Hong Kong

[Tuthina]

You can say Luxembourg was German, it was still occupied by the Nazis.
The people of Hong Kong never agreed to be ruled by the PRC. Not all Chinese are ruled by the PRC.

Regardless of ethnicity it is occupation if it is with without consent.

Also:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.scmp.c ... governance
Hong Kong is in recession it its poor leadership is making it worse.

Hong Kong has been Chinese for thousands of years. Even when the UK took it, there was an agreed upon return date.

It’s not comparable.

Unless you happen to be born south of the Boundary Street, or is among the 50 thousand families that manage to get British Citizenship, I guess.

And Vienna has historical claims from the Swiss border and the Alps to the Serbian frontier and deep into Ukraine. What's your point?

Hong Kong is Chinese by every relevant metric

So there is no collaboration with an occupying power, if anything, there’s a duty of loyalty to the state

There is never a duty of loyalty to the state. If anything, the movement has shown many that maybe it's for the best that Hong Kong should no longer be part of China, or at least, this China.

[Pasong Tirad]

EDIT: Double post

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

There is never a duty of loyalty to the state.

What if loyalty to a nation and loyalty to an unjust, terrorising, ethnic cleansing, imperialist-colonialist reich are two different things?

As said.

[Infected Mushroom]

Then maybe Luxembourg should belong to Germany, I don’t know enough about it’s history to comment

It should belong to the Federal Republic of Germany if it wants to be. Not otherwise. Not all historically and ethnically German states are ruled by the Federal Republic of Germany.

Just because a previous government ruled a place does not mean a current government has a right to rule it.

Hong Kong has been continuously Chinese for thousands of years chaining into the present though. That’s the big difference.

Even as a UK colony, the UK forcefully got a lease of Hong Kong, it was never a permanent land grab.

That’s the difference.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

It should belong to the Federal Republic of Germany if it wants to be. Not otherwise. Not all historically and ethnically German states are ruled by the Federal Republic of Germany.

Just because a previous government ruled a place does not mean a current government has a right to rule it.

Hong Kong has been continuously Chinese for thousands of years chaining into the present though. That’s the big difference.

Even as a UK colony, the UK forcefully got a lease of Hong Kong, it was never a permanent land grab.

That’s the difference.

Vae victis.

[Infected Mushroom]

Hong Kong has been Chinese for thousands of years. Even when the UK took it, there was an agreed upon return date.

It’s not comparable.

Unless you happen to be born south of the Boundary Street, or is among the 50 thousand families that manage to get British Citizenship, I guess.

Hong Kong is Chinese by every relevant metric

So there is no collaboration with an occupying power, if anything, there’s a duty of loyalty to the state

There is never a duty of loyalty to the state. If anything, the movement has shown many that maybe it's for the best that Hong Kong should no longer be part of China, or at least, this China.

I don’t agree. It will always be in Hong Kong’s interest to be part of a great power.

[Tuthina]

Even as a UK colony, the UK forcefully got a lease of Hong Kong, it was never a permanent land grab.

I see that's yet another thing that you talk about despite not knowing a thing about it. You might want to stick with the few things you're actually good at.

Unless you happen to be born south of the Boundary Street, or is among the 50 thousand families that manage to get British Citizenship, I guess.


There is never a duty of loyalty to the state. If anything, the movement has shown many that maybe it's for the best that Hong Kong should no longer be part of China, or at least, this China.

I don’t agree. It will always be in Hong Kong’s interest to be part of a great power.

And I disagree your disagree. That said, I'm not too objected to Hong Kong being part of US.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

It will always be in Hong Kong’s interest to be part of a great power.

Yes. The NATO-Australia-USA-Japan alliance.

[Pasong Tirad]

What right does the Xi government have to rule all ethnically Chinese people?

I never said he had a claim to Vancouver or Singapore

You're literally using the metric of Hong Kong being filled with ethnically Chinese people to justify the PRC's ownership over it and the you suddenly balk at the notion that they have a claim over Vancouver and Singapore. You are literally undermining your own arguments because they're built on nothing but sand, why are you still trying to dig your grave even deeper?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Even as a UK colony, the UK forcefully got a lease of Hong Kong, it was never a permanent land grab.

I see that's yet another thing that you talk about despite not knowing a thing about it.

But muh unequal treaties, muh century of humiliation.
To which I repeat: Vae victis - the only international principle that has withstood the test of time.

[Tuthina]

I see that's yet another thing that you talk about despite not knowing a thing about it.

But muh unequal treaties, muh century of humiliation.
To which I repeat: Vae victis.

In hindsight, suppressing the Chinese state might not have been that bad an idea, even if the ones doing that were probably not out of the goodness of their heart.

[Infected Mushroom]

I never said he had a claim to Vancouver or Singapore

You're literally using the metric of Hong Kong being filled with ethnically Chinese people to justify the PRC's ownership over it and the you suddenly balk at the notion that they have a claim over Vancouver and Singapore. You are literally undermining your own arguments because they're built on nothing but sand, why are you still trying to dig your grave even deeper?

It’s a combination of factors. Ethnicity, culture, and the fact that for thousands of years, it’s been Chinese (chaining into the present).

There’s no historical territorial claim to Vancouver or Singapore.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

But muh unequal treaties, muh century of humiliation.
To which I repeat: Vae victis.

In hindsight, suppressing the Chinese state might not have been that bad an idea, even if the ones doing that were probably not out of the goodness of their heart.

Mind you, China the state entity was always going to fight its neighbours over its own imperialist ideals, whenever it got powerful enough.

[Bombadil]

It should belong to the Federal Republic of Germany if it wants to be. Not otherwise. Not all historically and ethnically German states are ruled by the Federal Republic of Germany.

Just because a previous government ruled a place does not mean a current government has a right to rule it.

Hong Kong has been continuously Chinese for thousands of years chaining into the present though. That’s the big difference.

No it hasn't. China's borders have always been fluid through different dynasties, Guangdong wasn't properly sinicised until the Sui and Tang dynasties. Yet beyond that HK wasn't a thing before the British built it. Regardless, there's no universal law that hold a line in the sand as more important as separate values.

Even as a UK colony, the UK forcefully got a lease of Hong Kong, it was never a permanent land grab.

Actually HK island was in perpetuity, the New Territories were on a lease.

That’s the difference.

Except all your points are wrong.

[Pasong Tirad]

Unless you happen to be born south of the Boundary Street, or is among the 50 thousand families that manage to get British Citizenship, I guess.


There is never a duty of loyalty to the state. If anything, the movement has shown many that maybe it's for the best that Hong Kong should no longer be part of China, or at least, this China.

I don’t agree. It will always be in Hong Kong’s interest to be part of a great power.

You justify driving through protesters with tanks and having the PLA shoot them into submission. You have absolutely no claim to know what's in Hong Kong's best interests.

[Victoriala II]

Unless you happen to be born south of the Boundary Street, or is among the 50 thousand families that manage to get British Citizenship, I guess.


There is never a duty of loyalty to the state. If anything, the movement has shown many that maybe it's for the best that Hong Kong should no longer be part of China, or at least, this China.

I don’t agree. It will always be in Hong Kong’s interest to be part of a great power.

this metric just confirms my fears you're one of those twitter marxist-leninists who posts a lot of uyghur genocide denial

[Pasong Tirad]

You're literally using the metric of Hong Kong being filled with ethnically Chinese people to justify the PRC's ownership over it and the you suddenly balk at the notion that they have a claim over Vancouver and Singapore. You are literally undermining your own arguments because they're built on nothing but sand, why are you still trying to dig your grave even deeper?

It’s a combination of factors. Ethnicity, culture, and the fact that for thousands of years, it’s been Chinese (chaining into the present).

There’s no historical territorial claim to Vancouver or Singapore.

Your goalposts are so far from Beijing that even China can't claim it as theirs.

[Pasong Tirad]

I don’t agree. It will always be in Hong Kong’s interest to be part of a great power.

this metric just confirms my fears you're one of those twitter marxist-leninists who posts a lot of uyghur genocide denial

He's not even an ML lol he just wants the protesters to shut the fuck up because it's interfering with his gaming or something.

[Infected Mushroom]

Hong Kong has been continuously Chinese for thousands of years chaining into the present though. That’s the big difference.

No it hasn't. China's borders have always been fluid through different dynasties, Guangdong wasn't properly sinicised until the Sui and Tang dynasties. Yet beyond that HK wasn't a thing before the British built it. Regardless, there's no universal law that hold a line in the sand as more important as separate values.

Even as a UK colony, the UK forcefully got a lease of Hong Kong, it was never a permanent land grab.

Actually HK island was in perpetuity, the New Territories were on a lease.

That’s the difference.

Except all your points are wrong.

That’s the point. It’s been part of Chinese dynasties for thousands of years.

[Tuthina]

this metric just confirms my fears you're one of those twitter marxist-leninists who posts a lot of uyghur genocide denial

He's not even an ML lol he just wants the protesters to shut the fuck up because it's interfering with his gaming or something.

To be fair, most would be pretty pissed if the police decide to flung tear gas canister in densely-packed residential area, to say nothing of the few who actually got canisters launched into their room. The laundry's gonna take forever.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

No it hasn't. China's borders have always been fluid through different dynasties, Guangdong wasn't properly sinicised until the Sui and Tang dynasties. Yet beyond that HK wasn't a thing before the British built it. Regardless, there's no universal law that hold a line in the sand as more important as separate values.



Actually HK island was in perpetuity, the New Territories were on a lease.



Except all your points are wrong.

That’s the point. It’s been part of Chinese dynasties for thousands of years.

Vae victis says "lol who cares". Peking regime's rampant unchecked irredentism on the other hand is a grave threat to peace in the Far-East, Central Asia and Africa.

[Tuthina]

No it hasn't. China's borders have always been fluid through different dynasties, Guangdong wasn't properly sinicised until the Sui and Tang dynasties. Yet beyond that HK wasn't a thing before the British built it. Regardless, there's no universal law that hold a line in the sand as more important as separate values.



Actually HK island was in perpetuity, the New Territories were on a lease.



Except all your points are wrong.

That’s the point. It’s been part of Chinese dynasties for thousands of years.

Hopefully it'll stop being so.

[Bombadil]

No it hasn't. China's borders have always been fluid through different dynasties, Guangdong wasn't properly sinicised until the Sui and Tang dynasties. Yet beyond that HK wasn't a thing before the British built it. Regardless, there's no universal law that hold a line in the sand as more important as separate values.



Actually HK island was in perpetuity, the New Territories were on a lease.



Except all your points are wrong.

That’s the point. It’s been part of Chinese dynasties for thousands of years.

The point is your points are all wrong? Are you saying you're purposely getting everything wrong to show how stupid the CCP points are?

You're doing a great job if so.

[Pasong Tirad]

No it hasn't. China's borders have always been fluid through different dynasties, Guangdong wasn't properly sinicised until the Sui and Tang dynasties. Yet beyond that HK wasn't a thing before the British built it. Regardless, there's no universal law that hold a line in the sand as more important as separate values.



Actually HK island was in perpetuity, the New Territories were on a lease.



Except all your points are wrong.

That’s the point. It’s been part of Chinese dynasties for thousands of years.

I hereby invoke my ancient claims to all of Indonesia as it has been populated by Austronesians for thousands of years.

[Plzen]

Arbitrarily-defined geographic spaces have neither intelligence nor interest. It is the people, the real human beings, who inhabit these places who have social, political, or economic interests.

Now of course I do not speak for anyone but myself, but in the absence of evidence to the contrary I would generally assume it to be against the interests of any given human being to have his or her right to assemble and demonstrate be violently suppressed by an authoritarian government.