Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/15/opinion/hong-kong-extradition-protests.html

346 204 7 years ago

lostmsu2• 7 years ago

Considering, that HK leader did not immediately withdrew the bill after the first protest, it is only natural to assume, that that person does not represent the will of the people. So it makes sense to impeach.

devoply2• 7 years ago

Do I value my life or value my career?

jMyles• 7 years ago

If one aspires to this sort of leadership, then the hope is that person values freedom over both of those things.

JumpCrisscross4• 7 years ago

it is only natural to assume, that that person does not represent the will of the people

Hong Kong’s Chief Executive is “elected from a restricted pool of candidates supportive of the Central Government by a 1200-member Election Committee“ [1]. The Election Committee is pro-Beijing and not a democratic body.

Hong Kong’s CE is better thought of as the CPC’s emissary to Hong Kong than as a true executive.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Executive_of_Hong_Kong

dmix2• 7 years ago

I've read most the legislature is pro-Beijing, which is how the bill passed in the first place. I doubt these same people are going to impeach her for it.

ajdlinux2• 7 years ago

Just to be clear here - the bill has not passed the Legislative Council, however the bill is expected to pass if and when it is listed for a vote due to the pro-Beijing majority. (Lam's announcement on "suspension" rather than "withdrawal" means that debate on the bill will not be resumed indefinitely, however if the government changes its mind again it could list it for a vote in the Legislative Council immediately.)

LegCo's impeachment power was dead letter law from the start - I can't think of a circumstance where the pro-Beijing camp would ever use it, short of perhaps some situation where a previously pro-Beijing chief executive has gone rogue and refuses to resign...

sanxiyn• 7 years ago

I live in South Korea. In 2016, a lot of members in Park's party voted to impeach the president Park. (In fact, impeachment couldn't have passed without such.) It's pretty simple really. Anyone from competitive seat will do pretty much anything if they are 100% sure they won't be re-elected otherwise.

chrisseaton2• 7 years ago

it is only natural to assume, that that person does not represent the will of the people. So it makes sense to impeach.

Is that what impeachment means? To remove someone because they've lost popular support? I thought impeachment was rather about charging a public official with some kind of crime or wrongdoing. Being unpopular isn't a crime.

JumpCrisscross4• 7 years ago

I thought impeachment was rather about charging a public official with some kind of crime or wrongdoing

Impeachment “is the process by which a legislative body levels charges against a government official” [1]. Standards vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. But since the decision is made by a political body, not judges, it is ultimately a political decision.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment

lostmsu2• 7 years ago

Remove from power. I might have used the word incorrectly, but the desired outcome is the same.

hker4• 7 years ago

Whether and when the current Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, will be removed, is decided by CCP.

Let me explain.

Excluding the current (4th) Chief Executive Carrie Lam, there have been three other Chief Executives [1], and the upshot is that two of them experienced large protests--in 2003 for 1st CE Tung Chee-hwa, in 2014 for 3rd CE Leung Chun-ying--and both could not complete their second terms due to protests.

It is common knowledge in Hong Kong that they were pressured by higher-ups for not completing their second terms as Chief Executives, in exchange for seats as vice-chairmen of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference in China: both gave ridiculous reasons to not complete their second terms to serve Hong Kong, but then went on to become vice-chairmen serving China. They were not immediately removed after the protests only to save grace for them and for CCP.

The 1st CE Tung Chee-hwa resigned in 2005, less than 2 years after the protest in 2003 and 2 years into his second term, for a ridiculous medical reason [2]; the 3rd CE Leung Chun-ying was about to run for his second term in 2017, 3 years after the Umbrella protest, only to announce in a sudden that he did not intend to run to take care of his family [3].

Now in 2019 the 4th CE Carrie Lam faces the anti-extradition protest. And we wonder what the outcome will be.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Executive_of_Hong_Kong

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tung_Chee-hwa

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leung_Chun-ying

(Arguably, the 2nd CE Donald Tsang, the only CE not facing large protests but who is serving prison time, also has his fate decided by the CCP, with the speculation that he refused some orders from China, but I digress.)

xtirpation• 7 years ago

who is serving prison time

Donald Tsang was released earlier this year [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Tsang

irjustin2• 7 years ago

The difficulty with this statement is it requires that the people have the ability to affect their leaders through voting which in Hong Kong's case does not.

In HK, the people can vote for a Chief Executive of HK, but the pool that you can vote for is now only allowed to be "pro China", this is what the umbrella revolution was protesting and sadly failed. "Universal suffrage but only with the people we let you vote for."

Today, impeachment of the Chief Executive is overtly not possible[2] since China controls whether that vote is allowed to take place with pro China people doing the voting.

By overtly, I mean I personally cannot see a way forward, but I admit, I'm very surprised to see this bill be rescinded. Tactically speaking, I would have expected the same thing from the Umbrella Revolution. Which was basically let the protestors occupy the streets and let the public become annoyed to the point where the oppressed (protestors) become the oppressors.

Why wasn't the waiting game played this time around? I'm not sure. I'm super happy they were successful in this, and I hope/pray for long term change as my heritage is from HK. But... I'm extremely skeptical.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Hong_Kong_protests [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment#Hong_Kong

hker4• 7 years ago

By overtly, I mean I personally cannot see a way forward, but I admit, I'm very surprised to see this bill be rescinded. Tactically speaking, I would have expected the same thing from the Umbrella Revolution. Which was basically let the protestors occupy the streets and let the public become annoyed to the point where the oppressed (protestors) become the oppressors. > Why wasn't the waiting game played this time around? I'm not sure. I'm super happy they were successful in this, and I hope/pray for long term change as my heritage is from HK. But... I'm extremely skeptical.

As we are not Xi, we could only speculate why this time is different, that the anti-extradition protest in 2019 achieved something (the suspension of the law), unlike the Umbrella protest in 2014 which achieved effectively nothing.

One key difference is that, the 2014 Umbrella protest concerns only Hong Kong--China internal politics: other parties (US, UK, Canada, etc.) have less to say for Hong Kong's universal suffrage; meanwhile the 2019 anti-extradition protest concerns citizens of other countries, so they have a say in this particular event.

Quoting Simon Shen (in Chinese [1], section six there, translation mine + Google translate):

VI. Diplomacy of Diaspora: The Dispute of the "Fugitive Offenders" Breaks Through the Diplomatic Missions in Hong Kong Standardized by "the Vienna Convention"
...
However, the "Fugitive Offenders Ordinance" dispute is a rare opportunity for these diplomats to find reasons to comment on Hong Kong, because the regulations directly cover their own citizens and chambers of commerce in Hong Kong. With this starting point, comments are their basic responsibility and there is room for manoeuvre. It is said that the Office of the Special Commissioner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Hong Kong will release the doubts from the collective and their meetings. One of the reasons is naturally that the SAR Government can speak at the level of the Basic Law and is not interested in the other party. The SAR Government does not seem to be interested in a local regulation covering foreign businessmen and expatriates. This has already exceeded the pure legal issue, but opened a dangerous Pandora's box because "protecting the diaspora" is well known to the international community. "Universal Key", many acts that could have been classified as "interference in internal affairs" have become crowned with such reasonable reasons. For example, the United States intervenes in Venezuela to protect the diaspora, and Russia annexes Crimea to protect the diaspora. In recent years, embassies around the country have also stepped up publicity to protect the diaspora.
More importantly, this time the countries have made great comments on Hong Kong and set a number of precedents. In addition to the collective actions of the EU countries, the United Kingdom and Canada are also issued a "Joint Statement" by Hong Kong foreign ministers to Hong Kong, suggesting that the British will start "England after the Brexit". The possibility of the Australian-New Zealand Commonwealth is an example of other diplomatic work with Hong Kong; other diplomats seem to have a lot of cases in the past month. During the Disputes of the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, the SAR Government has been unable to successfully dispel the doubts of various countries, and even more and more, the consulates in Hong Kong have created more working relationships because of the need for direct exchanges. The importance of this consular mission was first activated in the twenty years after the reunification. It would be almost impossible without a draft that covered all the people of the world and caused a lot of local controversy.

And from a previous discussion, some one claimed that the real reason that the 2019 protest achieved something has to do with Taiwan: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20196738

[1] https://simonshen.blog/2019/06/16/%e5%be%9e%e5%9c%8b%e9%9a%9...

vmlinuz• 7 years ago

Just to be clear, the people cannot vote for the CE - from a limited pool, or otherwise. That was the proposed change in 2014, breaking the previous promise of universal suffrage, but the changes were shelved as a result of the protests, leaving the previous system in place - nominations and selection are still both made by the 1200-member 'election committee' which is widely considered to be a Beijing rubber-stamp group.

thedudeabides52• 7 years ago

Does anyone know the mechanism by which she could be forced to withdraw?

Impeachment is usually for breaking the law, not putting forth a bad one...

Leary2• 7 years ago

She can be impeached by the Legislative Council, which is unlikely given the Pro-Beijing faction holds a majority.

thedudeabides52• 7 years ago

ok, thanks, and how are the members of the legislative council appointed?

my_username_is_6• 7 years ago

Withdraw the extradition bill, or forced to step down from office?

The bill is not in the legislature yet, so it is up to her whether the bill gets brought to a vote. It sounds like even pro-Beijing lawmakers are growing weary of this bill, saying that this isn't worth the fight that's being made over it. The Article 23 National Security law is more of a priority for a lot of them, but that was similarly unpopular the last time it was brought up.

The most likely outcome with Lam leaving the position of Chief Executive is for her to resign. This could be on her own accord, because her legislation has proved so unpopular, or because of pressure from Beijing. This is not making Xi look very good--both internally and internationally. One of the most consistent demands of the protesters right now is for her to step down. It would not be surprising for her to do so if these protests continue.

dang• 7 years ago

Large thread from earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20196271

smnrchrds• 7 years ago

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 not shy away from killing thousands or putting millions in concentration camps.

Do all protesters in HK plan to emigrate before 2047 or do they think they can convince Beijing to keep away even after that date?

Waterluvian• 7 years ago

Why does everything have to have some long term goal? Everything is transient. Life is fleeting. Fight for tomorrow.

tlear• 7 years ago

They are idealists, their parents and grandparents were not subjected to Cultural revolution and rest of the brutality of PRC. They think they can keep the city they love as it is.

Realistically their only hope is collapse of PRC. Never say never and who knows they might help it happen.

I have quite a few classmates back from university (end of 90s start of 2000s) whose families saw writing on the wall, had enough $$ and got the fuck out while going was good.

JumpCrisscross4• 7 years ago

their only hope is collapse of PRC

Not necessarily. A respectful and long-term oriented Beijing would be fine. (The CPC would need to change, to prevent a dictator-for-life like Xi from re-emerging.)

There are a lot of win-win outcomes between the subjugation of Hong Kong and collapse of China.

my_username_is_6• 7 years ago

I think part of the reason that the number of people protesting has grown over the years is that a lot of the people who would have been protesters left around '97. A new generation has grown up with many basic freedoms and they don't want to give those up... And they don't want to leave HK either. I'm not sure if it's harder to get visas to other countries nowadays, but a lot of people are choosing to stay and fight for their country and their way of life rather than running away.

Ennis• 7 years ago

Naturally most people do things they think they can continue doing in the future. The more HKers value their way of life and defend it the more difficult it will be to tear down the walls just like that. Facts on the ground influence political outcomes.

Leary2• 7 years ago

One Country, Two Systems actually stipulates that Hong Kong shall enjoy a high degree of autonomy for "at least" 50 years, there is nothing that state what will actually happen afterwards.

Therefore it is conceivable for Hong Kong to remain somewhat autonomous after 2047, after which, it is possible for mainland China to further develop politically and legally so that integration would cause less of an issue.

rorykoehler• 7 years ago

They're "progressing" in the wrong direction at a rapid pace at the moment.

petre3• 7 years ago

It's more like whisful thinking. The CCP is just being patient, eroding HK autonomy one law at a time so people don't realize it or become complacent.

komali2• 7 years ago

They're fighting for a democratic China. Nobody else within the Chinese political sphere is so overtly standing up to xi jinping.

I think it's good. They're giving hope to fellow supporters of Chinese democracy. There's people like that on the mainland and they don't have much else to give them hope.

chr1• 7 years ago

What alternative do you propose for them? emigrate now? By 2047 many things could change, maybe China would become more democratic, maybe it would be easier to build a floating city, maybe indeed China would agree to leave more autonomy. The long term plan for everyone is to die, but improving things in short term is still worth it.

petre3• 7 years ago

Emigrate to where? Taiwan? Singapore? Other places with a vibrant Chinese community? By 2047 things could change for the worse. You're being overly optimistic when all signs hint that it's getting worse. They're too close to mainland with the PLA at their doorstep.

closeparen• 7 years ago

30 years is a decently long time relative to China's current political system, it could change quite a bit by then.

jopsen4• 7 years ago

30 years ago was tiananmen square...

What forces is at work for the better here?

azernik• 7 years ago

The extent to which they carry a flame for Tiananmen indicates that they have an all-China political vision as well.

pishpash5• 7 years ago

I believe there are two different crowds. The older one does the candle light vigils. The younger one wants HK independence and doesn't really care about the rest of China. But it would be great if the second group learned a bit of history, including of protest movements in the mainland, and showed that all-China vision you speak of. It could only help themselves and help everyone.

phantomathkg• 7 years ago

The short term goal is very simple.

* Withdraw the bill, not a temporary suspension. * Withdraw the characterisation of last Wed protest as a riot.

pishpash5• 7 years ago

Then? Carrie Lam step down? Then? Chief Executive elected directly? Then? Independence referendum? Then? ...

There is no end really, and absent a working political process to absorb and debate demands, street protests can always turn toward the extreme. That's why it's dangerous to force people to go this route.

Unfortunately there will be a red line somewhere, and for China it is probably one or two steps away on that list. Remember, Tian'anmen Square also spiraled out of control from very mild beginnings.

nine_k• 7 years ago

2047 is 28 years from today. A number of things may change.uh China during that time; the leadership of CPC very likely will have changed.

28 years ago, in 1991, China looked notably different from what it is today.

Danieru• 7 years ago

Indeed, 28 years ago China was not even a dictatorship!

It is foolish to think China in another 28 years is going to be nicer. Despot regimes get worse before they collapse. Sadly even the collapse is not a reprieve.

bytemut• 7 years ago

I think most protesters are optimistic that if they can keep on winning each political battle like this, something dramatic can happen in their favor in 2047.

Also even if nothing can be changed, one perspective is that it is better to vocally reject rather than accepting in silence.

my_username_is_6• 7 years ago

Several of the people that I've asked in Hong Kong say that they're simply fighting to protect the city that they love. There are many paths that the future can take, and while a lot of them do not look good for the way of life of many Hong Kongers, if they don't fight now then they're giving up their city freely. And to do that is just unfathomable.

irjustin2• 7 years ago

Agreed, which I was surprised the waiting game wasn't played like during the Umbrella Revolution.

I'm glad they were successful in this piece, but man... what's the long game and how do you get there?

Is there a path to keeping Hong Kong truly separate? A Crimea? An independent state?

Personally, I don't think so, but keep fighting guys, it's basically all they've got.

simonh4• 7 years ago

The ace in the hole for Hong Kong is that Beijing wants to unify with Taiwan as well and is promoting their relationship with Hong Kong as a possible model for how that might work. They want to demonstrate to Taiwan that they could reunify and Taiwan could still retain a degree of autonomy.

Beijing agreed to stay hands-off Hong Kong until 2047, but that doesn't necessarily mean the entire judicial, legal and political system in Hong Kong will become null and void overnight. In principle of course Beijing will be able to do whatever they like, but it seems at leas plausible that they will incrementally re-form the system in HK to their liking over time rathe than in one blow. In fact things like the extradition bill, which you can bet was at least reviewed and approved by Beijing if not dictated by them, is an attempt to start that process now through indirect means.

Ideally for Beijing, such indirect means would be the only means necessary even after 20147. Why impose change if you can present it as driven by HK legislators themselves?

andyonthewings• 7 years ago

You can also say that we are all going to die in < 100 years, let's don't eat/work/play/etc. But of course no body would stop doing things. We should always try to make the best of our lives.

powerapple• 7 years ago

They don't. That's why youngsters are the driving force for changes, they destroy. It is not a bad thing. The real driving force to make change is actually power. When these protests are aligned with some power, things go change. I am certain things won't happen in countries such as US or China. For smaller and weaker countries, maybe.

nialv7• 7 years ago

Even if it doesn't change anything, they at least stood up and fought.

Angostura• 7 years ago

Putting of a bad policy for a little less than 30 years doesn't seem trivial.

ForHackernews3• 7 years ago

2047 is 28 years from now. Twenty eight years ago, the Soviet Union still existed (until December). Twenty eight years ago, Chinese GDP per capita was $359.

Twenty eight years from now, the EU may not exist. There may no longer be fish in the ocean: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/salt-water-fish-extinction-seen...

All I'm saying is lot can happen in 28 years, and it's pretty silly for the protestors to give up now because of what might happen decades later.

ngcc_hk2• 7 years ago

Please read my comment below for the article.

For your question you must have to see not through the lens of a unified Hong Kong. Hong Kong is really international.

Firstly, there are four - June 9 1m+ then jun 9 evening; June 12 with some conflict but mostly the young one trying to stop the bill without this the bill would not have even suspended; jun 16 the 2m+. their composition are very different. The target is also different.

My comment and the article hopefully give you some hint on the jun 9 and jun 12 1 and 2m+. They are across spectrum of whole Hong Kong.

May I roughly said 1/2 of hker have foreign passport or at least have relatives overseas. Many of the protestors are not want to go but do have a place to go. Or try hard to. You may note those hongkonges’ link as 29 cities around the world join the protest. That segment join not to emigrate as they did it already. The law affected them staying in Hong Kong. But more importantly they would affect the Hong Kong status as it affect the foreigner as well.

You have to aware many of the objection to the law are coming from official diplomatic with official letters from Eu, Britain and many different USA camp. The 85,000 American lived here is a force. There are foreigners in the protest. If they go, Hongkong is done.

(There are another group. About 1m of hker are not really hker. They just come in the last 20 years for various reasons. The huawei woman in Canada is holding 3 hk passport. I suspect they might not have join the protest as they conf to hk to hide etc. Now they trigger others as if these group go the property markets may die. Hk is the most expensive place in the world to own a car park size flat. Other then foreigner these affect is key.)

This 2m+ protest is very unusual as many are pro-china and pro-establishment camp. For this they will no doubt stay. But it is driving away foreigner and hidden chinese rich that would affect them.

Guess you are after the two major protest but the conflict one. We are not sure about the brick throwing etc. But quite sure many of the protestor as reported by those hymns signing Christian are young kids. They call hk home. They would fight by putting their body between the gun and the legislature chamber to prevent the bill to pass. They are less calculated than we adults. They saw this as a beginning of end of Hong Kong as the chinese law come to rule. At all cost they have to stop it.

One protestor said clearly “shoot me dead is better than this” and then she join the effort encircling the chamber. Many young one was hurt as there is no weapon. One of my friend trying to help found out first time it hurt a lot when tear gas residue touch your skin. And she is just helping. But whilst crying and painful our kids just wash their eyes and skins. And go back. One said “I do not want to give up”. All still lost as the chamber finally was cleared. In fact they will charge 7-10 year in jail if caught. (And if they had gone to Hosiptal and without the doctor and nurse reporting them somehow the police know. Two get arrested this way.)

But the story leaked out to us all. Unlike umbrella movement there is no leader. None. Just kids organised themselves using telegram where to go. It was a shock to oldies like us. Self organised ... no match to riot police. But just kids fighting for their home.

The community know and shock. That is why one of the slogan is to not to define this as riot and release the student involved. In the protest sometimes I can see parents walking not very normal protestor like. Then I saw a boy or a girl around. You can sense what is going on. I suspect they come is to ensure the kid not to do this alone. May be they drag them out if something happen.

Before I went to protest one of my neigbour looking at me wearing black t shirt. They said they would not go themselves. But they told a bit their family and relatives story. It is like everyone know someone’s kid are involved. As she said in the past she blamed the activist. But all in jail now. These kids just went themselves. They are nice kids not troublemaker they said. Help them is their message if they are pro government.

These kids are not going to go anywhere. Better die than run, unlike their parents like us. Hong Kong is their home. 2047. I do not see they see there is a deadline. It is their motherland. Hong Kong is not China. Hong Kong is Hong Kong.

Hence even shocking to us usual protestor, the whole community move to protect their kids. I never saw so many people in my life m. I have even joined the jun 9 million people protest and June 16 is a totally different scale.

Not sure I answer your question as I do not know what are their strategy, tactics or plan. but I hope I give you an impression as one protestor following the case. It is a shock. If we live long enough you will see either a tragedy or a birth of a nation. God bless.

my_username_is_6• 7 years ago

One of my friend trying to help found out first time it hurt a lot when tear gas residue touch your skin. And she is just helping. But whilst crying and painful our kids just wash their eyes and skins. And go back.

My favorite line that I heard from one protester was "tear gas isn't so bad, it's sort of just like chopping onions. I eat spicy food worse than it all the time". You can't help but smile at that kind of attitude.

biggio• 7 years ago

Why can't Hong Kong vote for independence?

beachy• 7 years ago

For the same sort of reason that Texas can't?

alliao• 7 years ago

Texas can't??

toyg9• 7 years ago

I understand the technicalities, but Wilson’s Doctrine clearly applies to the citizens of Texas in 2019 as much as to the citizens of Austria-Hungary a century earlier. If it became absolutely certain that an overwhelming majority of Texans wanted to secede, the right answer would be to draw up ways to allow them to do so in the smoothest and most legal way, not to send the US Army to quash it.

I understand the Civil War happened and all that, but it was a different time and hopefully the Western world works on better principles now. If the USSR had let Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia free to chart their own destiny, maybe it wouldn’t have eventually collapsed under the weight of its own hypocrisy and lies.

jeff_carr2• 7 years ago

But Texas can vote for a Governor & for the government of Texas in general.

my_username_is_6• 7 years ago

There are quite a few reasons, but they all boil down to the fact that Beijing wants Hong Kong to be part of China.

Culture: From what I understand, China sees itself not as a nation-state, but as a civilization-state. The government has a desire to unite all Chinese people together in a single nation. This is why they still claim Taiwan as part of China. Letting Hong Kong be independent is a step back from that goal.

History: During British colonial rule, China opposed all attempts at introducing full democracy to Hong Kong. It doesn't have strong democratic institutions in the way that you might expect. Yes it has a legislature, but half of the seats are essentially reserved for businesses (called 'functional constituencies'). The head of state is chosen from a pre-selected group of people who are loyal to Beijing. So even if the people all agreed on independence being the best path (and that isn't something that people agree on, as best I can tell)

Geography: Hong Kong is a relatively small geographic area with a very large population. It doesn't have the means to support itself. For example, most (all?) of its fresh water comes from mainland China. A lot of food comes from the mainland too. If Beijing doesn't want Hong Kong to be independent, they could simply stop supporting it with it's infrastructure.

Economic: Hong Kong has a thriving economy, and it's history has left it with a special economic status in several countries (including the USA). This makes it very useful to Beijing. They can skirt trade laws and funnel money through Hong Kong as needed. An independent Hong Kong could make this more difficult.

cltsang• 7 years ago

1. The legislative council is controlled by the CCP for a number of reasons.

2. Last time the people tried to do organize a vote, China performed the largest DDoS attack at the time, trying to bring down the vote system backend.

3. Also most Hong Kong people don't want independence. Most just want CCP to keep hands off.

kumosawa3• 7 years ago

I’m from china mainland, and I stand for these protesters. At least, I don’t want them lose the right of fighting for their rights. And btw, even such huge protest happening, there is no report, no discussion in China, even message left on SNS also get censored or vanished. Terrifying.

Edit: apologize for uncertain words, it needs add a time limitation. The first protest was happening at 9th June and all Chinese media chose keep silent. And now it cannot be covered. But attention, it still be defined as a riot.

yibg2• 7 years ago

It seems the information flows to certain populations. I work for an US based company with an office in mainland China. Pretty much everyone in the office knows about the stuff happening in Hong Kong.

amiga_500• 7 years ago

Does the satellite office proxy web traffic via the HQ?

coupdejarnac• 7 years ago

Is the internet at your office filtered? I've heard of offices for foreign companies being unfiltered, but I haven't seen it firsthand.

lawrenceyan• 7 years ago

How common would you say it is for someone living in China to be able to have access to outside information / sites like you?

Does everyone mostly understand that the government censors things to such an extreme but because of a fear of being targeted choose to not say anything, or would you say that most people are actually genuinely ignorant?

xiaochuanSun• 7 years ago

There are some Chinese students who are studying in US universities support the CN government on this event. Even though they have access to the information, they still choose not to believe it.

wybiral2• 7 years ago

It's usually viewed as a protective measure more than a mechanism of oppression. And it is protective. If you believe that widespread dissidence could lead to the collapse of your government then preventing that is a necessary evil to ensure your own well being.

So, yeah, most mainlanders are aware of the censorship but it's not always viewed as inherently bad. And not just out of fear of being targeted or something. It's also easier to justify things that way when you're not even sure what exactly is being censored or why, you just assume it's probably for the better.

We allow similar censorship in the US (of things like extremist propaganda or hate speech) with a similar justification. But free speech in the US is rarely an actual threat to the authority of the government itself.

kumosawa3• 7 years ago

In China mainland, there is a censor tech named Great Firewall.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Firewall?wprov=sfti1) It just cut off the connection between China and the World Internet by blocking famous website like Twitter, Facebook etc. Only the people have eagerness of finding truth will use anti-blocking tech like VPN to find information by themselves. Of course, it’s inconvenience and sometimes not working because of outer server banned. Not sure how many people could get information by themselves. But it’s pessimistic for people living in China how willing to find the information.

Recently, because the propagation by gov, the citizens even think the GFW is protecting them from harmful information and the outside force want breaking up China rather than censorship itself. Especially, this time the protest is propagated as a riot planned by western country. Being lack of information, most citizens support gov’s standpoint.

So maybe not ignorant, just like not conscious, as a result of being accustomed.

weggooi• 7 years ago

I've been to mainland China recently, both rural and the fast changing cities like Shenzhen.

Chairman Mao is universally revered. No one ever questions his track record on economic growth was, even though the evidence is everywhere to see.

Similarly, censorship is rarely questioned.

rqs2• 7 years ago

How common would you say it is for someone living in China to be able to have access to outside information / sites like you?

Let me answer this question as well, because, well, I'm entitled.

It's very very rare to see Chinese people use VPN other than for maybe to play games, most people here is just living, don't even curious about the outside world. Even worse, among those who did got out, some saw those China's wrong doings and then they choose to simply denial.

And is the very reason of why it is important to spread information: To establish some basic understanding. It's not about who is wining, not about trade war, it's not about tech superiority or smear tactics, it's about basic right and wrong.

Recently, the government issued a series of laws and regulations to further limit Chinese people's ability to access information outside of China by making it straight out illegal. And some individuals already been punished for just using a proxy.

Also, since June 1, the GFW has been upgraded to block any high risk unknown traffic, which is intended to stop Shadowsocks and other traffic encryption tools that can be used to by pass GFW's screening. It's very effective, many people lost connection with their proxy because of this.

HongKong is Not a sovereign country, if people in HongKong eventually failed, then they will face the same thing in the future. Which is the reason why they must try not fail. (If they do, then welcome to West Korea, comrade. May our dear supreme leader bless you!)

And I must say, HongKongers is really bad at resonating with others, especially with mainlanders. They must know that many people in mainland is actually quite supportive of some of their protects, we both want real democracy in our country and we are NOT enemies (Well, at least on this subject, we still love tax-free milk and iPhone so).

Does everyone mostly understand that the government censors things to such an extreme but because of a fear of being targeted choose to not say anything, or would you say that most people are actually genuinely ignorant?

Young people who don't interested to see outside world are also not interested in figuring out what's really going on[0]. Old people who actually felt the pain knows more about the pain.

I also want to add, even in China, under such heavy censorship, people still blaming the government in some ways. So I don't think it's just "genuinely ignorant", but more of a "so what you can do about it?".

[0] An unrelated but "interesting" pic for you: https://twitter.com/1240883174Hu/status/1050010276584550400

zachguo• 7 years ago

In my bubble where people who has attended top schools and chose to stay in China. Almost all of them are aware of what is being censored. But people are too busy with earning their next million to care about those censored political topics.

elyobo• 7 years ago

I did wonder what the coverage on the mainland was like. No coverage seemed like the most likely outcome.

confusedhnguy• 7 years ago

Are you sure there are no discussions about this in mainland? I don't go to a lot of forums but at least I have seen lots of discussions on NGA and tieba. I am sure that there are even more discussions happened in Hupu, douban, KDS, and the countless QQ group chats. Even the threads got removed after a while, it still counts because people knows about the event and exchanged ideas.

False statements like this appeals to the Westerners but it worsens the misunderstanding between us, which is counterproductive if you want a more open and free China.

Proof: https://imgur.com/a/FbofCOK

jeff_carr2• 7 years ago

With conversations about some people that disappeared after some protests that happened in 2014.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causeway_Bay_Books_disappearan...

j16sdiz• 7 years ago

the protest was not just about anti china: https://medium.com/@sidneyfong/hong-kongs-extradition-bill-i...

zed882• 7 years ago

I can recall from a personal experience while working for a UN agency.

We had a form with country dropdown selector, and it included Taiwan.

We had huge pressure from the local Chinese embassy to remove it.

And they also called up some really high up UN officials, all for a dropdown!

886• 7 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_the_United_Nations

zed882• 7 years ago

Interesting.

The Republic of China's most recent request for admission was turned down in 2007,[1] but a number of European governments—led by the United States—protested to the UN's Office of Legal Affairs to force the global body and its secretary-general to stop using the reference “Taiwan is a part of China”.[2]

jyew• 7 years ago

I do not understand the sentiment on HK March.

No one bat an eye when a China citizen arrested on Canada soil to be extradite to US.

When China trying to pass a extradition bill on a China territory, the world goes batshit.

The reason that most journalist peddling is you may be trial unfairly in mainland China. You always get a fair trial. China law is fair in China. Shariah law is fair in the Islamic country. Plead the fifth is fair in US.

The problem comes when one thinks their own version of law is better than their neighbouring country law.

And those who comment about how hk democracy and China CCP. Democracy is not a be all system. In a Democratic system, the 51% will always dictate against the other 49%. I grew up in "progressive" multi racial country...so progressive that the majority race which have the Democratic power pass bills that give their race significant advantage over other citizen. Slippery slope system.

Disclaimer: I'm a 3rd gen Chinese descent grew up in a Democratic country and living in China now.

dosshell• 7 years ago

I agree that one should respect other countries law, from their point of view. But when you are not allowed (read killed) to protest against the ones who decides the law, that is a big problem whatever the laws are.

Democracy is not only about majority votes, it is about free speech, the ability to review and criticize the government. It is about that the people do not get censored information but where the people are the bosses of the government, not the other way around.

ngcc_hk2• 7 years ago

Being one of the protestor out of 2m and feet still hurt after 8 hour walking and stopping among children but mostly young man, let me try to supplement that article why especially those not mentioned in the article.

This related to two most common slogans shouted by the 2m. (The 3rd most common one is “Hong Kong Add Oil” not an issue per sec. )

(a) Withdrawn not suspension

In 2003 the first million protest after handover, a even worst law called article 23 was called for. It was ignored just last jun 9 walk, but later withdraw. There is no million walk into street since.

Hence the precedent is clear. Withdrawn should be done. Instead the administration just do a suspension. I do not know why prof chan used the phrase indefinitely. That is not in chinese. In fact the message that this is suspicion only temporary is clear. Whilst no timetable, the chief executive said her experience of consultation would take until end of this year. Not indefinitely. There is even a statement by the Chinese authority also stressed this temporary arrangement and in fact promise to chase after the behind-the-scene power.

Hence the major slogan of the 2nd protest is to withdrawn the bill not suspension.

(b) No riot and release those arrested

There are the issue of the declaration of riot around 3 or 6 p.m. Lots of people will be charged under this dreadful law where 7-10 years may be involved. Even standby could be charged if you are on site after that time. The law was drafted by the British against the chinese communist in 1960s during the cultural revolution era. Police can declare and arrest any gathering ... funny is that there are exception to this like religion gathering which the police cannot declare as riot. But in general police can declare and do arrest. Some of the cases should be charged as police excess of force, like aim and shoot a protestor from behind when he is a long way and just walking. Now using the law it will be the other way round. The guy might be charged and found guilty as part of riot gathering. (In fact, no one told on the scene that a riot is going on. Nothing throwing, no burning, no glass broken, ... etc. You may see throwing stuff in tv but that is much earlier and another group. The bulk of the peaceful demonstrator are not involved. In fact the official press interview at 3 pm by the commissioner of police is stated as disturbance. There is some argument spent out who declare riot in the press release later at 6 pm. Hence I am not sure about the timing. Just to distance himself, the chief secretary (deputy to the top lady CE) said the top management do not know about the declaration. They do support whatever the commissioner did.)

We asked for the withdrawn of that declaration and release the arrested.

(One of the major upset is to two arrest of patient in Hosiptal. The doctor and nurse do not report the case and somehow the police come and arrest them. ... too many details here but by and large the medical profession seriously not like this. There are procedure and the police did not follow them. Relationship is very poisonous now between the two.)

There are other usual demands like held accountable of the case. And other slogans, some quite nasty as Cantonese is a very nasty language. When 10646 was defined, some found it odd by the hk extension is full of male and female description. Hundreds of them. Sorry for the kids to expose during the 2m match. But that is the language. Can’t no blood wine or poem ...

Back to the extradition law, not mention is the public object to it as we do not trust the chinese legal system.

(Btw usually extradition law apply to foreigner not citizen).

Further not mention is the diplomat of Eu, Britain and official from different camps of USA are raised official diplomatic objection. It is not just about local citizen. There are 85,000 American lives in Hong Kong currently. There is no consultation whatsoever. And it seemed the discussion is about reading the bill to them.

In this regards, even strange is the ignorance of Taiwan in the process, even though it was used as the key reason for the rush.

Btw, found out today that even macau our sister region has thought about it and do not enacted similar law.

I think a better law will at least consult stakeholder so majority are on your side. Then you can crush ...

Anyway as commented living between powers like china and USA is not easy. You can access Facebook then not just 20 km north (hong kong is that small). Really not good to unite literally the whole world against you and also your own city wholly against you as well.

As mentioned in the article after the umbrella movement there are a lot of bad blood. But she not just united the democratic camp but even the pro-establishment camp.

Great political achievement in a sense. Too tired and hope it is not too confusing.

Hong Kong Add Oil.

dragonwriter• 7 years ago

I do not know why prof chan used the phrase indefinitely. That is not in chinese. In fact the message that this is suspicion only temporary is clear.

“Indefinitely” in this context does not mean “infinitely”, it means “without a predefined end time” if it is merely suspected that the suspension will be lifted at so uncertain future time, “indefinitely” appears correct.

my_username_is_6• 7 years ago

The criticism isn't that the translation was a lie, but rather it didn't capture the spirit of what she was saying (possibly with the intention to mislead international media). Indefinitely is frequently understood to mean infinitely, so by using this English word it is certainly misleading.

mnming• 7 years ago

Almost all press focus on the fact that there are two millions people on the street and the possibility of power abuse caused by this bill. None of them pay any attention to pros & cons of this bill from a rational perspective. People barely remembers that the origin of this bill is to extradite one brutal killer of a Taiwan girl. No one is seeking middle ground or constructive result.

People see, people fear, people destroy, without any regard to pragmatism and rationality. Great.

ulfw• 7 years ago

Taiwan doesn‘t want that extradition law either.

https://qz.com/1642413/why-taiwan-is-so-outspoken-on-hong-ko...

song4• 7 years ago

It was the brutal killing of a HK girl not a Taiwan girl. The murderer killed his girlfriend while traveling to Taiwan for Valentine Day.

Also Taiwan's government has explicitly stated that this bill is not needed to bring the murderer to justice and that this has only been used as an excuse to pass this law.

Additionally Taiwan said that if the bill pass they would refuse to use it to bring this murderer to justice as they are against this bill.

And finally, per the bill, the central government of the country need to approve the extradition. China doesn't recognize the central government of Taiwan so as per the law community in HK, it's not sure how this bill could ever be used in cases like that murder.

So, yes people have discussed it, people have their facts straight about this bill.

Why Hong Kong Is Still Marching

Related Stories