I’m not aware of the UK kidnapping anyone to stand trial in a foreign jurisdiction. On exploitation, in 1945 Hong Kong was bombed out rubble and in 1997 it was a first world city that had a higher GDP per capita than the United Kingdom. Some exploitation.
The nationality of HongKonger was the same as other UK citizen at the time called CUKC. For other UK ex-colony, they usually had a independent election to be an independent country or so, and these countries do not have the UK nationality anymore. But HKers never had such election taken place.
> China's leaders explicitly wanted to "preserve the colonial status of Hong Kong".[21] Liao Chengzhi, a senior Chinese official in charge of Hong Kong affairs, said in 1960 that China "shall not hesitate to take positive action to have Hong Kong, Kowloon and New Territories liberated" should the status quo (i.e. colonial administration) be changed. The warning killed any democratic development for the next three decades.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_development_in_Ho...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/world/asia/china-began-pus...
Over 50 protestors were killed and hundreds more injured.
You mean these?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/05/opinion/ching-cheong-hong...:
> The May 6 riot was started by the local chapter of the Chinese Communist Party (C.C.P.), which hoped to bring the colonial government to its knees. The year before, its counterpart had done just that with the Portuguese authorities in Macau, becoming the de facto ruler there....
> The local C.C.P. created more terror by issuing a list of people targeted for assassination. These included a senior Chinese official in the British administration, a top business leader, a representative of the landed class and Louis Cha Leung-yung, the publisher of Ming Pao, a Hong Kong newspaper that had criticized the riot. Lam Bun, an outspoken radio broadcaster who had also condemned the disturbances, was burned to death, along with his cousin, on the way to work....
> Sino-British relations came to a standstill. According to a highly reputable source who spoke on the condition of anonymity, it appears that Zhou Enlai, the Chinese premier, asked Mao Zedong if he intended to claim Hong Kong back from Britain. Mao said that it wasn’t time and that he would honor the treaties China had signed allowing Britain to rule Hong Kong until 1997. Zhou then ordered an immediate halt to the riot in Hong Kong.
That's because the UK kidnapped the entirety of hong kong.
> On exploitation, in 1945 Hong Kong was bombed out rubble
Isn't that because that's where the colonizing brits were? You know the ones the japanese wanted to remove from asia?
> and in 1997 it was a first world city that had a higher GDP per capita than the United Kingdom.
The rise of Hong Kong's GDP entirely tracks the opening of china. Meaning the UK had nothing to do with hong kong's rise.
Also, it's a joke to compare a city ( hong kong ) to a country ( UK ). I see it done too many times in traditional and social media. Hong kong's GDP per capita is lower than london's. Using your logic, does it make that an exploitation?
Hong Kong was richer than Spain in 1980. China didn’t open for trade until the 80s. When Nixon went to China international trade was so low the leadership had to raid the entire country’s foreign reserves to get enough dollars to travel to the US. Hong Kong’s prosperity was not based on the China trade between 1945 and 1980.
Spain was pretty poor in 1980.
People really can't help themselves: "Also, it's a joke to compare a city ( hong kong ) to a country ( UK ). I see it done too many times in traditional and social media."
Also is that supposed to be impressive? I've never associated economic strength or wealth with 20th century spain.
> China didn’t open for trade until the 80s.
Wrong. They opened up in the 60s. They tested trade with Japan first in the 60s before opening up relations with the US in the 1970s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Japan_relations#...
There is a reason why hong kong's standing improved in the 60s and continued to do so.
> Hong Kong’s prosperity was not based on the China trade between 1945 and 1980.
Yes it was. Hong kong's only value is as an entry point/port into china. There is nothing inherently noteworthy about hong kong. It has no resources and only a few million people.
We know it wasn't based on the UK since from 1842 til china's liberation and opening up, hong kong was a dirt poor colonial outpost where only the british and a few chinese lackey's were wealthy. We know it had nothing to do with hong kong for the reasons I noted. So the only remaining option is china's opening up.
Lets put it this way, if china was still the colonized china of pre-ww2 or if china was the china of 1945-1965ish, then hong kong would still be relatively poor.