The fight for freedom doesn’t stop at the border.
Hong Kongers, we are with you.
Your protest against continued tyranny by mainland China is a just cause. The Communist Party of China may no longer be in Marx’s pocket, but its members remain greedy and dictatorial and oppressive.
Leung, the governor of Hong Kong, refuses to step down. Tyrants do cling to power. (No term limits for them!) But the people have every right to demand his ouster under a principle established in our own revolution: Government must rest upon the consent of the governed.
I have no idea how this will all turn out. Ever since the Tiananmen protests, a generation ago, I’ve harbored hope: a freer future for the Chinese. But I know they are up against a juggernaut, an extremely entrenched exploiter class. The Tiananmen protests were violently put down, suppressed. Will Hong Kong’s be?
I think the people of Hong Kong know what they’re up against. All Chinese people know how corrupt and dangerous their government is. But the details, the exact history of the crimes? Not so much. Kept under wraps. Still, the people of Hong Kong developed a taste for freedom under the Brits. If not a taste for democratic elections. Now they are demanding both electoral democracy and democratic freedoms.
The protesters “occupying” Hong Kong have American analogues. But are they “Occupier” or “Tea Party”?
They aren’t demanding socialistic levels of more government. And they aren’t trespassing, or committing crimes. And they pick up after themselves.
That’s the way to “occupy” a city: For freedom, responsibly.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
4 replies on “How to Occupy Hong Kong”
The consent of the governed is difficult to maintain in a repressive state, but is not an option, but rather a necessity in the new information age. With information and availability come The most powerful forces in human history have all been ideas.
Governments will not fail or be overthrown as long as they are basically irrelevant to the everyday life of the average citizen. As soon as that changes their time is limited.
…. the People of Hong Kong developed a taste for Freedom under the Brits ….
And what a taste it was. Before, in 1997 — and very many instances for personal gain — the cabinet of the much-vaunted Mrs Thatcher cravenly gave up – to Peking’s pack of perilously-pernicious Predators – ownership of Free British Hong Kong – the seven-odd million then Free-British-Hong-Kong citizens – along with the 100-years-leased, New Territories.
A sad day, indeed, for once-great Britain. And for the principle of individual liberty.
Brian Richard Allen
Brian, they didn’t have a choice. If they had done otherwise it would have been a breach of Rule of Law. We have enough of that already. It was a 100 year lease and the original signers thought it would simply be somebody else’s problem because they would be long gone. Britain tried but concluded they could not defend Hong Kong if they chose to be “occupiers”. China simply would not re-let the island.
Ghandi did it without violence but most tasteful protesters usually get pushed aside. I expect this to go nowhere until it gets violent. Catalonia? I think that one will get violent and i support the Catalonians right to choose their future. I am amazed at the tolerance of Venezuelans to endure the sham government they have. Argentina and Brazil routinely screw up their economy & citizens. So, all in all, the lesson of history is that Hong Kong is no where close to getting what they want.
The reason? The ultimate reason why is the control of the MONEY. The tax flow. China cannot afford to lose the gargantuan tax flow that Hong Kong generates–and it is a military/defense issue that the PLA won’t tolerate. Neither can Madrid but they may not be strong enough for this fight.
Too bad we can’t get a large group, say 1 million, to “occupy” D.C.