← Back to context

Comment by SZJX

2 days ago

> It demands people ask: Do you prefer Hong Kong's past? Or its future?

Such a formulation is either sheer ignorance or worse, full-on deliberate cynicism.

Hong Kong's "past" was a typical colony where the governor was appointed by the British government with no local input whatsoever, and where any assembly of more than 6 people was deemed illegal and brutally suppressed. The type of thing that people like Gandhi (who are apparently heroes in contemporary narratives) fought against throughout their lives.

The British government only started changing the laws and handing locals more political freedom and freedom of speech once they knew that Hong Kong was returning to China no matter what (surprise, surprise).

In all such propaganda you see now, they try to construct a "past" that never existed, and apparently a lot of the young generation who never experienced the old days fell for it. But the older generation would tell them outright that "Hong Kong's past" is far less rosy than what's made out to be.

It's just astonishing when you see the amount of people waving British and American flags on the streets during the protests. What kind of "fight for freedom and independence" is that? Just imagine the reaction to protesters in a US territory or a European region (Catalonia etc.) waving Russian or Chinese flags.

>But the older generation would tell them outright that "Hong Kong's past" is far less rosy than what's made out to be.

Define older Generation. Because there are plenty of people who lived through 60s to 90s to tell you otherwise.

  • Those are the people who survived and worked with the colonial government.

    Many who protested were killed.

    The simple fact is that during the 60s, native Hongkongers were second class citizens.