HK is not the center of Cantonese culture by the way. If you say HK culture (a mixture of Cantonese some UK) it would be more correct.
Point taken. The whole area is being diluted with state sponsored Mandarin-ness, so there's general resentment about it.
that doesn't even make sense, there's nothing mandarin-ness about the whole canton area, and there's certainly nothing state sponsored about the language, I mean Taiwan people all speak mandarin. What they do resent are mainlanders, and it's no secret the superiority complex and increased xenophobia towards mainland travlers/immigrants, and this has nothing to do with PRC policies. I think part of the resentment these days are just a refusal to accept reality that the Chinese economic boom has made a lot of Chinese people richer, and even rich enough to buy up a lot of expensive the housing and other luxury items in Hong Kong and that makes a many people there angry. One because it drives up the housing price and secondly some are just mad because these "poor, dirty, uneducated" mainlanders are buying up all of their shet. I'm not even going in the politics of it all. China is obviously in the wrong with the broken promise, but what the hell do people expect, it's ****ing communist Chinese government we are talking about here, and when was the last time they made a good decision with policies on freedom and democracy. The point is, the anger certainly isn't just about the election in my opinion, it's a combinations of a lot of factors, social, economical, political that finally boiled over. growing up in Vancouver, most of my friends were of Hong Kong decent, and most of their parents immigrated to Canada in the early 90's because they were paranoid that the takeover would turn Hong Kong into a Communist state filled with poor mainlanders and ruin the economy. But when they realized that there's no jobs and money in Vancouver, and that Hong Kong was pretty much business as usual after 1997, most of them left vancouver in the 2000's back to Hong Kong to work and live. I think eventually this will all die down again when people realize Hong Kong will remain the same most likely, with or without PRC screening their candidates and go about their normal lives.
HK person living in UK atm. Got tons of friends on fb who all support and are at the Occupy movement. I would love to hear what are the 'better ways to do it'. The whole point of the protest is that the government (both PRC and HK) aren't giving the protesters much choice in voicing their displeasure, it's not like they can do it at the ballot box. I do agree that ultimately, the Chinese government isn't going to back down on this at all, and right now they are just hoping that the whole movement dissipates soon enough, which is unlikely. CY Leung has absolutely nothing to offer the protesters, so there's no reason why they should back down at all. And just one small comment on that 'poor vs rich' thing, as much as I love Hong Kong, it is very very unequal (http://www.scmp.com/article/1004440/haves-and-have-nots), so why wouldn't the poorer people, who cannot afford housing in any sense, be displeased? And the discrimination against mainlanders, unfortunately it does exist, fed by nicely-timed media stories and when you queue at a busy restaurant, you might find that the whole queue is speaking in Mandarin and you're standing there thinking 'Are there any HK people here?' It might get better as HK becomes a bit more trilingual and people learn more Mandarin, but that's a long way away.
both previous posts echoed what I said about discrimination. not only it's bad, it's creating hostility between mainlanders and HK people. some mainlanders are realizing that the locals are not treating them nicely and look down upon them and basically started hating HK people. if they had any sympathy before, I am not so sure anymore. if HK keeps on antagonizing mainlanders, it's not just about politics anymore.
right, so that's my point. it's not like what media is portraying that this is about democracy. it's about social issues that's been brewing for years and finally coming out all together. if poor people all over the world does this, then isn't that like a communist revolution? re-distribution of wealth. okay, maybe not exactly the same, but shares some similarities. by the way, the housing is so expensive, I can't afford to buy a 600 square feet apartment here. they should develop more apartments so people can afford it.
Communism - a socioeconomic system structured upon common ownership of the means of production and characterized by the absence of social classes, money, and the state; as well as a social, political and economic ideology and movement that aims to establish this social order. Fascism- a system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. There is no communism in China or Russia.... carry on.
Well, most of mainlanders wouldn't think Hong Kong people are lazy or corrupt, at least for most educated people as I know. It's well known for its fast-pace work/life style and less corruption comparing the mainland. You are right on the first one though, I have heard about many complaints about they got different services based on what you speak. Speaking Mandarin doesn't get the same hospitality as English. Personally, I went to HK last year with family. Staying at JW Marriott for two nights, we went to have diner downstairs but were turned down. Said all tables were booked, even though only 10% of the tables were occupied. Went there again in 30 minutes and this time we were served. For the whole 1 hour we were there, no more than 20% of the tables were taken. Thinking back, it's either a fxxked-up booking system, or we didn't look like high-profit customers (maybe the way we speak or dress). Snobbishness is one of the few things I resent so it did leave me some bad tastes to an otherwise pleasant trip. Not unique in HK though, same materialism is rampant in the mainland.
I've heard that theses protesters even pick up after themselves. Now that's not really like any american protesters. I don't think we ever pick up our trash after a protest. Maybe the tea party, but I assume there's a lot of cigarette butts laying around after they protest. The occupy wall street crowd usually leave poop all over the streets after they are done...... The Ferguson protesters usually tear up anything in a 5 mile radius..........
A little more rant on this. I fully support their freedom to voice and hope one day people in the mainland enjoy equal amount of freedom as them. On the other hand, I hope it's a gradual and mutual process so that we are all citizens under one country with equal rights in years to come. BTW people waving British flags among them is definitely a turn-off for me.
If this protest were to happened in the 70s, we could have possibly had another totalitarian state the same way it was in Cambodia. Asia during the 70s was some of the darkest chapters in human history. 1. Vietnam War 2. Pol Pot Regime 3. Death Squad leaders in Indonesia murdering over 2 million people, damn!!! Democracy saves lives!!!
My dad teaches at one of the HK universities and I've heard that view from both professors and students. The mainland students all work very hard while the HK students are lazy. HK is less corrupt than the mainland but I've heard from mainlanders that they feel HK people get special breaks because of their money even in the mainland. Anyway I agree that tensions between native Hong Kong people and mainlanders is part of these protests but I wouldn't simplify this issue to that. There very clearly is a desire in Hong Kong for self determination and the feeling that the PRC and HK Chief Executive have not lived up to the promises that were made to HK at the time of the handover.
apollo33, brantonli24, grumbler have all presented the situation pretty well. This protest is using democracy as a figurehead; it's the easiest and most "noble" looking subject to protest to gain local and global attention without actual/clear pragmatic solutions or addressing some of the politically incorrect motivations. It's important to point out that the majority or initial wave of protesters are usually youth (influenced by internet/social media) and the lower income/ less educated (have-nots). The actual motivation behind the protest is amalgamated frustration over decades of socioeconomic inequality and the disdain for nouveau riche mainlanders (often rude/uneducated) who have severely aggravated the socioeconomic situation. On top of that is absolutely true that China is eroding HK cultural identity, slowly taking away rights that HKers have come accustomed to, and accelerating the structural and cultural reform of HK into a Chinese city. However, this all occurred during British occupation (including cultural identity/inability to elect representatives); the difference is HK prospered across the board. There is some hypocrisy to the current movement. The argument of the anti-protesters or pro-China side: - the protest is unlawful and causing billion dollars of economic damage as it is impeding daily business from functioning (both rich and poor) - pragmatic protest should be in the form functional reform and policies (ie. stop blanket complaining, come up with a real plan, get people to sign it, then send it to representatives). - the current reality is, HK is now a part of China that requires China to thrive more than the other way around. HKers should accept that fact and adapt. The protesters are creating a huge divide in Mainland-HK sentiment. - HK has had a few decades of prosperity that China is freshly enjoying. HK should take the "higher ground" and have empathy and try their best to educate the mainlanders of the local issues that are being caused (this is very difficult imo). My rationale agrees with both sides. I think their are enough high level HK people who care about HK who are doing what they can to preserve HK rights in a pragmatic fashion and this is the way to get things done. At the same time, it's important to demonstrate, symbolically, to show how important those beliefs and rights are to the people.
I think there's alot of confusion here. Based on my understanding, the current issue have nothing to do with PRC's treaty with UK. PRC's treaty with the UK during handover never said the PRC promised to grant the people of Hong Kong the right to vote for their chief executive. In fact from the Joint Declaration between UK and PRC, it seems like its just a continuation of how the British handled the appointment of Hong Kong's chief executive, with one notable exception being instead of being appointed by the Queen now the chief executive is appointed by the PRC. The current conflict have to do the underlying conflict in Hong Kong's "constitution" in which on one hand universal suffrage is the ultimate aim under Basic Law and on the other hand PRC have final appointment power for the chief executive. What sparked this protest is PRC's 2007 National Congress decision to MAYBE allow universal suffrage voting for the 2017 chief executive position. In the August 2014, PRC National Congress they added an additional requirement that the "the Chief Executive shall be a person who loves the country and loves Hong Kong"
Except that there had been protest by people in Hong Kong towards the British before and prosperity wasn't widely across the board under British rule either. Keep in mind too while China was war riddled and then in the throws of the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution it was an easy argument to compare the conditions in Hong Kong versus conditions in China proper. Even with that though many in Hong Kong didn't appreciate British rule and felt it favored elites. Also as noted earlier many British reforms didn't happen until it was clear that the British were on the way out.
The HK Basic Law is a direct outgrowth of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and was drafted before the handover. While it isn't the treaty that returned HK it was understood that as part of that agreement that the terms of the Basic Law would be implemented. You're right the Basic Law says does say that the Chief Executive and Legislature is to be ultimately be by means of universal suffrage. The PRC has waffled on that and even as long as 2004 had said that it has final say on HK laws so effectively doing away with HK democracy before it was even fully implemented.
That's true, but there's also a narrative in the protest that claims HK lost the freedom it had under British rule, you will see people waving British flags and stuff, that's where the hypocrisy is. I would assume that most of the youngsters protesting were not old enough to actually live under the British rule.
I'm sure there are some people who long for British rule. There were many HK who did very well under British rule, were educated under British system and probably have some fondness for the British culture. I doubt that those people form a big part of the protests or that the protests are driven by a desire to return to British rule. As I said I dont' have polling data but I guess that most of the protesters are fine with remaining a part of the PRC as long as they can continue their autonomy and are guaranteed control of the Chief Executive and Legislature.
