world

Hong Kong democracy protesters aim for massive turnout at rare sanctioned march

19 Comments
By DALE DE LA REY

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2019 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.


19 Comments
Login to comment

Any violence by the protesters negates their message.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Any violence by the protesters negates their message.

Not to me.

I'm not sure where you got that silly idea.

You don't think that just because you don't agree with it, no one does, do you?

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

I'm not sure where you got that silly idea.

Violence begets violence. It doesn't matter who starts it, it just doesn't end.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

I agree. The CPP murdered protestors with tanks at Tienanmen square, and have murders prisoners for their organs. This violence has begat a complete and absolute fear of being subjected to future CPP violence. This has begat the protests in HK. The CPP violence has begat violence in the protestors who are literally fighting for themselves and all their descendants.

The violence of the CCP has begat the violence of the protestors. If the CCP respected human rights, the protestors wouldn’t have any need to protest.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

 I agree. 

So they're the same then. Gotcha.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Carrie Lam needs to resign. She doesn't have the voter's approval. That is clear.

Hong Kongers are fighting not just for the next 5 yrs, but for the next 500 yrs and for all the generations who follow them. Now is the time. They cannot stop until full democracy has been achieved.

They are just as stubborn as Beijing leaders appointed by committees, of committees, of committees. Look up how leaders are selected in China. That was how Lam was selected. Unacceptable to HK citizens.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

My initial reaction was to hope that there'd be no violence, until I read this:

Years of huge, peaceful democracy marches have made little headway, leading to increased radicalisation among some Hong Kong protesters and a greater willingness to embrace violent tactics

So the danger is if there's violence it'll invite a crushing response from Xi, and if it's peaceful the protesters will just be ignored. Poor people of Hong Kong.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Strangerland, the only thing that 'begat' anything was Britain's desertion of Hong Kong.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I hope it shifts away from violence and back to the millions of peaceful but angry demonstrators. Lam needs to go. She and her bunch are very much hated in her own home. (Think Donald Trump)

2 ( +2 / -0 )

some (not all) of the violence has come from agent provocateur posing as protestors ... example https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/c5uhna/a_police_provocateur_got_exposed_by_hong_kong/

1 ( +3 / -2 )

ThePBotToday  07:36 am JST

I'm not sure where you got that silly idea.

Violence begets violence. It doesn't matter who starts it, it just doesn't end.

No it does end, when one of the two parties believes that it has attained it goals and the other ceases any further resistance. Not advocating violence, just pointing out how it has always been in human history.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Britain's desertion of Hong Kong.

Really?

Britain didn't desert HK. Their 99 year lease was up. They followed an agreement and a planned handover which began in 1984. China would never have extended the lease. The mainland was forced into the lease by the Brits after a few wars over tea and opium that would have outraged people today.

China signed a 99 year lease in Sri Lanka a few years ago for a port.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The CPP murdered protestors with tanks at Tienanmen square, and have murders prisoners for their organs. 

They still do murder people for organs.

When Hong Kong was reverted to Chinese control, I (and most people familiar with the situation) was optimistic about China's direction. Though they had a terrible human rights record, it was gradually getting better, and life in general was improving. The country had the vibrant feeling of a place on the verge of greatness, and all the energy that comes with that.

Since then, all that has changed. The country is headed in the worst possible direction, and we will eventually see the worst possible results. People in Hong Kong are well aware of this. It's one thing to slap abusive and authoritarian government chains on people who are already somewhat used to being abusively governed. But how well will that go down in a place where people are used to freedom?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

the only thing that 'begat' anything was Britain's desertion of Hong Kong.

What were they supposed to do? They had an agreement - it expired.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

On the subject of violence, I hope that it can be avoided. Non-violent civil disobedience, in the manner of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, seems preferable.

I confess to being surprised that Xi has not yet succumbed to what must be the temptation to storm Hong Kong with overwhelming force, although that is certainly not the outcome that I would like to see. It is only natural for people to want not only economic viability, but the feeling of freedom and the inherent pride that comes from self rule. It is very encouraging that Xi has so far allowed Hong Kong a semblance of freedom. If there is ever to be a peaceful resolution to the Taipei - Peking standoff, it would help immensely if a peaceful resolution to the current Hong Kong question can be achieved. Conversely, a demonstration of brute force by Xi will likely only strengthen Taiwan's resolve to stay independent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So the danger is if there's violence it'll invite a crushing response from Xi, and if it's peaceful the protesters will just be ignored. Poor people of Hong Kong.

Well yes, you were a little slow to wake up to Hong Kong reality post-1997, but that's how it is.

In reality it's actually rather worse, because Hong Kong people are not being granted the status quo. Instead they are seeing their freedoms actively eroded, and with the extradition bill, it was finally and unavoidably clear that the Hong Kong government is uninterested in protecting their rights of the citizens or upholding the Basic Law. And it expects the people to go along with it, all the while being told that they're not to be trusted with full democratic rights. Which is an insult to any educated population.

Apparently the population has risen against that insult.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Lam should look at Andrew Scheer. When his party lost big, he stepped down.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Lam should look at Andrew Scheer. When his party lost big, he stepped down.

Agreed. Wouldn’t it be great if everyone were reasonable?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What were they supposed to do? They had an agreement - it expired.

Pfffft . . . The answer is painfully obvious: Follow Donny’s style and break the agreement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites