They are canceling Tienanmen,again

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118377009#Comment_118377009

I believe (as in it being my best estimation) that democracy of whatever stripe is too fundamental an ideal (and perhaps a practicality) for it to ever be forgotten as humans develop over the coming period.

It will be forgotten and abused but will ,hopefully always return for us to orient ourselves by.

I do believe a democratic state already exists ,but as a stepping stone along this path. We should not despair because our system is imperfect but we should aim to protect what we have and improve on it (and improve on its protections)

Even anti democratic regimes cloak themselves in a false charade of democracy and no doubt the Chinese regime will follow this propagandist tactic

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118377239#Comment_118377239

I did not say it does not suit the Chinese, I said it does not suit China. The social mores of a country is of that country and cannot be changed easily - particularly from outside. The British never allowed democracy in Hong Kong - only when they left.

The brutal trade in slaves did not suit the slaves, but in the eighteenth century, the English, and Americans were quite happy with it. The Russian Empire under the Czars, was built of serfdom. I would think it did not suit the serfs, but it suited the Czars and the aristocrats. There is a difference.

The point is that the social system in a country is of that country, and it takes many generations to change it.

Even now, the [black/coloured/African Americans] are suffering huge prejudice and deprivation many many years after that prejudice was abolished in law. It is not going to change much going forward (if the GOP get their way).

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118377218#Comment_118377218

Another user declared it arrogant to presume to "tell" China how it conducts itself re. Hong Kong ... surely it's presumptuous, if not arrogant, to say that democracy simply doesn't "suit China"? I hold my hands up that my knowledge of the country is a bit crap but firstly, has it been tried? As you said, Maoism was just an emperor by another name. Cos notwithstanding its flirtations with populism, India seems to work perfectly fine ... if we simply reduce the issue to countries of a certain size. Obviously you may be coming from a different angle, and no doubt experts could point to flaws in India's system ... but democracy is - and should always be - a work in progress.

As to the question of Chinese elections, I see them as legitimate and fair as Soviet Russia's own elections. Yes, ostensibly existent, where the population could exercise control by simply not showing up - or not voting for the party candidate they didn't like - but by no means comparable with something equitable.

By that logic no country was suited to democracy, before democracy came about. All the countries that are now considered democracies have far longer histories of being ruled by 'strongmen'.

Democracy is very fragile, and not easy to achieve. Not sure what China is other than Chinese. They may very well get their chance in time.

Sam Russell

You mention India.

There was no democracy in India under the British Raj - none. When the British left, they created two states (well three if you separate East and West Pakistan). Such was the creation, many Indians had to flee for their lives, and very many did not make it, including Mahatma Ghandi. Kashmir is still disputed.

Now, currently, how much democracy is there in India, and how much is corruption? just 70 years since democracy arrived there - it certainly is still a work in progress - and still is too early to tell if it is a success. Is the caste system fully abolished?

Sam Russell

Just as a different point, I said 'democracy does not suit China' as a away of saying the powers that be in China have no intention of letting China choose democracy.

The UK is a monarchy, and there is no intention by the powers that be in the UK of letting the UK monarchy become democratic.

Dav010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118376797#Comment_118376797

As I was reading this I genuinely thought the last line was going to be “Oh wait, this is US democracy”.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118377720#Comment_118377720

Ah, okay. The same as most established forms of government. There's probably no dictator or similar thinking, 'we've got this all wrong. Let's see what the people think '

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118377703#Comment_118377703

I don't disagree India has problems, only mentioned as I know in similar conversations in the past, geography and population was used as a reason liberal or social democracy couldn't apply to China, Russia, etc. Presumably the thinking that democracies only work in small groupings; a fairly cynical view TBH. But given the thread focuses on principles rather than specifics of application, India shows a multi party democracy works fine in large, historically ancient countries. The "corruption" angle is its own segue really; China has its own brand so it's not unique to democracies - it's only human nature.

Sam Russell

I think we should recall Lord Widgery's 'appalling vista' comment about the idea that the Bloody Sunday soldiers opened fire first. Well, that appalling vista come to pass. A bit like the Tiananmen Square episode. Large governments do not like being proved wrong on such matters.

How many enquiries in all the years did the result of those enquiries deny the truth?

So perhaps the Chinese authorities may eventually accept their miss deeds, but I doubt it ill do so, ever. Stalin never did.

Good loser

When the crowds were gathered in Tiananmen Square 30 years ago the factions in the Central Comtte considered which among the two possible responses they would adopt. The hardmen won and went for the murderous one - the Butcher of Bejing did the business. [He died unrepentant in 2000] The alternative of concessions and a drift towards democracy was rejected. Control, oppression and repression have been the watchwords ever since. The place is run by out and out criminals.

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118380616#Comment_118380616

To defend the actions of the "authorities" who crushed the gatherings at Tienanmen one could say that it was in defence of the regime that lifted more people out of poverty than at any time in history.

(And unless I am wrong with the dates they could see what had just happened to USSR)

On the other hand if this was the reason why do they not own it since it might not be dishonorable if viewed -and defended in that light?

But they deny that these events happened and destroy the memory of these and other events.

They have a guilty conscience and do not trust their own people with the truth.

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118380666#Comment_118380666

The people of Hong Kong are especially undeserving ?

The Chinese state has therefore more license in the way it treats them than would otherwise apply?

I have no personal knowledge of life in Hong Kong but find it difficult to accept your assessment at face value.

Are you also saying that the Chinese regime has merely sped up the process and has not altered the fundamental agreement as to how HK would be run in the long term?

Was "one country two systems" just for the interim period?

kksaints

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118380635#Comment_118380635

You are wrong with the dates the Tiananmen Square protests and massacre happened in 1989. The collapse of the USSR while beginning to take shape in 1989 wasn't completed until 1991.

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118380967#Comment_118380967

I had heard that the fate of the USSR may have been in the back of their mind...

.

Perhaps that could still have been so if the collapse started earlier?

When did Lech Walesa get noticed,I wonder and the strikes in Gdansk?

kksaints

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118381447#Comment_118381447

That was the Warsaw Pact falling apart which did happen in 1989 although the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Romanian Revolution didn't happen until November and December 1989 respectively.

rock22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118377681#Comment_118377681

Plato certainly c, and presumably Socrates, onsidered democracy to be very flawed. . And they lived through the birth of democracy.

And there were more options than rule by 'Strongmen' . I think Plato would call them 'Tyrants.'.

In the last century, democratic states gave way to Tyranies. The Weimar republic to Nazis, Spain to the Franco dictatorship, Portugal and italy are other dictatorships that come to mind. Perhaps democracy is just a failed experiment on the way to the ideal (Platonic) Republic ?

riclad

China has a massive system of surveillance on all citizens it has a firewall that blocks many western websites . They are in the process of locking down Hong Kong anything that even slightly criricizes the government is being censored or closed down

The time when Hong Kong was a centre of arts music or film is nearly over if you are a writer or artist who values freedom or independent thought you would be better off they brought in vague laws about journalism and art anything that might be seen as anti patriotic could be illegal. You could go to prison for writing a poem. They are simply putting in place the rules that already apply in the rest of China it will be impossible to make a film in Hong Kong that even had slight criticism of the government or implys life in China is not great .

Imagine if there was a new law in Ireland no one can write about the civil war or the troubles did anyone really think China would take over Hong Kong and not clamp down on journalism and censor movies and TV programs that criticize communism or government officials?

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118386343#Comment_118386343

Yes ,but that is their gaff</sarc>

Otoh do we need to worry that wind is not coming our way with the Repub party in the States and their no doubt silent sympathisers among us

If it all kicks off over there ,which side will we be on?

China only tolerated a symbolic 2 countries 1 state sham while it suited, as the HK economy was very strong. Its a boiling frog attempt, keep HK a financial hub, but under Chinese rules.

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118386476#Comment_118386476

I don't suppose anyone imagined anything different.

However some of us naive fools hoped for some opening of minds to contrary opinions in China ,but the Chinese state has been corrupted by its own economic success as well as the poor example given to it by democratic countries in recent times.

HK was always going to be a full part of China (it was theirs in international law) so it existence always hung on a whim and a prayer.

Sam Russell

[HK was always going to be a full part of China (it was theirs in international law) so it existence always hung on a whim and a prayer.]

Not quite.

Hong Kong island was British territory under international law - that much is correct.

However, Hong Kong as is/was governed includes the New Territories - which were leased from China under a 99 rear lease, and that lease was running out. Britain would have to revert the NT back to China (PRC) at the end of the 99 years, leaving HK island orphaned.

To avoid that, a withdrawal agreement was drawn up that meant HK continued as was, under 'One Country - two systems'. At the time China was not such a success economically, and depended on HK as the gateway to the world for Chinese goods.

However, HK as a gateway is not needed anymore.

Edit:[The agreement was stuck by Thatcher in 1984 - long before the current surge of the Chinese economy. It came into effect on the 1st July 1997.]

amandstu

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118387282#Comment_118387282

Yes that sounds right.(but the horse has bolted)

Good loser

I believe all the members of the Central Committee of the CCC are billionaires; if so there was only one way that happened - corruption. Also I remember reading some years ago about a magazine article in HK tracing XI's shareholdings and wealth - which was vast.

riclad

China was happy to use hong kong as a centre of finance and banking and trade for 40 years. Now its a global trading superpower with the rise of digital apps digital currencys internet finance it can afford to clamp down and wipe out remnants of free speech and any artistic expession that might not be positive about the communist party

rock22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118387282#Comment_118387282

Importantly, the residents of Hong Kong were governed by a governor appointed by the crown and they had no democratic rights until the territory reverted to China.

At the same time the UK changes nationality laws to ensure that Hong Kong residents lost their full UK citizenship.

(As an aside, Hong Kong was only ceded to the UK by China after the Opium wars, historically they are and have always been , Chinese territory

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118389627#Comment_118389627

Yes, the colony never was democratic and it is a little - how would one politely say - a bit hypocritical of the UK Gov to claim the Chinese Gov are denying HK residents democracy.

Claims to territories attained by invasion and war is always a tricky question, and Britain built an empire by invasion and coercion. I do not think a single native people of a territory welcomed them in.

dwayneshintzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118374366#Comment_118374366

The CCP isn't 3,000 years old. And they are overwhelmingly opposed by the people of Hong Kong.

Sam Russell

You are right that the CCP is not three thousand years old.

However, there is 3,000 years of history in China where they had Emperors ruling with despotic powers. One man (and it was always a man) held the power of life and death over all his subjects, absolutely. It is this that gives the CCP the background culture of that they exercise such despotic powers with little opposition from most of the population.

In Britain, they have a culture of honouring one particular family that they revere as having special qualities that puts them way above everyone else in the land, and they bestow great wealth and privilege on that family - even if it is not deserved. I think they call it the monarchy, where the most senior member gets to wear a crown and wear fancy dress on state occasions.

We, in Ireland, do not subscribe to such nonsense, but we used to in more primitive times. Custom matters to most people in the world and it is not easy to change it.

dwayneshintzy

Not meaning to be offensive, but there's some heavy Orientalism at play there. Chinese people aren't as mystifying and different as some people like to imagine. Brutal crackdowns on dissent may have a bigger effect on popular opposition to the CCP than any inherent character trait in the Chinese people.

As well as the fact that in Hong Kong, the CCP clearly has very little popular support!