Walter's Blog |
|
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
|
|
28/11/2024 1 Comment Sliding Doors "The social unrest and riots tore at the tethers of Hong Kong society." There is a scene in the movie Sliding Doors when a London woman's love life and career hinge, unknown to her, on whether or not she catches a train. We see it both ways, in parallel. It is hard to forget that one event, a sliding door, prevents her from catching a train, changing the whole course of her life.
What if? Things could have been so different. That thought came to mind as I reflected on the conviction of 45 people for attempting to overthrow the Hong Kong government. Had the pan-democrats shown some pragmatism in 2014, when proposals for incremental changes to our governance system were on the table, we perhaps could have avoided the social unrest of 2019. Likewise, had they recognised that Hong Kong needed to implement Article 23, would the National Security Law not have been required? More competent politicians play by the adage, "Politics is the art of the possible." A savvy political cohort wouldn't have given tacit and direct support to violent mobs that smashed their way into our parliament. Also, they'd have seen the possible outcomes of mounting a direct challenge that sought to overthrow the government. And they'd have decried a "We Burn, You Burn" (攬炒) strategy that saw petrol bombs, the torching of MTR stations and the immolation of an innocent man. Anyway, the pan-democrats took an aggressive approach, aligning themselves with rioters, hooligans, and separatists. This decision led to the worst possible outcome for their agenda, a result that we now must grapple with. And while the West's politicians are reacting with a mix of threats, bitterness and tantrums at the conviction of the 45, those venting also did little to condemn the violence. Instead, they unquestioningly portrayed the protests as peaceful. What’s more, the Western MSM coverage continues to wilfully ignore the facts associated with the movement that Benny Tai and his crew ignited, including the attempts to systematically destroy the city's infrastructure and the sophisticated bomb plot aimed at massacring police officers. The broader context is that Western politicians supported the mob to apply pressure as part of the rivalry between the U.S. and China. Further, while the extradition bill and pro-democracy movements are cited as catalysts, that narrative is oversimplified. The horde that came to the streets proved a volatile mix of pro-independence and sectarian groups, religious zealots, and the disgruntled, who combined in a so-called leaderless movement to attack our parliament and occupy university campuses, turning them into bomb factories. Along the way, the rioters did millions of dollars worth of damage, distorting and traumatising countless lives. When analysing the causes of these events, it is crucial to consider the broader picture. The emergence of wealthy Chinese from the Mainland was first felt in Hong Kong, countering the collective view that only Westernised Chinese could succeed. This shift in status contributed to the social tensions that fueled various protests over access to milk powder and maternity hospitals. Given the unresolved issues from the 2014 "Occupy Central Movement" and the orchestrated "Fish Ball" riot of 2016, which ambushed the police, there was evidence of an escalating situation. That radicals attended regime-change training overseas is telling. The presence of overseas neo-Nazis in the protests is also significant. How did they arrive here? Likewise, the adoption of tactics straight out of the Antifa playbook points towards a level of sophistication which causes one to ponder. Who is the unseen hand? Did Gene Sharp’s book From Directorship to Democracy—a template for insurrection and regime change—guide the radicals? Nury Vittachi, a local journalist and author, explores these themes in The Other Side of the Story: A Secret War in Hong Kong, the most comprehensive account of the riots. All the radicals need is a trigger event to get the ball rolling. Benny Tai and his crew proved more than willing to help ignite a conflagration that inevitably burned them and left Hong Kong a different place. Given his track record, Benny Tai, a law professor at the University of Hong Kong, deserves particular criticism. In 2014, he initiated the 'Occupy Central' movement by leading thousands of young people and students to the streets. Soon, he abandoned them within weeks and returned to his office after losing control. Consequently, impressionable and misguided teenagers faced the consequences while Tai and his colleagues remained safe in their offices. Tai sought to mirror the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Arab Spring without learning lessons from their failures. This lack of reflection is a stark reminder that education alone does not guarantee wisdom. Likewise, his fellow travellers, including seasoned politicians, either gave tacit support to or failed to condemn the violence that terrified Hong Kong citizens. They remained silent when their supporters burned a man for criticising the protesters; they didn't call off the thugs who beat innocent Mainlanders or the hooligans who trashed business premises under the euphemism of "redecoration." The rioters eventually killed a street sweeper. Alan Leong, a barrister and politician, is reported to have stated in a debate at Hong Kong University that, "violence may sometimes be the solution to a problem." Except Leong wouldn’t be on the street. The social unrest and riots tore at the tethers of Hong Kong society, polarising sons against their fathers, daughters against their mothers, and breaking friendships. In response to the convictions, we may see more sanctions and gripes from the West. Meanwhile, those condemning the situation in Hong Kong supply weapons that inflict terror upon innocents in Gaza and sustain an unwinnable war in Ukraine. As Trump's election has confirmed, many in the West exhibit extraordinary self-deception. They cherry-pick evidence, shape narratives and then claim the moral high ground to disparage anyone who doesn't adhere to their doctrine. I wonder if Western politicians get dizzy from holding their high moral ground. The facts speak volumes. Hong Kong's courts, following established legal procedures, have convicted individuals who openly planned to shut down the government—actions that would be prosecuted as sedition in most jurisdictions, including the United States. This underscores the robustness and fairness of Hong Kong's legal system. Ultimately, the evolution of governance here will depend on choices made in the context of Hong Kong’s unique place within China. As the city continues to navigate that complex journey, this period of calm, rational discourse is welcome.
1 Comment
9/11/2024 0 Comments Trump Storms Home "Trump is not the cause of this shift; he is a symptom, a manifestation of the changing political dynamics." Love him or hate him, Trump’s victory was a spectacle to behold. There was no prolonged contestation of the results, no legal actions, no political violence, and no grounds to debate who won. He claimed the Electoral College, the popular vote, and the US Senate. And if the final count falls to him, the Republicans take the House; it's a clean sweep that defied all expectations.
Sure, some folks are distraught. After all, Trump trash-talks women, and in response, his opponents spasm uncontrollably, ranting about misogyny. In the meantime, Trump's vote share with women has increased, especially with young women. There are jokes that Puerto Rico is an island of garbage. And yet, Trump's share of the Puerto Rican vote increased. Maybe they got the joke. Trump, often accused of racism, sees his vote among blacks increase, with a significant surge from young black men. These unexpected alliances in his support base, which continue to vex his opponents, reveal the complexity of voter sentiment. Biden calls Trump supporters "garbage," so Trump boards a garbage truck and drives around mocking Biden. Giving the finger was never so effective. These results and his antics affirm that Trump comprehends voter sentiment better than all the journeymen politicians, pollsters, and pundits — while he defies the customary laws of political gravity. Still, watching the woke crowd and their fellow travellers fight to find excuses and justify their failure is delightful. They continue to miss the point: a profound shift is underway in the Western political landscape. This shift, driven by demographics, culture, and economics, reshapes the traditional political order. Trump is not the cause of this shift; he is a symptom, a manifestation of the changing political dynamics. For starters, the changes brought about by mass migration are daunting to indigenous populations. To dismiss these worries as "racist" does nothing to address the genuinely held concerns. At the same time, those who stand up for the safety of their kids face vilification by the woke contingent while we abandon the biological foundations of our society to experiment with complex gender issues we don't comprehend. Lastly, left behind groups, like young people who struggle in a system that fails them and then denigrates them, seek sanctuary in the extremes. Fed-up people want a conclusion to the never-ending wars, the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives they perceive as nonsensical. They are frustrated that their views, held with sincerity, get dismissed as hateful by sneering liberal academics and intellectuals. They understand that terms like "nazi" and "xenophobe" are now used as weapons to attack anyone with a differing viewpoint. They are weary of the degradation of language to the point where it becomes meaningless. They are weary of the falsehoods. And weary of the false hope given by politicians. They also recognise the risks to their daughters from allowing biological men into women's spaces and sports. They see the dangers in a culture that automatically defines young men as degenerate for displays of masculinity. They see a culture that cancels and then fires people from jobs and ruins their very existence because someone has hurt their feelings. Enough, they say. Thus, voters will punish those who malign them. So, they vote for Trump in protest at the overly confected sterile packages served by the traditional stale political parties. Why not, they say. For the Brits, I do wonder how the so-called "special relation" evolves given that Starmer and his crew have spent years attacking Trump. This should be fun to watch. So, as his critics dwell on the dangers of Trump 2.0, they underestimate why he's back and riding high. 6/11/2024 1 Comment Trump Wins, Pundits Crash! "Stewart consistently promoted Kamala Harris as a sure winner." Realising that one's worldview is wrong can be painful, especially when one earns a living as a pundit and confidently speaks on various issues. Trump's election to a second term has exposed many commentators who are experiencing very public meltdowns.
Rory Stewart, a former MP who unsuccessfully tried to become the UK Prime Minister and Mayor of London, has gained credibility in some circles through his partnership with Alastair Campbell on their podcast, "The Rest Is Politics." Initially, their conversations had a balanced tone; however, Stewart now appears to show signs of Stockholm Syndrome, as Campbell dominates the discussions and frequently promotes his views, often lauding Tony Blair's effectiveness during his time in office. In the lead-up to the U.S. election, inspired by the success of “The Rest is Politics USA," hosted by the steady Katy Kay and the loquacious Anthony Scaramucci, Campbell and Stewart decided they wanted to share in that success. This could undoubtedly be a lucrative gig. However, they exposed themselves as having silo-based perspectives, leaving them unprepared to comment effectively. Stewart consistently promoted Kamala Harris as a sure winner and criticised anyone who disagreed. He and Campbell were so confident that they hosted a live podcast in the U.S. to discuss the results as they came in. However, what followed was a slow and painful decline. Struggling to recover, Stewart could only warn about the challenging days ahead and lament that Trump “got away with things that others wouldn’t.” Absolutely. That’s the point. Trump is unfiltered, disingenuous and unalloyed, although he can sometimes be rambling and crude. Still, he addresses issues that matter to many citizens. You may disagree with him, as I do on many topics, but his stances resonate with those frustrated by the lies and distortions of mainstream media. Trump has excellent political instincts and understands which tactics gain support. Both Campbell and Stewart expressed discomfort, sometimes losing composure and struggling to respond effectively to Trump’s victory. In contrast, Scaramucci gracefully acknowledged Trump’s achievement and wished him well, while Stewart reacted petulantly, like a scolded child. We can expect more meltdowns in the coming weeks as the news settles in and commentators rush to reframe the narrative. In the meantime, let us acknowledge that Trump won and, in the process, has exposed the pundits as charlatans. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2025
CategoriesAll Festivals Hong Kong Hong Kong History Policing Politics Public Order UK USA |
RSS Feed