An American defends the Chinese Communist Party, arguing Hong Kongers are privileged and have been largely mollycuddled by Beijing. His views are sincere, intelligent and represent a significant, largely silent minority (a largely privileged and mollycuddled minority in Hong Kong). Of course it is tempting to say that if a Chinese publicly aired the opposite view on the mainland he is jailed, and that as the opposite view cannot be debated here in Beijing perhaps on balance and out of principle it would be best not to defend such an abhorrent regime at all. But that does not defeat his argument. The argument seems to involve selectively comparing the lot of Hong Kongers with the lot of mainlanders and various other nations and saying look how lucky they are. They should be satisfied with that because er they really are doing this because thy hate mainlanders and anyway, he says, the Beijing government has done nothing but help Hong Kong grow. He even goes so far as to argue Hong Kongers enjoy magnificent social welfare (compared to mainlanders or Americans, presumably). Not all of this is bullshit. it is simply flawed, in my opinion, but worth reading. I feel if he really wants to win the argument as he has framed it using a self-serving, fatuuous and misleading false logic, he should compare Hong Kongers to North Koreans. Ill concede North Korea does not rule Hong Kong, but thats irrelevant to my framework because that is the only framework for me to use when I argue. travelwithcyrus/2014/10/01/why-this-american-expat-is-100-against-the-protests-in-hong-kong/
Posted on: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 04:29:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015