Capitalism trumps democracy in Hong Kong

[oblivious]

Two articles:

1. HK lacks maturity for direct elections, state officials rule

-snip-
Briefing around 1,000 business, social and professional leaders and foreign envoys, Qiao Xiaoyang, deputy secretary-general of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, said the decision to ban the introduction of universal suffrage by 2007 was a responsible move.

"Those who dare to say that there cannot be universal suffrage in 2007 and 2008 due to Hong Kong's actual situation and long-term interest, are truly courageous and willing to bear responsibility. They truly care for Hong Kong and its people," he said, attracting an extended round of applause. -end snip-

Read that. So now it's courageous, heroic even, to deny the democatic aspirations of HKers. And they're only doing it because they care. AND THE CROWD APPLAUDED. Toadies every last of them.


2. Harmony before reform, says expert

-snip- Harmony between lawmakers and the government is a crucial requirement for universal suffrage in Hong Kong, a veteran mainland law professor says.

..."The legislators should not oppose whatever the administration proposes. It is this harmony that determines whether there can be universal suffrage," he said. -end snip-

Translation: The only way we will allow democracy is if the elected legislators agree to do exactly what we say.
Leadership disease. As you all well know, whenever a republican or communist says we all have to work together, this is not the time for bickering, they don't mean we should compromise; they mean you must do what we want.

[oblivious]

1. Whoops!

I was experimenting with your boldface function and forgot to turn it off. Sorry for the ugly post. Here's what I wanted to emphasise:

"Those who dare to say that there cannot be universal suffrage in 2007 and 2008...are truly courageous and willing to bear responsibility. They truly care for Hong Kong and its people."

[LARED]

2. Seems to me that HK

never had these problems before the Chinese took control?

[oblivious]

3. No, Hong Kong was always business first.

If that's your point.

But the problem is that certain promises were made in the Basic Law about moving towards universal suffrage, including direct election of the Chief Executive by 2007.

Recently, of course, that has been "reinterpreted" to mean no direct election in 2007.

AS a HK businessman, I have always appreciated HK's friendly business environment, but I don't agree that business has anything to fear from a democratic HK. They worry about the creation of a high tax, welfare state as a result of politicians pandering to the masses. And they look at the corrupt political system in Taiwan and see HK as being worse off than now under a democratic system.

I understand their concern and have some of the same worries myself, but some countries in North America and Europe have made a go of it, and I have absolutely no doubt HK would.

It's a bit humiliating for HKers to be told they lack the maturity to choose their own leaders.

It's a bit like the groupthink problem you have with your Republican leadership. No one in high positions in business or politics dares speak up in favour of democracy even if they think it's not as bad as the communist leadershp thinks. Imagine the paranoia of a CEO so afraid of democracy!