Taiwan is actually independent though. If Taiwan ever needed to "protest" China it would likely be after a large portion of their population was killed after somehow starting and losing a massive pseudo-proxy-war between China and the US.
> In crowded situations where internet access may be near-nonexistent, Orca encourages protesters on the edge of a crowd—where data coverage is better—to download the map, then AirDrop it into the crowd so it can make its way deep into the middle. “We call it rippling out, or rather rippling in,” he said.
This is by far the most interesting part for me. My fear is always what happens when authorities "turn off the hose", but mesh networks like this are inspiring.
Once this technique is known, I would imagine that authorities can exploit this by uploading bogus maps or many many bogus maps so you don't know which is the legitimate map and couldn't find it quickly enough even if you did.
that's no more true with the web than it is with mesh systems. The HK protesters are using a source of authority for this. This can be extended in a mesh system with a web of trust, not that that's w/o it's issues.
> With some guns, some tanks, some international support, and the right leader, Hong Kong could win their independence from the monsters who run China.
First of all, that's not what they're protesting for at the moment. All they want is to maintain their autonomy without interference from China, which was promised for 50 years. Most people know that Independence isn't feasible. (Both politically and geographically)
The moment people start using guns, will also be the moment when HK is completely over. China knows how important their international image is, which is why they won't send in the army any time soon. But the moment things get seriously out of hand, I'm fairly certain they'll send in everything they got, and end HK as we know it once and for all.
>None of them compared to the freedom fighters in Hong Kong. They do the things that Americans are too cowardly to imagine, like shutting down airports and transit.
Because the Hong Kong protests represent the entire cross section of society. It has been a very, very long time since there was a protest inducing issue in the US that came close to that.
>The moment people start using guns, will also be the moment when HK is completely over.
It took the Brits a long time to get the IRA off their back and that was with little international support for the IRA and patchy local support for the IRA. If this spirals into a shooting war the unanimity with which HK opposes being subjugated by China will make this a very tough occupation for China.
> the moment things get seriously out of hand, I'm fairly certain they'll send in everything they got
I'm not so sure: they wouldn't want to be seen internationally as the 800-Lb gorilla. I suspect they'll impose sanctions and start making food and other essentials hard to obtain.
> I'm not so sure: they wouldn't want to be seen internationally as the 800-Lb gorilla.
Of course not, which is why they still haven't done anything drastic, even though online commenters constantly keep saying this will be Tiananmen 2.0 or that tanks will roll in soon. China has been building it's international profile, and one wrong move with HK will destroy everything.
But I do suspect that they'll be willing to sacrifice a bit of their reputation, if things seriously get out of hand, I do think they'll eventually send in the PLA, on request of the HK government. While that will quell the unrest, it will seriously damage HK's reputation as a safe financial city.
Even the recent protests has caused companies to start looking at other nearby cities, Singapore probably being the nearest one.
Tourism and property sales has already taken a massive hit, and will likely put a lot of people out of business by the end of the year.
But with that said, the only thing that can resolve this is for the government to do whatever it takes to stop the protests. Like it or not, HK is quickly losing its appeal to international businesses and travelers.
Sure there are. Tibet isn’t a global financial and commercial hub with a history deeply rooted in the west.
China hasn’t forgotten the brutal economic sanctions and political isolation it faced in the wake of Tiananmen Square back in ‘89. A similar event in HK would certainly result in sanctions, which a struggling Chinese economy can’t handle.
The contrast between political fallout from an HK crackdown vs Tibet is vast, they aren’t very comparable situations.
> With some guns, some tanks, some international support, and the right leader, Hong Kong could win their independence from the monsters who run China.
The moment military grade weaponry is used by freedom fighters (or protesters, or anything that stands in the way of mainland China) the whole thing will be over in 48hours to China's advantage.
International support ? So, going at war with one of the top 3 nation on earth. Considering how Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. benefited from international support, what can go wrong ?
> Considering how Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. benefited from international support, what can go wrong ?
At least the women in Afghanistan did - and now piece by piece their freedom is taken away from them with every day as the Taliban advance to re-take control again.
The mistake of the Western world in all three conflicts was not entering it (one might argue it was neccessary to protect the human rights of the populace against the dictators), the mistake was completely ignoring the needs of the people and never having a clear long term plan in the likes of the post WW2 Marshall Plan.
> At least the women in Afghanistan did - and now piece by piece their freedom is taken away from them with every day as the Taliban advance to re-take control again.
How can you say this? Freedom is not disconnected from economic conditions. All the US army did in Afghanistan was kill as many "talibans" (which most were not) as possible and give away public infrastructure to private (usually foreign) corporations.
Neither men nor women have ever benefited from an army invading their land. That's why the talibans who once were a tiny conservative formation have been growing since the US invaded.
Pretending to invade a country to protect its women is deeply rooted in the history of colonization. France did the same in Algeria, for example.
> How can you say this? Freedom is not disconnected from economic conditions. All the US army did in Afghanistan was kill as many "talibans" (which most were not) as possible and give away public infrastructure to private (usually foreign) corporations.
Where the Taliban has power, schools for girls get closed and their freedoms that they gained (like, not having to wear a niqab/burqa) get taken away. Women in Afghanistan are actually afraid that the West pulling out of Afghanistan will leave them up for grabs: https://www.apnews.com/a63dfde74c594c9a8b13cfc366ea9c55
>Considering how Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. benefited from international support, what can go wrong ?
It's called a proxy war. Literally every other regional power is salivating over the idea of a massive thorn in China's side that a) gets them slapped with first world sanctions and b) gives them less free time to bully everyone else in the region. You're kidding yourself if you think all their intelligence agencies aren't coming up with shovel ready plans to get the the protestors the things they need if they decide to become freedom fighters.
I think that if China forcefully suppresses HK, that will drive Vietnam, Taiwan, Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei--and to a lesser extent Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar, and Australia--into a regional alliance with the US, a sort of ASEAN++/SEATO2. Its major agenda would likely be diplomatically evicting China from territorial claims in the South China Sea, particularly with respect to the "nine dash line".
If HK can be portrayed as the model of what PRC does to dominate, suppress, and assimilate lesser economic powers, and its occupation of Paracels and Spratlys as an overture to securing absolute control over all economic resources in the South China Sea, the neighboring nations will likely line up behind the US to discourage a hot military war, and then do everything they can to close ranks diplomatically and economically to keep PRC from taking pieces of their pie.
The mass-internment of Uighurs is also likely to spur the Muslim populations of Indonesia and Malaysia to wrongfoot China diplomatically and raise international support for sanctions.
China's main crime is carrying a really big stick, and speaking loudly instead of softly. If a country uses its strength too much, then it starts creating problems that only greater shows of force can fix. All that work on soft power in South America and Africa could go straight down the drain.
The 50-Cent Brigade doesn't need a reason beyond "not unequivocally pro-China". The major obstacle to that is the karma minimum for accessing the down-voting function, but sufficient investment into a user account can get there eventually. You only need a handful with the capability to blast a newish post into the grey before too many people read it.
I also like lasers, umbrellas and face masks against face recognition. Someone should collect these ideas to some web page as "Little Brother's Handbook".
> With some guns, some tanks, some international support, and the right leader, Hong Kong could win their independence from the monsters who run China.
You're suggesting engaging in a proxy war with China?
Purposefully creating a refugee crisis in your neighborhood is not a great idea. Maybe they could lock down the border completely with a zone of death full of mines and automatic machine guns to keep the refugees away, but that would be challenging to explain for the internal propaganda department, who have been describing Hong Kongers as true patriots opposing a handful of separatist rioters. How could they suddenly let them starve?
> None of them compared to the freedom fighters in Hong Kong.
The Hong Kongese aren't protesting for freedom; so they probably aren't freedom fighters. If the Chinese had a legal tradition as sophisticated as what Hong Kong has acquired from the Western powers, there wouldn't be much to complain about. Of the now-famous '5 demands', at least 4 and arguably 5 center around a deep suspicion of mainland influence over the justice system.
As far as the reporting goes the spark for the protests was the idea that the Hong Kong judiciary would become more intertwined with the Chinese legal system, and that upset people. If the Chinese had a legal system that was regarded as 'pretty good' or 'world class' it isn't obvious why anyone in HK would care. They don't seem to have a problem with being Chinese. It isn't even obvious that they are protesting against the CCP.
> With some guns, some tanks, some international support, and the right leader, Hong Kong could win their independence from the monsters who run China.
I wouldn't try it in their shoes. They are physically a very small city compared to China and it wouldn't be very good for them in the long term.
>>"With some guns, some tanks, some international support, and the right leader, Hong Kong could win their independence from the monsters who run China."
"They" would be independent...as in dead. You think China is going to allow a part of their country to secede? See Tibet or Xinjiang just to get an idea.
> With some guns, some tanks, some international support, and the right leader, Hong Kong could win their independence from the monsters who run China.
still enjoying your school holiday?
independence? you mean a self isolated island without water/food/electricity supply? will also be interesting to watch how they can manage to sustain their economy and way of life.
