You're viewing a single thread.
What I find disheartening is that it ultimately didn't work. Or am I wrong?
That’s not entirely true. Protests like these, at the very least, demonstrate class awareness to towards those in power. “Look what we can do”
Never forget that true power lies with the people. Always.
That really only works when the majority don't have power. The Hong Kong protests failed because it was a minority trying to take power they never had, against the wishes of the majority.
Also international news agencies spilling the beans on the fact the leaders of the group were in constant communication with us agencies.
Ah yes the minority.
~300k vs 1.4 billion. That's the definition of a minority.
That's not an honest comparison.
You have chosen the police-reported number of protesters (338 K) instead of 2 M reported by other sources.
You have also made a false comparison between Hong Kong (~10 M people) and the entire population of China. I recommend to use percentages. Up to 20% of the local population showed up to protest. More were dissatisfied.
What number of Chinese would show up to protest if a hot topic would appear and the regime would seem weak for a moment, is unknown.
So you said all that to say they're the minority and didn't have enough members to vote, so we should listen to said minority because they protested not getting their way because they didn't represent the majority viewpoint.
That's called tyranny, little one. China is a democracy. You have a problem, get educated, run for office and get voted in. If your problem is widespread then you'll have no problem winning an election on it.
China is a democracy.
Yes, the Republic of China appears to be a democracy.
About the People's Republic of China, we can read in Wikipedia:
A movement for increased democracy and liberalization stalled after the Tiananmen Square protests and massacre in 1989.
So, we read that democracy never came.
China is a unitary one-party socialist republic led by the CCP.
So, we read that only one party is allowed to exist and rule. We also read about CCP propaganda, which I think you have consumed too much:
The PRC officially terms itself as a democracy, using terms such as "socialist consultative democracy",[186] and "whole-process people's democracy".[187] However, the country is commonly described as an authoritarian one-party state and a dictatorship,[188][189] with among the heaviest restrictions worldwide in many areas, most notably against freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, free formation of social organizations, freedom of religion and free access to the Internet.[190]
I should note that according to its own words, the People's Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea) is also a "democracy", even if its passing of power among the Kim family resembles a hereditary monarchy. If you take words and slogans at their face value, you'll be easily mislead.
P.S.
little one
Don't troll. Also, don't spread disinformation.
NATOpedia is not credible on enemies of the west.
It's the working class, the majority, who don't have power..
It's the everyone with less than a gigabuck.
The working class control China, hence why billionaires are regularly executed if they hurt Chinese citizens.
I know it's hard to understand.
A fun question for you: can a worker in China start an independent trade union?
The answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_relations_in_China
Independent unions are illegal in China with only the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) permitted to operate.
China is a mostly capitalist country with the state owning a lot of capital, and a "communist" party deciding without a mandate from people. But it retains some features of socialist policy.
In year 2021, Beijing was the city with the biggest number of billionaires living there (later, Mumbai took over).
If you take the list of countries by income inequality, you will see that China has greater inequality than most of neighbouring countries, and most of Europe.
Some Gini indexes of Asian countries, more equal first (source: United Nations University, World Institute for Development Economics Research):
- Kazakhstan 27.79
- Pakistan 29.59
- Taiwan 32.58
- Mongolia 32.74
- South Korea 33.10
- Japan 33.40
- China 36.67
- India 37.06
Some highlights from other continents:
- Ukraine 25.63
- Poland 28.56
- Canada 28.80
- Sweden 30.08
- France 31.63
- Egypt 31.89
- Switzerland 33.82
- UK 34.24
- Russia 36.03
- USA 39.79
- Turkey 42.60
- Mexico 44.01
- Zimbabwe 50.26
Going by the Gini index, China has a lot in common with the USA and its closest matches among big countries are Russia and India.
It didn't do anything from what I recall.
I believe it was quickly dissolved after they found that the leadership was in direct communication with USA agents.
Plus I recall there was general dissatisfaction from civilians who found the protestors to be a nuisance.
There is no opinion here, just what recall from the event history.
My understanding was that there was some push back and political/police violence but the Chinese state largely let it play out and then within a month or two made mass arrests of the organizers.
This was a broadly supported movement, impressive in its size and unity.
The strategy Xi used was to not over emphasize the level of public support through direct confrontation - but to wipe out all resistance when the “controlled” energy of the crowd has somewhat dissipated.
Lesson for the current environment in the US: have a long term strategy tied to your goals, put very high degrees of pressure on specific state actors / functions that they cannot ignore or wait out
You are correct, it didn't work.
HK was economically dependent on China already, so their last struggle occurred too late, under the implied threat of the Chinese army moving in. The city government found ways to bring in Chinese police (or interior ministry troops) to overcome and outlast the protests.