Hong Kong

[Neko-koku]

Don't mind me. I'm just lamenting that the United States of Greater Austria never became a thing.

Why? It's not a good idea at all.

[Bienenhalde]

That sounds kind of risky...what if such a situation led to more wars breaking out?

I don't think so. German statism, Japanese statism, Russian statism and now Sinostatism were/are causes of war and oppression, not the Anglo-Jewish free trade system.

Couldn't the EU and the US be seen as part of the "Anglo-Jewish free trade system", though?

[Neko-koku]

I don't think so. German statism, Japanese statism, Russian statism and now Sinostatism were/are causes of war and oppression, not the Anglo-Jewish free trade system.

Couldn't the EU and the US be seen as part of the "Anglo-Jewish free trade system", though?

US is to a large extant. EU isn't though because it is protectionist. Franco-German centralism and statism are not dead yet and they ARE serious problems just like the more extreme examples of statism based in Beijing and Moscow.

[Nova Cyberia]

I don't think so. German statism, Japanese statism, Russian statism and now Sinostatism were/are causes of war and oppression, not the Anglo-Jewish free trade system.

Couldn't the EU and the US be seen as part of the "Anglo-Jewish free trade system", though?

Anyone can, tbh, considering it's a conspiracy theory.

[Nova Cyberia]

Couldn't the EU and the US be seen as part of the "Anglo-Jewish free trade system", though?

US is to a large extant. EU isn't though because it is protectionist.

What do Jews have to do with this again?

[Neko-koku]

US is to a large extant. EU isn't though because it is protectionist.

What do Jews have to do with this again?

As forces of good.

My narrative is the opposite of the usual continental-Nazi one mostly strongly supported by Russian trads today after Nazism largely fell. When you read shit such as "the Saker" you see the "muh Anglo-Zionist system" all the time. Well, the system is good. It is Russian opposition to it that is evil.

[Nova Cyberia]

What do Jews have to do with this again?

As forces of good.

My narrative is the opposite of the usual continental-Nazi one mostly strongly supported by Russian trads today after Nazism largely fell.

They can be. But Jews, as with any other variety of human, are always going to be a mixed bag.

[Infected Mushroom]

Except there’s no settler colonialism by the Chinese

China doesn’t have colonies

It doesn’t have troops overseas

Hence the wide spectrum of shit. I know you and Purgatio will say that China isn't currently an Imperial power because some shit about empires that died 60 years ago but China is at this moment a colonising imperial power.

And it does send soldiers overseas.

You’re confusing China with the British and American empires

[Neko-koku]

As forces of good.

My narrative is the opposite of the usual continental-Nazi one mostly strongly supported by Russian trads today after Nazism largely fell.

They can be. But Jews, as with any other variety of human, are always going to be a mixed bag.

Sure. However it is clearly that Israel and Jews are mostly forces of good and prosperity while continental authoritarianism and statism from France and Spain all the way to China are forces of evil and poverty. The authoritarian and statist stink that is prevalent in Moscow and Beijing is also present in Paris, Berlin and Madrid. For example we can just discuss how autonomous local govs in France actually are and WTF Paris controls so much.

[Bienenhalde]

Couldn't the EU and the US be seen as part of the "Anglo-Jewish free trade system", though?

Anyone can, tbh, considering it's a conspiracy theory.

The Jewish part is a little dubious, but don't think you need a conspiracy theory to show that Anglo-Saxon culture has had an enormous influence in the development of the modern world and free trade capitalism.

[Infected Mushroom]

I don't think so. German statism, Japanese statism, Russian statism and now Sinostatism were/are causes of war and oppression, not the Anglo-Jewish free trade system.

Authoritarianism is needed to unite a people against outside threats. History shows us that races and peoples suffer when they don't unite but there is internal infighting and divisions between the tribe. Statism or authoritarianism means protection from racial suicide. It means the defense of your people by maintaining a unified whole to protect us from being destroyed by outsiders who seek our destruction and systematic annihilation.

Yes

The people only understand fear. Without it, you get chaos like these protests

[Neko-koku]

Anyone can, tbh, considering it's a conspiracy theory.

The Jewish part is a little dubious, but don't think you need a conspiracy theory to show that Anglo-Saxon culture has had an enormous influence in the development of the modern world and free trade capitalism.

English political system + Jewish philosophers & sociologists + Jewish, white, NE Asian, Iranian and Indian STEM folks & business people = Awesome result

First and foremost an English political system is necessary. With this as the basis we can build everything else. Without an English political system the remaining good factors can't fully function. For example Jewish philosophers in Germany are not that effective not because they suck but because the statism (e.g. outbursts of Nazism and other nonsense) of Germany prevents them from being fully effective.

[Rojava Free State]

The Jewish part is a little dubious, but don't think you need a conspiracy theory to show that Anglo-Saxon culture has had an enormous influence in the development of the modern world and free trade capitalism.

English political system + Jewish philosophers & sociologists + white, NE Asian, Iranian and Indian STEM folks = Awesome result

First and foremost an English political system is necessary.

The English system is based on ancient rome's politics tho so shouldn't we mention them

[Neko-koku]

English political system + Jewish philosophers & sociologists + white, NE Asian, Iranian and Indian STEM folks = Awesome result

First and foremost an English political system is necessary.

The English system is based on ancient rome's politics tho so shouldn't we mention them

Sure.

[Bienenhalde]

Couldn't the EU and the US be seen as part of the "Anglo-Jewish free trade system", though?

US is to a large extant. EU isn't though because it is protectionist. Franco-German centralism and statism are not dead yet and they ARE serious problems just like the more extreme examples of statism based in Beijing and Moscow.

Bah! Give me European-style statism over being oppressed and exploiting by Trump and corrupt corporations any day!!!

[Farnhamia]

I've heard that some of the protestors are now going:

"Let's all take all of our savings out of HK's banks, HK's economy will collapse and China will meet our demands."

...

Can someone explain to me how this Protest/Demonstration strategy is supposed to work in a non democratic system?

The protestors seem to be thinking... "Well if we cause enough trouble for the average HK person, bring enough attention to HK by causing disruption/destruction/mass marches... then at SOME POINT China will give us the democracy."

The last part is where I'm confused.

Where's the leverage exactly?

I mean, isn't this basically "I'm going to destroy/threaten to destroy my home UNLESS I get all my demands met?"

That's a weird way to go about trying to get leverage.

So then let's say HK burns... now WHY exactly would China then go... "okay HK is 100% ruined now, let's give them democracy/let's give them what they want."

Where's the INCENTIVES? Where's the leverage here?

Can they not see that China can still 100% function even if HK goes down? Can they not see that there's no Best Case I Win scenario here?

What's the Best Outcome they are hoping for exactly?

Right now you don't even have 50% of the people protesting, is it even 10% of HK? Let's say that 100% of HKers decided "we're going to destroy/disrupt HK now."

Okay, HK's economy is down and life is now unsustainable here.

But how do you go from there to China saying: "Okay, you get 100% of your demands now"?

The protestors in Hong Kong have proven by now they aren't really interested in getting democracy or any of their demands met. Any real activist that is interested in having certain policies but into place would focus their efforts on lobbying the influential business community or engaging in peaceful protests to draw attention to their plight, not engaging in wanton vandalism and violent attacks on law enforcement and passers-by and making a mockery of your own movement. The violence of the protestors is so utterly self-defeating, the only possible sensible explanation to make sense of it is that these people don't care about getting their insipid demands met. These are antisocial deviants and hooligans who have always been itching to break the law, to cause chaos, violence, strife, pain and injury onto perfectly innocent people, and now they have a trumped-up, semi-plausible pretext to do so, all this 'democracy' nonsense is disingenuous virtue-signalling for goons and thugs to go around hurting people and destroying property and trashing their own city. These animals, these monsters, they''ve always wanted to do this and now they have an excuse and they're gonna use it and milk that excuse until they burn their own city to the ground.

*** Warned for trolling. ***

[Farnhamia]

You'll notice I said in my answer "rising power". Every nation needs allies, but a country with a growing economy and a GDP that has surpassed the US in PPP and might soon surpass the US GDP in nominal terms is a threat, unlike India or ROK or Vietnam. The historical pattern since WWII is the same, every time a major country that is not majority-white sees its economy grow large and fast enough that it might threaten to displace that of the US and other Western nations, there's a systematic attempt to suppress that growth. It happened with Japan in the 1980s and see the same thing happening with China today. It's racial tribalism in action, but on an international stage.

Yes I did notice that, which is why I said India. It's clear by your response you don't take them seriously, but I do and so should anyone with a brain in their skull. India is in the position now that China was in the early 90s, about to explode onto the world stage in a big way. If you can't see that, you can't see.

*** Warned for flaming ***

[Bombadil]

I've heard that some of the protestors are now going:

"Let's all take all of our savings out of HK's banks, HK's economy will collapse and China will meet our demands."

...

Can someone explain to me how this Protest/Demonstration strategy is supposed to work in a non democratic system?

The protestors seem to be thinking... "Well if we cause enough trouble for the average HK person, bring enough attention to HK by causing disruption/destruction/mass marches... then at SOME POINT China will give us the democracy."

The last part is where I'm confused.

Where's the leverage exactly?

I mean, isn't this basically "I'm going to destroy/threaten to destroy my home UNLESS I get all my demands met?"

That's a weird way to go about trying to get leverage.

So then let's say HK burns... now WHY exactly would China then go... "okay HK is 100% ruined now, let's give them democracy/let's give them what they want."

Where's the INCENTIVES? Where's the leverage here?

There's many leverage points. A lot of the CCP leadership has money and property tied up in HK, it's their cash cow for getting their ill-gotten gains out of China. CCP leadership absolutely doesn't want to see HK burn. For many Chinese companies, listing on the HSI is the best means to raise capital as they can attract international investors, so a lot of Chinese businesses do not want HK to burn. And then how HK pans out has a large effect on how Taiwan pans out, China is slightly hand-tied in how they deal with this because to enter and suppress the protests lays bare the mockery of One Country, Two Systems.

The fact these protests have continued for 11 weeks shows how much leverage the people actually have.

Frankly the one institution that could resolve this is the HK government. However they seem amazingly blind to the overall sentiment. Even after the weekend's protests they effectively had two things to say..

1. Ok fine, the protest was peaceful but business was affected - do they really think people care, even those businesses affected are often ok with it given they understand and support the ideals of the protest itself.
2. If we all settle down we promise to have dialogue - no one trusts the HK government anymore so that's a very empty promise

Truth is that if HK is inexorably subsumed into the Chinese state then the many freedoms, of media, of expression, of the right to protest itself are gone and HK as we know it no longer exists anyway. So if it's no longer going to exist then what's the difference? A lot of youth and a lot of people overall have decided that this is where we make our stand, and either outcome is acceptable but the status quo isn't.

[Purgatio]

I've heard that some of the protestors are now going:

"Let's all take all of our savings out of HK's banks, HK's economy will collapse and China will meet our demands."

...

Can someone explain to me how this Protest/Demonstration strategy is supposed to work in a non democratic system?

The protestors seem to be thinking... "Well if we cause enough trouble for the average HK person, bring enough attention to HK by causing disruption/destruction/mass marches... then at SOME POINT China will give us the democracy."

The last part is where I'm confused.

Where's the leverage exactly?

I mean, isn't this basically "I'm going to destroy/threaten to destroy my home UNLESS I get all my demands met?"

That's a weird way to go about trying to get leverage.

So then let's say HK burns... now WHY exactly would China then go... "okay HK is 100% ruined now, let's give them democracy/let's give them what they want."

Where's the INCENTIVES? Where's the leverage here?

There's many leverage points. A lot of the CCP leadership has money and property tied up in HK, it's their cash cow for getting their ill-gotten gains out of China. CCP leadership absolutely doesn't want to see HK burn. For many Chinese companies, listing on the HSI is the best means to raise capital as they can attract international investors, so a lot of Chinese businesses do not want HK to burn. And then how HK pans out has a large effect on how Taiwan pans out, China is slightly hand-tied in how they deal with this because to enter and suppress the protests lays bare the mockery of One Country, Two Systems.

The fact these protests have continued for 11 weeks shows how much leverage the people actually have.

Frankly the one institution that could resolve this is the HK government. However they seem amazingly blind to the overall sentiment. Even after the weekend's protests they effectively had two things to say..

1. Ok fine, the protest was peaceful but business was affected - do they really think people care, even those businesses affected are often ok with it given they understand and support the ideals of the protest itself.
2. If we all settle down we promise to have dialogue - no one trusts the HK government anymore so that's a very empty promise

Truth is that if HK is inexorably subsumed into the Chinese state then the many freedoms, of media, of expression, of the right to protest itself are gone and HK as we know it no longer exists anyway. So if it's no longer going to exist then what's the difference? A lot of youth and a lot of people overall have decided that this is where we make our stand, and either outcome is acceptable but the status quo isn't.

You have it backwards. The fact that this has dragged on for 11 weeks and nothing has been done in that time shows how ineffectual these protests are, it has done nothing but embarass the Hong Kong rioters and discredit their entire cause. They don't look like a legitimate political movement, just criminals and vandals destroying property and attacking police and bystanders. And what have they accomplished? What concrete benefit have the Hong Kong rioters given to their city in all that time? Nothing. Zilch.

[New haven america]

There's many leverage points. A lot of the CCP leadership has money and property tied up in HK, it's their cash cow for getting their ill-gotten gains out of China. CCP leadership absolutely doesn't want to see HK burn. For many Chinese companies, listing on the HSI is the best means to raise capital as they can attract international investors, so a lot of Chinese businesses do not want HK to burn. And then how HK pans out has a large effect on how Taiwan pans out, China is slightly hand-tied in how they deal with this because to enter and suppress the protests lays bare the mockery of One Country, Two Systems.

The fact these protests have continued for 11 weeks shows how much leverage the people actually have.

Frankly the one institution that could resolve this is the HK government. However they seem amazingly blind to the overall sentiment. Even after the weekend's protests they effectively had two things to say..

1. Ok fine, the protest was peaceful but business was affected - do they really think people care, even those businesses affected are often ok with it given they understand and support the ideals of the protest itself.
2. If we all settle down we promise to have dialogue - no one trusts the HK government anymore so that's a very empty promise

Truth is that if HK is inexorably subsumed into the Chinese state then the many freedoms, of media, of expression, of the right to protest itself are gone and HK as we know it no longer exists anyway. So if it's no longer going to exist then what's the difference? A lot of youth and a lot of people overall have decided that this is where we make our stand, and either outcome is acceptable but the status quo isn't.

You have it backwards. The fact that this has dragged on for 11 weeks and nothing has been done in that time shows how ineffectual these protests are, it has done nothing but embarass the Hong Kong rioters and discredit their entire cause. They don't look like a legitimate political movement, just criminals and vandals destroying property and attacking police and bystanders. And what have they accomplished? What concrete benefit have the Hong Kong rioters given to their city in all that time? Nothing. Zilch.

Actually, 0 people got hurt in the protests today, and there were at least 500,000 out, and almost no property got damaged.

[Purgatio]

You have it backwards. The fact that this has dragged on for 11 weeks and nothing has been done in that time shows how ineffectual these protests are, it has done nothing but embarass the Hong Kong rioters and discredit their entire cause. They don't look like a legitimate political movement, just criminals and vandals destroying property and attacking police and bystanders. And what have they accomplished? What concrete benefit have the Hong Kong rioters given to their city in all that time? Nothing. Zilch.

Actually, 0 people got hurt in the protests today, and there were at least 500,000 out, and almost no property got damaged.

Today, but what about the LegCo? The Liaison Office? The Central Police Station? The barricades on open roads? The harassment and ripping off masks of commuters in Fortress Hill station? Throwing rocks and lobbing burning paper at police officers?

[New haven america]

Actually, 0 people got hurt in the protests today, and there were at least 500,000 out, and almost no property got damaged.

Today, but what about the LegCo? The Liaison Office? The Central Police Station? The barricades on open roads? The harassment and ripping off masks of commuters in Fortress Hill station? Throwing rocks and lobbing burning paper at police officers?

Yes, those were unfortunate (Well, not all of them), but what else do you expect when people who just want their right to exist as they do is being threatened by a ruthless, authoritarian, almost Orwellian power who wants to strip them of their rights and freedoms?

[Bombadil]

There's many leverage points. A lot of the CCP leadership has money and property tied up in HK, it's their cash cow for getting their ill-gotten gains out of China. CCP leadership absolutely doesn't want to see HK burn. For many Chinese companies, listing on the HSI is the best means to raise capital as they can attract international investors, so a lot of Chinese businesses do not want HK to burn. And then how HK pans out has a large effect on how Taiwan pans out, China is slightly hand-tied in how they deal with this because to enter and suppress the protests lays bare the mockery of One Country, Two Systems.

The fact these protests have continued for 11 weeks shows how much leverage the people actually have.

Frankly the one institution that could resolve this is the HK government. However they seem amazingly blind to the overall sentiment. Even after the weekend's protests they effectively had two things to say..

1. Ok fine, the protest was peaceful but business was affected - do they really think people care, even those businesses affected are often ok with it given they understand and support the ideals of the protest itself.
2. If we all settle down we promise to have dialogue - no one trusts the HK government anymore so that's a very empty promise

Truth is that if HK is inexorably subsumed into the Chinese state then the many freedoms, of media, of expression, of the right to protest itself are gone and HK as we know it no longer exists anyway. So if it's no longer going to exist then what's the difference? A lot of youth and a lot of people overall have decided that this is where we make our stand, and either outcome is acceptable but the status quo isn't.

You have it backwards. The fact that this has dragged on for 11 weeks and nothing has been done in that time shows how ineffectual these protests are, it has done nothing but embarass the Hong Kong rioters and discredit their entire cause. They don't look like a legitimate political movement, just criminals and vandals destroying property and attacking police and bystanders. And what have they accomplished? What concrete benefit have the Hong Kong rioters given to their city in all that time? Nothing. Zilch.

This is all very embarrassing for the China government, and they don't really know how to deal with it. The protestors have a good well of sympathy around the world because, in the end, they're merely fighting to protect their freedoms and identity.

The great majority of protestors are peaceful, your sweeping characterisations notwithstanding.

[Purgatio]

Today, but what about the LegCo? The Liaison Office? The Central Police Station? The barricades on open roads? The harassment and ripping off masks of commuters in Fortress Hill station? Throwing rocks and lobbing burning paper at police officers?

Yes, those were unfortunate (Well, not all of them), but what else do you expect when people who just want their right to exist as they do is being threatened by a ruthless, authoritarian, almost Orwellian power who wants to strip them of their rights and freedoms?

You aren't fighting for your right to exist by defacing public property and smashing windows of businesses and harassing peaceful commuters on trains trying to get to work. You aren't a freedom fighter, that's being a violent criminal. None of this is virtuous or defensive or justifiable in any sense.

[Purgatio]

You have it backwards. The fact that this has dragged on for 11 weeks and nothing has been done in that time shows how ineffectual these protests are, it has done nothing but embarass the Hong Kong rioters and discredit their entire cause. They don't look like a legitimate political movement, just criminals and vandals destroying property and attacking police and bystanders. And what have they accomplished? What concrete benefit have the Hong Kong rioters given to their city in all that time? Nothing. Zilch.

This is all very embarrassing for the China government, and they don't really know how to deal with it. The protestors have a good well of sympathy around the world because, in the end, they're merely fighting to protect their freedoms and identity.

The great majority of protestors are peaceful, your sweeping characterisations notwithstanding.

What does great majority even mean? I have a right to walk down public streets without the fear of being harassed or attacked or caught in the crossfire when Hong Kong rioters start smashing windows or throwing things at law enforcement or breaking into government buildings. Why do you not care about the rights and freedoms of these innocent people?