The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Godfree Roberts Archive
Hong Kong's Poisoned Chalice
When Civilizations Clash
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Demonstrators breaking into Hong Kong’s Legislative Council Chambers

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In chats about Hong Kong and the mainland, we always reached a consensus: if you want to develop you can go to the United States or back to the mainland, but there is no future in Hong Kong. In recent years, the decline has happened with shocking speed. At handover in 1997, per capita GDP was twice Macao’s. Hong Kong’s GDP was 18 percent of China’s then; in 2013 it was three percent. Now, Macau’s is three times Hong Kong’s. In 1997, neither Beijing, Shanghai nor Guangzhou had GDPs approaching Hong Kong’s; now all are higher, as are Shenzhen’s and Tianjin’s. Hong Kong, Please Forget Me.

THE GOOD OLD DAYS

Under British rule, Hong Kong’s public had no say in political appointment and the Governor, who was Commander in Chief of military forces, could do anything short of sentencing people to death. Wiretaps didn’t require warrants; when police denied demonstration permits the courts could only review their paperwork; the legislature was a rubber stamp and there was no political opposition. Under Communist oppression, the courts review police decisions for reasonableness, citizens elect their legislators, the government has a political opposition, and the Chief Executive can neither declare martial law nor call out the military. Some things haven’t changed, however: it is still illegal in Hong Kong to join the Communist Party of China.

MISSING ELEMENTS

Some aspects of contemporary Hong Kong missing from our media’s coverage:

  1. As long as it controlled access to China’s gigantic market, Hong Kong flourished. Capitalism, Democracy, and British Justice had nothing to do with it.
  2. Had Hong Kong joined the mainland in 1997 its prosperity would have been assured.
  3. Before the handover the UK introduced electoral democracy, the poisoned chalice that ended the Colony’s hopes for development.
  4. When the Asian Financial Crisis crashed real estate markets Chief Executive Tung Chee-Hwa created the ‘85,000 Housing Development Project’ to build affordable homes and diversify the economy by building the Hong Kong Science Park and increasing investment in commerce, education, industry and tourism.
  5. Once the affordable housing units came onto the market the bourgeoisie opposed them because they affected real estate prices, the legislation voted with the bourgeoisie and the youth demonstrated in their support. Tung was vilified and thrown out.
  6. After they killed 224 people in the post-Tiananmen riots in 1989 French Intelligence, Britain’s MI6 and the CIA smuggled 600 agents out through Hong Kong to Western countries. The PRC arrested three Hong Kong-based activists but released them after intervention by the Hong Kong government.
  7. When China joined the WTO in 2001, trade bypassed Hong Kong, stagnation set in and the city’s best and brightest joined Taiwanese[1]Taipei recently fined 30 Taiwanese for taking jobs in mainland China. seeking a better life on the mainland.
  8. Hong Kong’s profile now resembles Britain’s: 23% of its children live in poverty– compared to the mainland’s 1%.
  9. Home ownership–a marriage prerequisite–fell from 53% in 2010 to 49% in 2018– compared to 78% on the mainland.
  10. Hong Kong trails only London and New York for the largest concentration of individuals worth more than $30 million.
  11. Hong Kong’s ten richest citizens account for 35% of its GDP.
  12. Hong Kong’s household GINI is 0.539, Singapore’s is 0.458 in 2016, America’s is 0.394 and the UK’s is 0.358. (0=equality).
  13. Rent for an HK ‘coffin apartment’ is HK$2,000/mo.

Hong Kong’s woes illustrate capitalism’s familiar shortcomings: wealth accumulation has far outstripped the development of productive forces and the vast majority of citizens have no way to share its benefits. A large rentier class owns most of the city’s social resources, the same contradiction–between capital accumulation and society’s desire to live a dignified life–we confront in the US.

What do Hongkongers really need? Economic growth, employment opportunities and better housing, tasks the mainland has already accomplished. If they want a bright future Hong Kongers need to work together harder and bring their education standards up to the mainland’s. Their youth must develop a clear understanding of their true friends and real enemies.

THE PROTEST PUZZLE

The protests are interesting for several reasons:

  • They’re directed at Beijing, which does not even have an extradition treaty with HK and has never requested one.
  • They’re timed (probably by the NED) to coincide with the anniversary of the handover.
  • They ignore the financial institutions and capitalists blocking legislative change.
  • Western media cover them sympathetically, almost hysterically, while ignoring real protests in Gaza, Honduras, Sudan, Yemen, and Brazil.
  • British media–which have persecuted, tortured, and incarcerated Julian Assange for non-political crimes–now urge his extradition, while trembling lest the PRC use ‘non-political crimes to prosecute critics.’
  • The UK Government has refused to sell crowd control gear to Hong Kong police.
  • Imagine how the NYPD would respond if one of their officers were assaulted like this:

  • Or if demonstrators behaved like this:

  • Hong Kong police reported firing 150 tear gas canisters, several rounds of rubber bullets and 20 beanbags during the one day of serious violence, causing 72 injuries, none of which required hospitalization, and making 30 arrests.
  • French police, by contrast, fired 19,000 rubber bullets last year and 5,400 shock grenades, caused 850 serious injuries and 30 mutilations, dozens of facial and skull fractures. Twelve French demonstrators lost one eye. Including those injured by tear gas, water cannon and truncheons, the number would approach six figures, a level of repression not seen since the German Occupation.
  • French police arrested 9,000 on March 24 alone, half of whom received prison sentences–and that was before orders were issued to arrest protesters even faster.
  • The almost total Western media silence about French figures has been matched with relentless propaganda presenting their demonstrators as destructive hooligans.

 

THE NED: DOING GOD’S WORK

Beijing’s completion of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge and the Hong Kong-Mainland high-speed railway, along with the relentless decline of voter support for ‘democracy’[2]Hong Kong’s Court ruled that Howard Lam, the 42-year-old founder of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party,who claimed he was abducted on August 10, 2017 by Mainland agents, lied about being kidnapped and tortured with a stapler by mainland Chinese agents. parties at every Hong Kong election are speeding the West’s ungraceful retreat from an Asia that never invited them. The extradition law will further erode Western influence and accelerate the political and economic integration of Hong Kong. Here are some elements of dis-integration:

  • Fourteen NED survey missions had visited Hong Kong by 2012 to assess the political environment and identify possibilities for NED programming.
  • In 2004, the NED found little interest among university students in activism,2 “Many critics still lament the low level of interest and activism by university students in Hong Kong”.
  • Between 1995 – 2013, HKHRM received more than $1.9 million in funds from the NED.
  • Through its NDI and SC branches, NED has had close relations with other groups in Hong Kong. SC has given $540,000 to the Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions in the past seven years.
  • The current protest’s messaging and its associated groups raise questions about how organic the movement is:
    • Some of the groups receive significant, direct funding from the NED.
    • The Canadian and British foreign ministries have publicly thrown their weight behind the protests.
    • The protesters appeal to Western audiences, using signs in English and the hashtag “AntiExtraditionLaw”.
    • The group below is waving colonial Hong Kong flags while accusing China of colonialism.
  • Keeping Hong Kong from China has been an American priority for decades. One former CIA agent even admitted, “Hong Kong was our listening post.”
  • Seventy international NGOs have endorsed an open letter urging the bill to be killed, but signed only by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor (HKHRM)–all US fronts.
  • In 2018, NED granted $155,000 to SC and $200,000 to NDI for work in Hong Kong, and $90,000 to HKHRM, which is not itself a branch of NED but a partner in Hong Kong.
  • The coalition cited by Hong Kong media, including the South China Morning Post and the Hong Kong Free Press, lists as organizers of the demonstrations the Civil Human Rights Front. That organization’s website lists the NED-funded HKHRM, Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions, the Hong Kong Journalists Association, the Civic Party, the Labour Party, and the Democratic Party as members of the coalition.
  • Since Beijing made a big deal of NED’s influence in the 2014 Occupy protests, it is inconceivable that the current protest organizers are unaware of NED’s ties to its members. One NED official, Louisa Greve, told the Voice of America that “activists know the risks of working with NED partners” in Hong Kong.
  • House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Congress has “no choice but to reassess whether Hong Kong is ‘sufficiently autonomous’ under the ‘one country, two systems’ framework.”
  • The State Department says the extradition bill could “could undermine Hong Kong’s autonomy and negatively impact the territory’s long-standing protection of human rights, fundamental freedoms and democratic values.”
  • Martin Lee, founder of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party, a member organization of the Civil Human Rights Front, met with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who expressed support for the protests
  • Why are the protests supported by a foreign power currently carrying out a coup in Venezuela, threatening the DPRK and trying to start a war with Iran?

THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT

The amendment would “allow Hong Kong to surrender fugitives on a case-by-case basis to jurisdictions that do not have long-term rendition agreements with the city,” among them mainland China and Taiwan. It was introduced when authorities found that a Hong Kong man wanted for murdering his pregnant girlfriend could not be returned to Taiwan to stand trial. Under current law, criminals from other parts of China can escape charges by fleeing to Hong Kong (imagine if Louisiana, under its Napoleonic code, refused to extradite fugitives from Texas or California for crimes committed in those states). Under the amendment the following crimes will be extraditable:

  • Aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring suicide.
  • Maliciously wounding; maiming; inflicting grievous or actual bodily harm; assault occasioning actual bodily harm; threats to kill; intentional or reckless endangering of life whether by means of a weapon, a dangerous substance or otherwise; offences relating to unlawful wounding or injuring.
  • Offences of a sexual nature including rape; sexual assault; indecent assault; unlawful sexual acts on children; statutory sexual offences.
  • Gross indecency with a child, a mental defective or an unconscious person.
  • Kidnapping; abduction; false imprisonment; unlawful confinement; dealing or trafficking in slaves or other persons; taking a hostage.
  • Criminal intimidation.
  • Offences against the law relating to dangerous drugs including narcotics, psychotropic substances, precursors and essential chemicals used in the illegal manufacture of narcotics and psychotropic substances; offences relating to the proceeds of drug trafficking.
  • Obtaining property or pecuniary advantage by deception; theft; robbery; burglary (including breaking and entering); embezzlement; blackmail; extortion; unlawful handling or receiving of property; false accounting; any other offence in respect of property or fiscal matters involving fraud; any offence against the law relating to unlawful deprivation of property.
  • Offences against bankruptcy law or insolvency law.
  • Offences against the law relating to companies including offences committed by officers, directors and promoters.
  • Offences relating to securities and futures trading.
  • Offences relating to counterfeiting; offences against the law relating to forgery or uttering what is forged.
  • Offences against the law relating to protection of intellectual property, copyrights, patents or trademarks.
  • Offences relating to bribery, corruption, secret commissions and breach of trust.
  • Perjury and subornation of perjury.
  • Offences relating to the perversion or obstruction of the course of justice.
  • Arson; criminal damage or mischief including mischief in relation to computer data.
  • Offences against the law relating to firearms.
  • Offences against the law relating to explosives.
  • Offences relating to environmental pollution or protection of public health.
  • Mutiny or any mutinous act committed on board a vessel at sea.
  • Piracy involving ships or aircraft.
  • Unlawful seizure or exercise of control of an aircraft or other means of transportation.
  • Genocide or direct and public incitement to commit genocide.
  • Facilitating or permitting the escape of a person from custody.
  • Offences against the law relating to the control of exportation or importation of goods of any type, or the international transfer of funds.
  • Smuggling; import and export of prohibited items, including historical and archaeological items.
  • Immigration offences including fraudulent acquisition or use of a passport or visa.
  • Arranging or facilitating for financial gain, the illegal entry of persons into a jurisdiction.
  • Offences relating to gambling or lotteries.
  • Offences relating to the unlawful termination of pregnancy.
  • Stealing, abandoning, exposing or unlawfully detaining a child; any other offences involving the exploitation of children.
  • Offences relating to prostitution and premises kept for the purposes of prostitution.
  • Offences involving the unlawful use of computers.
  • Offences relating to fiscal matters, taxes or duties.
  • Offences relating to unlawful escape from custody; mutiny in prison.
  • Bigamy.
  • Offences relating to women and girls.
  • Offences against the law relating to false or misleading trade descriptions.
  • Offences relating to the possession or laundering of proceeds obtained from the commission of any offence described in this Schedule.
  • Impeding the arrest or prosecution of a person who has or is believed to have committed an offence described in this Schedule.
  • Offences for which persons may be surrendered under multilateral international conventions; offences created as a result of decisions of international organizations.
  • Conspiracy to commit fraud or to defraud.
  • Conspiracy to commit, or any type of association to commit, any offence described in this Schedule.
  • Aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring the commission of, inciting, being an accessory before or after the fact to, or attempting to commit an offence described in, this Schedule.

The current spate of US-initiated wars, threats of wars, embargoes, threats of embargoes, coups, threats of coups, heavy censorship and massive propaganda, while impressive in its breadth, seems to lack strategic coherence, tactical effectiveness, credibility or effectiveness.

Notes

[1] Taipei recently fined 30 Taiwanese for taking jobs in mainland China.

[2] Hong Kong’s Court ruled that Howard Lam, the 42-year-old founder of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party,who claimed he was abducted on August 10, 2017 by Mainland agents, lied about being kidnapped and tortured with a stapler by mainland Chinese agents.

[3] The NED has four main branches, at least two of which are active in Hong Kong: the Solidarity Center (SC) and the National Democratic Institute (NDI).

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, China, Hong Kong 
Hide 245 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Laowai234 says:

    Mr. Roberts: Your articles on China, which are usually well-researched and filled with information that is unavailable elsewhere, would nonetheless have more credibility if you did not constantly portray China and the CCP as saints who can do no wrong. In this way all your articles are entirely predictable: China is right and good, whoever is criticizing them or in conflict with them is wrong and bad. You merely provide the inversion of the anti-China narrative. It’s valuable insofar as it presents the opposing viewpoint, but it’s like reading a defense lawyer’s brief rather than an objective assessment.

    Having spent a good deal of time in both Hong Kong and mainland China, I would like to point out a number of problems with what you say here.

    First, the standard of living in Hong Kong is in many respects noticeably higher than in many parts of the mainland. The notion that only 1% of mainland people live in poverty strains credibility to anyone who has been to mainland China, whether a major city or the countryside. What is the definition of poverty here? Your inclusion of this laughable statistic is exactly the kind of bias I mentioned above.

    Hong Kong has far stricter policies about consumer safety. When the poisoned baby formula scandal happened some years ago, it created a rather large demand for baby formula from Hong Kong, so much so that they had to pass a law stating that people can only bring two cans across the border with them. Products from Hong Kong, whether food and beverage, cosmetic, or just about anything else, are widely seen as superior to what is available on the mainland. Both better quality and more trustworthy, far less likely to be fake. This is why there is an entire industry consisting of mainland traders who cross the border daily to buy up merchandise from Hong Kong and take it back to the mainland for resale. (I should point out that many of these products are imported. Hong Kong offers a huge selection of goods imported from the US, Europe, Korea, Australia, and most everywhere else, which are unavailable on the mainland.)

    Hongkongers refer to these mainland traders as “locusts” because they swarm parts of the city like Sheung Shui and completely transform them. It’s important to remember that Hong Kong people have standards of cleanliness and behavior that is more in line with Western standards. So when mainlanders come over en masse, with their spitting on the ground, skipping people in line, allowing their children to urinate and defecate in public on sidewalks, it creates resentment and frustration in Hong Kong people.

    Hong Kong’s educational system is also superior to the mainland’s. Many students from Shenzhen are bussed into Hong Kong daily to attend school there. I’m not aware of any Hong Kong students attending school in Shenzhen. This is in spite of the high cost of education in Hong Kong. (Mainland education is not cheap either, and bribery is the norm for parents trying to place their children in favorable schools.)

    There is also the surge in housing prices over the last decade, which has much to do with investment by mainland developers. Hong Kong is seen as a relatively stable place for mainlanders to put their money. (And why is that? Why do they see it that way if the mainland is so good and fair and safe as you constantly say?) So they buy up real estate and keep it vacant. To them it’s just an investment, but the net effect on the property market is to raise prices. Opening up the Hong Kong housing market to mainland investment has been a disaster for them. I’m not blaming mainland investors entirely – the property market was already controlled by a small cabal of wealthy Hong Kongers like Li Ka Shing. But it went from bad to worse. You can listen to a good overview of the situation on the Renegage Economists podcast here: https://www.mixcloud.com/RenegadeEconomists/hong-kongs-caged-housing/

    So Hong Kong people are in a really tough situation. The younger generation faces a world in which they will not be able to afford to buy a home – which is a big deal in Chinese culture, whether mainland or Hong Kong – and in which they feel encroached upon by the mainland, a feeling which is made palpable by the presence of the “locusts” buying up all the baby formula and leaving a dirty mess in their wake. They are worried that that’s their future: to live like poor mainlanders. It’s not accurate to simply blame Beijing for this situation, but to the average Hong Konger, it looks that way. All they know is that, for them, things have gotten a lot worse since the handover. (I have no doubt that Americans and other foreigners exploit and inflame this situation for their own benefit, both to make China look bad, and to portray Hong Kong as some sort of “free market paradise,” which it is not.)

    In my opinion, Beijing could do a lot of good in Hong Kong if they sided with the people AGAINST the wealthy elite who control Hong Kong. But I don’t really see that happening.

    • Replies: @last straw
    , @foolisholdman
  2. I understand your point about my portrayal of China, but it’s both deliberate and useful.

    Deliberate because 99% of MSM portrayals of China are negative–so why should I be ‘balanced’?– and useful because I back up my claims with evidence that people can access.

    If anyone wants to correct or question what I say, great, but most folks have been lied to about China all their lives, so directly confronting their prejudices is my only hope of persuading them to reconsider.

    As to Beijing siding with Hong Kongers, that’s not on the cards until they themselves get tired of the ‘two systems’ because, after all, Beijing solved the mainland’s problems with a own system that HK opted out of.

    I suspected from the beginning that it was Beijing’s plan to let HK and Taiwan wallow in their inferior, Western systems until they got sick of them, and I now consider that to be even more likely.

    • Agree: Alfred
  3. Yee says:

    HongKong is like a TV box. A show is on to tell people how distorted a society can be when it is kidnapped by foreign influences.

    It’s pretty obvious to by-standers that they have an economic problem. They missed the Internet craze 20 years ago, again missed the mobile Internet 10 years later, and will likely miss the next generation of Internet of things. Their strong point Finance isn’t going to provide many jobs, and they’re fast losing the role of middleman between mainland China and the outside world.

    It’s not like no one in HongKong ever saw what is coming and tried to do something at the time. Their 1st Chief Executive had several proposals which, in hindsight, bet right on the money. However, since he’s picked by Beijing, so he must be opposed. You can forget about the myth of high IQ, Chinese people can be brainwashed to lose all rational thinking like anyone else.

    The Brits and the Yanks really displayed their power in HK. Liberals in China should rest their case. Western style politics aren’t for us.

    • Agree: tamo
  4. WC says:

    Dear author: you’re out of your f’ing mind.

    Just because democracy doesn’t automatically produce perfect outcomes, it doesn’t follow that a totalitarian dystopia like Communist China is actually better.

    You don’t think it’s a dystopia? To cite just one piece of evidence, Chinese people are desperate to move their money out of the country, and likewise for their children to gain foreign passports or residency. How many wealthy Americans or Europeans are banging down the door to invest in Chinese property, engage in birth tourism, or send their kids to Chinese universities?

    This article reads like a #resistance caricature of the alt-right, obsessed with sucking the c*cks of dictators.

  5. NYMOM says:

    The problem is that mainland China has the death penalty for what we in the west would consider relatively ordinary financial crimes and they use prisoners for organ harvesting…so who wants to take a chance on extradition if they could be facing that???

    I guess, the bottom line, is that like South African whites the Hong Kong people who could not fit into the new society should probably have just emigrated years ago and maybe they should consider doing so now.

    Most of the demonstrators look relatively young, appear that they might be educated (students and such) so they would probably be welcomed in other places.

    Time to pack the moving bags….

  6. peterAUS says:

    Polite version:

    ….constantly portray China and the CCP as saints who can do no wrong. In this way all your articles are entirely predictable: China is right and good, whoever is criticizing them or in conflict with them is wrong and bad. You merely provide the inversion of the anti-China narrative.

    Not so polite but more to the point:

    Dear author: you’re out of your f’ing mind.

    A thought, maybe interesting:
    Imagine, instead of the current MSM presentation of China this type of daily brainwashing.
    Or…more to the point, maybe, instead of current personnel in MSM, this type of personnel.

    I mean, would it really make a difference? The author does write on alt-Something site, BUT, would it really make any difference?

    That train of thought could go even a bit further but let’s stop here.

    • Replies: @Hail
  7. Republic says:

    Sure looks like a color revolution to me.
    The last one in HK, the Umbrella revolution didn’t work out so well

    • Replies: @denk
  8. @WC

    1. Chinese people are desperate to move their money out of the country? No, billionaires can live anywhere and most billionaires have chosen Beijing.

    2. likewise for their children to gain foreign passports or residency.? No, only rich parents with dumb kids send them abroad. Anyone who can get into a good Chinese university does so. Here’s why: It was the summer of 2000. I was 15, and I had just finished my high school entrance exam in China. I had made considerable improvements from where I started in first grade, when I had the second- worst grades in the class and had to sit at a desk perpendicular to the blackboard so that the teacher could keep a close eye on me. I had managed to become an average student in an average school. My parents by then had reached the conclusion that I was not going anywhere promising in China and were ready to send me abroad for high school. Contrary to all expectations, however, I got the best mark in my class and my school. The exam scores were so good that I ranked within the top ten among more than 100,000 students in the whole city. My teacher and I both assumed the score was wrong when we first heard it.
    As a consequence, I got into the best class in the best school in my city, and thus began the most painful year of my life. My newfound confidence was quickly crushed when I saw how talented my new classmates were. In the first class, our math teacher announced that she would start from chapter four of the textbook, as she assumed, correctly, that most of us were familiar with the first three chapters and would find it boring to go through them again. Most of the class had been participating in various competitions in middle school and had become familiar with a large part of the high school syllabus already. Furthermore, they had also grown to know each other from those years of competitions together. And here I was, someone who didn’t know anything or anyone, surrounded by people who knew more to begin with, who were much smarter, and who worked just as hard as I did. What chance did I have?
    During that year, I tried very hard to catch up: I gave up everything else and even moved somewhere close to the school to save time on the commute, but to no avail. Over time, going to school and competing while knowing I was sure to lose became torture. Yet I had to do it every day. At the end-of-year exam, I scored second from the bottom of the class—the same place where I began in first grade. But this time it was much harder to accept, after the glory I had enjoyed just one year earlier and the huge amount of effort I had put into studying this year. Finally, I threw in the towel, and asked my parents to send me abroad. Anywhere else on this earth would surely be better.
    So I came to the UK in 2001, when I was 16 years old. Much to my surprise, I found the UK’s exam-focused educational system very similar to the one in China. What is more, in both countries, going to the “right schools” and getting the “right job” are seen as very important by a large group of eager parents. As a result, scoring well on exams and doing well in school interviews—or even the play session for the nursery or pre-prep school—become the most important things in the world. Even at the university level, the undergraduate degree from the University of Cambridge depends on nothing else but an exam at the end of the last year.
    On the other hand, although the UK’s university system is considered superior to China’s, with a population that is only one-twentieth the size of my native country, competition, while tough, is less intimidating. For example, about one in ten applicants gets into Oxbridge in the UK, and Stanford and Harvard accept about one in twenty-five applicants. But in Hebei province in China, where I am from, only one in fifteen hundred applicants gets into Peking or Qinghua University.
    Still, I found it hard to believe how much easier everything became. I scored first nationwide in the GCSE (high school) math exam, and my photo was printed in a national newspaper. I was admitted into Trinity College, University of Cambridge, once the home of Sir Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, and Prince Charles.
    I studied economics at Cambridge, a field which has become more and more mathematical since the 1970s. The goal is always to use a mathematical model to find a closed-form solution to a real-world problem. Looking back, I’m not sure why my professors were so focused on these models. I have since found that the mistake of blindly relying on models is quite widespread in both trading and investing—often with disastrous results, such as the infamous collapse of the hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management. Years later, I discovered the teaching of Warren Buffett: it is better to be approximately right than precisely wrong. But our professors taught us to think of the real world as a math problem.
    The culture of Cambridge followed the dogmas of the classroom: a fervent adherence to rules and models established by tradition. For example, at Cambridge, students are forbidden to walk on grass. This right is reserved for professors only. The only exception is for those who achieve first class honors in exams; they are allowed to walk on one area of grass on one day of the year.
    The behavior of my British classmates demonstrated an even greater herd mentality than what is often mocked in American MBAs. For example, out of the thirteen economists in my year at Trinity, twelve would go on to join investment banks, and five of us went to work for Goldman Sachs.

    3. How many wealthy Americans or Europeans are banging down the door to invest in Chinese property, engage in birth tourism, or send their kids to Chinese universities? I know some, but they’re very, very bright because #2, above.

  9. @Laowai234

    First, the standard of living in Hong Kong is in many respects noticeably higher than in many parts of the mainland. The notion that only 1% of mainland people live in poverty strains credibility to anyone who has been to mainland China, whether a major city or the countryside. What is the definition of poverty here? Your inclusion of this laughable statistic is exactly the kind of bias I mentioned above.

    This is only partially true. For China’s 1st tier cities, a few of them have populations of 20-30 million, the living standard is already catch up on that of Hong Kong’s.

    Hong Kong has far stricter policies about consumer safety.

    By the time China’s per capita income approaches that of Hong Kong’s, I’m sure China will also have similar consumer safety regulations.

    Hongkongers refer to these mainland traders as “locusts” because they swarm parts of the city like Sheung Shui and completely transform them. It’s important to remember that Hong Kong people have standards of cleanliness and behavior that is more in line with Western standards. So when mainlanders come over en masse, with their spitting on the ground, skipping people in line, allowing their children to urinate and defecate in public on sidewalks, it creates resentment and frustration in Hong Kong people.

    How many mainland Chinese actually do these sort of things nowadays? Probably very few.

    Hong Kong’s educational system is also superior to the mainland’s. Many students from Shenzhen are bussed into Hong Kong daily to attend school there. I’m not aware of any Hong Kong students attending school in Shenzhen. This is in spite of the high cost of education in Hong Kong. (Mainland education is not cheap either, and bribery is the norm for parents trying to place their children in favorable schools.)

    Go to take a look at https://www.natureindex.com/
    Shenzhen has replaced Hong Kong as the center of innovation for China, if Hong Kong ever had such status.

  10. @WC

    You don’t think it’s a dystopia? To cite just one piece of evidence, Chinese people are desperate to move their money out of the country,

    Not necessarily, in fact, Chinese move their money abroad in a very surprising way: Chinese tourists make almost 150 million international trips a year, and spend almost 260 billions a year overseas, the most in the world.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/these-are-the-countries-that-spend-the-most-abroad/ar-BBRvivP

    How many wealthy Americans or Europeans are banging down the door to invest in Chinese property, engage in birth tourism, or send their kids to Chinese universities?

    The same thing can be said of Japan and South Korea. In general, East Asian societies such as China are ultra-competitive. It’s not easy to get ahead in such a society. Sending your kids overseas is to give them a easier life. As for investing in Chinese property, China has been a major destination of FDI for many years.

    On the other hand, even one third of Americans want to live abroad:

    https://www.kent.ac.uk/news/society/20593/one-third-of-americans-consider-living-abroad

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  11. kauchai says:

    ” They’re timed (probably by the NED) to coincide with the anniversary of the handover.”

    Partly true. This is just a cover, after all they have been doing it every year since 1997.

    Let me put in my 5 cents worth.

    5 years and 3 months ago, the CIA and Jap intelligence planned and supported the storming and occupation of the taiwanese legislature that put paid to KMT prez Ma Yingjeou’s ECFA (Economic Co-operation Framework Agreement) with the mainland. [ ECFA was supposed to be the FTA for goods and services between taiwan and the mainland with the aim of reducing tariffs and other trade barriers.]

    It also caused Ma’s popularity rating to plummet into the single digits. Consequently, the KMT lost the 2016 presidential election to the DPP’s Tsai Ing wen by a huge majority. The protesters were largely university students instigated and trained by the CIA and jap intelligence and the sit-in was executed to perfection by the independence leaning DPP, a.k.a poodle of the empire. DPP politicians immediately took up positions in the legislature and supported the students and their demands for more than 20 days.

    Tsai took the reins of power in taiwan and promised taiwanese the sky but only delivered the goodies to her own party’s apparatchiks and cronies. At the same time, she trashed the hard won 92 consensus with beijing and incurred their wrath. Taiwanese economic performance plummeted to between 1-2 % for the last three years. Graduates’ starting salaries were stagnant at NTD 22,000 / month. On the diplomatic front, beijing was pulling the carpet from under her feet by pulling over 5 of taiwan’s remaining 22 diplomatic recognitions. Her popularity rating fell to the low teens by the second half of 2018. Reality bit hard, when she lost all the major municipal electoral seats and was barely able to retain only a handful after the Nov 24 2018 elections. Even the traditional DPP stronghold of Kaohsiung was lost to the KMT by almost 150,000 votes. Ahead, is the 2020 presidential election which she is feverishly working on to retain power.

    From that humiliating defeat last year, she obviously saw the writings on the wall. Even party elders were going for her throat. At first she thought she would get the DPP nomination like a walk in the park. But her colleague Lai Ching Te threw up a surprise in mid-march of this year to register as a candidate to challenge her. Fearful that she may get dumped, she manipulated party machinery to put her own people in charge of the nomination process. Nomination was supposed to be carried out by end march but due to her low rating, she had it postponed to April and then had it postponed again to mid-May.

    By then the HK protest against the extradition bill was almost 2 months into the making, having already started on 31 march. “Miraculously”, Tsai’s popularity rating soared past Lai’s by a wide margin and finally it was decided the FINAL date would be end of May. Abracadabra ! Tsai Ing Wen was re-nominated as the DPP’s presidential candidate for taiwan’s 2020 presidential election!

    COINCIDENCE???

    Read on:

    After the student mobs broke into the HK Legco, they sprayed the words “Sunflower HK” on the wall of the chamber in chinese. Why would they do that and what is “sunflower” one may ask.

    The Sunflower movement was the protest movement mentioned above in taiwan more than 5 years ago. The storming and sit-in of the taiwan legisature was done between mid-march to mid-april of 2014. So successful was this protest (as witness by Ma Ying-jeou’s capitulation) that the empire saw it fit to send some of the potential Occupy Central (HK) future leaders to taiwan to learn from their compatriots. Remember, this was some 5 months before Hong Kong’s Occupy Central happened on 26 Sep 2014 and lasted til 15 Dec. The rest is history.

    See how these entities are related now? See how the storming of the HK Legco was an exact copy of the Sunflower storming of the taiwan legislature? I am not surprised if the Dalai Lama’s independence soldiers and the WUC (World Uighurs Congress) militant arm are also in cahoot with these mobsters and thugs.

    A Postulation:

    We will not see the end of this bunch of CIA, MI6 and jap sponsored mobsters and thugs until after Jan 11, 2020 which is the day of the taiwan presidential election. WHY?

    a) Bcos Tsai Ing wen knows this is a sure way of getting votes.

    b) Bcos the empire have huge, huge interests in both localities to carry out their subversion of the chinese mainland. To maintain this machinery, they need to provide succor to their local hounds thru its consulate in HK and the AIT in Taipei.

  12. AmRusDebate says: • Website

    Before the handover the UK introduced electoral democracy, the poisoned chalice that ended the Colony’s hopes for development

    i.e. the real fault lies on the British.

    Or would that be because Honk Kongers cannot handle the practice of self-rule?

    Do Honk Kongese have a right to leave the island, and settle anywhere in the mainland? We know they have a right to settle anywhere within the Commonwealth, hence flooded Vancouver and Sydney.

    if they do have the right to circulate in the PRC, then are they choosing to live sardined in chicken coops, instead of moving to Macao or Guangzhou who now have triple per capita GDP?

  13. Anon[140] • Disclaimer says:
    @NYMOM

    You obviously don’t have a clue. Why don’t you take a few minutes and read the summary below instead of regurgitating the same death sentence and human organs harvest lies? And if you haven’t noticed, the West you speak of has been sending criminals back to China.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-crime-corruption/chinas-biggest-bank-corruption-criminal-repatriated-from-u-s-idUSKBN1K10RF

    What is the extradition process under the proposed law?

    Upon receiving a request for extradition, Hong Kong’s Department of Justice first determines whether several conditions are met, including: the crime is one of the 37 listed categories and punishable by seven years or more in prison; the offence in question is a crime in both Hong Kong and the requesting jurisdiction; the offence in question is not of a political character, and the offence is not punishable by death.

    If the justice department determines that the conditions are met, then it goes before Hong Kong’s chief executive, who can decide whether to veto or proceed with the extradition request. At this point, the suspect can apply for judicial review, with a right to appeal in the city’s highest court. If the request proceeds, an arrest warrant is issued, after which the subject is immediately barred from leaving Hong Kong. Once the subject is arrested, the case moves to the courts, where a preliminary hearing is held. Once the court decides that there is no political motive behind the extradition request, and that there is sufficient prima facie evidence that there is a possible case, it can then make an order of committal. At this point, the suspect can appeal.

    With the judicial process over, the request goes back to the chief executive, who can again decide to deny the extradition request on humanitarian grounds. Here, the subject can petition the chief executive to oppose extradition. Should the chief executive decide to proceed with the extradition, an extradition order is given. At this stage, the suspect can again appeal to the courts to stop the extradition. If the suspect decides not to appeal, or if the appeal is unsuccessful, the suspect is extradited. The process could take years, which is typical of extradition proceedings.

  14. Brett says:

    This is helpful to see these issues better contextualized. One question though: there’s a massively popular reddit post claiming 2 millions people in Hong Kong participated in the protests. Even if there’s legitimacy to the claim that so much of these protests are being propped up by foreign actors, it appears the Hong Kong public largely supports it. Is there much if any support in favor of this amendment?

    Link:

    Timelapse of a 2 Million Marchers in a city with a population of 7 Million. That means every 2/7 of the people in Hong Kong are protesting for keeping their rights. from gifs

    • Replies: @last straw
    , @lloyd
  15. Yee says:

    AmRusDebate,

    “the real fault lies on the British. Or would that be because Honk Kongers cannot handle the practice of self-rule?”

    The Brits are experts at running colonies…

    You can bet that even though they have left, they have prepared ways to control some of the key superstructures beforehand – courts, law enforcement (not the police though, I suspect it’s the Independent Commission Against Corruption, much smaller but more powerful and easier to control than the police), media, education institutes and whatnot, the “soft power” sort. So, HongKongers don’t really get to “practice of self-rule”.

    HongKong never de-colonized, and they don’t really want to. You gotta hand it to the Brits, top-notch colony masters…

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  16. @Brett

    This is helpful to see these issues better contextualized. One question though: there’s a massively popular reddit post claiming 2 millions people in Hong Kong participated in the protests. Even if there’s legitimacy to the claim that so much of these protests are being propped up by foreign actors, it appears the Hong Kong public largely supports it. Is there much if any support in favor of this amendment?

    Hong Kong police counted 0.338 million. On the hand, at least 0.85 million Hongkongers signed up on a Hong Kong government website IN SUPPORT of the extradition law, which was reported by Hong Kong media but not by any western MSM, as far as I know.

  17. Svevlad says:

    Just force reintegrate, demolish the concrete cages and scatter the populace

    The ancients had the right idea

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  18. The idea of “revolution” has been entirely co-opted. All revolutions are color revolutions nowadays. Reaction is the only revolution possible, flawed as it is.

    • Replies: @denk
  19. denk says:
    @obwandiyag

    I often wonder why do ‘they‘ leave
    UNZ and other alternate media alone ?

    Perhaps to keep the people from pounding the streets like those swarming adolescence in HK.

  20. ponderer says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    How does the public fair in your calculus? It’s far more important for those outside the MSM to be above suspicion in their reporting precisely because they reach a much smaller audience. You only have a few chances to educate those reading your articles, those who peruse alternate sites because they want truth over comfort. Producing a different brand of propaganda is no more useful than the same type already out there, just the paymasters are different. If someone dismisses the MSM because of clear bias to come here they can’t help but think they have wasted their time. Like the MSM you’ve chosen the government (CCP in your case) over the public interest and that will shadow everything you write in the future. Perhaps its worth it to desperately cling to the coat tails of the powerful.

    If the CCP was willing to kill tens of millions of its own citizens to maintain their grip on power why would we believe that HK or Taiwan are to blame for wanting some semblance of self determination? The truth is that there are no “good guys” in international relations. The Western and Eastern Elites may come by their power in different ways and may have slightly different tactics but both are a danger to humanity.

    • Agree: TKK
  21. lloyd says: • Website

    From my decade experience in China, civilised Chinese cities and populations are the former concession cities and the former European and Japanese colonies. The rest of China is filthy and germ infested. How many children defecate in the street and in public facilities including international airports is a good litmus test. A Chinese lady said to me as she gazed at the neon lights of Hong Kong harbour. “I love my country but I am sorry we got Hong Kong back because we will mess it up.” The quality is in the common people in mainland China. Hong Kong I felt had the most evil people I had ever visited.

    • Agree: jim jones
    • Replies: @last straw
    , @last straw
  22. lloyd says: • Website
    @Brett

    A bit crowd swallows everyone else up. I suspect most of this crowd are doing or attempting to do their daily chores.

  23. lloyd says: • Website

    I should have written big not bit.

  24. Anon[134] • Disclaimer says:
    @denk

    An honest witness tells the truth

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @denk
    , @denk
    , @Wizard of Oz
  25. Anon[134] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    He was wrong about the non-violence in the previous two demonstrations. He just didn’t see it. There are videos out there that captured the violence.

  26. @ponderer

    If the CCP was willing to kill tens of millions of its own citizens to maintain their grip on power why would we believe that HK or Taiwan are to blame for wanting some semblance of self determination?

    While historically peasant rebellions and dynasty changes in China were often associated with horrible human suffering, where did you get the ideal that CCP was willing to kill tens of millions of its own citizens to hold on power, especially when most mainland Chinese both support their government and the reunification with Taiwan?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  27. @lloyd

    From my decade experience in China, civilised Chinese cities and populations are the former concession cities and the former European and Japanese colonies. The rest of China is filthy and germ infested. How many children defecate in the street and in public facilities including international airports is a good litmus test. A Chinese lady said to me as she gazed at the neon lights of Hong Kong harbour. “I love my country but I am sorry we got Hong Kong back because we will mess it up.” The quality is in the common people in mainland China. Hong Kong I felt had the most evil people I had ever visited.

    You sound disingenuous, or you are confusing China with someplace else, such as India. Although even streets of the U.S., a country several times richer than China, can also be contaminated:

    When President Trump Was Asked About The Epidemic Of Human Feces On Our Streets, Here Is How He Responded…

    http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/when-president-trump-was-asked-about-the-epidemic-of-human-feces-on-our-streets-here-is-how-he-responded

    • Agree: Agent76
    • Replies: @FB
    , @Biff
  28. @lloyd

    From my decade experience in China, civilised Chinese cities and populations are the former concession cities and the former European and Japanese colonies. The rest of China is filthy and germ infested. How many children defecate in the street and in public facilities including international airports is a good litmus test.

    Really? There are almost 20 Tier 1 Chinese cities, how many have you been to?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_city_tier_system

    • Replies: @last straw
    , @lloyd
    , @neir
  29. @kauchai

    Many, many thanks for your explanation.

    I am always newly impressed at America’s regime change chops.

    How ironic that, just as they’re peaking, the American regime itself is itself failing.

  30. @ponderer

    If the CCP was willing to kill tens of millions of its own citizens to maintain their grip on power I would not be writing positively about it.

    Can you explain where you believe this slaughter occurred, and on whose authority you give it credence?

  31. denk says:
    @Anon

    Agent provocateurs bent on provoking crackdown from police, they want bloodshed, preferably a bloodbath, to be blamed on CCP.

    Same M,.O. in TAM, Tibet, Xinjiang, HK….
    violence, reaction, demonisation.
    Lather, rinse, repeat…..

    Works like a charm.

    Those sobs

  32. denk says:
    @ponderer

    Same B.S., different names.

    fucking cybots.

  33. lloyd says: • Website
    @last straw

    So many I can’t recall. Behind the shining post modern China, there lies old China that all white and Japanese outsiders learnt to dislike because of its poverty and general lack of hygiene unless they joined them. By old China I mean China about a hundred years ago. Most Chinese understanding of hygiene is pre industrial and they treat technology as magic. Several hundred million Chinese live in China as migrant workers. As such they are living as if the Chinese revolutions never happened. As they are outside their provinces, they are outside any statistics and State support. They are Chinese version of America’s homeless. The difference being that no one usually notices their existence. Most insiders would secretly agree the mainland Chinese are either very clever or very stupid. That does not appear to be racial or even much class. Both qualities commonly run in families. Their domestic products are dreadful and usually break down after a few months unless they are high tech. The stupid Chinese make them, and the clever Chinese work only with their heads. All this explains why all enterprising Chinese are desperate to live in the West unless they are rich and live in the bubble in China. In China, professional jobs are treated as senecures and connections not the Communist Party per se determines employment. They commonly lose your valuables and then refuse to look for them. There are European sections in the biggest cities where all foreigners gather for recreation. Foreigners are officially designated as foreign experts and as such are paid and given privileges that far exceed native Chinese doing the same work. Corruption is a way of life. The Chinese in cheating the system are completely amoral but personally amazingly honest. The more things change the more they remain the same.

    • Replies: @last straw
    , @lloyd
  34. Icy Blast says:

    I am open to new critiques of Hong Kong politics and of the Maoist murderers who run the mainland. But “Godfree” (Get it? He’s a hipster commie materialist!) Roberts has no credibility. Mr. Unz might as well enlist Tom Cruise to sell us Scientology. I don’t know if Roberts is old enough to have met the hellish “Chairman” – who passed away on September 9th, 1976 – but if he did, I’m sure he made a grovelling fool of himself. Ilana Mercer’s column about Ivanka Trump has much more weight and substance than anything that comes from the pen of the groupie “Godfree.”

  35. Yee says:

    Icy Blast,

    You have nothing to say about the topic so you attack the author?

    What’s your problems with materialist? Well, unless you’re a Islam jihadist…

  36. @lloyd

    So many I can’t recall. Behind the shining post modern China, there lies old China that all white and Japanese outsiders learnt to dislike because of its poverty and general lack of hygiene unless they joined them. By old China I mean China about a hundred years ago. Most Chinese understanding of hygiene is pre industrial and they treat technology as magic.

    There are many modern cities in China, and they do not look like places where people have poor hygiene. I don’t understand your claim in your previous post that the only clean Chinese cities are those that were once ruled by colonial powers, because few modern Chinese cities have such a legacy, and even if they do, such influence was removed 3 generations ago. Finally, I wasn’t talking about China one hundred years ago.

    Several hundred million Chinese live in China as migrant workers. As such they are living as if the Chinese revolutions never happened. As they are outside their provinces, they are outside any statistics and State support. They are Chinese version of America’s homeless. The difference being that no one usually notices their existence.

    This does not make much sense either. It’s like saying that illegal immigrants are like homeless people. They are not. China’s migrant workers are very hard working people. They are now covered by China’s national basic health insurance and pension plan, no matter where they go. In hard times, they also have the option of going back to their rural homeland, where astonishingly, 90% of them owns their own home. Unlike homeless people, they are not plagued with drug addiction and psychiatric disability. They have as much human dignity as you and I. Nobody notice them because they don’t make a mess on the streets, like homeless people do sometimes.

    The rest of your post is just some mumbling for which I have little patience to respond.

  37. denk says:
    @Anon

    Confession….havent gotten to watch your vid,
    I normally prefer text.

    While on youtube , saw the same vid there so I click on it outta curiosity.

    Yes, its a damning evidence on the agent
    provocateurs.

    Peter Bently
    ‘In the west this kind of violence would be met by real bullets’

    Say it all…..the utter hypocrisy of 5liars.

  38. lloyd says: • Website
    @lloyd

    The Chinese pension all Chinese citizens in the world get. Women get it at age fifty and men fifty five. My Chinese wife is waiting for hers. It is so small I have forgotten the amount and I don’t want to fire her up by asking again. Maybe a hundred dollars a month. A looked forward amount for a third world economy. The Chinese health system which is excellent but in often physically nauseating conditions, applies to everyone regardless inside China. They test you for HIV in something resembling a coca cola dispenser.

  39. Hail says: • Website
    @peterAUS

    Imagine, instead of the current MSM presentation of China this type of daily brainwashing.

    Your suggestion of contrasting our MSM with the pro-CCP propagandistic tone on display in these articles gets me thinking, as follows: Overt pro-CCP propaganda would turn off, even shock, most Westerners. Yet our MSM takes exactly the same kind of line when it comes to non-Europeans in Western societies (Blacks, Muslims, ‘Hispanics,’ non-Western immigrants in general, and to an exent, Israel). To save a substantial amount of reading time, the gist is this: “We’re always wrong and they’re always right.”

    The case of Gay presidential candidate Mayor Pete Buttigeig denouncing one of his event attendees (early July 2019) for suggesting that Blacks (in “Mayor Pete’s” city) should work to lower their crime rate, is instructive, too, but probably too close to the real thing to work. Overt pro-CCP propaganda might work better.

  40. Escher says:
    @kauchai

    The author makes some good points about how Hong Kong elites control an unhealthily high portion of the economy, strangling growth opportunities for the youth in the process.
    Still, as other commentators have said, he needs to go easy on the China hagiography.

    See example below:
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-48825090

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  41. JNDillard says:
    @Icy Blast

    An ad hominem attack, a logical fallacy, which inherently disqualifies the speaker from the realm of rational discourse.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  42. JNDillard says:

    Another excellent and informative article by Mr. Roberts. His intent to fight back against the overwhelming blackwashing of China by Western media is important, noble, and necessary. If you have an emotional reaction (many readers do), consider the possibility that you have either been brainwashed or are on the payroll of interests that parasitically benefit from the maintenance of an exploitative status quo.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  43. Anonymous[312] • Disclaimer says:
    @last straw

    ‘where did you get the ideal that CCP was willing to kill tens of millions of its own citizens to hold on power, especially when most mainland Chinese both support their government and the reunification with Taiwan?’

    Read any biography of Mao. I really liked this article it points out many things you will never see in any western media production about Hong Kong and China.

  44. @Anon

    What naiveté! Who is the main beneficary from the vandalism by the small number of mostly yojng people who broke into the LegCo? The CCP of course. So who do you think planned that media event?

  45. I have read most of your articles with interest since they first appeared on UR. But this one blows the top right off my BS detector.

    No Aussie leaving behind business failure in the US to live and write in Chang Mai is going to be able to do the amount of research you assert or imply underlies such an article without being a shill for the CCP.

    Moreover it is absurd to suppose that one of your sophistication does not at least state and discuss the likelihood that the vandals who broke into LegCo were agents of the CCP if not all knowingly.

  46. Anonymous[312] • Disclaimer says:
    @NYMOM

    ‘The problem is that mainland China has the death penalty for what we in the west would consider relatively ordinary financial crimes ‘

    Presumably to fight the culturally ingrained corruption…

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  47. @Godfree Roberts

    That par 2 really threw me? Who is this “Godfree Roberts” that I have just characterised as an Australian with a failed business in the US who lives in Chang Mai? Back to checking my memory.

    Reassuringly I find the honest John Derbyshire who speaks Chinese and has many Chinese friends and relations calling him a crank (rather than a paid publicist of the CCP) at https://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Diaries/2018-01.html

    Then there is SBS on his Australianness

    “Another Australian, Godfree Roberts, moved to Thailand when the global financial crisis wiped out his retirement fund. Now, he has a comfortable life in the northern Thai city of Chiang Mai. “It’s the best balance of scenery, culture and cost and fun that I’ve been able to find anywhere.” ”

    As to education there is plenty of evidence of a Godfree Roberts even with a doctorate from Amherst.

    All that noted, there is nothing incredible about Par.2 as a biographical note for someone. Indeed only yesterday an Australian friend who was going back home to Beijing told me of the bright Chinese girl who had offers from colleges at both Oxford and Cambridge but chose Peking University (or maybe it was Tsinghua) because she could always go to Oxford or Cambridge later but didn’t want to be branded as one who couldn’t get into China’s top universities so used family money to get in elsewhere.

    But who is par,2 about?

  48. jim jones says:

    I see that the “fifty cent army” are bombarding Youtube with their usual illiterate coamments:

  49. chrimony says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    So you’re fighting propaganda with propaganda? Let’s take your stats of China poverty stats at 1% versus 23% for Hong Kong. You don’t list any sources. Searching on my own, I could find a World Bank poverty line of 0.7% for China — at less than $1.90 a day. There’s no comparable stat listed for Hong Kong. The number at less than $5.50 a day for China was 27%. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentage_of_population_living_in_poverty

    But countries also set their own national poverty lines. This is relative wealth, and a completely different measure from World Bank dollars. Here I can find something more along the line of 20%. Source: https://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hkstat/sub/so461.jsp

    Also, you make the claim that Hong Kong’s wealth had nothing to do with capitalism, but merely as being a gatekeeper into the Chinese market. But you completely ignore that China’s own economic developed soared when they opened up investments and followed a free market capitalist approach. That’s not to say China doesn’t run their own brand of capitalism, but it’s a far cry and opposite approach to their attempts at communism.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  50. neir says:
    @last straw

    the “new tier 1 cities” are not official. Zhengzhou and Dalian are both poor shitholes. Shenyang is likely a poor shithole too consider the entire northeast of china is in serious decline.

    • Replies: @last straw
  51. @Icy Blast

    Most insightful and a real contribution to this discussion.

    If your interest in China or Mao is sincere, then I recommend boning up on them before popping your cork.

    Start here: http://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered/?highlight=mao

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
    , @Icy Blast
  52. @NYMOM

    I don’t give a rat’s butt about a bunchofslopeheads…

  53. Tom Verso says:

    This article and comments are precisely why reading the Unz Review every morning is a must. At the end of each read I think ” I should sue my college for a refund of tuition! I learn more about history and society reading Unz then I did in a MA History program from which I graduated with honors.

    Thanks and God Bless Ron Unz.

  54. bucky says:

    Yeah whenever the western media paints China, and even Iran! as quote-unquote “authoritarian” it sounds to me like racial stereotyping.

    As is often noted, America has the highest per capital incarceration rate in the world, higher than China’s or Iran. So who is authoritarian?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Lo
  55. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Godfree Roberts

    Godfree Roberts says: “I studied economics at Cambridge, a field which has become more and more mathematical since the 1970s. The goal is always to use a mathematical model to find a closed-form solution to a real-world problem. Looking back, I’m not sure why my professors were so focused on these models. I have since found that the mistake of blindly relying on models is quite widespread in both trading and investing—often with disastrous results, such as the infamous collapse of the hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management. …”

    This just in:

    Nearly all of modern modern mainstream economic and investment theory is based on mathematics, and the use of mathematically based models to “predict” how the economic/financial future will supposedly work.

    And it started well before the 1970’s, I can assure you. 🙂

    Ironically, the only school of economic thought that has, from its beginnings in the 1870’s, systematically and vociferously rejected the methodological reliance on mathematics and mathematically derived, supposedly predictive “economic” models , is the [ “horror of horrors” 🙂 ] , outside-the-mainstream, free market Austrian school.

    I say “ironically” because :

    [1] the Austrian school , most recently “led” by the likes of Von Mises, Hayek and Rothbard, is the only school to point out the inherent fallacies, social destructiveness and impossibility of any/all centrally based economic planning [ ie the economic calculation problem : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Calculation_Problem ] ; centrally based economic planning which in fact is, coincidentally, the very same centralized planning that all socialists/ fascists/ communists worship and insist on as being essential to their own glorious “systems” because it will supposedly ensure economic prosperity for all [when it in fact ensures the exact opposite, poverty for the masses], and……

    …. [2]: because you consistently promote [Chinese] communism!

    And so it goes….

    Ironically yours, onebornfree

    Recommended reading: “The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science” by Ludwig von Mises : https://mises.org/files/ultimate-foundation-economic-sciencepdf-0

  56. Ram says:

    Hong Kong is a strange place. While the Brits were still there, hardly anybody would speak English even after 100 years of Occupation.. Today they seem to prefer it to their own language.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  57. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    English pirates always agitating the waters to see what they can steal , England five centuries serving Mammon .

  58. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    Also this week english pirates seized an iranian oil tanker in the spanish waters of Gibraltar .

    England ,five centuries serving Mammon .

  59. Agent76 says:

    Jul 3, 2019 China ambassador tells UK to back off Hong Kong

    China’s ambassador has been summoned to the Foreign Office after telling the UK to keep its “hands off Hong Kong and show respect”.

    Jul 5, 2019 How China Subverts Freedom with the “United Front” | Sonny Lo | China Uncensored

    China is using a shadowy organization called the United Front to infiltrate and undermine Hong Kong and protesters’ fight for freedom and democracy.

  60. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @onebornfree

    Too much mathematics and too little common sense and good faith .

  61. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    The french yellow vests protesting for the 34 th week :

    https://sputniknews.com/europe/201907061076166377-34th-weekend-of-french-yellow-vests-protest/

    but the paper Le Figaro says nothing about it , and starts its ciber with domestic violence , oh !!! ,

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/violences-conjugales-des-outils-judiciaires-peu-utilises-20190705

    interesting , the ” free press ” .

  62. @NYMOM

    The bill will only allow extradition of criminals that committed crimes that are consider crimes in both places and of more than 7 plus years in prison sentence.

    It also excludes financial crimes.

    You should at the very least understand what it is before talking about it.

    And if USA has death sentence for financial crimes of certain severity, maybe we will get rid of ourselves of Bernie Madoff types and the 2008 financial crisis. Food for thought.

  63. @Agent76

    Trying to make a point with China uncensored. That is about as stupid as it gets.

    Grats, you won the stupid award of the day.

    • Replies: @Agent76
  64. @Ram

    Shanghai and Singapore has made Hong Kong less relevant. It used to be the sole conduit for China to the outside world, it is now just another city. Coupled that with stupid residents like the protesters. You get Hong Kong of today.

    And yes, I do consider them stupid. I should list my reasons but who cares.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  65. @onebornfree

    You should read Friedrich list. You will learn a lot.

    He is the father of all Asian tigers. Including China. They may changed a little but they all follow his Model.

  66. @last straw

    On the other hand, even one third of Americans want to live abroad.

    Perhaps, but 97% of those are all talk, and then exclusively in English.

    • Replies: @last straw
  67. @Yee

    The Brits are experts at running colonies…

    But they have lost control of their own country.

  68. @Svevlad

    Your recounting if the wisdom of the ancients is too antiseptic; the ancients would raze all the buildings and infrastructure, loot anything of value, kill all the men, rape the women and sell them and the children into slavery, and sow the soil with salt so nothing could grow there.

  69. Che Guava says:
    @kauchai

    Your post is interesting, and makes sense on many points.

    I am curious abt. what you mean by ‘Jap intelligence’ in ‘CIA and Jap intelligence’.

    I am somewhat well-read on the topic, far more than most, but since the late 1990s any critical media was shut down by death threats from the Yakuza.

    So, truly critical media no longer exists.

    If the ‘CIA and Jap intel’ really existed, from what agency were the Japanese instigators?

    I would guess, as usual, organised crime, but would love it if you could offer a different answer.

  70. voicum says:
    @WC

    If WC stands for” water closet” then your comment makes perfect sense.

  71. @NYMOM

    The problem is that mainland China has the death penalty for what we in the west would consider relatively ordinary financial crimes

    I applaud that China has the death penalty for such “ordinary” financial crimes but considering the level of corruption in China I guess many get away with it. Perhaps this is what those Hong Kongers are afraid of, as if applied efficiently to them, many would be goners. And why can’t we have the west adopt the death penalty for economic crimes and show up the Chinese by applying it effectively and efficiently, and making sure Israel is no safe haven for financial criminals? Now why can’t we have such nice things and instead only get to go to the stadium to watch sports games? It would solve a lot of problems.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  72. Yee says:

    chrimony,

    ” Searching on my own, I could find a World Bank poverty line of 0.7% for China — at less than $1.90 a day. ”

    China is different than many other countries in that the poorest people in China are peasants, and they all own lands and houses. So they can farm all their food and DIY almost everything they need. They just don’t have many products with commercial value to sell so they have a very low cash income.

    If you have a mind to compare poverty lines of different countries, I think you should convert the food and rent and commuting cost too.

  73. voicum says:
    @ponderer

    Correct , to a point , but very simplistic.

  74. @JNDillard

    You might yourself try boning up on logic.

    This is about right

    “It should also be noted that an ad hominem fallacy occurs when one attacks the character of an interlocutor in an attempt to refute their argument. … Whether it is fallacious depends on whether or not the insult is used as a reason against the interlocutor’s argument”

    What “argument” did you take Icy Blast to be fallaciously attempting to counter?

    Was he not just saying “don’t trust Roberts on China even as to his selected facts”.

  75. @Yee

    YEE

    You are quite right. Remember Americans and Europeans pay high rents and by the time they pay rent and purchase food and toothbrushes…they have zero money. Which is why they have to have credit cards.

  76. @JNDillard

    By your standards that counts as ad hominem “fallacy”. As one who tells all the younger generation that anyone who doesn’t speak Chinese in 20 years time will be like someone who doesn’t speak English now I don’t like selective propaganda from any side.

  77. @bucky

    You seem to have a limited vocabulary. Authoritarian, if no longer totalitarian, should be OK for China. How about “barbarian” for America?

  78. @Astuteobservor II

    Do you think it was genuine protesters who vandalised LegCo? Was it not most likely a “false flag” event staged for the CCP?

    As to stupidity of the genuine activists, do you not see possible motives as including

    1. Perfecting their credentials for refugee status (“see me here at the demonstration with a policeman panhandling me”)?

    2. Making the CCP calculate that accelerating HK”s incorporation is not worth the trouble?

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  79. @kauchai

    This doesn’t pass the smell test of common sense. It attributes far too much sophisticated competence to the CIA. Someone has been picking up urban myths in the pub.

  80. @Commentator Mike

    There seems to be a tendency to forget that the justice system is systemivly and systematically fixed to deny justice independent of what the CCP wants in China. Mind you I oppose Australians being extradited to the US not least.

  81. @Yee

    Are there no landless labourers?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  82. The whole thing has the reek of a U.S. backed (((colour revolution))) about it.

  83. @Anonymous

    Read any biography of Mao.

    Famines, peasant rebellions, civil wars, dynasty changes, and revolutions have caused huge loss of human life and wide-spread human suffering throughout Chinese history. Mao was the leader of one of the most important revolutions in China’s history. But his is not a murder.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  84. nsa says:

    “Full foreign ownership of securities firms, futures businesses, and life insurance companies will be allowed by 2020, Chinese Premier Li Kequiang, said at the World Economic Forum in Dalian on Tuesday.”
    China caves and allows foreign financial services (the jew) to operate freely on the mainland, which was the actual stumbling block to an amicable settlement of the JUSA- China trade war. The Chinese economic miracle has been based on the exclusion of the jew, having experience their machinations during the Opium Wars and the Century of Humiliation. Maybe the Chinese are not quite a smart as Godfree thinks……..

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    , @denk
  85. @neir

    the “new tier 1 cities” are not official. Zhengzhou and Dalian are both poor shitholes. Shenyang is likely a poor shithole too consider the entire northeast of china is in serious decline.

    There are 65 cities in China with a population of 1 million or more, and 360 cities with population between 100,000 to 1 million. I’m sure a few of them are relatively poor as you said, such as Zhengzhou and Shenyang, which are located in China’s “rust belt”. But I serious doubt any of them is a real shit hole nowadays. China’s “rust belt” is not a real rust belt, it’s just some areas where China’s heavy industry was located that are temporarily underdeveloped compared to more prosperous regions.

    http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/china-population/cities/

    Go to the following link, you will see what it looks like for many Chinese cities. You may even find Zhengzhou, Shenyang and Dalian there.

    https://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?s=90e04ddfc408930e982a709bcb9991ff&f=803

  86. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    This is a sad statement, as this has ended my respect for Dr. Roberts.
    ‘Lie and mischaracterize as much as possible because my client has been tarnished thoroughly for so long!!’
    Alas, such confirms your MO, and nothing surprising. But it is sad indeed as you are openly biased and unscholarly. What’s the point, sir? You will not convince anybody now, or persuade, being a lobbyist.
    Go to Congress to make you case, eh?

    • Replies: @Fitzhenrymac
  87. @The Alarmist

    Perhaps, but 97% of those are all talk, and then exclusively in English.

    Yes, the article I quoted talks about U.S. born Americans. Few of them speak a second language.

  88. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Where’s your famous stats? Thought this would exactly be a case you could make a good case.
    Ya know, scholarship does matter. This is sloppy heresay on both sides.

  89. Agent76 says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.” Albert Einstein

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    , @denk
  90. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    You’d be a great champion for truth if you make the case against evidence you cite in support. Accepting everything published by whatever source, is rather amateur. A mere lobbyist.

    Take, for example, controversies as leveled against my kind….. What you and others rail and rage are merely alleged, as the Nanjing massacre and the enslaved comfort women, which is as credible as the US false flags like the gulf of tonking engagement. We admit to true horrors, but you all love to scream about so much more and try to take as much as you can from us before the welfare is cut off. Such was China several years ago on aid being cut as China is a developed and great country that can care for itself.

    We should have lobbied the power players, but we believe in good humble behaviour, not on power play. The screaming and crying seems to work better on the westerners than facts, though.

    So much garbage out there. Putting out what you declare as true does not make it so, although y’all have learned well from the Brits and Ed Bernays on deceit. Everybody loves to cite Joseph Goebbels but he’s just a student. How are you any different, eh, Dr. Roberts?

    • Replies: @Lo
  91. Icy Blast says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    If you are ready to end your squalid career as a sycophant for the regime in Beijing, I suggest you start here: “The Unknown Mao” by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday; and “Mao’s Great Famine” by Frank Dikotter. You are not doing the young people who visit this site any favors by regurgitating Maoist propaganda. And the old standby tactic of finding fault with a rival government is dishonest and childish: Every adult knows there are no earthly utopias, and certainly Hong Kong is no paradise.

    I have lived half my life in California, and it has a steadily growing population (maybe half-a-million by now) of Chinese who have escaped the mainland. These middle-class to extremely-wealthy Chinese voice patriotic sentiments. They also have children in California so they can, under Chinese and American law, get their wealth out of the PRC. Their actions speak louder than their words.

    Your career as an obsequious journalist may produce short-term rewards of various kinds, but it will ultimately lead you to a “bad place,” psychologically speaking.

  92. peterAUS says:
    @Hail

    Well, my point is: we don’t replace one bullshit with another.

    I guess that for say…..10 % of readers/posters here (not necessarily the authors; let’s leave the owner and the mods out of it….) the purpose of spending time/effort/energy on this site is trying to find a reasonable alternative to the paradigm we live in.
    China thing simply isn’t that. In plenty of elements it’s even worse.

  93. @Wizard of Oz

    Who can tell one way or the other. What evidence do you have on this “false flag” theory of yours? Remember, estimates are 2 million protesters. When you have that big of a mob, I am 100% sure some will cross the line.

    I disagree on the genuine protesters part. I am 100% of the opinion that almost all of them have no idea what they are protesting or rioting about. As to ulterior motives, if they do exist, the “protesters” deserve everything coming to them and more.

    This HK thing just proved to me that 60% to 80% of humans are stupid and cannot think for themselves.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  94. @Agent76

    It is why I limit the award to only today.

    Get it?

    PS, stop quoting something some retard wrote. This wasn’t even a direct quote, just some dumbass attributing it to a physicist.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  95. @nsa

    Do you know why the deal was kaput?

    Nothing was published or revealed. Just the usual vomit from trash rags like nyt n such.

  96. J. Zete says: • Website

    > Hong Kong’s profile now resembles Britain’s: 23% of its children live in poverty– compared to the mainland’s 1%.

    Are you perhaps using the international poverty line when calculating your number for the mainland, and the Hong Kong poverty line when calculating your number for Hong Kong? There’s over a tenfold difference in the two.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  97. @Godfree Roberts

    Let’s see now: NED run by CIA; CIA run by Neocons and Jews; And Democracy always flourishes under the Jews right………….what could go wrong?

  98. Cogitator says:

    Damn writers who use abbreviations like NED without telling what it stands for. Be damned if I’m going to spend my time searching to find out.

    • Agree: tamo, Alden
    • Replies: @redmudhooch
  99. @Wizard of Oz

    Fortunately, Wizard of Oz, you don’t have to have the resources of the CCP to write the informative article Roberts wrote above. You just need to open your eyes, have a clear head and an unbiased mind mixed with a good dose of logic and a willingness to read more than the Murdoch press.

    Much of what he wrote is freely available on the net such as the criteria for extradition under the proposed legislation and the activities of the National Endowment for Democracy which targets China more than any other nation..

    Did you check the primary sources of any of the statements you disagreed with?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  100. @Half-Jap

    What did you particularly object to in Roberts’ article?

    I agree he should have included his references even though this is not a scholarly paper, however I have found most of this material came from primary sources such as Hong Kong government sites.
    Including more links and references would have shut up those who disagreed – either paid or voluntarily.

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
  101. @Icy Blast

    When you see ‘Chinese’ in California, you are seeing the descendants of over two centuries of Chinese emigration to America plus Chinese tourists (1.6million) and visiting students at your universities and colleges.

    Chinese can also come from any of country where Chinese have settled in the past and become American citizens. It’s often difficult to tell them apart unless you speak to them.

    East Asian Americans, including Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Korean Americans, Mongolian Americans, Taiwanese Americans, and Tibetan Americans.

    South Asian Americans, including Bangladeshi Americans, Bhutanese Americans, Indian Americans, Nepalese Americans, Pakistani Americans, and Sri Lankan Americans

    Southeast Asian Americans, including Burmese Americans, Cambodian Americans, Filipino Americans, Hmong Americans, Indonesian Americans, Laotian Americans, Malaysian Americans, Mien Americans, Singaporean Americans, Thai Americans, and Vietnamese Americans.

    Each of the above countries has a large Chinese population. They send students to California’s universities and often immigrate. but they don’t always ome from mainland China.

    https://cacollegebound.com/california-colleges-with-largest-chinese-student-population/

    http://factsanddetails.com/china/cat5/sub29/item2746.html

    • Replies: @Lo
    , @Icy Blast
  102. @Astuteobservor II

    That’s a very curious loosely expressed second par. Are you saying you know better than almost all of the protesters? Unless that all proceeds from your “60% to 80% [hardly “nearly all” btw] are stupid and cannot think for themselves” which you present as a conclusion rather than a premise, that is hard to accept. Or are you saying that the proposal for an extradition law was too complex for them to understand (or that they hadn’t bothered to understand it’s detail – unlike you) and that mattered?

    Are you assuming uniformity of motive when you say that those with “ulterior motives, if they do exist, deserve everything coming to them and more”? What “ulterior motives” are you you referring to and are you referring to the non-violent majority?

    As to your opening paragraph you are trying to reverse the onus of proof amongst the ignorant like you and me. Given the actual effect of the vanadalism by a few was only to the advantage of the CCP shouldn’t the “false flag” possibility be entertained as a real one? Neither you nor I would, from what you have shown of your actual knowledge, have any strong basis for reaching a view one way for the other.

    I am not sure why you are so dogmatically unsympathetic to the (non violent) protesters. Is it not understandable that those who have enjoyed the rule of law should want to prevent early absorption into an authoritarian system in which the judiciary is an instrument of the CCP?

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  103. Lo says:
    @bucky

    China and Iran do not have millions of Subsaharans.

    • Replies: @bucky
  104. @Fitzhenrymac

    You miss my point. If he did all that research himself he’s being paid to do it. I suspect he’s also helped in his shilling for the CCP by useful feeds.

    • Replies: @Fitzhenrymac
  105. Lo says:
    @Half-Jap

    I don’t know a lot about either. Not many outside East Asia have special interest in these topics, and even when you do have interest, it is impossible to read these languages without years of study. So, people choose the easy and lazy way of blaming the already blamed, following the logic of smoke & fire. What are Japanese arguments regarding these two issues? Are there reliable statistics? When are brief histories of these two claims?

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
  106. Lo says:
    @Fitzhenrymac

    Stop this nonsense. Chinese try their best to emigrate West, if they have an opportunity & not already wealthy in China (even the wealthy often get residence in other countries using their money). I have known people who exchanged professorship or engineering professions for lowly service jobs in the US or Canada.

  107. @Cogitator

    LOL. Typical Merican. NED is pretty notorious, its basically a branch of the CIA. They waste lots of our money making billionaires lots of more money.

  108. @Wizard of Oz

    You might find it hard to believe, but many people actually love checking the facts. It keeps the mind active and debunking obvious misinformation is great sport as well as moral obligation.

    The first thing I did when I heard of the Hong Kong demonstrations was to go straight to the actual proposed legislation where I found it was eminently reasonable with safeguards that prevent what the demonstrators are allegedly fearful of. And that even the US has extradited people to China without a treaty – see link below. In fact the real question was why they weren’t demonstrating to get the criminals sent back. Who wants the worst of China’s and Taiwan’s crims holing up in their city.

    The last thing I would do is accept what the media here in Australia says without checking it. I know many Americans are just as cynical about their media, and rightly so.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-crime-corruption/chinas-biggest-bank-corruption-criminal-repatriated-from-u-s-idUSKBN1K10RF

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-china-hong-kong-extradition-pacts/

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  109. So Hong Kong is basically a gangsters paradise. Lots of organized crime, drugs prostitution and such, kinda like Vegas or New York here in Merica.

    https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/hong-kong-law-and-crime/article/2152975/hong-kong-macau-pivotal-players-massive

    https://www.rt.com/news/447485-canadian-drug-smuggling-china/

    There’s a lot of stolen artifacts from around Asia sold in Hong Kong to the elite from around the world.

    https://thebhutanese.bt/bhutans-stolen-heritage-up-for-sale-in-hong-kong/

    I bet if we gave the death sentence to folks like Dimon, Blankfein, Cohn, Mnuchin we wouldn’t be in half the shit we are now would we? Add Trump, Clinton, Bush and Obama, Biden Cheney for war crimes and treason and see how quickly things change. Add all of congress and most local govts for all the fraud, corruption, bribery and war crimes. Rope therapy for ALL! How quickly things would change.

    Instead they get million dollar bonuses, promotions, appointed to the new Presidents cabinet, yet we wonder why this country is going down the tube.

    Don’t mind locking up someone for cannabis though, some unpaid speeding tickets, fucking capitalists get away with stealing trillions of dollars in wealth, ruining the lives of millions of people, the lives of future generations, get away with mass murder and genocide, crimes against humanity, and get appointed to Trumps cabinet. But watch out for those communists!

    God bless the empire! God bless Merica and our capitalist overlords, they dindu nuffin!
    Look over there, a communist! AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  110. Documentary on Mao, not the CIA propaganda most Mericans are used to watching

  111. Frankie P says:
    @kauchai

    This comment seems to be the product of someone who has taken the basic bare bones structures of historical events and created a fantasy world of nefarious intrigue, hanging grotesque organs, muscles, flesh and skin on the skeleton.

    I say this as an American who has lived in Taiwan for over 30 years, is sympathetic to China in many geopolitical issues, agreeing with many of Godfree Roberts’ conclusions about much of the western propaganda slandering China, but who remains firmly on the side of the rights of the 23 million citizens of Taiwan to decide their own future. I’m frankly appalled to see Godfree Roberts applaud this comment; it demonstrates his willingness to believe nonsense that supports his biases and narratives while avoiding facts.

    First, the CIA and Japanese intelligence (what kind of WWII fantasy world do you live in?) had absolutely nothing to do with the Sunflower movement and the students’ occupation of the Taiwanese Legislature (thanks for identifying it as “Taiwanese” instead of “ROC”). That occupation was a spontaneous action that was supported by the majority of the citizens here, not some fringe action funded by foreign intelligence. Ma’s ECFA, which he tried to ramrod through the Legislature against the wishes of the majority, was already dead on arrival. It was opposed by most of the population, it was NOT an FTA, it was fundamentally a services agreement, and some of its provisions would have allowed Mainland Chinese service workers (beauticians, car repair mechanics, etc.) to work in Taiwan. Bad move by Ma, it spelled the end for him.

    Tsai Ying-wen and her party won the 2016 elections, giving the DPP the Executive and control of the Legislature for the first time in history. I find it interesting and entertaining that you fail to mention one of their most important achievements in these few years, namely the recovery of national assets swallowed by the KMT during its long, authoritarian one-party rule. These assets belong to the people of Taiwan, and the embarrassing fact that the KMT was the wealthiest political party in the world, using national assets to fund political and election campaigns remains a testament to its corruption. Add to that the fact that the KMT vilified the Communist Party of China for all those years and then jumped into its arms when faced with a credible opposition in Taiwan, and you can see why the recovery of the ill-gotten party assets from the KMT is fully supported by at least 85% of the population.

    The 92 Consensus, unlike your description of it, was neither hard-won nor a consensus; KMT Legislator Su Chi the chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council at the time, admitted that he created the term in the year 2000 in order to ensure cross-strait harmony before the KMT handed power to the DPP.

    The embarrassing DPP performance in the municipal elections of 2018 were a challenge from the Taiwanese people to an administration that was seen as complacent and passive on economic issues. It was a cry of impatience, but be clear about one thing: it was IN NO WAY a reflection of pro-unification views from the Taiwanese people. The fact is that at least 85% of the Taiwanese people are happy with the status quo, which in reality is de facto independence. Taiwan has a territory, a population, mechanisms of government, a military. The only thing it lacks is recognition from the global community.

    The sad statistics you point out about the low salaries of Taiwanese university graduates is more a consequence of misguided policies allowing foreign labor from Southeast Asian nations than cross-strait policy. There are currently over 750,000 foreign workers here working primarily as operators in factories and domestic elder caregivers. Needless to say, allowing these workers in has gutted salaries of local people. Perhaps a good suggestion for China would be to point this fact out and stand up for the Taiwanese workers; it would win more hearts and minds than aiming missiles does.

    The Hong Kong protests have deep support among the population. One-seventh of the population was on the streets, a million people. This presents a number of problems and challenges for China. Firstly, it highlights the one country/two systems concept as it stands in Hong Kong as completely unacceptable to the people of Taiwan. President Xi was correct to mention that Taiwan needs unique solutions. He should continue to emphasize that China doesn’t expect the situation in Hong Kong to translate to Taiwan. He should do more than call for reasonable ideas; China is the major regional power, and as such, it should put forward options. I believe that Chinese officials, all the way up to President Xi, are terrified of approaching solutions for the Taiwan problem. It is a career killer for Chinese officials. The second problem for China that the Hong Kong protests present is the impact on the citizens of China. Many feel that the control of information exercised by the Communist party keeps the people of China totally in the dark. Believe me, they are watching. China has painted itself into a corner here. If they don’t recall the extradition Bill, the protests continue indefinitely. If they DO withdraw the bill, the citizens of China receive a message: we too can influence policy through protest.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @denk
    , @denk
    , @Che Guava
  112. @Fitzhenrymac

    May I suggest you have a look at the general subject of extradition. I was first alerted to its potential for injustice when I became aware of Australia’s equivalent to the NatWest Three (remember that they were banged up in Texas thanks to Tony Blair despite the US Congress not even having ratified the relevant treaty and made it reciprocal and despite NatWest not wishing to proceed against them). Thanks to our so-called Free Trade Agreement with the US Copyright breaches were made criminal and a young Australian who had never been to the US was extradited there after being held in custody for a year or so during extradition proceedings. He was then in jail in the US far from friends and family or lawyers he could trust until the inevitable plea bargain coerced by typical US prosecutor’s overcharging.

    Many countries refuse to extradite their own citizens and, in my view, justice and fair trials require trial in one’s own country if one wants it. That’s so even when the accusing country pretends to speak the same language…. On a practical note, isn’t it better to have a foreign prosecutor assisting the locals while staying at the Marriott than to have the defendant in jail 10,000 miles from home.

    If I were a Hong Kong citizen I would regard the notion that there enough safeguards to prevent unfair trials as fanciful. “Try them here” would be my slogan. I was told, by the way, by a European who had served on a Hong Kong jury that the cultural bias, even there, was strongly in favour of the prosecution.

    • Replies: @Fitzhenrymac
    , @Rollmop
  113. @NYMOM

    The death penalty for the financial crimes of the 2007/8 crisis sounds reasonable for the heads of major actors. How many lives ruined, how many suicides? If the damage is “only” dollars, then no retribution?

  114. Jason Liu says:

    There are far too many protesters to be merely the work of the NED. Clearly there is some discontent in HK, which is unjustified and hysterical IMO. Even if the CCP used the new extradition law to pluck dissidents out of HK, I doubt they’d do it on a greater scale than they already do now, which is not much.

    The simpler explanation is that HKers have lived under higher living standards for several generations, and therefore care more about liberal values than money or nationhood. This has happened all over the world, no reason to assume HK is different.

    The key error in CCP thinking is that people won’t protest if they get richer. It’s the opposite. Wealthier people will always demand more rights, more freedoms, more services because not being poor no longer impresses them. If China’s living standards continue to improve, you’ll see this kind of discontent in mainland cities within a few decades.

    The slide into liberalism is a far more dangerous problem than foreign enemies or restive minorities, because democracy will eventually undermine nationalism. If the CCP wants to survive in the long run, it cannot base its legitimacy on economic growth alone.

    Beijing needs to enact a more sophisticated policy to ease China into prosperity without letting society fall into the liberalism trap. So some degree of openess: Allow criticism and nationalistic debate in media and among citizens. That is, people who point out flaws relentlessly but with the intention of making China stronger.

    But crack down on treasonous dissent: democracy advocates, multiculturalists, the upper crust elites who worship western liberalism, etc. These people are rapidly growing in number, especially in Chinese universities. Investigate them, kick them out of positions of power, disband their organizations, squelch mention of them in media.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  115. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    I should note that the article itself is excellent.

  116. denk says:
    @Icy Blast

    ROFLMAO

    JUng Chang

    Oops, is she related to Gordon ‘China gonna collapse’ Chang ?
    A book is only as good as its citations/ref.,
    In which case that Chang book falls flat entirely, already debunked here multiple times, genius.

    regime in Beijing.

    why dont you speak for yourself moron ?
    I’ll let you in a little secret honey,
    If you dumb fucks had out sourced all your dear leaders in that Washington cesspool, instead of your industries, the good old USA wouldnt have slided into today’s banana republic

    hehehe

    Chinese in California

    WTF has it gotta do with this thread genius ?
    Instead of vomiting Ad hominem and murikkans bullshit, how about actually refuting the author’s arguments, provided of course, you’ve enough grey stuff between your ears !

  117. Icy Blast says:
    @Fitzhenrymac

    First of all, I know the history of Chinese emigration rather well. There were Chinese immigrants in California (1848-1850) before California became a state. (Something about “Sutter’s Mill.”) Most of them came from Fujian province.

    Secondly, as we all know, the Chinese in general are very proud of China and its ancient culture – even those who risked their lives to escape the mainland will profess their love of the homeland.

    Thirdly, those ethnic Chinese who came to California by way of Vietnam or Cambodia or Malaysia, if you make polite conversation with them, will immediately inform you of their heritage. They want to proclaim and establish in your mind their membership in the Han tribe before any conversation proceeds.

    As it turns out, young man, I have spoken to hundreds of Chinese in California. Multitudes come from Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Shenyang, and from a long list of second and third tier cities.

    The first wave of major wave of Chinese immigration (in the recent past) began in the late 70’s, and came from Taiwan. For some reason a businessman there decided the suburb called Monterey Park, in Los Angeles County, was the place to buy a house. Chinese from the mainland followed suit and in a few years the Eastern half of Los Angeles County acquired a Chinese flavor. Arcadia, for example, a rather characterless suburb next to Pasadena, became known as “The Chinese Beverly Hills.” Mandarin Chinese became an integral part of the public school curriculum! That these Chinese speak Mandarin should give you a clue. Mainlanders with money poured in, as they found the real estate cheap. Real estate agents all over Southern California were amazed at their good fortune: These buyers, while discoursing in broken English (or through an interpreter) about something called “feng shui,” paid in cash! Oh the commissions!

    The Bay Area experienced something similar, on a slightly smaller scale. The super-elite Chinese bought houses in Cupertino. Others, perhaps not fabulously wealthy but still affluent, settled in San Jose, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and all the surrounding suburban cities known collectively to some as “Silicon Valley.”

    I could go on and on, but I think there is another reason Mao and his successors have so many willing defenders on this site. After the failure of the Soviet Union became apparent, tens of thousands of Soviet fanboys adopted Mao as their new socialist demigod. This shift took place roughly between the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 and the awarding of the Nobel Prize to Solzhenitsyn in the mid-70’s.

    Socialism at gunpoint (communism) has failed everywhere it has been enforced, resulting only in fear, hunger, and piles of dead bodies. But the aspiring American intellectual, once having adopted the marvellous new Hipster Religion known as Marxism, is too proud to admit it is stupid.

    In other words, you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.

  118. denk says:
    @Agent76

    YOu keep peddling fake news , even after I pointed out CU is a fucking CIA front.

    You and your ilks bitch about the Jews 24×7,
    But where’s the world’s premiere bullshit factory, that’s right, the murikkan led 5liars.

    The worst part is, I find it increasingly difficult to differentiate bet the govn and the people, unfortunately there’s none, you’ and your ilks are the living proof.

    P.S.
    apology to the 15 % decent yanks, gonna be an endangered species.

    • Replies: @Biff
  119. Half-Jap says:
    @Lo

    Our understanding on Nanjing: The western press that was present was silent throughout the period of the alleged horrors. Confiscated journals of Japanese soldiers mention nothing about alleged horrors, except Chiang Kai Shek’s soldiers hid amongst the residents and refugees within the walls, in which upon capture, they were executed. Confiscated records show some Japanese soldiers were arrested and executed for rape or abduction for prostitution. These records are still held by the US in U of Maryland’s naval library. A certain academic sought to find how many half-jap children resulted from the alleged mass rapes, and could not find any Chinese records, then and later. Demographics vary, but the population of Nanjing seems to have increased after the Japanese arrived, instead of decreasing, despite alleged horrors, which one would think would dissuade refugees. Chiang Kai-shek regularly had to execute his soldiers for desertion or its attempt in the form of a small rebellion throughout the war, leaving behind lots of bodies, including upon Japan’s siege of Nanjing. He was also regularly having published propaganda against the Japanese, and records are available in Taiwan’s national library, where one could see that their Public Information Agency, or bureau (forgot exact name) regularly had done so, with some westerners’ assistance. Etc. I wish we had an open and honest dialogue and/or trial about this so we can get over this chapter of history.

  120. denk says:
    @nsa

    Opium war,

    Eight nations alliance,

    Tibet,

    Xinjiang,

    TAM,

    HK,

    Asia pivot,

    SARS, bird flu, swine flu,

    Mh370,

    Terrorism in Apak, Africa….

    Mi6/CIA…

    Lemme guess,…who’s been the Chinese mortal enemy for the past five centuries ?

  121. @Lo

    So what? China is still a developing country. And there are 1.37 billion Chinese, all of them are free to emigrate. Some of them are bound to settle in the West. People in developing countries emigrate to developed countries, not the other way around. China is no exception. Even some developed countries and regions such as South Korea and Taiwan have a lot of emigrants to the U.S. On the other hand, a lot of Chinese also emigrate to other parts of the world, some of them even go to Africa.

  122. @redmudhooch

    Yes Hong Kong is extremely criminal top to bottom of society but I’m not sure how cleaner China is or whether the death penalty does much to eradicate crime there. Maybe they execute the odd big shot now and again but it would seem many others are allowed to operate to keep corruption on the high level. I don’t know about now but when I was in China a while back there was so much fake money in circulation, it was unbelievable, more than any other country I’ve been to. Even banks would issue fake money. And the police were not bothered to investigate reports of fake money unless it involved suitcases full. The problem with the death penalty or stiff sentences for corruption is that it actually doesn’t act as a deterrent in a thoroughly corrupted society as it just removes one corrupt official to be replaced by another. In such a society many of those politicians who campaign to have someone removed for corruption are themselves corrupt and just eying the position they want to fill so they can scam even more money. It’s like the drug pusher on the corner who operates for three days so he can flash some money and gold jewellery to impress his peers, and then gets killed by another pusher who wants his lucrative spot on the street corner to operate for another three days until he is replaced. Politicians and businessmen east and west are no different except the sums of money they operate with are far greater and they tend to keep their positions and operate their scams for far longer, like that Madoff character. But I’m all for filling up stadiums with them, even on a conveyor belt system if need be.

    And for those who think that Singapore is some clean non-corrupt state I’d say you just start looking at their football league and betting syndicates and then work your way up to their banks. It’s certainly a good place from which to run international financial swindles, just like Hong Kong.

  123. “You don’t think it’s a dystopia? To cite just one piece of evidence, Chinese people are desperate to move their money out of the country, and likewise for their children to gain foreign passports or residency.”

    What evidence is that? I live in China and don’t see much signs of such desperation. For instance, if they were so desperate, then as a European man wouldn’t you expect the local women to be queuing up to match up with someone like me? But there’s not a lot of banging on that door.

  124. @Lo

    yes it’s always greener on the other side of the fence. However once there, many Chinese emigres and students find it’s not all its cracked up to be. Increasingly Chinese are returning home because of racism, not being able to find a job that fits their qualifications, poorly paid low class jobs, and often loneliness.

  125. kauchai says:

    1) “…but who remains firmly on the side of the rights of the 23 million citizens of Taiwan to decide their own future.”

    As someone who claims to have lived in taiwan for over 30 years, you are very ignorant of the RoC’s constitution. The 23 million taiwanese DO NOT have the exclusive rights to “decide their own future”. The constitution of the Republic of China states:

    a) That Taiwan is a province of China
    b) That the RoC’s territory encompass the MAINLAND, Qinmen, Mazu, Penghu and taiwan island
    c) That the 1.4 billion people living across the straits are citizens of the RoC
    d) That reunification with the mainland should be pursued with the highest priority

    Therefore, the 1.4 billion chinese in the mainland also have the “rights” to decide taiwan’s future.

    I challenge any secessionists or independent DPP members to amend the constitution and declare taiwan independent. ( Many of them and their empire and jap handlers often have wet dreams about this but they never dared to. Even the high priest of secession, Lee Teng Hui declared it cannot be done. And he dared not even change a single word, or comma or period in the original document that was drafted in Nanjing more than a hundred years ago)

    2)”… the CIA and Japanese intelligence (what kind of WWII fantasy world do you live in?) had absolutely nothing to do with the Sunflower movement and the students’ occupation of the Taiwanese Legislature”

    Are you playing us for stupid? Why would the CIA and jap intelligence dirty their own hands when they can remote control it from the comfort of their air-condition offices in the AIT and the jap consulate? Never mind this, the fact that I mentioned in the above that Lee Teng Hui and his corrupt successor Chen Shui Bian openly declared that taiwan independence is not achievable is not only because they don’t have the support, financial and military muscle to do so. Everytime they tried, their masters from the empire will give these guys a hard knock on the head and reminded them to be good boys. Why? Because the empire loves to use taiwan to prick china as and when they have an itch or two. THIS IS WHY TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE IS NOT POSSIBLE.

    Oh, and talking about “WWII fantasy”, do you know that the empire started to spy on the KMT and CCP even before WWII ended? ( I suppose this is for another rainy day, eh?)

    3) ” not some fringe action funded by foreign intelligence. ”

    Oh no, the empire and the japs know for sure that if the ECFA goes full blown, taiwan will be inevitably drawn tighter and tighter into the mainland’s orbit and the PRC’s and ROC’s goal of reunification will be just a matter of declaration only. And there goes the empire’s leverage against the CCP and much more importantly, a very significant piece of military real estate fronting the western pacific will be under the control of the PLA. Booooom! the empire’s second and third island chains are in smithereens. (Heeee…heeee….heeee)

    4) “…Ma’s ECFA, which he tried to ramrod through the Legislature…”

    This is another piece of pure bullshit. Ma’s party, the KMT held more than 20 public hearings throughout the island in places like schools, universities, town halls and even temple grounds to educate the people on the importance of ECFA. Even the DPP, through one of their legislative members, Duan Yi Kang held no less than 8 public hearings on this.

    5) ” …was already dead on arrival.”

    [MORE]

    Another lie. The KMT had 2/3 majority in the legislature at that time. Public opinion at the time was swayed by taiwanese media which was and still is 80% controlled and loyal to the DPP. (One wonders where they get the money to survive and thrive in taiwan’s small market of 23 million. Wink! wink!) The students were bought and paid for to demonstrate and occupy the legislature. Some have “graduated” to become legislative members, like Huang Guo Chang and some of the mindless ones continued on to become “professional” students still languishing in the campus ever ready to create chaos and mayhem at a moment’s notice.

    Ma ying jeou was gutless and gave in for fear of losing votes. Had he really wanted to “ramrod” the ECFA through, no one in taiwan would have stopped him or the KMT legally. And for this, the KMT was severely punished in the 2016 presidential election and Ma was vilified for his cowardice until today, even by his own party.

    6) ” it was NOT an FTA, it was fundamentally a services agreement, and some of its provisions would have allowed Mainland Chinese service workers (beauticians, car repair mechanics, etc.)”

    This was precisely what should have been done by the ROC and the PRC for reunification. It was to be started with a services agreement first to be followed by the goods later, FTA or not. And like I mentioned above, the empire saw the writings on the wall and scuppered it good and proper. Because of this, taiwan’s economy is now languishing in the 1-2% growth and things doesn’t look good into the future. Soon, with CPTPP and RCEP taiwanese goods will be priced out of the asia pacific market as those CPTPP and RCEP countries enjoy preferential tariffs. Prepare for even more taiwanese to move to the mainland and elsewhere to look for employment. Already, there are 2 million taiwanese working, studying and basically living in the mainland, enjoying similar benefits like the mainlanders.

    7) ” … namely the recovery of national assets swallowed by the KMT during its long, authoritarian one-party rule. These assets belong to the people of Taiwan, ”

    Again this is another deliberate lie. The KMT’s assets were all looted from the mainland. When Chiang kai Shek scurried to taiwan with 2 million of his cronies in tow, he stole tons of gold from the national treasury, 600-700,000 priceless artifacts which are now displayed and stored in Taipei’s Palace Museum and he literally brain drained the mainland of elite technocrats, engineers, scientists, etc. Chiang and his son, Ching Kuo used part of this loot to develop taiwan’s economy, especially the industrial sector. It was not a coincidence that taiwan used to be known as one of asia’s 4 dragons. Chiang Ching Kuo was credited for his efforts to open up and develop the Hsinchu Hitech industrial park which propel taiwan to the fore front of the world hi-tech industry.

    Lets be fair, these assets do not belong to taiwanese and they sure as hell doesn’t belong to the DPP. They belong to the mainland and should be returned to the mainland.

    8) ” …it was IN NO WAY a reflection of pro-unification views from the Taiwanese people.”

    They certainly didn’t buy DPP’s pro-independence either. Only about 20-30% are pro-independence. About 15-20% are for unification. The 60-70% are fence sitters who would swing either way depending on how good the “goodies” are.

    9) “The 92 Consensus, unlike your description of it,was neither hard-won nor a consensus;”

    How could it not be a consensus when both sides fought each other so fiercely prior to 1949 and even after 1949 well into the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s. Even now, there is no peace treaty or even an armistice treaty between the KMT and the CCP. There was no attempts at negotiation and peace until the 92 consensus was signed. The consensus was; both sides agree that there is only ONE china and both sides can stick to their own “definition” of china. And this was enough to open up a plethora of relations between both sides, For the first time, those who were separated from their families over the war were able to reunite, communications and transportation links were established, business relations flourishes, etc, etc.

    10) “The sad statistics you point out about the low salaries of Taiwanese university graduates is more a consequence of misguided policies..”

    You’ve said it but you refused to acknowledge that the DPP government closed its doors to investments from mainland companies which would have boosted taiwan’s economy multi-fold by now had they not torpedoed the ECFA in 2014. Taiwanese by now would have plug into the Belt and Road projects all across the world and reaping billions instead of looking into a bleak future.

    11) ” Perhaps a good suggestion for China would be to point this fact out and stand up for the Taiwanese workers; it would win more hearts and minds than aiming missiles does.”

    The mainland tried to help with ECFA. But stupid taiwanese preferred to listen to their empire and jap masters. What more do you want the mainland to do? When ECFA was mooted, the south koreans were salivating at it. When it was torpedoed, the koreans pleaded with beijing to just give them whatever terms that were mentioned in the ECFA during their nego on the FTA with china. The mainland actually held back the korean FTA in favour of taiwan.

    And as for the missiles, china don’t even need these now. The PLA have much more cheaper and effective rocket artillery to reduce taiwan into smouldering ash piles.

    12) Hong Kong:

    Only 1 million in the streets? What happened to the rest of the 6 million ?

    Do you even know what the extradition bill is all about?

    Have you read the entire article?

    Do you know it has nothing to do with politically offenses?

    Do you know that only criminal offenses are extraditable?

    Do you know that only criminal offenses that carry jail sentences of more than 7 years are extraditable?

    DO YOU EVEN KNOW THAT THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE NOR ANY MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE ARM OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG CANNOT LEGALLY EXTRADITE A CRIMINAL SUSPECT UNTIL HE/SHE HAS BEEN PRESENTED WITH DUE LEGAL PROCESS?

    Do you even realize that HK has existing extradition treaties with the empire, its former colonial master and the empire’s various dogs around the world, except mainland china, taiwan and macau? Why the discrimination?

    Now why is it that gweilos like you always get china wrong?

    13) One country two systems

    Xi Jinpeng never said taiwan’s one country two system will be a copy of hongkong’s or Macau’s. You were right to say that taiwan needs a unique solution. Do you know why? Ok, let me brush off your ignorance just for once ( next time I will charge tuition fee)

    HK and Macau were colonial territories that were violently annexed from China. When the brits started negotiating with beijing for HK’s return, London was still harboring the desire to retain HK on a rented basis. Deng Xiaoping would have none of it. At one point during maggie thatcher’s meeting with deng, things got so heated that old deng threatened to walk into HK and take it over in one afternoon, and reminded thatcher how the PLA fought wars, like in korea. ( I guessed she must have been so shocked after the meeting that she took a tumble on the steps of the Great Hall of the People). The message to the world is: China does not owe Britain anything on HK. If you want to play rough so can I. The fact that One country two systems happened for HK was mainly due to china’s own lack of internal economic infrastructure at that time to facilitate international trade.

    The result is china missed the chance to change HK’s governance structure which was cemented over 150 years with the muck of colonialism. The brits were happy to sit back and collect rentals through their obedient local taipans who were first turned into anglophiles before they were allowed to run HK affairs. Beijing never even make a serious attempt to change this colonial mindset which give rise to today’s street protests. And we are going to see even more radical ones in the future.

    Taiwan by contrast was a completely different kettle of fish. It was not a western colonial outpost. It was already occupied by the KMT from 1949 onwards, albeit with a different political system. In beijing’s eyes, taiwan is another province with a special political entity that it must deal with due respect. (Hence Xi jinpeng mentioned that chinese people do not kill chinese people.)

    One country two systems was actually promulgated by deng xiaoping for taiwan originally. In it he called for reunification and under the umbrella of one china, he offered taiwan almost absolute autonomy. How absolute one may ask? Well, taiwan can retain its ROC label, its own army (provided it is not used against the mainland and vice-versa), taiwan will have a seat at international forums including the UN, etc. He even approached Singapore’s PM Lee Kuan Yew in the 70’s to pass a message to Chiang Ching Kuo to say that he had a plan for china’s reunification and he wish to meet up with this “old classmate” of mine. Upon hearing Lee Kuan Yew’s words, Chiang Ching Kuo just nodded his head and said nothing. Had chiang agreed to talk, taiwan would have elicited more concessions from Deng because taiwan’s economy at that time was 45% of the mainland’s GDP. Taiwan had much more to offer the mainland then. And with that, the RoC and PRC’s dream of early reunification died with chiang.

    Today, taiwan’s GDP is only 4.5% of the mainland’s and slipping. It no longer can demand much. If taiwanese allow their politics to be mired in “independence” illusions” and “freedom” and “democracy”, they and their descendants will face a very bleak future.

    • Replies: @Frankie P
  126. @Lo

    Yes it’s always greener on the other side of the fence. However once there, many Chinese emigres and students find it’s not all its cracked up to be. Increasingly Chinese are returning home because of racism, not being able to find a job that fits their qualifications, poorly paid low class jobs, and often loneliness.

  127. @Jason Liu

    If you are giving pragmatic advice to the CCP, presumably so it can remain as the single party ruling the state without stirring unmanageable opposition, what about making the CCP aristocratic in a modern sense. Perhaps noble, public spirited and meritocratic is an approximation. Ah! Revive the Manarinate do I hear?

    It would have to have ranks so that it could remain large but part of its strength would be that families would want to remain, with their children, within the aristocracy, and getting top academic honours with acceptable character would not be most people’s guarantee of membership of the inner circles. Tests of character (well, probably PC and loyalty in practice) consistently met over years would be typical together with de facto IQ tests to include only those well above average except for those who had earned their entitlement to inclusion over 15 years of impeccable performance.

    Maybe there would be assemblies for which 80 per cent of the population might qualify and could form juries that could remove the membership of CCP members who would otherwise remain aristocrats.

    Moi, I would want hermits still to be honoured 😎

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
    , @peterAUS
  128. @Wizard of Oz

    Yes Australia doesn’t even own our “Waltzing Mathilda” or Ugh boots any more due to America’s interpretation of retroactivity in their patent laws.

    Australia and America both have extradition treaties with Hong Kong. America still has the death penalty. So do several other countries Hong Kong already has treaties with such as India and Japan. The whole thing is just a furphy, an excuse for ‘regime’ change’.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#/media/File:Capital_punishment_in_the_world.svg

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-china-hong-kong-extradition-pacts/

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  129. Anonymous[312] • Disclaimer says:
    @last straw

    ‘But his is not a murder’

    I assume you meant murderer?

    This is silly in the extreme. Mao was an incredibly ruthless individual, to be a revolutionary leader you have to be.

    • Replies: @last straw
  130. @Anonymous

    The West is quite extraordinarily lenient when it comes to financial crimes! The Bankers in London and Washington, with a little help from their friends, wrecked the economy of the western World and would if the could have, wrecked the economy of China as well and what punishment did they receive? Well they got “bailed out”.

    One British policeman on the “Keiser Report” told of how Scotland Yard was ordered to take no action on the multiple crimes they wanted to investigate in connection with the crash of 2007-2008. Considering how many deaths and how much other misery they caused, I think a good case for multiple death sentences could be made. If their organs could be harvested, well, it would make a small amend. (In general I am against the death penalty but exceptional cases……)

  131. @onebornfree

    I Visited China in 1964 and what immediately struck me was that in contrast to the USSR, there were a lot of small businesses filling the gaps in the centrally planned economy. I think it is a widespread fallacy in the West that “The Chinese economy is centrally planned”. Yes, there is central planning that covers major industries and large scale projects, but that is only part of it and the gaps that are left by the central planners are filled in by private enterprises and I think, always have been, since 1949 to the present day.

  132. @Hail

    Unless you define ‘propaganda’ as ‘facts I’ve never heard before,’ could you be more specific and quote something I’ve written that you consider propaganda–and why?

  133. @Escher

    I’ve written about the Uyghurs here: http://www.unz.com/article/uyghurs-political-islam-the-bri/. Take a look and I think you’ll agree that it’s much better sourced and credible than the BBC piece–which fails to mention American sponsorship of terrorism there.

    Says US Ambassador Chas. H. Freeman, “The CIA programs in Tibet, which were very effective in destabilizing it, did not succeed in Xinjiang. There were similar efforts made with the Uyghurs during the Cold War that never really got off the ground. In both cases you had religion waved as a banner in support of a desire for independence or autonomy which is, of course, is anathema to any state.

    Adrian Zenz, author of the BBC piece, is a German who does not cite a single first-hand source and who always spins his stories about China in hilariously negative ways. Nor does he provide the backstory.

    In 2009, twenty-one Wahabbi Uyghurs from Xinjiang[1] massacred hundreds of Han men, women and children. When the Xinjiang court sentenced only six to death and one to life imprisonment enraged relatives of the victims hired forensic specialists to prove that six men could not have killed so many. They spread their message through social media but the Censor quickly blocked them explaining that the court had honored the constitutional guarantee of preferential treatment for minorities and that further discussion would only inflame ethnic tensions. When attacks resumed in 2014 the censor said that publicizing them would rekindle dormant hatreds and the government should address the needs of illiterate, unemployed, young rural Muslims. Thousands of radicalized Uyghur families were required to study and, in some cases, live at vocational schools. Western media called them ‘concentration camps’ and exaggerated the number of detainees–though inspectors from twelve Muslim countries had toured the schools and spoken praised[2] them.

    The biggest problem with militant islamists is that they are poor and, thus, jobless and the main reason for that is that they are illiterate. So, as part of its drive to eliminate terrorism in Xinjiang, China is building schools for them–just as it has done for every poor person in the country.

    Zenz, of course, sees these as reincarnations of Auschwitz: “Campuses have been enlarged, new dormitories built and capacity increased on a massive scale. Significantly, the state has been growing its ability to care full-time for large numbers of children at precisely the same time as it has been building the detention camps.” In other words, China is building boarding schools in rural Xinjiang like the boarding schools it has built in all its rural areas, and also building vocational schools. The horror!

    [1] They may have had outside help, ”
    https://supchina.com/podcast/legendary-diplomat-chas-w-freeman-jr-on-u-s-china-strategy-and-history-part-3/
    [2] No cultural, religious repression of Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang: Pakistan diplomat . Times of India, Jan 24, 2019

  134. @Wizard of Oz

    Did you notice that my sources are Western, not Chinese?

    Why am I obliged to speculate about agents provocateurs, exactly?

    How about addressing my claims in the article instead of inventing feeble ad homs and making statements about my capacity for research–without even reading my published work?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  135. @chrimony

    China’s own economic developed soared when they opened up investments and followed a free market capitalist approach?

    Mao, while conducting three revolutions, grew the economy twice as fast as America during her boom years, and faster than the UK, Germany or Japan during their takeoff years and did so under the most crushing embargoes in world history, while fighting two costly wars with America and winning.

    The economy accelerated when the embargoes were lifted and then only because all Mao’s infrastructure made it possible.

    As to Hong Kong’s poverty rate, apparently you did not look very hard. There are dozens of articles like this online:
    How to break the cycle of child poverty in Hong Kong, where one in five children are poor
    Chenhong Peng and Paul Yip say ensuring all children have an equal chance of formal education is important but not enough. Increasingly, resources must be focused on helping disadvantaged children develop soft skills such as resilience and confidence

    • Replies: @chrimony
  136. @Agent76

    There’s nothing shadowy about the United Front. It has been in the public eye since Mao founded it two generations ago and its mission statement is available on line. That’s why so many Chinese trust their governments and their media

    It’s the West that does shadowy and, of course, does it anonymously and denies that it does it.

    That’s why so few of us trust our governments and our media.

  137. @Wizard of Oz

    China is not the USA. There are no landless laborers.

    And the justice system is the most trusted in the world–by the smartest people in the world.

    • LOL: Wizard of Oz
  138. @Icy Blast

    “The Unknown Mao” by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday is fiction with footnotes. If you’re seriously interested in her book I recommend The Battle for China’s Past, by Australian Prof. Mobo Gao, who knew–and subsequently interviewed–the people she quotes.

    Chang, like all emigré elites since Ancient Athens, and despite their utter failure when they had the opportunity, views those who replaced her class with great bitterness. Her father was among the most senior government officials and she was raised by a wet-nurse with a nanny, maid, gardener and chauffeur in a walled compound and educated in a school for officials’ children.

    Horrified[1] by a brief stint in the countryside, “Mao intended me to live the rest of my life as a peasant,” she received a generous scholarship to study in the UK (years before her father was rehabilitated), a distant dream for millions of abler students.

    She assumes that peasant students must be ‘semi-literate’ who have ‘little aptitude’ for scholarship while she clearly deserved the best. Though she was far from being the victim of a brutal regime her other book, Wild Swans (which, oddly, contradicts the narrative of The Unknown Story) was greeted universally as a first-hand account of great personal suffering by Western academics and reviewers. Clearly, they shared her terror of being reduced, even briefly, to the level of ordinary people.

    As for “Mao’s Great Famine” by Frank Dikotter, I have dissected its nonsense myself, here: http://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered-part-two-whose-famine/

    I lived in CA for forty years and still have many Chinese friends there. I would always ask newcomers “Why are you here?” and I always got the same answer: “Do you know how hard it is just to be an ordinary person in China? How competitive?” One of them, Puzhong Yao, wrote an account of how he got there:

    “It was the summer of 2000. I was 15, and I had just finished my high school entrance exam in China. I had made considerable improvements from where I started in first grade, when I had the second- worst grades in the class and had to sit at a desk perpendicular to the blackboard so that the teacher could keep a close eye on me. I had managed to become an average student in an average school. My parents by then had reached the conclusion that I was not going anywhere promising in China and were ready to send me abroad for high school. Contrary to all expectations, however, I got the best mark in my class and my school. The exam scores were so good that I ranked within the top ten among more than 100,000 students in the whole city. My teacher and I both assumed the score was wrong when we first heard it.

    “As a consequence, I got into the best class in the best school in my city, and thus began the most painful year of my life. My newfound confidence was quickly crushed when I saw how talented my new classmates were. In the first class, our math teacher announced that she would start from chapter four of the textbook, as she assumed, correctly, that most of us were familiar with the first three chapters and would find it boring to go through them again. Most of the class had been participating in various competitions in middle school and had become familiar with a large part of the high school syllabus already. Furthermore, they had also grown to know each other from those years of competitions together. And here I was, someone who didn’t know anything or anyone, surrounded by people who knew more to begin with, who were much smarter, and who worked just as hard as I did. What chance did I have?

    “During that year, I tried very hard to catch up: I gave up everything else and even moved somewhere close to the school to save time on the commute, but to no avail. Over time, going to school and competing while knowing I was sure to lose became torture. Yet I had to do it every day. At the end-of-year exam, I scored second from the bottom of the class—the same place where I began in first grade. But this time it was much harder to accept, after the glory I had enjoyed just one year earlier and the huge amount of effort I had put into studying this year. Finally, I threw in the towel, and asked my parents to send me abroad. Anywhere else on this earth would surely be better.

    “So I came to the UK in 2001, when I was 16 years old. Much to my surprise, I found the UK’s exam-focused educational system very similar to the one in China. What is more, in both countries, going to the “right schools” and getting the “right job” are seen as very important by a large group of eager parents. As a result, scoring well on exams and doing well in school interviews—or even the play session for the nursery or pre-prep school—become the most important things in the world. Even at the university level, the undergraduate degree from the University of Cambridge depends on nothing else but an exam at the end of the last year.

    “On the other hand, although the UK’s university system is considered superior to China’s, with a population that is only one-twentieth the size of my native country, competition, while tough, is less intimidating. For example, about one in ten applicants gets into Oxbridge in the UK, and Stanford and Harvard accept about one in twenty-five applicants. But in Hebei province in China, where I am from, only one in fifteen hundred applicants gets into Peking or Qinghua University.
    Still, I found it hard to believe how much easier everything became. I scored first nationwide in the GCSE (high school) math exam, and my photo was printed in a national newspaper. I was admitted into Trinity College, University of Cambridge, once the home of Sir Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, and Prince Charles.

    “I studied economics at Cambridge, a field which has become more and more mathematical since the 1970s. The goal is always to use a mathematical model to find a closed-form solution to a real-world problem. Looking back, I’m not sure why my professors were so focused on these models. I have since found that the mistake of blindly relying on models is quite widespread in both trading and investing—often with disastrous results, such as the infamous collapse of the hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management. Years later, I discovered the teaching of Warren Buffett: it is better to be approximately right than precisely wrong. But our professors taught us to think of the real world as a math problem.

    “The culture of Cambridge followed the dogmas of the classroom: a fervent adherence to rules and models established by tradition. For example, at Cambridge, students are forbidden to walk on grass. This right is reserved for professors only. The only exception is for those who achieve first class honors in exams; they are allowed to walk on one area of grass on one day of the year.
    The behavior of my British classmates demonstrated an even greater herd mentality than what is often mocked in American MBAs. For example, out of the thirteen economists in my year at Trinity, twelve would go on to join investment banks, and five of us went to work for Goldman Sachs.”

    [1] China’s Comprador Capitalism Is Coming Home. By James Heartfield. Journal of Radical Political Economics. June 1, 2005

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
    , @Wizard of Oz
  139. @J. Zete

    I’m using international poverty standards: half the median income, as this SCMP article does:

    How to break the cycle of child poverty in Hong Kong, where one in five children are poor
    Chenhong Peng and Paul Yip say ensuring all children have an equal chance of formal education is important but not enough. Increasingly, resources must be focused on helping disadvantaged children develop soft skills such as resilience and confidence…https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/2095321/how-break-cycle-child-poverty-hong-kong-where-one-five

  140. @Wizard of Oz

    All functional states are single party states, it’s just that some permit factions within their single party and some do not.

    America does permit capitalist factions, China does not permit communist factions.

    Which of those two countries is eating the other’s lunch: the one that permits factions or the one that does not?

    Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

    This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

    The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

    Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

    It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

    There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

    The period when no party divisions existed in United States (a decade after 1816) became known as Era of Good Feelings.

    Some of what Washington conveyed to his countrymen about the divisiveness of political parties reveals the president’s genuine wisdom:

    “Parties become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion”. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
    Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

    President Washington expressed genuine concern in that “the alternate domination” of one political party over another, thereby allowing one party to enjoy temporary power over the government that would use it to obtain revenge on the other. He seriously felt that this tendency toward atrocities directed at the party out of power “…is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism.”

    Washington understood what America would become if “a wise people” did not do their duty to discourage and restrain the over-zealous development of political parties.

    The period when no party divisions existed in United States (a decade after 1816) became known as Era of Good Feelings.

    Read more at http://www.commdiginews.com/history-and-holidays/george-washington-warning-america-against-political-parties-63046/#jbEwHP4X9MVmJWB8.99

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
    , @Wizard of Oz
  141. It seems to me that while it is probably true that the behaviour of mainland Chinese is often not up to international standards, e.g. allowing small children to shit in the street, pushing and shoving in queues and talking too loudly in groups, it is also true that in many respects China has changed and improved to an astonishing extent in the last 70 years and there is no sign that it is slowing down. The Chinese Government has this year launched a nationwide drive to improve, update and expand public toilet facilities. When the Chinese government “launches a drive” it usually means results.

    The Social scoring system, coupled to facial recognition systems, sounds to Western ears like a horribly Orwellian idea, but I can imagine that it will have a big effect on precisely those things that Lloyd complains about and on safety at work, food safety, safety of medicines, unhygienic behaviour, bad manners, queue-jumping, noisy groups, bad driving and jay-walking.

    Incidentally, is the shit-in-the-streets problem in LA, caused by lack of free public toilets? Or is it that fpts exist but no one wants to use them?

    • Agree: Godfree Roberts
  142. denk says:

    HK ‘democratic activists’, with their friends in
    high place the Washington cesspool.

  143. Frankie P says:
    @kauchai

    Use the reply button or people may miss your responses.

    1. So you and I are in agreement with most Taiwanese people that the ROC Constitution is an anachronistic throwback that needs to be replaced. The farcical idea that the ROC encompasses the Mainland and indeed, all of your a,b,c,d above are not part of the public’s consciousness. You dare any politician to try to change it and declare independence? It seems to me that you, unlike President Xi and most of the Communist party, would LIKE to see China attack Taiwan and have Chinese kill Chinese. Look for the change to come in the form of referendums, not legislative changes to the Constitution.

    2-6. I repeat, you are completely unhinged. The Japanese are US poodles, and they have no intelligence assets in Taiwan. You make yourself look stupid. It wasn’t that the Empire saw that ECFA would draw Taiwan closer into China’s embrace and took action, it was that the people of Taiwan saw it, and THEY acted.
    If, as you say, Ma could have passed the law through legislative action, why didn’t he? The people were up in arms, public opinion completely supported the students and opposed ECFA, and Ma backed down. The fact that you think he should have persisted in the face of strong public opposition says something about you, not Ma.

    7. In my view, there is no doubt that the art and historical relics at the National Palace Museum belong to the people of China. That said, you are again completely wrong about the KMT’s ill-gotten assets. The KMT ran a one-party system, and they gobbled up ALL the properties of the Japanese. They sold property and used the proceeds to fund party organizations. The economic success you speak of was driven by Taiwanese. In the early years the KMT set up the foundation with China Steel, China Shipbuilding, and other massive government contract enterprises, but the subsequent Taiwan economic miracle was locally driven.

    8. We are not too far apart here, although I don’t see the majority as fence sitters who would swing either way. They would prefer the status quo, as I said, which is tantamount to independence. I hope that a resolution can be made, and China and Taiwan will be joined in some kind of federation.

    9. Only KMT officials claim the Consensus said “each with its own interpretation”. That phrase seems to have disappeared from the narrative from the Chinese side. Perhaps you can explain.

    10-11. Your narrative ends with ECFA, and you don’t continue to the present. The foreign labor issue IS a good opportunity for China to show concern for Taiwanese workers. China has given Taiwanese investment incentives in businesses in the Mainland. In March 2018 they announced the 31 incentives, enabling Taiwanese companies and individuals to receive preferential treatment when investing in China. These are the actions that will result in changed perceptions in Taiwanese. You act as if Taiwan rejected ECFA and now can’t come to the party.

    12. A million in the streets is huge. Regarding HK, this is the only issue I raised. Christ almighty! I said nothing about the extradition bill, and you still have to release a rant as if I attacked it!
    I know what it is, and I read Godfree’s article.

    13. I don’t need lessons on One Country Two Systems from some Wu mao commenter who can’t keep his cool. You’re right, I was right about Taiwan needing a special solution, and I’m fully aware why. I was also RIGHT about Chinese officials, even President Xi, being reluctant to take bold steps to resolve the situation. They’re afraid that the kind of creative solution necessary will be interpreted as being soft on Taiwan. I was RIGHT that China is the regional superpower and should be more proactive in engaging with the people of Taiwan through the leaders they elect, even if, heaven forbid!, it means talking with the DPP.

    Get your brain out of the box and think creatively. Anything but a peaceful resolution will be a catastrophe for China as well as Taiwan.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @kauchai
  144. denk says:
    @Frankie P

    The fact is that at least 85% of the Taiwanese people are happy with the status quo, which in reality is de facto independence

    YOu forget to mention….thats exactly the way PRC wants it too.

    PLA would act iff TW choose the independence path.

    I’ve pointed out this fact many times here.

    IOW, if you care for TW, the best way is to leave them alone AND, tell your psychopathic arsonists in DC to fuck off from TW straits.

  145. Yee says:

    Frankie P,

    “Many feel that the control of information exercised by the Communist party keeps the people of China totally in the dark. Believe me, they are watching.”

    LOL… Sure we’re watching HongKong and Taiwan. But how did you come to the conclusion that we’re in the dark?

    Actually, many Chinese believe Western Media distort the world far more than Chinese media ever could. Chinese netizens generally agree “中宣战五渣” (Chinese ministry of propaganda has poor fighting capabilities), in comparison to Western ones. The very fact that you believe you are in the “free” world tells me who is more in the dark.
    ——————————-

    Soft Power: The U.S. Cultural Offensive and Japanese Intellectuals
    Takeshi MATSUDA

    “By the end of World War II, the U.S. government had recognized how important a cultural dimension of foreign policy was to accomplishing its broad national objectives.
    ……
    President Harry Truman clearly sensed the advent of a new age. On August 31, 1945, he proclaimed that “the nature of present-day foreign relations makes it essential for the United States to maintain information activities abroad as an integral part of the conduct of our foreign affairs.”
    ————————-

    There’re some very interesting articles on Chinese Internets explaining in details how the US castrated Japan and Germany culturally. Chinese people probably know more about the world than you people in the “free world”, because CIA lies can’t poison us as thoroughly …

    • Replies: @frankie p
  146. Half-Jap says:
    @Fitzhenrymac

    As I stated elsewhere, the article is excellent as is. But his responses tend to be mere hearsay. He loves his ‘trust in government’ survey or ‘direction going’ survey to support the CPC, but such is a ludicrous base to support a claim for what is a wholly owned country by a single political party, with unfortunate consequences for challengers, perceived or serious.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  147. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    As stated often, the US and China are mere evil twins.

  148. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Indeed. As great and truthful as Iris Chang’s ‘Rape of Nanking.’
    Almost seems like some entitly wants us to be hating one another for as long as possible.

  149. @Fitzhenrymac

    I don’t blame you for having an imperfect knowledge of IP law but excuse me if I doubt that “interpretation of retroactivity in their patent laws has anything to do with Waltzing Matilda which, if in any way affected by IP law, would be a matter of Copyright. Ugh boots aren’t subject of registered design law or Trade Mark law in Australia but generic. However, it seems that A litigious American company called Decker has registered UGG in some Trade Mark design in most countries. Apparently Ugh/UGG’s generic status might have been established if Ugh boots originated in Saudi Arabia and Ugh was an Arabic word but American courts seem to distinguish the case of claimed Anglophone generics. I think your reference to retrospectivity could find me some support in what I have heard called the “Disney amendment” obtained in the usual way from Congress to hold on to Donald Duck Copyright for another 20 profitable years. It seems to have worked its way through in part to Australia which, after the misbegotten “Free Trade” Agreement with the US some 15 years ago, extended the already more than adequate life plus 50 years to life plus 70 – Not quite the 90 in America. I don’t think you will find that there is a problem with Waltzing Matilda anywhere though I suppose Paterson’s estate might have sold the Copyright to the words in America when he died in 1941 and that Copyright might have been extended by the “Disney Amendment” till 2031 in the US!! And the music mutatis mutandis.

    I think the UR’s Wally can be assured that quoting Mein Kampf at length won’t get him into Copyright trouble.

    All of which reminds me what a lot of expensive fraud on the public interest there is in all IP law except perhaps Patents. Trade Marks in particular are rotten in conception unless the original manufacturer is still in production. There must be a better way of giving people some protection when they rely on reputation.

    As to those extradition treaties between countries which do and don’t have the death penalty, it reminds of the typical humbug that one gets from Attorneys-General and Justice Ministers when one suggests that they should exhibit greater backbone in favour of fair trials and non extradition. Why? Because their claim to be carrying out a duty mandated by treaty is vitiated by the invariable condition imposed by Australia that there will be no death penalty.

  150. Yee says:

    Wizard of Oz,

    “Are there no landless labourers?”

    Not the poorest. As I said before, the poorest people in China are peasants. If you’re born in rural, you have land.

    City residents has no lands, but they can get $20 a day washing dishes in restaurants. There’s always some jobs in the cities.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  151. skrik says:
    @peterAUS

    the purpose of spending time/effort/energy on this site is trying to find a reasonable alternative to the paradigm we live in

    Me: Haw. And kindly tell us, Sherlock, once you find your putative Nirvana-system, how do you propose to acquire/implement it? [Tip: In Aus, as in most of the ‘democratic’ West, reps don’ t usually work for the wishes of their voters – rather, quite the opposite – just one proof = electricity privatisations.]

    Reminds me of the Irish “Arr, you can’t get there from here!”

  152. @Godfree Roberts

    Certainly some considerable research has been done. Do you have any assistance? Who pays you? Or is it entirely altruistic improvement of benighted Westerners understanding of China?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  153. @Godfree Roberts

    I took you seriously when you said
    “As for “Mao’s Great Famine” by Frank Dikotter, I have dissected its nonsense myself, here: http://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered-part-two-whose-famine”

    I clicked on the link and searched for Dikotter – even just Dikot- but got not a single strike. No point by point refutation – nada. All I found was your straw man defence of Mao as though the critical accusation was that he intended to kill millions by starvation.

    I do not intend to make a study of Mao beyond what I have picked up over many years of miscellaneous reading from Edgar Snow on. I still hope that threads initiated by your contributions may correct any serious misapprehensions I may be under as I have been taking China very seriously since before I passed first year Chinese in a Summer crash course at major university about 30 years ago. (And I repeat often that anyone who doesn’t speak Chinese in 20 years time will be like Someone who doesn’t speak English today). However, I remain still of the impression that Mao was a ruthlessly cruel man, devoted to the efficacy of violence, even sadistic and his hero status amongst many I regard as totally irrelevant because history provides many examples of the masses swooning in adoration of psychopaths.

    You also praise Mao as the master of logistics which actually draws attention to the harshness and incompetence of his Great Leap Forward because it is generally reckoned that fewer than one in ten of those who started on the Ling March survived to the end. (You would have been on more secure ground perhaps in praising the efficiency of his purging tactics as evidenced by his “Let a thousand flowers bloom” campaign).

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  154. denk says:
    @Frankie P

    The Hong Kong protests have deep support among the population

    Thats your pov, peddled by the ‘activists’ themselves , unsubstantiated.

    Lets talk facts….
    HK’S protestors leaders have deep support from the Washington cesspool, [fixed]

    Who’s Martin Lee, the gawd father of HK
    ‘democrazy’ movement….

    http://web.archive.org/web/20050211144655/http://www.asiaweek.com/asiaweek/97/0502/ed1.html

    Readers will notice that Russia under Yeltsin was spared the ‘human rights’ charade, whereas Russia under PUtin is demonised 24×7, just like China.

    • Replies: @frankie p
  155. @Godfree Roberts

    Your attempted sleight of hand doesn’t quite wipe out the possibility of making meaningful distinctions while using “party in the everyday sense of an organisation made up of volunteers who are associating to contest elections which will give control of executive and legislative functions of government. At best your opening statement proffers the near truism that a state is unlikely to keep its citizens peaceful and sufficiently content if it’s executive and legislative, not to say judicial functions, are being constantly disrupted by people either totally at odds over principles of good government or because some are systematically and permanently excluded by manoeuvring seen as grossly unfair. Some degree of consensus is needed or it requires a country to be at least quite rich (or have outlets for the disgruntled abroad). Interesting what keeps Spain together, or Switzerland but then it occurs to me that the Scottish Nationalists really test your apothegm, as do the NI Unionists. At least those parties can to some extent be bought….

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  156. Tell US how the protests are a product of anything given or done by (the support) of the Washington cesspool?

  157. @Yee

    I did the obvious and Googled “are there landless labourers in China”. Google didn’t seem very interested in “landless” but more so in surplus rural labour which at least connotes not enough land.

    Here is one example:

    China’s dramatic economic growth during the past three decades is characterised by rapid
    industrialisation that was fuelled by a large pool of rural surplus labour in the agricultural
    sector. The large scale movement of labour from the agricultural to the industrial and
    services sectors witnessed in recent years raises pertinent questions about its
    sustainability: is there still a pool of surplus labourers in rural China? If there is, how
    large is that pool and how long can it last? These questions are hotly debated in China.
    The present study contributes to that discussion by providing new quantitative
    information about the size of the surplus labour. Applying a dynamic general equilibrium
    model of China’s economy the paper estimates the size of the rural labour surplus from
    1997-2005 and forecast its size from 2006 -2015. Alternative simulation estimates the
    effect on the size of the rural labour surplus under the assumption of accelerated
    improvement of labour productivity in China’s agricultural sector.

    I found somewhere the figure of about 10 per cent for the rural landless but there is no doubt that the bigger problem would be just not having the right to farm enough, or good enough, land. I haven’t time to follow up this further but a 2015 article about commercial farming included the following in a table:

    ‘Oops! It only came out in code. It said “Proletarian Farmworkers” and in another column “Landless, work on company land as employees”.

  158. Rollmop says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Most Europeans in Hong Kong don’t know sh*t about the place and their opinions and experiences are worthless. I’m an “expat” in HK and practically every other expat I know is uninformed, culturally isolated, and forms their opinions on the basis of cliches and stereotypes. Most of these hopeless chancers should simply be deported to their home countries, where they would probably be on welfare.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  159. Yee says:

    Wizard of Oz,

    “It said “Proletarian Farmworkers” and in another column “Landless, work on company land as employees”.

    The farm workers are actually landlords who lease their land to the commercial companies and then get a wage to work for the company too.

    This is a very simple legal matter, China doesn’t allow selling farm land to private owners. So no company owns land, and no peasant will be landless.

  160. Anon[134] • Disclaimer says:

    Don’t forget about Open Society Foundations which has been very active in HK, especially in HK University. Brian Patrick Kern, a white guy who was seen directing the protesters against the HK police is known to be an associate of Open Society Foundations.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Society_Foundations

    Open Society Foundations, formerly the Open Society Institute, is an international grantmaking network founded by business magnate George Soros. Open Society Foundations financially support civil society groups around the world, with a stated aim of advancing justice, education, public health and independent media.

    This is the same Soros who tried to raid the local currency and stock market in 1998 .

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Asian_financial_crisis

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/economy/article/1906325/how-beijing-and-hong-kong-sent-billionaire-george-soros-packing

    How Beijing and Hong Kong sent billionaire George Soros packing the last time he attacked Asian markets. The history of how George Soros has affected currencies and economies in Asia is remembered with some bitterness

    George Soros says Xi Jinping is the world’s “most dangerous opponent” of open societies

    Tracing his critique of authoritarian governments to his own childhood under Nazi occupation in Hungary, Soros, who is now 88, urged the Trump administration to take a harder stance on China.

    https://qz.com/1533031/davos-george-soros-calls-xi-jinping-a-dangerous-opponent-of-open-societies/

  161. @Wizard of Oz

    Google home ownership in China and compare the rates of the top 10 economies of the world right now.

  162. @Anonymous

    This is silly in the extreme. Mao was an incredibly ruthless individual, to be a revolutionary leader you have to be.

    So Washington is a murderer too?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  163. @Rollmop

    You obviously know too many FILTH! I used to stay with a friend who was head of the Asia-Pacific arm of a major ratings agency or with a cousin who had by the time I stayed with him retired from a bank to chair a Hong King based water utility which gave him a house on the Peak. Then there was the cousin who ran a major media company for several years based in Hong Kong. And the Chinese doctor who was a member of LegCo but had a flat in London. And…. For all that, apart from the businessman who had served on a jury I can’t vouch for any of them knowing anything like what say the editor of the biggest local Chinese language newspaper would know about Hong Kong and maybe you somehow know. So what the FILTH know I can accept as worthless.

  164. @Wizard of Oz

    Because I considered the rule of law to be utter bullshit in the western countries too. Case in point, the affluenza teen case. Google it. Also, even the supreme court in the USA has been perverted by party politics. It is now an instrument of both parties furthering whatever the current goals of each party depending on who has the majority of the life long justices in their pocket.

    The only thing that would tick off the CCP is any kind of organized dissent aiming at over throwing the current Chinese govt. But isn’t that the norm for any govt/country? Or are you one of those that is still stuck with retarded ideologies? Those evil, evil communists, how dare they improved the Chinese lives! That can only happen in a democracy!

    I find it comical that there are still retards that still consider the Chinese govt as a communist one. State control yes, but communism? Come on. One party ruled China vs two party ruled USA. Omfg, we are so advanced!!!!!!!!!!!

    Of course the onus of proof is on the one who first brings up a theory. Especially for loaded ones. You can’t be serious in thinking that I would entertain such theories without a lengthy write up from you to support it. A possibility is not an answer. It is just a possibility.

    When every single recorded interview of a protester show me how ignorant they are of their protest, yes, i cannot help but think that they are stupid without out the ability to think for themselves. As to ulterior motives, I refer to your comment that I reply to.

    A question, why do you think this extradition bill is ccp’s attempt at accelerating unification?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  165. @Astuteobservor II

    I only got as far as

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes/

    but it’s very interesting. It’s hard to believe that it covers all the peasant households unless the tenure of agricultural holdings has been radically altered, but still, quite different from the contemporary US. (Who was the Margaret Thatcher of China who started the sell off of state owned housing on favourable terms?). Of course the dwellings are about a third the size of the average house in Australia which is another point of difference. One wonders whether the One Child policy as well as the likelihood of parents helping with money but later moving in was a significant factor which may now change as housing and educating two or three children may become more common.

    Still, the most striking difference from the modern West is the Chinese personal saving rate. One of the contrasts with the West, for the moment, that this draws attention to, is the desperation of Western governments to get their citizens consuming. It doesn’t look as though China has moved far in that direction even if the massive construction boom to get through the Global Financial Crisis (saving Australia too) is now mostly past.

  166. frankie p says:
    @Yee

    Is there some genetic factor that keeps people like you, Yee and Kuachai from replying to comments directly? It really does facilitate interaction with the people you want to respond to. Try it.

    “Many feel that the control of information exercised by the Communist party keeps the people of China totally in the dark. Believe me, they are watching.”

    LOL… Sure we’re watching HongKong and Taiwan. But how did you come to the conclusion that we’re in the dark?

    This is either a serious reading comprehension issue or a poster boy for the word “contradiction” or
    矛盾.

    “I” didn’t come to the conclusion that you’re in the dark. The sentence reads “Many feel”. The subsequent sentence gives my own view. I didn’t come to the conclusion that you’re in the dark.

    Actually, many Chinese believe Western Media distort the world far more than Chinese media ever could.

    I too believe that Western Media distort the world more than Chinese media ever could. In addition, the Chinese understand that the media in China is controlled, while the western people muddle along with the concept that they are the beneficiaries of a “free press”.

    The very fact that you believe you are in the “free” world tells me who is more in the dark.

    Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. As I mentioned in my comment to Kuachai, I’m in Taiwan. Please point out where I said I was in the free world, while those in China aren’t. To quote Kishore Mahbubani from his youtube video (not sure if you free guys can watch that, but don’t get me started on youtube and Google, I’m a user but not a great lover) “America’s Fundamental Misunderstanding of China”, “every year, 120 million Chinese……leave China freely as tourists. Amazingly, 120 million Chinese return to China freely. Now if China was a communist gulag Stalinist state, would you go back to China”. Yee, you have misunderstood me. I’m not an enemy of China. I’m an enemy of Empire. That said, I’m also not a 100% supporter of ALL of China’s actions. I’ll leave that to you, Kuachai and Godfree Roberts. I believe in personal morals, values and opinions. I’ve yet to meet a political party, politician or even other human being whose morals, values and opinions match mine completely. To sum up, I believe that China has done very well, President Xi and the Chinese Communist Party have taken advantage of globalism and pulled more people out of poverty than at any other time in human history, and these leaders continue to act for the benefit of their nation and people, as leaders SHOULD. I only wish American and European leaders did the same. Putin does.

    Regarding life in Taiwan, I’m not complaining. I find the living environment very acceptable and friendly here. I understand that the Taiwanese people are informed by Chinese culture. They understand that, too, even if they are caught up in what they see as a political conflict with a neighboring giant intent on gobbling them up. That’s why I call for creative solutions, and the solutions must originate from China.

    Frankie P

    • Replies: @last straw
  167. frankie p says:
    @denk

    I agree with you that the Empire would love to see a Yeltsin-type come into power in China so that the financial sector and the corporatocracy could plunder China’s resources. Therefore, the current government in China, like that in Russia under Putin. will continue to be demonized 24/7 by the western media.

    That doesn’t mean that there wasn’t deep support for the HK protests among the people. I don’t need the activists to peddle their story to gain my point of view, I HAVE EYES. Unless of course you are saying that perhaps 500,000 or 700,000 of those people were out in the streets IN SUPPORT OF the extradition law. And please don’t release a rant about the actual bill. I’m not commenting on the bill, I’m just commenting on the protests. 1 out of 7 were on the streets. Isn’t that deep support?

    • Replies: @last straw
    , @denk
  168. peterAUS says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Interesting ideas.
    Especially

    ….noble, public spirited and meritocratic is an approximation….

    and

    …Tests of character…consistently met over years

    with

    ….together with de facto IQ tests to include only those well above average except for those who had earned their entitlement to inclusion over 15 years of impeccable performance.

    And, of course

    ….assemblies for which 80 per cent of the population might qualify and could form juries that could remove the membership of CCP members who would otherwise remain aristocrats.

    Wouldn’t mind the same around here either. First three quotes in particular.

  169. peterAUS says:
    @Frankie P

    My Taiwanese friend would agree.
    Except with:

    I hope that a resolution can be made, and China and Taiwan will be joined in some kind of federation.

    of course.

  170. @frankie p

    Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. As I mentioned in my comment to Kuachai, I’m in Taiwan. Please point out where I said I was in the free world, while those in China aren’t. To quote Kishore Mahbubani from his youtube video (not sure if you free guys can watch that, but don’t get me started on youtube and Google, I’m a user but not a great lover) “America’s Fundamental Misunderstanding of China”, “every year, 120 million Chinese……leave China freely as tourists. Amazingly, 120 million Chinese return to China freely. Now if China was a communist gulag Stalinist state, would you go back to China”.

    First of all, nowadays Chinese tourists make almost 150 million international trips a year. Secondly, anyone can watch youtube in China by using a VPN. A few years ago, I heard there were plenty of free VPNs provided by western NGOs with the specific purpose of allowing more Chinese to jump the Great Firewall. Finally, there are many Chinese students overseas who have families and friends in China. So I serious doubt mainland Chinese are “in the dark”.

  171. @frankie p

    That doesn’t mean that there wasn’t deep support for the HK protests among the people. I don’t need the activists to peddle their story to gain my point of view, I HAVE EYES. Unless of course you are saying that perhaps 500,000 or 700,000 of those people were out in the streets IN SUPPORT OF the extradition law. And please don’t release a rant about the actual bill. I’m not commenting on the bill, I’m just commenting on the protests. 1 out of 7 were on the streets. Isn’t that deep support?

    Do you know that Hong Kong police only counted 338,000 protesters while the protest organizers claimed 2 million? Also, at least 850,000 Hongkongers signed a petition in support of HK government’s extradition bill. Hong Kong media reported, but western MSM did not.

  172. Yee says:

    frankie p,

    LOL… I believe you live in Taiwan, because Taiwanese and HongKonger will inevitably mention Facebook or YouTube when talking about the mainland.

    No, I don’t use VPN to watch YouTube or Facebook. What for? To watch CIA funded channels? There’re already more than enough videos on Chinese platforms to last any person several lifetimes.

    If you don’t believe the US will fund propagandas on all kinds of media platforms, I suggest you listen to President Truman again, “…essential for the United States to maintain information activities…”

    I have no reason to think the policy has changed.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Frankie P
  173. @Astuteobservor II

    We don’t seem to be speaking the same language. And I didn’t even say that I thought the extradition bill was the CCP’s attempt at accelerating unification!!

    The concept of “rule of law” that you don’t believe in has nothing to do with the historical and philosophical meaning which you could Google for as I have for your affluence teen case. This definition isn’t bad:

    “the restriction of the arbitrary exercise of power by subordinating it to well-defined and established laws.
    ‘when military dictators fall, the democrats who follow them must try to restore the rule of law’ ”

    That the *legal system” in practice is not great at managing adolescence – or a lot of other human problems – has bugger all to do with free people’s willingness to subject themselves to a jurisdiction where the single irrevocable ruling party is above the judiciary.

    I observe the way the legal systems work in the US with some horror but you write as though one can realistically deal in absolutes instead of recognising degrees and types of shortfalls from the ideal. I, though an atheist, regard the conviction of Cardinal George Pell of sexual offences in a recent jury trial here as an appalling miscarriage of justice, but it doesn’t count at all as an argument against the traditional notion of rule of law.

    I am not sure of the relevance to anything I have written of most of your comment but I do get a hint that you were trying to misuse the notion of onus of proof in relation to my pointing out the obvious, namely that the greatest beneficiary of the vandalism of LegCo would be the CCP. (I should perhaps have added as alternative instigators rich CCP cronies in LegCo). When the process is an investigation rather than a trial there is no onus of proof, only intelligent speculation and reasoning with, in this like many cases, prominent attention to the question cui bono.

    • Replies: @anon
  174. @last straw

    “counted”?

    Links please to those Hong Kong media reports.

  175. @Yee

    It’s one think to be a patriotic Chinese citizen who is happy with his government but you do let yourself down as a commenter by saying something as silly as “CIA funded channels” which, apart from not being true in any ordinary sense, would only matter if the funding was for particular pieces of lying propaganda which, since you don’t watch Facebook or YouTube, you must think you know about because your granny warned you about them when you were a child.

  176. kauchai says:
    @Frankie P

    1) So you and I are in agreement with most Taiwanese people that the ROC Constitution is an anachronistic throwback that needs to be replaced. The farcical idea that the ROC encompasses the Mainland and indeed, all of your a,b,c,d above are not part of the public’s consciousness. You dare any politician to try to change it and declare independence? It seems to me that you, unlike President Xi and most of the Communist party, would LIKE to see China attack Taiwan and have Chinese kill Chinese. Look for the change to come in the form of referendums, not legislative changes to the Constitution.

    I never agree with you on the ROC constitution being an “anachronistic throwback”. I merely pointed to your ignorance of the fact. This “anachronistic throwback” is your own wet dream because taiwanese by and large do not see it that way. They are largely ambivalent about it because the younger set of taiwanese from 30 downwards have been deliberately brain washed by the revised school curriculum that no longer teaches chinese history as they have done in the past. The DPP from Lee Teng Hui downwards are on a campaign to wipe out all traces of chinese culture in taiwan and replace it with a mish-mash of western and jap cultures.

    As for the pro-independence referendum, the DPP and various other factions have been dying to do it since Lee Teng Hui. To-date, none of these secessionists dare to even propose it much less carry it out. Why?

    a) They know they will lose very badly as only about 20-30% are pro-independence. In last year’s local elections there was a referendum to change taiwan’s official name in the coming Tokyo olympics from Chinese Taipei to Taiwan and it was soundly defeated by a wide margin. This was seen by local political pundits and even the KMT as a sure sign that taiwan independence have no future despite the fake news spewing out of the empire’s and the DPP’s echo chambers. Taiwanese also know which side their bread is buttered on as 41% of their GDP is reliant on trade with the mainland. The DPP’s smoke has clouded your eyes.

    b) Their empire masters would never allow it because it would drag in the empire to sacrifice their precious sons and daughters for taiwan in the event of a PLA attack ( assuming the empire is willing). Much more importantly, as I have mentioned in my previous reply, the empire would lose big because their intelligence assets will be gone. Their 2nd and 3rd island chains will be gone. They would have no more leverage to prick china when the itch strikes.

    By the way, when and if taiwan declares independence, it will no longer be chinese anymore. So, messrs Xi and his colleagues in ZhongNanHai will have no remorse to wipe out foreign occupiers on a piece of chinese soil. So, “chinese do not kill chinese” does not apply anymore, get it?

    2) I repeat, you are completely unhinged. The Japanese are US poodles, and they have no intelligence assets in Taiwan. You make yourself look stupid. It wasn’t that the Empire saw that ECFA would draw Taiwan closer into China’s embrace and took action, it was that the people of Taiwan saw it, and THEY acted.
    If, as you say, Ma could have passed the law through legislative action, why didn’t he? The people were up in arms, public opinion completely supported the students and opposed ECFA, and Ma backed down. The fact that you think he should have persisted in the face of strong public opposition says something about you, not Ma.

    The japs have no intelligence assets in taiwan? Their biggest and most visible intelligence asset is Lee Teng Hui and he doesn’t even try to hide it. This piece of junk was the result of repeated rapes by his japanese police officer father on his local domestic maid during the occupation. After japan’s defeat, his father ran back to japan and left him in taiwan with his mother. Both mother and son were adopted by their father’s local colleague and was bestowed with the surname Lee. LTH declared that he was a japanese in the first 22 years of his life and made a vow of loyalty to the jap emperor as a “huang min” – the emperor’s subject. After 1945, about 300,000 “huang min” chose to remain in taiwan and adopted chinese names. These f*ckers are still rabidly loyal to the emperor and are the base of jap intelligence in taiwan. (now go blow yourself)

    As for ECFA, please re-read my earlier reply. Taiwanese are already regretting it and they will regret even more in the near future.

    3) The KMT ran a one-party system, and they gobbled up ALL the properties of the Japanese. They sold property and used the proceeds to fund party organizations.

    Why don’t you ask president tsai how her family come to acquire so much wealth? If you don’t know what questions to ask, may I suggest you start with how her father was bequeathed an entire combat aircraft maintenance business by the japs. Ask the Koo family how they acquire their wealth during the jap occupation. The japs left no property of any value whatsoever by the time they surrender. Whatever assets of value were stripped bare and repartriated back to japan before they left. The KMT got nothing. When taiwan was declared liberated in dec 1945, there was not enough food and medicine to go around. The KMT appointed person in charge of taiwan (Chen Yi) requested supplies to be shipped from the mainland even though the mainland itself was in dire need of such items. After 50 years of jap occupation, taiwan in 1945 was stripped completely bare, it had nothing.

    4) The economic success you speak of was driven by Taiwanese. In the early years the KMT set up the foundation with China Steel, China Shipbuilding, and other massive government contract enterprises, but the subsequent Taiwan economic miracle was locally driven.

    This is oversimplification. The KMT did much more than this. Taiwan was a complete ruin after 1945 as a result of the jap occupation and the incessant empire bombing campaigns. It has no public infrastructure, no economy, no social support, in fact it has no “government” to speak of. The stolen gold and the elites that Chiang Kai Shek brought with him were primarily instrumental in re-building taiwan. Many of today’s roads, railroads, power stations, schools, universities, hospitals, stand as testament to these people. As in all economies, when there is good infrastructure, other businesses and industries tend to mushroom and grow. Please, give credit where credit is due.

    5) They would prefer the status quo, as I said, which is tantamount to independence.

    How long can they maintain this status quo? And no, it is not “tantamount” to independence. Otherwise, the opinion polls since long ago would have tilt this group into the pro-independence camp. Taiwan has no international standing. If beijing wants to be real nasty, they will pull out the remaining 17 diplomatic recognitions and isolate taiwan on the international stage completely. As it is, taiwan cannot sign any FTA with other countries a la WTO. Beijing can move aggressively to seal taiwan off economically and there is nothing the empire and its pack of dogs can do. Taiwan will collapse in a week. Now, lets see how these secessionists maintain the status quo. See, beijing don’t even need a military solution.

    6) I hope that a resolution can be made, and China and Taiwan will be joined in some kind of federation.

    Which was what Deng Xiaoping proposed more than 40 years ago – one country two systems, except that he didn’t call it a federation. But you people twisted this into something sinister to demonise and vilify china to the point that taiwanese were brain washed into the same gutter.

    7) Only KMT officials claim the Consensus said “each with its own interpretation”. That phrase seems to have disappeared from the narrative from the Chinese side. Perhaps you can explain.

    Isn’t it obvious? 40+ years ago when one country two systems was offered with near absolute autonomy, taiwan spurned it. Now that the mainland’s GDP is more than 22 times taiwan (and growing at 3-4 times faster) and its military is equipped with the latest stealth fighters, global positioning system, supersonic and hypersonic missiles, AIP and nuclear powered ballistic subs, Aegis equivalent destroyers, laser and particle beam weapons, railguns, etc, etc, do you think beijing is still in the mood to talk about “each with its own interpretation”? Some taiwanese are advising their compatriots to forget about RoC and embrace the PRC. For laughing out loud!

    8) You act as if Taiwan rejected ECFA and now can’t come to the party.

    The 31 incentives were exactly what was encoded in the ECFA. Had these stupid people not listen to their empire and jap running dogs that occupied the legislature, many taiwanese people do not even have to migrate to the mainland to seek employment. If Ma bit the bullet in 2014, by now, scores of mainland companies would have invested heavily in taiwan and job opportunities would come knocking on the young graduates’ doors. You keep talking about how the mainland should show more goodwill. If this is not goodwill delivered way over backwards, I don’t know what. Can you mention any other country who would extend goodwill like this to taiwan? (Uhh, their empire masters maybe, or their former jap tormentors? They won’t even flung shit taiwan’s way) Some times I think the mainland is being too kind and are spoiling taiwan and HK. Yes, taiwan rejected the ECFA in bright daylight.

    9) A million in the streets is huge. ….I know what it is, and I read Godfree’s article.

    The 6 million who are in their homes minding the kids, in their offices slaving away to provide for the family (including those thugs and mobsters), in the subway driving the trains, driving buses and taxis and maintain social order have yet to express their opinions. And you gave the impression that this is the only way to get things done in HK and to pressure beijing. Never mind the fact that these thugs and mobsters beat up the police and trashed public property and the Legco.

    And having read godfrey’s piece, the deafening silence on your part with specific regard to the bill lends credence to my observation that this protest which you are so enamored with is just a cover for something else, isn’t it?

    10) I don’t need lessons on One Country Two Systems from some Wu mao commenter who can’t keep his cool. You’re right, I was right about Taiwan needing a special solution, and I’m fully aware why. I was also RIGHT about Chinese officials, even President Xi, being reluctant to take bold steps to resolve the situation. They’re afraid that the kind of creative solution necessary will be interpreted as being soft on Taiwan. I was RIGHT that China is the regional superpower and should be more proactive in engaging with the people of Taiwan through the leaders they elect, even if, heaven forbid!, it means talking with the DPP.

    You are completely off you rocker. Xi reluctant to take bold steps? What bold steps? The military option? Economic blockade? What creative solution? They have rejected one country two systems even with the caveat of being able to maintain their own arm forces. Did the west germans allow the east germans to do so? Did the north vietnamese allow the south vietnamese to do so? DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE CREATIVE SOLUTIONS THAT’S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS ALREADY DONE AND PROPOSED?

    The mainland did engage with taiwan through the leaders that were elected by taiwanese. Case in point: the myriad of political exchanges between the CCP, KMT, New Party, and even the DPP in the past. And the most important one was the meeting in Singapore in 2015 between Ma Ying jeou and Xi jinping. All these meetings was premised on the 92 consensus which tsai ing wen disavowed. Since she does not recognise that there is only one china and insist that taiwan is independent, why should Xi or any other CCP leaders meet with her? Why should the beijing leadership lend legitimacy to a rebel? Do you understand diplomacy?

  177. Biff says:
    @denk

    apology to the 15 % decent yanks, gonna be an endangered species.

    Down to 15%; weren’t you at 20% a couple of months ago?

    • Replies: @denk
  178. Frankie P says:
    @Yee

    You have nothing to say. I don’t give a damn if you watch YouTube or use Facebook. You refuse to address issues, and you keep prattling on about the CIA funding everything. You didn’t address even ONE issue that I raised.

  179. HK is a city governing itself. A showcase and experiment thing for Taiwan about ‘one country, two system’.
    Though we(Chinese mainlander) hope all the good things for HK, it’s OK that HK get messed up by itself again and again, even if it’s partially because that it is mislead by some foreign powers. As mainland Chinese, I think we can totally get it. History and inertance should be respected. Manpower takes time and we need to be patient. That’s the 50 year policy won’t change thing.
    The main reason of any chaos in HK would still be that HK is not governing itself nicely and it leaves plenty room for others to take opportunity and use it as a tool.
    Beijing itself is not governing China perfectly, so we learn lessons that adjust ourselves continuously. It’s normal and it’s OK.
    The difference would be:
    if HK fucks up itself really bad, Beijing will finally show up to clean up the mess; if others want to fuck up HK directly, Beijing will give them a lesson.
    while if Beijing fucks up China really bad, no one will step up to help, most possibly the others will come to loot us again. Chinese people get ourselves only and that’s enough.
    We are not that naïve that we believe others sincerely want any good for us. Maybe some minority humanist want some good for the whole human beings and some scholars want alternative case study for human society but that’s not the usual case.
    We are not that naïve that we think other people really care about what happens to us, what we feel, what we think, what we plan for the future.
    We can’t communicate until we are finally equal.
    The appearance could be: Read what you want to read and believe what you want to believe. We can not communicate with each other when each side believe the other side is deeply brainwashed/money supported. There are too many different aspects/sides of the exact same thing, you can always find the one side truth to support your argument.
    The fact behind the appearance would be: it’s all about interest/benefit. When there comes interest, you don’t even get much chance to pick your side. You are naturally given a side once you are born. And it’s hard to fight against whatever born with you.
    How can we communicate?
    For us Chinese, since we are not good at English, luckily we can always choose to keep silent, step down the forum, and find some thing concrete to do.
    Softpower & propaganda dominance is the attachment of the hardpower.
    USA, the big master, so much lessons for the world to learn. How great!

  180. anon[487] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Interesting that you default to the CCP being the main beneficiaries of the LegCo vandalism.

    The main land Chinese vehemently hate to be reminded of their history subjugation by foreign powers. By hanging the colonial flag the protestors are increasing the pressure on the CCP to react lest this insult go unpunished.. but any sane man can see it is in the CCP’s best interest to keep their hands-off approach.

    Theories aside, seeing as how there have been demonstrators walking around waving the colonial flag with provocative slogans like ‘This is British Soil!’ ever since the 2014 protests, the flag being hung as part of an escalation of provocations shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone paying attention.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  181. denk says:
    @frankie p

    Taking your higher figure , 700000,
    verifiable by your eyes [sic], out of 7 million, more like 1/8 of hK.
    Ah, the proverbial tyranny of the vocal minority !

    Swarming adolescence.
    brainchild of Gene Sharp, gawd father of color rev,.
    Using naive, impressionable, highly malleable, impulsive teens as regime change foot soldiers.

    What a brilliant idea ?
    Deployed in Yugo, TAM, Eastern Europe, HK with roaring success, the current unrest in HK is a sequel to the 2014 failed ‘umbrella rev’.

    vAST MAJority of the protestors are teens, still wet behind their ears, do they even understand the extradition law in the first place, or just brainwashed by their mentors, ‘hey, you’r gonn fight those evil ‘Chinese colonists’ ? [1]

    Do these look like vanguard for democracy, or mindless, brainwashed swarming adolescence ?

    WTF !

    Do you think FUKUS would tolerate this kind of nonsense in their midst ?

    These two [email protected]#$% call their country cina,

    who’r they appealing to , definitely not Beijing…

    [1]
    i heard some of the rioters arrested are barely legal, as young as 14yrs old, do they even know what the proposed law is all about ??

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  182. @Half-Jap

    I love my ‘trust in government’ survey or ‘direction going’ survey to support the CPC, but such is a ludicrous base to support a claim for what is a wholly owned country by a single political party, with unfortunate consequences for challengers, perceived or serious?

    How else are we to learn what people in big countries are thinking if we don’t survey them regularly, using sound survey methodology?

    Though the PRC is the world’s biggest public opinion surveyor–it spends billions on polls–I use Western sources like Gallup and Edelman, which have been gathering data there for decades. I also verify their results myself (as you can) by talking to Chinese themselves.

    If any country can be said to be owned by a single political party it is the United States, whose Capitalist Party owns 90% of all national assets and controls the judiciary, the administration and the legislature–with unfortunate consequences for challengers, perceived or serious, like Manning and Assange whose ‘challenge’ consisted of exposing its war crimes.

    • Replies: @Half-Jap
  183. @Wizard of Oz

    For some karmic reason I’ve had a sympathetic interest in China since my youth and have followed its fortunes all my life.

    I spent my adult life, from age 33 to 65, studying alternative cultures (which resemble business models) and participating in the creation of one that, coincidentally, resembles Confucius’s ideal dàtóng society*.

    I’ve made a deep dive into Chinese culture in the past ten years, invested thousands of hours and dollars in the process and concluded that it represents our best hope for global peace and equitability. That’s why I write what I write.

    If I had invested as much time in writing negative stories about China I would, like most Westerners who write about China, be earning a living from it because Western powers pay well for such stuff–even if it is wrong year after year after year..

    Frank Dikotter, who wrote Mao’s Great Famine, for example, received $2 million in grants from the UK and US Governments before royalties-turbocharged by adulatory reviews–began pouring in.

    Going by Congressional testimonies, NED disclosures and tell-all books like Udo Ulfkotter’s (banned by Amazon) I estimate that Western taxpayers have spent $1.5 billion annually since 1949 just on slandering and attacking China–enough to buy every news outlet and academic on Planet Earth. All to protect inherited wealth, fundamentally.

    I would love–and have fantasized about–being paid by the PRC (or anyone) to write what I write but, so far, no luck. The PRC plays the long game and they are committed to letting their actions speak louder than words.

    ______________________________________________________
    *Now to have states, families, and selves is to allow each individual to maintain a sphere of selfishness. This infracts utterly the Universal Principle, gongli, and impedes progress..Therefore, not only should states be abolished–so that there would be no more struggle between the strong and the weak–but families should be done away with, too, so that there would no longer be inequality of love and affection among men. Finally, selfishness itself should be banished, so that goods and services would not be used for private ends..for the only true way is sharing the world by all alike, tienxia weigong. To share everything is to treat each and every one alike: there should be no distinction between high and low, no discrepancy between rich and poor, no segregation of human races, no inequality between sexes..All should be educated and supported with the common property; none should depend on private possession..This is the way of the Great Community, dàtóng, which prevailed in the Age of Universal Peace.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  184. @Wizard of Oz

    Sorry. Here’s what I’ve found.

    Our media shape not only our present and expectations of the future, but our sense of the past.

    In 1964 Felix Greene[1] pointed out that anti-communists (the vast majority of Western media) predicted massive Chinese famines every year but no-one took them seriously until 2010, when a German historian[2] claimed he had discovered thirty-million deaths from starvation during the formation of the communes in 1958-1961. Not only did tens of millions die of starvation, he said, but millions more died of violence during the Great Leap Forward and, ‘as a rough approximation’ forty percent of Chinese homes were destroyed as more lives wasted on disastrous, centrally planned projects. The Ming Tombs Reservoir, he said, “Was built in the wrong location. It dried up and was abandoned after a few years” and attributed its failure to communal efforts during the Great Leap Forward. In real life, the enormous reservoir was an aquatic venue for the Beijing Olympics.

    The author’s preface made his agenda clear, to discredit socialism as an alternative to capitalism. “As the modern world struggles to find a balance between freedom and regulation, the catastrophe unleashed at the time [the Great Leap Forward] stands as a reminder of how profoundly misplaced is the idea of state planning as an antidote to chaos.” He discredited Great Leap by claiming that thirty-million living, breathing Chinese starved to death.

    They did not. Since there is no eye-witness accounts, recorded of death by starvation or photographs of starvation after 1950, the author ascribes the deaths to two causes–a population deficit during 1958-1961 and imputed births (i.e., did not actually occur) whose absence he attributes to death by starvation.

    He insists that, had Mao maintained his 1953 population growth rate, China’s population would have been thirty-million higher, basing his claim on the work of American demographers[3] who themselves arrived at their apocalyptic figures by highly dubious methods. One of them, Judith Banister[4] admitted, “In all years prior to 1973-75 the PRC’s data on crude death rates, infant mortality rates, expectation of life at birth, and causes of death were non-existent, useless, or, at best, underestimates of actual mortality.” A University of Chicago demographer[5] pointed out that the 1953 figure came from provincial estimates purporting to show a thirty percent population increase between 1947-53, a period of warfare, famine and intense revolutionary struggle. The missing millions probably never existed, he said.

    To test his hypothesis, historian Boris Borisov[6] applied the author’s techniques to the United States’ much more reliable census figures and found millions of deaths from starvation during the Great Depression:

    Few people know about five million American farmers–a million families–whom banks ousted from their land because of debts during the Great Depression. The US government did not provide them with land, work, social aid, or pensions and every sixth American farmer was affected by famine. People were forced to leave their homes and wander without money or belongings in an environment mired in massive unemployment, famine and gangsterism. At the same time, the US government tried to get rid of foodstuffs which vendors could not sell. Market rules were observed strictly: unsold goods categorized as redundant could not be given to the poor lest it damage business. They burned crops, dumped them in the ocean, plowed under 10 million hectares of cropland and killed 6.5 million pigs. Here is a child’s recollection, “We ate whatever was available. We ate bush leaves instead of cabbage, frogs too. My mother and my older sister died during a year.” The US lost not less than 8,553,000 people from 1931 to 1940. Afterwards, population growth indices change twice, instantly. Exactly between 1930-31 the indices drop and stay on the same level for ten years. No explanation of this phenomenon can be found in the extensive report by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Statistical Abstract of the United States.

    Though Professor Borisov’s methodology is unimpeachable, even dedicated conspiracy theorists struggle to believe that seven percent of Americans starved to death in those ten years and left neither faded photographs nor coroner’s reports.

    Famines are difficult to hide. Even as far back as 19875, news of the Irish Potato Famine raced around the world while the 1974 Bangladesh famine is still remembered as a deeply tragic event in the nation’s history. Its official death toll was 30,000 (out of a population of 76 million) though unofficial sources put the toll at 100,000. Compare this to an alleged death toll of 30 million out of a population of 660 million during the Great Leap Forward: the Great Leap death toll is thirty-five times higher than the higher estimated death toll for the Bangladesh famine.
    Historical demography, always been more art than science, is usually employed to buttress authors’ personal prejudices, but recorded history tells a different story.

    After land reform and the formation of rural cooperatives in the 1950s there were mass campaigns to clean up the environment and do away with disease bearing pests while a basic rural health care system was put in place and no-one disputes the dramatic reduction in the death rate and from 1953-1958 the death rate[7] fell from twenty to twelve per thousand (a level India reached thirty years later) so the author used this death rate as his baseline without revealing that it was Mao’s proudest accomplishment.

    He then noted the increased death rate during 1959-61 and ignored the fact that people were better off in 1961 than at any time in the previous century: life expectancy had almost doubled, to fifty-eight years. He ignored the fifty percent fall in fertility that accompanies food shortages all the records showing that the deceased were all over sixty, the havoc from El Nino floods and droughts, the exodus of country workers to cities and the fall in birth rates when women join the labor force. He ignored universal food rationing, America’s grain embargo, the USSR’s withdrawal of aid and the fact that the peasants, heavily armed for the only time in history, took no action.

    He claimed that deaths should have continued declining steeply after fitting a linear time trend to Mao’s falling death rate, blamed famine for the difference and blamed Mao for the famine and thirty-million deaths that nobody noticed at the time. Closer scrutiny[8] revealed more non-existent things. When a reader asked why the book’s cover image was taken twenty years before the Great Leap the author confessed that he could find no photographs of a Great Leap famine so chose one from a per-Mao famine. When a second reader queried the source for his damning Mao quote[9], “When there is not enough to eat, people starve to death. It is better to let half the people die so the other half can eat their fill,” a check of the archives revealed that Mao had said nothing of the kind: at a Resources Committee meeting Mao agreed to reduce the number of large enterprises by half. The ‘people’ who would be allowed to ‘die’ were overambitious projects[10].

    https://i.imgur.com/xXtNm93.jpg

    Historian Han Donping, who lost two grandparents[11] during the Great Leap, later visited Shandong and Henan Provinces, the sites of the worst shortages. Yes, farmers told him, the apparent abundance in 1958 led to carelessness in harvesting and consuming food, and to their assumption that they were no longer responsible for their own food security, “I interviewed numerous workers and farmers in Shandong and Henan and never met one who said that Mao was bad. I talked to a scholar in Anhui who grew up in rural areas and had done research there. He never met one farmer that said Mao was bad nor a farmer who said Deng Xiaoping [Mao’s successor] was good.” As Gwydion Williams dryly observes, “Had the peasants’ faith in Mao been shaken, would the survivors have shown the enthusiasm for Mao’s Cultural Revolution that they demonstrated from 1966 onwards?”

    The book’s author received two million dollars from the British and American Governments and economist Amartya K. Sen boosted the book’s credibility and won the Nobel Prize for Economic Sciences[12] by theorizing that India’s democratic, free press had published news of the food shortages that allowed prompt government action while China’s government-controlled media callously suppressed the news and prevented relief. Confronted with this evidence most Westerners, though knowing little about the famine, remain convinced that China’s government deliberately starved millions of people to death. By repeating ‘thirty-million famine deaths’ for two generations our media has established in our minds fiction as historical fact[13].

    _____________________________________________________
    [1] A curtain of ignorance : how the American public has been misinformed about China.
    Felix Greene. 1964. J. Cape
    [2] Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-1962 [Hardcover] Unknown Binding – 2010
    by Frank Dikötter (Author)
    [3] AJ Coale (Rapid Population Change in China 1952-1982, 1982) and Judith Banister (China’s Changing Population, 1987)
    [4] Banister, J. China’s Changing Population,(Stanford University Press, 1987), p.87-8.
    [5] Studies on the Population of China, 1368–1953. Ping-ti Ho. January 1959
    [6] RESEARCHER: FAMINE KILLED 7 MILLION IN U.S. DURING “GREAT DEPRESSION” Dmitry Lyskov
    Pravda. MAY 22, 2008
    [7] ‘China’s growth in life expectancy between 1950 and 1980 ranks as among the most rapid sustained increases in documented global history.’ An exploration of China’s mortality decline under Mao: A provincial analysis, 1950–80. Kimberly Singer Babiarz, Karen Eggleston, Grant Miller,Qiong Zhang
    [8] The Socialist Legacy Underlies the Rise of Today’s China in the World– by Dongping Han. Remembering Socialist China, 1949-1976. Aspects of India’s Economy Nos. 59-60 (Oct. 2014):
    [9] Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe. p. 134
    [10] Did Mao Really Kill Millions in the Great Leap Forward? by Joseph Ball Monthly Review. (Sep 21, 2006)
    [11] Like all excess deaths in those years, they were over 60 years of age at a time when life expectancy was 58.
    [12] “Don’t let the Nobel prize fool you. Economics is not a science.” Joris Luyendijk THE GUARDIAN. Sun 11 Oct 2015 19.08 BST
    [13] The Economist’s special China issue repeated the allegation in three articles (and refused to publish letters from experts refuting it) and intellectuals like Slavoj Zizek[2] cite it as fact. [1] MAO DID NOT WANT HALF OF CHINA TO STARVE TO DEATH: A KEY DOCUMENT IN FRANK DIKOTTER’S BOOK MAO’S GREAT FAMINE. Joseph Ball http://www.maoists.org/dikottermisinterpretation.htm
    [2] Introduction ‘Mao Zedong on Practice and Contradiction.’ Slavoj Zizek. 2006.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  185. @Wizard of Oz

    You’re trying to fit a Roman frame to a Confucian society. Dissent is unavoidable in human societies, especially when dissenters are richly rewarded. But it’s the aggregate that matters:

  186. @Wizard of Oz

    Again, we’re trying to shoehorn a Confucian society into a Roman governance model, collectivist into an individualist consciousness.

    They’re not shoehornable.

    You must step outside the model you were born into and assess the benefits and drawbacks of each.

    I find it liberating, or at least challenging.

  187. @last straw

    Whom did Mao ruthlessly murder?

    Mao’s aversion to violence came from his Buddhist mother and he attended temple with her throughout his childhood.

    “What harm is there in not executing people? People’s heads are not like leeks. If you cut them off they won’t grow again. If you cut off a head wrongly there is no way of rectifying the mistake even if you want to.”

    More people visit his birthplace each year than visit all the shrines of all of history’s heroes combined.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  188. @last straw

    Do you have a link for ‘at least 850,000 Hongkongers signed a petition in support of HK government’s extradition bill.’?

    • Replies: @last straw
  189. @denk

    Hilarious photos. Why are they waving the Union Jack? Do they expect the Royal Navy to appear on the horizon and save them? So all these people are worrying they’ll be extradited to China to face prosecution for crimes? Or they worry about some friend, relative, or secret society Triad co-member getting marched off to a stadium in China? LOL.

    • Replies: @denk
  190. Godfree,

    Since you have all the figures, graphs and statistics on hand, there is one question I want answered. How come the Chinese population has doubled since 1960 when they had a one-child policy for much of that period? I raised this question before but didn’t get a satisfactory answer. In simplest mathematical terms, one-child families would lead to a halving of the population. For a population to double, each family should have three children on average, if I am not mistaken – has this been the actual case? I really want this properly explained and accounted for numerically.

  191. @anon

    I am not sure why you say I “default to”[sic] the “CCP being the main beneficiaries of the LegCo vandalism” though I think it fair to say that I can’t see any other beneficiaries or anyone else indeed who could rationally forsee benefit except the CCP or allies. Can you – even if you can, as I suppose one must, conceive of it as possible that a few hotheads saw some merit in it for the protesters? Yes, I suppose some could even reason that it is best to try and bring on a crackdown but I would want some actual evidence before favouring that theory about risk taking over the one which says the CCP would be on an almost certain winner.

  192. @Godfree Roberts

    Yo seem to have changed the subject unless you are admitting to having applied a Confucian frame to non Confucian societies with the result that I misunderstood your point about all societies being one party states.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  193. @Godfree Roberts

    I would be interested in a study of those trust in government figures which included the disentangling of the many variables like how muchpoorer people were yesterday, how much time they spend getting information (including falsehoods) from free media, etc.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  194. @Commentator Mike

    The one child policy didn’t start till 1979 so it could have doubled in just that 19 years at an annual rate of increase of about 3.7%. Not likely but assume improved infant mortality and increases in life expectancy plus exceptions to the one child policy for peasants who wanted sons, Uighurs and other minorities (astonishing isn’t it!) a bit of bribery and generally a slow start to the one child campaign and maybe you get there.

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
  195. @Commentator Mike

    My mistake, should be four, not three, children per couple for the population to double.

  196. @Godfree Roberts

    That graph cries out for explanation. I mean the greater percentage of home ownership amongst the comparatively poor points to one simple explanation, namely that whatever the terms are on which the rural poor have a roof over their heads it is counted as them owning a home. I wonder how much they could borrow against such dwellings to provide working capital for an urban business.

  197. @Godfree Roberts

    Thank you for the courtesy of your replies.

  198. @Godfree Roberts

    As it happens I’m not very interested in the numbers of those who died because of Mao’s or colleagues’ incompetence or callousness. It’s a bit like fighting over the odd million of the Holocaust death toll (except that Mao is unlikely to have had a positive desire to exterminate large numbers of Chinese).

    If peasants alive after the 1959-61 famines didn’t criticise Mao it is hardly surprising. I don’t suppose many of those living and farming on monastery lands in the late 1530s denounced Henry Vlll as the monster he was. Even Stalin had a fan club, though you would have had to be one of the rare winners in Ukraine to forgive him the Holomodor, a precursor to the Great Leap Forward.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  199. Something that I haven’t seen is that Hong Kong developed better than other Chinese port cities post WWII from acting as middleman between China and the West, especially during Mao era when China could not trade directly with US. PLA could have taken HK in 1950 too, but the loss of that conduit and pissing off the British then was considered enough to make it not worth doing. Now that China has substantial trade with US through other port cities, HK is pretty much useless.

    I remember some girl in US spoke of how HK was/is more modern (than mainland Chinese cities) due to British. That’s bull shit. HK was/is mostly a financial/trade city. I don’t know of any serious technology or industry based there. PRC was poor standard of living wise but being big with some serious investment in technology and military, HK was pretty much always a joke in comparison.

    I like it when people prove themselves through concrete actions/achievements as opposed to media/talk. As much as people in the West dislike PRC, PRC solidly controls all of the vast land of mainland China, exporting tons of indispensable products to the rest of the world, among many other things, giving the people who run it ton of leverage. By the way, PRC actually militarily controls HK too. Because of that, those with Chinese citizenship are not obliged to listen to what outsiders have to say about their country. Though what is said in the English media about China will have consequences to varying degrees for the people and organizations responsible.

  200. This is copied over from my Disqus comment on Steve Hsu’s blog.

    The Cultural Revolution is highly controversial. People mostly see it in the vague and abstract based on what they read or hear. It, referring to the heated political power struggle, also really only lasted at most 3 years, not 10. After 3 years, the 造反派, which consisted of people like the Gang of Four and also 康生 and 陈伯达, had pretty much already seized power and the Red Guards were disbanded and sent to the countryside.

    How can you be so sure that Mao despised traditional Chinese culture? He was clearly very erudite in it, with many references to it in his poetry. As for the destructions of historic and cultural relics, including of, say, the Confucian temples in 曲阜, you’re making it sound as if Mao actually approved of that, which is dubious. From what I remember from reading, one of those Red Guards by the name of 谭厚兰 was sent the jail by the early 70s for that. As for Duan Wu, MidAutumn, and Qing Ming banned, I’ll have to ask about that, not to mention that “banned” can be an exaggeration, it’s often not a 0 or 1 binary thing. For example, I had an interview on June 4th of this year, and after telling my interviewer that I know a distant relative of Chiang Kai-shek (Steve Hsu), my interviewer talked a little politics with me, followed by a “you know what day it is today right. this kind of thing it’s not allowed to be said in certain public settings.” By public setting, talking about it at a restaurant does not really qualify, I’ve seen people do that before and nobody would give a fuck. How do you ban celebration of those traditional festivals entirely? Practically infeasible. Even Christmas celebrations and ornaments were only banned to a certain degree in some high profile places, not everywhere (again basically impossible to do), this year.

    My point is that HKers have such low reputation in China now, by default, when somebody’s from HK and says something disliked to a mainlander, that person will be assumed problematic and beneath consideration. Just want to tell you the truth, however unpleasant. And mainland Chinese can discriminate against HKers with impunity because HKers don’t have the power or capability to do anything or fight back, all they can do is complain and maybe not even that soon. To blame is all the negative reputation HKers have accumulated over the past 3 decades, which will be very difficult to change. It’s like if you’re gonna make somebody else really dislike you, then at least you should not depend on them or have the ability to defend yourself against them. The PLA and even the Chinese police can declare martial law on Hong Kong and control it anytime, arrest those who resist, China’s way more powerful now than in 1989, China doesn’t even really have to give a fuck about outside world opinion this time as the consequence will be negligible. So you should probably shut up to not make the situation worse for yourself and the people of HK.

    I may well stop reading this blog or using Disqus soon. These are American platforms after all. There is no point in arguing with Americans and their lackeys on their media who will oppose you no matter what, better to make what they think ever more irrelevant by overpowering them, as mainland China has done with HK. And those on the English language internet who are not like that, commenting in favor of PRC/CPC might get you some benefit from them eventually in a direct or indirect fashion. You might meet some people, get some opportunities through that, etc. Or, so long as you can have a satisfying career in America or one of her vassal states somewhere where China has little or no say, you can campaign against Tiananmen or Tibet or Taiwan be as anti-China, anti-PRC, anti-CPC as you like, your choice. Or you can just stay politically silent.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  201. @NYMOM

    The problem is that mainland China has the death penalty for what we in the west would consider relatively ordinary financial crimes and they use prisoners for organ harvesting…

    The West has the most extraordinary leniency towards financial crimes, provided they are big enough. For example in 2007-8, the bankers in London and New York wrecked the financial system of the Western world and had they been able to, would have wrecked that of China too. They thus lost millions of people untold sums of money and drove large numbers to suicide and made still larger numbers of people very miserable. They sold innocent people dud insurance and evicted people from their houses (in some case even from houses on which the bank had no claim!). What happened to them? For the insurance scam the bank was fined and for wrecking the economy they were bailed out, at the taxpayers’ expense.

    Maybe if we had a death penalty for such crimes they would occur more seldom and if the organs of the condemned bankers were harvested, it would make a small recompense for the damage they caused. In general, I am opposed to the death penalty but extraordinary crimes merit extraordinary punishments, IMHO.

  202. Yee says:

    Wizard of Oz,

    “since you don’t watch Facebook or YouTube, you must think you know about because your granny warned you about them when you were a child.”

    Oh, I don’t need my granny… There’s something call logic that never fails.

    When I have evidence as concrete as a US President’s words on “maintain information activities”, I can come to a logical conclusion.

  203. @Laowai234

    Hongkongers refer to these mainland traders as “locusts” because they swarm parts of the city like Sheung Shui and completely transform them. It’s important to remember that Hong Kong people have standards of cleanliness and behavior that is more in line with Western standards. So when mainlanders come over en masse, with their spitting on the ground, skipping people in line, allowing their children to urinate and defecate in public on sidewalks, it creates resentment and frustration in Hong Kong people.

    I can imagine that it does cause resentment. Is part of the problem that there are not enough public toilets? Or are these people simply ignoring toilets that are there? I would imagine that fining people who are there for what sounds like commercial reasons, would change their behaviour fairly quickly. It seems that the problem is partly the legacy of an extremely unhygienic past and partly the result of the one-child-policy, giving rise to the phenomenon of a whole generation of “spoilt brats” who have always been allowed to get away with anti-social behaviour.

    Well, maybe there is hope that things will change fairly rapidly. The Chinese government is in the middle of a drive to rapidly install modern toilets throughout China. This is, of course, a mammoth undertaking, but then that is typical for China and when they set out to do something they usually succeed.

    The other thing which, I imagine, will reduce the frequency of this sort of behaviour is the “Social Credit” system which punishes anti-social behaviour and rewards good. While it sounds to Western ears horribly Orwellian, it may at least, make this pampered generation more careful how they treat other people. Maybe it is necessary to deal with this and similar problems, even?

    There is also the surge in housing prices over the last decade, which has much to do with investment by mainland developers. Hong Kong is seen as a relatively stable place for mainlanders to put their money. (And why is that? Why do they see it that way if the mainland is so good and fair and safe as you constantly say?) So they buy up real estate and keep it vacant. To them it’s just an investment, but the net effect on the property market is to raise prices. Opening up the Hong Kong housing market to mainland investment has been a disaster for them. I’m not blaming mainland investors entirely – the property market was already controlled by a small cabal of wealthy Hong Kongers like Li Ka Shing.

    If Hong Kong is a democracy, why cannot the voters change the system, the law, which allows a small number of people to drive up the price of houses? Or is it a “democracy”?

  204. @Hail

    There were according to classical authors three types of lies: 1) The lie direct. 2) The false suggestion, and 3) The suppression of the truth. (There may well be others but I can’t place them at the moment.)

    Propaganda is, I think, composed of a judicious mixture of all three plus a small amount of truth to lend it credibility, but perhaps there is a noticeable tendency, nowadays, to use the suppression of the truth as the main component. One of the false suggestions, particularly in relation to China is that things in China are fixed and unchanging.

    Godfree Roberts, as far as I can tell, gives us the facts, as he sees them, and usually backs these up with references. This is, to people used to reading about China, in the MSM, so shocking as to engender disbelief. I don’t see what one can do about that.

    One of the false suggestions constantly made in relation to China is that things today are the same as they were yesterday and will be the same tomorrow. This one of the stupidest suggestions, but I see it persistently used in writings attacking China.

  205. @Wizard of Oz

    your point about all societies being one party states.

    I think we can agree that the system of governance in a western-style democracy is not going to change as the result of an election. Really, you have a ruling class which sets the policies and the “Change of Party” resulting from an election is largely personal – whose bum on which seat, or theatrical, to keep the voters believing they live in a democracy. Hence the implication that it is really all one party though divided up into factions.
    In a dictatorship, of course it is all one party. In a theocracy it is all one religion. Hence the statement that all states are one-party states.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  206. denk says:
    @Biff

    unfortunately, the redneck/sinophobes murikkans seem to be gaining on the decent yanks.
    The outlook is very dim indeed.

  207. denk says:
    @Commentator Mike

    I heard those HK separatists [sic] have made numerous request to emigrate to UK, but getting stonewalled so far.

    NOt surprising, as far as LOndon is concerned, its better for them to remain in HK as useful assets, rather than joining the useless eaters in UK.
    These wogs just dont get it, they dont belong
    But that doesnt stop them from working overtime to prove their ‘Britishness

    ehhehehe

  208. @Commentator Mike

    Between 1949 and 1979 there was a huge improvement in public health, there was also huge improvement in life in general which led people to have a lot more children and to old people living much longer. It was because the population was increasing with such alarming rapidity that the one-child policy was introduced. I think after 1960 you would have found many families with more than four children.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  209. @Godfree Roberts

    I agree with WoO, ‘the graph cries out for explanation.’ Take China 2015. How can “All income home ownership” be smaller than “Below median home ownership”? What is the definition of “All”?

  210. @Godfree Roberts

    Do you have a link for ‘at least 850,000 Hongkongers signed a petition in support of HK government’s extradition bill.’?

    I saw it on https://www.singtaousa.com/ (the U.S. edition of Sing Tao Daily). The article mentioned that at least 1 million signed, but about 150,000 signatures were deemed dubious and were deleted.

    The matter of fact is, you do not have to believe Sing Tao Daily. But without any alternative, such as a petition initiated by the opposition and signed by hundreds of thousands of protest supporters, I doubt who is the real majority.

  211. Half-Jap says:

    I guess Dr Godfree is just like the other normies, flipping out and having no idea how to approach forceful opposing views and evidence. He’s so great against the mindless and shallow but got nothing on Lo or myself, and some other stalwart skeptics. SAD! 😉

  212. @foolisholdman

    I guess you could be right. I’ve also read somewhere that in many villages they weren’t reporting the extra children. It must also have been hard enforcing this one child policy on poor people who couldn’t pay the fines. What could the government do anyway? Take away the children and do what with them? I suspect that the policy probably couldn’t be enforced and that could be another reason why it was abolished.

  213. @Godfree Roberts

    I have long thought that Mao’s aversion to killing people is best illustrated by the occasion when he had Chiang Kai-shek in his power, Mao actually saved him from being killed by his own (that is by Chiang’s) troops. Bear in mind that Mao’s first marriage was a love match and that when Chiang had captured Mao’s wife and daughter he had them killed because they were Mao’s wife and daughter.

  214. Che Guava says:
    @Frankie P

    It’s still, politically, and remains the Republic of China. It is reflected on the names of all sorts of things (banks, airlines, museums, more), and on passports, unless there has been a recent change.

    The U.S.A. tries to pretend, but it is only to make trouble, and part of a policy to make the oceans around China inaccessible to shipping. It is groundless. Only a geogolital game.

  215. @gmachine1729

    You sound a bit like someone giving condescending advice to Jews around 1900 on how to accommodate themselves to German reality.

    Does your bosom swell with pride at being one of 1.3 billion belonging to a now powerful polity? It is perhaps how Sergeant Jones of the 75th felt as he contemplated his forthcoming service in India after marching in Queen Victoria’s 60th Jubilee parade….

  216. @foolisholdman

    Ask the Scottish Nationalists.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  217. chrimony says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    So you’re going to completely ignore all the economic development that started with China’s “special economic zones”? Planned economies suck. It was proved over and over again in Marxist country after Marxist country in the twentieth century. Your blinders on this issue is embarrassing.

    As for the poverty stats, YOU MISSED MY MAIN POINT. It wasn’t to dispute the poverty rate of children in Hong Kong. It was to find a comparable stat for China, instead of your unsourced “1%”. The only stat I could find regarding China poverty that comes close to 1% is a different measure of poverty, as I explained in my comment.

    You really are a hack.

  218. @Commentator Mike

    China has never had a one child policy. That’s just Western propaganda. They did have an urban family planning policy which simply asked people to space births more widely and taxed third and fourth children to cover the additional costs of providing infrastructure.

    Planning policies were more lax in rural areas and non-existent for minorities.

  219. @Wizard of Oz

    Your comments assume the premise that Mao and his colleagues were callous. The stats demonstrate that they were not.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  220. @foolisholdman

    It is certainly worth digging into. I would suggest writing to Jones Lang Lasalle’s China. They have the best stats available in English. If you read Chinese, of course, you can get the info from the government database.

  221. @Wizard of Oz

    Edelman, which polls every country every year, always asks how much they trust their government. They publish their methodology and, if you ask nicely, will send you the question as it appears in the native language you’re interested in.

    I agree that it’s very broad-brush, but the series goes back 20 years and the trend is your friend.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  222. Laowai234 says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Really? I personally spoke with a woman from the countryside who was the second born of her family. When she was little the tax people or whatever their official title is came to her family home to demand money for the second child. Since the family was poor, they couldn’t pay. So the government people acted like thugs and busted up the house.

    Now it’s possible that this was not official policy, but rather just the effect of corruption at the local level. This kind of corruption – people using their positions of power for personal gain – is endemic in China (and in America too). To the extent that Xi Jinping’s war on corruption is actually tackling these abuses, I applaud it.

    Most of China’s problems stem not from their form of government but from defects in their national character. I don’t say this to pick on the Chinese – every nation and ethnic group has their unique set of defects and flaws. For the Chinese, it seems to be a combination of: 1) materialism and avarice (I’ve never encountered a more materialistic people); 2) indifference to suffering (probably stemming from a misinterpretation of Buddhist doctrine that has now become part of the culture); 3) entrenched nepotism, which spoils their attempts at meritocracy.

    After spending almost a decade among them, my conclusion is that the worst enemy of the Chinese people are other Chinese people. They will rip each other off in every conceivable way just to get a little extra benefit. People in the West don’t appreciate that we live in a culture that has been shaped by Christian morality. It’s our strength and our weakness. It’s why we feel we can trust each other. The Chinese don’t have this, and they don’t trust each other, or anyone else, at all.

  223. Half-Jap says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Sound methodology in a shitty environment makes for a shitty result. You just can’t, and it’s a sad aspect of our attempt at approaching or approximating the reality. It is simply not reliable when it is known that opinion can have personal consequences. Having visited there on and off for about a couple years, yeah, I can believe that people may believe things are headed in the right direction, but such does not support that the people trust the gov’t, as distrust may have a negative effect personally. Essentially, they are a captive population and their opinions are not freely given by design. Sorry, but Gallup or Shinhua or whatever, makes no meaningful difference.
    No need to refer to what the US is…many of us here on Unz know that the US is owned, and it’s not really capitalist either.
    It is closer to feudalism, and in an ironic way, us Japs and Chinese are freer outside the land of the free.

  224. @Godfree Roberts

    Stats certainly can’t prove that anyone wasn’t calloues. At best they can displace all or part of someone’s supposed evidence for saying that thet were. However, the standard version in the West seems to be that Mao was sadistic or, at any rate, one would relished the use of violence for its sheer effectiveness. Nothing about the loss of life during and along the route of the Long March seems to contradict that, nor does the famous quote about power coming out of the barrel of a gun. Then there is the objective fact of what happened to very many inoffensive people when Mao launched the Red Guards on Them (real Lord of the Flys cruelty that he must have known would happen). Not that he could have competed in earlier centuries with the likes of Vlad Dracula (the Impaler) or the first Emperor of China for that matter.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  225. @foolisholdman

    I think the only logical explanation is the one I cooked up, namely that the poorer half were nearly all in rural shacks that they could call their own just as feudal tenure allowed a fee simple to be the standard tenure at Common Law even if it wasn’t fee simple absolute in possession so as to be without conditions.

  226. @Wizard of Oz

    Sorry about the typos which my phone’s hyperactive autofill and spellcheck sometimes manage to insist on or allow through.

  227. @Wizard of Oz

    I think the Scots, at least those I know, would reply that Scotland, whatever its legal position, is in fact something like an occupied country or a colony of England and that their struggle, though peaceful is a struggle for National Liberation. Similar to the struggles of the Catalans, Basques, Irish, Kurds……

  228. @Godfree Roberts

    You might enjoy this from my slightly lefty cousin who was a successful merchant/Investment banker in HK (and more by the end of his time there). Without being able to open the link to

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/26/viral-in-china-a-bittersweet-farewell-to-hong-kong/

    (Doesn’t that tell you something? He would have had clever young minions to do that. In fact he referred to the unopened link as an attachment)

    “XY the attachment didn’t wish to be opened.I will say that in my experience the HK elite have seamlessly integrated into the PRC elite.As a backstop the HK rich have bought Vancouver and some of London.They have little interest in Australia for all kinds of reasons including snobbery .I am told a lot of the demonstrators are worried about jobs and expensive housing rather than politics.All in all perhaps HK will revert to being a look a like to the Colony I arrived at in 1975. Very rich HK and now Mainland Chinese and a dwindling number of long term privileged expats. And lots of poorly housed and paid locals competing for unattractive jobs with their mainland cousins. Most major businesses run from ( and now owned by ) Shanghai as they were before WW 2. And with the same level of democracy, probity ,collusion and self interest as existed under the British. Remember the HK police rioted when the Colonial Government introduced the ICAC-then known as I can’t accept cash rather than the Independent Commision Against Corruption. A Governor shortly before I arrived was said to have to return to the UK by ship due to the farewell hand shakes he received from a grateful public.Happy days.The senior doctors,lawyers etc were and still are extremely well remunerated,not particularly good and never likely to leave.

    If the Brits had remembered the good old days of say Indian colonial rule they would have taken the HK Government reserves with them when they left.I think in Macau their reserves left with the Government officials responsible for the wind up.When at [famous name] I worked with and liked a man whose family was still fabulously wealthy with the capital accumulated by an early relative who was merely Secretary to Clive of India.Now that is how it should be done”.

    BTW GF – and anyone, what would you say were the HK rich’s non-snobbery reasons for showing little interest in Australia. Could it just be that, taking a *very* long view they see that Australia may be in China’s sphere of influence in a way that Canada will not be? (Think extradition and think how craven Tony Blair and the Brits became with no one breathing hard over the shoulder). Anything else?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  229. @Wizard of Oz

    There was a huge tussle over HK’s gold reserves. The resolution, I believe, was that they would stay in the Bank of England’s vaults until HK reverted completely to PRC control.

    I know Chinese in Australia and they are thriving in the professions there, but it’s not a place for the intelligentsia nor the super-rich. To isolated, racist and insular.

  230. @Godfree Roberts

    Your second par needs elaboration. Which Chinese are you referring to? I would make pretty clear distinctions between
    1. Diaspora Chinese, typically Malaysian (but same would apply generally to Taiwanese and Singaporeans)
    2. Hing Kong Chinese
    3. Disaffected mainlanders e.g. Falun Gong
    4.. Mainlanders with varying degrees of enthusiasm for PRC but still connected and loyal in varying degrees

    Agree?

    Setting aside the super rich as having special priorities, what is this intelligentsia that you refer to that is somehow too precious too live where lawyers, GPS, medical specialists, academic scientists and other academics, professional engineers etc flourish?
    What is the racism that upsets them too much to live in big cities where there are hundreds of thousands of other Han and other non whites?
    How are they isolated in the internet connected world compared with anywhere outside China other than New York or London?
    Insularity? Manifested how – so as to affect them?

    At my old prep school, (English sense) which is located in the still most expensive suburb and has always been entirely fee paying upper middle class a female relation who was chairing a parents committee told me that Chinese parents had just given a magnificent new swimming pool – and that 65 per cent of the next entry at some level were Chinese! (Her children are learning Chinese and have tutors who are married to old Aussies). Mind you their world must be completely different from that of poor sub-continental students living amongst the indigenous whitish ferals of the Western suburbs.

    Clearly these many merely ordinarily rich ethnic Chinese (also to be seen in cheerful party spirits at fundraisers for political perties attended by senior politicians) are not likely to be conveying the message “don’t think of joining us here: it’s insular and racist”. So who is it who is put off as you suggest and how do they get their ideas?

    I suspect that you are a bit out of date – but you wouldn’t be if you were ethnic Chinese considering at least a pied a terre in Australia. Would you not take notice of Melbourne having elected an ethnic Chinese Lord Mayor (John So, born in Hong Kong) as it’s first popularly elected Lord Mayor nearly 20 years ago? And I have just looked for the Rolf Harris take-off program on SBS where Ahn Do, a comedian who came as a Vietnamese refugee, interviews people as he paints them. But it is actually on the ABC! and in prime time. Do you really think a Hong Kong artist, film-maker or writer is going to look at Sydney and Melbourne and decide that they are too insular and racist for him?

  231. @Godfree Roberts

    More from my cousin who knew HK so well after I did a copy and paste of the “bitter sweet farewell to Hong Kong link” to him.

    ” Thanks X, I think the article reflects how I see the future.If anything the author does not realise how the HK system has been designed to suit the few.The land release policy ,the absence of income tax and the currency link to the US dollar all seem designed to maintain HK as a limited ( perhaps static? ) pool of property and financial wealth and activity rather than generate anything new.Whereas the PRC as POTUS keeps reminding us is powering ahead in all kinds of new AI , high tech and software based activities.One can imagine it is active PRC policy to reduce the role and importance of HK over time.

    Add to this the growing attraction of Singapore as an Asian base for International tax evasion/avoidance activities and it is hard to see where HK will fit in in the future.

    Incidentally during my first stint in HK insider trading was not an offence nor was the oppression of minorities or drunk driving .It was a time of the dismemberment of the old British trading companies and the rise of the HK Chinese property tycoons who would buy land sold by retreating foreigners and released ( sold ) by the Government and make instant tax free fortunes upon building mass high rise very mean apartments.This continues.”

    He says “This continues”” but as he also, incorrectly, says there is no income tax in Hong Kong I shall issue the “are you up to date?” challenge to him too. Mind you 15 or 17% on income earned in HK and no capital gains tax doesn’t allow much for the indulgence of welfare spongers….

  232. FB says: • Website
    @last straw

    When asked by Tucker Carlson about human feces on the streets of US cities…Trump responded…

    There’s nothing wrong with taking a dump on the street…I mean if you gotta go you gotta go…actually pretty satisfying to leave a big old Stanley Steamer sitting there…why one time I squeezed one out that must have been as big around as a large pizza…and about a foot high…LOL…didn’t know I had it in me…

    • Replies: @jeff stryker
  233. @FB

    FB

    Asia doesn’t quite having the homeless crisis that the US has and I don’t know why. Maybe because all the jobs were sent there that Mexicans don’t do.

    Also, if you’re a really bad junkie you’ll either be jailed (China) or shot (Philippines) or given a nice welfare check so you can shoot up in a tiny one room closet (Japan).

  234. Biff says:
    @last straw

    From your link:

    But when it comes to human feces, nobody can even come close to San Francisco.

    Sometimes the truth just stinks.

  235. bucky says:
    @Lo

    No they don’t.

    Most of China’s vaunted police state dystopia is a result of their pesky minorities.

    Unlike America, they are doing everything they can to erase these minority narratives, and they are better for it.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Godfree Roberts Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?