Hong Kong goings ons

bobzilla said:

In reply to bearmtnmartin :

...They have shown they do not hold an individuals rights with any regard and they will do whatever their leader tells them to do... 

That's because individual rights are not relevant.  There are no individuals. There are just parts of the whole that is China.  What is good for the whole is what is best.  Protesting the government thus does not make any sense, it's like protesting yourself.

bearmtnmartin said:

In reply to 02Pilot :

When China stopped canola imports from Canada to prove a political point, I thought about how that must have affected thousands of Chinese businesses that have come to depend on a steady supply. It's not like China could just go out and quickly replace millions of bushels of a seasonal crop immediately. But the government didn't care a whit about either the economic impact or the plight of their citizens. They economy is massive and controlled by a single person. So whatever China decides to do with Hong Kong, economic considerations will I think be far down the list for Xi. 

The difficulty is that a significant part of the mainland population, especially those who would be considered Millennials, have grown up conditioned to expect double-digit annual economic growth in the post-Deng reform era. Xi has tried to constrain the liberalization while maintaining the economic expansion, which isn't working out so well. Then there are issues that are beyond the control of even the head of the CCP, for example the rise in pork prices (up to 69% from what I've read) caused by the combination of tariffs on US-sourced pork plus the epidemic of African swine flu that has resulted in massive culls of domestic herds. Increasing domestic discontent caused by slowing economic growth provides a fertile breeding ground for the sort of resistance now occurring in HK to spread, which is exactly what the CCP is worried about. They may not care about their citizens' welfare in individual terms, but they are certainly concerned about mass discontent sufficient to produce organized popular resistance to CCP rule.

aircooled said:

bobzilla said:

In reply to bearmtnmartin :

...They have shown they do not hold an individuals rights with any regard and they will do whatever their leader tells them to do... 

That's because individual rights are not relevant.  There are no individuals. There are just parts of the whole that is China.  What is good for the whole is what is best.  Protesting the government thus does not make any sense, it's like protesting yourself.

That's not just a communist thing, that is an Asian cultural thing. Common throughout Asia. Including Japan  and Korea. 

02Pilot said:

bearmtnmartin said:

In reply to 02Pilot :

When China stopped canola imports from Canada to prove a political point, I thought about how that must have affected thousands of Chinese businesses that have come to depend on a steady supply. It's not like China could just go out and quickly replace millions of bushels of a seasonal crop immediately. But the government didn't care a whit about either the economic impact or the plight of their citizens. They economy is massive and controlled by a single person. So whatever China decides to do with Hong Kong, economic considerations will I think be far down the list for Xi. 

The difficulty is that a significant part of the mainland population, especially those who would be considered Millennials, have grown up conditioned to expect double-digit annual economic growth in the post-Deng reform era. Xi has tried to constrain the liberalization while maintaining the economic expansion, which isn't working out so well. Then there are issues that are beyond the control of even the head of the CCP, for example the rise in pork prices (up to 69% from what I've read) caused by the combination of tariffs on US-sourced pork plus the epidemic of African swine flu that has resulted in massive culls of domestic herds. Increasing domestic discontent caused by slowing economic growth provides a fertile breeding ground for the sort of resistance now occurring in HK to spread, which is exactly what the CCP is worried about. They may not care about their citizens' welfare in individual terms, but they are certainly concerned about mass discontent sufficient to produce organized popular resistance to CCP rule.

Decades are short term to most of Asia. Its's not that they don't want democracy, they simply want it on terms they are comfortable with.   When Japan adapted most of American style democracy they kept their reverence for their Emperor and the respect for their elders.  
When one man one vote finally does become accepted in China do not expect the whole culture to change overnight.  Messy American style democracy  will not be adopted.  It's a cultural thing that has existed for many centuries.  

In reply to frenchyd :

It's not my business to speculate on what system of government any segment of any population might or might not want. In IR we analyze structural factors and look for historical corrolates and relevant models. Cultural tendencies are a notoriously ephemeral factor; not that I'm saying they don't exist, but rather that they are very hard to factor in reliably in general terms.

Certainly, the protesters in HK have considerably more experience of democracy than most Chinese, but its basic form seems to be shaped more by that experience than any cultural tendency. Taiwan's democracy is probably the more instructive example, as it has had more time to evolve largely exclusive of foreign influence.

The Japanese experience is of limited utility here, given that the circumstances surrounding their adoption of democracy were not exactly consensual.

In reply to 02Pilot :

If Japan doesn't meet your required parameters then look to Korea, but I suspect you are underrating Japan.  
My experience with the Japanese has them accepting American style democracy  more than willingly. 
When the Japanese were granted the right to retained their emperor, that resolved their cultural conflict. Then they were eager to see what strength we had that defeated their best.  I've only read the translation their Emperor gave following Japan's surrender but conversations with Japanese  lead me to believe that their acceptance of things American was deep seated and unreserved. 
 

Conversations with Chinese  on the other hand is different. They feel superior to Americans.  Even during the Ping Pong diplomacy when China was literally starving they felt superior.  Granted it was below the surface, However it went right down to their shoes.  
Americans shouldn't feel alone.  The Chinese feel that way towards the British as well. Germans etc etc. etc. 
Given their 5000 + year history  perhaps there is some justification. But I digress.  

In reply to frenchyd :

I would argue that more analogous point of reference would be pre-war Japan rather than post-war. At that point in their history, they were on the ascent as a potential regional hegemonic power, much as China is today, under an increasingly centralized nationalist government with an expansionist agenda. At that point (let's say between the onset of the Depression in 1929 and Pearl Harbor) they had no reason to believe that they were not going to continue their upward trajectory, and there was no discussion of further embracing democracy; indeed, what democracy had developed in the post-WWI years gave way to nationalism and militarism fairly quickly.

The better comparison is probably Wilhelmine Germany, as it removes the economic dislocation and temporary imbalances that came about in the wake of the Great War as factors. Here too there was no impetus toward democracy while Germany was ascendant, and indeed the liberal tendencies of reformers in the late 19th Century were successfully co-opted by Bismarck to strengthen the drive toward a conservative system of unitary government.

In reply to 02Pilot :

Hmmm I'm afraid there is a significant cultural difference between those two. China and Germany.  
While I can see the connection you've made but I believe the two are too far apart  to make the leap you did. 
 

Asian's in general place little value on the individual and thus tend to respect authority. While  German's  place a great store in the individuals and respect authority. 

I apologize for the gross generality of that statement but culturally  wise I believe it to be valid.  
 

In reply to frenchyd :

My argument would be that 1) the structural similarities outweigh the cultural differences, and 2) that the conservatives controlling Wilhelmine Germany were far less concerned about individuality or other liberal constructs than is the case in today's democratic German government (see, for example, Bismarck's manipulation of parliamentary factions). But mine is an IR point of view, not an anthropological one.