> At the University of Queensland, the tensions spilled over into violent clashes last week, when a group staging a support rally for the Hong Kong demonstrators were confronted by pro-Beijing protesters.
Hundreds of protesters faced off against each other, yelling insults and abuse as the Chinese national anthem was blasted from a speaker.
Videos posted online showed pro-China supporters ripping posters from the hands of opponents, prompting shoving and physical confrontations.
Yeah, when "pro-government" protesters start appearing and they are the ones that immediately become violent or start doing stuff that invites violence, there's a 99.7% chance that those "protesters" were government-paid bullies, especially when we're talking about a more corrupt/authoritarian government.
> Ms Fan and Ms Leung say such harassment has also continued off campus. They have found pictures of themselves being shared on Chinese social media sites next to threatening messages. Ms Fan said one comment warned she would "face consequences".
If anyone's there, or knows someone who's there who happens to be protesting this, you should probably recommend they wear Winnie the Pooh merchandise, or wear t-shirts mentioning the Tiananmen Square protests, for their own personal safety. This has already gone too far, fighting fire by taking advantage of censorship your opponents are defending with violence is the most rational thing to do.
Maybe this is well known but I didn't understand why you would suggest wearing Winnie the Pooh merch. A quick search lead me to this article, linking here I'm case it is of interest to others:
I believe the intended impact is to prevent pictures of oneself from becoming famous, by making sure that they are censored.
The censorship trick won't work globally, and won't block authorities from seeing the picture, but I think the real goal is to avoid becoming individually well known within China as a dissident.
They should be caught, tried and charged under Australian laws. Most countries have in their laws that people will be removed for the major crimes (violence etc).
If you're in a country where you are not a citizen you are a guest. You wouldn't go to someone's house, create a lot of trouble, and then expect to be able to stay do you?
The guest framing applies equally to the people supporting the Hong Kong protests.
Students shouldn't behave like guests in countries which value freedom of speech. However, students who engage in violence and intimidation should certainly be removed from the University based on the rules almost every University has regarding what constitutes acceptable behavior, and in this case it seems they would also have broken laws by attacking the original protestors.
I got the impression he was referring to the counter "protestors", (if you're "protesting" in a violent way.. that's a riot, not a protest).
My understanding of the counter-protesters were not citizens of Australia. Despite being a student, it doesn't change that they're guests. This is frequently warned on the State department's travel guides. NEVER join in on foreign protests, not all countries have the same rights in those reguards.
Maybe don't jump straight toward someone being a nationalistic bigot right away. Due process should be followed, but pushing anti-democratic views is quite literally a reason to have your visa cancelled in Australia, even if no other crimes have occurred. If a crime is also committed, then maybe they should spend some time in jail before removal. However, considering that it doesn't look like the violence was particularly grievous (bruised ribs and a chipped tooth seem to be the worst of it), placing them in jail is probably just an extra burden on the penal system before they would be removed anyway.
"Not be disruptive" is a very common visa condition, and promoting violence, threatening harm, or interrupting the operation of the Australian community (which a university is a part of) is grounds to have your visa cancelled. Considering that some physical altercations also took place should make the vase very solid.
There was another side of the story. Another video of this particular event shared among Mainland Chinese students showed that the HK students picked fight first and one female HK side student faked fall to ground after the Mainland side tried to push her away gently. Chinese students were angered by the selective coverage by BBC. BBC was also criticized for its selective coverage of HK protect that became riot. The most criticized case was a video showing a police officer pointing a short gun at protesters. There was a few minutes of video before that showing mobs attacked and beaten some police officers then this particular officer loaded the shotgun with rubber bullets.
HK protect started peacefully now turned into riot with no clear political purpose. The extradition bill is dead already. I haven't heard any clear political demand from those protesters afterwards. It could hardly be called pro-democracy demonstration now.
Haven't these pro-Beijing students ever tried to access uncensored information online that was denied to them until they arrived in their host countries? Why are they content to continue believe in the propaganda? You'd think that even a casual search for a subject like Tiananmen Square would be a wake-up call.
That’s not how propaganda works, I assume the vast majority of these students haven’t left the country until close to adulthood. I completed elementary school in China and the teaching begins in grade 1 for students to believe in communism and patriotism. When you have been raised in that belief for your entire life, changing your belief system is not as simple as “look what other people with a different view say!”. Same goes for how people in other countries have a hard time understanding the need for civilians to hold guns, and yet no matter how many logical reasoning you throw, a large portion of Americans still believe in guns.
Edit: my comment was downvoted, unsure if it’s because the comparison for gun law in the states provoked someone, but if that was the case it just goes to show how difficult it’d be for someone to change the belief system they’ve been raised with
This is one reason I decided to go back to America once we had a kid. I’m not a big fan of nationalism.
Unfortunately, I’m a bit worried about American schools, many now require daily pledge of allegiance here in Washington state, which was definitely not true when I was a kid. It just feels like something China would do but the USA shouldn’t.
random aside, there was a kid in my Texas high-school who stopped saying the pledge around the time of the 2003 Iraq war. While I didn't necessarily agree with the method, a few of us did appreciate the fact that he did that; it showed that sometimes the most patriotic thing you can do is not blindly support your government.
Interesting, I was curious. Personally, I feel like the nationalism has gotten a lot worse / uncomfortable in Guangdong in recent years. I don't feel like it used to be this way in anything-goes Southern China.
I don’t think it was that bad in 1999, 2002 or 2008. Indoctrination was still a thing, but most Chinese kids didn’t take it seriously. It took some populism combined with nationalism from Xi to really turn things around.
My time in China doesn't go back that far, but it certainly feels different from when I first went there. Guangdong used to feel pretty chill about that stuff, probably a combination of HK-Proximity and the Emperor-is-Far/Mountains-are-high attitude. Nowadays, you can't drive anywhere without seeing Xi's 12 fucking thoughts plastered everywhere. Even Hua Qiang Bei has speakers blasting out propaganda.
That they're technically optional doesn't prevent peers for bullying over it.
Source: I was an Australian citizen while in US schools from 2nd through 12th grade. It can be highly uncomfortable to stand silently (and politely) during the Pledge.
When I was in school, almost no one actually said the pledge. By the time I was in high school almost every just sat and continued doing what they were doing. This was in a conservative suburban school in the south.
I also live in WA state and I feel like the daily pledge of allegiance here is pretty trivial.
It's just something the kids say, the school isn't building it up or making it a huge deal or forcing them to believe in it like it's the only thing that matters.
Comparing this to China's brainwashing is a huge slippery slope IMO.
I think in terms of US school problems, this one is pretty low on the list. I would be far more worried about general quality of the schools, curriculum, "active shooter drills" and other insane safety measures, and increasing lack of funding for basics like acceptable landscaping and art/music classes.
My point was that I moved from China back to here to avoid stuff like that for my kid, and am disappointed that things have changed for the worse since I was a kid growing up in the same area.
It is a “small thing” of course compared to comprehensive political education, but it is a thing and signals the start of a trend that could turn out to be dangerous (doubly so in this age of Trump-style ultra nationalism).
Saying the pledge of allegiance in school has been around since I was a kid in the 80s though, and I'm fairly certain it's been this way since basically forever. So IMO it doesn't seem like it's the "start" of anything.
Americans are going to look at the broader issue here and think "Last time this happened for us we just shot at them until they left" and disregarding the practicality of such notions, it's nevertheless baked into the collective consciousness and constitution.
Tl;dr this is the one major situation where guns, as they exist in the US constitution, can be justified unequivocally.
>a large portion of Americans still believe in guns.
It would be the exact same situation if American students in Australia or England were trying to shut down a rally against gun ownership.
I personally believe in the right to own a gun in written into the constitution of the united states...as is the right to burn a flag..I don't own a gun and would not burn a flag...and if I was in Australia, I would definitely not try to stop people from burning an American flag..
The point I’m trying to get across and explain here is that there are ideas that seem obvious to one set of people, can be incredibly difficult to get across to another set of people due to what they have believed in since childhood. And the fact that I’m getting so many downvoted and people trying to debate and disapprove of my gun law comparison proves that exact point.
Their sense of loyalty and identity is the reason. People are hesitant to absorb information that questions their identity and they're even more hesitant when they feel that that identity is being threatened. Their sense of identity in this case is not just something random but something instilled in them since a young age by the Chinese government. They feel a loyalty to the Chinese government and so are willing to propogandize themselves.
Bear in mind, if you are a Chinese national studying abroad you are probably well off as far as Chinese nationals go. This means that you are probably a strong beneficiary of the current Chinese regime. So you're likely to be very attached to it, unlike people who are not well off or are repressed. Those people probably aren't studying abroad.
Agree here. In terms of cognitive dissonance, it cuts both ways, think about the systematic elimination of native american tribal lands, slavery, Jim Crow, the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII, etc.
Everyone has their starting point, usually strongly associated with their cultural or familial identity. It takes a while for other info to filter through.
This is a massive brainwashing that they've done. That's hard to reverse without directly pointing that out. Due to "political sensitivity" that won't be. (People are afraid of standing up to china)
A few things that are going on: (Check up on Serpentza+laowhy86 videos)
> Do you think Americans are going to hate their country after reading about MKUltra?
One, we don’t censor that information.
Two, I’d expect most Americans to freely criticise those government actions, as well as the people and agencies responsible. The latter is prohibited in China.
> I’m talking about why anybody would expect a Chinese student to change their attitude because of 6/4
I wouldn’t, but that’s because of something deeper than anything we experience in America or Australia.
Consider pre-Snowden public opinions on mass surveillance. The public didn’t know and didn’t believe. Once the information came out, however, people believed. Some actions were taken, and on many fronts activism got aggressive. (A large minority accepted the new facts while deeming it acceptable. A smaller minority thinks the disclosures themselves were a conspiracy.)
It would be surprising if a majority of Chinese students, after learning about the massacre at Tiananmen Square [1], rejected it as a global propaganda campaign. Some will. More than in America, given the energy given to brainwashing by Beijing.
The difference will be in the number who believe it happened but defend it as having been necessary. Teaching the worth of democratic values is tough. The violence exhibited towards the Hong Kong protesters, and Beijing’s emissary’s support of it as patriotism, exemplifies that.
> I wouldn’t, but that’s because of something deeper than anything we experience in America or Australia.
I'm sick of this holier than thou attitude that people have here. There's this patronizing attitude that if only the brain washed Chinese knew what was really happening they would rise up! Yet you know about the Nayirah testimony, MKUltra, Snowden, Cambridge Analytica, migrant camps... why aren't you out protesting, storming congress, why isn't Bush in prison, why isn't Trump impeached? It's not a "small minority"; it's the majority. Most Americans don't care enough to find out and if they did they wouldn't care enough to do anything.
I'd argue that the propaganda is much deeper and subtle in the West. The media is a oligarchy yet it's still "independent" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWLjYJ4BzvI You believe are the good guys despite history despite everything.
Trump isn't impeached simply because not enough representatives think that these are sufficiently severe atrocities to do so, and not enough people think that these are severe enough to undermine the state institutions.
You have legislators and media critical of the government wrt CA and migrant camps. That's why you don't see so much civil disobedience, because these concerns are visibly reflected in the government.
This doesn't mean I disagree with you that Chinese who know more about Tiananmen wouldn't "rise up", but against your argument that it is propaganda in the West that prevents people from civil disobedience.
I would agree that propaganda and soft power shape opinion and taboo in the West and US, but on the other hand, I don't think that this insidious and subtle propaganda is anywhere near as powerful as the total propaganda and coercion practiced by some other regimes.
You don't have to, when nobody really cares for it, and the system is such that nobody is gonna do anything about it (and the people who did those things get a slap on the wrist, if not a pat on the back).
It's regimes that lack this that censor information -- regimes that are worried that e.g. protests could result in bringing them down.
If you don't worry about that, you can let almost anything be said. Especially if you just let it be declassified/acknowledged decades after the fact, when even fewer will care.
The comment you are replying to is not making any judgment on the morality of the state, and is likely in agreement with you. It's just pointing out that the grandparent's rhetorical suggestion is undermined by an incorrect premise (that people don't know about US atrocities and their criticism and would be appalled to know them, where actually such information is easily available)
Americans didn’t have their government machine gun down peaceful protestors, then the medics and doctors who went to help them, and then run over the bodies with tanks until they were mush.
And if they had to learn about something that bad, they’d learn about it as soon as possible and the government would be powerless to cover it up.
Ultimately, what we have that China doesn't have is a system in place to address these concerns. Technology companies freely and openly made it more difficult for the NSA to spy. The prison system is on the minds of every politician and newspaper, and change is happening (slowly, sure). The Iraq war was debated to death.
Every country is going to have problems. It can never make decisions that satisfy everyone. What matters is the ability to talk about it, like what we're doing here. Politics is always going to be slow, though; that's the tradeoff versus having a dictator.
I can only speak for myself, my answer is no. I've read up on the numerous atrocities committed by the U.S. Government (highly recommend Wikileak Files: World according to U.S. Empire) I think citizens of every country shouldn't ignore their past, they should look directly towards it, grapple with the consequences, and critique it.
No, but Americans do seem intent on labeling any modern day version of MKUltra to be a conspiracy theory only an idiot would believe. That might be worse than just censoring it.
> Do you think Americans are going to hate their country after reading about ...
Yes, this commonly occurs in fact. Americans trash their own country aggressively, routinely all over social media, for its flaws and past mistakes. See: Twitter, Reddit or Imgur comments every day of the week.
We pay sports athletes and celebrities tens of millions of dollars and they regularly trash the US for its flaws and past mistakes. They do so all over social media, routinely, and with few repercussions (essentially none from the government, and few from social blowback).
How many famous millionaire Hollywood celebrities would you like me to quote - eg from their tweets - saying they somehow hate the US or wish to leave?
A small minority of Americans do that and when talking about large populations, it goes without saying that we’re not talking about population distributions in an absolutist sense.
It isn't about how many people do that, it is about how many people can do that publicly without any repercussions towards them from the state. And I would say, in the US that proportion comes to around "pretty much all of them".
The civilians are not supporting the China Communist Party- they are supporting the unification of China, by whatever mean possible.
Call it the Chinese Manifesto, if you will. South China Sea expansion, Taiwan, HK, Belt and Road Initiatives. Chinese believes that all these are from their ancestors, and one day China will reclaim all the territories that were stolen from China by foreign powers.
I know this sounds racist but it's true. Just go on Youtube and watch all those Simplified Chinese-only propaganda videos.
William Shirer was an American living in Germany during Hitler's reign. Here's what he said about how successful propaganda can be:
"I myself was to experience how easily one is taken in by a lying and censored press and radio in a totalitarian state. Though unlike most Germans I had daily access to foreign newspapers, especially those of London, Paris and Zurich, which arrived the day after publication, and though I listened regularly to the BBC and other foreign broadcasts, my job necessitated the spending of many hours a day in combing the German press, checking the German radio, conferring with Nazi officials and going to party meetings. It was surprising and sometimes consternating to find that notwithstanding the opportunities I had to learn the facts and despite one’s inherent distrust of what one learned from Nazi sources, a steady diet over the years of falsifications and distortions made a certain impression on one’s mind and often misled it. No one who has not lived for years in a totalitarian land can possibly conceive how difficult it is to escape the dread consequences of a regime’s calculated and incessant propaganda. Often in a German home or office or sometimes in a casual conversation with a stranger in a restaurant, a beer hall, a café, I would meet with the most outlandish assertions from seemingly educated and intelligent persons. It was obvious that they were parroting some piece of nonsense they had heard on the radio or read in the newspapers. Sometimes one was tempted to say as much, but on such occasions one was met with such a stare of incredulity, such a shock of silence, as if one had blasphemed the Almighty, that one realized how useless it was even to try to make contact with a mind which had become warped and for whom the facts of life had become what Hitler and Goebbels, with their cynical disregard for truth, said they were."
[edit] The quote is from The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany, which is very good and a surprisingly easy read for how long it is.
Excellent quote, propaganda is used to manipulate people, especially those lack of calm mind and neutral view. Sadly though, today's media, especially those online ones, tend to feed you what audience interest with, not neutral on story, nor whole facts, e.g. the same event could be reported very differently on CNN and Fox. I wouldn't be surprised both sides of the arguments here read more news in their interest, or pro-their-views. Doesn't that put them in the situation German had, siloed in one side of the story, even for those educated and intelligent persons.
Perhaps a way to having a peaceful conversation is helping both sides to hear, read, understand others' points. It might not be easy though, the media are very much dominated by one language, that majority of one side in this argument doesn't speak, according to [1], 19.3% internet users contributes 1.7% content. In fact, it's VERY hard in this situation, to tell if we are the intelligent German in the story, or the William Shirer, regardless which side you are on.
The Hong Kong residents hasn’t really done themselves any favours and won the hearts and minds of the mainlanders. They’ve always been viewed as snobbish and generally hold mainlanders in low regard. It doesn’t help that Hong Kong media makes a big fuss about how uneducated mainlanders are whenever some mother lets her child urinate or defecate on public transport.
Most mainlanders still insist that Taiwan is a part of China and Hong Kong’s protests is just some political unrest stirred up by Western countries to cause trouble.
Coupled with a lifetime of brainwashing and propaganda (their primary school textbooks have dedicated sections where the students recite their love for their country and the communist party), I am not surprised at this at all.
Most still justify Tiananmen Square as something that had to be done to preserve the stability of the country. Secondly, they see any Western criticism as third parties commenting on an internal China political issue, of which they have no right to.
> Haven't these pro-Beijing students ever tried to access uncensored information online that was denied to them until they arrived in their host countries
Most (flat earthers/birthers/anti-vaxxers/people who believe all sorts of nonsense) have had access to uncensored information online for years.
They continue to believe the various crazy things that they believe.
Why do you think political opinions should be any different?
Shit, there's no shortage of people who, despite being willing to acquiesce to the factual truth of a statement, will actively choose to disregard it. They'll do it because the statement is incompatible with their political affiliation, because the statement was uttered by a foreigner who should be minding their own business, because the person who uttered it has the 'wrong' political affiliation or religion or class or skin color or background or profession.
This sort of tribalism is incredibly normal, and you don't need to travel abroad to find it.
I'm deeply concerned by the lack of introspection of anyone painting this as a problem unique to citizens of mainland China.
Quite on the contrary, Chinese students usually become way more nationalistic after being abroad and having seen for themselves that the western, developed, free and democratic countries aren't that much better after all.
Those who have never lived in the west can't draw comparisons from their own experience so they tend to be more skeptical of Chinese government and fantasize about the west.
>You'd think that even a casual search for a subject like Tiananmen Square would be a wake-up call.
That assumes they'd agree with the Tiananmen Square protests, which is quite a large assumption.
Some might disagree with any protest, like many of people in the US disagree with all kinds of protests (of left and right) -- e.g. because they're pro "law and order" and centrist --, and tons which disagree with protests of left XOR right.
Others might agree in principle, but still think China is better off without a regime change, which would be a huge unknown, and might even bring a huge 1.6 billion + country on the brink of chaos and civil war, with power struggles and what have you. Who said such a change is necessarily gonna be a peaceful transition? Officially or unofficially, they already have heard of stories of massive human toil in past power struggles (the "cultural revolution" for one), and might prefer stability and prosperity over democracy.
Or they could consider their situation just a-ok as it is, with its warts like many places have, but generally working well for the country (or for their personal interests).
Aside from propaganda, people also make their own minds, and what someone else, from another country believes they should be wanting, is not necessary what they do believe.
I would like to know how much of this is state-organized thuggery, typical of all authoritarian regimes. As in, directly fund, indoctrinate and direct initimidation and violence against anything that is seen as threatening to the state.
If you don't consider a Trump rally and calls of "fake news" to be part of a propaganda campaign intended to generate these sorts of opinions, I don't know what to tell you.
(To be clear, the same is true for Democratic rallies, too - they're propaganda.)
We're in agreement here. The political pop culture is weird and celeb worshiping in the US.
Compared to the propaganda coming out of China and is being pushed in other nations, it's like comparing a mountain to a molehill.
Yes there is a sub-group that believes and endorses in the pro-trump beliefs. Are they valid/good/true? Who cares. Part of our basic rights means that we can hold these beliefs and opinions and express them. If you are to believe in the basic right you have to be willing to accept that people will hold beliefs and will speak on things you don't like.
We have universal laws in the US, if they cross them, enforce the law. (I.e. trying to hit other people with a car at a protest etc)
My point is that China's done with Tienanmen Square what Trump's trying (fairly successfully) to do with "fake news" claims - discredit factual stuff he doesn't like his supporters believing in.
No, thats a huge exaggeration, Trump is not sending to kill or throwing to jail anyone who disagrees with him, forcing schools to brainwash its students, etc etc, America may have many problems but its not China.
Nor is China doing that in Australia. As described in the article, they've outsourced the harassment to patriotic, nationalist civilians.
A Trump supporter was at the Cincinnati rally the other day making slit-throat gestures at the press pen. Same sort of crowdsourced intimidation tactics.
What qualifies as "same sort of crowdsourced intimidation tactics"? Yesterday, a Trump supporter was actually beaten bloody by a crowd in NYC based on the hat he wore. Are media and political figures who demonize Trump and his voters also responsible for that "crowdsourced intimidation"?
> “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you?” Trump said, drawing cheers and laughter. “Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise. They won’t be so much, because the courts agree with us too — what’s going on in this country.”
Exactly, people here are talking like this is a big mystery, but it's just old nationalism.
Only that is easier to see the speck in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye.
Whatever the motivations or nationality this behavior should not be tolerated.
Anecdotally, somebody explained to me how in a school, here in Europe, they did a "day of the countries" and every kid had to bring a flag from their original country. China parents went to the school to protest because there was a Taiwan flag in the exhibit.
Good. China has every right to control its territories and this includes Hong Kong. If the KKK were to stage an anti-Black protest in an American university they would be rightfully similarly attacked and persecuted. China is only defending its rights. Those HK protesters need to face justice.
That does not make sense at all. The KKK is not a foreign government sending its members to foreign colleges to censor students who are lawfully protesting in their own country.
If Chinese students are offended by what other college students are protesting in their own country, they can do what everyone else does, ignore them.
Do all the news you listed provided any concrete evidence? Having the same opinion with the government on some topics does not mean they are controlled by the government or share all beliefs with the government.
Like I support Trump's government policy on making the health bills more transparent, but I do not agree with him on his 'racist' tweets.
I don't want to ban you because your comments have been mostly good recently. But you've also continued to post flamebait, and if you keep doing it we won't have much choice. Would you please review the guidelines and not post destructively here? The idea is to preserve HN as an interesting place for all of us. Scorched earth is not interesting.
Kids will be kids, but the consul generals words do frighten me. It’s whistle blowing to Chinese kids that it’s okay to incite violence. Patriotism is never an excuse for harming others.
“Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.”
This infuriates me. Intimidation and hostile attitude towards people protesting in a different country is an act of barbarianism and should be condemned internationally. In fact, the way to combat this is to further enrage, fearlessly protest the PRC patriotic machine and "poke" the hornet's nest so to speak. I've taken the pledge to never visit China and avoid Chinese goods because of shit like this. The PRC has a stronghold locally in China but their PR strategy is deeply flawed to get international cooperation, respect and dignity. The west has ideals that allow protesting of ridiculous ideas such as the KKK, sometimes with protection from the police, whilst try doing the same thing in China - last time they did that was in 1989 Tiananmen square which resulted in a massacre.
This hurts you far more than it does China. Use systemic, not individual, actions instead (insofar as you can). Vote for political admins likely to respond to Chinese human rights violations, support protest movements, etc.
I mean, a single person's vote has pretty much the same weight as a single person boycotting Chinese goods. So I'm not sure what you. At least with a personal boycott, I keep my peace of mind and diminish the number of Chinese goods in my possession. Voting doesn't exactly have the same direct effect.
It is an irrational emotion driven thing for me. It is sort of like not going to a particular amazing popular restaurant just because the service isn't good - it hurts me by not going to the restaurant and enjoying their incredible food but it becomes a matter of principle.
Gandhi protested the British by spinning up his own yarn and making his own clothes, it is the concept not the objective ROI of his decision to not buy British-made goods.
I am avoiding Chinese goods as much as I can. Anybody buying Chinese goods is supporting a totalitarian regime.
If it says "Mads in China", I am not buying it. Simple.. And I don't care, if I have to pay more or if everything is made in China these days. I am NOT buying it.
>At Simon Fraser University, a controversy over three “Lennon Walls” — fixtures where people can post notes of support or inspirational wishes — shows how tensions related to increasingly violent protests in Hong Kong may get harder to manage on Canadian campuses. At least one academic is calling on all involved — both students and universities — to take a more formal, respectful approach.
>The original Lennon Wall, located outside the main Bennett Library, was “repeatedly destroyed and rebuilt, with post-it notes taken down. It’s gone for now,” said Wan.
>I visited the Lennon Wall on campus on Friday (on the left side of the library) at 15:30. There were a handful of students speaking in Mandarin, one of them speaking very loudly (we’ll call him A). I started walking up to the wall and examining the notes closely, one other (I assume local) SFU student was doing the same as well. This student started asking if I know anything about what’s going on, so I started having a conversation with her. However, within seconds, A and his friends started walking up close to us and he started loudly interjecting his own opinion on us. It was not until the student that I was having a convo with indicated that she was having a private conversation with me that A had finally stopped. Later on, while I was still on scene, I heard A loudly say (in Mandarin) that, “if protests in Hong Kong had happened here in Vancouver, the RCMP would’ve shot all of them dead”. I found it extremely distasteful that A had said that.
Sounds like any college campus, but instead of some fringe politician’s recruits recruiting impressionable idealist students for quirky causes its chinese students interjecting
Odd, but really not that foreign the way they are acting on a college campus: Aggressively passionate about an ideology nobody here cares about
Is HN exactly like Boomer Facebook now? What's with this "kick them out of the country" rhetoric?
If people are assaulting peaceful protesters, arrest them, charge them, try them, and punish them according to the law. It's literally right there on camera.
But no, please continue inciting outrage and controversy. China bad. Hong Kong good.
Come on, you guys are talking about the same thing. Parent was probably (obviously?) saying that trying them will probably (or should?) result in their visa being revoked.
In most rational countries, folks who are visiting on various forms of visas ARE deported when they commit crimes. Making this out to be some kind of lynch mob thing is kind of disingenuous
When I see a response like 'kick them out of the country' I view it as emotional shorthand for 'arrest them under due process, try them with appropriate counsel provided, then deport them as proscribed by law'. One is just shorter to type. It's people letting off steam, not suggesting dismantling the judicial system.
It's outrage-porn peddled as world news by the BCC, plain and simple. The tell-tale sign is that they didn’t bother to get both sides of the story. There are videos of the incident readily available on Youtube [1] which show what exactly happened.
There’s one group of HK/Australian pro-Hong Kong protestors on one side. There’s another group of Mainland students exercising their right to free speech by playing and singing the Chinese national anthem on the other. Was this extremely annoying to the pro-HK protestors? Definitely. Was it offensive to the Australians? Yes. Were the pro-China crowd offended by the signs saying “free Hong Kong”? Yup.
You can see the ensuing minor scuffle ("violent clashes" according to the BBC) between between a tiny handful of students from both sides. I saw exactly one sign being torn down. The vast majority of the students were just standing there peacefully.
The BBC article makes it seem as though the Chinese students strong-armed their way into the crowd and started beating people, which is objectively not the case. This is the narrative of the two pro-HK students who they interviewed. If there is evidence of threats and intimidation, then that evidence should be brought forth and those students should be formally reprimanded at the very least, or expelled/criminally charged/deported at worst if the complaints are proven to be valid.
It’s easy to see why they’d write a story like this though when you see the emotional response elicited even from people here -one can only imagine the effect it'd have on the less educated masses.
edit: Another longer video of the "violent clashes" or "Lennon wall violence in University of Queensland" as described by the Youtube uploader (warning: extremely long and boring video where nothing happens)
>The tell-tale sign is that they didn’t bother to get both sides of the story.
Why? Not every story has two sides. Here one group used violence on another that didn't. Unless you have evidence that the pro-HK protesters actually used violence first, that's the only side to the story. The mainland faction being riled up doesn't excuse violence.
Just because it's not a massive riot where the streets run red with blood doesn't mean it's not a worrying instance.
>The BBC article makes it seem as though the Chinese students strong-armed their way into the crowd and started beating people, which is objectively not the case.
On the contrary, it objectively is the case, as the first video you yourself linked to shows: it opens with a pro-mainland student in black rushing into the pro-HK crowd and assaulting someone with a crowd screaming and advancing behind him.
It's very strange that you're working so hard to downplay what happened. Not just downplaying, willfully distorting what the videos show.
> On the contrary, it objectively is the case, as the first video you yourself linked to shows: it opens with a pro-mainland student in black rushing into the pro-HK crowd and assaulting someone with a crowd screaming and advancing behind him.
Quick questions:
1. How do you know that guy is pro-mainland? I certainly don't have enough information to make a concrete determination such as that, i'd be curious to know how you did. It looks like he came from the pro-HK side of the mob as they are the ones holding the signs and the guy in the black sweater and glasses from that side is screaming "free hong kong", but I could be wrong.
2. Who hit who first? It looks like a mutual engagement to me.
Your confirmation bias is really shining through here.
If not every story has two sides, why do you need to bring every case to the court? Just execute the offenders on the wrong side of the story and get it done with, why the effort?
I think it's a fair question to ask whether or not people should be allowed to stay in the U.S. after demonstrating toxic behavior. In case you didn't read the article, these students are using violence and doxxing personal information of protestors:
> One of their friends was also "doxxed" - personal information including his passport, marriage certificate and student ID details were posted online. "Don't worry, there won't be a peaceful life for him in Brisbane," read an accompanying caption on Chinese social media platform Weibo.
Is this the kind of behavior that you would allow from a visitor to your home?
EDIT: Some shady down-voting going on in this thread. Not sure what else I expected with a politically-volatile topic like this one but it just goes to show that people don't care about discourse - they just care about feeling right.
>Is HN exactly like Boomer Facebook now? What's with this "kick them out of the country" rhetoric?
This is complete false equivalence. No one in this thread is calling for all Chinese to be expelled from Australia or nonsense like that.
>If people are assaulting peaceful protesters, arrest them, charge them, try them, and punish them according to the law. It's literally right there on camera.
This is exactly what people are calling for. If you are convicted of a serious crime you can be expelled from the country. Some people feel they should be. Perhaps you disagree, but you're saying the exact same thing.
They are being censored by proxy groups that have been indoctrinated to do and follow what their sovereign tells them to. Assuming 16-20 years of propaganda and being told what to do is not enough, different tools such as:
1. Financial reward
2. Threats to life and family
3. Cuts to loan & grants
4. Harrassment
5. Social exclusion
Are used to put you in line. It will only get worse from here onwards, if you think you are safe where you live, ask yourself "If they mistreat their own population and use the media to misguide the truth, what will they do to 'these damn foreigner'?"
While the humanities departments decry the evils of colonialism, admissions departments never met a rich foreigner they didn't like. Same dynamic for Hollywood.
I guess they are all being somewhat consistent here, since it probably doesn't count as colonialism-proper when the indigenous peoples happen to be Anglo.
A 'peaceful' protest is allowed then a 'peaceful' protest to your protest should also be allowed. If anyone broke the law, there are polices.
Do you guys not believe in Australia polices and judicial system? Then protest against them. I believe in australia you have this freedom, right?
Speaking louder in public place is not breaking any LAW.
If you have evidence, call Australia polices. I believe in Australia polices and the judicial system.
If you do not have evidence, it is just your speculation. If you do not believe the fairness of Australia polices, protest against them.
Your initial message ended with "Speaking louder in public place is not breaking any LAW." This indicates that you were responding to some claim that the counter-protesters had broken a law by being louder in public. I haven't seen any claims resembling that so I'm curious to see where you did.
I spend vacation time working at an academic summer camp for 11–year-olds. My hall typically includes some students from China.
This year, one of my Chinese kids mentioned that he frequently used a VPN to get around China's firewall. This made another one of my Chinese kids quite upset: "You broke the law? How could you?"
The argument got somewhat heated, but I didn't intervene because I legitimately wasn't sure what to say. On one hand, yes, within the context of an 11-year-old's worldview, breaking the law is bad and should be avoided. On the other hand, China is an authoritarian regime attempting to suppress free access to information, and everyone should work around that however they can.
I've been replaying this in my head quite a bit, and I'm still not sure what I should have done.
I think the best thing is directly do what you did. Then in a completely unrelated context work in the idea "it is your duty to break an unjust law". There are lots of ways to do that, but hard to pull off in context of a summer camp.
Those violence is indeed not acceptable. However, proclaiming all pro-Chinese students behave / think the same way is also too subjective or even racist in some extreme cases.
If the Chinese students have a different opinion, they should do the same thing as the HK students. They can also start a petition / protest to against violence riot in their Country.
Free speech is not only available to HK students but to Chinese students in Australia too. The principal of free speech is not just speaking out loud without any responsibility, it's about mutual respect.
Those violence is indeed not acceptable. However, proclaiming all pro-Chinese students behave / think the same way is also too subjective or even racist in some extreme cases.
If the Chinese students have a different opinion, they should do the same thing as the HK students. They can also start a petition / protest to against violence riot in their Country.
Free speech is not only available to HK students but to Chinese students in Australia too. The principal of free speech is not just speaking out loud without any responsibility, it's about mutual respect.
A side note is that although you may feel insecure / anxious about being monitored, it is not necessary the fact without any evidences. As a free country, anyone can feel whatever they feel like. With the same theory as one of the HK student, others with opposite opinion can feel that they will be assaulted in HK given the violent riot situation in HK too. If that is the case, free speech is not being taken away by the Chinese government but by the rioters themselves.
If the Chinese student assault HK student, he should be put under the justice system. If HK police is using excess force, they should be put under justice system. If HK rioters broke the law, they should be put under justice system. Denial should never be excuses for act of violence.
157 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 202 ms ] threadHundreds of protesters faced off against each other, yelling insults and abuse as the Chinese national anthem was blasted from a speaker.
Videos posted online showed pro-China supporters ripping posters from the hands of opponents, prompting shoving and physical confrontations.
Yeah, when "pro-government" protesters start appearing and they are the ones that immediately become violent or start doing stuff that invites violence, there's a 99.7% chance that those "protesters" were government-paid bullies, especially when we're talking about a more corrupt/authoritarian government.
If anyone's there, or knows someone who's there who happens to be protesting this, you should probably recommend they wear Winnie the Pooh merchandise, or wear t-shirts mentioning the Tiananmen Square protests, for their own personal safety. This has already gone too far, fighting fire by taking advantage of censorship your opponents are defending with violence is the most rational thing to do.
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855
It would make sharing images of the protest on the mainland difficult.
The censorship trick won't work globally, and won't block authorities from seeing the picture, but I think the real goal is to avoid becoming individually well known within China as a dissident.
If you violently push your pro authoritarian views in your democratic host country, they have every right to kick you out.
But no, you're right, let's get the pitchforks and torches and have them all 'git out of our 'country!
When you are a resident, you are a guest to a country and must act accordingly.
Getting kicked out would be the logical extension AFTER a criminal trial and possible incarceration.
Saying we should remove criminal guests from any country, is IMO a logical point.
If you're in a country where you are not a citizen you are a guest. You wouldn't go to someone's house, create a lot of trouble, and then expect to be able to stay do you?
Students shouldn't behave like guests in countries which value freedom of speech. However, students who engage in violence and intimidation should certainly be removed from the University based on the rules almost every University has regarding what constitutes acceptable behavior, and in this case it seems they would also have broken laws by attacking the original protestors.
My understanding of the counter-protesters were not citizens of Australia. Despite being a student, it doesn't change that they're guests. This is frequently warned on the State department's travel guides. NEVER join in on foreign protests, not all countries have the same rights in those reguards.
"Not be disruptive" is a very common visa condition, and promoting violence, threatening harm, or interrupting the operation of the Australian community (which a university is a part of) is grounds to have your visa cancelled. Considering that some physical altercations also took place should make the vase very solid.
Check the student visa (subclass 500) conditions here: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/already-have-a-visa/ch...
Australia is looking to buy nukes on public government TV atm, because the next 20-30years of china's future is looking uncertain.
If a China war kicks off, Australia is going to be the front line.
Which law?
Why should they be punished?
HK protect started peacefully now turned into riot with no clear political purpose. The extradition bill is dead already. I haven't heard any clear political demand from those protesters afterwards. It could hardly be called pro-democracy demonstration now.
Edit: my comment was downvoted, unsure if it’s because the comparison for gun law in the states provoked someone, but if that was the case it just goes to show how difficult it’d be for someone to change the belief system they’ve been raised with
Unfortunately, I’m a bit worried about American schools, many now require daily pledge of allegiance here in Washington state, which was definitely not true when I was a kid. It just feels like something China would do but the USA shouldn’t.
Haven’t court decisions rendered pupils’ participation in the pledge of allegiance optional in all 50 states?
random aside, there was a kid in my Texas high-school who stopped saying the pledge around the time of the 2003 Iraq war. While I didn't necessarily agree with the method, a few of us did appreciate the fact that he did that; it showed that sometimes the most patriotic thing you can do is not blindly support your government.
Source: I was an Australian citizen while in US schools from 2nd through 12th grade. It can be highly uncomfortable to stand silently (and politely) during the Pledge.
For example, a Colorado teacher physically assaulted a student for not saying it: https://kdvr.com/2018/08/31/teacher-accused-of-assaulting-st...
Another teacher just tried the guilt trip approach: https://fox2now.com/2018/11/16/teacher-banned-after-students...
It's just something the kids say, the school isn't building it up or making it a huge deal or forcing them to believe in it like it's the only thing that matters.
Comparing this to China's brainwashing is a huge slippery slope IMO.
I think in terms of US school problems, this one is pretty low on the list. I would be far more worried about general quality of the schools, curriculum, "active shooter drills" and other insane safety measures, and increasing lack of funding for basics like acceptable landscaping and art/music classes.
It is a “small thing” of course compared to comprehensive political education, but it is a thing and signals the start of a trend that could turn out to be dangerous (doubly so in this age of Trump-style ultra nationalism).
Saying the pledge of allegiance in school has been around since I was a kid in the 80s though, and I'm fairly certain it's been this way since basically forever. So IMO it doesn't seem like it's the "start" of anything.
Americans are going to look at the broader issue here and think "Last time this happened for us we just shot at them until they left" and disregarding the practicality of such notions, it's nevertheless baked into the collective consciousness and constitution.
Tl;dr this is the one major situation where guns, as they exist in the US constitution, can be justified unequivocally.
It would be the exact same situation if American students in Australia or England were trying to shut down a rally against gun ownership.
I personally believe in the right to own a gun in written into the constitution of the united states...as is the right to burn a flag..I don't own a gun and would not burn a flag...and if I was in Australia, I would definitely not try to stop people from burning an American flag..
Bear in mind, if you are a Chinese national studying abroad you are probably well off as far as Chinese nationals go. This means that you are probably a strong beneficiary of the current Chinese regime. So you're likely to be very attached to it, unlike people who are not well off or are repressed. Those people probably aren't studying abroad.
Everyone has their starting point, usually strongly associated with their cultural or familial identity. It takes a while for other info to filter through.
We need far less nationalism in the world. It's never led to anything good.
A few things that are going on: (Check up on Serpentza+laowhy86 videos)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tsXtk7psUc
- The Confucius Institute is pushing propaganda campaigns in Unis and in public (Their adverts are spammed everywhere)
- In China, they do have people that are willing to turn you in for "violations" (non-government.. citizens)
-- See the video: they'll even try to interrupt talks in the US to "correct the record"
- Forums. Again SerpentZA has found that they are collecting together in Chinese only forums to doxx and harass. Death threats are common there.
One, we don’t censor that information.
Two, I’d expect most Americans to freely criticise those government actions, as well as the people and agencies responsible. The latter is prohibited in China.
Your response and the others here have nothing to do with that.
I wouldn’t, but that’s because of something deeper than anything we experience in America or Australia.
Consider pre-Snowden public opinions on mass surveillance. The public didn’t know and didn’t believe. Once the information came out, however, people believed. Some actions were taken, and on many fronts activism got aggressive. (A large minority accepted the new facts while deeming it acceptable. A smaller minority thinks the disclosures themselves were a conspiracy.)
It would be surprising if a majority of Chinese students, after learning about the massacre at Tiananmen Square [1], rejected it as a global propaganda campaign. Some will. More than in America, given the energy given to brainwashing by Beijing.
The difference will be in the number who believe it happened but defend it as having been necessary. Teaching the worth of democratic values is tough. The violence exhibited towards the Hong Kong protesters, and Beijing’s emissary’s support of it as patriotism, exemplifies that.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of...
I'm sick of this holier than thou attitude that people have here. There's this patronizing attitude that if only the brain washed Chinese knew what was really happening they would rise up! Yet you know about the Nayirah testimony, MKUltra, Snowden, Cambridge Analytica, migrant camps... why aren't you out protesting, storming congress, why isn't Bush in prison, why isn't Trump impeached? It's not a "small minority"; it's the majority. Most Americans don't care enough to find out and if they did they wouldn't care enough to do anything.
I'd argue that the propaganda is much deeper and subtle in the West. The media is a oligarchy yet it's still "independent" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWLjYJ4BzvI You believe are the good guys despite history despite everything.
Because in America you can openly talk about those things on the press and the internet and comments, and thus let off steam...
Of course the end result is the same, as in China they keep happening!
You have legislators and media critical of the government wrt CA and migrant camps. That's why you don't see so much civil disobedience, because these concerns are visibly reflected in the government.
This doesn't mean I disagree with you that Chinese who know more about Tiananmen wouldn't "rise up", but against your argument that it is propaganda in the West that prevents people from civil disobedience.
I would agree that propaganda and soft power shape opinion and taboo in the West and US, but on the other hand, I don't think that this insidious and subtle propaganda is anywhere near as powerful as the total propaganda and coercion practiced by some other regimes.
You don't have to, when nobody really cares for it, and the system is such that nobody is gonna do anything about it (and the people who did those things get a slap on the wrist, if not a pat on the back).
It's regimes that lack this that censor information -- regimes that are worried that e.g. protests could result in bringing them down.
If you don't worry about that, you can let almost anything be said. Especially if you just let it be declassified/acknowledged decades after the fact, when even fewer will care.
And if they had to learn about something that bad, they’d learn about it as soon as possible and the government would be powerless to cover it up.
Every country is going to have problems. It can never make decisions that satisfy everyone. What matters is the ability to talk about it, like what we're doing here. Politics is always going to be slow, though; that's the tradeoff versus having a dictator.
Just because you have problems doesn't mean you can't point out that someone else does too, as long as you have acknowledged yours.
Yes, this commonly occurs in fact. Americans trash their own country aggressively, routinely all over social media, for its flaws and past mistakes. See: Twitter, Reddit or Imgur comments every day of the week.
We pay sports athletes and celebrities tens of millions of dollars and they regularly trash the US for its flaws and past mistakes. They do so all over social media, routinely, and with few repercussions (essentially none from the government, and few from social blowback).
How many famous millionaire Hollywood celebrities would you like me to quote - eg from their tweets - saying they somehow hate the US or wish to leave?
Call it the Chinese Manifesto, if you will. South China Sea expansion, Taiwan, HK, Belt and Road Initiatives. Chinese believes that all these are from their ancestors, and one day China will reclaim all the territories that were stolen from China by foreign powers.
I know this sounds racist but it's true. Just go on Youtube and watch all those Simplified Chinese-only propaganda videos.
"I myself was to experience how easily one is taken in by a lying and censored press and radio in a totalitarian state. Though unlike most Germans I had daily access to foreign newspapers, especially those of London, Paris and Zurich, which arrived the day after publication, and though I listened regularly to the BBC and other foreign broadcasts, my job necessitated the spending of many hours a day in combing the German press, checking the German radio, conferring with Nazi officials and going to party meetings. It was surprising and sometimes consternating to find that notwithstanding the opportunities I had to learn the facts and despite one’s inherent distrust of what one learned from Nazi sources, a steady diet over the years of falsifications and distortions made a certain impression on one’s mind and often misled it. No one who has not lived for years in a totalitarian land can possibly conceive how difficult it is to escape the dread consequences of a regime’s calculated and incessant propaganda. Often in a German home or office or sometimes in a casual conversation with a stranger in a restaurant, a beer hall, a café, I would meet with the most outlandish assertions from seemingly educated and intelligent persons. It was obvious that they were parroting some piece of nonsense they had heard on the radio or read in the newspapers. Sometimes one was tempted to say as much, but on such occasions one was met with such a stare of incredulity, such a shock of silence, as if one had blasphemed the Almighty, that one realized how useless it was even to try to make contact with a mind which had become warped and for whom the facts of life had become what Hitler and Goebbels, with their cynical disregard for truth, said they were."
[edit] The quote is from The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany, which is very good and a surprisingly easy read for how long it is.
Perhaps a way to having a peaceful conversation is helping both sides to hear, read, understand others' points. It might not be easy though, the media are very much dominated by one language, that majority of one side in this argument doesn't speak, according to [1], 19.3% internet users contributes 1.7% content. In fact, it's VERY hard in this situation, to tell if we are the intelligent German in the story, or the William Shirer, regardless which side you are on.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_used_on_the_Internet
Most mainlanders still insist that Taiwan is a part of China and Hong Kong’s protests is just some political unrest stirred up by Western countries to cause trouble.
Coupled with a lifetime of brainwashing and propaganda (their primary school textbooks have dedicated sections where the students recite their love for their country and the communist party), I am not surprised at this at all.
Most still justify Tiananmen Square as something that had to be done to preserve the stability of the country. Secondly, they see any Western criticism as third parties commenting on an internal China political issue, of which they have no right to.
Most (flat earthers/birthers/anti-vaxxers/people who believe all sorts of nonsense) have had access to uncensored information online for years.
They continue to believe the various crazy things that they believe.
Why do you think political opinions should be any different?
Shit, there's no shortage of people who, despite being willing to acquiesce to the factual truth of a statement, will actively choose to disregard it. They'll do it because the statement is incompatible with their political affiliation, because the statement was uttered by a foreigner who should be minding their own business, because the person who uttered it has the 'wrong' political affiliation or religion or class or skin color or background or profession.
This sort of tribalism is incredibly normal, and you don't need to travel abroad to find it.
I'm deeply concerned by the lack of introspection of anyone painting this as a problem unique to citizens of mainland China.
Those who have never lived in the west can't draw comparisons from their own experience so they tend to be more skeptical of Chinese government and fantasize about the west.
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-many-Chinese-become-much-more-n...
That assumes they'd agree with the Tiananmen Square protests, which is quite a large assumption.
Some might disagree with any protest, like many of people in the US disagree with all kinds of protests (of left and right) -- e.g. because they're pro "law and order" and centrist --, and tons which disagree with protests of left XOR right.
Others might agree in principle, but still think China is better off without a regime change, which would be a huge unknown, and might even bring a huge 1.6 billion + country on the brink of chaos and civil war, with power struggles and what have you. Who said such a change is necessarily gonna be a peaceful transition? Officially or unofficially, they already have heard of stories of massive human toil in past power struggles (the "cultural revolution" for one), and might prefer stability and prosperity over democracy.
Or they could consider their situation just a-ok as it is, with its warts like many places have, but generally working well for the country (or for their personal interests).
Aside from propaganda, people also make their own minds, and what someone else, from another country believes they should be wanting, is not necessary what they do believe.
Does a bear shit in the woods?
This is hardly unique to China. Go to a Trump rally and see how many people respond positively to an AP fact check of one of his claims.
(To be clear, the same is true for Democratic rallies, too - they're propaganda.)
We're in agreement here. The political pop culture is weird and celeb worshiping in the US.
Compared to the propaganda coming out of China and is being pushed in other nations, it's like comparing a mountain to a molehill.
Yes there is a sub-group that believes and endorses in the pro-trump beliefs. Are they valid/good/true? Who cares. Part of our basic rights means that we can hold these beliefs and opinions and express them. If you are to believe in the basic right you have to be willing to accept that people will hold beliefs and will speak on things you don't like.
We have universal laws in the US, if they cross them, enforce the law. (I.e. trying to hit other people with a car at a protest etc)
A Trump supporter was at the Cincinnati rally the other day making slit-throat gestures at the press pen. Same sort of crowdsourced intimidation tactics.
http://www.fox5ny.com/news/maga-hat-beating
Encouraging it.
You let me know when a prominent Democratic candidate does something like offering to pay legal fees if you beat up the other side, like Trump did: https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-campaign-protes...
> “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you?” Trump said, drawing cheers and laughter. “Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise. They won’t be so much, because the courts agree with us too — what’s going on in this country.”
In the case of the media intimidation, calling them "the enemy of the people": https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/11142215334617907...
Only that is easier to see the speck in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye.
Whatever the motivations or nationality this behavior should not be tolerated.
Anecdotally, somebody explained to me how in a school, here in Europe, they did a "day of the countries" and every kid had to bring a flag from their original country. China parents went to the school to protest because there was a Taiwan flag in the exhibit.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20594434 and marked it off-topic.
2. Hong Kong has rights, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Basic_Law
If Chinese students are offended by what other college students are protesting in their own country, they can do what everyone else does, ignore them.
https://supchina.com/2018/01/18/caught-in-a-crossfire-chines...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/us/chinese-students-weste...
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/us-intelligence-chin...
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/07/chinas-long-arm-reaches...
Like I support Trump's government policy on making the health bills more transparent, but I do not agree with him on his 'racist' tweets.
This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
I don't want to ban you because your comments have been mostly good recently. But you've also continued to post flamebait, and if you keep doing it we won't have much choice. Would you please review the guidelines and not post destructively here? The idea is to preserve HN as an interesting place for all of us. Scorched earth is not interesting.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?Con...
This is off-topic.
> Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it.
Wie bitte???
This hurts you far more than it does China. Use systemic, not individual, actions instead (insofar as you can). Vote for political admins likely to respond to Chinese human rights violations, support protest movements, etc.
Gandhi protested the British by spinning up his own yarn and making his own clothes, it is the concept not the objective ROI of his decision to not buy British-made goods.
If it says "Mads in China", I am not buying it. Simple.. And I don't care, if I have to pay more or if everything is made in China these days. I am NOT buying it.
https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/hong-kong-protests-...
>At Simon Fraser University, a controversy over three “Lennon Walls” — fixtures where people can post notes of support or inspirational wishes — shows how tensions related to increasingly violent protests in Hong Kong may get harder to manage on Canadian campuses. At least one academic is calling on all involved — both students and universities — to take a more formal, respectful approach.
>The original Lennon Wall, located outside the main Bennett Library, was “repeatedly destroyed and rebuilt, with post-it notes taken down. It’s gone for now,” said Wan.
Here's a personal account-
https://www.reddit.com/r/simonfraser/comments/ciymgc/id_like...
>I visited the Lennon Wall on campus on Friday (on the left side of the library) at 15:30. There were a handful of students speaking in Mandarin, one of them speaking very loudly (we’ll call him A). I started walking up to the wall and examining the notes closely, one other (I assume local) SFU student was doing the same as well. This student started asking if I know anything about what’s going on, so I started having a conversation with her. However, within seconds, A and his friends started walking up close to us and he started loudly interjecting his own opinion on us. It was not until the student that I was having a convo with indicated that she was having a private conversation with me that A had finally stopped. Later on, while I was still on scene, I heard A loudly say (in Mandarin) that, “if protests in Hong Kong had happened here in Vancouver, the RCMP would’ve shot all of them dead”. I found it extremely distasteful that A had said that.
Odd, but really not that foreign the way they are acting on a college campus: Aggressively passionate about an ideology nobody here cares about
'China is your daddy': Backlash against Tibetan student's election prompts questions about foreign influence
Chemi Lhamo, 22, got thousands of hateful comments after becoming U of T Scarborough student president
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/china-tibet-student-e...
If people are assaulting peaceful protesters, arrest them, charge them, try them, and punish them according to the law. It's literally right there on camera.
But no, please continue inciting outrage and controversy. China bad. Hong Kong good.
It’s lawful and valid to revoke visas of those convicted of violent crimes. Assaulting protesters is a violent crime.
Nobody reasonable is advocating for deporting all Chinese students. Just those who assault protesters.
There’s one group of HK/Australian pro-Hong Kong protestors on one side. There’s another group of Mainland students exercising their right to free speech by playing and singing the Chinese national anthem on the other. Was this extremely annoying to the pro-HK protestors? Definitely. Was it offensive to the Australians? Yes. Were the pro-China crowd offended by the signs saying “free Hong Kong”? Yup.
You can see the ensuing minor scuffle ("violent clashes" according to the BBC) between between a tiny handful of students from both sides. I saw exactly one sign being torn down. The vast majority of the students were just standing there peacefully.
The BBC article makes it seem as though the Chinese students strong-armed their way into the crowd and started beating people, which is objectively not the case. This is the narrative of the two pro-HK students who they interviewed. If there is evidence of threats and intimidation, then that evidence should be brought forth and those students should be formally reprimanded at the very least, or expelled/criminally charged/deported at worst if the complaints are proven to be valid.
It’s easy to see why they’d write a story like this though when you see the emotional response elicited even from people here -one can only imagine the effect it'd have on the less educated masses.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CkH3zqoGWw
edit: Another longer video of the "violent clashes" or "Lennon wall violence in University of Queensland" as described by the Youtube uploader (warning: extremely long and boring video where nothing happens)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiRmRPsJ-sM
Why? Not every story has two sides. Here one group used violence on another that didn't. Unless you have evidence that the pro-HK protesters actually used violence first, that's the only side to the story. The mainland faction being riled up doesn't excuse violence.
Just because it's not a massive riot where the streets run red with blood doesn't mean it's not a worrying instance.
>The BBC article makes it seem as though the Chinese students strong-armed their way into the crowd and started beating people, which is objectively not the case.
On the contrary, it objectively is the case, as the first video you yourself linked to shows: it opens with a pro-mainland student in black rushing into the pro-HK crowd and assaulting someone with a crowd screaming and advancing behind him.
It's very strange that you're working so hard to downplay what happened. Not just downplaying, willfully distorting what the videos show.
Quick questions:
1. How do you know that guy is pro-mainland? I certainly don't have enough information to make a concrete determination such as that, i'd be curious to know how you did. It looks like he came from the pro-HK side of the mob as they are the ones holding the signs and the guy in the black sweater and glasses from that side is screaming "free hong kong", but I could be wrong.
2. Who hit who first? It looks like a mutual engagement to me.
Your confirmation bias is really shining through here.
> One of their friends was also "doxxed" - personal information including his passport, marriage certificate and student ID details were posted online. "Don't worry, there won't be a peaceful life for him in Brisbane," read an accompanying caption on Chinese social media platform Weibo.
Is this the kind of behavior that you would allow from a visitor to your home?
EDIT: Some shady down-voting going on in this thread. Not sure what else I expected with a politically-volatile topic like this one but it just goes to show that people don't care about discourse - they just care about feeling right.
This is complete false equivalence. No one in this thread is calling for all Chinese to be expelled from Australia or nonsense like that.
>If people are assaulting peaceful protesters, arrest them, charge them, try them, and punish them according to the law. It's literally right there on camera.
This is exactly what people are calling for. If you are convicted of a serious crime you can be expelled from the country. Some people feel they should be. Perhaps you disagree, but you're saying the exact same thing.
> Security officials quickly arrived to separate the groups
Separation calms the issue but does not punish those who harm others.
Are used to put you in line. It will only get worse from here onwards, if you think you are safe where you live, ask yourself "If they mistreat their own population and use the media to misguide the truth, what will they do to 'these damn foreigner'?"
I guess they are all being somewhat consistent here, since it probably doesn't count as colonialism-proper when the indigenous peoples happen to be Anglo.
This is entirely about the counter-protestors violently attacking the protestors.
Your initial message ended with "Speaking louder in public place is not breaking any LAW." This indicates that you were responding to some claim that the counter-protesters had broken a law by being louder in public. I haven't seen any claims resembling that so I'm curious to see where you did.
Brainwashed dictatorship proponents are blaming those who oppose dictatorship for their own aggression. How classy.
This year, one of my Chinese kids mentioned that he frequently used a VPN to get around China's firewall. This made another one of my Chinese kids quite upset: "You broke the law? How could you?"
The argument got somewhat heated, but I didn't intervene because I legitimately wasn't sure what to say. On one hand, yes, within the context of an 11-year-old's worldview, breaking the law is bad and should be avoided. On the other hand, China is an authoritarian regime attempting to suppress free access to information, and everyone should work around that however they can.
I've been replaying this in my head quite a bit, and I'm still not sure what I should have done.
If the Chinese students have a different opinion, they should do the same thing as the HK students. They can also start a petition / protest to against violence riot in their Country.
Free speech is not only available to HK students but to Chinese students in Australia too. The principal of free speech is not just speaking out loud without any responsibility, it's about mutual respect.
If the Chinese students have a different opinion, they should do the same thing as the HK students. They can also start a petition / protest to against violence riot in their Country.
Free speech is not only available to HK students but to Chinese students in Australia too. The principal of free speech is not just speaking out loud without any responsibility, it's about mutual respect.
A side note is that although you may feel insecure / anxious about being monitored, it is not necessary the fact without any evidences. As a free country, anyone can feel whatever they feel like. With the same theory as one of the HK student, others with opposite opinion can feel that they will be assaulted in HK given the violent riot situation in HK too. If that is the case, free speech is not being taken away by the Chinese government but by the rioters themselves.
If the Chinese student assault HK student, he should be put under the justice system. If HK police is using excess force, they should be put under justice system. If HK rioters broke the law, they should be put under justice system. Denial should never be excuses for act of violence.