Hong Kong.........

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

So un is Jung Kim's middle name, got it.

Doesn't matter.  His real name is 'John Smith'.

Boru

[BryanS]

Hong Kong is a vestige of the colonial era. China was picked apart by colonial powers, and to this day China resents this meddling by world powers. It only obtained sovereign control over Hong Kong due to a long term treaty with Britain on the terms of transition back to Chinese control. Hong Kong only has distinct rights because of this agreement. The only thing preventing China from rolling in the tanks and locking the place down is the high economic costs to destroy the economic engine that Hong Kong is. Hong Kong is just the sort of conflict that I could imagine generating a Chinese overreaction out of pride.

So when Brian37 argues for unspecified action, he should understand this is more sensitive than most conflicts of this sort. The risk for spiraling out of control is very high. China knows it cannot afford to lose Hong Kong as an economic force in Asia, but push it just a little too hard, and China may decide it needs to crack down to protect its sovereignty.

[Brian37]

So un is Jung Kim's middle name, got it.

Doesn't matter.  His real name is 'John Smith'.

Boru

I thought his name was John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, his name is my name too.

[EgoDeath]

Brian, you started this thread off arguing with someone who isnt even there. Let someone disagree first before you start yelling.

Go get laid dude, for chrissakes.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Hong Kong is a vestige of the colonial era. China was picked apart by colonial powers, and to this day China resents this meddling by world powers. It only obtained sovereign control over Hong Kong due to a long term treaty with Britain on the terms of transition back to Chinese control. Hong Kong only has distinct rights because of this agreement. The only thing preventing China from rolling in the tanks and locking the place down is the high economic costs to destroy the economic engine that Hong Kong is. Hong Kong is just the sort of conflict that I could imagine generating a Chinese overreaction out of pride.

So when Brian37 argues for unspecified action, he should understand this is more sensitive than most conflicts of this sort. The risk for spiraling out of control is very high. China knows it cannot afford to lose Hong Kong as an economic force in Asia, but push it just a little too hard, and China may decide it needs to crack down to protect its sovereignty.

I can't see it that way at all.  China (now more than anytime in the last 20 years) needs 'the economic engine that Hong Kong is'.  I don't really see them destroying it out of pride.  Xi is more practical than that.

Boru

[onlinebiker]

Hong Kong is a vestige of the colonial era. China was picked apart by colonial powers, and to this day China resents this meddling by world powers. It only obtained sovereign control over Hong Kong due to a long term treaty with Britain on the terms of transition back to Chinese control. Hong Kong only has distinct rights because of this agreement. The only thing preventing China from rolling in the tanks and locking the place down is the high economic costs to destroy the economic engine that Hong Kong is. Hong Kong is just the sort of conflict that I could imagine generating a Chinese overreaction out of pride.

So when Brian37 argues for unspecified action, he should understand this is more sensitive than most conflicts of this sort. The risk for spiraling out of control is very high. China knows it cannot afford to lose Hong Kong as an economic force in Asia, but push it just a little too hard, and China may decide it needs to crack down to protect its sovereignty.

I can't see it that way at all.  China (now more than anytime in the last 20 years) needs 'the economic engine that Hong Kong is'.  I don't really see them destroying it out of pride.  Xi is more practical than that.

Boru

The problem for Xi is that it also is to him a bad example - of what happens when the peons get liking such horrible things as free speech......

[BryanS]

I can't see it that way at all.  China (now more than anytime in the last 20 years) needs 'the economic engine that Hong Kong is'.  I don't really see them destroying it out of pride.  Xi is more practical than that.

Boru

Xi is practical, yes. But he's also very invested in staying president for life (he got term limits removed after all). Xi can't afford to appear to "lose" Hong Kong to the West. The Chinese media keep playing up an angle that the protests are a US plot to cause trouble for China. The pretext to crack down has already been laid out. They have also learned no lessons worth learning from Tienanmen other than you can get away with being brutal and that being brutal is better than ceding power to the people.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I can't see it that way at all.  China (now more than anytime in the last 20 years) needs 'the economic engine that Hong Kong is'.  I don't really see them destroying it out of pride.  Xi is more practical than that.

Boru

Xi is practical, yes. But he's also very invested in staying president for life (he got term limits removed after all). Xi can't afford to appear to "lose" Hong Kong to the West. The Chinese media keep playing up an angle that the protests are a US plot to cause trouble for China. The pretext to crack down has already been laid out. They have also learned no lessons worth learning from Tienanmen other than you can get away with being brutal and that being brutal is better than ceding power to the people.

First of all, there is no chance - none - of losing Hong Kong to the West.  I can't imagine that's even part of Xi's thinking.  Secondly, the idea that there is going to be some sort of Tiananmen-type of crackdown in one of the world's great financial hubs doesn't bear thinking about. Xi isn't going to risk a global economic panic.  Lastly, Xi is smarter than his predecessors.  He'll likely find some sort of middle way (get it?) that quiets the protestors and lets him save face.

Then again, this IS China we're talking about.  Anything could happen.

Boru

[Anomalocaris]

Hong Kong's importance to China as an economic hub has declined tremendously since the China has taken it over in 1997.   It's importance to China been surpassed in almost every measure by some other city in China, and if anything, capital now flows from China into Hong Kong, not the other way around.   This is precisely why Xi is likely to feel he has a strong hand, and why he has not yet sent in the army:

1. The young people clamoring for democracy is but an irritant, because business and established wealth in Hong Kong knows their continued prosperity depends more on China than China's prosperity depends on Hong Kong.     This may well be the reason why he has not sent in the Chinese army yet, because he thinks once the business of the city has been disrupted long enough by the protests, the real powers that be in Hong Kong knows which side their bread is buttered and will force an effective end to the protests.

2. Even if things don't quiet down, and instead threaten Chinese rule in Hong Kong, Hong Kong is no longer so important to China that he can't afford to break it.   It is no longer than Goose that lays the golden egg for China.   So he call afford to kill the goose as a last resort and send in the army.


The main lever Hong Kong has is not its own importance to China anymore.   The main lever is in China's relation with Taiwan.    Uniting all "Chinadom", in this case including both mainland and Taiwan, is something that strikes a very deep chord with the Chinese because of their history.   The legitimacy of the communist party in China actually stems to a high degree from preventing any part of old pre-Manchu imperial China from breaking away and gaining independence or be subsumed by another country.   That includes Taiwan.    But its future legitimacy will depend on actually brining Taiwan to heel.    It hopes to do this without war, through a combination of threats and enticements.     The enticement is China offered to form a union with Taiwan rather than subjugating Taiwan.  Under the Union Taiwan will have access to the Chinese market but will be allowed to remain completely self-governing with its current political system intact, so long as it submits its defense and foreign policy to Beijing.    The example that such as a system is workable with communist china as partner is to be Hong Kong.

I think it is not unfair to say Xi and communist party of China will give up a lot more to prevent Taiwan from declearing formal independence and to affect a peaceful reunion with Taiwan than either will to coddle protesters in Hong Kong at this point in time.


If China bloodily crushes Hong Kong out of spite,  then no one in Taiwan could possibly ne enticed by a union with China, so any chance china might peacefully reunite with Taiwan is also gone for the foreseeably future.  Instead the nightmare for communist legitimacy - Taiwan declaring formal independence and the communists can't effectively stop or reverse it - is more likely to come true.

On the other hand, if Taiwan does something now to make China think Taiwan is about to declare independence soon anyway, then I think that would precipitate a immediate bloody crack down in Hong Kong because the Xi and the communists would have little to lose by it, but rather may intimidate Taiwan with a show of resolve and evidence they mean business and would accept whatever sacrifice it takes to impose order and buttress its own rule.

[Amarok]

Guarantee if it becomes a shooting revolution- the lead will only fly one way - and it won't be towards the guys with the AK47s.....

You're going to get to see what happens to an unarmed populace dealing with a dictatorial regime.

It's gonna be reaall ugly.

Ready to go " stand by them" hero?

1. Considering it was an armed populous that put the dictatorship in charge in the first place ....

2. Considering the greatest advocates of democracy have been non violent .Sorry you confuse other countries with your own 

3. Are you going to stand with them mister armed hero ?

---

You've made a large error.

You assume that I think giving the citizens of Hong Kong guns now would make a difference.

It won't. They' re seriously fucked.

You assume it would matter either way 

The problem is they long ago lost their right to arms (or never had it) and allowed their government to become the dictitorial juggernaught it has become.


That's what happens.

Lol no an armed populous is how they took power in the first place. That's what happens . So get your red dawn fantasies out of your head . Armed populations don't stop dictators they create them .