HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Ye <stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU>
Subject:      HK democracy...
Reply-To: Ye <stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 06:15:37 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

> FROM Avron Boretz <xhgy@CRUX2.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>:

>I cannot tell you all how pleased I am to finally see a clear, well
>thought out, aware, and historically accurate comment in this latest
>debate

Well, but I am very confused about democratizing an existing democracy.

I think some people involved in this debate are having truble expressing
themselves. The question is not whether HK is a democracy, or whether
HK is not hence needs a quick injection of democracy. The question is how
do you view the chances that CCP will keep the current HK system (democracy
or not) for 50 years, and whether install a new system (and agitate CCP)
can force CCP to more likely keep the promise.

>and even more so, to finally hear it from a truly concerned
>standpoint, i.e., a citizen of Hong Kong, who can (unlike all of us,
>foreign devils and Han Chauvinist/imperialists alike) speak for the
>people of Hong Kong.

I will take your words on your devilishness, but please provide evidence about
all non-HK people being devils, chauvinists, and imperialists. Or am I having
unrealistic expectations on an average china-nt poster?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: B118789@VAX.CSC.CUHK.HK
Subject:      Setting the Record Straight
Reply-To: B118789@VAX.CSC.CUHK.HK
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 07:45:00 GMT
Comments: cc: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Thanks, Avron Boretz, for the compliment. I am not speaking for
the people of Hong Kong, however, and I am sure you knew that; I speak
for myself only.

My objective was merely to set the record straight. I sense that
Britain is getting a bad rap on China-nt for pressing ahead on
democratic reforms, and I don't understand why. People who attack
the British government on this question should keep the matter
in perspective, and there is no better contrast for the success of
British rule than what one sees in China.

People say the Brits are hypocritical for seeking democratization now,
but I think the move is purely pragmatic: Britain has a lot of money
invested here, and thousands of British citizens will seek to remain
in Hong Kong after 1997. If Britain does not guarantee the safety of
these citizens and British assets, the Conservative Party will
experience a strong political setback at home. I should add that it's
not just a "British" problem, as many other Westerners will seek to
remain here after 1997. At present there are more Americans here
(18,000) than Brits (12,000). The safety of American citizens and
American assets would be assured by democracy as well, so the problem
has international implications.

These are the reasons for implementing democracy now. Previously, the
British courts and legal system were in place, the military had a
strong presence here, and democracy was considered unnecessary for
social order.

Mak
Hong Kon
       |-g
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Zhimin Chen <zhimin@UNSSUN.SCS.UNR.EDU>
Subject:      Re: IFCSS HQ NR-4071: Employment Opportunities in Computer Science
Reply-To: Zhimin Chen <zhimin@UNSSUN.SCS.UNR.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 01:50:11 GMT
Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list CHINA-NT <CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu>

I understand that most of Chinese students are spcializing in sciences.
However I would assume that there are a sizable number of students of arts
as well. Those students in journalism, English literature and liguistics,
political sciences, arts, and philosophy are totally neglected and
unrepresented in various organizations of CSS.

Can IFCSS also manage to set up connections and database in arts area in
addition to the sole kingdom of scientists?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: YXXIAO@TWSUVM.BITNET
Subject:      help!
Reply-To: YXXIAO@TWSUVM.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 07:21:03 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.bitnet

*** Resending note of 11/20/92 01:15
To: QUESTION--CMSNAMES

From:
*** Resending note of 11/20/92 01:09
To: QUESTION--CMSNAMES

From: Yi xiao
I want to send a paper to my friend through E-Mail.  But I don't want to re-
type it.  It is already saved in my disk.  Does anyone know how to load my
paper from the disk into E-Mail to my friend? If you do, please show me the
detailed procedure.  Thanks.
Xiao Yi
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: kxd5425@usl.edu (Du Kaisheng)
Subject: Re:      British and HK democracy.
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 02:11:41 GMT

In article <By15s0.1wF@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> DU@ANLCHM.BITNET writes:
>  Why the British's motive to give democracy to HK is so important to some
>people? If you want democracy, support it, if you do not like it, against
>it.
>
>  There is no clear or single motive in anything. You can probably find
>"good" motives for Deng Xiaoping to kill students. You probably can also
>find "bad" motives for Zhao Ziyang to support students.
>
>  If you do not want British to get all HK's money, stop it. But you can
>probably only do it if HK has democracy, or you can rely on Chinese
>government. Either way, talk more about issues, less motives.

If you never think before you move you will definitely be fooled all the 
time by some beautiful words or slogons.  You may even do something
terribly wrong while thinking you are doing something great.  Good intention
does not mean anything in some case.

Mao said: People is the real hero.  But on the contrary, politicians are
real heroes since they can manipulate people to benifit themselves.
From: lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Louie Crew)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Found in the HK Supreme Court
Date: 23 Nov 92 02:39:59 GMT
Reply-To: <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


 
 
                     Found in the Hong Kong Supreme Court
 
 
 
   The    Brits      here      tumes,      and     so freely that they
   could   have      that      would     sashes    barely   notice  it
   call-             would     seem       which           in 10-
   ed it              not      too        deco-            inch
   T h e              match    com-       rate            script
   Way  Out, or        well   mon          the             very
   like the Ro-           with            pri-             visi-
   mans,               the    their        vi-            ble as
   Ger-               pow-     18th-      lege             they
   mans,            dered       cent-     they             leave
   and us,  The     wigs,        ury      exer-            us in
   Go  Out; but    robes,         cos-    cise           the dock.
 
Copyright 1987, 1992 by Louie Crew
 
 

-- 
  ==========================================================================
  Louie Crew, Assoc. Prof., Academic Foundations Dept., Rutgers U./NWK 07102
  lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu                                   201-485-4503
                            Closets are for prayer!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: R2CMW@AKRONVAX.BITNET
Subject: (none)
Reply-To: R2CMW@AKRONVAX.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 06:31:33 GMT

SUB: 123 r2cmw@vax1.cc.uakron.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: HE@UCC.UWINDSOR.CA
Subject:      Re: Comments on Mak Hong Kon's mails. (fwd)
Reply-To: "Ignatius Y. Ding" <ding%HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM@ucc.uwindsor.ca>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 04:37:26 GMT
Comments: To: multiple recipients <CHINA-NT@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>

    It seems that some people are always very interested in checking people's
background, and others are very interested in people's motives.


----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> You will get a job as assistant secreatary of U.S., do more abuse of China!
>

  It seems to be a rather strange response from an intellectual, Chunde Shi of
  ulowell.edu).  Anybody knows what's going on?


  Ignatius Y. Ding
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: bihkyan@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Yang Yuanxin)
Subject: Re: Prisoner Execution: Shot from Behind 
Organization: Educational Computing Network
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 21:34:45 GMT

In article <By33D9.93H@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li) writes:
>In article <By2zD9.35t@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> yawei@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (~{QG9p~}) writes:
>>In article <By2Lrp.C8C@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> bihkyan@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Yang Yuanxin) writes:
>>>living inside China are unaware of this "practice", Only some smart
>>>people living outside China are aware of this. Why? Because this kind
>>>of news are manufactured outside of China.
>>> People who believe in this kind of thing must be one of the following
>>> two kinds of people:
>>> 1. Too naive/stupid.
>>> 2. Real enemy of China. (Who actually know this are untrue)
>>
>
>I witnessed only one time of the execution in my entire life.
>But it was horrible. I never want to watch it again.
>
>That was in 1976 when I in the countryside for the first year
>as "intellectual youth". It was after Mao's death. The commune
>....
>and followed too. I was very curious to see how people would
>be executed.
>
   But that happened 16 years ago! re-read the original post, auther
 is talking about today!

   One of my friend said he once saw a prisoner was executed in a 
 electic chair, he told me many details he saw, and that was happened
 in the US. 

   BTY, you are a famous SCC story/lie teller, I don't buy your story
 at all, just assumed it was true.

YY


Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Ye <stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU>
Subject:      HK democracy...
Reply-To: Ye <stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:27:22 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

As usual, political analysis and advice are free, especially when my project
seems going nowhere...
The whole debate about HK democratization is an old kids game: you kick
someone real hard, and then declare: 'from now on we will be grownups and
stop fighting!' of course the other kid is just as smart: 'we will be
grownups after I kick you back!'.
The British is now saying: 'no matter how wrong was our colonial rule,
let's start democracy!' while the Chinese government is saying: 'HK will
have democracy after I have enjoyed the governership!'.
HK people is saying: 'I was a shameful subject, but now I am a born-again
democrat and want democracy!' while HK business is saying: 'you can have
democracy after I finished making my next million!'.

My advice? sit back and read LaoZi. He said 'every person has a master whom
he truly deserves'... or was it SunZi? ErZi?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re: PRC wants to abrogate Joint Declaration on HK
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Distribution: na  
Date: 19 Nov 92 16:08:44 GMT

In article <BxyHAL.J1@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU writes:
>Now it is quite clear that the move by Governor Patten worries the reform,
>moderate wing of CCP most, just as the 89 movement worried the same wing
>most. And the guy who worries most, is Zhu, Rongji. He even could not
>keep silence any longer.
>
>If we all are confident that a democratic HK will survive after 1997, I will
>support the move by Patten. But if this is just a political gamble, I see
>no points to struggle for a democracy and then see it destroyed vulnerably.
>This process may be emotional and romantic just as French Revolution, though.
>
>The move by Patten gives the hardliners in CCP a excellent excuse to regain
>power in CG and put moderates such as ZRJ into a very difficult situation.
>China has been moving on the right direction and becoming more and more
>open and having more and more freedom. Anybody familiar to modern Chinese
>history knows the current trend of China is *not easy*. Ba2 Miao2 Zhu4 Zang3
>such as the move by Patten will only achieve the opposite.
>
>It's very funny to praise Patten and Britain Government's love for democracy
>and concern on HK people's welfare. If they really did love democracy, they
>would have had HK become a democracy decades ago. They never did because
>they know that if HK were a democracy under Britain's rule, Britain would not
>had transfered so much wealth form HK to Britain during the past decades.
>They know that the median voter will oppose such transfers. They themselves
>dared not to "enjoy" it but they do want CG to "enjoy" it, at the same time
>they can gain some good fame. They put HK people on risk and will not bear
>any consequence, just like Shen Tong. Well, they all politicians.
>
>
I am not going to comment on Patten's proposal and reaction of 
the chinese and the british, but it does seem to me that Patten
is on a ego trip, he does seem to be interested in make a name for himself
receive fame & glory rather than anything else, it almost like
he wanted the confrontation and the media coverage, either way he
wins.  
>
>William Deng


Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Avron Boretz <xhgy@CRUX2.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: (none)
Reply-To: Avron Boretz <xhgy@CRUX2.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:20:37 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Fri, 20 Nov 92 13:10:46 -1100
>From:    DU@ANLCHM.BITNET
To:      Multiple recipients of list CHINA-NT <CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu>
Subject: British and HK democracy.

  Why the British's motive to give democracy to HK is so important to some
people? If you want democracy, support it, if you do not like it, against
it.

  There is no clear or single motive in anything. You can probably find
"good" motives for Deng Xiaoping to kill students. You probably can also
find "bad" motives for Zhao Ziyang to support students.

  If you do not want British to get all HK's money, stop it. But you can
probably only do it if HK has democracy, or you can rely on Chinese
government. Either way, talk more about issues, less motives.

------- End of Forwarded Message
GThis is the first sensible, cool-headed thought I've seen so far on this
controversy.  Of course, motivation for any action can be quite complex --
and up until now, both "sides" have been reifying "Chinese" and "British,"
as if even the central governments of these historical nations can be
considered a single, timeless, unified, and even coherent entity.

That's the theoretical part, and thank you DU@anlchm.bitnet for reminding us.
As for the practical side, a good point here (which seems obvious, but
apparently not to many of my fellow netters) which is that whatever the
motives of the British colonial powers may have been in denying democracy
and autonomy to Hong Kong for so long, and however cynical their moves to
promote democracy now at the eleventh hour may be perceived as being, the
simple fact is that if you want to stomp out the move to promote greater
participation and representation for the people of Hong Kong (which is what
I believe the meaning and practice of real democracy is supposed to be) because
you are cynical about British motives past and present, you are cutting off
your nose to spite your face -- or, since I have noticed that most of the
esteemed commentators seem to NOT be Hong Kong citizens, cutting off someone
else's nose (the people of Hong Kong) to spite someone else's (the British
colonial administration, or perhaps hated Western colonialists who have
-- and I don't deny this -- offended the pride and sensibilities of the
Chinese and their nationalist ideology) face.

Indeed, I sense that face and pride are much more at the core of both the
problem, and most of the debates on the issue (on this discussion list and
elsewhere) than anything else...

Avron Boretz
Anthropology/Asian Studies (+Cornell Chinese-Japanese-Korean Computing and
Database Facility)

Comments from non-political economists and other lower forms of life
welcomed (just kidding...)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Xinsheng Ling <XSLING@YALEVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Sign-On
Reply-To: Xinsheng Ling <XSLING@YALEVM.BITNET>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 13:33:52 GMT

Please sign me on your news distribution list, if possible.

 XSLING@YALEVM
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: yawei@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (~{QG9p~})
Subject: Re: 20 Million Prisoners in China
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 19:27:09 GMT

In article <By2Lrp.C8C@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> bihkyan@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Yang Yuanxin) writes:
>>News about public executions of prisoners in China for minor crimes
>>is common in the daily press here in Hong Kong. I am surprised that
>>Chinese people living abroad are unaware of this practice.
>>
>>Mak
>>Hong Kong

> You should not be so surprised if you know that even Chinese people
>living inside China are unaware of this "practice", Only some smart
>people living outside China are aware of this. Why? Because this kind
>of news are manufactured outside of China.
> People who believe in this kind of thing must be one of the following
> two kinds of people:
> 1. Too naive/stupid.
> 2. Real enemy of China. (Who actually know this are untrue)


Are you saying that,

  1. You actually lived in China at one time or another, and
  2. You are not aware of public execution of prisoners?

I think you are the one who is

  1. Being naive and stupid, or
  2. Actually knows that this is true but is afraid to 
     admit it.

Your credibility stinks.

   Ya-Gui Wei





Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: jimtan@earth.monash.edu.au (Jianjun Tan)
Subject: Re:      test
Reply-To: jimtan@earth.monash.edu.au
Organization: Monash University Dept of Earth Sciences
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 12:40:46 GMT

TEST OK
---

   \  ------
 ---- |-/\-|
      |/__\|        
  ---  ----
 -----|-----|
  /-\  --|--  
  \_/ ---|---



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Jianjun Tan         Earth Sciences ,Monash University
 -----------         Clayton,Vic.3168, Australia   

 _--_|\.                    .                           
/      \                      Phone: (03) 565 5769(O)          
\_.--._/__/ Melbourne                (03) 543 5130(H)           
      v   \----- I'm here!    Fax:   (03) 565 4903           
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  




Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Wing Ng <wing@pegasus.com>
Subject:      William Deng's objection to HK democracy
Reply-To: Wing Ng <wing@pegasus.com>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 03:33:26 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu, WMA@ccr2.bbn.com,
              humu!harvard.harvard.edu!lau@tyrosine.Nosc.Mil,
              members@ahkcus.org

This is one reply from AHKCUS member to William Deng's post
re democracy in Hong Kong.

Wing

=====================================
From: "Wai-yan (Ian) Ma" <WMA@ccr2.bbn.com>

<If HK should become a democracy, its government will follow the
<preference
<of the median voter, assuming simple majority rule is applied. Then a
<democratized HK will inevitably go for independence because the
<median voter will prefer independence in order to secure democracy which
<s/he
<prefers. The terminal result will be bloody crackdown which nobody
<wants to see.

Don't label pro-democracy with independence!


<From almost all aspects HK doesn't look like a part of China. So it's
<well understandable for the median voter to prefer independence.

So obviously s/he doesn't understand Hong Kong people.

<The process to democratize HK has very negative effect on HK's economy.
<Just see how strong the HK businessmen society protest the governor's
<move (reported in CND). When the move worried businessmen, the claim by
<IFCSS that the move will promote prosperity is just ridiculous.

Just as s/he said, 'in the history too many tragedies were driven by
good-wills'.  Won't the good will ;-) of those 'worried' businessmen drive
Hong Kong to tragedies? It's so 'ridiculous' to wholeheartedly believe what

those businessmen say are always true and correct!

<Only after the whole China is democratized, a democratized HK is possible
<and sustainable. So, please work on democratizing *the whole China* first.


Can't they proceed together??

<While China is still a totalitarian country, democrating HK will bring
<about nothing but disasters. If you don't buy it, just let us wait and
<see.
<
<I understand that most HK people desire more democracy. But they are not
<aware of the bad consequence of what they are doing, just as those Bosnian

<people could not forsee their today's tragic fate when they voted for
<independence not a long time ago.

There are 4 types of people. Those make things happen. Those don't konw
what
are happening. Then those see things happen, but say nothing. The worst are

those see things happen and told other that they had told them what would
have happened.  Anytime I read logic like this, I feel deeply sorry for
those who died in 1989. Couldn't they see their tragic fate? but did they
have other choices?  They couldn't just wait and see!


==========end==
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: y0z8374@zeus.tamu.edu (ZHANG, YUEMIN)
Subject: Re:      Re:  What the HK governor is doing?  Why?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:37:00 GMT

In article <Bxzy5u.EqA@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, FUW@conan.ie.orst.edu writes...
>> From:       Shizhong Chen <chen%molly@SDSC.EDU>
>> Subject:    Re:  What the HK governor is doing?  Why?
>>
>> that we can never trust those foreign devils. (Unfortunately, to go with
> 
>> favor the democratization program by the British ghosts, how the
> 
>>
>> Shizhong Chen
>>
> 
> 
>    Sorry, wise man, there are couple of points in your essay which are too
>hard for me to understand.  I sincerely hope I can get some educational
>information  from you.
>    First of all, what makes them to be devils and ghosts?  Is that because
>their race is different from ours? Consequently, what is the difference
>between calling whites devils or ghosts and the Chinese being called East
>Asian sick man or the blacks being called Negro?

Let me tell what makes them to be devils and ghosts? It is nothing but their 
behavior. Please study some history, Britain was the first country invaded 
China for the dirty opium which was forbided in their own country. They forced 
China to sign the first unfair treat and took over Hongkong. This shameful 
history is remembered by all chinese people. They have been ruling Hongkong for 
150 years. Did they give Hongkong people democracy? Do you guys have the right 
to vote Hongkong governer? They keep Hongkong's colony system for 150 years, 
now only 4 more years left for them, the devils became angels overnight, they 
want change Hongkong's political system dramaticly. What is the motive behind 
their action? Look at new airport contracts go to whose hand, the answer is 
very clear.

>    What is real democracy? Obviously, you don't believe British is a
>democratic country.  Why don't you tell us what the real democracy is and
>which country is a real democratic country?  How about China which has been
>under the Communist Party's ruling for more than fourty years?
> 
>    Dummy
British is democracy( as your definition) country, but Hongkong is not. I have 
a question why a democratic country did not gave their colony democracy. If 
there were no 97 turnover, would British change Hongkong's political system?

YZ