Hong Kong Protest Quotes

Not being able to see this, culture-based explanations for economic development have usually been little more than ex post facto justifications based on a 20/20 hindsight vision. So, in the early days of capitalism, when most economically successful countries happened to be Protestant Christian, many people argued that Protestantism was uniquely suited to economic development. When Catholic France, Italy, Austria and southern Germany developed rapidly, particularly after the Second World War, Christianity, rather than Protestantism, became the magic culture. Until Japan became rich, many people thought East Asia had not developed because of Confucianism. But when Japan succeeded, this thesis was revised to say that Japan was developing so fast because its unique form of Confucianism emphasized co-operation over individual edification, which the Chinese and Korean versions allegedly valued more highly. And then Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and Korea also started doing well, so this judgement about the different varieties of Confucianism was forgotten. Indeed, Confucianism as a whole suddenly became the best culture for development because it emphasized hard work, saving, education and submission to authority. Today, when we see Muslim Malaysia and Indonesia, Buddhist Thailand and even Hindu India doing well economically, we can soon expect to encounter new theories that will trumpet how uniquely all these cultures are suited for economic development (and how their authors have known about it all along).

Look closer at this street corner: The sun is setting. The vendor at the newspaper stand packs up the dailies and puts away the cartons of eggs. Students with laptops in their arms shuffle out of the cha chaan teng. Elderly couples and their poodles take a stroll by the pier. You can still hear the uproar of the crowds that once gathered on the steep slopes for film screenings, festivals, protests. The florists at the wet market put away the last lilies. The last tram slots itself into the station. And then the scene dissolves again. Maybe you can’t save this place; maybe it isn’t even worth saving. But for a moment, there was a sliver of what this city could have become. And that is why we’re still here.

Just 15 percent of Americans said they were following the 2014 midterm elections "very closely" in the past week, according to polling released Monday by the Pew Research Center. That's less than half the number that said they were tracking the Ebola virus story (36 percent) or the reports on the U.S. airstrikes against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (31 percent). It's also less than the 21 percent of people paying close attention to the problems at the Secret Service. Not surprisingly, the people paying the least attention to the midterms are 18-to-29-year-olds - just 5 percent of whom said they were monitoring the story closely. More young Americans were paying close attention to the Hong Kong protests. -Chris Cilizza from the Fix

In fact, Tung himself was also a businessman. Born in Shanghai, Tung took over his family business after his father, shipping magnate Tung Chao Yung, died in 1981 and managed Orient Overseas, one of the world's leading shipping and logistics service providers. Sitting next to Tung at the meeting with President Xi was Li Ka- shing who made a statement on Oct. 15, calling on the Occupy protesters to go home and not to "let today's passion become tomorrow's regrets." The Asia's wealthiest man did not make it clear whether or not he agrees with the appeals of the protesters. Li built his family business empire from plastics manufacturing and accumulated wealth through real estate, supermarket chains and mobile phone network. Other Hong Kong tycoons, such as Lee Shau-kee, nicknamed "Hong Kong's Warrenn Buffett," Kuok Hock Nien known for his sugar refineries in Asia, and Woo Kwong-ching whose businesses range from Hong Kong's cable TV to the Star Ferry, have all remained mute.

Miliardi e Mondiali La macchina da soldi che non conosce soste L’ultimo caso per la federazione la scelta di Russia e Qatar Giulia Zonca | 824 parole Trovare l’uomo chiave dell’operazione Fifapulita è praticamente impossibile. Troppi soldi, troppe mazzette vere o presunte e troppi giri d’affari concentrici che prima di chiamare denaro ne producono in abbondanza. La Fifa si basa su un sistema fatto di soldi, tanti dichiarati, incalcolabili quelli in nero, non tutti e non sempre sono spesi male, anzi, ma il circolo infinito di dollari che non conosce crisi crea un vortice in stile deposito di Zio Paperone dove avidità chiama altra avidità. E non c’è pace. Cambiare tutto La Fifa si ritrova nelle stesse condizioni in cui stava il Comitato olimpico prima degli scandali del 2002 e ora se vuole reggere dovrà fare la stessa mossa. La rivoluzione. Nuovi nomi e altre regole ma al momento il sistema Fifa si basa proprio sull’immutabilità, sul circolo chiuso, su un potere che resta sempre nelle stesse mani, garantisce a tutti grandi introiti e visto dall’interno funziona benissimo. Ogni uomo preso con le mani nella marmellata sa che verrà abbandonato, però sa anche che fino a lì vivrà alla grande. La perdita di credibilità non è mai sembrata un problema al governo di pallone. Ogni voce considerata frottola, ogni frode un male inevitabile ed arginabile. Il pantano perpetuo. L’inchiesta dell’Fbi parte dal 1991 e traccia una scia di bigliettoni che rimbalzano dai conti alle Cayman, girano sulle banche di Hong Kong e tornano in Svizzera. Fondi alleggeriti e pronti ad altro uso. Il mondo del pallone ha dichiarato 4,826 miliardi di dollari di incasso dall’ultimo quadriennio mondiale. Già: la parola magica che attira sponsor, apre porte, unge canali ed evidentemente fa dimenticare ogni decenza. Non è solo la manifestazione più vista al mondo a solleticare scambi illeciti, dentro il calderone della frode denunciato dall’accusa americana ci sono Confederations Cup, tornei minori, pacchetti di diritti tv e persino la Coppa America del 2016 che si gioca proprio negli Stati Uniti. Al Bureau non hanno indagato a caso. La doppia assegnazione Lo scandalo più evidente e cristallino resta l’assegnazione dei Mondiali 2018-2022, doppio pacco per essere sicuri di mescolare abbastanza le carte e sovrapporre gli illeciti. La confusione e la molteplicità degli interessi in ballo è sempre lo sfondo in cui si muove la Fifa. L’edizione 2018 è andata alla Russia e quella del 2022 al Qatar, voto segreto deciso da 22 persone: dovevano essere 24 ma due erano già tagliati fuori da un’inchiesta di corruzione. Tanto per capire. E qui siamo agli atti non alle speculazioni. Sempre fatti concreti escono dal rapporto Garcia, una memoria investigativa seguita alle proteste per quei Mondiali assegnati in modo così strano. I conti non tornavano a nessuno il che significa che hanno provato a farli tutti e che il famoso voto di scambio, di cui ci si preoccupava all’inizio del dicembre 2010, era davvero in atto. Doveva esserci un asse Inghilterra-Australia, uno Spagna-Portogallo-Qatar: tu muovi consensi per il 2018, io per il 2022 e siamo tutti contenti. Era già molto al limite però almeno non ancora fraudolento. Peccato che il giochino sia scoppiato perché sono intervenuti fattori esterni. Le bustarelle. L’indagine censurata L’indifferente Blatter ha tentato di mostrarsi magnanimo. Ha varato una commissione etica, ci ha messo dentro Michael Garcia, ex procuratore federale americano, e qui parte il labirinto. Garcia ha redatto un rapporto, mai reso noto ufficialmente, la Fifa ne ha prodotto una sintesi e ha concluso che non c’era stata manipolazione nel voto. Garcia ha rigettato la tesi e ha dato le dimissioni. Vi gira la testa? Chiaro, i nonsense si rincorrono e la trasparenza è impossibile perché la Fifa è uno statuto autonomo, risponde solo a se stessa. Non ha pubblicato gli esiti dell’indagine e la normale conseg

Foreigners ask me why American citizens are not out in the streets protesting around the clock, like people did in Hong Kong and South Korea. The answer is that protest is more of a financial risk than a political one, and financial risks form the backbone of modern American terror. We cannot afford to overcome.

Foreigners ask me why American citizens are not out in the streets protesting around the clock, like people did in Hong Kong and South Korea. The answer is that protest is more of a financial risk than a political one, and financial risks form the backbone of modern American terror.

Republicans too have seen the influence of money from China. Since 2015, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell has been Senate majority leader and the most powerful man in Washington after the president. Once a hardliner, in the 1990s he became a noted China dove (although in 2019, in a likely instance of ‘big help with a little badmouth’, he voiced support for Hong Kong protesters37). In 1993 he married the daughter of one of his donors, Chinese-American businessman James Chao. Elaine Chao went on to serve as secretary of labor under President George W. Bush and in 2017 was sworn in as President Trump’s transportation secretary. She wasted no time organising a trip to China that included meetings between members of her family and Chinese government officials, a plan that was spiked only when the State Department raised ethical concerns.38 James Chao has excellent guanxi—connections—in China, including his classmate Jiang Zemin, the powerful former president of China. Chao became rich through his shipping company, Foremost Group, which flourished due to its close association with the state-owned behemoth the China State Shipbuilding Corporation. McConnell, after his marriage to Chao’s daughter, was courted by the highest CCP leaders, and his in-laws were soon doing deals with Chinese government corporations.

People often ask me whether the music scene in Hong Kong is “political”: What they mean is, if the lyrics allude to a spirit of resistance, or if the musicians are active protesters. They do not understand that rebellion comes in the form of organizing shows without obtaining permits, playing where you were told you couldn’t play, living how they don’t want you to live. In other words, we aren’t supposed to exist at all. And yet, here we are.

Every serious analysis of the Hong Kong protests has to focus on how a social protest, potentially a true game changer, was recuperated into the standard narrative of the democratic revolt against totalitarian rule.

The Communist party, under General Secretary Xi Jinping, has tried to label anyone who tries to oppose China’s crackdown as “separatists” or “terrorists,” designations punishable by life imprisonment or the death penalty, just as they did with pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong and peaceful Buddhist monks in Tibet.

[HK protests have been] mob demonstrations...[T]hey were conducted in a way which most societies would consider unacceptable because they involved attacking property, attacking the police, and of course occupying the airport. The Western media have been hypocritical.

During the Hong Kong protests in 2019, Apple bent over backward granting Beijing’s demands, including by hiding the Taiwanese flag emoji, removing the news outlet Quartz from the Chinese version of its app store for covering the protests, and removing HKmap.live, an app that protesters were using to organize and avoid police.

Police often ask me whether the music scene in Hong Kong is "political": What they mean if, if the lyrics allude to a spirit of resistance, or if the musicians are active protesters. They do not understand that rebellion comes in the form of organizing shows without obtaining permits, playing where you were told you couldn't play, living how they don't want you to live. In other words, we aren't supposed to exist at all. And yet, here we are.