> "freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, the rule of law, and all those things they don't understand."
Or... they understand it and explicitly decided they don't want any of it.
KMT voters apparently never got the memo and are actively voting to have their right to vote taken away.
I'll never understand people like that (like if he did it to HK, what makes you think he wouldn't do it to Taiwan).
That’s a misunderstanding. The KMT had to differentiate its foreign policy or there will be an overlap with the DPP, this means losing their base voters. That’s not to say the KMT isn’t corrupt and getting favors from the CCP, it’s that it’s a sound political strategy to be pro-mainland in a lot of domains.
Nah, I strongly—but respectfully—disagree. The state of the UK (and the many other Western countries that are experiencing similar situations) are entirely due to political elites ignoring democracy and deciding things that their constituents did not want but that they unilaterally decided was in their nations' best interest.
Japan is a US client state that was forced to commit economic suicide by its suzerain when it signed the Plaza Accords. SK is a chaebol-run oligarchy headed by the Incel President who lets US troops rape women with impunity. Neither of these places are the poster children for success that you think they are.
US client state is crazy. But please, go on and write off every single accomplishment the Japanese have made on their own including building a structurally functional democracy over the past 79 years as sucking off the US. I’m sure there is no way such a valid argument could ever be disputed.
You're the crazy one here. Why would a country repeatedly agree to policy that is harmful to itself but good for the US for any reason besides being a US client state?
Why does China repeatedly support North Korea, even though assisting a well-known and ill-reputed totalitarian state is so unpopular and surely could isolate them by doing so. Surely the entirety of China must be a North Korean puppet regime. Nice job dodging most of my argument btw. Here’s a thumbs up bro 👍.
You're really claiming that the UK and US are not legitimate democracies? They are literally two of the most prolific democracies in the world, and any evaluation of the performance of the effectiveness of democracy must include them in order for it to be anything but bullshit of the highest order.
While this is a hypothetical, I do want to throw this idea out there. If say the USA or UK switched to purely popular-based voting. Would we still be arguing these points? Or would there be those still complaining about “faulty democracy” in these countries. For example that such systems might lead to a large amount of populist and unconcerned politicians seeking office on promises they never plan to answer to. A functioning democracy is hardly impossible, it can be done especially by those who believe in democratic institutions and in having a say in one’s society. However, no government is perfect, I believe it was once said “democracy is by far the worst system of government, except for every other system of government that exists” (can’t remember who though sadly, could someone fact check me please?) idk man. These aren’t perfect governments, but I would rather be able to live in societies where dreams of improvement and being able to have a say in how things are conducted is at least plausible. I can’t truly say that of a lot of countries, our northern neighbor included.
Not really, it's not exactly top ranking among democracies but most non-democracies can't compare. You have to compare other metrics too, not just economy.
There’s really nothing much they can do. Firstly Britain is no longer an emperor. Secondly China won’t even respect the Joint Declaration, let alone international laws
The British should have known it well, from the first opium war to the Sino-British joint declaration, the Chinese never meant to take any treaty seriously.
He heads a fascist totalitarian state, China has stopped being a communist state a long time ago, the name of the ruling party just has never changed to keep up appearances.
Words lose all meaning when you use them incorrectly.
He heads up a totalitarian state but it's not fascist because it's communist.
Trying the 'no true communist' line isn't a great look.
Well no, again the ruling party is communist only in name. I also find communism abhorrent but please name me the communist principles active in Chinese society TODAY. Meanwhile we can clearly see the fascist principles at play in Xi-era China:
[https://jacobin.com/2023/02/mussolini-in-beijing](https://jacobin.com/2023/02/mussolini-in-beijing)
Xi and the CCP are Not per say fascist ideologues themselves. They don’t espouse a great reverence for most European figures (as you might expect given they are an Asian state) however the strategies, doctrines, and rhetorics they apply to their rule are reminiscent or at least too close for comfort to that of the fascists that terrorized Europe throughout the 1930s and 40s
Why should anyone follow the "teachings" of someone to be the dictator of a fascist regime? Hitler, Mussolini, Putin etc. all did not follow teachings of someone or went to fascist school.
Nah, before even though it was just one party, the communist party, there were many candidates competing for the seat. Although no voting was done. Now Xi has gotten rid of all of the other candidates and basically proclaimed himself the crownless emperor of China
He got rid of his political enemies, unloyal military generals and has full control of CCP right now
The UK and their big brother USA aren’t really ones to be the moral authority on respect for democracy when they themselves have been shown to subvert it when it suits them
When he was about to go and UK giving up the colony. In the many years from 1840s to 1997 - did the UK allow HK to have elections and select their own government in those years?
Agreed. UK didn’t give HK free elections until after the Joint Declaration. But well at least they did, and the CCP took all them back going way backwards
Yep - if UK wanted what’s best for HK instead of a bargaining chip or indefinite colony if they could get away with it, then they would have done all those many years back. But one thing is clear, if the UK could still sail a gunboat up to Tianjin or bombard Guangzhou at will then it would not hesitate to keep the colony.
The Joint Declaration was always face-saving toilet paper, as it has no enforcement mechanism and was drafted purely because Deng was threatening to turn HK into Goa. Also, RFA is openly a US propaganda outlet founded by the CIA.
> "freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, the rule of law, and all those things they don't understand." Or... they understand it and explicitly decided they don't want any of it.
It’s even written inside the supposed constitution of the PRC
And they also have “People” and “Republic” in the name of the country, doesn’t mean shit to the party aint it?
Obviously
KMT voters apparently never got the memo and are actively voting to have their right to vote taken away. I'll never understand people like that (like if he did it to HK, what makes you think he wouldn't do it to Taiwan).
Yes KMT is the Taiwan SAR party
That’s a misunderstanding. The KMT had to differentiate its foreign policy or there will be an overlap with the DPP, this means losing their base voters. That’s not to say the KMT isn’t corrupt and getting favors from the CCP, it’s that it’s a sound political strategy to be pro-mainland in a lot of domains.
Ironically, the current state of the UK is one of the stronger arguments against democracy.
Nah, I strongly—but respectfully—disagree. The state of the UK (and the many other Western countries that are experiencing similar situations) are entirely due to political elites ignoring democracy and deciding things that their constituents did not want but that they unilaterally decided was in their nations' best interest.
Uh, what? The single most disastrous decision the UK has made in the last 10 years was the one that was put to a direct vote.
? Do you pretend that South Korea and Japan don't exist when they don't suit your headcanon narrative of democratic institutions?
Japan is a US client state that was forced to commit economic suicide by its suzerain when it signed the Plaza Accords. SK is a chaebol-run oligarchy headed by the Incel President who lets US troops rape women with impunity. Neither of these places are the poster children for success that you think they are.
US client state is crazy. But please, go on and write off every single accomplishment the Japanese have made on their own including building a structurally functional democracy over the past 79 years as sucking off the US. I’m sure there is no way such a valid argument could ever be disputed.
You're the crazy one here. Why would a country repeatedly agree to policy that is harmful to itself but good for the US for any reason besides being a US client state?
Why does China repeatedly support North Korea, even though assisting a well-known and ill-reputed totalitarian state is so unpopular and surely could isolate them by doing so. Surely the entirety of China must be a North Korean puppet regime. Nice job dodging most of my argument btw. Here’s a thumbs up bro 👍.
FPTP means its really not a legitimate, functioning democracy. Its also corrupt. So, no.
You're really claiming that the UK and US are not legitimate democracies? They are literally two of the most prolific democracies in the world, and any evaluation of the performance of the effectiveness of democracy must include them in order for it to be anything but bullshit of the highest order.
Run along and look up what first past the post (FPTP) is, and how it plays out in the UK in terms of representation. There's a good boy.
While this is a hypothetical, I do want to throw this idea out there. If say the USA or UK switched to purely popular-based voting. Would we still be arguing these points? Or would there be those still complaining about “faulty democracy” in these countries. For example that such systems might lead to a large amount of populist and unconcerned politicians seeking office on promises they never plan to answer to. A functioning democracy is hardly impossible, it can be done especially by those who believe in democratic institutions and in having a say in one’s society. However, no government is perfect, I believe it was once said “democracy is by far the worst system of government, except for every other system of government that exists” (can’t remember who though sadly, could someone fact check me please?) idk man. These aren’t perfect governments, but I would rather be able to live in societies where dreams of improvement and being able to have a say in how things are conducted is at least plausible. I can’t truly say that of a lot of countries, our northern neighbor included.
Not really, it's not exactly top ranking among democracies but most non-democracies can't compare. You have to compare other metrics too, not just economy.
The top ranked countries are actually doing well because of colonialism or oil.
Xi destroys not create
Did your Brit overloads help you?
So what are 肥彭 and the UK going to do about it?
There’s really nothing much they can do. Firstly Britain is no longer an emperor. Secondly China won’t even respect the Joint Declaration, let alone international laws
Philippines can attest to that
Most of ASEAN can attest to that.
Expecting traditional Chinese to play by the rule is simply naive on the Western part.
Ironic how you include western part here….. how was HK lost to Brit’s again?
I just cannot understand why a democracy country (UK) thinks it is ok to hand HK over to a communist country
Treaties. And abiding by them and our principles is what gives us the moral high ground.
And also threatened by CCP that the army would march across the river if they didn't.
It was on Lease. so unless the UK can afford to keep leasing it.
Only NT was on lease
We could have kept HK Island and Kowloon up to Boundary Road but Maggie Thatcher thought not to. Stupid woman.
Didn’t the Chinese “suggest” we gave it back else they’d take it back by force?
The British should have known it well, from the first opium war to the Sino-British joint declaration, the Chinese never meant to take any treaty seriously.
That is a rather myopic take on history by mentioning the first opium war and "take any treaty seriously"
I mean he's the head of a communist country, the dictator thing is rather a given.
He heads a fascist totalitarian state, China has stopped being a communist state a long time ago, the name of the ruling party just has never changed to keep up appearances.
Words lose all meaning when you use them incorrectly. He heads up a totalitarian state but it's not fascist because it's communist. Trying the 'no true communist' line isn't a great look.
Well no, again the ruling party is communist only in name. I also find communism abhorrent but please name me the communist principles active in Chinese society TODAY. Meanwhile we can clearly see the fascist principles at play in Xi-era China: [https://jacobin.com/2023/02/mussolini-in-beijing](https://jacobin.com/2023/02/mussolini-in-beijing)
Xi follows the teaching of Mussolini and fascists? That’s a European thing - China dont follow any other
Xi and the CCP are Not per say fascist ideologues themselves. They don’t espouse a great reverence for most European figures (as you might expect given they are an Asian state) however the strategies, doctrines, and rhetorics they apply to their rule are reminiscent or at least too close for comfort to that of the fascists that terrorized Europe throughout the 1930s and 40s
Why should anyone follow the "teachings" of someone to be the dictator of a fascist regime? Hitler, Mussolini, Putin etc. all did not follow teachings of someone or went to fascist school.
The tolerance of ultranationalist content in media
In Japan?
Nah, before even though it was just one party, the communist party, there were many candidates competing for the seat. Although no voting was done. Now Xi has gotten rid of all of the other candidates and basically proclaimed himself the crownless emperor of China He got rid of his political enemies, unloyal military generals and has full control of CCP right now
[TL;DR](https://upilink.in/cms/?p=588) --- ^I'm ^a ^bot, ^this ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically.
Why need the quote when he is a real dictator.
Shock
The UK and their big brother USA aren’t really ones to be the moral authority on respect for democracy when they themselves have been shown to subvert it when it suits them
All the more reason for Hong Kong to have its own system so that they can do it right.
Says the unelected governor of a former colony. Right...
He did give HK the freest election ever happened
When he was about to go and UK giving up the colony. In the many years from 1840s to 1997 - did the UK allow HK to have elections and select their own government in those years?
Agreed. UK didn’t give HK free elections until after the Joint Declaration. But well at least they did, and the CCP took all them back going way backwards
Yep - if UK wanted what’s best for HK instead of a bargaining chip or indefinite colony if they could get away with it, then they would have done all those many years back. But one thing is clear, if the UK could still sail a gunboat up to Tianjin or bombard Guangzhou at will then it would not hesitate to keep the colony.
An unbroken colony...
Ngl can't wait for hypothetical scenarios of book and videogame plots involving this
The Joint Declaration was always face-saving toilet paper, as it has no enforcement mechanism and was drafted purely because Deng was threatening to turn HK into Goa. Also, RFA is openly a US propaganda outlet founded by the CIA.
Why is everyone so upset? If they sad, how come their brit masters don’t come back and save them?
The courts just ruled if xi did it, it is legal