WildStalins posted:'pro democracy protests' sounds like bullshit to me but then again chinas the global epicentre of labour unrest soooo http://left-flank.org/2014/09/29/occupying-hong-kong/#sthash.9sP5twfa.70NBRZwQ.dpbs
of course it is, it's the global epicentre of labor itself.
i'm sure the vast majority of the protestors mean well but this is the most bizarre exercise in blinkered liberal bullshit. by all means protest in defence of your right to vote but the post-handover honeymoon was never going to last forever and it can't be a complete shock if the powers that be have decided to keep recalibrating civil liberties downwards for the sake of the stability of greater china.
the style of this thing is all wrong. "Occupy"? the ferguson-style hands up dont shoot stance is particularly on the nose. this isn't tiananmen square and it's not about to be. grow up, middle class college kids of hong kong. you shits.
Petrol posted:the stability of greater china.
"it is right to rebel" - mao tse-tung
Edited by TheIneff ()
I mean, honestly, the CPC is only going to scale down the electoral process if they feel the opprobrium of HKers is worth risking. The article WildStalins posted hints at the real problem: growing dissonance with the mainland. The party would just as likely phase in pro-democratic reforms on the mainland if it were practical in a short time frame. In the longer term I'd actually be surprised if that wasn't on the cards. But for now, the one country two systems thing is getting real creaky.
The point is simply that the CPC isn't the crazed freedom-hating boogeyman the New York Times would have everyone believe. Taking cues from a pack of elder imperialist stooges, on aims, logistics, even branding.. I honestly don't see who can benefit from this spectacle but a bunch of think tank yank spooks who just want something to watch while they stuff themselves full of pop corn and hot dogs.
Petrol posted:The party would just as likely phase in pro-democratic reforms on the mainland if it were practical in a short time frame.
WildStalins posted:'pro democracy protests' sounds like bullshit to me but then again chinas the global epicentre of labour unrest soooo http://left-flank.org/2014/09/29/occupying-hong-kong/#sthash.9sP5twfa.70NBRZwQ.dpbs
Petrol posted:The point is simply that the CPC isn't the crazed freedom-hating boogeyman the New York Times would have everyone believe.
Thanks for the heads up. Here at the Rhizzone, we appreciate contrarian opinions on the merits and trustworthiness of New York Times.
(snark aside, do we know anything about these protesters, who constitutes them and their secondary complaints? every protester is "pro-democracy" these days and it's dumb to see that as an immediate sign of liberalism and US collaboration. not saying you're doing that, but... there is also the fact that these "occupy" movements have universally failed in the short term so it's always fun to see "the people" butting their head to a wall, again and again. It makes for great spectacle though)
One other thing you don’t hear often is that protests in China sometimes actually work! The center responds and tries to cut a deal or steps in to mediate/decide things. Strikers and protestors know this. They know the police can be brutal and don’t trust them necessarily. But often they do seem to trust the center or hope/expect it to step in eventually. Look at Wukan in Guangdong province a couple years back. I won’t claim to know what the real stories were – was it clan/familial politics as some allege, or truly grass-roots democracy in action, or some combo — but it did work. Their biggest grievances and demands were met (shake-up of local officials, return of land, etc). And they even voted for new officials, with the protest leaders elected. Now it also seems not all of this has panned out either — to be honest you’d have to be there to really know what is going on. But my point is just that there was a response from the center to try and fix things, you see? Even in Foxxconn — and I trust this won’t be taken as apologia – wages went up eventually and they did things (beyond the infamous nets put around the dorms to ‘help’ suiciders). In fact you see reports from time to time about a lack of labor, a shortage in Guangdong/southern China. Can you imagine that? It means wages are going up, and/or the migrants/rural laborers have other options. At some point China will outsource its labor– not that this is a victory for the Chinese working class but an indication of development I suppose and raised living standards. Hard to fathom.
Compare this to the USA or elsewhere. It compares favorably. The entirety of London takes to the streets to stop the war on Iraq and Blair shrugs his shoulders and tells them to go get stuffed. My own shameless employer then invites him to Hong Kong years later to talk about “faith’! The USA Occupy movement– fascinating and admirable and interesting and…. completely ineffective, no? The state could give a hang about civil society. The Chinese state, even the inept Hong Kong system, actually cares more, i.e. responds. It even responds to the so-called “netizens” sometimes. Not well enough, and not enough in general. But I like to see it and root for it. Right now I don’t care if this dialectic is to be described as “socialist” or “Confucian” statecraft. I’m for it. And it is 100% clear that what drives it is protest and collective action. And 100% clear that the “down with the Communist party!” approach is not theirs and does not work (and moreover is not that popular). HK “democrats” still need to learn that.
http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=10436
from last year but still basically correct. this is just a hong kong arab spring, with the same mix of genuine (confused) leftists, CIA agents, and liberals and labor aristocracy, and it's still objectively counter-revolutionary. whether Tienanmen square was counter-revolutionary is more arguable but these protests clearly are.
Petrol posted:it's literally
http://www.voanews.com/content/arab-spring-revolutions-follow-game-plan-from-1993-book-123273468/173007.html
a
http://www.usnews.com/topics/author/jamila-raqib
'color'
http://www.aeinstein.org/the-struggle-for-universal-suffrage-in-hong-kong/
'revolution'
That's weak man. what does that even trying to prove? you know something about ae institute that we don't? speak up.
also you literally advanced the AKP's accusation to Gezi movement lol
Petrol posted:it's literally
http://www.voanews.com/content/arab-spring-revolutions-follow-game-plan-from-1993-book-123273468/173007.html
a
http://www.usnews.com/topics/author/jamila-raqib
'color'
http://www.aeinstein.org/the-struggle-for-universal-suffrage-in-hong-kong/
'revolution'
In my wallet there are little lists of books to read some day, some of which I made from ye olde LF book thread. That Gene Sharp book is on there, plus some other hilarious liberalism from a different time 
Some other funny ones are Naomi Klein - The Shock Doctrine and No Logo (friend of the Colbert Report) Rules for Radicals - Alinsky (thanks Obama) Going Postal - Mark Ames (he was big for a while in LF)
Even long time Marxist-Third Worldist poster me wasn't always ideologically pure
i cant remember her saying anything stupid
Petrol posted:it's literally
http://www.voanews.com/content/arab-spring-revolutions-follow-game-plan-from-1993-book-123273468/173007.html
a
http://www.usnews.com/topics/author/jamila-raqib
'color'
http://www.aeinstein.org/the-struggle-for-universal-suffrage-in-hong-kong/
'revolution'
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/09/the-ned-hong-kong-riots.html
So lets just look up the usual relevant source of such exquisite fragrance. The 2012 annual report of the U.S. government financed National Endowment of Democracy, aka the Central Color Revolution Agency, includes three grants for Hong Kong one of which is new for 2012 and not mentioned in earlier annual reports:
National Democratic Institute for International Affairs - $460,000
To foster awareness regarding Hong Kong's political institutions and constitutional reform process and to develop the capacity of citizens - particularly university students - to more effectively participate in the public debate on political reform, NDI will work with civil society organizations on parliamentary monitoring, a survey, and development of an Internet portal, allowing students and citizens to explore possible reforms leading to universal suffrage.
American Center for International Labor Solidarity
$139,532
To continue to advance worker rights by building the capacity of democratic trade unions in Hong Kong. The Solidarity Center will work with its partners to advocate for collective bargaining rights, utilize local and international mechanisms to improve working conditions, and promote understanding of worker rights abuses and developments in China among the international labor movement and human rights community.
Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor
$155,000
To raise the standards of human rights protection and democratic representation in Hong Kong. The Monitor will carry out human rights monitoring, casework, campaigning, and public education drawing local and international attention to civil rights and human rights developments in Hong Kong.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/hkedition/2011-09/27/content_13796808.htm
http://carnegieendowment.org/2006/04/12/arab-reform-bulletin-april-2006/ddia?reloadFlag=1
Headline: 'Meddling' In Ukraine: Democracy is not an American plot.
Article: "Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine? Yes."
welcome to american pro-democracy discourse, loved by policy wonks everywhere
HenryKrinkle posted:the NED & USAID back liberal activists in all countries, even in countries w/ pro-US regimes (such as in Turkey as mentioned earlier). is this about creating a false sense of "consistency?"
its probably more about creating a certain sense of instability
EDIT: to clarify, this Hong Kong stuff is most definitely US astroturf, but that's based on obvious geopolitical rivalries rather than some six figure grants from the NED.
Edited by HenryKrinkle ()
HenryKrinkle posted:so the US intentionally wants to destabilize Turkey under erdogan of all people?
i think its probably more that they will do their best to have a hand in any kind of mobilization that happens under erdogan
that doesn't mean we should condemn any and all revolt against erdogan as 100% astroturf.
c_man posted:HenryKrinkle posted:so the US intentionally wants to destabilize Turkey under erdogan of all people?
i think its probably more that they will do their best to have a hand in any kind of mobilization that happens under erdogan
ya of course, but that's a lot different from astroturfing political instability into existence. every large social movement is a amalgamation of various forces vying for pre-eminence.
also what i was referencing was that during the protests, pro-akp media pointed to gene sharp as the "mastermind of the civilian coup attempt" due to some of the more creative non-violent tactics the protesters used. CIA funded OTPOR was behind the dastardly plan to unseat the man of the people, Erdogan.
c_man posted:i don't see why that's so surprising. erdogan is pretty unpopular with a lot of turkish liberals and a lot of these international democracy orgs seem pretty liberal. i mean idk if the CIA was involved or whatever but the national endowment for democracy wouldn't be too out of place there.
i'm not saying they would be out of place there, but do you see why it's dumb to point to a non-violent protest manual (with some liberal sensibilities) as the culprit behind a massive social movement? receiving the support of this or that liberal organization tells us very little about the dynamics of what's actually going on. in the turkish case, the liberals had shit to do with what animated the movement 'cause that was directly about the appropriation of public land for capital development. i don't know what's the deal with Hong Kong though.
Fundamentally, having all candidates in an election be selected by popular nomination is not necessary to something being democratic. Further, being democratic isn't some sort of necessary end-goal. In any event, this sounds like people want more say in selecting their oligarchs; there's nothing here about giving more political offices and authority to common people, or having public referendums on passing laws and making other political declarations.
Procedurally, this election involves the people to a much greater extent than the last one, which didn't feature a popular vote at all. Further, even though reality doesn't conform to your personal fantasy of how hong kong should be run, it doesn't give random people the authority to go shutting down entire areas of the city in a big temper tantrum display of immaturity. I can't find the cultural or legal agreement that allows random children and disaffected people to override the government process and somehow decide how to fill political office.
redfiesta posted:c_man posted:i don't see why that's so surprising. erdogan is pretty unpopular with a lot of turkish liberals and a lot of these international democracy orgs seem pretty liberal. i mean idk if the CIA was involved or whatever but the national endowment for democracy wouldn't be too out of place there.
i'm not saying they would be out of place there, but do you see why it's dumb to point to a non-violent protest manual (with some liberal sensibilities) as the culprit behind a massive social movement? receiving the support of this or that liberal organization tells us very little about the dynamics of what's actually going on. in the turkish case, the liberals had shit to do with what animated the movement 'cause that was directly about the appropriation of public land for capital development. i don't know what's the deal with Hong Kong though.
yeah i agree.
also, i also dont know what's the deal with Hong Kong. Exactly what the hell is going on in Hong Kong?
Hong Kong Development Network 
National Endowment for Democracy
jeffery posted:Occupy Central with Love and Peace
lmao
HenryKrinkle posted:the NED & USAID back liberal activists in all countries, even in countries w/ pro-US regimes (such as in Turkey as mentioned earlier). is this about creating a false sense of "consistency?"
hegemony wants to appropriate all political movements and channel the movements into something that benefits global capital within a neoliberal framework. the goal is controlling the outcome, and/or diminishing the impact of any type of movement that seeks to enact political change.
like with everything in capitalism it's about control
HenryKrinkle posted:the NED & USAID back liberal activists in all countries, even in countries w/ pro-US regimes (such as in Turkey as mentioned earlier). is this about creating a false sense of "consistency?"
constant pressure everywhere that always churns fresh naive helpless meat into positions of power that is beholden directly to the United States, basic kids, multi denied opposition groups and loony Nazis, whatever, make sure the London educated banker squats are in charge, then those goofs get a foothold and start securing their local resources and acting independently to satisfy local constituencies that don't like the United States, start using their economies as tools of policy independent of the United States and its little quislings and the money, start acting less "liberal", then before anything like that can turn the United States presses again, the policy is very easy for State Department grad gimps to justify in terms of the self interest of the United States aligning with every virtue while the real policy is done over their heads to align with the security and defense agencies anfd you can see it all with julian assange, you will actually be able to smell his hair bleach on this adventure, you will hear the Jersey in the voice of the president of estonia and it will move you, to a bigger house
