British Hong Kong or Chinese Hong Kong?

[Namor]

During the Taiwan issue, some people were talking about Hong Kong. After Hong kong returned to China in 1997, many people thought that the political situation has gotten worse, even when there was a SAR policy going around.

[Pingxiang]

Hong Kong was always part of China until the forced occupation.

Poster of the Return of Hong Kong to the Motherland. HK. flag and all.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'm not sure of the details, but I'd say British as I can't see how it's better Chinese.

Or even better- whatever the people want.

[Hippostania]

British Hong Kong. The illegitimate socialist regime in Beijing had no right to negotiate with the UK, only the Republic of China and its representatives in Taipei had that right. Hong Kong is now under an oppressive communistic regime, and that's not good. Hong Kong was an integral part of the United Kingdom for centuries, and it should still be a part of it. Just like Macao should be a part of Portugal.

[The Matthew Islands]

British Hong Kong. The illegitimate socialist regime in Beijing had no right to negotiate with the UK, only the Republic of China and its representatives in Taipei had that right. Hong Kong is now under an oppressive communistic regime, and that's not good. Hong Kong was an integral part of the United Kingdom for centuries, and it should still be a part of it. Just like Macao should be a part of Portugal.

Wow, its like you've turned into the thing you claim to hate so much. Its amazing really.

[Pingxiang]

Seems need to read the following.

Before 1997, HK had better living standard than China so they looked down on Mainlanders, they ignored the repressive British colonial rule and did whatever they could to please their colonial master. All the Brits needed to do was to dangle some MBE, KBE, etc., knighthood in front of HK people, then they could herd HK people like flock of sheep. Human right abuse was regard as deserved punishment for the troublemakers, and second-class citizen treatment was regard as the norm.

HK today has more political freedom and rights than under the British, HK has better living standard than under the British, HK is better off than the British nearly in every aspect. The only aspect HK people has lost is the fake superiority they enjoyed before returning to China.

A lot of HK people resent that loss, that’s what you got about what you meant “what they feel about living under CCP rule.” Those so called democracy fighters would be locked up in the “white house’ basement and deported to the middle of nowhere in the Pacific Ocean or Indian Ocean during the British colonial rule long time already.

[Great Nepal]

Neither.
Independent Hong Kong.

[Democratic Koyro]

Chinese Hong Kong.

[Novaltia (Ancient)]

Britain colonised an Chinese area.
Yes China is a dictatorship but you got to take two things into account:
1. It was Chinese originally, Imperial China didn't have a good enough human rights as modern China either.
2. Currently it is one of the democratic a free Areas of China.

[Machtergreifung]

Look at the average life of a citizen of Hong Kong.

Look at the average life of a citizen of PRC.

The result is simple.

[Novaltia (Ancient)]

British Hong Kong. The illegitimate socialist regime in Beijing had no right to negotiate with the UK, only the Republic of China and its representatives in Taipei had that right. Hong Kong is now under an oppressive communistic regime, and that's not good. Hong Kong was an integral part of the United Kingdom for centuries, and it should still be a part of it. Just like Macao should be a part of Portugal.

From 1839 to 1997 it was British. That's 158 years.
For over hundreds and probably a thousand years, it was either Chinese or belonging to a Chinese kingdom.

[The Kingdom of Okwe]

Britain helped to develop Hong Kong, but now its not a part of it I think that Independence is better - it practically is now

[Mesoland]

British Hong Kong, the citizens were better off under the repressive British rule and the much more oppressive Chinese rule can't do much good for them.

[The UK in Exile]

Hong kong hong kong and an NCR New Vegas.

[Proloteriat]

Its Chinese.

[Todlichebujoku]

British Hong Kong. The illegitimate socialist regime in Beijing had no right to negotiate with the UK, only the Republic of China and its representatives in Taipei had that right. Hong Kong is now under an oppressive communistic regime, and that's not good. Hong Kong was an integral part of the United Kingdom for centuries, and it should still be a part of it. Just like Macao should be a part of Portugal.

From 1839 to 1997 it was British. That's 158 years.
For over hundreds and probably a thousand years, it was either Chinese or belonging to a Chinese kingdom.

We're talking about which country HK's better off with, not who it belonged to first. I say Britain-there was an exodus to Vancouver right before 1997.

[Arcadiana]

The PRC should have never had legal ownership of Hong Kong considering the true Chinese government is Tiawan...besides once Hong Kong looses its SAR status its citizens will rapidly loose their freedoms, just ask the Tibet about the friendliness of the PRC.

[Birkinghamia]

Whatever the people of Hong Kong want is the best, I'd say.

[The Godly Nations]

Of course British Hong Kong! Everyone was happier when England ruled the world. Ask the Indians and Pakistanis- they'll tell you that under England's kind guidance, they weren't pointing rifles at each other, but with independence, look at them now. And British Orient, now you see the Mahometans killing each other. It would have been unthinkable under English leadership. What we need is to restore the British Empire, that's what we need.

[Tuthina]

Definitely British Hong Kong. Even if we give all the benefit of the doubts to PRC concerning all the craps that we had since the handover, the current administration is, at best, on par with the colonial government, and HKSAR government still suck at PR, among many other things.

Before 1997, HK had better living standard than China so they looked down on Mainlanders, they ignored the repressive British colonial rule and did whatever they could to please their colonial master. All the Brits needed to do was to dangle some MBE, KBE, etc., knighthood in front of HK people, then they could herd HK people like flock of sheep. Human right abuse was regard as deserved punishment for the troublemakers, and second-class citizen treatment was regard as the norm.

Because the prosperity of Hong Kong since WWII is not due to the British rule.
While it can be oppressive sometimes, it at least brings the promise of prosperity and security while PRC is either busy screwing with itself or trying to take over Hong Kong by starting riots.

HK today has more political freedom and rights than under the British, HK has better living standard than under the British, HK is better off than the British nearly in every aspect. The only aspect HK people has lost is the fake superiority they enjoyed before returning to China.

More political freedom till the 80s indeed, but it is PRC who reversed the 1995 reform that brings more democratic elements in the legislature, not to mention disregarding the entire legislature and the laws they changed between 1995 and 1997.
Living standard actually degenerated since the handover. While some argue that it is merely an extension of the British rule, the fact that the gini coefficient of Hong Kong increased since then do tell something. The fact that the urban renewal project of Hong Kong only serves to heat the real estate economy and drive poor people into cage houses and its worse incarnation also do not suggest higher living standard for those who need it the most.
Of course we feel superior to PRC, at least we do not use tanks to suppress student uprising. There is a reason why 25% of Hong Kong population protested shortly before June 4 1989, and we still have tens of thousands people holding events to let others remember it. The fact that more than 50 thousand people fled Hong Kong in 1989 and 1990 also shows something.

A lot of HK people resent that loss, that’s what you got about what you meant “what they feel about living under CCP rule.” Those so called democracy fighters would be locked up in the “white house’ basement and deported to the middle of nowhere in the Pacific Ocean or Indian Ocean during the British colonial rule long time already.

Do you even know what is going on in Hong Kong?

[Mesoland]

Of course British Hong Kong! Everyone was happier when England ruled the world. Ask the Indians and Pakistanis- they'll tell you that under England's kind guidance, they weren't pointing rifles at each other, but with independence, look at them now. And British Orient, now you see the Mahometans killing each other. It would have been unthinkable under English leadership. What we need is to restore the British Empire, that's what we need.

Except for when Britain left their African realms for them to become independent, they all went down the shitter. Independence has indeed made it worse for a lot of former Empire nations, and Hong Kong, I believe, is one of them.

[Eylandia]

Its impossible to say whether HK is more British or Chinese. It was Chinese for centuries, sure, but it was a tiny handful of fishing villages until the British turned up. With that in mind I think HK should legitimately be independent, sure it was Chinese for centuries but it was the British who made it the commercial centre it is today but who have surrendered their colonial rule.
Thankfully the British managed to negotiate a settlement that assured HK's devolution from Beijing upon return, but really its as good as independent anyway, I think it should be the whole way and become independent (a Chinese version of Singapore if you like). I think thats what the British would have liked to have seen happen, but pure geopolitics over-ruled, Britain wants to look friendly to China and so compromised. Geopolitical realities aside, independence would make most sense. Essentially, its both British and Chinese in different ways, making it a distinctly seperate HK indentity that should be recognised with independence.

EDIT: I also think the opinion of the people of HK is important as well, and as the other posters have pointed out perfectly, the majority of HKers are not exactly happy at becoming Chinese.

[Pingxiang]

The PRC should have never had legal ownership of Hong Kong considering the true Chinese government is Tiawan...besides once Hong Kong looses its SAR status its citizens will rapidly loose their freedoms, just ask the Tibet about the friendliness of the PRC.

I did read that some people from Hong Kong and the PRC were looking at Taiwans current style of government.

At the time of the handover, there was much speculation over whether the mainland would change Hong Kong or Hong Kong would act as a model for the mainland. Almost fifteen years on, it seems that neither is the case. Instead, both Hong Kong and the mainland talk about another model – Taiwan. Its recent presidential election caused a stir in the mainland, forcing even the mainland’s nationalistic Global Times to admit, however grudgingly, that the election “touched a nerve of the Chinese mainland,” and the questions that “overwhelmed the Internet” was: “Why can’t the same style of elections be held here?”

The Global Times answered its own question by saying the price for stability and unity is a lack of democracy or more to the point, you can’t have everything. Still, not everyone is convinced. Wealthy mainland businessmen who observed the elections in Taiwan were favorably impressed, with one reporting ”This is an amazing idea, to be able to choose the people who represent you.” And with up to 250 million mainland microbloggers watching the election and all chattering on the Internet, Taiwan may well become the tail that wags that running dog.

[Tuthina]

I did read that both Hong Kongs government and the PRC government were looking at Taiwans current style of government.

Except what ends up is the system that the "oppressive" British used on Hong Kong for a while: Half elected according to votes by residents in different locations (i.e. your basic representative democracy), and another half "functional constituencies" which are effectively elected and controlled by rich merchants. It certainly pleases the merchants, but not entirely what the Taiwanese have.

[New England and The Maritimes]

The people of Hong Kong seem to like being part of China, so why not.