notebookstack

I think the comparison in situation/contrast in international attention being made is more between Catalonia and Hong Kong. There's certainly a ton of other important issues causing the unrest, but there is a certain element of xenophobia/ superiority complex in play in Hong Kong as well, that has been simmering for many years.

https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3032041/hong-ko...?

Democracy was forcibly imposed on Japan by the US when they lost WWII; India had been colonized by the British and its elites exposed to their cultural and political systems for 200 years before independence. In Western Europe, the process took a couple millenia, dating back to the legacy of Greece and Rome. The Magna Carta started to limit monarchial authority in England beginning in 1215; the French had not one but a whole series of revolutions from the late 1700's through the 1800's. And yet, in between, there were decades and centuries of backslides into fiefdoms and dictatorships and absolute monarchies; even when progress was made, it was incremental - giving political say first to landed aristocracy and clergy, then men, then women.

I think it's a little early to definitely say that this hypothesis has been proven false in China. Keep in mind that China's growth has really only taken off since the mid-to-late 90's. That's less than one generation. Look at the path that comparable economies in Asia took who developed much earlier. Korea's economic miracle took off in 1960, but it was basically ruled by military dictatorships in all but name until 1987. Taiwan saw it's main burst of economic growth in the 60's and 70's, but it was also ruled as a dictatorship by the KMT since they lost the Chinese Civil War. In fact, the first opposition party was not formed until 1986, and martial law, which had been in effect since 1949, was not lifted until 1987, a year before Chiang Ching-kuo, Chiang Kai Shek's son and successor, passed away. Singapore's government all during its economic miracle was famously authoritarian.

So...because you don't personally know any of these 1.4 billion people, you feel like it's okay to make whatever assumptions you want about every single one of them? Is that not dehumanization? Would you enjoy having others' assumptions of you being whatever worst crime your government has ever perpetrated? How about even the simple assumption that you are your government and agree with every single one of their current policies and actions?

Have you been on any Chinese social media?

I actually think that everybody has had unrealistic expectations about the speed of democratization in China. That doesn't mean that it won't yet happen.

If you look at the recent US-led debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan, or even the results of all the Arab Spring protests, I think it's fairly obvious that you can't just take a people with no background and hard-fought experience in governing themselves through elections and say poof, you're good. The west tends to forget this - but you have the legacy of Greece and Rome from thousands of years in the past; The Magna Carta started to limit monarchial authority in England beginning in 1215; The French had not one but a whole series of revolutions from the late 1700's through the 1800's. And yet, in between, there were decades and centuries of backslides into fiefdoms and dictatorships and absolute monarchies; even when progress was made, it was incremental - giving political say first to landed aristocracy and clergy, then men, then women. Human progress almost never goes in a straight line, and sometimes, slow and steady and making sure you build a base of support in the general population for the change you're making can work better than monumental sudden changes the populace may not be ready for (look at the different paths, for instance, the acceptance of gay rights and abortion have taken in the US).

Also, keep in mind that China's growth has really only taken off since the mid-to-late 90's. That's less than one generation. Look at the path that comparable economies in Asia took who developed much earlier. Korea's economic miracle took off in 1960, but it was basically ruled by military dictatorships in all but name until 1987. Taiwan saw it's main burst of economic growth in the 60's and 70's, but it was also ruled as a dictatorship by the KMT since they lost the Chinese Civil War. In fact, the first opposition party was not formed until 1986, and martial law, which had been in effect since 1949, was not lifted until 1987, a year before Chiang Ching-kuo, Chiang Kai Shek's son and successor, passed away. Singapore's government all during its economic miracle was famously authoritarian.

China's the most populous countries on this planet. I just tend to think that things like this take time, that in fact, sometimes it works out a little better with a certain base level in the population at large. Also, overwhelming consensus in the foreign policy establishment always seems to be wrong - they were wrong in the 90's about the path and speed that liberalization would occur, and now that everyone concurs that it will never happen....well, I tend to think that they might be wrong there too.