50 years, but China is trying to impose only 22 years into the treaty. Does this mean China's words aren't even worth 50% of what they put on papers? So flash forward to the current protest, how did it start? Well, China wanted to pass an extradite bill in HK, another infringement of the current agreement. HK'ers did not want this law, which they are within their own rights to deny since China agreed it will not impose, yet China still adamantly demand that this law be passed. If you look over at the 5 demands HK is currently protesting for, they are extremely reasonable given that China started this by breaking their words. 1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019. 2. Inquiry into police brutality - Also valid, the people would like to investigate police's conduct. The police are meant to protect the people, not beat them up when they are protesting. 3. Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters - This started because China broke its words, so the people were upset and protested. Had China not broke its words, this wouldn't have happened. The people marched because China lied, not because they randomly rioted out of no where. This point can be a case by case basis with some standards since I understand not all protesters are good, some can be destructive, and we should judge them fairly. 4. Amnesty for arrested protesters - Same as point 3. 5. Dual universal suffrage, for both their Legislative and Chief Executive - Again, China signed an agreement that allows the HK'ers to manage their own government. If they are true to their words, let the HK'ers decide how they want their government to be ran. My main point is that HK originally didn't protest for independence. This was NOT how the protest started. They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement. It is only escalating because instead of admitting they were in the wrong, China cracked down on the HK citizens. HK citizens now are entertaining independence because they realized Mainland China does not keep its word. To use a Starcraft analogy, this is similar to Mengsk, Reynor, and Kerrigan working together, yet Mengsk abandoned Kerrigan on that one planet (forgot the name). When Reynor became rightfully pissed for what Mengsk did and turned on him, Mengsk called Reynor a terrorist. China is pulling a Mengsk right now. If China is true to its words. Come back in 28 years and let the HK'ers do what they want to do with their government for now.
1. China hopes to sign extradition regulations with Hong Kong (extending criminal offenders because there have been criminals who have committed murder and rape in mainland China and have been cast into Hong Kong. The Chinese government and other countries such as the United States also have extradition regulations, and the Hong Kong government has other regions. The state has extradition regulations). Why is it rejected? This is not because mainland China requires the implementation of laws in Hong Kong, but hopes to sign regulations with Hong Kong. This is actually very strange. It is actually an agreement between a country and a country within a country.
2. I hope that you can read the Sino-British Joint Declaration carefully. He has not given the British any rights after this. You can blame the Chinese government, but because of this, I think other countries are involved. This is still the Beijing government of China and the Hong Kong region. problem.
In addition, the Chinese government's commitment is to keep Hong Kong unchanged for 50 years. I don't know how you understand it. I have two thoughts. One is to continue Hong Kong before the colony in 1997, and the second is to follow the basic law after 1997. Hong Kong. Before 1997, Hong Kong was a colony. Hong Kong people did not even have British nationality. The leaders of Hong Kong were all British whites. They were also British nationals, both the first and the second, including the Hong Kong Constitution, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. During the British colonial period, there was no universal suffrage. I don't know where Hong Kong's universal suffrage comes from. This violates the Constitution of Hong Kong - the Basic Law. In addition, without universal suffrage, it cannot mean that they have no democracy. Hong Kong's politics is closer to the Swiss political system, and each leader does not adopt the Swiss rotation system.
Keeping it for 50 years, isn't it just that there is no universal suffrage? Once the universal suffrage is not a violation of the China Commitment and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and the Hong Kong Basic Law? Although I think that Hong Kong has been harming itself for 50 years, the development of first-tier cities in China is much better than that of Hong Kong. For me, I have lived in Shanghai for a long time, and Hong Kong is like a rural area. Of course, I am not actually, most of them. This is also true in Europe, and I have a stark contrast to the views of Japanese cities.
3. The Chinese government of Beijing and all Chinese have never opposed liberal democracy and legal protests. However, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese were sensitive to the protests because we realized that such collective behavior would often evolve into violence. For example, China’s previous protests, the US bombing of the Yugoslav embassy, and Japan’s activities to commemorate the death of soldiers in World War II. This kind of parade in China has produced extreme violence, as happened in Hong Kong.
If you don't trust the Chinese and don't trust the Chinese government, don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised, don't believe it? Don't you believe in Western media? Go look for their evaluation of the Hong Kong police and the Hong Kong government in history.
4. Special criminals are not advisable. Think about the United States, but the country with the highest proportion of prison population. Of course, I don't want China to become the United States.
But think about it. There are many British nationals in the Hong Kong police, white people (maybe I think you still don't believe in the yellow race, but I don't think it is racist).
Hong Kong's judicial system, so the judges are British nationality, Australian nationality, 90% of judges are white.
You should trust them, not a group of unemployed people, a group of young people who have taken a poison and drink alcohol and have sex on the roadside (although you call it freedom, but often these are blocked by neutral media).
Opposite to these violent protesters are peaceful protesters who have long since left the protest, and supporters who support the police, support the Hong Kong government, and support the Chinese government.
They are more numerous, but unfortunately they need to work and they do not use violence. So it seems to be weak, and because many of them are older people (you should have heard of Hong Kong's aging), they are not very familiar with the Internet, and the Internet is now a Z-age person (in fact, 1995-2000) Born person).
5. Why did they protest?
Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people.
Hong Kong knows that Hong Kong is bought by Li Ka-shing, and that the Chinese government cannot interfere and support socialism. Everyone has food and housing.
Later, the economic decline of Western society, if you are a European, there should be experience, the US economy has recently grown, but it is also uncomfortable. After the 2008 financial turmoil, it has been declining for a long time.
China is getting better and better. When China gets better, when they find that the Chinese who once earned 200 yuan a month have the same income and even more money, they find that they can’t be like the colonial era. Next, when it came to China, it became a millionaire, went to bed with more girls, and bought more luxurious cosmetics.
So I hope to return to the colonial era and pass violence. (Their slogan is what you saw in this Hong Kong player and the NBA), by robbing mobile phone stores, selling them online, by raising the flags of the United States and the United Kingdom.
I saw Swedes, and I think I should understand why, academically, the Sedgmo syndrome.
Perhaps Westerners believe that the colonial era is very glorious.
|
On October 10 2019 04:35 chuchuchu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:On October 10 2019 02:46 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 02:13 Excludos wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese?. I hope you understand that while this is an interesting conversation, your views are inherently skewed by the propaganda you've been fed every day. We know how the Chinese media works (and it's not just China btw. America has much of the same problems, and most of us here do recognise it as such). You have already made made several false statements and made comparisons that does not make sense (Comparing China to England because England has a mock Queen for instance). As such everything you say will be taken with the biggest grain of salt imaginable I do think it's interesting what the ordinary Chinese thinks, but it truthfully doesn't matter. You don't get to commit human rights violations and consider it ok because "The ordinary Chinese thinks so". Guess who doesn't think it's ok? Hong Kong and its citizens. Very interesting, wrong comparison I just want to show that some forms of democracy and freedom will change, just as discrimination against blacks is definitely not one of freedom of speech in the United States. Although Martin Luther King was killed. Similarly, China's democracy and freedom are not so much the same as the United States, because the so-called autocracy and dictator seem to be like the Queen of England and the Emperor of Japan. And when you talk about it, we should think about Hong Kong and its citizens. I am very eager to ask, do you know how many Hong Kong people participated in this Chinese National Day celebration? Including young people, college students, government officials, police, famous stars, and ordinary people. Do you think we should think about Hong Kong people, then do you know how many people in Hong Kong support the police parade? The police in Hong Kong, the government in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, so many condemns the violent protesters, and the ordinary people, shouting at the bbc reporters, this is Hong Kong, China, the taxi driver who supports the law revision, isn't it Hong Kong? What you see seems to be the collective public opinion of Hong Kong, actually because those people have amplified this reaction through radical methods. Think about it, if it is really a problem of the society and the Chinese government, the Hong Kong government, the ordinary people of Hong Kong (Is it not ordinary people and the grassroots officials?) Are these attitudes still not showing anything? Think about how good the credibility of the Hong Kong government is, and the same group of people are not trusted now. The vast majority of protesters on the streets of Hong Kong are college students, young people, and young unemployed people. Is this a normal antibody or a collective carnival of young people, like an American youth who likes to take drugs? China has experienced two very painful students, and the young people have dominated the political violent protests, almost smashing the entire country. However, these protests did not make more than a billion people ignorant, and the ordinary Chinese who were at a loss knew how to live well. The Chinese have supported all the legal acts of Hong Kong and have wanted to split China and Hong Kong for many years. There is nothing too fierce. We support Hong Kong, support democracy, support freedom, and even to some extent, support universal suffrage in Hong Kong. However, what you have to understand is what is the slogan of Hong Kong's independence and violence? This is what the Hong Kong player and the NBA rocket manager said. This is also why the Chinese currently call it a terrorist, because terrorists in the Middle East often call themselves freedom fighters. If Hong Kong, China, is not dominated by the majority of Chinese people and by the majority of Hong Kong people, then who will decide? Can Texas and California declare independence today and expel all blacks and people from other states？ So，why China give up HK？and Violent protestors demanding the expulsion of mainlanders？ In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons。 (you can find it in many Hong Kong movies，In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons (you can find out from many Hong Kong movies, including asking mainlanders if they have seen Apple phones made in China, and mocking the mainland for lack of high-rise power and modern technology, the same thing is still happening to Chinese people in Europe, the United States, etc.)It used to be Korea and Japan.). You bring up valid points, but what you seem to miss out on is how this all started in the first place. There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system, a clear infringement of the agreement. Since China agreed that HK could remain autonomous and have authority over their own government, then why is China screening candidates for HK's Chief Executive? This started around 2014 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests), and afterwards the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat this declaration as void. You say China support HK's democracy, then why not let the HK'ers elect who they want, instead of screening who they want the HK people to elect? The HK'ers are upset because they were promised 50 years, but China is trying to impose only 22 years into the treaty. Does this mean China's words aren't even worth 50% of what they put on papers? So flash forward to the current protest, how did it start? Well, China wanted to pass an extradite bill in HK, another infringement of the current agreement. HK'ers did not want this law, which they are within their own rights to deny since China agreed it will not impose, yet China still adamantly demand that this law be passed. If you look over at the 5 demands HK is currently protesting for, they are extremely reasonable given that China started this by breaking their words. 1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019. 2. Inquiry into police brutality - Also valid, the people would like to investigate police's conduct. The police are meant to protect the people, not beat them up when they are protesting. 3. Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters - This started because China broke its words, so the people were upset and protested. Had China not broke its words, this wouldn't have happened. The people marched because China lied, not because they randomly rioted out of no where. This point can be a case by case basis with some standards since I understand not all protesters are good, some can be destructive, and we should judge them fairly. 4. Amnesty for arrested protesters - Same as point 3. 5. Dual universal suffrage, for both their Legislative and Chief Executive - Again, China signed an agreement that allows the HK'ers to manage their own government. If they are true to their words, let the HK'ers decide how they want their government to be ran. My main point is that HK originally didn't protest for independence. This was NOT how the protest started. They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement. It is only escalating because instead of admitting they were in the wrong, China cracked down on the HK citizens. HK citizens now are entertaining independence because they realized Mainland China does not keep its word. To use a Starcraft analogy, this is similar to Mengsk, Reynor, and Kerrigan working together, yet Mengsk abandoned Kerrigan on that one planet (forgot the name). When Reynor became rightfully pissed for what Mengsk did and turned on him, Mengsk called Reynor a terrorist. China is pulling a Mengsk right now. If China is true to its words. Come back in 28 years and let the HK'ers do what they want to do with their government for now. 1. China hopes to sign extradition regulations with Hong Kong (extending criminal offenders because there have been criminals who have committed murder and rape in mainland China and have been cast into Hong Kong. The Chinese government and other countries such as the United States also have extradition regulations, and the Hong Kong government has other regions. The state has extradition regulations). Why is it rejected? This is not because mainland China requires the implementation of laws in Hong Kong, but hopes to sign regulations with Hong Kong. This is actually very strange. It is actually an agreement between a country and a country within a country. 2. I hope that you can read the Sino-British Joint Declaration carefully. He has not given the British any rights after this. You can blame the Chinese government, but because of this, I think other countries are involved. This is still the Beijing government of China and the Hong Kong region. problem. In addition, the Chinese government's commitment is to keep Hong Kong unchanged for 50 years. I don't know how you understand it. I have two thoughts. One is to continue Hong Kong before the colony in 1997, and the second is to follow the basic law after 1997. Hong Kong. Before 1997, Hong Kong was a colony. Hong Kong people did not even have British nationality. The leaders of Hong Kong were all British whites. They were also British nationals, both the first and the second, including the Hong Kong Constitution, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. During the British colonial period, there was no universal suffrage. I don't know where Hong Kong's universal suffrage comes from. This violates the Constitution of Hong Kong - the Basic Law. In addition, without universal suffrage, it cannot mean that they have no democracy. Hong Kong's politics is closer to the Swiss political system, and each leader does not adopt the Swiss rotation system. Keeping it for 50 years, isn't it just that there is no universal suffrage? Once the universal suffrage is not a violation of the China Commitment and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and the Hong Kong Basic Law? Although I think that Hong Kong has been harming itself for 50 years, the development of first-tier cities in China is much better than that of Hong Kong. For me, I have lived in Shanghai for a long time, and Hong Kong is like a rural area. Of course, I am not actually, most of them. This is also true in Europe, and I have a stark contrast to the views of Japanese cities. 3. The Chinese government of Beijing and all Chinese have never opposed liberal democracy and legal protests. However, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese were sensitive to the protests because we realized that such collective behavior would often evolve into violence. For example, China’s previous protests, the US bombing of the Yugoslav embassy, and Japan’s activities to commemorate the death of soldiers in World War II. This kind of parade in China has produced extreme violence, as happened in Hong Kong. If you don't trust the Chinese and don't trust the Chinese government, don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised, don't believe it? Don't you believe in Western media? Go look for their evaluation of the Hong Kong police and the Hong Kong government in history. 4. Special criminals are not advisable. Think about the United States, but the country with the highest proportion of prison population. Of course, I don't want China to become the United States. But think about it. There are many British nationals in the Hong Kong police, white people (maybe I think you still don't believe in the yellow race, but I don't think it is racist). Hong Kong's judicial system, so the judges are British nationality, Australian nationality, 90% of judges are white. You should trust them, not a group of unemployed people, a group of young people who have taken a poison and drink alcohol and have sex on the roadside (although you call it freedom, but often these are blocked by neutral media). Opposite to these violent protesters are peaceful protesters who have long since left the protest, and supporters who support the police, support the Hong Kong government, and support the Chinese government. They are more numerous, but unfortunately they need to work and they do not use violence. So it seems to be weak, and because many of them are older people (you should have heard of Hong Kong's aging), they are not very familiar with the Internet, and the Internet is now a Z-age person (in fact, 1995-2000) Born person). 5. Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people. Hong Kong knows that Hong Kong is bought by Li Ka-shing, and that the Chinese government cannot interfere and support socialism. Everyone has food and housing. Later, the economic decline of Western society, if you are a European, there should be experience, the US economy has recently grown, but it is also uncomfortable. After the 2008 financial turmoil, it has been declining for a long time. China is getting better and better. When China gets better, when they find that the Chinese who once earned 200 yuan a month have the same income and even more money, they find that they can’t be like the colonial era. Next, when it came to China, it became a millionaire, went to bed with more girls, and bought more luxurious cosmetics. So I hope to return to the colonial era and pass violence. (Their slogan is what you saw in this Hong Kong player and the NBA), by robbing mobile phone stores, selling them online, by raising the flags of the United States and the United Kingdom. I saw Swedes, and I think I should understand why, academically, the Sedgmo syndrome. Perhaps Westerners believe that the colonial era is very glorious.
"don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised"
"Why did they protest?
Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people."
This is trolling for sure... I can hardly find any other explanations.
I can't take this seriously. This dude probably just heard about Blizzard Hearthstone news today and read some discussion about Hong Kong on Weibo and decided to make a post.
|
Northern Ireland26152 Posts
On October 10 2019 04:19 whitehat511 wrote:
You've got to love all the irony of all these Americans and Europeans throwing around accusations that the Chinese government has committed atrocities. You know what they say about people in glass houses.
What are you talking about? I was young yes but I was at the Iraq war protests back in the day, across the West these constituted some of the biggest mass protests that have ever occurred:
In my native land nobody but the genuinely bigoted from my British background would support the actions taken by the British armed forces on Bloody Sunday, and if anything even vaguely similar happened today people would be out protesting.
Regardless of atrocities or not, to me the crux of the issue is a Western company stifling and censoring around said issues, not what the Chinese do or don’t do.
To be an active agent in this process, rather than assuming a neutral or totally apolitical stance entirely.
|
On October 10 2019 04:24 StasisField wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 04:22 whitehat511 wrote:On October 10 2019 03:26 Meta wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese? It's like I'm here to express the thoughts of an ordinary Chinese. Indeed, I feel sad that I didn't learn English well, because what I lost is not a good paper, but an opportunity to communicate with others. Not only Americans can define the world. The pioneers of socialism and communism are Germans and French. Formerly President Roosevelt of the United States was also criticized for socialism or communism. But think about Chinese history, the current development of China, and the past workers of Britain. Some ideological conflicts are unavoidable, especially under the propaganda of some western media, they usually distort the report in order to satisfy their own interests. China does not do very well in many places, but it does not want to do so. No Chinese wants his country to be like India with the same population. (I do not mean to discriminate. Most Chinese want to live a good life first and guarantee everyone the same rights, wealth, rights and status.) In China, it is still possible to elect people who have been upgraded from the grassroots level through examinations and votes, while officials at the grassroots level are also elected. In China, former leaders were even born to poor peasants rather than a billion-dollar owner or equally wealthy political family. Both father and son are presidents. Western media believe that China is undemocratic and not free, and the Chinese believe that they are free and democratic. This seems to be a disgusting tactic. I was disappointed with many of the statements, especially those of the distorted Sixth Fourth Movement (my father was one of the participants, but later they built China into the second largest country in the world), and those who believed that the Hong Kong police should not react to any of the protestors'actions. When commenting, consider that China has 1.4 billion people. This country can not change because of the ideas of more than a dozen people, thousands of people and tens of thousands of people. The most important thing is to ensure that more than a billion people, like other Westerners, can live with wealth and dignity on this planet. I wonder what this guy thinks about the hundreds of students that were murdered at Tienanmen Square in 1989. And I wonder what you think about the Trail of Tears? The Trail of Tears is universally taught as an abhorrent action by the United States government here in the US. It is not celebrated. Its brutal events are condemned by the people and by society. So now tell us what you think about Tienanmen Square in 1989.
The Chinese often regard 1989 as the same event as the Cultural Revolution.
If you preach him, for the Chinese, as if to promote k.k.k, my father used to be one of them, but he told me a lot.
The reason why the Chinese do not want to talk about the 1989 and the Cultural Revolution, because this is a disaster and an unspeakable thing. More importantly, they are related to political struggles. It’s as if Americans don’t talk about Lincoln actually not liberating all black slaves.
The African Americans actually struggled for human rights until the 1960s-1970s, but today it is no longer a simple assassination of Martin Luther King.
In fact, you can see when I see you talking to you here. China is not what you think. I will still talk to you about this, because Blizzard is often more tolerant, just like StarCraft, or World of Warcraft shows. I will not be arrested.
Similarly, if I know you in reality, maybe I will pretend not to know and be surprised as you mentioned above. In fact, I started to understand 1989, or from China's website (dark network, the Chinese network is very complicated, in fact, you can find what you want, including everything that violates all human laws)
Because we don't want to talk about it, this is not a simple thing. Just like we don't talk about conspiracy theories on the moon or aliens in the 51st district. We talked about Kennedy flying more to the moon and today's nasa, not to him and Marilyn Monroe, as well as Cuba, and the conspiracy theories he was killed.
(Actually, these conspiracy theories in the United States were very popular in China. People refused to believe that landing on the moon was true. People also believed that Kennedy died of Marilyn Monroe and family curses, and there were really aliens in District 51.)
|
On October 10 2019 04:41 jy_9876543210 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 04:35 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:On October 10 2019 02:46 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 02:13 Excludos wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese?. I hope you understand that while this is an interesting conversation, your views are inherently skewed by the propaganda you've been fed every day. We know how the Chinese media works (and it's not just China btw. America has much of the same problems, and most of us here do recognise it as such). You have already made made several false statements and made comparisons that does not make sense (Comparing China to England because England has a mock Queen for instance). As such everything you say will be taken with the biggest grain of salt imaginable I do think it's interesting what the ordinary Chinese thinks, but it truthfully doesn't matter. You don't get to commit human rights violations and consider it ok because "The ordinary Chinese thinks so". Guess who doesn't think it's ok? Hong Kong and its citizens. Very interesting, wrong comparison I just want to show that some forms of democracy and freedom will change, just as discrimination against blacks is definitely not one of freedom of speech in the United States. Although Martin Luther King was killed. Similarly, China's democracy and freedom are not so much the same as the United States, because the so-called autocracy and dictator seem to be like the Queen of England and the Emperor of Japan. And when you talk about it, we should think about Hong Kong and its citizens. I am very eager to ask, do you know how many Hong Kong people participated in this Chinese National Day celebration? Including young people, college students, government officials, police, famous stars, and ordinary people. Do you think we should think about Hong Kong people, then do you know how many people in Hong Kong support the police parade? The police in Hong Kong, the government in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, so many condemns the violent protesters, and the ordinary people, shouting at the bbc reporters, this is Hong Kong, China, the taxi driver who supports the law revision, isn't it Hong Kong? What you see seems to be the collective public opinion of Hong Kong, actually because those people have amplified this reaction through radical methods. Think about it, if it is really a problem of the society and the Chinese government, the Hong Kong government, the ordinary people of Hong Kong (Is it not ordinary people and the grassroots officials?) Are these attitudes still not showing anything? Think about how good the credibility of the Hong Kong government is, and the same group of people are not trusted now. The vast majority of protesters on the streets of Hong Kong are college students, young people, and young unemployed people. Is this a normal antibody or a collective carnival of young people, like an American youth who likes to take drugs? China has experienced two very painful students, and the young people have dominated the political violent protests, almost smashing the entire country. However, these protests did not make more than a billion people ignorant, and the ordinary Chinese who were at a loss knew how to live well. The Chinese have supported all the legal acts of Hong Kong and have wanted to split China and Hong Kong for many years. There is nothing too fierce. We support Hong Kong, support democracy, support freedom, and even to some extent, support universal suffrage in Hong Kong. However, what you have to understand is what is the slogan of Hong Kong's independence and violence? This is what the Hong Kong player and the NBA rocket manager said. This is also why the Chinese currently call it a terrorist, because terrorists in the Middle East often call themselves freedom fighters. If Hong Kong, China, is not dominated by the majority of Chinese people and by the majority of Hong Kong people, then who will decide? Can Texas and California declare independence today and expel all blacks and people from other states？ So，why China give up HK？and Violent protestors demanding the expulsion of mainlanders？ In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons。 (you can find it in many Hong Kong movies，In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons (you can find out from many Hong Kong movies, including asking mainlanders if they have seen Apple phones made in China, and mocking the mainland for lack of high-rise power and modern technology, the same thing is still happening to Chinese people in Europe, the United States, etc.)It used to be Korea and Japan.). You bring up valid points, but what you seem to miss out on is how this all started in the first place. There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system, a clear infringement of the agreement. Since China agreed that HK could remain autonomous and have authority over their own government, then why is China screening candidates for HK's Chief Executive? This started around 2014 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests), and afterwards the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat this declaration as void. You say China support HK's democracy, then why not let the HK'ers elect who they want, instead of screening who they want the HK people to elect? The HK'ers are upset because they were promised 50 years, but China is trying to impose only 22 years into the treaty. Does this mean China's words aren't even worth 50% of what they put on papers? So flash forward to the current protest, how did it start? Well, China wanted to pass an extradite bill in HK, another infringement of the current agreement. HK'ers did not want this law, which they are within their own rights to deny since China agreed it will not impose, yet China still adamantly demand that this law be passed. If you look over at the 5 demands HK is currently protesting for, they are extremely reasonable given that China started this by breaking their words. 1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019. 2. Inquiry into police brutality - Also valid, the people would like to investigate police's conduct. The police are meant to protect the people, not beat them up when they are protesting. 3. Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters - This started because China broke its words, so the people were upset and protested. Had China not broke its words, this wouldn't have happened. The people marched because China lied, not because they randomly rioted out of no where. This point can be a case by case basis with some standards since I understand not all protesters are good, some can be destructive, and we should judge them fairly. 4. Amnesty for arrested protesters - Same as point 3. 5. Dual universal suffrage, for both their Legislative and Chief Executive - Again, China signed an agreement that allows the HK'ers to manage their own government. If they are true to their words, let the HK'ers decide how they want their government to be ran. My main point is that HK originally didn't protest for independence. This was NOT how the protest started. They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement. It is only escalating because instead of admitting they were in the wrong, China cracked down on the HK citizens. HK citizens now are entertaining independence because they realized Mainland China does not keep its word. To use a Starcraft analogy, this is similar to Mengsk, Reynor, and Kerrigan working together, yet Mengsk abandoned Kerrigan on that one planet (forgot the name). When Reynor became rightfully pissed for what Mengsk did and turned on him, Mengsk called Reynor a terrorist. China is pulling a Mengsk right now. If China is true to its words. Come back in 28 years and let the HK'ers do what they want to do with their government for now. 1. China hopes to sign extradition regulations with Hong Kong (extending criminal offenders because there have been criminals who have committed murder and rape in mainland China and have been cast into Hong Kong. The Chinese government and other countries such as the United States also have extradition regulations, and the Hong Kong government has other regions. The state has extradition regulations). Why is it rejected? This is not because mainland China requires the implementation of laws in Hong Kong, but hopes to sign regulations with Hong Kong. This is actually very strange. It is actually an agreement between a country and a country within a country. 2. I hope that you can read the Sino-British Joint Declaration carefully. He has not given the British any rights after this. You can blame the Chinese government, but because of this, I think other countries are involved. This is still the Beijing government of China and the Hong Kong region. problem. In addition, the Chinese government's commitment is to keep Hong Kong unchanged for 50 years. I don't know how you understand it. I have two thoughts. One is to continue Hong Kong before the colony in 1997, and the second is to follow the basic law after 1997. Hong Kong. Before 1997, Hong Kong was a colony. Hong Kong people did not even have British nationality. The leaders of Hong Kong were all British whites. They were also British nationals, both the first and the second, including the Hong Kong Constitution, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. During the British colonial period, there was no universal suffrage. I don't know where Hong Kong's universal suffrage comes from. This violates the Constitution of Hong Kong - the Basic Law. In addition, without universal suffrage, it cannot mean that they have no democracy. Hong Kong's politics is closer to the Swiss political system, and each leader does not adopt the Swiss rotation system. Keeping it for 50 years, isn't it just that there is no universal suffrage? Once the universal suffrage is not a violation of the China Commitment and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and the Hong Kong Basic Law? Although I think that Hong Kong has been harming itself for 50 years, the development of first-tier cities in China is much better than that of Hong Kong. For me, I have lived in Shanghai for a long time, and Hong Kong is like a rural area. Of course, I am not actually, most of them. This is also true in Europe, and I have a stark contrast to the views of Japanese cities. 3. The Chinese government of Beijing and all Chinese have never opposed liberal democracy and legal protests. However, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese were sensitive to the protests because we realized that such collective behavior would often evolve into violence. For example, China’s previous protests, the US bombing of the Yugoslav embassy, and Japan’s activities to commemorate the death of soldiers in World War II. This kind of parade in China has produced extreme violence, as happened in Hong Kong. If you don't trust the Chinese and don't trust the Chinese government, don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised, don't believe it? Don't you believe in Western media? Go look for their evaluation of the Hong Kong police and the Hong Kong government in history. 4. Special criminals are not advisable. Think about the United States, but the country with the highest proportion of prison population. Of course, I don't want China to become the United States. But think about it. There are many British nationals in the Hong Kong police, white people (maybe I think you still don't believe in the yellow race, but I don't think it is racist). Hong Kong's judicial system, so the judges are British nationality, Australian nationality, 90% of judges are white. You should trust them, not a group of unemployed people, a group of young people who have taken a poison and drink alcohol and have sex on the roadside (although you call it freedom, but often these are blocked by neutral media). Opposite to these violent protesters are peaceful protesters who have long since left the protest, and supporters who support the police, support the Hong Kong government, and support the Chinese government. They are more numerous, but unfortunately they need to work and they do not use violence. So it seems to be weak, and because many of them are older people (you should have heard of Hong Kong's aging), they are not very familiar with the Internet, and the Internet is now a Z-age person (in fact, 1995-2000) Born person). 5. Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people. Hong Kong knows that Hong Kong is bought by Li Ka-shing, and that the Chinese government cannot interfere and support socialism. Everyone has food and housing. Later, the economic decline of Western society, if you are a European, there should be experience, the US economy has recently grown, but it is also uncomfortable. After the 2008 financial turmoil, it has been declining for a long time. China is getting better and better. When China gets better, when they find that the Chinese who once earned 200 yuan a month have the same income and even more money, they find that they can’t be like the colonial era. Next, when it came to China, it became a millionaire, went to bed with more girls, and bought more luxurious cosmetics. So I hope to return to the colonial era and pass violence. (Their slogan is what you saw in this Hong Kong player and the NBA), by robbing mobile phone stores, selling them online, by raising the flags of the United States and the United Kingdom. I saw Swedes, and I think I should understand why, academically, the Sedgmo syndrome. Perhaps Westerners believe that the colonial era is very glorious. "don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised" "Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people." This is trolling for sure... I can hardly find any other explanations.
Hmm, I'd say it's a combination of a narrow, biased and generalizing worldview combined with poor English.
|
On October 10 2019 04:41 jy_9876543210 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 04:35 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:On October 10 2019 02:46 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 02:13 Excludos wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese?. I hope you understand that while this is an interesting conversation, your views are inherently skewed by the propaganda you've been fed every day. We know how the Chinese media works (and it's not just China btw. America has much of the same problems, and most of us here do recognise it as such). You have already made made several false statements and made comparisons that does not make sense (Comparing China to England because England has a mock Queen for instance). As such everything you say will be taken with the biggest grain of salt imaginable I do think it's interesting what the ordinary Chinese thinks, but it truthfully doesn't matter. You don't get to commit human rights violations and consider it ok because "The ordinary Chinese thinks so". Guess who doesn't think it's ok? Hong Kong and its citizens. Very interesting, wrong comparison I just want to show that some forms of democracy and freedom will change, just as discrimination against blacks is definitely not one of freedom of speech in the United States. Although Martin Luther King was killed. Similarly, China's democracy and freedom are not so much the same as the United States, because the so-called autocracy and dictator seem to be like the Queen of England and the Emperor of Japan. And when you talk about it, we should think about Hong Kong and its citizens. I am very eager to ask, do you know how many Hong Kong people participated in this Chinese National Day celebration? Including young people, college students, government officials, police, famous stars, and ordinary people. Do you think we should think about Hong Kong people, then do you know how many people in Hong Kong support the police parade? The police in Hong Kong, the government in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, so many condemns the violent protesters, and the ordinary people, shouting at the bbc reporters, this is Hong Kong, China, the taxi driver who supports the law revision, isn't it Hong Kong? What you see seems to be the collective public opinion of Hong Kong, actually because those people have amplified this reaction through radical methods. Think about it, if it is really a problem of the society and the Chinese government, the Hong Kong government, the ordinary people of Hong Kong (Is it not ordinary people and the grassroots officials?) Are these attitudes still not showing anything? Think about how good the credibility of the Hong Kong government is, and the same group of people are not trusted now. The vast majority of protesters on the streets of Hong Kong are college students, young people, and young unemployed people. Is this a normal antibody or a collective carnival of young people, like an American youth who likes to take drugs? China has experienced two very painful students, and the young people have dominated the political violent protests, almost smashing the entire country. However, these protests did not make more than a billion people ignorant, and the ordinary Chinese who were at a loss knew how to live well. The Chinese have supported all the legal acts of Hong Kong and have wanted to split China and Hong Kong for many years. There is nothing too fierce. We support Hong Kong, support democracy, support freedom, and even to some extent, support universal suffrage in Hong Kong. However, what you have to understand is what is the slogan of Hong Kong's independence and violence? This is what the Hong Kong player and the NBA rocket manager said. This is also why the Chinese currently call it a terrorist, because terrorists in the Middle East often call themselves freedom fighters. If Hong Kong, China, is not dominated by the majority of Chinese people and by the majority of Hong Kong people, then who will decide? Can Texas and California declare independence today and expel all blacks and people from other states？ So，why China give up HK？and Violent protestors demanding the expulsion of mainlanders？ In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons。 (you can find it in many Hong Kong movies，In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons (you can find out from many Hong Kong movies, including asking mainlanders if they have seen Apple phones made in China, and mocking the mainland for lack of high-rise power and modern technology, the same thing is still happening to Chinese people in Europe, the United States, etc.)It used to be Korea and Japan.). You bring up valid points, but what you seem to miss out on is how this all started in the first place. There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system, a clear infringement of the agreement. Since China agreed that HK could remain autonomous and have authority over their own government, then why is China screening candidates for HK's Chief Executive? This started around 2014 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests), and afterwards the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat this declaration as void. You say China support HK's democracy, then why not let the HK'ers elect who they want, instead of screening who they want the HK people to elect? The HK'ers are upset because they were promised 50 years, but China is trying to impose only 22 years into the treaty. Does this mean China's words aren't even worth 50% of what they put on papers? So flash forward to the current protest, how did it start? Well, China wanted to pass an extradite bill in HK, another infringement of the current agreement. HK'ers did not want this law, which they are within their own rights to deny since China agreed it will not impose, yet China still adamantly demand that this law be passed. If you look over at the 5 demands HK is currently protesting for, they are extremely reasonable given that China started this by breaking their words. 1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019. 2. Inquiry into police brutality - Also valid, the people would like to investigate police's conduct. The police are meant to protect the people, not beat them up when they are protesting. 3. Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters - This started because China broke its words, so the people were upset and protested. Had China not broke its words, this wouldn't have happened. The people marched because China lied, not because they randomly rioted out of no where. This point can be a case by case basis with some standards since I understand not all protesters are good, some can be destructive, and we should judge them fairly. 4. Amnesty for arrested protesters - Same as point 3. 5. Dual universal suffrage, for both their Legislative and Chief Executive - Again, China signed an agreement that allows the HK'ers to manage their own government. If they are true to their words, let the HK'ers decide how they want their government to be ran. My main point is that HK originally didn't protest for independence. This was NOT how the protest started. They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement. It is only escalating because instead of admitting they were in the wrong, China cracked down on the HK citizens. HK citizens now are entertaining independence because they realized Mainland China does not keep its word. To use a Starcraft analogy, this is similar to Mengsk, Reynor, and Kerrigan working together, yet Mengsk abandoned Kerrigan on that one planet (forgot the name). When Reynor became rightfully pissed for what Mengsk did and turned on him, Mengsk called Reynor a terrorist. China is pulling a Mengsk right now. If China is true to its words. Come back in 28 years and let the HK'ers do what they want to do with their government for now. 1. China hopes to sign extradition regulations with Hong Kong (extending criminal offenders because there have been criminals who have committed murder and rape in mainland China and have been cast into Hong Kong. The Chinese government and other countries such as the United States also have extradition regulations, and the Hong Kong government has other regions. The state has extradition regulations). Why is it rejected? This is not because mainland China requires the implementation of laws in Hong Kong, but hopes to sign regulations with Hong Kong. This is actually very strange. It is actually an agreement between a country and a country within a country. 2. I hope that you can read the Sino-British Joint Declaration carefully. He has not given the British any rights after this. You can blame the Chinese government, but because of this, I think other countries are involved. This is still the Beijing government of China and the Hong Kong region. problem. In addition, the Chinese government's commitment is to keep Hong Kong unchanged for 50 years. I don't know how you understand it. I have two thoughts. One is to continue Hong Kong before the colony in 1997, and the second is to follow the basic law after 1997. Hong Kong. Before 1997, Hong Kong was a colony. Hong Kong people did not even have British nationality. The leaders of Hong Kong were all British whites. They were also British nationals, both the first and the second, including the Hong Kong Constitution, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. During the British colonial period, there was no universal suffrage. I don't know where Hong Kong's universal suffrage comes from. This violates the Constitution of Hong Kong - the Basic Law. In addition, without universal suffrage, it cannot mean that they have no democracy. Hong Kong's politics is closer to the Swiss political system, and each leader does not adopt the Swiss rotation system. Keeping it for 50 years, isn't it just that there is no universal suffrage? Once the universal suffrage is not a violation of the China Commitment and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and the Hong Kong Basic Law? Although I think that Hong Kong has been harming itself for 50 years, the development of first-tier cities in China is much better than that of Hong Kong. For me, I have lived in Shanghai for a long time, and Hong Kong is like a rural area. Of course, I am not actually, most of them. This is also true in Europe, and I have a stark contrast to the views of Japanese cities. 3. The Chinese government of Beijing and all Chinese have never opposed liberal democracy and legal protests. However, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese were sensitive to the protests because we realized that such collective behavior would often evolve into violence. For example, China’s previous protests, the US bombing of the Yugoslav embassy, and Japan’s activities to commemorate the death of soldiers in World War II. This kind of parade in China has produced extreme violence, as happened in Hong Kong. If you don't trust the Chinese and don't trust the Chinese government, don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised, don't believe it? Don't you believe in Western media? Go look for their evaluation of the Hong Kong police and the Hong Kong government in history. 4. Special criminals are not advisable. Think about the United States, but the country with the highest proportion of prison population. Of course, I don't want China to become the United States. But think about it. There are many British nationals in the Hong Kong police, white people (maybe I think you still don't believe in the yellow race, but I don't think it is racist). Hong Kong's judicial system, so the judges are British nationality, Australian nationality, 90% of judges are white. You should trust them, not a group of unemployed people, a group of young people who have taken a poison and drink alcohol and have sex on the roadside (although you call it freedom, but often these are blocked by neutral media). Opposite to these violent protesters are peaceful protesters who have long since left the protest, and supporters who support the police, support the Hong Kong government, and support the Chinese government. They are more numerous, but unfortunately they need to work and they do not use violence. So it seems to be weak, and because many of them are older people (you should have heard of Hong Kong's aging), they are not very familiar with the Internet, and the Internet is now a Z-age person (in fact, 1995-2000) Born person). 5. Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people. Hong Kong knows that Hong Kong is bought by Li Ka-shing, and that the Chinese government cannot interfere and support socialism. Everyone has food and housing. Later, the economic decline of Western society, if you are a European, there should be experience, the US economy has recently grown, but it is also uncomfortable. After the 2008 financial turmoil, it has been declining for a long time. China is getting better and better. When China gets better, when they find that the Chinese who once earned 200 yuan a month have the same income and even more money, they find that they can’t be like the colonial era. Next, when it came to China, it became a millionaire, went to bed with more girls, and bought more luxurious cosmetics. So I hope to return to the colonial era and pass violence. (Their slogan is what you saw in this Hong Kong player and the NBA), by robbing mobile phone stores, selling them online, by raising the flags of the United States and the United Kingdom. I saw Swedes, and I think I should understand why, academically, the Sedgmo syndrome. Perhaps Westerners believe that the colonial era is very glorious. "don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised" "Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people." This is trolling for sure... I can hardly find any other explanations.
Oh, poor man. In fact, it is very simple. You only need to use Google to search for the gap between the rich and the poor in Hong Kong.
Have you been to Hong Kong and China?
I am very familiar with it.
|
chuchuchu are you a chinese highschooler' AI project ?
|
On October 10 2019 04:24 StasisField wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 04:22 whitehat511 wrote:On October 10 2019 03:26 Meta wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:04 Spirit_HUN wrote:
When this player signed up for that tournament, he accepted the rules.
He simply broke the rules, ended up banning himself.
Blizzard did the right thing. This is a video game company, not a political platform.
If you are concerned about human rights in Hong Kong the are other ways, platforms to do that.
You should not force a video game company to be political.
There are no political comments in the Olympics, Football, Formula1 etc. as well.
I dont want video games, sports events to be filled with politics. Viewers are there to be entertained, competitors are there to compete, and not to be forced to eat political bs 0-24. They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow. Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet. China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese? It's like I'm here to express the thoughts of an ordinary Chinese. Indeed, I feel sad that I didn't learn English well, because what I lost is not a good paper, but an opportunity to communicate with others. Not only Americans can define the world. The pioneers of socialism and communism are Germans and French. Formerly President Roosevelt of the United States was also criticized for socialism or communism. But think about Chinese history, the current development of China, and the past workers of Britain. Some ideological conflicts are unavoidable, especially under the propaganda of some western media, they usually distort the report in order to satisfy their own interests. China does not do very well in many places, but it does not want to do so. No Chinese wants his country to be like India with the same population. (I do not mean to discriminate. Most Chinese want to live a good life first and guarantee everyone the same rights, wealth, rights and status.) In China, it is still possible to elect people who have been upgraded from the grassroots level through examinations and votes, while officials at the grassroots level are also elected. In China, former leaders were even born to poor peasants rather than a billion-dollar owner or equally wealthy political family. Both father and son are presidents. Western media believe that China is undemocratic and not free, and the Chinese believe that they are free and democratic. This seems to be a disgusting tactic. I was disappointed with many of the statements, especially those of the distorted Sixth Fourth Movement (my father was one of the participants, but later they built China into the second largest country in the world), and those who believed that the Hong Kong police should not react to any of the protestors'actions. When commenting, consider that China has 1.4 billion people. This country can not change because of the ideas of more than a dozen people, thousands of people and tens of thousands of people. The most important thing is to ensure that more than a billion people, like other Westerners, can live with wealth and dignity on this planet. I wonder what this guy thinks about the hundreds of students that were murdered at Tienanmen Square in 1989. And I wonder what you think about the Trail of Tears? The Trail of Tears is universally taught as an abhorrent action by the United States government here in the US. It is not celebrated. Its brutal events are condemned by the people and by society. So now tell us what you think about Tienanmen Square in 1989.
Tienanmen Square in 1989 was also a brutal event and a mistake like many throughout history... And so what? 3 decades or 30 years have passed, 3 leaders have changed, lessons have been learned. You think that Xi Jinping will start killing his own people like in the past? What does Tienanmen Square have to do with the situation now at hand in Hong Kong? After 4 months of violent protesting and rioting, there is 1 person shot (not even dead) after he attacked a policeman. If anything Hong Kong police are handling the situation way better then countries like France or the US...
|
On October 10 2019 04:47 Penev wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 04:41 jy_9876543210 wrote:On October 10 2019 04:35 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:On October 10 2019 02:46 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 02:13 Excludos wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:
[quote]
They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow.
Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet.
China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese?. I hope you understand that while this is an interesting conversation, your views are inherently skewed by the propaganda you've been fed every day. We know how the Chinese media works (and it's not just China btw. America has much of the same problems, and most of us here do recognise it as such). You have already made made several false statements and made comparisons that does not make sense (Comparing China to England because England has a mock Queen for instance). As such everything you say will be taken with the biggest grain of salt imaginable I do think it's interesting what the ordinary Chinese thinks, but it truthfully doesn't matter. You don't get to commit human rights violations and consider it ok because "The ordinary Chinese thinks so". Guess who doesn't think it's ok? Hong Kong and its citizens. Very interesting, wrong comparison I just want to show that some forms of democracy and freedom will change, just as discrimination against blacks is definitely not one of freedom of speech in the United States. Although Martin Luther King was killed. Similarly, China's democracy and freedom are not so much the same as the United States, because the so-called autocracy and dictator seem to be like the Queen of England and the Emperor of Japan. And when you talk about it, we should think about Hong Kong and its citizens. I am very eager to ask, do you know how many Hong Kong people participated in this Chinese National Day celebration? Including young people, college students, government officials, police, famous stars, and ordinary people. Do you think we should think about Hong Kong people, then do you know how many people in Hong Kong support the police parade? The police in Hong Kong, the government in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, so many condemns the violent protesters, and the ordinary people, shouting at the bbc reporters, this is Hong Kong, China, the taxi driver who supports the law revision, isn't it Hong Kong? What you see seems to be the collective public opinion of Hong Kong, actually because those people have amplified this reaction through radical methods. Think about it, if it is really a problem of the society and the Chinese government, the Hong Kong government, the ordinary people of Hong Kong (Is it not ordinary people and the grassroots officials?) Are these attitudes still not showing anything? Think about how good the credibility of the Hong Kong government is, and the same group of people are not trusted now. The vast majority of protesters on the streets of Hong Kong are college students, young people, and young unemployed people. Is this a normal antibody or a collective carnival of young people, like an American youth who likes to take drugs? China has experienced two very painful students, and the young people have dominated the political violent protests, almost smashing the entire country. However, these protests did not make more than a billion people ignorant, and the ordinary Chinese who were at a loss knew how to live well. The Chinese have supported all the legal acts of Hong Kong and have wanted to split China and Hong Kong for many years. There is nothing too fierce. We support Hong Kong, support democracy, support freedom, and even to some extent, support universal suffrage in Hong Kong. However, what you have to understand is what is the slogan of Hong Kong's independence and violence? This is what the Hong Kong player and the NBA rocket manager said. This is also why the Chinese currently call it a terrorist, because terrorists in the Middle East often call themselves freedom fighters. If Hong Kong, China, is not dominated by the majority of Chinese people and by the majority of Hong Kong people, then who will decide? Can Texas and California declare independence today and expel all blacks and people from other states？ So，why China give up HK？and Violent protestors demanding the expulsion of mainlanders？ In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons。 (you can find it in many Hong Kong movies，In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons (you can find out from many Hong Kong movies, including asking mainlanders if they have seen Apple phones made in China, and mocking the mainland for lack of high-rise power and modern technology, the same thing is still happening to Chinese people in Europe, the United States, etc.)It used to be Korea and Japan.). You bring up valid points, but what you seem to miss out on is how this all started in the first place. There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system, a clear infringement of the agreement. Since China agreed that HK could remain autonomous and have authority over their own government, then why is China screening candidates for HK's Chief Executive? This started around 2014 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests), and afterwards the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat this declaration as void. You say China support HK's democracy, then why not let the HK'ers elect who they want, instead of screening who they want the HK people to elect? The HK'ers are upset because they were promised 50 years, but China is trying to impose only 22 years into the treaty. Does this mean China's words aren't even worth 50% of what they put on papers? So flash forward to the current protest, how did it start? Well, China wanted to pass an extradite bill in HK, another infringement of the current agreement. HK'ers did not want this law, which they are within their own rights to deny since China agreed it will not impose, yet China still adamantly demand that this law be passed. If you look over at the 5 demands HK is currently protesting for, they are extremely reasonable given that China started this by breaking their words. 1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019. 2. Inquiry into police brutality - Also valid, the people would like to investigate police's conduct. The police are meant to protect the people, not beat them up when they are protesting. 3. Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters - This started because China broke its words, so the people were upset and protested. Had China not broke its words, this wouldn't have happened. The people marched because China lied, not because they randomly rioted out of no where. This point can be a case by case basis with some standards since I understand not all protesters are good, some can be destructive, and we should judge them fairly. 4. Amnesty for arrested protesters - Same as point 3. 5. Dual universal suffrage, for both their Legislative and Chief Executive - Again, China signed an agreement that allows the HK'ers to manage their own government. If they are true to their words, let the HK'ers decide how they want their government to be ran. My main point is that HK originally didn't protest for independence. This was NOT how the protest started. They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement. It is only escalating because instead of admitting they were in the wrong, China cracked down on the HK citizens. HK citizens now are entertaining independence because they realized Mainland China does not keep its word. To use a Starcraft analogy, this is similar to Mengsk, Reynor, and Kerrigan working together, yet Mengsk abandoned Kerrigan on that one planet (forgot the name). When Reynor became rightfully pissed for what Mengsk did and turned on him, Mengsk called Reynor a terrorist. China is pulling a Mengsk right now. If China is true to its words. Come back in 28 years and let the HK'ers do what they want to do with their government for now. 1. China hopes to sign extradition regulations with Hong Kong (extending criminal offenders because there have been criminals who have committed murder and rape in mainland China and have been cast into Hong Kong. The Chinese government and other countries such as the United States also have extradition regulations, and the Hong Kong government has other regions. The state has extradition regulations). Why is it rejected? This is not because mainland China requires the implementation of laws in Hong Kong, but hopes to sign regulations with Hong Kong. This is actually very strange. It is actually an agreement between a country and a country within a country. 2. I hope that you can read the Sino-British Joint Declaration carefully. He has not given the British any rights after this. You can blame the Chinese government, but because of this, I think other countries are involved. This is still the Beijing government of China and the Hong Kong region. problem. In addition, the Chinese government's commitment is to keep Hong Kong unchanged for 50 years. I don't know how you understand it. I have two thoughts. One is to continue Hong Kong before the colony in 1997, and the second is to follow the basic law after 1997. Hong Kong. Before 1997, Hong Kong was a colony. Hong Kong people did not even have British nationality. The leaders of Hong Kong were all British whites. They were also British nationals, both the first and the second, including the Hong Kong Constitution, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. During the British colonial period, there was no universal suffrage. I don't know where Hong Kong's universal suffrage comes from. This violates the Constitution of Hong Kong - the Basic Law. In addition, without universal suffrage, it cannot mean that they have no democracy. Hong Kong's politics is closer to the Swiss political system, and each leader does not adopt the Swiss rotation system. Keeping it for 50 years, isn't it just that there is no universal suffrage? Once the universal suffrage is not a violation of the China Commitment and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and the Hong Kong Basic Law? Although I think that Hong Kong has been harming itself for 50 years, the development of first-tier cities in China is much better than that of Hong Kong. For me, I have lived in Shanghai for a long time, and Hong Kong is like a rural area. Of course, I am not actually, most of them. This is also true in Europe, and I have a stark contrast to the views of Japanese cities. 3. The Chinese government of Beijing and all Chinese have never opposed liberal democracy and legal protests. However, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese were sensitive to the protests because we realized that such collective behavior would often evolve into violence. For example, China’s previous protests, the US bombing of the Yugoslav embassy, and Japan’s activities to commemorate the death of soldiers in World War II. This kind of parade in China has produced extreme violence, as happened in Hong Kong. If you don't trust the Chinese and don't trust the Chinese government, don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised, don't believe it? Don't you believe in Western media? Go look for their evaluation of the Hong Kong police and the Hong Kong government in history. 4. Special criminals are not advisable. Think about the United States, but the country with the highest proportion of prison population. Of course, I don't want China to become the United States. But think about it. There are many British nationals in the Hong Kong police, white people (maybe I think you still don't believe in the yellow race, but I don't think it is racist). Hong Kong's judicial system, so the judges are British nationality, Australian nationality, 90% of judges are white. You should trust them, not a group of unemployed people, a group of young people who have taken a poison and drink alcohol and have sex on the roadside (although you call it freedom, but often these are blocked by neutral media). Opposite to these violent protesters are peaceful protesters who have long since left the protest, and supporters who support the police, support the Hong Kong government, and support the Chinese government. They are more numerous, but unfortunately they need to work and they do not use violence. So it seems to be weak, and because many of them are older people (you should have heard of Hong Kong's aging), they are not very familiar with the Internet, and the Internet is now a Z-age person (in fact, 1995-2000) Born person). 5. Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people. Hong Kong knows that Hong Kong is bought by Li Ka-shing, and that the Chinese government cannot interfere and support socialism. Everyone has food and housing. Later, the economic decline of Western society, if you are a European, there should be experience, the US economy has recently grown, but it is also uncomfortable. After the 2008 financial turmoil, it has been declining for a long time. China is getting better and better. When China gets better, when they find that the Chinese who once earned 200 yuan a month have the same income and even more money, they find that they can’t be like the colonial era. Next, when it came to China, it became a millionaire, went to bed with more girls, and bought more luxurious cosmetics. So I hope to return to the colonial era and pass violence. (Their slogan is what you saw in this Hong Kong player and the NBA), by robbing mobile phone stores, selling them online, by raising the flags of the United States and the United Kingdom. I saw Swedes, and I think I should understand why, academically, the Sedgmo syndrome. Perhaps Westerners believe that the colonial era is very glorious. "don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised" "Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people." This is trolling for sure... I can hardly find any other explanations. Hmm, I'd say it's a combination of a narrow, biased and generalizing worldview combined with poor English.
Yes
My English is very poor, and it has indeed become an important point of irony. I think there may be some deviations between my remarks and what I want to express.
Because I often use Google Translate to modify my English.
But it is very interesting when a Chinese person communicates with others in English. Westerners laughed.
And think in reverse. They have no communication with me in Chinese. Because they don't know, even the simplest China.
If they distinguish between Japanese, Chinese and Korean, I am already very happy.
|
On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:
1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019.
huh?
Do you know what extradition is? Extradition is not related to the promise of "not imposing their laws". The USA doesn't impose its laws in Canada. However, if I run a giant telemarketing scam from Canada ripping off thousands of USA senior citizens I can be extradited to the USA by Canada. This doesn't mean the USA is imposing its laws in Canada. Both countries have prison sentences for people committing massive levels of fraud.
You'll need to add more details to this point to show how it is a "very valid demand considering China signed an agreement..."
|
On October 10 2019 04:49 KT_Elwood wrote:
chuchuchu are you a chinese highschooler' AI project ?
不不不，我觉得我比AI高级点。我
No no no
I should be more advanced than AI.
As for why it is a high school student, I probably didn't figure it out. Is it because of English? Maybe I should translate a bad review for Google.
I think if it refers to speech, I think it should not be. Because you should have never seen a high school student in China.
At least, high school students in the United States are holding signs at the United Nations to protest environmental policies and strikes.
Chinese high school students will go to plant trees, improve the level of greening, and strive to receive the UN's praise for the next time.
I don't know if you are based on that one standard?
|
On October 10 2019 04:48 chuchuchu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2019 04:41 jy_9876543210 wrote:On October 10 2019 04:35 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 03:57 phodacbiet wrote:On October 10 2019 02:46 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 02:13 Excludos wrote:On October 10 2019 02:04 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 10 2019 01:28 chuchuchu wrote:On October 10 2019 01:21 Wombat_NI wrote:
[quote]
They’re not a political platform, but they do have a clear political position here which is tow whatever line the Chinese authorities want them to tow.
Seems to me it was a pretty good platform for the guy to use really, although the attention it gained was more from Blizzard’s reaction than his actions specifically. Gained a fuckload of traction even US Senators are wading in, doubt he’d have been able to elicit such a response with a tweet.
China and especially the Gulf States use sport as an extension of their soft power, they’ve made it political already, likewise the Cold War saw sporting events like the Olympics as an ideological battleground. if it is not an political extension of soft power,why some officials of the organization are talking about politics？if not,STOP talking.As an official, you can't blatantly confront the Chinese public opinion while thinking that discrimination against Chinese people, Chinese culture and support separatism and violence. Why not? National self-determination is a key principle of geopolitics in the modern era. Considering a bomb blew in the windows of my house when I was but a babe, I’m quite happy that the United States interceded and helped facilitate a peace here that respected both of the national identities in our wee country. I would personally like to see more of China and its culture emerge onto the world stage, an old and venerable culture indeed, whose people have accomplished remarkable things in the last few decades especially. If it’s by trampling on everyone and expecting Westerners to bend to their whims and where criticism is construed as a grievous insult then, no thanks. When you think so, have you ever asked about the thoughts of ordinary Chinese?. I hope you understand that while this is an interesting conversation, your views are inherently skewed by the propaganda you've been fed every day. We know how the Chinese media works (and it's not just China btw. America has much of the same problems, and most of us here do recognise it as such). You have already made made several false statements and made comparisons that does not make sense (Comparing China to England because England has a mock Queen for instance). As such everything you say will be taken with the biggest grain of salt imaginable I do think it's interesting what the ordinary Chinese thinks, but it truthfully doesn't matter. You don't get to commit human rights violations and consider it ok because "The ordinary Chinese thinks so". Guess who doesn't think it's ok? Hong Kong and its citizens. Very interesting, wrong comparison I just want to show that some forms of democracy and freedom will change, just as discrimination against blacks is definitely not one of freedom of speech in the United States. Although Martin Luther King was killed. Similarly, China's democracy and freedom are not so much the same as the United States, because the so-called autocracy and dictator seem to be like the Queen of England and the Emperor of Japan. And when you talk about it, we should think about Hong Kong and its citizens. I am very eager to ask, do you know how many Hong Kong people participated in this Chinese National Day celebration? Including young people, college students, government officials, police, famous stars, and ordinary people. Do you think we should think about Hong Kong people, then do you know how many people in Hong Kong support the police parade? The police in Hong Kong, the government in Hong Kong, Hong Kong, so many condemns the violent protesters, and the ordinary people, shouting at the bbc reporters, this is Hong Kong, China, the taxi driver who supports the law revision, isn't it Hong Kong? What you see seems to be the collective public opinion of Hong Kong, actually because those people have amplified this reaction through radical methods. Think about it, if it is really a problem of the society and the Chinese government, the Hong Kong government, the ordinary people of Hong Kong (Is it not ordinary people and the grassroots officials?) Are these attitudes still not showing anything? Think about how good the credibility of the Hong Kong government is, and the same group of people are not trusted now. The vast majority of protesters on the streets of Hong Kong are college students, young people, and young unemployed people. Is this a normal antibody or a collective carnival of young people, like an American youth who likes to take drugs? China has experienced two very painful students, and the young people have dominated the political violent protests, almost smashing the entire country. However, these protests did not make more than a billion people ignorant, and the ordinary Chinese who were at a loss knew how to live well. The Chinese have supported all the legal acts of Hong Kong and have wanted to split China and Hong Kong for many years. There is nothing too fierce. We support Hong Kong, support democracy, support freedom, and even to some extent, support universal suffrage in Hong Kong. However, what you have to understand is what is the slogan of Hong Kong's independence and violence? This is what the Hong Kong player and the NBA rocket manager said. This is also why the Chinese currently call it a terrorist, because terrorists in the Middle East often call themselves freedom fighters. If Hong Kong, China, is not dominated by the majority of Chinese people and by the majority of Hong Kong people, then who will decide? Can Texas and California declare independence today and expel all blacks and people from other states？ So，why China give up HK？and Violent protestors demanding the expulsion of mainlanders？ In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons。 (you can find it in many Hong Kong movies，In mainland China, Hong Kong people's bad reputation, sense of geographical superiority and discrimination against mainlanders are the main reasons (you can find out from many Hong Kong movies, including asking mainlanders if they have seen Apple phones made in China, and mocking the mainland for lack of high-rise power and modern technology, the same thing is still happening to Chinese people in Europe, the United States, etc.)It used to be Korea and Japan.). You bring up valid points, but what you seem to miss out on is how this all started in the first place. There is currently a Sino-British joint declaration agreement between China and the UK dated back in 1984 and went into effect in 1997 stating that HK will have its own government, is able to pass its own laws, and that their way of life would not change for 50 years. You can read a bit on that agreement here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration. This means that in this agreement, China agreed that its PRC principles would not be practiced in HK until 2047. Despite this agreement, in 2014, China proposed a reform to HK's electoral system, a clear infringement of the agreement. Since China agreed that HK could remain autonomous and have authority over their own government, then why is China screening candidates for HK's Chief Executive? This started around 2014 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests), and afterwards the British Foreign Office announced that Chinese officials now treat this declaration as void. You say China support HK's democracy, then why not let the HK'ers elect who they want, instead of screening who they want the HK people to elect? The HK'ers are upset because they were promised 50 years, but China is trying to impose only 22 years into the treaty. Does this mean China's words aren't even worth 50% of what they put on papers? So flash forward to the current protest, how did it start? Well, China wanted to pass an extradite bill in HK, another infringement of the current agreement. HK'ers did not want this law, which they are within their own rights to deny since China agreed it will not impose, yet China still adamantly demand that this law be passed. If you look over at the 5 demands HK is currently protesting for, they are extremely reasonable given that China started this by breaking their words. 1. Full withdrawal of the extradition bill - Very valid demand, considering China signed an agreement that they will not be imposing their laws in HK until 2047. Last I checked, it's only 2019. 2. Inquiry into police brutality - Also valid, the people would like to investigate police's conduct. The police are meant to protect the people, not beat them up when they are protesting. 3. Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters - This started because China broke its words, so the people were upset and protested. Had China not broke its words, this wouldn't have happened. The people marched because China lied, not because they randomly rioted out of no where. This point can be a case by case basis with some standards since I understand not all protesters are good, some can be destructive, and we should judge them fairly. 4. Amnesty for arrested protesters - Same as point 3. 5. Dual universal suffrage, for both their Legislative and Chief Executive - Again, China signed an agreement that allows the HK'ers to manage their own government. If they are true to their words, let the HK'ers decide how they want their government to be ran. My main point is that HK originally didn't protest for independence. This was NOT how the protest started. They started because China lied and backed out of their own words only 22 years into a 50 years signed agreement. It is only escalating because instead of admitting they were in the wrong, China cracked down on the HK citizens. HK citizens now are entertaining independence because they realized Mainland China does not keep its word. To use a Starcraft analogy, this is similar to Mengsk, Reynor, and Kerrigan working together, yet Mengsk abandoned Kerrigan on that one planet (forgot the name). When Reynor became rightfully pissed for what Mengsk did and turned on him, Mengsk called Reynor a terrorist. China is pulling a Mengsk right now. If China is true to its words. Come back in 28 years and let the HK'ers do what they want to do with their government for now. 1. China hopes to sign extradition regulations with Hong Kong (extending criminal offenders because there have been criminals who have committed murder and rape in mainland China and have been cast into Hong Kong. The Chinese government and other countries such as the United States also have extradition regulations, and the Hong Kong government has other regions. The state has extradition regulations). Why is it rejected? This is not because mainland China requires the implementation of laws in Hong Kong, but hopes to sign regulations with Hong Kong. This is actually very strange. It is actually an agreement between a country and a country within a country. 2. I hope that you can read the Sino-British Joint Declaration carefully. He has not given the British any rights after this. You can blame the Chinese government, but because of this, I think other countries are involved. This is still the Beijing government of China and the Hong Kong region. problem. In addition, the Chinese government's commitment is to keep Hong Kong unchanged for 50 years. I don't know how you understand it. I have two thoughts. One is to continue Hong Kong before the colony in 1997, and the second is to follow the basic law after 1997. Hong Kong. Before 1997, Hong Kong was a colony. Hong Kong people did not even have British nationality. The leaders of Hong Kong were all British whites. They were also British nationals, both the first and the second, including the Hong Kong Constitution, the Sino-British Joint Declaration. During the British colonial period, there was no universal suffrage. I don't know where Hong Kong's universal suffrage comes from. This violates the Constitution of Hong Kong - the Basic Law. In addition, without universal suffrage, it cannot mean that they have no democracy. Hong Kong's politics is closer to the Swiss political system, and each leader does not adopt the Swiss rotation system. Keeping it for 50 years, isn't it just that there is no universal suffrage? Once the universal suffrage is not a violation of the China Commitment and the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and the Hong Kong Basic Law? Although I think that Hong Kong has been harming itself for 50 years, the development of first-tier cities in China is much better than that of Hong Kong. For me, I have lived in Shanghai for a long time, and Hong Kong is like a rural area. Of course, I am not actually, most of them. This is also true in Europe, and I have a stark contrast to the views of Japanese cities. 3. The Chinese government of Beijing and all Chinese have never opposed liberal democracy and legal protests. However, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese were sensitive to the protests because we realized that such collective behavior would often evolve into violence. For example, China’s previous protests, the US bombing of the Yugoslav embassy, and Japan’s activities to commemorate the death of soldiers in World War II. This kind of parade in China has produced extreme violence, as happened in Hong Kong. If you don't trust the Chinese and don't trust the Chinese government, don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised, don't believe it? Don't you believe in Western media? Go look for their evaluation of the Hong Kong police and the Hong Kong government in history. 4. Special criminals are not advisable. Think about the United States, but the country with the highest proportion of prison population. Of course, I don't want China to become the United States. But think about it. There are many British nationals in the Hong Kong police, white people (maybe I think you still don't believe in the yellow race, but I don't think it is racist). Hong Kong's judicial system, so the judges are British nationality, Australian nationality, 90% of judges are white. You should trust them, not a group of unemployed people, a group of young people who have taken a poison and drink alcohol and have sex on the roadside (although you call it freedom, but often these are blocked by neutral media). Opposite to these violent protesters are peaceful protesters who have long since left the protest, and supporters who support the police, support the Hong Kong government, and support the Chinese government. They are more numerous, but unfortunately they need to work and they do not use violence. So it seems to be weak, and because many of them are older people (you should have heard of Hong Kong's aging), they are not very familiar with the Internet, and the Internet is now a Z-age person (in fact, 1995-2000) Born person). 5. Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people. Hong Kong knows that Hong Kong is bought by Li Ka-shing, and that the Chinese government cannot interfere and support socialism. Everyone has food and housing. Later, the economic decline of Western society, if you are a European, there should be experience, the US economy has recently grown, but it is also uncomfortable. After the 2008 financial turmoil, it has been declining for a long time. China is getting better and better. When China gets better, when they find that the Chinese who once earned 200 yuan a month have the same income and even more money, they find that they can’t be like the colonial era. Next, when it came to China, it became a millionaire, went to bed with more girls, and bought more luxurious cosmetics. So I hope to return to the colonial era and pass violence. (Their slogan is what you saw in this Hong Kong player and the NBA), by robbing mobile phone stores, selling them online, by raising the flags of the United States and the United Kingdom. I saw Swedes, and I think I should understand why, academically, the Sedgmo syndrome. Perhaps Westerners believe that the colonial era is very glorious. "don't you believe that the Hong Kong government and the Hong Kong police, which have always been highly praised" "Why did they protest? Quite simply, young people can't find a job without a way out, and they are poor. The long-term segregation policy with mainland China discriminates against mainland Chinese people and believes that they are all poor people, as whites discriminate against black people." This is trolling for sure... I can hardly find any other explanations. Oh, poor man. In fact, it is very simple. You only need to use Google to search for the gap between the rich and the poor in Hong Kong. Have you been to Hong Kong and China? I am very familiar with it.
Yeah yeah I can find Gini index for every country in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
But why do you think that's the reason of the protest? Where did you find that? Who told you that? You are very familiar with it but you don't know the reason?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
