slogan example的八卦，YOUTUBE、PINTEREST和Yahoo名人娛樂都在討論

只睇7.1嘅表面或者單一現象，將香港年輕人判斷並報道為暴徒係太盲目，不成熟嘅做法(日文後ろ By Soko)

究竟咩嘢推到佢地咁樣嘅地步？咩嘢逼到佢地自殺，變成死士？其憤怒，絕望之根源係咩嘢，萬惡之源究竟係邊，要正視，要探討，要深思。

7月1日香港の若者たちが立法議会に突撃した行為が様々な議論を醸し出しています。
...Continue ReadingIt is too blind and immature to judge and report the young people in Hong Kong as thugs (After Japanese)

What exactly has pushed them like this? What forced them to commit suicide and become a dead man? What is the root of anger and despair? The source of all evil lies, we should face it, explore and think deeply.

July 1th, the acts that young people in Hong Kong have attacked the legislative assembly are creating various discussions.

Many Hong Kong youth and citizens are dissatisfied with the fact that multiple media in Japan wrote a mob of Hong Kong young people or mob.

What is in the root of Hong Kong Youth's anger?

According to a social worker who was at the site on July 1th, there were 1 young people who were prepared to act on death.

Democratic lawmakers are going to jail, they might be shot by gun, reconsider! I tried to stop, but," already three (suicide) Dead! I don't even know what to say! I'm ready for the assault!"

In the process of temporary occupation from the assault to the legislative assembly, there was an act of writing a slogan to beat the window, break the equipment, and criticize the government on the wall. It may probably not be the act that many democratic people wanted.

There will also be an excuse to suppress the parents of the parents, and there will also be a union that tries to take advantage of the actions of young people, and it will also be an element that will be suspected of the nature of the demonstration that has been moving on to the back of peace. No, the foreign media and international public opinion that will support you can also be away...

There was a destruction of windows, equipment, and the slogan of political criticism to the wall, but for the historical and cultural value, " don't destroy this!" There was also a side of paying money without being protected or drinking at the legislative assembly. Therefore, it does not mean that the vandalism is allowed. I'm going to tell you that there was a side like that too. The subject of vandalism was not a person but a thing consistent with things.

Various discussions are winding up on July 1th. I think I need to take a look at what is the base of Hong Kong's youth, anger, and despair, without being left alone in the video and superficial events.

June 9th 100 million demonstrations will be held. Mr. Lam, the top secretary of Hong Kong, is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the one who is the After that, I've been watching three watarai on the media for 10 days and 11 days, but I don't listen to opinion just by claiming the legitimacy of the fugitive ordinance.

In the morning of June 12th, in the tv interview, the ordinance will never withdraw, and the mother, the young man of Hong Kong, to the son," comment that I can't forgive the selfish act of my son," This is how the mother of Hong Kong was angry that the mother of Hong Kong did not deserve to name you, and in Hong Kong, the protest assembly of the unprecedented mothers was held.

When the democratic party announces a statement to rum and the government who continue to ignore the request of opinion, and the democratic party announces the statement, Mr. Lam takes out an example of the determination that has happened in the past years, and he is severely punished. Intimidated the young man.

For a series of response such as the lamb administration, citizens are disappointed, and the government who does not listen to what they say, if this ordinance has been passed to such a government, what is the security of our freedom and safety? It's going to be... fear and worries are getting more and more bloated.

The only way left was to enter the legislative assembly at the time of the second deliberation of the 12th, and to disrupt the deliberation and stop the pass, this day the police squad and the demonstrators collided hard, and the video was also The clearly captured police force was accused of violence, but the government did not follow police violence, and the people's demonstrations were defined as riot, and 32 people were arrested. My name has become a riot sin.

After that, while police assault was severely criticized by the international society, the g20 that was taken by xi jinping was imminent, and the government said that the government will stop the deliberation of the ordinance. In Japan, some media have been featured in the fact that some media have expressed the revocation of the facts, and the voices of the people and the voices of praise have risen, but the citizens of Hong Kong are not suspended = they are not withdraw, and there is a possibility that they will resume in the future. And above all, I understand the fear of the government that has not been able to stay in the middle of a hard posture that has been ignoring opinion for a long time.

And 200 million + 1 demonstrations happen. The screams of Hong Kong people have arrived in the whole world. This is what the rum administration did in the form of an apology conference as a pose, but the citizens were not able to do it, but the lamb administration did not try to listen to the citizens's demands. I did.

On July 1, the demonstrators requested an emergency meeting to the secretary of rum, but it was rejected by Mr. Lam for the reason that he was busy.

In the conflict between citizens and governments by today, the despair of young people in Hong Kong went to I, the one who chose to die (three people), or the people who were prepared to act with the death of the death. (the young man who entered the legislative assembly), what is the root of the evil that is like this, the anger and despair of this kind of anger and despair? On the essential main axis, I think that the government has been stepping on the opinion, not listening to the voice of the young people, without respect, and continuing to trampled until today.

Anger is beyond the limit, despair, and the thoughts of the young people who are going to be in the middle of the day, the thoughts of the young people who are in the middle of the day, without listening to the voice, without seeing what is behind it, the radical footage and single I think it's a very short-cut judgement to see only the events and easily put it on the mob.

What is in the back of their despair and anger, I think they need to look at what they have made them.

I'm not going to defend the destructive act, but the wrath of the young people is in the middle of the day, and there are millions of people who have gathered in peace, and when they are disbanded in peace, what will be! Citizen's opinion and democracy are just the same as the government is trampled by the government, the anger of the young people who are desperate for the adults who do not listen to the story, the feeling that explodes, and the dangers of life, but action I want to be able to understand the courage to wake up, and I want to support the future of their drawing.

There is a survey that the parent-Chinese media [economic ung] and [CLEAR NEWS] went together." while the demonstration was sustainable, the demonstrators destroyed the legislative Congress on the 1th, so i sue this Can you agree with the way?" 214,634 people answer and agree at 8 pm last night %, don't agree but 9 %, no comment Is 10 %.

It is said that the intention of the survey of the parent-Chinese media should have been a government support, and it should have been a good idea to suppress the demonstration, but the intention is edge, and the result of most citizens supporting the demonstrators. It's been embossed.

During the collision on June 12, there was a radical action of throwing bricks in a few demonstrators, but today there was no other human attack, and the demonstration was held in peace. . The vandalism in the row of July 1th was not a person, but it was against the stuff.

As A Supplement, I think that the installation of the independent investigation committee is a fair measure for both of the violence in a series of demonstrations. With a fair third party, you should check it out, democracy is also demanding it to the government. However, the government continues to refuse the installation of the independent investigation committee. For some reason it's obvious, because government and police brutality are exposed to the light of the international society.

I'm going to investigate in the agency called the existing Deputy Council, but the general council is not legally guaranteed to summon the investigation rights and witnesses to the court, and half of the members of the council committee. More than a parent. The Police are going to investigate the police, and we have to set up the independent investigation committee, and we continue to voice the opposite of the investigation at the general council, but we continue to be rejected today. Yes.

Article: @[699908786774332:274:SOKO hé quán sù xíng]Translated

【#TheDiplomat: 沈旭暉隨緣家書英文版🇭🇰】很久沒有向國際關係評論網 The Diplomat 供稿，但國際線十分重要，不應放棄。這次他們希望分享23條、國安法、反恐法風雨欲來的「新香港」前瞻，願國際社會能多了解快將出現的危機：

While the world is preoccupied with a fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been tightening its political grip on all aspects of Hong Kong’s civil society. Rumor has it that Beijing will push through legislating national security laws under Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law by unconventional means, such as massively disqualifying pro-democratic legislators or even directly applying a national law, widely argued as a major step to destroy the rights and freedom of Hong Kongers, and bring Chinese authoritarianism to Hong Kong.

After the 2019 protests, the administration of Carrie Lam, who theoretically is still leading the special administrative region of China, has little political capital at stake, with its legitimacy reaching rock bottom. The pro-government camp has dwindling prospects for the city’s upcoming Legislative Council election. The government‘s ”nothing to lose“ mentality is apparent from its recent blatant reinterpretation of the Basic Law’s Article 22 (another article that limits the influence of China’s offices in Hong Kong’s internal affairs). The debate is nothing new, but the pressure this time is quite different.

This article highlights the different strategies Beijing could adopt to enact Article 23 insidiously or under disguise to avoid backlash from the international community, while continuing to reap benefits from the city’s globally recognized special status. This seems to be part of Beijing’s brinkmanship to bring Hong Kong protesters and their supporters to their knees and move the city closer to authoritarianism. To counter these moves, Hong Kongers must define the boundaries beyond which Hong Kong falls into authoritarian rule and make a case as to why the city’s downfall is detrimental to the international community‘s interest.

The Long-Term Controversy Over National Security Laws

Back in 2003, the implementation of Article 23 was thwarted by the moderate pro-establishment politician James Tien. In face of overwhelming public disapproval of the law, he withdrew support and votes from his Liberal Party. However, 17 years later, it is hard to imagine Beijing following the old legislative playbook: start with a public consultation, followed by public discourse and political debate, and end with the majority rule. This playbook only works in peaceful societies ruled by a trustworthy government with integrity.

The aftermath of 2003, as well as the 2019 protests, should have taught Beijing and the Hong Kong government a lesson: pushing through national security legislation in a flawed parliament controlled by the minority pro-government camp would inevitably set off another full city-scale protest — and undoubtedly more fierce and focused this time. Given the current government’s numerous displays of dishonesty, it is conceivable that they will embark on a less-traveled path to implement Article 23.

Strategy One: “Anti-Terrorism”

In principle, one possible strategy could be to directly enact Chinese national law across Hong Kong, which can be achieved by declaring a state of emergency in the city. However, this is risky business as it would tarnish the integrity of “one country two systems” and subsequently Hong Kong’s international standing. Beijing, a risk-averse regime, is also unwilling to see Hong Kong’s status as a middleman for laundering money disappear into thin air.

Instead, Beijing could be concocting a narrative that would see Chinese national law applied to Hong Kong while not damaging Hong Kong’s international standing and Beijing’s own interests. The key word in this script is “anti-terrorism.” As early as 2014, pro-Beijing scholars have been claiming the emergence of “local terrorist ideology” on Hong Kong soil. Since the anti-extradition bill protests last year, government rhetoric frequently described the protests, which caused no deaths at all in the entire year, with phrases like “inclination to terrorist ideology.” That was a signal to the world that Hong Kong’s internal conflicts had ballooned into a national security issue. This gives the government the legitimacy to justify the implementation of Chinese national laws across the highly autonomous region to counter terrorism. The Chinese government knows that if it can persuade the world that terrorism exists in Hong Kong, and that it is as severe as the terror threat facing many other nations today, the international community will be less critical of Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong. Enacting Chinese laws directly is a convenient path that will save Beijing from having to tackle Hong Kong’s internal conflicts, basically turning the Hong Kong issue into a nonissue.

Strategy Two: Stacking the Legislature by Disqualifying Candidates

An even bolder strategy was probably foretold by a recent incident where the Hong Kong government and Beijing’s agencies for Hong Kong affairs (HKMAO and the Liaison Office) jointly criticized lawmaker Dennis Kwok for filibustering, framing it as “misconduct in public office” and “violating his oath.” It is incomprehensible to claim that filibustering goes against a lawmaker’s main duty; rather, it is common understanding that legislative work includes debating the law and representing public opinion against unreasonable laws. In a parliament controlled by the minority, pro-democratic members representing the majority of Hong Kongers are forced to express their objections using means like filibustering. Wouldn’t a lack of different political opinions turn the legislative branch into a rubber-stamp institution?

The above allegation has set a dangerous precedent for twisting the logic behind a certain provision in the Basic Law to target opposing lawmakers. In other words, to fulfill Beijing’s interpretation of the principal requirement for holding public office in Hong Kong, one could be required to take a meticulously legalistic approach to uphold the Basic Law down to its every single wording. A public official, by this new definition, not only needs to support “one country, two systems” or object Hong Kong independence, but also must abide by every single provision in the Basic Law. Worst of all, based on the previous cases, whether an official’s words or actions oversteps a provision is up to Beijing’s interpretation of his/her “intent.”

If this approach is applied, in the next election, there might be additional official questions for screening candidates like the following: “The Basic Law states that the enactment of Article 23 is a constitutional duty. Failing to support Article 23 legislation violates the Basic Law. Do you support it?” This question would suffice to disqualify even moderate or even pro-establishment candidates like James Tien. Even if any pro-democratic candidates were elected, once Article 23 re-enters the legislative process, they could risk ouster by raising objections.

Despite the absurdity of this tactic, the Chinese regime may just be tempted enough if such a strategy could resolve two of China’s current nuisances — voices of dissent in the Legislative Council and the previous failure to implement Article 23.

Strategy Three: The “Boiling Frog Effect”

Article 23 is not yet implemented, but the dystopian world that the protesters pictured in 2003 is already becoming reality. Regular citizens have been persecuted for “sedition” for sharing their views on social media or participating in legal protests; workers face retaliation for taking part in strikes; corporations are pressured to publicly side with the government’s stance; employees who have the “wrong” political views are fired; schools have been closely monitored for teaching material; protest-supporting fundraisers were framed for money laundering; a retweet or like may lead to persecution, under a colonial-era law. Only now have Hong Kongers woken up to their new reality — although the Basic Law technically protects citizens’ rights to speak, rally, march, demonstrate, and go on strike, the government could enfeeble civil rights by bending antiquated laws and legal provisions. The frequent abuse of law enforcement power on a small scale, such as improper arrests and police violence, is desensitizing the public and the international community. In a few years, Hong Kong will become unrecognizable. This is indeed a clever play on Beijing’s part to slowly strip away Hong Kong’s autonomy and freedom, without causing much international attention.

Counter-Strategies Against Beijing’s Brinkmanship

Beijing’s overarching goal is to hollow out Hong Kong but, at the same time, avoid major backlash from the international community, which could spell the end of the privileged global status of Hong Kong not granted to other Chinese cities. Beijing also aims at preventing single incidents that could cascade down into mass protests as seen in 2003, 2014, and 2019; and eliminating any resistance forces from within Hong Kong’s legislature. The tactics outlined above are typical in a game of brinkmanship.

In response, Hong Kongers in Hong Kong and on the so-called “international frontline” must know their strengths and bargaining chips on this negotiating table with Beijing.

Unlike Xinjiang and Tibet, Hong Kong is a city with transparency and free flow of information. Hong Kongers need to make a case to the world that the protests are not acts of terrorism. Some suggestions include comparing the Hong Kong protests to similar struggles in 20 or so other counties in the world at the present time, none of which were classified as terrorism; collecting a large amount of concrete evidence of the disproportionate use of force by the Hong Kong police; and showing how enacting Chinese national laws in Hong Kong will end the city’s autonomy and spell disaster for international community‘s interests.

The Legislative Council is the institution that can counteract Beijing’s “boiling frog” strategy and to keep Hong Kongers’ hope alive in the system. Those who plan to run for legislative office must be prepared to be disqualified from running. If only individuals are banned, there need to be alternative candidates as back-up plans. However, if and when the disqualification process is applied broadly to entire camps of candidates (for example, all who object to Article 23), the pro-democracy camp must make a strong case to the Hong Kong and global public that this is the endgame for Hong Kong democracy. Then the incumbent popularly elected legislators will hold the internationally recognized mandate from the public and serve as the last resistance.

These recommendations delineates how the slogan “if we burn, you burn with us,” often seen in the protests, may play out in the game of international relations. If the national security laws are “passed” by a legislature that is jury-rigged in this manner, or if related national laws are directly implemented in Hong Kong, Hong Kongers should signal clearly to the world that it goes way beyond the promised “one country, two systems.” Crossing this red line by Beijing should be seen by the world as a blunt violation of its promised autonomy to Hong Kongers. At that time, if the international community led by the United States and the United Kingdom decided to revoke the “non-sovereignty entity” status of Hong Kong and regard the SAR as an ordinary Chinese city, it shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Dr. Simon Shen is the Founding Chairman of GLOs (Glocal Learning Offices), an international relations start-up company. He also serves as an adjunct associate professor in the University of Hong Kong, Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and associate director of the Master of Global Political Economy Programme of the CUHK. The author acknowledges Jean Lin, Coco Ho, Chris Wong, Michelle King, and Alex Yap for their assistance in this piece.

▶️ 高度自治 vs 全面管治
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwt8wZl8jHQ

「#電影故事：迷幻列車2」

Veronika: What's 'Choose life'?

Renton: What?

Veronika: 'Choose life'. Simon says it sometimes. He says "Choose life, Veronika!"

Renton: 'Choose life'. 'Choose life' was a well meaning slogan from a 1980's anti-drug campaign and we used to add things to it, so I might say for example, choose... designer lingerie, in the vain hope of kicking some life back into a dead relationship. Choose handbags, choose high-heeled shoes, cashmere and silk, to make yourself feel what passes for happy. Choose an iPhone made in China by a woman who jumped out of a window and stick it in the pocket of your jacket fresh from a South-Asian Firetrap. Choose Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and a thousand others ways to spew your bile across people you've never met…..

「迷幻列車」的第一集是1996年的作品。

當初男主角Renton不屑 "Choose Life" 那資本主義生活，為何一定要買名車買樓有份好工？ "I chose not to choose life: I chose something else. " 他選擇了毒品。因為毒品的世界簡單得多，生活要追求的東西變成只有它一樣。年輕總是任性的。

四個年輕人沈淪於毒品的生活，因為毒品失去好友甚至女兒，到最後Renton欣然擁抱他原來很看不起的生活，義無反顧的背叛了自己的一班毒友，踏上正常人生的道路，在21年前為一眾當時還年輕的影迷留下無限可能性。

但脫離毒海的沉淪，在資本主義的社會，何嘗不是也像上癮般，跌進不斷消費再工作再消費的輪迴？不過，至少他有能力選擇，毒品讓他們連生活的選擇也沒有。

是的，有了車有了樓有了錢我們就有能力選擇。可以選擇不過這樣的生活，可以選擇過著樸素沒有物慾的生活。但又有多少記得其實我們並不是那樣身不由己？達到某目標後是否非最求更好不可？我們忘記了「選擇」，執著於不必要的東西。

不是要你做到無慾無求，人從來就是自私的貪心的，不過要記著很多東西沒有了，我們生活是依然繼續的，不必抓住不放。

「生活」不易，第二集的主角們還是一事無成，似是充滿唏噓？但這就是人生。努力過不一定成功，任性過不一定要付出代價，不是我們選擇人生，而是人生選擇我們。我卻認為沒有半點唏噓，只是沒有了那份以為可以掌握世界的輕狂，明白執著也是徒然，他們的心終於自由了。

你也還在那輪迴中嗎？

Illustration by Kazy Chan
Storyteller : 慢靈魂 A Slow Soul

#沒有你的故事也是你的故事
＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿

「Storyteller 說故事」是一個獨立創作單位，擁有一群風格獨特的插畫師及文字創作人，也是連結插畫師及故事的平台，歡迎任何合作或個人投稿，將你們的故事或插畫作品 inbox message或email 至info@story-teller.com.hk

更多故事：http://www.story-teller.com.hk
Follow us on IG https://goo.gl/jY6eg7