Hong Kong

[Purgatio]

Thats sad to hear, but again the police wouldn't be committing these abuses if not for the riots hapening in the first place. If Hong Kong remained the peaceful and orderly society it had been before all this chaos started, everything would be fine and the police wouldn't be hurting anyone.

They'll be peaceful if the CCP did something unimaginable, like not trying to reduce their western style freedoms.

The riots solve nothing. Depriving other people of their right to be safe in their person and property because a third party is denying you your "Western style freedoms" is self-defeating. Either you support liberty or you don't, and if you do you have to support it for everyone, including the bystanders being hurt by the property destruction of the HK rioters.

[Purgatio]

Its not whataboutism if the police are resorting to brutalities only because they are scared for their lives. Rioters are throwing rocks and glass bottles and Molotov cocktails at them, many have gotten hurt or burnt, of course they scared and a minority may act out because of that fear and panic in them.

It is, it is saying criminal behavior of others justifies criminal behavior.
Hardly supporting the rule of law there.

The rule of law has to be restored, before that can happen peace and stability needs to be restored. Then we rebuild the rule of law thereafter when everything's quietened down.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

It is, it is saying criminal behavior of others justifies criminal behavior.
Hardly supporting the rule of law there.

The rule of law has to be restored, before that can happen peace and stability needs to be restored. Then we rebuild the rule of law thereafter when everything's quietened down.

There is no rule of law in an Unrechtsstaat. There is Rule of the Party. That you support Autocratic Rule of the CPC is disgusting.

[Bombadil]

They'll be peaceful if the CCP did something unimaginable, like not trying to reduce their western style freedoms.

The riots solve nothing. Depriving other people of their right to be safe in their person and property because a third party is denying you your "Western style freedoms" is self-defeating. Either you support liberty or you don't, and if you do you have to support it for everyone, including the bystanders being hurt by the property destruction of the HK rioters.

Except as shown in the recent elections, it's a sacrifice we're clearly willing to accept as a majority.

[Purgatio]

The riots solve nothing. Depriving other people of their right to be safe in their person and property because a third party is denying you your "Western style freedoms" is self-defeating. Either you support liberty or you don't, and if you do you have to support it for everyone, including the bystanders being hurt by the property destruction of the HK rioters.

Except as shown in the recent elections, it's a sacrifice we're clearly willing to accept as a majority.

The pro-Beijing camp losing seats in the 2019 local elections kinda undermines the whole argument that you guys have no recourse except violence to make your voice heard.

[Novus America]

Because it allows you to live in luxury without working. Nice for you but others who do not have that luxury are not really going to care if you lose some value of your stocks in order to benefit their family.

That's pretty selfish of them then, to not care about the active injuries they inflict on other people's property.

Well in the world you want, which is everyone for themselves that is what you get.
Besides they care more about their survival than your luxury obviously.

Which is the inherent failure of your system. Because you oppose the government helping them to survive, you make a system where it is you vs them in a fight for survival.

[Novus America]

Except as shown in the recent elections, it's a sacrifice we're clearly willing to accept as a majority.

The pro-Beijing camp losing seats in the 2019 local elections kinda undermines the whole argument that you guys have no recourse except violence to make your voice heard.

The local councils have no real power.

[Novus America]

It is, it is saying criminal behavior of others justifies criminal behavior.
Hardly supporting the rule of law there.

The rule of law has to be restored, before that can happen peace and stability needs to be restored. Then we rebuild the rule of law thereafter when everything's quietened down.

This is completely contradictory. Protecting the rule of law by destroying it. And why would we think it would magically rebuild after authoritarianism rules?

Also this is some weird inverse utilitarianism. You would kill hundreds to save a few windows.

[Bombadil]

Except as shown in the recent elections, it's a sacrifice we're clearly willing to accept as a majority.

The pro-Beijing camp losing seats in the 2019 local elections kinda undermines the whole argument that you guys have no recourse except violence to make your voice heard.

Our voice was heard but not listened to, and those elections are for, like, how many bins should be on the streets, nothing of real import other than a channel to make our voice heard. The only thing it did was break the lie of some mythical silent majority that you seem to also allude to in your theory of people being afraid to walk out the door for fear of protests.

Look, we all get your opinion, it's fine. It just doesn't really relate to reality on the ground and what people are fighting for, because you don't really value it.

Law and order to protect vested minority interests to the detriment of universal free speech and suffrage is simply no good to anyone other than those vested minority interests.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

They'll be peaceful if the CCP did something unimaginable, like not trying to reduce their western style freedoms.

The riots solve nothing. Depriving other people of their right to be safe in their person and property because a third party is denying you your "Western style freedoms" is self-defeating. Either you support liberty or you don't, and if you do you have to support it for everyone, including the bystanders being hurt by the property destruction of the HK rioters.

I do, you obviously don't as you called for massacres to protect those phantom bystanders you talk about, even though they're probably virtually non-existent. You advocate for more violence than the protesters are currently doing.

[Bombadil]

The pro-Beijing camp losing seats in the 2019 local elections kinda undermines the whole argument that you guys have no recourse except violence to make your voice heard.

The local councils have no real power.

..and they're trying to actively dismantle what little power they have anyway because the results didn't go their way.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

The rule of law has to be restored, before that can happen peace and stability needs to be restored. Then we rebuild the rule of law thereafter when everything's quietened down.

This is completely contradictory. Protecting the rule of law by destroying it. And why would we think it would magically rebuild after authoritarianism rules?

Tbh his views synergises perfectly with the view that the CPC has the absolute right to Rule by Party, bugger this Western Imperialist notion of rule of law etc. Others like me may not be entirely enamoured with the idea of a State of Total Injustice.

[Purgatio]

That's pretty selfish of them then, to not care about the active injuries they inflict on other people's property.

Well in the world you want, which is everyone for themselves that is what you get.
Besides they care more about their survival than your luxury obviously.

Which is the inherent failure of your system. Because you oppose the government helping them to survive, you make a system where it is you vs them in a fight for survival.

That's where the rule of law comes in, the rule of law is needed to protect the property rights of people which is otherwise vulnerable to mob rule and mob violence.

[Purgatio]

This is completely contradictory. Protecting the rule of law by destroying it. And why would we think it would magically rebuild after authoritarianism rules?

Tbh his views synergises perfectly with the view that the CPC has the absolute right to Rule by Party, bugger this Western Imperialist notion of rule of law etc. Others like me may not be entirely enamoured with the idea of a State of Total Injustice.

If there is a contradiction, its a contradiction that assails the other side's case, the people who criticize the CCP for failing to respect the rule of law but then cheering as windows are smashed and Molotov cocktails and rocks are thrown about in the open air.

[Purgatio]

The pro-Beijing camp losing seats in the 2019 local elections kinda undermines the whole argument that you guys have no recourse except violence to make your voice heard.

Our voice was heard but not listened to, and those elections are for, like, how many bins should be on the streets, nothing of real import other than a channel to make our voice heard. The only thing it did was break the lie of some mythical silent majority that you seem to also allude to in your theory of people being afraid to walk out the door for fear of protests.

Look, we all get your opinion, it's fine. It just doesn't really relate to reality on the ground and what people are fighting for, because you don't really value it.

Law and order to protect vested minority interests to the detriment of universal free speech and suffrage is simply no good to anyone other than those vested minority interests.

Because individual rights matter too, not just whatever the majority one. Btw I've never been one of those who suggested the Hong Kong rioters are some tiny minority that the silent majority despises, my position has always been the majority of Hong Kongers support the mass mob violence taking place and that's what disturbs me so much about the situation in HK, that so many of its people have no respect for Law and Order they are willing to tolerate the untrammeled infliction of violence in a state of anarchy and lawlessness, is extremely troubling and a huge cause for concern.

[Purgatio]

The riots solve nothing. Depriving other people of their right to be safe in their person and property because a third party is denying you your "Western style freedoms" is self-defeating. Either you support liberty or you don't, and if you do you have to support it for everyone, including the bystanders being hurt by the property destruction of the HK rioters.

I do, you obviously don't as you called for massacres to protect those phantom bystanders you talk about, even though they're probably virtually non-existent. You advocate for more violence than the protesters are currently doing.

When an airport is forcibly shut down with violence, I'm pretty sure innocent bystanders are injured and inconvenienced by that action. Unless you are suggesting people who book flights in and out of one of Asia's busiest financial hubs are "virtually non-existent", "phantom bystanders". Get real, man.

[Plzen]

If the current social organisation never benefited me, if property rights always meant other people's right not to have to provide me a decent living because I never had any meaningful property of my own, if the arbiters of justice and of order have always been there to punish me for speaking my mind, and if the law is created by people who have no regard for my interests or my desires, why exactly would I have respect for any of these things? When shattered windows and broken trams don't make my life worse in any way I find meaningful, why would I oppose violence and direct action?

Luckily I live in a society that is somewhat more just than CCP's Hong Kong, but if I were as desperate as many of these protesters seem to be, I too would be willing to throw society to the dogs because what have I got to lose?

Those whose applecarts are full will never understand why other people are so willing to upset them. It's alright, I suppose. Fostering understanding is not necessary when pitchforks can make the point just as well.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

I do, you obviously don't as you called for massacres to protect those phantom bystanders you talk about, even though they're probably virtually non-existent. You advocate for more violence than the protesters are currently doing.

When an airport is forcibly shut down with violence, I'm pretty sure innocent bystanders are injured and inconvenienced by that action. Unless you are suggesting people who book flights in and out of one of Asia's busiest financial hubs are "virtually non-existent", "phantom bystanders". Get real, man.

I'm going to get real by telling you that just because some protesters are assholes does not mean tanks should be sent in. A small group of inconvenienced travelers do not have a higher value than the HK people. Hell, pro-democracy protesters get roughed up even more by CCP thugs.

Also, there's more to liberty than how intact a piece of property is.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

I wonder how long it will truly be before China drops the desguise, and takes direct rule of the city.

Handover agreement stated one country two systems would end in 2047, so direct rule is coming anyway.

I know, but I also know they will not wait that long either.

[Heloin]

Our voice was heard but not listened to, and those elections are for, like, how many bins should be on the streets, nothing of real import other than a channel to make our voice heard. The only thing it did was break the lie of some mythical silent majority that you seem to also allude to in your theory of people being afraid to walk out the door for fear of protests.

Look, we all get your opinion, it's fine. It just doesn't really relate to reality on the ground and what people are fighting for, because you don't really value it.

Law and order to protect vested minority interests to the detriment of universal free speech and suffrage is simply no good to anyone other than those vested minority interests.

Because individual rights matter too, not just whatever the majority one. Btw I've never been one of those who suggested the Hong Kong rioters are some tiny minority that the silent majority despises, my position has always been the majority of Hong Kongers support the mass mob violence taking place and that's what disturbs me so much about the situation in HK, that so many of its people have no respect for Law and Order they are willing to tolerate the untrammeled infliction of violence in a state of anarchy and lawlessness, is extremely troubling and a huge cause for concern.

Have you brought up how you think the PLA should enter Hong Kong so your family's bank account will make you richer yet?

[Bombadil]

Our voice was heard but not listened to, and those elections are for, like, how many bins should be on the streets, nothing of real import other than a channel to make our voice heard. The only thing it did was break the lie of some mythical silent majority that you seem to also allude to in your theory of people being afraid to walk out the door for fear of protests.

Look, we all get your opinion, it's fine. It just doesn't really relate to reality on the ground and what people are fighting for, because you don't really value it.

Law and order to protect vested minority interests to the detriment of universal free speech and suffrage is simply no good to anyone other than those vested minority interests.

Because individual rights matter too, not just whatever the majority one. Btw I've never been one of those who suggested the Hong Kong rioters are some tiny minority that the silent majority despises, my position has always been the majority of Hong Kongers support the mass mob violence taking place and that's what disturbs me so much about the situation in HK, that so many of its people have no respect for Law and Order they are willing to tolerate the untrammeled infliction of violence in a state of anarchy and lawlessness, is extremely troubling and a huge cause for concern.

Yet HK is generally peaceful with among the lowest crime rates in the world. The relationship with police was high. So you have to question what it takes for a majority of people to accept a degree of violence, because it's clearly something very real and very valuable that's being lost, HK is home like no other and I don't think people who don't live here factor that in.

If your home was repossessed by an outside bully who started to change the way you live, your home.. your family.. I suspect you'd get very angry as well, especially given no other channel to vent your displeasure.

[Propheticum]

Also, there's more to liberty than how intact a piece of property is.

Preach!

[Infected Mushroom]

I have just read this page and I have to say that Purgatio is making a lot of sense

He’s really hitting all the key points

[Purgatio]

I have just read this page and I have to say that Purgatio is making a lot of sense

He’s really hitting all the key points

Thanks man! We really are of one mind on a lot of these issues!

[Purgatio]

If the current social organisation never benefited me, if property rights always meant other people's right not to have to provide me a decent living because I never had any meaningful property of my own, if the arbiters of justice and of order have always been there to punish me for speaking my mind, and if the law is created by people who have no regard for my interests or my desires, why exactly would I have respect for any of these things? When shattered windows and broken trams don't make my life worse in any way I find meaningful, why would I oppose violence and direct action?

Luckily I live in a society that is somewhat more just than CCP's Hong Kong, but if I were as desperate as many of these protesters seem to be, I too would be willing to throw society to the dogs because what have I got to lose?

Those whose applecarts are full will never understand why other people are so willing to upset them. It's alright, I suppose. Fostering understanding is not necessary when pitchforks can make the point just as well.

People like you who would rather destroy social organisation than live under it and abide by it on a norm of reciprocity are precisely why the police exist. In a perfect world, we could trust in the morality and civic-mindedness of the people to obey the law, learn to respect basic property rights, work hard, do well in school, get a job and provide for their family, knowing that the money they earn through hard work is protected by the law and if a burglar barged into your house he would be arrested, and if he stole your hard-earned money from your family the law would force him to pay restitution - that protection, of course, rests on you reciprocally respecting the property rights of everyone else as well, mine included.

Unfortunately, not everyone understands this norm of reciprocity nor are they willing to respect Kant's most basic moral imperative of universalizability - that for something to be moral, it must be possible of universal abstract moral obligatoriness. Your system fails the Kantian moral imperative because if everyone thought like you and decided to loot, steal, and burn things because a 'smash-and-grab' mentality is selfishly more convenient than respecting other's property rights and not stealing from them or maiming them and taking their possessions, then no one could live a fulfilled life because you can never be sure someone else won't do to you what you propose to do to me - hurt you and steal from you what you plan to steal from me.

Thankfully, there is a way to keep the hooligans of the world who have no respect for morality or reciprocity, in check - law enforcement. The police exist to lay down the law by force, to give everyone assurance that their property rights will be respected. If our society rested on voluntary respect for the law, we would be doomed because people with your selfish morality would be ruling the streets by violence and mob rule. Thankfully, we don't live in that society. We live in a society where you can be a good person voluntarily and obey the rules and not hurt people - or, you can be an asshole and hurt people and try and steal their stuff, and go to jail.