Me no like to be here
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Here ---> X
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today Hong Kong enters China.
Whereas the autonomous region was officially handed over to Beijing over 17 years ago, the population of Hong Kong has until now enjoyed a smooth transition as the motherland gave them little hindrance to continue living and making money.
Never, until today, were Honkongers given a reminder of the radically different attitudes of their new landlords.
And now, in a desperate and futile attempt at obtaining scraps of democracy, a group of students will realize the true price of their quest, as did their equals in Beijing in 1989.
The sad truth of it all is that a majority of the local population has already bowed to the new regime. They see little gain in democracy, they accept and are content with the settling of a new power that rules them, happy with being alleviated from the burden of governing themselves.
The elite has now mostly been converted, or told to remain quiet and to bend over so as to reduce the discomfort.
The angiogenesis is complete and now feeds the new metastatic communist branch.
It was, of course, foolish of anyone to expect anything else.
And truth be told, things will remain mostly as they are for the average Joe Wong for years to come. Save, of course, for the occasional nudge in the judicial system, the sporadic censorship, the creeping propaganda, the odd concentration of powers and the incidental corruption. But is that really a bad thing, when you can still live and make money?
Democracy is a luxury only given to those worthy of it.
So long to the Hong Kong of yesterday and good luck to the Hong Kong of tomorrow, may you still manage to remain the unique city you became famous for.
{cue overdramatic sorrowful tears}
Oh, and if you think this has nothing to do with aviation in Hong Kong, think again.
Whereas the autonomous region was officially handed over to Beijing over 17 years ago, the population of Hong Kong has until now enjoyed a smooth transition as the motherland gave them little hindrance to continue living and making money.
Never, until today, were Honkongers given a reminder of the radically different attitudes of their new landlords.
And now, in a desperate and futile attempt at obtaining scraps of democracy, a group of students will realize the true price of their quest, as did their equals in Beijing in 1989.
The sad truth of it all is that a majority of the local population has already bowed to the new regime. They see little gain in democracy, they accept and are content with the settling of a new power that rules them, happy with being alleviated from the burden of governing themselves.
The elite has now mostly been converted, or told to remain quiet and to bend over so as to reduce the discomfort.
The angiogenesis is complete and now feeds the new metastatic communist branch.
It was, of course, foolish of anyone to expect anything else.
And truth be told, things will remain mostly as they are for the average Joe Wong for years to come. Save, of course, for the occasional nudge in the judicial system, the sporadic censorship, the creeping propaganda, the odd concentration of powers and the incidental corruption. But is that really a bad thing, when you can still live and make money?
Democracy is a luxury only given to those worthy of it.
So long to the Hong Kong of yesterday and good luck to the Hong Kong of tomorrow, may you still manage to remain the unique city you became famous for.
{cue overdramatic sorrowful tears}
Oh, and if you think this has nothing to do with aviation in Hong Kong, think again.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is little difference between pure democracy and pure tyranny. Pure democracy simply degenerates into the tyranny of the majority as factions become manipulated against one another.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Here and There
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shep69 is not far from the truth.
The video link below is a good explanation of the different forms of government, albeit in the context of America.
Still applicable to any country.
Republic vs Democracy - YouTube
The video link below is a good explanation of the different forms of government, albeit in the context of America.
Still applicable to any country.
Republic vs Democracy - YouTube
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Kowloon
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All over facebook and the cx secret page are inciting cabin crew (and/or flight crew) to port sick tomorrow so as to paralyze hk aviation. Great response online so far. Once again, presenting to you the IQ of wuurd's best airline awok. Now give me some popcorn! 
Actually to a certain extent the HK population did have democracy under the Brits ; that is the root of the problem now . Please compare Brit rule versus communism under the maoists for a better definition .
cheers
cheers
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Benevolent dictators don't remain benevolent for very long.
The writers of the US constitution were very fearful of pure democracy hence the property ownership requirement and limited voting demographic to give voters a stake in not voting money out of the public treasury (and that Federalism is designed such that local states fight a central government over resources and power keeping it in check). The same thing can be achieved by a completely flat tax without exemption.
Originally the Senate was appointed by states (not directly elected) as was the President (appointed by electors sent by the state legislatures). Since legislation had to clear both the house and senate, the senate served as a deliberative body and (having the local best interests at heart) would stop bad legislation. The constitution served as a flat stop as well--providing concrete limits on the government and its powers. Electing the president via state legislature also limited the ability for mob rule voting to put someone at the helm who handed out goodies to those placing him--or her--there (this was torpedoed in a gradual process having its roots in the 14th Amendment paving the way for presidental election by popular vote. NOT the intent of the founders who had set things up for only the house and state legislatures to be able to be directly elected). The US was originally set up as a collection of individual autonomous states held together in a common defensive and economic alliance.
The 16th and 17th Amendments were "logic bombs" toward the US charter by allowing widespread taxing authority (resources) as well as senators now to be elected by popular vote instead of appointed by state legislatures (paving the way for resources being used to buy votes rather than having to be appointed by a legislature acting as a buffer with the individual states' best interest in mind). Took 100 years but we are reaping the "rewards" of this now--as we are by miscreants with excellent rationalization skills watering down the objective rights and limitations affirmed in the US constitution as to make it meaningless.
So it CAN work but demands more vigilance than most cultures can muster--at least over time. De Toqueville was right in this regard. Eventually factions are manipulated by those with an agenda to the demise of the whole.
Kinda like a certain offer which comes to mind which folks only have one more day to think about.
The writers of the US constitution were very fearful of pure democracy hence the property ownership requirement and limited voting demographic to give voters a stake in not voting money out of the public treasury (and that Federalism is designed such that local states fight a central government over resources and power keeping it in check). The same thing can be achieved by a completely flat tax without exemption.
Originally the Senate was appointed by states (not directly elected) as was the President (appointed by electors sent by the state legislatures). Since legislation had to clear both the house and senate, the senate served as a deliberative body and (having the local best interests at heart) would stop bad legislation. The constitution served as a flat stop as well--providing concrete limits on the government and its powers. Electing the president via state legislature also limited the ability for mob rule voting to put someone at the helm who handed out goodies to those placing him--or her--there (this was torpedoed in a gradual process having its roots in the 14th Amendment paving the way for presidental election by popular vote. NOT the intent of the founders who had set things up for only the house and state legislatures to be able to be directly elected). The US was originally set up as a collection of individual autonomous states held together in a common defensive and economic alliance.
The 16th and 17th Amendments were "logic bombs" toward the US charter by allowing widespread taxing authority (resources) as well as senators now to be elected by popular vote instead of appointed by state legislatures (paving the way for resources being used to buy votes rather than having to be appointed by a legislature acting as a buffer with the individual states' best interest in mind). Took 100 years but we are reaping the "rewards" of this now--as we are by miscreants with excellent rationalization skills watering down the objective rights and limitations affirmed in the US constitution as to make it meaningless.
So it CAN work but demands more vigilance than most cultures can muster--at least over time. De Toqueville was right in this regard. Eventually factions are manipulated by those with an agenda to the demise of the whole.
Kinda like a certain offer which comes to mind which folks only have one more day to think about.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The best argument against Democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter".
Churchill.
If the HK people achieve Democracy what would they do with it ? Having said that we need something better than this lame duck Executive, dominated by plutocrats, vested interests from the property sector downwards, and unable to achieve anything, let alone pass any laws in to statute.
Maybe the Temasek model. Aah, hang on. That would require competent, benevolent, socialist leadership. Not an estate agent. Or failed shipping magnate.
Churchill.
If the HK people achieve Democracy what would they do with it ? Having said that we need something better than this lame duck Executive, dominated by plutocrats, vested interests from the property sector downwards, and unable to achieve anything, let alone pass any laws in to statute.
Maybe the Temasek model. Aah, hang on. That would require competent, benevolent, socialist leadership. Not an estate agent. Or failed shipping magnate.
Last edited by jacobus; 8th Oct 2014 at 23:21.
OT: Thought the US constitution doesn´t even mention democracy but rather stresses the term republic - the rule of law. Democracy has never worked on a long term basis. A drastic example is a Lynch mob. If a majority believes someone is guilty and executes him that would be democracy as well.
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
