>You have to understand that Chinese prefer security over freedom.

Pretty much everyone prefers security over freedom in particular in the abscene of security, but also just in general. Take a look at countries that have freedom written on their flags and then count the CCTV cameras in London or the number of three letter agencies in the US.

The only difference is the fact that in China the role of the state in exercising this surveillance is out in the open and endorsed as a means of organising society and everywhere else it happens through the backdoor.

Not sure one can easily speak about 1 billion people, speaking different languages, having different religion, living in different climates, as « prefering security over freedom ».

The chineese i’ve spoken to, that actually lived in china, first told you the official point of view, and then after the conversation kept going on, told you about things they didn’t like, then after some more time you realize all they want is leave china and come live in the west.

Ask the ones you've talked with whether they dare to level with their own parents or relatives, most likely they will be scolded as traitors or even be shuned to avoid troubles.

Yes, there will always be outliers, but in the case of China, where conformity is of utmost importance, they really are just absolute minorities in the 1.4B population.

If you've been following the developments of HK protests, a key indicator is that almost all of these "passive dissents" of the CCP you described turned against HKers just like average Chinese, they are bashing HKers and lapping up the info the party gave them.

Do these people love freedom or even democracy, yes, but they are also acting against it in the case of HK. This is the paradox, they love the "good aspects" of freedom and democracy but they also vehemently hate and reject the "bad ones" that inevitably come with it.

It's the tradeoff between democracy and nationalism. I bet if you offered the typical mainlander the following choices.

1. Democracy + Developed country standard of living, but Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, Xinjiang, Tibet vote to become independent and do become independent countries.

2. Autocracy + Developing country standard of living, but mainland China unifies with Taiwan.

Then most mainlanders would pick the second option. Due to historical reasons, any scenario that risks tarnishing the borders of the idealized unified China incurs a hyperallergic reaction.

> You have to understand that Chinese prefer security over freedom.

Or, as Mike Tyson put it: everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.

I don't know, hongkongers seem to prefer freedom.

Exactly. HongKongers dont consider themselves Chinese.

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/28/hongkongers-identifyin...

Only the minority that are protesting.

When asked, over 50% of Hong Kong people identified as “Hongkonger[s]”, even though various Chinese options were available.¹ Clearly then at least some non-protesters agree.

1. https://www.hkupop.hku.hk/english/popexpress/ethnic/eidentit...

At their height, about a half of Hong Kong's labour force (people aged over 15) hit the streets.

"minority"

This doesn't help the discussion. Also, anything less than half is a minority.

Not everyone participates, some are scared probably.

The hongkongers are protesting, so in Hong Kong your minority is 100% of the residents.

Your statement is deceptive

Are you saying that every Hong Kong resident would choose to protest if not scared?

If a country is 33.33% of three different groups, are all 3 a minority?

I suppose so. Though it's much clearer when the matter is dichotomous, such as "going to protest"/"not going", and "GOP"/"Democratic" (I know, I know, but independent is not significant).

Yeah, abject outcasts sponsored by black hands from America and the UK.

As I noted in another comment, a majority of Hong Kong people did not identify themselves as “Chinese” when given the choice.⁰ It is rather implausible to claim that over three million Chinese people are “sponsored by black hands from America and the UK”. Moreover it is quite unlikely that the majority of them are “abject outcasts.” And, finally, as a Marxist, I should like to know in what sense you consider your remarks to be compatible with the compassion for “outcasts” that animated at the very least Marx: “we should not abandon Marxism-Leninism;”¹ “[a]ll Party members must…be firm in their commitment to…the Marxist view on development;”² “[w]e must adhere to Marxism.”³

0. https://www.hkupop.hku.hk/english/popexpress/ethnic/eidentit...

1. XI Jinping, The Governance of China, p. 10

2. Ibid., p. 23

3. Ibid., p. 25

The UK government probably wants this setup, no?

Already under proposal for the existing "ring of steel": https://www.professionalsecurity.co.uk/news/interviews/new-r...

And selectively deployed at "public order" events: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/facial-recognition-tec...