John Burns in HKFP on how an ex-cop’s rise to Chief Secretary goes with a decline in trust, accountability and the role of professional civil servants. And Steve Vines on Hong Kong’s transition to a police (or whatever you want to call it) state where the government has ‘abandoned cooperation and persuasion in favour of crackdowns and heavy punishment’. Benedict Rogers of HK Watch gives Security Secretary Chris Tang a serious mauling after the latter blames ‘those who incite violence and hatred against the country’ for the stabbing/suicide in Causeway Bay on July 1.
Hong Kong’s security officials are clearly enraged at public reluctance to buy in to their hype about terrorism – and especially at online portrayals (however histrionic) of the attacker as a martyr.
The laying of flowers outside Sogo was not about ’romanticizing a despicable act’, nor really even about honouring a stranger who could hardly have been of sound mind when he stabbed himself in the heart. Simple explanation: it’s a (now rare) opportunity for people to express their view of the NatSec regime as a whole, and of a police force now seen as an instrument of oppression.
The cops’ bullying of kids and bystanders in Causeway Bay earlier that day served no purpose other than to embitter the public. The intimidation of flower-bearers at Sogo the day after, or screaming at kids the day after that, etc, only accomplished the same. People are not like soymilk companies. (Warning: watching these items could make you ‘radicalised by myriad fake information’. You’d have thought the police PR people might realize that the whiny panty-wetting about ‘mourning the cold-blooded attacker’ is itself inciting more people to bring flowers – but no.)
As the articles at the top point out, Beijing’s Hong Kong officials could in theory ask how they created this mess, and break the cycle of brutality-alienation by returning to a more representative, rule-by-consent style of government. But in a system that relies on constant paranoia and insecurity, all they understand is a strategy to break the will of the population and force them into submission.
Sadly, the front-line cops don’t seem to realize – or mind – that this puts them in a position where they bear the brunt of public hostility. Meanwhile, their ex-boss-turned-Chief Secretary thinks he can heal the social divide…
…through “non-political activities” such as sports events and campaigns that encourage a healthy lifestyle among teenagers.
Better Red than expert!
To get an idea how „history will judge their performance“ John Lee and Chris Tang may Google for „Erich Mielke“. Also very instructive to learn what might still be in store.
Our new Chief Secretary says that people should not endorse terrorist activities but should express their views in a “reasonable and lawful manner”.
Let’s see…what is reasonable and lawful?
– you can’t protest anymore
– you can’t vote as the election was cancelled and when it is held all of the democrats will be in jail
– you can’t join an NGO as they are disbanding
– you can’t open a stall and start a petition
– you can’t write to the paper and have your views aired, because there is no paper left that will print your letter
So what can you do that is “reasonable and lawful”? Nothing. This is why people take more extreme action.
As usual, hilarious if it wasn’t so sad.
Lesson #17 in Timothy Snyder’s “On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century”: “Listen for dangerous words. Be alert to the use of the words “extremism” and “terrorism”. Be alive to the fatal notions of “emergency” and “exception”. Be angry about the treacherous use of patriotic vocabulary.”
I wonder if it’s allowed on the shelves of Hong Kong public libraries and how much longer it will be allowed to be sold in bookstores here. This especially since its Lesson #3 is “Beware the one-party state”.
Cops have the biggest persecution complex. Why don’t people like us? Don’t people understand how hard our jobs are? It’s so unfair that our children get bullied in school. We’ve made so many sacrifices. People call us nasty names all the time. And so on, and so forth.
Again, a painful reminder that:
1. When you enforce brutality on a population and limit civil liberties, they do begin to fight
2. When you adopt a counterpropaganda POV people realise you are full of BS and begin to fight
3. When you try to enforce police strong arm law and force as a moral virtue, people disagree and counterattack
The CCP is absolutely horrendously incapable of understanding that they are the ones creating the problems. They are intoerlable stupid cretins.
It seems the police have a full explanation for the stabbing incident. No investigation is needed.
But who knows the mental state of the attacker at the time?
What lies and misinformation pushed him over the edge? Maybe some truths pushed him as well?
It seems that the police can see into the hearts and minds of people so easily.
Also, people who take an oath will be judged on how “true” they are.
Someone needs to tell the Correctional Services Dept that the government now believes that people cannot change their minds or be rehabilitated.
Past deeds now show how your thinking will be for the rest of your life.
Again…any updates on the firm tasked by the government with polishing the turd known as Hong Kong so that outsiders will be comforted in knowing it’s business as usual, an opportunistic gateway to China (or your first step into China now) and a great place to vacation?
Just curious, thanks.
May I draw your attention to the person by the name of Mark Peaker, from The Peak. Mr Peaker is a frequent letter writer to the Alibaba Rag. He is a great friend of China and the HK popo, and a supporter of the Greater Bay Area.
Peaker is also the founder of an art gallery, “3812 Gallery”, branches in HK and London. May I suggest that in case you are looking to buy art, consider buying it somewhere else.
According to the DSM-5 a person with Narcissistic Personality Disorder possesses at least five of the following nine criteria, typically without possessing the commensurate personal qualities or accomplishments for which they demand respect and status:
1) A grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g. exaggerating achievements and talents, expecting to be recognised as superior without commensurate achievements)
2) Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3) Believing that they are “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4) Requiring excessive admiration
5) A sense of entitlement (unreasonable expectations of especially favourable treatment or automatic compliance with their expectations)
6) Being interpersonally exploitative (taking advantage of others to achieve their own ends)
7) Lacking empathy: unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8) Often being envious of others or believing that others are envious of them
9) Showing arrogant, haughty behaviours or attitudes
Sounds a lot like an alleged government and police force we know — lucky they have an Office for Safeguarding Narcissists’ (in)Security to keep them wrapped in the soothing cotton wool of their fantastical cognitive dissonances.
Oh, it’s a police state.
Wikipedia:
“A police state describes a state where its government institutions exercise an extreme level of control over civil society and liberties. There is typically little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive, and the deployment of internal security and police forces play a heightened role in governance.”
Merriam-Webster:
“a political unit characterized by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures”
@Who put the narc in narcissus
Possibly, but you could say this describes just about every business, military or political leader since the Creation (and definitely every “social influencer” ever). Actually, I thought lack of empathy (#7) was a defining feature of a psychopath. Any shrinks out there can say what the difference is?
“through “non-political activities” such as sports events and campaigns that encourage a healthy lifestyle among teenagers.”
Thank goodness the rest of us will not be cajoled into joining tai-chi classes at 6am, we are clearly considered as lost causes.
@Mary
Your comment reminds me that I went to a university lecture about three years ago given by a professor who claimed to be a Hong Kong local who was “in touch with teen values and culture.” His lecture was filled with slides that claimed that Hong Kong teens had been basically brainwashed by Western propaganda about China that was created through Facebook and exposure to other “Western apps” like YouTube. His solution was, as you allude to, to encourage more Hong Kong teens to play sports and to stop watching YouTube so that they could appreciate Hong Kong and Chinese culture more. Of course, other solutions were also suggested. One that I clearly remember for its audacious stupidity was to invite the PLA to attend concerts and entertainment events so that they could stand guard over the students / teens and show them how much the China mainland cares for them. I’m totally serious. The weird thing was that there were no questions from the audience after his spiel. I didn’t know if that was because everyone believed in what he was saying and accepted or if it was because people were so embarassed to be seen at the event that they wished not to draw attention to their presence.
Quentin Quarantino.
Just goes to show that even homosexuals sometimes revel in the joys of authoritarianism.
Red Dragon.
Could it be the lure of scout uniforms and goose stepping?