Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 238 posts

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#221

Post by afarrell »

toyg wrote: post #214
afarrell wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Austria-Hungary was not a state with a functional and loyal military in 1919. The reason why Wilson's Doctrine applied to it was that there were French, Romanian, Italian, and Serbian troops occupying parts of its territory.

It was as much for that as to avoid a repeat of the squabbling over territories that had caused the war in the first place. The main point was that territories should not be assigned just because this or that army controls it (which would have inevitably degenerated again, as it did), but because the population wishes to be so. The failure of Versailles to fairly apply that rule (and later, of Germany and USSR to res…

Do I think that a velvet divorce is better than a civil war? Yes. Do I think that “the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must” is a detestable thing? Of course. But wanting a thing doesn’t make it so.

Examining the question “can Hong Kong meaningfully vote for independence?” inherently requires examining the power relationships involved: Who has power? How do they view themselves? What incentives constrain/impel their actions?

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#222

Post by afarrell »

toyg wrote: post #187
pvg wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hardly controversial that whatever Wilson's ideas were, they did not include Texas becoming an independent country. I also don't think it's controversial that all the intricate thinking, principles and international proclamations on self-determination don't actually boil down to 'any group or region can easily turn themselves into a sovereign country, if they really want to and work hard at it'.

Obviously there are parameters, but Wilson's principles have been one of the pillars of modern international relations. Discounting them would mean throwing us back to "might makes right", which is a recipe for permanent war. If you want to discuss why Texas does not meet parameters for independent statehood in your opinion, I'm happy to listen; but you cannot unilaterally say an unexplained "no" without looking very…

We still live in a world where might makes right. We also live in a world where the mighty identify themselves with certain principles and have certain incentives...which is why our current state of permanent war (since 2001 at least) is relatively mild

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#223

Post by coryfklein »

echaozh wrote: post #167
richardw wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not from the west. You don't have to trust people, but you should be free to make up your own mind. Read what they say and decide. In South Africa we used to have strict control over our news media. Having opened up, I'd rather read and watch what I want, make my mind up, and not get into trouble for voicing my opinion. A free media fights corruption. If you have no corruption then you're a very special country.

Be free to make your own mind. The Chinese are making their own mind, right? So what the fuss? The most funny part when the US or other western countries point fingers at Chinese having insufficient information of misinformation to decide for themselves, is that a significant portion of their population still believes in God, and in US specifically, people believe in Creationism. I don't know, information is just inf…

> China has problems and people talk about. In public. On the Internet.

I'm sorry - but isn't that in direct contradiction to the censorship? Doesn't the censorship prevent you from talking about things that Chinese leadership thinks would reflect badly on them or the country?

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#224

Post by toyg »

afarrell wrote: post #221
toyg wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was as much for that as to avoid a repeat of the squabbling over territories that had caused the war in the first place. The main point was that territories should not be assigned just because this or that army controls it (which would have inevitably degenerated again, as it did), but because the population wishes to be so. The failure of Versailles to fairly apply that rule (and later, of Germany and USSR to res…

Do I think that a velvet divorce is better than a civil war? Yes. Do I think that “the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must” is a detestable thing? Of course. But wanting a thing doesn’t make it so. Examining the question “can Hong Kong meaningfully vote for independence?” inherently requires examining the power relationships involved: Who has power? How do they view themselves? What incentives…

> wanting a thing doesn’t make it so.

If enough people want it, yes it does.

> inherently requires examining the power relationships

Indeed, but no country exists in a vacuum, not even a superpower like China. The world has a role to play.

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#225

Post by toyg »

afarrell wrote: post #220
toyg wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In one of those cases, the US themselves deployed weaponry to protect the population's own right to self-determination, so at least to US audiences it should read as uncontroversial, surely. Catalunya is still a bit fresh, but I think it is uncontroversial to say that quashing such demands has historically resulted in bad things happening that we probably wouldn't want to see happening again. In the age of the intern…

I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you. I’m disagreeing with your belief in the non-controversial nature of your statement. > The US deployed weaponry to... Is an admission that an position is controversial enough that a major world power thought it prudent to enforce that opinion with violent force or the active threat of force. "Kosovo je Srbija" is still an opinion you’ll find expressed in earnest. Would it be c…

> an admission that an position is controversial enough that a major world power thought it prudent to enforce that opinion with violent force

But that is the point of Wilson's: the US will (or rather should) back the right to self-determination. That has been the case for a century, and completely doing away with it (or witholding it from its very own citizens) would be a regression.

> Secession can also cause violence

Absolutely, as we've seen in the Balkans. And that's why I'm not a fan of independentist movements, in general. I just don't think one can sustain Wilson in some scenarios and not in others, as a principle. One can calculate pros and cons and allow secession only if certain conditions are met, but we cannot dismiss it with prejudice.

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#226

Post by toyg »

afarrell wrote: post #222
toyg wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously there are parameters, but Wilson's principles have been one of the pillars of modern international relations. Discounting them would mean throwing us back to "might makes right", which is a recipe for permanent war. If you want to discuss why Texas does not meet parameters for independent statehood in your opinion, I'm happy to listen; but you cannot unilaterally say an unexplained "no" without looking very…

We still live in a world where might makes right. We also live in a world where the mighty identify themselves with certain principles and have certain incentives...which is why our current state of permanent war (since 2001 at least) is relatively mild

> We still live in a world where might makes right.

I'd like to think that's not the case. The proof is that we have states that, if it were only due to pure power, would have no business existing (the Baltic ones, Singapore, most Caribbean ones, etc).

I am not so silly to think that might is not a factor in international relations, but I also think we must strive to be better every day, resolving our problems in ways that don't always boil down to pure power. Otherwise we're just left with tribes and spears.

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#227

Post by jopsen »

adinobro wrote: post #179
jopsen wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was China better 30 years ago? Didn't we just see the 30 year anniversary of tiananmen square..

500,000,000+ people taken out of extreme poverty is generally considered a slight improvement.

Fair point :)

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#228

Post by [deleted] »

smnrchrds wrote: post #12

Could someone please explain what the long-term goal of the protesters is? Best case scenario, HK and Chinese government postpone the integration until 2047. What then? When the borders come down, what will happen to all those who openly talked against Beijing government, held candlelight vigils for Tienanmen Square victims, and rallied and protested against a government who does not like people protesting and does n…

[deleted]

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#229

Post by afjl »

echaozh wrote: post #167
richardw wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not from the west. You don't have to trust people, but you should be free to make up your own mind. Read what they say and decide. In South Africa we used to have strict control over our news media. Having opened up, I'd rather read and watch what I want, make my mind up, and not get into trouble for voicing my opinion. A free media fights corruption. If you have no corruption then you're a very special country.

Be free to make your own mind. The Chinese are making their own mind, right? So what the fuss? The most funny part when the US or other western countries point fingers at Chinese having insufficient information of misinformation to decide for themselves, is that a significant portion of their population still believes in God, and in US specifically, people believe in Creationism. I don't know, information is just inf…

> a significant portion of their population still believes in God, and in US specifically, people believe in Creationism.

They believe Creationism because the US/west offers the freedom of choice. There is no government regulation forcing you to believe in one way or the other - you choose based on your own beliefs and experience.

Re: Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

#230

Post by afarrell »

toyg wrote: post #224
afarrell wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I think that a velvet divorce is better than a civil war? Yes. Do I think that “the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must” is a detestable thing? Of course. But wanting a thing doesn’t make it so. Examining the question “can Hong Kong meaningfully vote for independence?” inherently requires examining the power relationships involved: Who has power? How do they view themselves? What incentives…

> wanting a thing doesn’t make it so. If enough people want it, yes it does. > inherently requires examining the power relationships Indeed, but no country exists in a vacuum, not even a superpower like China. The world has a role to play.

> If enough people want it, yes it does.

No it doesn't. Thats like saying that if you spend enough money, you can produce housing. That is only true in a world where money allows you to incentivize and organize a group of people to assemble housing. (A significant chunk of HN does not live in that world)

Likewise, if enough people want a thing, that allows some group of them to build a power structure which is able to incentivize some of those people to make the thing happen. But it is a fundamental law that in order to do any kind of work over time, you need to exert power.

Post reply on HN