[Tengen]

Not sure if anyone is following it, but some pretty intense shit going down in Hong Kong for the past few days.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacif...28111.html

Quote:

The demonstrators are furious over last month's announcement by Beijing that while it will allow the city's next leader to be elected in 2017, it will insist on picking the candidates, with critics branding the move a "fake democracy".

Public anger over rampant inequality is also at its highest in years in a city once renowned for its stability.

[TheBulldozer]

I'm surprised a thread is this late in getting started.

October 1 is China National Day, basically the equivalent of their independence day. Protests will be vociferous over night and into the day, I'd imagine.

How will China handle it?

-Let the protestors tire themselves out by lobbing tear gas, gambling this isn't an issue HK residents are willing to die over?
-Making an example of a few?
-Making an example of many?

Know this, China cares about one thing, and one thing only - staying in control. All else is peripheral.

Note that much of the money in this city has no care for this, this is an overwhelmingly youthful protest. China does have a history of at least listening to their youth, though not always acting on it.

I spoke with some co-workers in HK today, and they're jaw dropped that China hasn't smashed down harder on this yet.

[Saweeep]

China is in a delicate situation.

Money, saving face (their image to the world) and the ROC being the reasons for their inaction so far.

[TheBulldozer]

^Frankly, if push comes to shove over their authoritarian absolute rule, I don't think China gives much of a damn how they maintain power or what the world thinks about them.

[El Chinito loco]

HK will be handled with kid gloves because there are too many eyeballs on that city. The PRC will do some undercover work and bust the leaders of movements like this and probably engage in other shady activities like putting in counter activists. Then try to win the media over with bought journalists. It's basically all the standard fuckery that every U.S. citizen is also familiar with.

If they really want to smash a movement they can be deadly efficient at it though. The whole uighur/xinjiang thing should have gone off the rails a long time ago since it's such a hotbed of extremism but they just started shooting all the leaders and broke down large scale organized rebellion.

The PRC is willing to go to extremes when no one is watching.

[Foolsgo1d]

Hong Kong was under British rule for a century and we gave it back as per the agreement.

Looks like the true problems from that swap are coming to the surface as it takes years for this sort of mass movement to gain momentum in the face of communists.

One thing is for certain, we will not be delivering freedom anytime soon.

[Maciano]

Good for these kids. They show these communists they won't give up without a fight.

[Cheetah]

Should Hong Kong be avoided to visit at the moment? How long time do protests like these usually last, should it be reasonably back to normal in like a week?

[WalterBlack]

The British have a history of leaving shit behind whenever they leave an area which was formerly under their rule e.g. India/Pakistan, Palestine/Israel & the rest of the Middle East, Malaysia/Thailand, most of Africa.

The British had almost zero democracy in HK until just before they handed it over to China. They probably got the whole thing going as an irritant to the Chinese.

[kaotic]

If you think for a second the Chigov will let these guys have their way, you're dead wrong.

I don't think they'll crush the protests, but they will dismantle it from the top down. It'll all be behind scenes and these kids will slowly run out of gas also.

It's all about big money and control, they don't give a shit about these kids at all.

[WalterBlack]

^^^

They can let the kids camp out in the street and deny them food and water. They'll be done in 2 or 3 days.

[El Chinito loco]

(09-30-2014 10:56 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

The British have a history of leaving shit behind whenever they leave an area which was formerly under their rule e.g. India/Pakistan, Palestine/Israel & the rest of the Middle East, Malaysia/Thailand, most of Africa.

The British had almost zero democracy in HK until just before they handed it over to China. They probably got the whole thing going as an irritant to the Chinese.

The Brits fucked Sri Lanka real good too by pitting ethnic divisions against each other.

Brits have always been pretty good at this type of cultural warfare. They leave in these cultural schisms because they know shit will blow up real good down the road. This always gives a doorway for future negotiations or military action. It's classic empire building strategy. You always try to create schisms in rule so you can manipulate the ruling party from a distance as puppetmasters.

Back in the 80's (I think Margaret Thatcher was PM) the Brits were thinking about renegging on the 99 year "lease" in place. They basically did the analysis and realized there was just no way the British could ever hold it if push came to shove. The PRC could just blockade all resources and do a mass push that would make the Korean war look like a walk in the park.
.

[Orion]

If bunch of citizens is totality of problem, then i don't see the problem at all. This is just a nuisance.

Seriously, who gives a crap if 7 million office drones will get right to decide anything that concerns their inner geographically isolated city anyway.

Good for marketing purposes, but not of much significance besides image.

[The Beast1]

(09-30-2014 10:56 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

The British have a history of leaving shit behind whenever they leave an area which was formerly under their rule e.g. India/Pakistan, Palestine/Israel & the rest of the Middle East, Malaysia/Thailand, most of Africa.

The British had almost zero democracy in HK until just before they handed it over to China. They probably got the whole thing going as an irritant to the Chinese.

You have a country like India that already had rigid social restrictions that glorify fair skinned individuals.

Then you have a global hegemonic power that is:
1. Pretty damn white
2. Has similar rigid social mobility.

You have the perfect storm for white worship and furthering the social divide. India was screwed long before the Brits came in.

[Cheetah]

Anyone's on the ground that could give an update what the situation is at the moment? The media tend to focus on when things escalate, not deescalate.

[El Chinito loco]

(09-30-2014 11:33 AM)frenchie Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 10:56 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

The British have a history of leaving shit behind whenever they leave an area which was formerly under their rule e.g. India/Pakistan, Palestine/Israel & the rest of the Middle East, Malaysia/Thailand, most of Africa.

The British had almost zero democracy in HK until just before they handed it over to China. They probably got the whole thing going as an irritant to the Chinese.

You have a country like India that already had rigid social restrictions that glorify fair skinned individuals.

Then you have a global hegemonic power that is:
1. Pretty damn white
2. Has similar rigid social mobility.

You have the perfect storm for white worship and furthering the social divide. India was screwed long before the Brits came in.

The British empire played a masterful chess game in India. They split the hindus, sikhs, and muslims right across ethnic AND religious lines. Then they used the sikhs to fight their own countrymen as well as using them as stormtroopers overseas.

[rekruler]

I'm rooting for the Chicoms to maintain absolute control ( over HK and more importantly mainland proper) and keep the West and its feminazi progressivist globalist bazaar "culture" the fuk away. Last thing the world needs is for 1.3 billion Chinese to fall under the sway of our media and institutions.

[El Chinito loco]

(09-30-2014 11:40 AM)rekruler Wrote:  

I'm rooting for the Chicoms to maintain absolute control ( over HK and more importantly mainland proper) and keep the West and its feminazi progressivist globalist bazaar "culture" the fuk away. Last thing the world needs is for 1.3 billion Chinese to fall under the sway of our media and institutions.

I have to agree on some level. While the chicoms are a nasty bunch they are pragmatic and at least maintain some core cultural values.

The anglosphere influence is very toxic in the long run and on the individual level it ruins people. The trade off is maybe gaining more material wealth and completely selling your soul to do it.

[WalterBlack]

(09-30-2014 11:33 AM)frenchie Wrote:  

(09-30-2014 10:56 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

The British have a history of leaving shit behind whenever they leave an area which was formerly under their rule e.g. India/Pakistan, Palestine/Israel & the rest of the Middle East, Malaysia/Thailand, most of Africa.

The British had almost zero democracy in HK until just before they handed it over to China. They probably got the whole thing going as an irritant to the Chinese.

You have a country like India that already had rigid social restrictions that glorify fair skinned individuals.

Then you have a global hegemonic power that is:
1. Pretty damn white
2. Has similar rigid social mobility.

You have the perfect storm for white worship and furthering the social divide. India was screwed long before the Brits came in.

Indians were never “white” worshippers. The reason why the rulers were pale skinned was because they had origins in central Asia and the Middle East. When the Europeans first came to India they had to ask the Indian rulers for permission to trade.

There was internal political unrest and the British hired native Indians to work for them. At the time there was no country called “India”, just a collection of kingdoms. The local Indians had no issues fighting for the British, as long as they respected their religious beliefs, all they care about was getting paid.

A lot of the British in India in the late 16/1700s actually adopted Indian culture. Many of them converted to Islam and Hinduism. 1/3 of British officers had an Indian wife. With their kids, if they were pale skinned, they were taken to England and raised as Christian. If they were darker, they stayed in India and were raised as Hindu or Muslim. A lot of the British nobility has Indian blood. Even Prince William, the future King of England, has Indian ancestors.

In the 19th century there was a huge growth in evangelical Christianity in UK, and the British then disapproved of Hinduism and Islam.

Hong Kong was a by product of British rule in India. The British wanted to sell Indian opium in China, and then shit kicked off because the Emperor disapproved. The Opium Wars happened, the British won and they got Hong Kong. When the British fought the Chinese, in the some of the battles there were Indian soldiers right there with them.

[Maciano]

The Brits actually did a world of good.

They've spread all sorts of good ideas worldwide; things like capitalism, rule of law, separation of powers, basic rights from the state, empirical science, religious tolerance, democracy, freedom of speech, nationstate, and liberalism. Not all ideas were British, but they sure spread them far and wide.

They also harmed people, repressed many and made fantastic blunders, but they didn't leave a disaster in their wake wherever they'd go.

[DjembaDjemba]

Quote:

Chinese authorities offer money for mixed marriages in bid to quell Uighurs

Chinese authorities in the restive western region of Xinjiang have begun offering large cash incentives for interracial marriages in the latest attempt to quell growing unrest among the mainly Muslim Uighur ethnic group that inhabit the region.

The policy, celebrated by local Communist party officials as advancing the “great cause of assimilation” and “ethnic unity”, offers couples entering into mixed marriages an annual bonus of Rmb10,000 ($1,600), equivalent to 135 per cent of average annual rural incomes.

The government has long been concerned about the low rate of interracial marriage between Uighurs and Han, which it sees as an obstacle to solidifying Chinese rule in the vast border territory.
In 2000, the last year the government published official figures, only 1.05 per cent of Uighurs lived in mixed-race families, compared with 7.71 per cent for Tibetans and a national average of 3.2 per cent, according to Mr Leibold.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/eed8fdf8-...z3F7WYuM2d

[Akula]

(10-03-2014 04:43 PM)DjembaDjemba Wrote:  

Quote:

Chinese authorities offer money for mixed marriages in bid to quell Uighurs

Chinese authorities in the restive western region of Xinjiang have begun offering large cash incentives for interracial marriages in the latest attempt to quell growing unrest among the mainly Muslim Uighur ethnic group that inhabit the region.

The policy, celebrated by local Communist party officials as advancing the “great cause of assimilation” and “ethnic unity”, offers couples entering into mixed marriages an annual bonus of Rmb10,000 ($1,600), equivalent to 135 per cent of average annual rural incomes.

The government has long been concerned about the low rate of interracial marriage between Uighurs and Han, which it sees as an obstacle to solidifying Chinese rule in the vast border territory.
In 2000, the last year the government published official figures, only 1.05 per cent of Uighurs lived in mixed-race families, compared with 7.71 per cent for Tibetans and a national average of 3.2 per cent, according to Mr Leibold.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/eed8fdf8-...z3F7WYuM2d

Unfortunately for the Uighurs I think that even if there are any of these marriages they will be pretty heavy on Chinese culture training, and pretty light on Uighur-dom!

[WalterBlack]

^^^^

A similar thing was tried before and created the Hui people:

Quote:

By the 14th century, the total population of Muslims in China had grown to 4 million. After Mongol rule had been overthrown by the Ming Dynasty in 1368, this led to a violent Chinese backlash against West and Central Asians. In order to contain the violence, the Ming administration instituted a policy where all West and Central Asian males were required to intermarry with native Chinese females, hence assimilating them into the local population. Their descendants are today known as the Hui people. 6.7% Hui people's maternal genetics have an Caucasian origin, while slightly over 30% paternal genetics also have an Caucasian origin.

However, it doesn't seem to have worked:

Quote:

In the 19th century, the Hui rebelled against the Chinese government trying to create an independent state.

The event was known as the Panthay Rebellion:

Quote:

The Panthay Rebellion (1856–1873), known in Chinese sources as the Du Wenxiu Rebellion (Tu Wen-hsiu Rebellion; Chinese: 杜文秀起義; pinyin: Dù Wénxiù Qǐyì), was a rebellion of the Muslim Hui people and other (non-Muslim) ethnic minorities against the Manchu rulers of the Qing Dynasty in southwestern Yunnan Province, as part of a wave of Hui-led multi-ethnic unrest.

I'm not sure why the people in Hong Kong have such a hard on for democracy - isn't life in China mostly OK if you don't fuck with the government? India is the world's biggest democracy, but I bet you a lot of them would give up the chance the vote if they could enjoy the same quality of life as the average Chinese citizen.

[Feisbook Control]

If China wants to breed the Uigurs out, rather than give bonuses to mixed marriages, it might make more sense to do some combination of relaxing the One Child Policy for Han, giving cash to those Han who then have more children (provided they remain within Xinjiang, and pay Han from outside the region to move in. Poor peasants from other parts of China would probably respond well to all of those incentives.

As for Hong Kong's obsession with democracy, I think this is probably somewhat of a generational thing as I expect many of the older people don't care one way or the other so long as they keep making money. The so-called Asian values that are prevalent in older generations of East Asians have been heavily eroded by exposure to postmodern Western culture. Some of this has been a deliberate effort on the part of Western governments (especially the American government), and some of it has been a result of exposure to Western media, entertainment, etc.

East Asia is going to have some pretty big problems in twenty years. I suspect that right now, if only people under the age of 30 could vote, there'd be little difference between Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Japan (not so sure about Korea) and many Western basket cases. There'd be massive, out of control welfare systems and social spending, enormous levels of national and personal debt, etc. SJWs would flourish rapidly, and so on. There's already a not-insignificant loony environmental movement in Taiwan, complete with dirty hippies from the West who have been attracted to this like pigs to shit (though to be fair, there is some pretty bad pollution and environmental destruction in many places).

What really surprises me about East Asia is how incredibly fragile the culture(s) is. Lesbianism is rampant in Taiwan, fertility rates have plummeted, obesity is rapidly on the rise, etc. All of the social ills affecting the West are on the march in this part of the world, and what's really weird is that they have advanced so far and so fast despite their parents and grandparents having these so-called Asian values that are ostensibly extremely conservative. When conservatism as a political force becomes greatly diminished over the next couple of decades, it's hard to imagine what's going to happen in East Asia. I am extremely bearish on the future of the region's cultures. A big war in the region (something I don't relish the prospect of!) is probably the only thing that would arrest and reverse the trends I see here.

[Tengen]

Hong Kong protesters to attend crunch talks

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacif...68304.html

This quote is enlightening:

Quote:

Leung Chun-ying, Hong Kong's leader, told foreign media on Monday that free elections were unacceptable, partly because they risked giving Hong Kong's poor and working class a dominant voice in politics.

"Student demands for direct input from the public on candidates were impossible," Leung said.

"If it's entirely a numbers game and numeric representation, then obviously you would be talking to half of the people in Hong Kong who earn less than US$1,800 a month," Leung told the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times.