Scuffles break out in HK as protesters hurl slurs, abuse at mainland Chinese tourists

[Hehe]

Many great points here.

The thing I don't understand is why is PRC forcing HK to take everything of it (becoming the same as mainland China)?

If HK people want to preserve their uniqueness in culture, custom and/or whatever the hell they want, why not just let it be? It's like the entire Anglophone Canadians are not forcing Francophone Canadian to join them. We just let them do whatever they want. Heck, we even adjust everything official related (public doc/sign, packaging, custom personnels... etc) to accommodate our fellow French Canadians.

PRC should really stop this non-sense. If they really just consider HK as a SAR and embrace what they already have in place, HK would be much happier and less complicated.

[CP.AR]

I didn't believe that this was much of a problem in HK... thinking it might be about the same as what we have in Richmond and that the media is just blowing it up.
I was wrong

Now living in HK I realize that holy shit it's bad.

ps: give it another 5 years. Hong Kong will be an arm of Shenzhen

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by Traum

The difference is forced erosion/displacement versus natural occurrence. Say, if a dear friend or family member passed away due to natural causes (old age, illness, whatever), you'd probably accept that reasonably well even though you miss him. Now suppose that same friend or family member is brutally killed, are you just going to swallow that without any kind of resentment? Or are you simply going to say, "instead of channelling all that frustration/anger, you are are just going to stress the importance of peacefully accepting the reality without doing anything"? At the language front, the sentiments are exactly the same.

but your example seems to be on the very extreme end and it hasn't gotten that bad, yet? For example when ROC fled to Taiwan and imposed martial law spanning almost 4 decades....nevermind all the torture and executions...they literally forced it upon you to speak/write Mandarin in school/media and banned the Taiwanese dielects. Seems like HK has it good beacuse of the basic law in place and it's something PRC wish to slowly integrate in.

Gov / business written Chinese is different from verbal vernacular especially Cantonese.. The actual pass rate for Chinese lit in their version of provincials is extremely low. That's different from the Chinese you find on Facebook. I think the pass rate is also quite low in China, because it is brutal. But don't worry they have a huge population so they can still generate a useful pool of prospects.

so it's not a grave literacy concern because they can still read/write...it's just they can't put together proper, grammatically correct/formal sentences.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by RFlush

Then hongers won't complain about mainlanders going to HK since they won't need to go to HK anymore.

The only problem is that HK would be left for dead, but as long as they have their excolonism pride, they can survive on that.

CBC here.

Why are you in Hong Kong then? It's pretty much going down the tubes.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by Hehe

PRC should really stop this non-sense. If they really just consider HK as a SAR and embrace what they already have in place, HK would be much happier and less complicated.

Because they can. If Quebec were to seperate, it could potentially lead to the disintegration of Canada. Hong Kong is just a tiny spec. Also, I imagine there's some pride at stake too - colonial rule of HK was something that should have never happened and now China is going to run things its way.

It's a lousy situation for Hongers. I imagine that many will start to leave over the next decade and dust off their Canadian, British, Australian passports.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Hehe

The thing I don't understand is why is PRC forcing HK to take everything of it (becoming the same as mainland China)?

If HK people want to preserve their uniqueness in culture, custom and/or whatever the hell they want, why not just let it be? It's like the entire Anglophone Canadians are not forcing Francophone Canadian to join them. We just let them do whatever they want. Heck, we even adjust everything official related (public doc/sign, packaging, custom personnels... etc) to accommodate our fellow French Canadians.

PRC should really stop this non-sense. If they really just consider HK as a SAR and embrace what they already have in place, HK would be much happier and less complicated.

The points you make are spot on, and for the life of me, I don't understand why China sees a need to mainlandize Hong Kong. What is even more ironic is that Hong Kong is special precisely because it is unlike most Mainland cities, and (corrupt) officials and the wealthy are precisely taking advantage of that fact by securing a good chunk of their wealth in Hong Kong.

What I can say, though, is that forced assimilation has long been an established practice from the PRC government. It has long been happening in the north western Xinjiang where Uyghurs used to be the dominant ethnic group, and again in the south western Tibet and nearby regions where Tibetan cultures are being displaced. I don't even want to get into the Tibetan discussions because they are ugly and utterly disrespectful.

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

but your example seems to be on the very extreme end and it hasn't gotten that bad, yet? For example when ROC fled to Taiwan and imposed martial law spanning almost 4 decades....nevermind all the torture and executions...they literally forced it upon you to speak/write Mandarin in school/media and banned the Taiwanese dielects. Seems like HK has it good beacuse of the basic law in place and it's something PRC wish to slowly integrate in.

The murder example is a bit on the extreme end -- I was merely using that to drive the point home. Suffice to say that when stuff is being forced upon anyone against their will, backlash should not be a surprising consequence at all.

It's amusing how you mentioned ROC because we see precisely the same thing happening, except that it all happened a good 30 - 50 years ago, and the outcome is plainly obvious -- backlash was created in the form of the Green political camp. Fortunately for ROC, the ex-leader Chiang Jr. had enough wisdom, foresight, and forbearance in him to abolish the 1-party rule and introduce democracy to Taiwan. This is part of the reason why ROC is so far ahead of PRC in terms of being a civilized society. And going back to the language point that I made previously, this is why the Min Nan / Hokkien language/dialect is able to flourish in Taiwan.

[PeanutButter]

I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the places the British colonized.. So were the British getting taxes from those in Hong Kong when it was under British rule?

And if the British told China they weren't going to give back Hong Kong, would there be a war?

[godwin]

The colonies served more like outposts.. think of them as resupply stations.

HK was the end of the supply chain.. before was singapore, burma and India.

British get taxes.

Well the last question is yes and no, legally they are obligated to give it back because it was turned into a lease.

Originally Posted by PeanutButter

I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the places the British colonized.. So were the British getting taxes from those in Hong Kong when it was under British rule?

And if the British told China they weren't going to give back Hong Kong, would there be a war?

[SkinnyPupp]

Britain never leased from the PRC, and I don't think they technically had the obligation to "give it back". Also, Britain 'owned' HK island and Kowloon in perpetuity, it was only New Territories that was a lease.

Thatcher went to Beijing to negotiate the handover in the 1979, and Deng played major hardball with her. Remember in 1979 China was still very much a sheltered communist state. A complete mess, all the way through the 80's. Hell even in the early 2000's it was nothing like it is now. They absolutely needed Hong Kong, and there was NO way they were going to accept anything other than a complete handover.

The only power Britain had was to make sure they would agree to a two system policy, which worked fine from 1997 to about 2003 or so, it seems. I'm sure they were using that time to prepare, and from 2003 to now people are seeing those plans taking place. Even though the agreement is to change absolutely nothing until starting in 2047.

UK's other options were possibly to hand it over to ROC (Taiwan) remembering that both ROC and PRC claim they are "China" (which as you recall, I consider a confusing term and I prefer to just consider as a land mass). Obviously that would have been a political mess... The other option would be to keep HK and Kowloon as a colony.. but that would be just about as bad... and they would have no water... The third option I suppose would be to make it a city state... but again you have a ton of issues.

The "one country, two systems" policy was probably the best possible scenario, and part of it was to show Taiwan that hey, look it's not so bad! You should join us under the same policy!

But then China got really rich, and are pushing it way too far, too fast, and the whole thing is turning into a shit show. I'm not sure what the attitude is like in Taiwan, but if they were starting to consider joining PRC under a two system policy, this has to be scaring them off.

[threezero]

I have lived in hk as a mainlanders for quite a bit of time. I have to say hk is the most two faced hypocritical society I have ever encounter and be a part of.

Love the place but most of the people their think they are thinking independently but in reality they are all just sheep blindly following the latest trend.
Happening in all level and all ages, from kids hating on mainlanders because their brainwashed teacher told them to, to aunties that buys a Rolex every year because she saw an ad on TV.

Is mainlanders culturally different than honger? Yes. Is having violent protest and hate monte ring the proper way to solve this problem? No. Does mainlanders hating sells more newspaper and other forms of media. Hell yes.

To add to that honger will discriminate ppl base on an array of different characteristic, live in place like tsw? Look down on. You don't work in an office? Look down on. You don't have nice clothes? Look down on. You are still single at 30? You must be poor or retarded look down on. Fake lv? Look down on. Real lv from last year catalog? Look down on. East Indian? Look down on. Black? Better watch my wallet. Philippinos? Why ain't you cleaning my kitchen? Mainlanders? Hate you guys, but don't stop spending k!!!!

The only ethnicity that gets a pass on everything is ironically white people.

[SkinnyPupp]

Originally Posted by threezero

To add to that honger will discriminate ppl base on an array of different characteristic, live in place like tsw? Look down on. You don't work in an office? Look down on. You don't have nice clothes? Look down on. You are still single at 30? You must be poor or retarded look down on. Fake lv? Look down on. Real lv from last year catalog? Look down on. East Indian? Look down on. Black? Better watch my wallet. Philippinos? Why ain't you cleaning my kitchen? Mainlanders? Hate you guys, but don't stop spending k!!!!

Go to any rich neighbourhood in any part of the world, and the exact same attitudes will exit. Generalizing an entire country or city like that is shitty.

[threezero]

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

Go to any rich neighbourhood in any part of the world, and the exact same attitudes will exit. Generalizing an entire country or city like that is shitty.

So generalizing mainlanders is ok? With statement like hk will turn into Shenzhen how is that not generalization?

The last time the Chinese people protest with this much passion against other fellow Chinese was during the "great cultural revolution" in Mao era.

All these protest and hate mail is 100% fuel by media and trend following mentality. If hongers are really so culturally superior than mainlanders is resulting to name calling the best way to show your civility and intelligence?

Just playing devil' advocate. I still love hk, if I had to live in any city in china, with no hesitation I would still pick hk

[SkinnyPupp]

Generalizing anyone isn't OK

Saying HK will turn into Shenzen is not an inherently negative generalization... For some people, maybe that's what they want. For others, they would hate it. The key is, it is being forced on people without consent, and against their own constitution.

The protests aren't 100% fueled by the media. The media is fueled by the people. If people didn't care about this stuff, they wouldn't buy into the media.

Hongers aren't culturally "superior" to mainlanders. They are culturally different. And like I said, name calling and being nasty, like those in the OP, are shitty people. And like I always say, there are shitty people everywhere, and good people everywhere. Shitty hongers, good hongers, shitty mainlanders, good mainlanders. The people in the OP are shitty, angry hongers.

And you say you would pick HK, and a lot of people think the same way. However if HK "turns into SZ" then people will think quite differently. Not because they are "superior" but because they are "different". Not everyone wants their culture and lifestyle to be taken over just because a communist government wants to do so. Not because they "hate mainlanders", but because they don't want that culture to take over their own.

[threezero]

I see where you are going. But the way I see it the only real way to preserve the hk culture completely to to have hk either go back to British rule or for it to be completely segregation from the rest of china. Both of which is never going to happen.

On the note of Shenzhen, it is actually my second choice only because it's been so heavily influence by the hk culture in the pass decade it is completely different than what I remember it 20+ years ago.

Perhaps the right way is to fnd a way for both to coexist instead of re enforcing the us vs them mentality. I guess what I want to for both side to rise above their difference and not having to take a "side" anymore.

[SkinnyPupp]

The thing is, this 'segregation' is written into Basic Law, and is supposed to be upheld until 2047. At that point, the PRC can begin to make changes, similar to the ones they are doing now.

I don't think people mind coexisting, after all the fact is that HK is an SAR of PRC. There's nothing that can be changed about that. However, these changes are not supposed to be happening. People are supposed to be able to vote for their executive. None of this is happening, and PRC is illegally influencing their lives. This is what causes the "us vs them" to worsen.

[HonestTea]

Originally Posted by threezero

To add to that honger will discriminate ppl base on an array of different characteristic, live in place like tsw? Look down on. You don't work in an office? Look down on. You don't have nice clothes? Look down on. You are still single at 30? You must be poor or retarded look down on. Fake lv? Look down on. Real lv from last year catalog? Look down on. East Indian? Look down on. Black? Better watch my wallet. Philippinos? Why ain't you cleaning my kitchen? Mainlanders? Hate you guys, but don't stop spending k!!!!

The only ethnicity that gets a pass on everything is ironically white people.

QFT

They pretty much seem to hate on everything. It's just the way they are. It's probably ingrained in their culture that they always need to have the latest and most expensive things, just so they can have "face". The average HK girl will sacrifice pretty much everything just to be able to purchase the latest Chanel purse and show it off.

There's a saying that HK people would rather look down on someone being poor than someone being prostitute.

[SkinnyPupp]

Originally Posted by HonestTea

There's a saying that HK people would rather look down on someone being poor than someone being prostitute.

Why would you look down on someone for being a prostitute?

People I look down on are criminals, scam artists, pedophiles, etc... people who get paid to have sex? nope

[threezero]

I agree with skinny in that these type of mentality but I just feel it's something that is deeply ingrained in hk society and something that is openly encourage.

Just take a look at the ad they have on tv for legal loan sharking.
They basically go like is, broke down on your luck have no money? It's ok come borrow from us and you can buy your gf that diamond ring.
No house no car? No wonder your gf dump you, come borrow from us and she will love you again.

I'm not kidding the ads are serious right to the point like this.

I have frds in hk that laugh at my cheapo watches while they are rocking Rolex and Gucci shoes while they are struggle to pay rent. Does this happen in all society probably, but it seems to be a lot worse in hk. They are always trying to be something or someone they are not.

At least here in canada you are encourage to be who you want to be. In hk if you are anything but a suit in a office or other type of professionals ie doctors than you fail in life.

[SkinnyPupp]

Oh I agree there are definitely some things about the culture here that are kind of fucked up. Those ads are disgusting, and a lot of the marketing goes that way. Even worse are the ads for infant formula and junk food for kids, telling parents that it will turn their kids into a genius... And the education system is beyond fucked; I know for sure I would never raise children here.

If you have friends who laugh at you for your watch, etc, those people are fucking assholes. It doesn't matter where they are from. I have friends who are very well off and came from privileged upbringings, but they are nothing but humble and gracious. Very generous, without overtly looking for 'face'. These people could be dirt poor, and still be good people. That's who I want to hang out with, I don't care how rich or poor someone is, I just want to spend my time around kind, interesting people.

Really though, none of this has nothing to do with the issues in this thread .

[Traum]

To threezero especially, I would like to remind you to go back a bit into history and consider the general Hong Konger's sentiments and mentality about the 1997 reunification and their impression of the PRC government at the time. 1997 was after the 1989 Tienanmen Massacre, so people are at least factually aware of what the PRC government is capable of and willing to do when things get ugly (in their eyes). And yet the general sentiments towards reunification and the PRC government is overwhelmingly positive. As a matter of fact, throughout those years between 1997 to as late as 2003-ish, past surveys have shown that Hong Kongers generally have a more favourable impression of the Mainland top brass than their own HKSAR CEO (aka mayor) at the time. Additionally, while Hong Kong people probably didn't think too highly of Mainlanders at the time, they most certainly do not hate them.

Try asking the same question again today, and you'll probably see a far more negative view for both the Chinese leaders and the HKSAR CEO. Survey the general public and the majority will probably dislike Mainlanders for the disruptions they have brought onto the Hong Kongers' daily lives. A portion of the population will be fervently pro-China, but these groups are likely new/new-ish immigrants that have recently moved down from the Mainland. Some of these work (and get paid) for their pro-Mainland stance much like a regular job. Others are benefactors through business ties and dealings or political favours.

Between these 10 - 15 years, something changed the attitudes of the majority of Hong Kong people, and it isn't really the media brainwashing people or even fueling that fire. As a matter of fact, I think it is more appropriate to say that the majority of Hong Kong's mainstream media are extremely hesitant to too heavily criticize the PRC government -- maybe except for Apple Daily. The mainstream media are certainly not afraid to chide the PRC government on little things, but overall, their reporting style, direction, and emphasis are more inline and on the side of the Establishment.

Regarding the protesters and demonstrators mentioned in the beginning of this thread, I agree that their means are crude and inappropriate, and most importantly, they were targeting the wrong crowd. At the same time, I completely understand the frustrations and anger that drove them into doing this, so I would definitely say I am sympathetic towards them.

[Qmx323]

Originally Posted by eurochevy

So in other words main-landers are coming in with money to hong kong and people from hk are complaining because they have it better than everywhere else in china because of previous british rule. Well im sorry to tell you but they're all Chinese at the end of the day. Thats pretty much the same as when everyone in the summer goes to kelowna / that area from vancouver for vacation. Pretty retarded if you ask me ... this comment is what made me laugh = "I think the government should listen to our voice seriously. It has to stop allowing Chinese tourists into Hong Kong … We do not want them." What a bunch of pompous pricks. You're ALL Chinese, live with it.

THEMS FIGHTIN WORDS

[Manic!]

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

Why would you look down on someone for being a prostitute?

People I look down on are criminals, scam artists, pedophiles, etc... people who get paid to have sex? nope

Is prostitution legal in HK?

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Manic!

Is prostitution legal in HK?

For direct 1-to-1 dealings with the sex trade worker, it is not illegal. Living off or otherwise benefiting from the sex trade, however, is illegal.

Increasingly, however, I would say that any businesses directly or indirectly supporting the sex trade could be targeted for arrest and prosecution should the police will it.

[Harvey Specter]

HONG KONG'S education department caused a furore last month by briefly posting on its website the claim that Cantonese was “not an official language” of Hong Kong. After an outcry, officials removed the text. But was the claim correct? The law says that “Chinese and English” are Hong Kong’s official languages. Whereas some people say that Cantonese is a dialect of Chinese, others insist that it is a language in its own right. Who is right—and how do dialects differ from languages in general?

Two kinds of criteria distinguish languages from dialects. The first are social and political: in this view, “languages” are typically prestigious, official and written, whereas “dialects” are mostly spoken, unofficial and looked down upon. In a famous formulation of this view, “a language is a dialect with an army and a navy”. Speakers of mere “dialects” often refer to their speech as “slang”, “patois” or the like. (The Mandarin Chinese term for Cantonese, Shanghaiese and others is fangyan, or “place-speech”.) Linguists have a different criterion: if two related kinds of speech are so close that speakers can have a conversation and understand each other, they are dialects of a single language. If comprehension is difficult to impossible, they are distinct languages. Of course, comprehensibility is not either-or, but a continuum—and it may even be asymmetrical. Nonetheless, mutual comprehensibility is the most objective basis for saying whether two kinds of speech are languages or dialects.

By the comprehensibility criterion, Cantonese is not a dialect of Chinese. Rather it is a language, as are Shanghaiese, Mandarin and other kinds of Chinese. Although the languages are obviously related, a Mandarin-speaker cannot understand Cantonese or Shanghaiese without having learned it as a foreign language (and vice-versa, though most Chinese do learn Mandarin today). Most Western linguists classify them as “Sinitic languages”, not “dialects of Chinese”. (Some languages in China, like Uighur, are not Sinitic at all.) Objective though it may be, this criterion can annoy nationalists—and not just in China. Danes and Norwegians can converse, making some linguists classify the two as dialects of a single language, though few Danes or Norwegians think of it this way.

In China the picture is further confused by the fact that one written form unifies Chinese-language speakers (though mainland Chinese write with a simplified version of the characters used in Hong Kong and Taiwan). But this written form is not a universal “Chinese”: it is based on Mandarin. The confusion arises because many people consider written language to be the “real” language, and speech its poor cousin. The same reasoning can be used to classify Arabic as a single language, though a Moroccan and a Syrian, say, cannot easily understand each other. Ethnologue, a reference guide to the world's languages, calls Chinese and Arabic "macrolanguages", noting both their shared literature and the mutual (spoken) unintelligibility of many local varieties, which it calls languages. For the most part, linguists consider spoken language primary: speech is universal, whereas only a fraction of the world’s 6,000-7,000 languages are written. This is behind the linguist’s common-sense definition: two people share a language if they can have a conversation without too much trouble.

The Economist explains: How a dialect differs from a language | The Economist

.

[SkinnyPupp]

That's part of the problem of the term "Chinese". It can mean so many things... Chinese is not a language, so Mandarin and Cantonese are not dialects. They are all languages that are spoken on the plot of land called China.

I do think that Cantonese people are very proud of their heritage, and I don't see the language dying any time soon. To this very day you can travel throughout Guangdong, and the locals will all speak some level Cantonese. And it's not just service people who cater to Hong Kong tourists.