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

'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

fieldofvision.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 289 posts

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#201

Post by dumb1224 »

gonehome wrote: post #194
dumb1224 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it's definitely not censored on social media: https://s.weibo.com/weibo?q=%E7%BB%B4%E5%B0%BC%E7%86%8A&wvr=... Even if it was slightly true it must have been incredibly insignificant hence my skepticism. My point is that we could leave out a bit of noise as it is very easy to come across misunderstanding already.

It's not noise - the censors drop specific comms over time when there's focus. When the Pooh meme was happening if you tried sending it the receiver would never get it. Now that it has died down it's no longer a focus (though I'm still unsure if that image would be received). The same thing happens around certain events (Tiananmen Square Anniversary) where they get more extreme about the censorship. The fact that the…

I'm not sure it's censored for the reason you've stated (the mildest 'threat' part). But I take your point. The censoring regarding June every year is a very different story. I just hope I can contribute to a more meaningful discussion here as there are simply too much misunderstanding.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#202

Post by einpoklum »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #126
scotty79 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fragility of the CPC and its fear in being portrayed in any negative light knows no limits. That's because they have single party system. Eventually they'll figure out that splitting into two parties and exchanging highest power between the two every few years while still colectively controlling everything of value is way more resilient system. Then they will be able to let themselves to be hated because half o…

> they'll figure out that splitting into two parties and exchanging highest power between the two every few years while still colectively controlling everything of value is way more resilient system This requires rule of law to function. Otherwise, one set of elites won't trust handing power to the other. The breathless levels of corruption at the top of the CCP would also have to go, which is a difficult transition…

> The breathless levels of corruption at the top of the CCP would also have to go

Need I mention the Trump and Clinton foundations? The Bush family and the Carlyle group (complete with the Bin-Ladens)? And that's while ignoring Trump's over-the-top stuff, like getting the government to use his personal resorts and hotels, as an outlier.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#203

Post by scotty79 »

gonehome wrote: post #161
scotty79 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a criticism, but a praise. Political stabilitiy is of immense value to everybody. US is doing it correctly as the track record shows. No revolutions while other countries had multiple in the same timespan. I might sound a bit cynical but I prefer to think about this as non-idealistic. Because reality very rarely seems to align with any sort of idealism for me.

The framing is cynical, though I agree with you that stability is valuable. I'd argue the reason the framing is cynical is because the two party system wasn't intentionally crafted as some sort of 'nothing changes' power structure, but is the outcome from the current incentives of our democratic system. The two parties bit is arguably a flaw the founders tried unsuccessfully to prevent ( because it can lead to instab…

I don't believe intentions matter all that much. Certainly not more than than the outcomes.

Stumbling upon a pragmatic solution while pursuing idealistic goals doesn't sanctify the solution. And introducing a solution just for pragmatic reasons witout any pretense of idealism doesn't vilify it.

> But policy does change and decade over decade

That's a very low bar. It happens in single party systems as well. China went from communism into capitalism with single party system, without revolution.

Washington quote shows that he had some awareness of what qualities parties should have to improve the stability. Basing them on geography would be a terrible idea. Also picking two too comabative ideologies to center the parties on would be bad. You want two halves but not in open war with one another. You want them to agree on everything that matters, like that the rich and ruling should stay rich and ruling, army should be funded as much as it wants, and business should proceed, and differ only on conceptual issues that don't really connect all that much with anything really important.

Just ask yourself how would you design a two party system for China.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#204

Post by philsnow »

Aunche wrote: post #181
philsnow wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the fact that Western HN commenters can't differentiate Hong Kong and the CCP This is not a fact. Do you have a citation? edit: it's also a pretty vague statement that could be satisfied by finding any two people who "can't differentiate" between HK and the CCP. You didn't say "the majority of Western HN commenters".

The comment I replied to was equating my defense of the Hong Kong police as "a CCP talking point." How else am I supposed to interpret it?

> The comment I replied to was equating my defense of the Hong Kong police as "a CCP talking point." How else am I supposed to interpret it?

Not as equating HK with the CCP?

You wrote "How is this a CCP talking point?". I don't know if touting "only 2 deaths by HK police" is or isn't a CCP talking point, but it ignores the question of how many HK residents were extradited[0] to the mainland, never to be heard from again. So omitting that discussion makes it a statement favorable to the CCP (or at least neutral).

[0] if you even want to call the process "extradition" and not straight up "abduction"

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#205

Post by dirtyid »

medium_burrito wrote: post #78
dirtyid wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some classification of these new forms of interventions: Ukraine is more hybrid warfare. HK is more lawfare. Chinese maritime disputes is more gray zone warfare.

In all cases, the goal is to establish a truth on the ground independent of political posturing. Of course, someone can call your bluff on it!

IMO the political posturing is paramount. Ultimate goal is to provide an sufficient truth calibrated to deter bluff calling. Fundamentally most countries don't want to or have capability to intervene, so the purpose is to give competing parties a credible "out" with manageable political cost, i.e. reduce bluff calling to angry letters / sanctions versus hard military retaliation. Gain objective while deter / mitigate the most unwanted responses.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#206

Post by ghostwriter »

dnautics wrote: post #145
ghostwriter wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not taking a side here, just pointing out the fact that the tactic was known and used well before the Crimean events: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overthrow_of_the_Hawaiian_King... The current difference is that now it's happenning during a live broadcast, and the actions are being tried to be justified (as "justice") through existing legal frameworks. That's one of the ways Empires grow their periphery regions. Ano…

> The current difference Just as a point of comparison (not justifying russia or the US), the region of donetsk (and crimea) was supermajority ethnically russian, and by the time the US overthrew the hawaiian kingdom, ethnic hawaiians were a minority within the (mostly imported) population, so in the case of both russia and the US's actions the majority of local populace gained political power in the aftermath of the…

fair point, my reference to "the current difference" was more about the ongoing Crimea situation rather than the HK situation, I should have been more clear in that regard. I still believe that in the HK case there's a vested interest of certain political elite (rather than economic) strata to be aligned with Beijing.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#207

Post by MsMowz »

chronicsunshine wrote: post #57
MsMowz wrote: post #44

I'll try to strictly source my remarks and refrain from commenting on the political content of the HK demonstrations to keep this purely factual, as I think this could be a rather controversial thread; however, it's interesting how different the reception to these demonstrations is to the reception to the US Capitol riots and the BLM demonstrations of last year. Hong Kong demonstrators have stormed government buildin…

Equating the two is ridiculous. The Capitol Riots were an attempt to overturn a free and fair democratic election in favor of the rioters preferred candidate. The HK protests are in relation to freedom from the Chinese Government's dictatorial rule. Democracy is what is most important in both of these situations. The Capitol Riots were anti democracy. The HK protests are pro democracy.

I understand your point, but what I was asking for is a non-ideological distinction. Every point you have made is from the ideological position that supports liberal democracy, but those who support people’s democracy would levy the same accusations in reverse. I’m not interested in hearing either of those points of view, because there simply cannot be a productive discussion on those terms.

I would like to understand the empirical situation. You suggest that I’m equating the two, but I’m actually just ignorant on the _substantive_ arguments. If you would be kind enough to enlighten me on that front, I would truly appreciate it.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#208

Post by toiletfuneral »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #165
toiletfuneral wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which party do I vote for if I want to stop US imperialism? which party do I vote for if I want MFA? Its not the Republicans, and its definitely not the Democrats. Its no conspiracy theory to say the duopoly shuts down a lot of issues from being ever being addressed

Why are there no US political parties advocating for the dissolution of the US?

now we're talking!

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#209

Post by bsaul »

lxe wrote: post #90

This is the kind of content I'd like to see less of on Hacker News. > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. There are other platforms (Reddit) where there's plenty of discussion around topics like this. Not to say that HN…

End-user technology (as opposed to military) starts to play a broader and broader role in political events those days, and places like HN are a very good place to have people actually designing those tools realize what the implication are for real people around the world.

As an example, this video made me instantly realize how much there is a need for truely decentralized technology, that no government could shut down. I already knew it of course, but now i have the faces of those students in my mind. I happen to be working on encryption for a messaging app at the moment.

Re: 'Do Not Split': A Hong Kong protest film [video]

#210

Post by lovelyviking »

One more film(VR). One more democracy under attack by former communists.

Dnipro – outpost of Ukraine - VR version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AS1cOAm6gI

This one is one step further - with millitary forces and war. Can those communists be former really ...

Post reply on HN