> For the record, I'm not saying that Hong Kongers are wrong for protesting or wanting freedom. I'm just saying they'll fail, and the consequences won't be pretty.
You may be correct, you may not. I wonder if people said the same thing right up to the end of segregation, and other things. But that doesn't matter: might does not make right. Our predictions don't matter, our individual stances do.
> Finally, it is the act itself that matters. When instrumental reason is the sole guide to action, the acts it justifies are robbed of their inherent meanings and thus exist in an ethical vacuum. [..] the moral good of a moral act inheres in the act itself. That is why an act can itself ennoble or corrupt the person who performs it.
-- Joseph Weizenbaum
Everybody dies at some point, anyway. All wealth goes down the drain. What these people are changing, and what cannot be taken from them, is themselves. If the results will "not be pretty", there will be no end to songs about them in our lifetime and maybe that of our children and grandchildren -- the kind of songs that would excactly not get written about people with cushy finance jobs, not even once. This isn't meant as snark against you, it's a compliment for them.
They are in the same political and cultural position as Hong Kong: 1 country 2 systems, colonized by a European country, speak Cantonese, etc. but there are no protests in Macau.
Why? The economy is doing well and people there are relatively well off.
[1] https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_#...
Getting rid of segregation has a strong moral foundation and backing... keeping colonial roots in control of HK, not so much.
This is so cynical it makes me sad. Some people have principles that are not necessarily the best for their own personal outcome, but they are deeply felt.
I've never been an ambitious person, but I appreciate those that are and all they have created. I do live by principles, however, and my own personal well-being comes second to the idea of liberty.
There is a reason HKers were carrying American flags-> because America is an idea. I certainly support the people of HK protesting this power-overreach.
There are plenty of examples throughout history, let alone in any of the many incidents of competition happening today - from sport all the way to war - of the opposite.
sources? yes, finance was always big in HK, but how many people got those cushy jobs really?
You are assuming HKers would sell their freedom to a tyrprican government in exchange for GDP growth the way mainland Chinese can. That's a big assumption.
Mainlanders may not like it to hear it, and I'll even go as far as to say the best strategy for discussing politics with mainlanders is to not directly tell them this, but their political canon is anomalously full of holes that are exposed when explored in any significant depth (yes I've been through this process with mainlanders).
Unfortunately that's not what's at stake because they won't succeed; freedom isn't actually an option. They think it is, but they'll fail.
> Liberty is what they are fighting to keep. Not wealth.
That might be what they tell themselves, but I can guarantee that if all the HK youth got cushy finance jobs like the previous generation, these protests would have never happened. In absence of personal fulfilment, HK youth are searching for an identity.
> The trigger for the current mass-action was not an economic event
Yes, that was the trigger. However there are triggers, and underlying sentiment. Remember the Umbrella Revolution was a thing only a few years before.
For the record, I'm not saying that Hong Kongers are wrong for protesting or wanting freedom. I'm just saying they'll fail, and the consequences won't be pretty.