When Western Media Covers HK – Why Do Many Caucasians Support Chinese but Condemn Hong Kongers?

Featured

I have been following this news about Hong Kong being most racist in the world, and so glad that the name of Hong Kong has been cleared after some tough work our friendly blogger did:

The western media does not seem to pay a lot of attention to HK except when HK is being condemned for being a racist country (please do not tell me calling Hong Kong a country isn’t PC). I have some rather difficult to digest thoughts to share:

  • Self-abased but self-important
    Chinese are ashamed of the history baggage they all share – being beaten at many wars by Japanese and Western countries. The low self-esteem amongst the Chinese is not spoken, they are not even aware of this problem. For example, when you asked them about WWII, all they focus on was Japan’s invasion and what a humiliation that was to China, but fail to discuss the war on a different level.
    They cannot face the deeply rooted problems Chinese all share, nor could they admit the problems and try to correct them (well detailed by Joe Chung’s book “I Don’t Want to be Chinese Again” – no English translation available yet. This book is banned, obviously, in China but have a lot of awakening facts and argument about Chinese people). The so called history baggage has been suppressing Chinese. However, given the recent decades of economic advancement, Chinese seem to have become extremely self-important because of the new wealth they have – just look at the luxury shops and see how they behave, as if “one can do anything he wants as long as he has money”. The extremely self-abased people are now loaded with money, a new tool for exploitation from an individual to a global level, they are not extremely self-important. “Extreme self-abased turns into extreme self-important” – a phrase Hong Kongers use on its own people
  • “Persecutory delusion”
    Chinese is tuned or trained to believe that they have been suffering from discrimination across the world and the western world, in particular, have mistreated Chinese for centuries. Every time there is any sort of incidents caused by their behaviour (for example, the formula powder shortage problem), Chinese would come out shouting they are being discriminated. This deeply rooted mindset cannot be changed. They enjoy being the powerless victims when things happen to them, because of the point below
  • White guilt
    Western world did start war in China, even colonised some Asian countries or imported Asian for cheap labours for decades. This somehow imposed a guilt amongst the Caucasians thinking they need to protect the “yellow skin fellows”
  • Who are Hong Kongers?
    Hong Kongers are seen by the Western world a more civialised country than China (because the British government had taught Hong Kongers a lot of universal values and simply because the world know that communist countries cannot work). Hence, Hong Kongers are being seen equals on the level of “social sophistication”. Unfortunately, because of the skin colour, Caucasians still can’t quite see Hong Kongers with yellow skin as their equals! Caucasians in general do think they are more superior than the coloured people – many deny and say this type of comment is racist. But I think people prefer to stick to those who are similar to themselves – in terms of appearance, believes, tradition, etc. We often generalise things, and judge people by their skin or they way they dress. Generalisation is built-in self-protection mechanism – we hang out with people look and behave similar to ourselves, so we know what to expect and what not to do, the most extreme is we stereotype others so that we will be extra carefully when we meet someone who looks and speaks differently than ourselves. Here’s a massive conflicts!
  • How should we treat Chinese?
    Because of the White Guilt, Caucasians want to save those “poor coloured people”. This fits perfectly when the Chinese love to promote their “victim” identity. Although they are not shy about their wealth, they have no problem emphasizing their imaginary victim identity which trigger the sympathy of kind-hearten people (may it be Caucasians or local Hong Kongers) – the people from Hong Kong (as said before, a more civilised country) must help educate the less educated and less civilised Chinese! Please remember, China’s economy is amongst the top three, the people who play this “victim” game aren’t those poor ones – they are the ones who can afford to travel around the world and buy expensive handbags, etc (a fantastic example here in recent news). However, the western world, perhaps being blinded by the White Guilt, yes, the Brits have taught the Hong Kongers a lot things (values, justice, honesty, etc), but back then the Brits have the absolute power, it was relatively easier for them. Now that China has Hong Kong’s sovereignty and has an upper hand over Hong Kong (the worst is many Hong Kongers believe that if it wasn’t for China, Hong Kong had died) Hong Kong, as a nation of 7 million people, is in no position to educate or transform China, a nation with 1.3 billion people.

**let me repeat one more time: the term “Chinese” in my blog when referring to human beings is “national Chinese” not “racial Chinese”**

ANGRY! 70% of Students in HK’s Universities are Mainland Chinese!!!

I do not suppose anyone would disagree that universities in Hong Kong should give priority to Hong Kong students.

In Hong Kong, the number of students from China has been growing while the number of spaces for the local Hong Kong students has been stagnant. Bear in mind the fact that these universities are partly funded by the Hong Kong SAR government, which means tax payers in Hong Kong are funding foreign students.

The latest statistics show that an alarming 70% of the postgraduate students in the universities in Hong Kong are Chinese from Mainland China. These universities explain that recruiting foreign students is a way to internationalise their schools. However, the so called “internationalisation” is misleading! A truly internationlised university should have students from all over the world, which is what universities in Hong Kong used to be, but not from ONE SINGLE COUNTRY.

The majority of these so called “international” students from China have the traditionally Chinese mentality – refuse to emigrate into the local society nor would they embrace the local culture, criticise Hong Kong and the people of Hong Kong, victimise themselves when they provoke public outcry. Here are a few blog posts by another blogger about these students from China:

City University incident

Student from China Calls HKer DOGS

Poly U China Students Hates HK

One thing I want to say is if these students from China despise their host universities and their host country (Hong Kong) and if China is such a wonderful place in all aspects, why did they CHOOSE to come to Hong Kong to study? Why did they CHOOSE to work in Hong Kong after they graduated? All they want is the Hong Kong identity cards or use Hong Kong as a platform for them to immigrate to other countries!

Hong Kong students are working on raising fund to place advertisements in newspapers. Below are the first round of designs, you can also visit the Facebook group which was set up a while ago:

Image

ImageImage

There have been numerous cases that clearly shows these universities favours students from China. The banners they put up in the campuses are in Simplified Chinese instead of the official written language – Traditional Chinese. Announcements are written with China terminologies. There’s a case recently reported by the press which was extremely controversial (also shows how ungrateful those Chinese students could be, CY Leung helped him to get his degree, and he turned around and said CY Leung would unlikely to uphold justice during his tenure as Hong Kong SAR’s Chief Executive).

Another thought: The world is getting really confused about how to differentiate between Hong Kongers and Chinese, sometimes they mixed Taiwanese up with Chinese as well! I can honestly say, this would insult the genuine Taiwanese and Hong Kongers who have their national pride.

Beijing blocks free Hong Kong elections – The Vancouver Sun Reports

By Jonathan Manthorpe, Vancouver Sun

The Chinese government has made it clear it has no intention of living up to its promise to allow voters among Hong Kong’s 7.1 million people to freely elect their government leader.

Beijing has repeatedly put off the democratic reforms it promised 30 years ago during negotiations before the 1997 return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty after 155 years of British rule.

China’s stalling and its heavy-handed dealings with Hong Kong have sparked repeated peaceful demonstrations in Hong Kong since the handover.

But Beijing’s latest announcement that it will keep a veto over whatever Hong Kong voters decide has heightened demands for universal suffrage.

 

This is the first news article in the Western world that reports the situation without being biased. Clear evidence of China breaches the Sino-British Joint-Declaration by blocking a fair and free election in Hong Kong repeatedly (the so called political reformed in 2012 did not provide Hong Kong a more democratic election).

Margaret Thatcher’s Death

(source: TheJakartaGlobe.com & Reuters)

Margaret Thatcher, Former Prime Minister of the UK, died on 8th April. This news has been covered by every newspaper, forum, discussion board and Facebook page in Hong Kong. Although the world (and the majority of the people of Hong Kong) are evaluating what she’s done when she was in office, people in Hong Kong, especially the local, began to look at what has she done during the Sino-British negotiation back in the late 70s and 80s. Did the Iron Lady actually fight for Hong Kong? Or was she not really that tough a Prime Minister after all when she faced the Commies?

(source: Bloomberg)

Perhaps she did not fight, perhaps she did. Some said that the UK government never had the best interest of the people of Hong Kong in their heart. After all, not many people knew about Hong Kong then (in fact, many still don’t know Hong Kong was a British colony before it was handed to the Communists in 1997). People in the UK were extremely worried that 3 million** of Hong Kong people were going to flee to the UK and would collapse the country – the fact is, people of Hong Kong did not want to move to the UK, they only wanted some sort of security if the Communist ever crosses the line they have something to fall back to. People of Hong Kong are grateful for what the British government has done (e.g. nine years of free education for children, rule of law, clean government [at least cleaner than many other governments including China’s for years and for now], basic national health care provided by public hospital, public housing for the poor and the grass root, etc), yet disgusted by the fact that the British government essentially betrayed the people of Hong Kong as the British government kept their subjects in Hong Kong in the dark until it was the point of no return.

** The total population in Hong Kong was no more than 5 million, and no more than 3 million were British nations, i.e. either born in Hong Kong, a British colony, or have British citizenship via different means

I found a short post on the most popular discussion forum in Hong Kong, Golden Forum, and below is the translation (not word for word as I felt it is important to elaborate to give more details to the context):

一般香港人對英國的誤解
近日,有部份團體/個人提出一些意見,指”英國真的有那麼好嗎?”、”英國出賣香港,為何還要懷緬殖民地時代,何必呢?”云云。英國和中共相比, 大家都有眼睇;”英國出賣香港”實際上是某些人士借題發揮、大眾以訛傳訛的後果。筆者認為香港人有必要知道當年究竟發生甚麼事,而有之後的”香港成為英國 殖民地”、”香港忽然要被回歸”,因為香港赤化愈來愈嚴重,而且教科書亦非全面講解,只有短短數行字,電視亦為免”得罪大陸,打爛飯碗”,也不會道出全部 事實。

大家都知當年,滿清戰敗,先後割讓香港島、九龍半島,並讓英國租借新界。但為何要選擇香港這個地方呢?其實與清英戰爭有關。其實當年英軍久攻不破 林則除的防線,而艦上的淡水又接近用完,當時的澳門政府又拒絕為英軍補給,但為何最後又可以戰勝滿清?因為當時的香港人為英軍補給,致令英國戰勝滿清(有 部份歷史資料認為是基於反清心理,促使香港人協助英軍)。當時的英國主帥查理‧義律爵士雖然以英國利益為先,但亦深知滿清不會放過出於香港人,故冒上被撤 職的風險,都要出於道義和利益提出佔領香港、保護香港人,而非中史書所言的”不滿穿鼻草約利益過少而把義律撤職”。(詳情可以上網搜尋義律上書印度總督信 件,而信件內容已被香港浸會大學及樹仁大學引用為史實;亦可以翻閱” 改變香港歷史的60篇文獻”)

香港就此逐步成為英國的殖民地。

那麼,明明香港人生活安定,為何忽然要”被回歸”?很多人都以為是”租約到期”, 但明顯地是錯誤的,大家想一想割讓出去的香港島、九龍就會知道?

要理解這個問題,大家應先了解一些國際的決議。

聯合國1516號決議案訂明殖民地自決的權利,即是殖民地有權決定是否獨立、維持原狀等。

而在1946年12月14日,經聯合國大會決議,香港還在”尚未自治殖民地”名單內,要注意是整個香港(包括香港島、九龍、新界、離島及相關水域)。

聯合國憲章第73條b亦規定:尚未自治的殖民地,必須依照各地的情況,逐步協助使其自治。

看到這裡,大家都會有疑問:照常理,香港就算不獨立,也應該逐步取得全面自治,究竟”被回歸”原因何在?

原因就在於大陸的”奸招”(可能有人覺得冇問題,”奸”純粹是筆者對此事的觀感)。1972年,在聯合國準備通過2908號決議(內容是令使殖民 地都能儘快自決獨立)前,大陸以某種方式作要脅,提出將香港、澳門剔除出殖民地名單。當時,斐濟、瑞典、委內瑞拉等3國持不同意見,而英國亦依據香港主流民意(維持現況)致函聯合國秘書長,抗議聯合國大會把香港決議為中國領土,但大家都知大陸在聯合國內有幾多”朋友”。因此,英國唯有無奈接受,盡量為香港爭取”被回歸”後的利益。

香港就此被”老屈”收回,而近日不少示威中有人高呼”香港獨立”亦可算是合情、合理,而且並無違法。

The misunderstandings average Hong Kongers have against the UK:

Recently, some organisations and individuals have started to ask “was Britain that good?” “Britain betrayed Hong Kong, why would Hong Kongers still miss the colonial days?”.  I believe that Hong Kongers must learn about what actually happened back then before the phrases “Hong Kong became a British colony” and “Hong Kong was suddenly being returned”. Text books nor the media would not reveal all the facts as they need to make a living (note: given that they need to have the business from pro-China or China-backed organisations, individuals, etc)

As all should know (note: evidentially not known to many Brits), when Qin government lost in wars, Hong Kong Island and Kowloon were ceded to Britain perpetually, whilst the New Territories were leased to Britain (note: for 99 years, which in Chinese language it is equivalent to eternity). Why did Britain pick Hong Kong (a small fish village back then)? The British army had been fighting the Qin government’s troop (led by Lin Tse-Hsu) but could not defeat them, to make the situation more difficult, they were running out of fresh water, but the Macau government then refused provide supply to the British army. Fortunately, people in Hong Kong provided supply to the British troop which eventually helped them beat Qin. Although Admiral Sir Charles Elliot, who led the army, put England’s interest first, he understood that Qin government would not let the people of Hong Kong off. He risked his career and proposed to take over Hong Kong in order to protect the people of Hong Kong, purely because of his morality. This is completely different from the Chinese history books which say “the British government was not pleased about the benefits they could get from the Convention of Chuenpee” (this can be referenced to the letter Charles Elliot sent to the governor of India, which has been categorised as historical fact).

This is when Hong Kong began to turn into a British colony.

The people of Hong Kong had been doing just fine, why was there a sudden “being returned to China”? Many thought that it was because of the lease (note: New Territories) was up, but there is a fundamental fault in this theory.

To understand this, one must understand some international resolutions:

According to United Nations Security Council resolution 1516 (noted: a feedback suggests that this should be General Assembly resolution 1514), colonies have right for self determination, meaning colonies can determine whether to go independent, remain status quo, etc.

As of 14th December 1946, United Nations General Assembly still recognised Hong Kong as one of the non-self-governing colonies. It is important to note that the definition of Hong Kong included Hong Kong Island, Kowloon, New Territories, outer islands and relevant territorial water (New Territories and outer islands in Hong Kong were “leased to the British for 99 years” in the Treaty of Nanking – please also note in Chinese language, 99 is a symbol representing “forever” and “eternity”).

As stated in the Article 73 (b) of the Charter of the United Nations: Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:

  1. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
  2. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement;
  3. to further international peace and security;
  4. to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to co-operate with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in this Article; and
  5. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which Chapters XII and XIII apply.

According to this Article, Hong Kong should have gone self-governing even if it had not gone independent. What is the reason for “being returned to China”? (note: “being returned to China” here consist the fact that people of Hong Kong were NOT informed nor consulted about this “decision” and were left with no choice but to “be returned to China”)

This is all because of the trickery China played. In 1972, just before the United Nations was going to pass Resolution 2908 (Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples), China threatened the members that they have to agree on taking Hong Kong and Macau off the list of colonies in the EU. At that time, Fiji, Sweden and Venezuela objected this notion. The UK, based on the mainstream public opinion (which was remain to be a British colony, a status quo), wrote to the Secretary-General of the UN, objecting the General Assembly’s resolution that Hong Kong is China’s territory. Given that China had (and still has) a lot of “friends” in the UN, the UK had no choice but to accept the resolution and to focus on getting the the best for Hong Kong in preparation of it “being returned to China”.

This is how Hong Kong ended up having to be handed over to China. The noise calling for Hong Kong independence that recently surfaced is reasonable and legitimate.

Hong Kongers Awaking

Read this piece in late Feb (this has been sitting in my draft box for a while…) and find it explains a lot of things and reminds me how myself (or many other pro-independence Hong Kongers) come to support Hong Kong’s independence.

Hong Kong has long been separated from the PRC (China), under the colonial time Hong Kong advanced a lot faster than its neighbourhood PRC, and had been living a more comfortable life. Somehow, this became a “guilt” – similar to the so-called white guilt, and subconsciously think that Hong Kong has to help or even compensate China.

This nationalistic idea has rooted deep down and muddled up Hong Kongers’ self identity – Are we Chinese (race)? Are we British (nationality)? Are we Hong Konger (ethnicity)?

Because of the guilt, Hong Kongers had (to many still have) zero resistance to the “ideas” of “we are all Chinese” and “blood is thicker than water”. Hence, many pan-democrats and social movements focus solely on this “nationalist” ideology amongst most Hong Kongers. Supporting Peking students back in 1989, Li Wangyang’s “suicide” case, are just two examples – it’s a matter of doing the right thing but not necessarily because “we are all Chinese”. The so called pan-democrats are hijacking Hong Kongers’ empathy for the injustice in PRC, and hooking it to the nationalist ideology. Gradually (after decades) PRC’s democratic development became the precondition of Hong Kong’s democratic movement – if China doesn’t have democracy, Hong Kong will never have democracy, hence Hong Kongers should help PRC’s democracy.

Communist China sees this logical fallacy and guilt amongst Hong Kongers, and they demand Hong Kongers to pay their debt – making Hong Kongers contribute and became their stepping stone to economic boom. Luring Hong Kongers with hot money, uncontrolled tourists, and many other so-called economic benefits (how is having China companies listing in Hong Kong benefit the people of Hong Kong? This helps Chinese companies to have access to global investors and Hong Kongers’ money) to achieve PRC’s assimilation scheme.

Communist China uses Hong Kongers’ guilt to make them believe China is still the underprivileged and Hong Kongers have the obligations to help and save China. It does not make any sense to demand a city-state with 7 million people to support and resolve problems for a country with a population of 1.3 billion!

The author of this commentary said that he’s glad to see Hong Kongers are awaking recently – “unload their guilt” and stand up for the local’s rights and livelihood.

He quoted that Krystian Zimerman, who vowed would not return to the US until George W. Bush was out of office in protest of America’s placement of a missile defense shield in Poland, saying “get your hands off of my country” and said it fits Hong Kong’s situation perfectly. Communist China has been invading Hong Kong since the handover of its sovereignty on multiple levels – population, politics, education and economy. CY Leung, the Chief Executive, insists on paying attention to the feelings and needs of Chinese in the PRC. Law enforcement units side with Mainland Chinese smugglers, local “politicians” repeatedly emphasis the needs for Hong Konger to embrace Mainland Chinese because they are the underprivileged” even though they break laws and disrupt Hong Kong’s society.

Hong Kongers have the right to say to these traitors and invaders “GET YOUR HANDS OFF OF MY HOME!”

Press Freedom Erodes

This is a relatively old news (published a couple weeks ago), but is certainly worth reading as it shows that Hong Kong’s press freedom is being threatened, and the mission is ordered directly by the HKSAR government…

Roy Tang Yun-kwong, Director of Broadcasting is alleged to have interfered RTHK’s freedom in producing programmes. According to news report published on 13th March, Tang said that he does not intervene editorial freedom and independence.

However, an email he issued to the production team went public shortly after the rumours about him infringing upon RTHK’s press freedom and he’s under political missions from Peking/HKSAR government, including the refusal of renewing the contract with the current Acting Assistant Direct, Forever Sze Wing-yuen, also nicknamed “the last samurai of RTHK”, who refused to carry out politicial missions Tang ordered.

Tang said in a Legislative Council hearing that the production team of Headliner, RTHK’s popular TV programme on current affairs, suggested to use Hitler and other Nazis characters in one section of the programme that satirise social issues (the section is currently using Empress Dowager and an eunuch as the key characters). He, however, thought that using Hitler and Nazis related characters would cause controversies and demanded the production team to ditch the plan. The team, at the end, voluntarily changed their programme design (the team changed their plan because they found other characters that are more suitable than the Hitler idea, but not surrendering to Tang’s command).

An anonymous letter which includes an email Tang issued to the production team at Headliner, was sent to the media following Tang’s hearinRTHK (source: AM730)

Tang has no experience in the media sector prior to joining RTHK. His ability and leadership was questioned when he was appointed.

The public concerns that the above email by Tang shows that any ideas on programme production has to get “clearance” from the Director or the government. Some public figures also suspect that Tang was given the political mission to “sanitise” RTHK.

HK reporter got beaten up in Peking

Breaking news!!!

A female HK reporter currently working on an assignment about Why Yang (also translated as “Yang Kuang”), a HK activist who went to the building block where Liu Xia lives (wife of Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu XiaoBo who’s been under house arrest for over 2 years with no legitimate reason) was surrounded and beaten up by at least 5 police in China.