As unfortunate as it is, when it comes to a tyrranical government that will have little hesitation to resort to violence (i.e.Tianemen Square), violent revolution is a viable option
Ah yes the solution to our problems, more violence
@Bad Canadian, not necessarily. It's possible to defend yourself in non-violent ways, especially against organizations or authorities.
@Marida Cruz, agreed it’s called not buying their products
@Dimir FTW, that particular one doesn't really work against governments.
@Marida Cruz, it works agains the Chinese government since they wanna threaten us by not doing business if we don’t bend to their will.
@Dimir FTW, but we're not the ones who need to defend ourselves against the Chinese government. The people of Hong Kong are. You do know where Hong Kong is, right?
@Marida Cruz, I know Poland and Germany are next to each other but it’s still follows the same. The polish Jews knew what was happening in Germany to their fellow Jews but that was happening only in Germany right???? So there is no need to worry since the Jews are only being persecuted in Germany so no need to worry here in Poland.
@Dimir FTW, except Germany and Poland were about the same size and were both politically and economically independent. Hong Kong is about the size of Rhode Island, is both politically and economically dependent on China, and is somewhat of a puppet state to China.
@Marida Cruz, ok, you’ve got me lost are not for human rights cause I’m getting those vibes from you?
@Dimir FTW, uh, what? How have I said anything that would even remotely indicate that? I'm very much for human rights, and I don't believe I've said anything that would indicate otherwise.
@Marida Cruz, If you could help Hong Kong would you, or would you leave them to their own problems?
@Dimir FTW, ?
@Dimir FTW, I would definitely help them, but as it stands, there's really nothing I can do. I'm a middle class American with an average income who spends most of my money on basic necessities and lacks any skills that would be useful in aiding the people of Hong Kong.
@Marida Cruz, hey, all I wanted was I would if I could answer not just leave them to their own problems.
@Dimir FTW, look, I'm just being realistic. The only people who can really do anything about the situation are the higher ups in the governments of world powers, or the people of Hong Kong and China themselves. And the Chinese are so brainwashed that they wouldn't even if it was choice between helping Hong Kong and cutting off their fingers.
@Marida Cruz, you’re exactly right. I just want people to have that not my country not my problem kinda mentality.
@Dimir FTW, I feel like that kind of mentality doesn't really fit well into the modern world, as so many aspects of so many countries are interwoven with each other through cultural osmosis, trade, and the internet, that any large problem in a first world country has a global impact.
@Dimir FTW, not my country not my problem is how genocides happen
@Marida Cruz, that’s why we should care we are so interwoven it’s ridiculous
@Bad Canadian, sometimes force is the only solution. In fact its often a very effective solution.
@BlazingBowman, I agreed but in this case I feel using violence would simply dehumanize the
Hong Kong protesters in the eyes of mainlanders. Guns can win battles, but I believe peaceful protests can win hearts. Change might be slow, but it will come with time.
@Bad Canadian, it could, it could also have the opposite effect. If they were to defend themeselves the chinese government could piss off alot of normal Chinese plebs with collateral dammage. This could have an ever greater compounding effect. More plebs that join the hong kong movement = more collateral dammage= more plebs that join the hong kong movement.
@BlazingBowman, China will fall by the hands of countless plebs
@Bad Canadian, governments really should fear the might, and barbarity of the inconvenienced normies.
@BlazingBowman, gamers rise up
@Bad Canadian, the most oppressed class of them all.
@Marida Cruz, Hong Kong is definitely not economically dependent on China....like, at all
@Not him again, it very much is. Or do you think economics is just about money?
@Marida Cruz, they pretty much operated basically independently from China while under British rule and were the most thriving city within the boundaries of the country. If you put it in those terms, you could basically say that the entire worlds economy is dependent on China, which in a way it is, but indirectly. It's not like China directly supported any economic growth of Hong Kong.
@Not him again, but in modern times, they aren't under British rule, and ARE under Chinese rule. They also acquire almost all of the raw resources they make their products out of from China, and almost all of the labor done to make any products that aren't homemade is outsourced to China. Not to mention that their government has been controlled by the Chinese government for almost a decade, or perhaps longer. There's also a point to be made about how much of Hong Kong's electricity is actually produced within the country/city itself, and where it gets it's water and food from. There's not exactly any space within Hong Kong for farms or cattle ranches, after all. They also don't control nearly enough of the coastline around them to get a feasible amount of food from fishing either, at least not without China's say-so.
Again, economics isn't just about money. It's also about resources and trade, and China controls the vast majority of Hong Kong's resources and trade.
@Not him again, to put it another way, it's the political equivalent of when Disney takes ownership of a company by becoming the majority shareholder.
@Marida Cruz, what I originally meant was that the goods produced and technology created from Hong Kong are sold all over the world. The finished product is going to be worth more than the raw materials, but without them they could never be produced. That's why I said that based on your logic, the entire worlds economy is based on China in that sense, but the end product is going to be worth more. Capitalism allows for a more prosperous environment because of the desire to innovate and improve. Now China wants to put a stranglehold on that, hence what is happening right now, and nearly all of the citizens of Hong Kong knew this was exactly what was going to happen when the UK relinquished its control
@Not him again, I don't see how this even remotely refutes what I've said, seeing as what you're talking about is china giving most first world countries about 40% of the resources they use, while what I'm saying is that china gives Hong Kong about 90% of the resources they use. Like I said, Hong Kong is incapable of getting their own resources except from minimal amounts of fishing, as their entire country is taken up by a single city. Compare this to every other first world country, which have handfuls of cities with wide open areas between filled with farmland, forests, and mineral deposits. The only first world countries that are currently even remotely comparable to Hong Kong in terms of economic dependence are Liechtenstein, which gets all of its electricity from Germany, and the Vatican City, which is its own country in name only for reasons that are purely cultural.
@Bad Canadian, i dont need guns, i have CLAWS! *angry lobster sounds*
@Dimir FTW, ah yes the old argument that guns are equal to people. Hint:they arent
@Not him again, but not everyone gets their raw materials from China, Hong Kong currently does. Sure the end product might be worth more but where else are they going to buy from now? Theyd either pay more for the materials to get someone else's supply or pay more shipping it there. Capitalism also allows for the exploitation of those without power, so all things in moderation bud
@AWildMagikarp, well much of the reason they get all their raw materials from China is because they are basically forced to
@AWildMagikarp, nothing is equal to the life of a person
If only there right to defend yourself was a negative right. Not one given or taken away by government. I feel like that might be worth trying
@voided sanity, the definition of a right according to the constitution is specifically something that's NOT given by the government; it's something inherently allowed by nature and unable to be completely suppressed by the government.
@Rtas Vadum, That definition is pretty vague. You can stretch that to fit literally anything under that.
@K1l, any right in the constitution is regarded that way, anything else doesn't have the same level of implicit protection
@voided sanity, your rights arnt given to you by the government. They are inalienable. They are only protected and insured by the government.... or taken away but thats when you use your guns.
@K1l, exactly. The constitution was written with specific restrictions on the government. If it wasn’t specifically stated in there what the government was allowed to do, they aren’t allowed to do it without an amendment to the constitution.
@Rtas Vadum, that’s incorrect. They called out certain rights specifically, but the writers considered not doing that at all for the reason you just said. If it’s not written in the constitution doesn’t mean it’s not protected. The constitution was written specifically to limit what the government is allowed to do. If it isn’t written in there, they are not allowed to do it. That is the intent of the constitution. Not to grant you specific rights.
You douche. I uploaded the same thing and it posted the same date but yours got put in recent and mine in uncut 😡
@ImNotRacistBut, like it’s his fault? Lol go moan to the big green turtle in the sky.
@ImNotRacistBut, *Plays the worlds smallest violin* I’m sorry
@Bad Suggestions, I’m being overly sensitive you douche!
@ImNotRacistBut, that’s not allowed *shoo* go make a protest or something.
@Bad Suggestions, that’s for f a g s
They have umbrellas
Yes, because guns would solve Hong Kong's problem overnight.....🙄
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, no they wouldnt youre absolutely right. But imagine if they had guns in the firat place. And actual support from people like Nike or Blizzard
@Guy Fawkes, If the Hong Kong citizens had guns and retaliatied with violence, all it would do would give the Chinese government justification to act in return with violence. The way they’re protesting now is much more effective than if they tried to retaliate with firearms since the government can’t justify a full on obliteration of the city.
@K1l, absolutely. But i dont think it wouldve gotten to the point of the Hong Kong protests if they were an already armed populace.
Pure speculation of course
@K1l, sadly with a tyrannical government like china they are gonna need a lot more support across the country than just hong kong. It's only a matter of time before they fall. If all of china could have weapons and then the government of china would be forced to fear public outrage against the horrible things they do. But they have nothing and can just roll over them as they have been.
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, pretty much. I bet the chinese tyranny would be a little more careful and less blatant if the protestors could fight back in a meaningful way.
@K1l, then it would turn into a much larger thing. And theres no garauntee that china would win such a confrontation. Afterall Guerilla warfare has confounded super power nations for decades. It would prolly be moreso if the people they were fighting were fellow citizens.
@K1l, you're forgetting the Tieneman Square massacre, the only reason the same thing isn't occurring today is because of the internet and cell phones, not because China needs a justification. The people at Tieneman Square would probably have been alive today if they had the right to defend themselves with firearms.
@InsaneAnimeCleavage, ok nice straw man you built there! Where did anyone say that “guns would solve anything overnight”? 🙄
@NoneYo Business, stupid wherever youre from.
@NoneYo Business, such a great contribution.
I support gun ownership, but I think this is a poor example. There have been very few deaths and the world is getting on their side. The may win without guns and thousands of deaths.
believe me, the police have tactics than negate any gun you can buy. so naive thinking you’ll fight the government with ak-47’s
Ive wondered if some anonymous group smuggled weapons to the public what kind of chaos would occur
Japan's right across the water, just was for some swords