And HK protestors are making the same mistake, radicals have taken over.
EDIT: The immediate downvote of any pro HK civil liberties comment continues on HN and still @dang, instead of looking into the real issue and into the number of new accounts created on HN to specifically support the PoC in these threads, chastises whoever points what is happening.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d0iqpy/2000_medic...
You can give up your own human rights however you wish, but not those of others on their behalf.
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ind...
edit: wow, I dropped 14 karma in a 13 minutes of posting this comment, because apparently one or more people are going through older of mine comments and downvoting anything that can still can be voted on. That's actually the first time in over 6 years that happened.
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ind...
What matters is they're too radical for the current CCP leadership. It doesn't matter that the agreement provides mutually agreed and signed written promise of universal suffrage in election of the Chief Executive, and I think of the Legislative Council.
Which is a slap in the face for HKers with every Chief Exec appointee from Beijing with the comical farce of the "show election". Surprise, Beijing's choice wins every election!
Had Hu not been forced to resign and publicly recant, Tiananmen and the China wide protests might have gone very differently. The hopes and optimism expressed in the article had a real chance of becoming true. Being forced out for not being harsh enough on protesters, months before Tiananmen and only weeks into the demonstrations changed everything both in China, and for Hong Kong's future.
You conveniently forget that also in the Basic Law is a signed written promise to legislate a national security law, i.e. Article 23. Rejecting that means the die has been cast to forego reasoned compromise and go down the road of political confrontation. Then it becomes a power game that HK will lose every time, dragging the prospects of political liberalization in the mainland down with it.
If you meet one radical on the way to work, you met a radical.
If you conclude that the entire population of a large and established polity is radical, you're the radical.