Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday November 06 2019, @10:15AM   Printer-friendly
from the getting-roughed-up dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Chinese state media has urged authorities to take a "tougher line" against protesters in Hong Kong who vandalised state-run Xinhua news agency and other buildings at the weekend, saying the violence damaged the city's rule of law.

[...] In an editorial, state-backed China Daily newspaper criticised the "wanton" attacks by "naive" demonstrators, adding, "They are doomed to fail simply because their violence will encounter the full weight of the law."

Police fired tear gas at black-clad protesters on Saturday and Sunday in some of the worst violence in the Asian financial hub in weeks, with metro stations set ablaze and buildings vandalised.

Violence also erupted on Sunday after a man with a knife attacked several people and bit off part of the ear of a pro-democracy politician. Two of the victims are reportedly in critical condition, according to reports.

The past five months of anti-government protests in the former British colony represent the biggest popular challenge to President Xi Jinping's government since he took over China's leadership in late 2012.

Protesters are angry at China's perceived meddling with Hong Kong's freedoms, including its legal system, since the Asian financial hub returned to Chinese rule in 1997. China denies the accusation.

The widely-read Global Times tabloid on Sunday condemned the protesters' actions targeting Xinhua and called for action by Hong Kong's enforcement agencies.

"Due to the symbolic image of Xinhua, the vandalizing of its branch is not only a provocation to the rule of law in Hong Kong, but also to the central government and the Chinese mainland, which is the rioters' main purpose," it said.

On Friday, after a meeting of China's top leadership, a senior Chinese official said it would not tolerate separatism or threats to national security in Hong Kong and would "perfect" the way it appointed the city's leader.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 07 2019, @01:29PM (6 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday November 07 2019, @01:29PM (#917297) Journal

    Again, don't you see your own inconsistency? China does something, be it trying to pass unjust laws or lie about protesters or whatever else, it's tyranny?

    First, that is tyranny.

    We do something such as pass unjust laws or lie about the protesters and it's something else?

    Who is "we"? I personally am not a government or media source. I don't pass unjust laws or lie about protesters.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @01:39PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @01:39PM (#917303)

    We would be the "west" in general, and the United States in particular. I put "west" in quotes as I would also consider nations such as South Korea or Japan part of the "west" in this reference.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @04:33PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @04:33PM (#917378)

      Why can't you just be against tyranny in general, whether the US government or the Chinese government does it?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @06:09PM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 07 2019, @06:09PM (#917412)

        Because I don't agree that these actions are tyrannical in any way, shape, or form. And I think most people would generally agree except when the vile perpetrator of acts like pushing for extradition agreements happens to come from an 'unfriendly' nation. It invariably comes down to declaring things that we regularly engage in, but would never call tyrannical, are now required to be tyrannical. The most basic way to refute poor logic is to assume something is true and show it leads to a contradiction. Our overly enthusiastic use of words like tyranny is a perfect example of this.

        I feel like in a way we're gradually turning into a Monthy Python skit. [youtube.com] However, it's somehow real life.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday November 08 2019, @12:17AM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday November 08 2019, @12:17AM (#917652) Journal

          It invariably comes down to declaring things that we regularly engage in, but would never call tyrannical, are now required to be tyrannical.

          We know that China has set up an enormous apparatus to filter and eliminate speech and knowledge it finds inconvenient. That has long been tyranny. Here, Hong Kong is proposing extradition to China, famed for its lack of justice, for all kinds of dubious charges like political speech. That's long been tyranny as well. There is a remarkable hypocrisy here - lies excused, human freedom violated, and attempts in Hong Kong to break law on an institutional scale for their Chinese tyrants. And yet somehow the hypocrisy of the US completely justifies that evil.

          Obviously, you have never considered the logical consequences of your hypocrisy. After all, if the US is similarly given a free pass on its stuff because China does it too, then we'll see a quick race to the bottom of human decency.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 08 2019, @04:56AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 08 2019, @04:56AM (#917765)

            China is famed for injustice and targeting people for all kinds of dubious charges? How in the world is that they have 1/5th our incarceration rate then? It's interesting how often the rhetoric and the facts don't really line up, isn't it?

            On the firewall not long ago I'd have agreed with you, but I've gradually come to see that social media is probably even more damaging to a society than many of the things we do strictly control, such as gambling or various drugs. The one and only reason I would never support such a thing in the US is because I do not think our politicians tend to prioritize individual > party > nation. The communist party of China is of course also very motivated by its own interest but I get the perception that the general ordering there is nation > party > individual. I think is a big part of the reason that China has been going into overdrive while much of the rest of the world continues to stagnate. Changes such as filtering in the US would be driven with national interests a distant concern to party interests.

            So for instance the CPC does control what can be broadcast on television but instead of requiring just political rants or indoctrination, they require a certain chunk of general educational broadcasting. Imagine if our reality TV or clickbait news occasionally got interrupted for an episode of NOVA? It's possible I'm seeing things with rose colored glasses, but to me this not only seems like a very good idea but one that may ultimately end up being a necessary idea. Or even on recruitment to the CPC. Instead of valuing just blind loyalty, or charisma, or whatever other tertiary skill - they are now primarily focusing on technical skills and knowledge. China has quite a lot of problems, but again is also doing quite a lot of things very right.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday November 09 2019, @01:31AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 09 2019, @01:31AM (#918125) Journal

              China is famed for injustice and targeting people for all kinds of dubious charges?

              Why are you asking this question?

              How in the world is that they have 1/5th our incarceration rate then?

              Based on whose evidence?

              It's interesting how often the rhetoric and the facts don't really line up, isn't it?

              Indeed.

              On the firewall not long ago I'd have agreed with you, but I've gradually come to see that social media is probably even more damaging to a society than many of the things we do strictly control, such as gambling or various drugs.

              Yet another place where you've bought into the propaganda. Your assertion is ridiculous, not that I think that gambling or "various drugs" are significantly damaging to a society.