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

Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 178 posts

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#161

Post by chachachoney »

KyleBerezin wrote: post #158
chachachoney wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Hopefully they can correct the mistake by granting full citizenship to Hong Kong permanent residents who wants it, otherwise whatever they say is a farce. Same goes for USA, if they want solidarity with Hong Kong protestors grant them unconditional asylum or permanent residence, rest all talks are worthless. This is something we should all be advocating for.

How do we start?

Good question. Given that the concept of asylum has been demonized by the current administration in the US, seems like the first step is electing the opposition party and demanding that they express their sympathies for HK protestors with legislation instead of words, thoughts and prayers.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#162

Post by NeedMoreTea »

greedo wrote: post #145
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not forget that the hyperinflation of the Weimar Republic was, in large part, intentional. They printed money to pay the Versailles reparations, and to inflate them away. Obviously it escalated out of control, but they weren't mere innocent victims of external events.

Weren't reparations specified in Gold marks to specifically address concerns of inflating away the debt?

They were specified in gold value, but payment was accepted in gold, cash, commodities, stock and bonds, and even manufactured goods I think. I think cash was only restricted fairly late on in the reparation payments - mid 1920s at a guess, i.e. after the hyperinflation.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#163

Post by dragonsh »

graeme wrote: post #144
dragonsh wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already commented on this issue on another post so won't repeat again. Britain never had intention to give democracy to Hong Kong which will require it to make economic contributions to a colony. Their first priority has always been to safeguard their own economic interests. [1] [1] https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1419999...

Did you read the article I linked? It talked about the 1960s and china warning britain it would invade if democracy were attempted. Your article is about the 1997 handover and how britain had limited room for maneuver. It absolutely does nit say what you say it says.

You mean to say Britain was so scared by China in 1960 that from 1960 to 1997 it could not grant autonomy, economic and political freedoms to Hong Kong. I am not sure what stopped them to democratically elect a Hong Kong CEO, which is an appointed head without any people involvement until Chris Patten in 1997.

Even during cultural revolution when China was going through famine, Britain could not do anything.

The declassified papers if you read whole, you will find that Britain did not fight for Hong Kong democracy because it will require economic contribution to Hong Kong and will impact Britain's economy.

Britain has never wanted democracy for India too the largest colonial example. It was its people who declared in 1921, quit India movement, they left because one can't govern person who doesn't want at any cost.

Indeed before leaving Britain did make sure India remains a divided country so that it does not challenge the Britain in future. India and the resulting Pakistan and Bangladesh still suffer the consequences.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#164

Post by graeme »

dragonsh wrote: post #163
graeme wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article I linked? It talked about the 1960s and china warning britain it would invade if democracy were attempted. Your article is about the 1997 handover and how britain had limited room for maneuver. It absolutely does nit say what you say it says.

You mean to say Britain was so scared by China in 1960 that from 1960 to 1997 it could not grant autonomy, economic and political freedoms to Hong Kong. I am not sure what stopped them to democratically elect a Hong Kong CEO, which is an appointed head without any people involvement until Chris Patten in 1997. Even during cultural revolution when China was going through famine, Britain could not do anything. The decl…

>You mean to say Britain was so scared by China in 1960 that from 1960 to 1997 it could not grant autonomy, economic and political freedoms to Hong Kong.

Yes? China had beaten off the US in the Korean war and was a massive land power in the region.

Britain had just suffered a humiliating setback in the Suez crisis if 1956 and basically abandoned all imperial ambition.

More specifically related to HK, Britain withdraw almost all military forces "Easy of Suez". They were powerless in the east and both they and China knew it.

You yourself mention "fighting" for HK democracy, implying it wasn't their choice to make, really.

You're mixing timeframes by referring to India. They gained independence in 1948. My argument was the by the 1960s Britain was democratizing as colonies, having given up the empire. It's not unusual that Britain didn't give Hong Kong democracy in 1920. It is unusual that they didn't give it democracy in 1960 or 1970.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_of_Suez

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#165

Post by godelski »

greedo wrote: post #147
godelski wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What can you do about this? Pretty much nothing. A lot. And what you can do depends who you are. Hongkongers can keep doing what they are doing. I'm sorry, but killing everyone in HK is not an option for China. Not only would it start a global war, as genocides tend to do, it would create unrest in the mainland, and frankly people are a resource. You can't govern the dead. I frequently hear the arguments from Ameri…

If China decides to solve HK with force, there's nothing any other country will do militarily. As much as liberal Western democracies want to protect civil rights across the world, nothing militarily will be done. China is too strong, HK is too far away, and the West has let its military strength atrophy too far. Do you think Germany will ignore Bismarck's dictum? "...not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenad…

Can is a weird word here. Especially since stuff is being done.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#166

Post by dragonsh »

graeme wrote: post #164
dragonsh wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean to say Britain was so scared by China in 1960 that from 1960 to 1997 it could not grant autonomy, economic and political freedoms to Hong Kong. I am not sure what stopped them to democratically elect a Hong Kong CEO, which is an appointed head without any people involvement until Chris Patten in 1997. Even during cultural revolution when China was going through famine, Britain could not do anything. The decl…

>You mean to say Britain was so scared by China in 1960 that from 1960 to 1997 it could not grant autonomy, economic and political freedoms to Hong Kong. Yes? China had beaten off the US in the Korean war and was a massive land power in the region. Britain had just suffered a humiliating setback in the Suez crisis if 1956 and basically abandoned all imperial ambition. More specifically related to HK, Britain withdraw…

As I said in my earlier comments please read through the declassified documents completely. Britain has no interest in giving democracy at the expense of its economic interests.

Even from 1960-1997, Hong Kong has been a cash cow, profit generating colony for Britain. So those interests were also very important.

> You're mixing timeframes by referring to India.

India is just an example of what does Britain meant by giving democracy to its colonies and for safeguarding its own interests. There is nothing noble about it, and what is happening in Hong Kong is just the repercussions of Britain's selfish economic interests. In history 22 years cannot be compared with 150 years, and it very well shows how Britain looked after the interests of Hong Kong and filled its own coffers.

I will agree with your one point that people of Hong Kong should have asked for autonomy and political freedom since 1960 or even earlier like other British colony with mass movements, they didn't.

But at least today Britain can come out and show a gesture to Hong Kong permanent residents from whom it profited for 150 years, by really granting them unconditional permanent residence in Britain.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#167

Post by dragonsh »

y2kenny wrote: post #148
dragonsh wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economic issue should have been raised in protest and could have converted to mass movement to reject a house of car park size or make it illegal for developer to build such home. Force government through peaceful protest to take measures like Singapore for house, health and education. Universal suffrage is not a panacea, indeed in many democracies money decides who become the head of state. In two largest democracy…

Are you familiar with Hong Kong's public housing system? [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Hong_Kong

I am pretty familiar with it and how it failed the Hong Kong people, when government worked in the interest of billionaire real estate developers. The house ownership ratio will itself reveal the reality.

Singapore learned from Hong Kong but did it much better and today one of the best example of public housing (they call it Housing Development Board - HDB). I will not go into details but its a topic of its own to discuss issues of Hong Kong real estate and get rich quick ideas based on it.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#168

Post by VK538FY »

godelski wrote: post #146
VK538FY wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm probably a bigger fan of self-determination than you: if the people of HK, Catalonia or California wish to follow their own road, I support them, but they need to work that out on their own. When those movements are even partly the product of foreign intervention and are given uncritical coverage in the western press, that is a giant warning sign. We've been there before many times yet we never learn.

> When those movements are even partly the product of foreign intervention I feel this is a cop out. We live in a global economy and so all these things are highly connected. Your statement implies that our reporting of these events is intervention. May be influence, but I'm not sure that would be intervention.

To clarify.

A free press writes what it likes and the act of writing a newspaper article of any sort is not an act of 'foreign intervention'. We probably agree on that.

I have a problem with the fairly homogeneous discourse that I observe in the western press about certain subjects that prepare the domestic public opinion for political and armed intervention in other countries. I know that it's happening because I remember the day when I could read a lot more opposing opions in the newspapers of my language.

But preparing the domestic public opinion for intervention is not intervention itself. I am resolutely opposed to the intervention that is desired by the powers that be.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#169

Post by VK538FY »

duxup wrote: post #96
VK538FY wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree partially. The limits of 'acceptable' foreign intervention are not black and white. My feeling, based on what I observe, is that western intelligence services are all over this. Foreign intervention in Syria and Lybia started quietly enough alright through unofficial meetings with opposition groups. It's obvious that many Hongkongese are legitimately concerned about their political and economic future. Foreig…

It's strange the differences in perspective here as with Syria and Libya ... IIRC there was little in the way of any mystery as far as who sided with who and their involvement, yet some folks portray those events as some sort of semi secret war. Those events have also become the poster child for some regimes to use to warn people about opposing them.

A semi-secret war? Surely a very mysterious war, at least to me because conventional reasoning does not allow me to understand why western governments encouraged putches that destroyed stable governments (imperfect but far, far superior to the alternative) and subsequently armed 'moderate' groups whose morbid ideology differed little from the ideology that we're all supposed to combat ('...right?').

Unfortunately, our press doesn't ask the hard questions. No one is held accountable for the death and destruction that these policies have created. So western governments go on and try to apply the magic formula again. I believe that they are doing the same in HK.

Re: Eyewitnesses describe brutal beatings by HK police

#170

Post by notzuck »

xster wrote: post #129
notzuck wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why haven't the protesters said this is one of their main issues?

Same reason why the rich-controlled media manage to get the 99% in the US to be too busy calling each other bigots and nazis instead of fighting for their common economic cause.

Nonsense diatribe with little substance and totally fails to explain anything. Why even bother?
Post reply on HN