Blog Archives

Walter's Blog

"But how can you live and have no story to tell?" Fyodor Dostoevsky

Reflections on recent events, plus the occasional fact free rant unfiltered by rational argument.

"If you want to read a blog to get a sense of what is going on in Hong Kong these days or a blog that would tell you what life was like living in colonial Hong Kong, this blog, WALTER'S BLOG, fits the bill." Hong Kong Blog Review

Hong Kong weather

28/3/2021 0 Comments

Tit For Tat

"You can't draw up a few cannons and intimidate us. Those days are over."

The propaganda department of the CCP has a recruit in President Joe Biden. The boys in Beijing don't need to worry too much about their popularity; Biden is rallying the Chinese people behind them. By stating he will not allow China to become a leading world-power, Biden played into the narrative of bullying foreigners holding back the Chinese.

Whoever is advising Biden has no grasp of history, the sentiment within China, nor the likely consequences of this bravado. Unbeknown to Washington wonks, the dyed-haired brigade in Zhongnanhai is now probably grinning from ear to ear. Meanwhile, Asians (because all Asians are Chinese) suffer terrible violence in a febrile anti-Chinese atmosphere, as the racial hatred pot is stirred.

A few politicians seek to make the distinction between the CCP and the Chinese people. But that's a dead-end street for many reasons. First, all the surveys show consistent majority support for the CCP within China. Second, even if the CCP fell or some form of democracy emerged, don't imagine that Chinese public sentiment would differ. They will still demand that past shames are not repeated. That includes resisting the demands of the West.

Here it is necessary to pause and understand the deep-seated underpinnings in the Chinese mindset. A truth that ought to be acknowledged is that China was once the world's leading civilisation. Then China took a century-long detour through instability, mayhem, civil war and famine. Granted, that's very much a potted history. During this period, stronger nations waded-in to get a piece of the action, hence Hong Kong, Macau and various treaty ports. Japan exploited China's weakness to seize vast tracts of lands committing many atrocities along the way.

Well documented is China's hundred years of humiliation. Every Chinese kid knows how the British used gunboats to bombard Mainland ports to force the sale of opium. They know about the Summer Palace's sacking and the plunder of art, much of which now sits in the British Museum. Plus, that foreign powers took turns biting chunks out of China. That era remains a deep scar on the national psyche, shaping everything. Thus last week, when the West announced sanctions, China's response was swift and unequivocal, "You can't draw up a few cannons and intimidate us. Those days are over."

In forums, meetings and press conferences, the Chinese leadership make it clear they'll no longer remain silent and passive when Western nations take action. This week they've countered-sanctioned several British politicians, an academic and companies. Of course, those sanctioned claim to be upholding British values, although they appear more reticent about events on their doorstep in Batley. Strange that death threats against a teacher don't summons them to action around their claimed values.

The issue of the day is Xinjiang and claims of genocide. Getting a handle on what is happening to the Uyghurs remains challenging. A few commentators suggest the situation is comparable to Northern Ireland in the 1970s/80s on a much larger scale. Others note the geopolitical aspects asserting that Xinjiang is an ideal jumping-off point for destabilising China. Don't forget that Xinjiang province abuts Afghanistan, where a Western force has been at war against the Taliban for decades. Xinjiang is also home to the largest reserves of oil in Asia.

It's natural for anyone who recalls the whole WMD saga and Iraq to be sceptical. Recent history has told us that 'manufactured-consent' is a tool used to shape public opinion before action. Last week, we had this report affirming that Trump and his team lied about Chinese influence on US elections.

I do not doubt that China is clamping down hard in Xinjiang following a wave of terrorist incidents. And aspects of that clampdown are robust, perhaps similar to the US approach after 9/11. It's worth remember that many Uyghurs were held in Guantanamo Bay.

As the struggle between the West and China escalates, the Uyghur issue has proven a useful stick with which to beat Beijing. Yet odd, isn't it, that Muslim nations remain silent about the Uyghurs? I suspect the truth is much more complex and nuanced than we currently understand.

Over the past 40 years, with the communist experiment de facto abandoned, China moved towards an authoritarian-capitalist centralised system. This approach brought unprecedented growth. Academics in the West naively believed that such success would morph into a western-style democracy. They opined that true affluence could only come by adopting such a system.

That proved wrong. Likewise, the belief that China would disintegrate Soviet Union style. How many times did I listen to lofty professors holding forth that China would either fail or break up into feuding fiefdoms. That none of it happened illustrates that the 'experts' hardly justify their title.

Whatever Biden may say, China is a dominant power in our world. It takes the lead on climate change, while the belt-and-road initiative has seen it bring much-needed infrastructure to developing countries in parts of Asia, Africa and elsewhere. Besides, the pandemic affirmed growing Chinese confidence that the West is in decline.

Despite all the bellicose noise, China does not present the kind of threat one might believe. Beijing is not seeking to promote its ideology as it ramps up economic clout and international reach. In truth, China is more occupied with its own financial, demographic and political challenges. The one-child policy proved too effective, with possible destabilising consequences meaning the country may grow old before it grows rich. In short, they may not have enough people. The emergence of a middle class pushes that process along, as educated women take charge of their reproduction.

Then atop that are debt-ridden industries and clunky state-owned enterprises proving a drag on economic progress. What China has, in its favour, are unity and focus. It's not a 'silly people' as eloquently put here by Bill Maher.

Blocking China's advance, as Biden proposed, is a blunt instrument from a Cold War mindset of military dominance. Looking ahead and returning to an old theme, the future will be far better if Beijing and Washington place cooperation above confrontation. As the tectonic plates of global strength shift, shouting at each other from the barricades won't help.

0 Comments

24/3/2021 1 Comment

Teacup in a Storm

"And while you could argue the government has overreacted, I'd opine their caution is correct"

As news broke this morning of shut Covid-19 vaccination centres, a palpable fear gripped the city. The first whiff I got of something untoward was RTHK's 'Backchat' show; the presenter happily relaying reports sent to them on Facebook around 9 am.

He was keen to stress the reports as 'unconfirmed'. Yet did I detect a degree of relish in his tone? After all, such a tidbit is manna from heaven for a journalist. He repeated the breaking news at least twice, all without any verification or fact-checking.

My Whatsapp soon filled with messages. These included a forwarded picture of a makeshift sign announcing BioNTech jabs' suspended. Next, I heard that Macau had stopped jabs with a public statement. By 9:30 am, the conspiracy nut-jobs had it that a cyberattack took out the Vaccine webpage and booking system. I soon confirmed this to be untrue by logging-on to the webpage without issue.

Over the next hour, the conspiracies escalated. In various forms, the lunatic fringe claimed that the government messed up the BioNTech vaccine to force us all to opt for Sinovac. The claimed motivation is to prove Hongkong's patriotism. This gem ignored certain realities.

For starters, why would the government give us a choice of vaccines and then opt to sabotage one? Plus, to date, two-third of jabs are Sinovac. Next, the government has enough on its plate organising and promoting vaccine use. Besides, China ordered millions of BioNtech doses, which destroys the patriotism argument. So all the conspiracy theories collapse as nonsensical naked fantasies.

Also, I find it perverse that Covid-19 causes so much misery and hardship for medical professionals, yet many of them discredit the government's efforts. In some of their utterances, you can see the bias spilling forth.

Some facts. The BioNTech vaccine comes in glass vials. Each vial contains five doses, although, by careful handling, it is possible to squeeze out six shots with a fine needle. While Hong Kong uses fine needles, it opts for five doses a vial to avoid any untoward issues.

The vials have four features that prevent leakage and cross-contamination. Even if one seal fails, the others provide redundancy. The first seal is a plastic cap, the second a metal cap and finally a rubber membrane. Also, inert gas pressurises the vials to prevent the intrusion of contamination if a seal fails. That pressure will also show any leaks by causing the liquid vaccine to expel, leaving a stain.

The government states that they've found 57 identifiable defects in 150,000 vials. That sounds well within production tolerance to me.

It would appear that during transportation, unwrapping and preparation for use, a few vials sustained damage. And that damage prompted the issue we've seen today. And while you could argue the government has overreacted, I'd opine their caution is correct. You can imagine the outcry if they'd pressed-on without investigation. Also, unscrupulous types could exploit the damaged vials with leaks to the press.

If my thinking is correct, with the harm caused by transportation, it's a straightforward matter. Physical checks with a 'Mark One Eyeball' should be enough before resuming the vaccination programme.

Even so, I accept the detractors have a new drum to beat. Listen out for the beat because they must seize upon any morsel to justify their falsehoods.

1 Comment

21/3/2021 1 Comment

Do as I say, not as I do!

"Fancy ten years jail for being annoying?"

It's said that an era of censorship, threats and state repression is upon us. The government is demanding the deletion of Internet content and seeking to censor the media. A leading magazine is facing threats of legal action and unlimited fines.

New laws are coming in that will curtail the right to protest including criminalising peaceful demonstrations. Fancy ten years jail for being annoying? At the same time, freedom of speech will falter under draconian 'hate speech' legislation. Even comments made in the privacy of a home may now be subject to legal sanction. It's a heady mix of Orwellian stuff.

And to clarify, I'm not talking about Hong Kong. All this is happening in the UK. Undoubtedly, if Hong Kong attempted the same, we'd face threats of sanctions and an international outcry.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill ( Part 3 Para 54 of draft bill is relevant) has undergone a second reading in the UK Parliament. The bill is a hotchpotch of mundane matters, while hidden in there are ‘Trojan horses’. This legislation gives the Police the power to stop protests, even static single-person events that officers deem too loud or causing a nuisance.

Moreover, Police can decide that a demonstration has too much 'impact' and then close it down. Even causing 'annoyance' is to become unlawful. Forgive me, but I thought the purpose of protests was 'impact' and 'annoyance'.

Applying ‘impact’, ‘annoyance’ ‘noise’ and the ‘nuisance’ principle would shut down all Hong Kong protests. If that’s the international standard that we are to be measured against, I’m sure we’d do well.

Even unwittingly attending an outlawed UK protest may now become a statutory offence with a possible jail sentence. Powers to stop people walking on the cracks in the pavement have yet to emerge. No doubt they'll get round to that.

The new law proposes broad discretion for the Police. Likewise, the Home Secretary gets sweeping powers to ban demonstrations. What could go wrong?

To date, the bill enjoyed an easy passage through parliament. Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, made a token effort, but his weak party are too busy infighting. Theresa May, the former PM, had a bash by warning these proposals are a severe infringement of the right to protest. Things must be dire with your democracy when the only effective opposition is a former PM sitting on the back-benches.

The recent events on Clapham Common may make the passage for the bill harder given the public disquiet at police actions. That Home Secretary Priti Patel sought to shut down the Clapham Common vigil by encouraging the Police to act is now evident. This revelation has opened another can of worms. Don't the Police operate independently of politicians? Then we have disingenuous criticism of the Police by Patel, who it now appears acted on her instructions.

On March 11, Scotland voted in a controversial new law of 'stirring up hatred'. One commentator called this "the most contentious piece of legislation ever considered by the Scottish Parliament". This law got my attention because many people in the West like to poke fun at China's 'picking quarrels' charge. Fair enough, but Scotland now has its version.

There are serious concerns that this new law will impact freedom of speech. For example, JK Rowling, of Harry Potter fame, could face up to seven years in prison for expressing her concerns about trans rights. Comedians telling "A Scotsman, an Englishman and an Irishman walked into a bar" jokes may face arrest. All it takes is for someone to decide this is 'hate' and report it.

Lawyers, journalists, actors, authors, comedians, churches, secularists, civil liberties groups and feminists all objected to the new law. These groups warned that the 'stirring up' offence is vague and far-reaching. The Scottish Police Federation said the bill would result in officers "policing what people think or feel."

Plus, don't forget that in 2018, Scotland successfully prosecuted a comedian for the moronic stunt of teaching his dog to give a Nazi salute. As Ricky Gervais noted at the time, "If you don't believe in a person's right to say things that you might find 'grossly offensive', then you don't believe in freedom of speech."

The specific wording of the offence is:-

'behaves in a manner that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting' — or communicates such material — if he or she 'intends to stir up hatred against a group of persons based on the group being defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship), or ethnic or national origins, or if a reasonable person would consider the behaviour or the communication of the material to be likely to result in hatred being stirred up against such a group'.

Codifying feelings and view-points, then ascribing some as hateful, is a slippery slope. Does the State feel it's qualified to regulate emotions? I can only assume that in Scotland, politicians are confident they can.

Yet this law places a loaded gun at every debate, in comedy clubs and at the head of anyone who dares to speak out. And while proponents of the law claim they have good intentions, that's a profoundly naive statement. They've created a monster that will come back to haunt them.

For the record, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides no right not to be offended. But, Article 19 states:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Indeed, the British Police have already demonstrated an inability to apply such laws with appropriate discretion. Harry Miller's case tells us that officers will over reach to appease special interest groups. In the process, they are willing to trample on freedoms. Then you have Merseyside Police backpedalling after this massive blunder.

All this is atop a network of official informants that the UK established the 2015 Counter Terrorism and Security Act.

It's compelling to note that the Scottish National Party-controlled parliament enacted this ‘hate speech’ law. This week the SNP, through the Crown Office, sought to censor The Spectator magazine with legal action threats. The magazine received instructions to remove details of the ongoing Sturgeon/Salmond saga.

Much of this information is already in the public domain. David Davies, an MP, took advantage of parliamentary privilege to reveal the same facts. So why the haste to delete it from The Spectator magazine?

How often do we have to listen to lecture from the Dominic Rabb and the rest about upholding ‘universal values’. Yet here we stand, with compelling evidence that Britain is stripping away people's freedoms while pointing the finger at us.

Sorry, I forget this stuff is only authoritarian when enacted outside the 'free world’—my mistake.

1 Comment

18/3/2021 0 Comments

Hello Kitty & Beer is the answer!

"It's not five-star accommodation, neither is it Club Med. Yet, it's clean and well-provisioned"

Our 'Dear Leader' has spoken. Carrie Lam made it clear that her formidable shoulders will carry the burden of implementing Hong Kong's political 'reforms'. Should we applaud her? At the back of my mind, her statement stirred something from my school days. Then it came back to me, Squealer's address from Animal Farm:

"Comrades, I trust that every animal here appreciates the sacrifice that Comrade Napoleon has made in taking this extra labour upon himself. Do not imagine, comrades, that leadership is a pleasure! On the contrary, it is a deep and heavy responsibility."

For sure, Carrie Lam has a thankless task, made harder by her lack of empathy and self-awareness. As more families with young children faced quarantine in the Penny's Bay facility, Carrie's robotic side was on full display.

It's not five-star accommodation, neither is it Club Med. Yet, it's clean and well-provisioned. Then stories emerged of breast-feeding mothers separated from their babies; while restrained in cots; toddlers faced days of purgatory. Last year we had this self-entitled lady over-egging it with concentration camp claims. She's now gone to ground.

I'm told Hong Kong's Mumsnet went into hyperventilation mode. But, the hype soon became clear. As far as I can tell one mother faced separation, after she'd opted to place her child into hospital care, and then relented. She is now back with the kid.

Less tolerable is the now admitted practice of physically restraining children. No matter how you cut it, this procedure is medieval with or without the parent's permission. Surely we can do better because flashing around the world is the message that Hong Kong ties up babies.

Meanwhile, a clip is circulating of an expatriate family in Pennys Bay with the wife bemoaning the conditions. She has two kids. And, yes, she will struggle with two youngsters in such a room for weeks. Yet, these conditions are not unknown to most Hongkongers, who live in tiny spaces. Mrs Chan from a tenement in Sham Shui Po dreams of such luxury. Thus, sympathy from the majority? Forget it.

In all this hullabaloo, a simmering anti-expatriate vibe emerged. That a Chinese couple kicked-off the complaints about child separation doesn't sit well with the narrative of whinging Expats. Then you have the chap in the clip below, full of praise of the facilities as he undergoes testing at North Lantau Hospital.

Into this fray, steps 'caring' Carrie. In her public statements, she hits all the proper technical notes; follow the law, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and blah, blah, blah. In all this, she manages to display not an ounce of affinity or humanity. All it would take is, "As a mother, I understand these concerns. We will seek to make the children's stay as comfortable as possible." Instead, nothing except "We are compassionate" when her tone suggests otherwise.

All the research tells us the importance of empathetic gestures and compassion in modern leadership. These traits go a long way to anchoring authentic leaders. Did Carrie get that memo?

And then she went even further, claiming that the public is not cooperating over Covid vaccinations. I wonder why? Leadership models tell us that Carrie has five kinds of power she can exert to get people to take vaccines.

Expert power: get the doctors to tell the people the facts. That approach falters because the 'experts' disagree as they jockey for the media spotlight and their 15-minutes of fame. A politicised medical profession doesn't help.

Referent power: this all about being liked and respected. You can see the issue. Even within the pro-government camp, Carrie doesn't enjoy much affection.

Coercive power: punish those who don't get vaccinated. This one doesn't look tenable given political sentiment. Forcing people plays into the loss of freedoms narrative.

Legitimate power: if people feel Carrie is a legitimate leader, they'll respond and get vaccinated. Again, you can see the issue. Only 40 per cent of the population view Carrie Lam as legit. The rest reject her or don't care.

Reward power: induce people to comply by rewarding them.

I reckon the last option is Carrie's best bet. Also, I'm prepared to help with suggestions based on my extensive observations of society. A careful review of Hong Kong history points the way with helpful precedents. Every time McDonald's offered a free toy with a burger, the lines went around the block. Plus, back in the day before I became a potential vector for Mad Cow disease, I'd empty an arm full of blood at the Red Cross. A cold San Miguel followed as reward and rehydration.

And contrary to Carrie's disingenuous claims, over a quarter of a million folks have cooperated in getting their first shot. There you go, Carrie. Give away Hello Kitty dolls to the younger crowd while free beer works for me.

You know it makes sense. Cheers!

0 Comments

<<Previous

YOUR CART

Walter's Blog

Tit For Tat

Teacup in a Storm

Do as I say, not as I do!

Hello Kitty & Beer is the answer!

Author

Archives

Home

Introduction

Contact Walter