Why Would Someone Care About the Right of Chinese People to Riot and Start Fires at the Mall?

The media is completely bombarding the population of the West with propaganda about how important it is for people in Hong Kong to have a right to riot and try to overthrow the government by attacking the cops and firebombing shopping malls.

What they have failed to do is explain why anyone in the West would care about such an obscure issue that actually does not have anything to do with anything related to any of our lives.


Hong Kong’s fate shows China’s true authoritarianism so the rest of the world should stand up to President Xi Jinping and start to put human rights above financial gain, pro-democracy activist Nathan Law told Reuters.

China unveiled a national security law this week which Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters and the West say breaches the “one country, two systems” principle enshrined in the 1984 Sino-British treaty that guaranteed the autonomy of Hong Kong.

“The protests in Hong Kong have been a window for the world to recognise that China is getting more and more authoritarian,” Law told Reuters via internet video. Law, 26, left Hong Kong this week. He declined to disclose his location.

Law called on the international community to put human rights above the financial interests of trading with the world’s second largest economy and to “multilaterally deal with the China issue in a more assertive way.”

“It is important we prioritise human rights issues over trade when we deal with China,” he said.

I just can’t understand why anyone would care about this. It’s actually baffling to me.

Firstly, it is frankly bizarre to argue that anyone should have a right to riot and start fires everywhere. However, even if you equated rioting and fire-starting to “freedom,” it would still be very confusing to me why anyone in the Western world would care about this.

I have a list of social and political issues I care most about (ethics in gaming journalism, etc.). Then, I have lists of things I care less about, but still think are important (preservation of endangered marine life, etc.).

At nowhere on any of my lists is “freedom for the Chinese.”

What the media obviously does is put issues out there and then force you to take a side on them. Then, once you’ve taken a side, they start hyping you up like crazy.

I have witnessed that in right-wing circles. Even in my own right-wing circles, people tend to say, “I hate the Chinese, but they should have freedom.” Furthermore, right-wingers will claim that “freedom leads to prosperity,” while also claiming that China is a looming threat to the West.

Well, if they’re a threat, then why would you want them to be more prosperous by giving them freedom?

Again: even that is the wrong angle here. What people should do is recognize that they are being bullied into taking a side on an issue that has no effect on their life, no effect on the lives of anyone they know, and realize that when the media comes at you with this “WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THIS ISSUE???” thing, it is perfectly valid to simply say, “actually, I have my own problems I’m focused on and this really doesn’t have anything to do with me.”

What’s more, the presumption that you should take a side in an internal Chinese domestic political matter also assumes that you should spend your personal energies becoming informed about this issue so that you can make an educated decision as to whether or not you support freedom for the Chinese. They are asking you to give a part of yourself to the cause of the Chinese right off the bat by telling you you need to have an opinion on it.

Most people in the West have very little understanding of issues going on in their own domestic policy, so this demand by the media that you take the time to understand what is going on in the internal politics of China so you can make an informed decision about the morality of the actions of the Chinese government is a kind of abuse.

It should probably go without saying that this is a new method from the media. We did not used to have a situation where the media would make active demands that random people take a moral stance on the internal affairs of countries on the other side of the world.

The Only Thing About Hong Kong That Matters

The only thing that matters to me about what is going on in Hong Kong is that the government of my country and those of my sister countries Australia and Britain are now saying that they are going to bring in millions of Chinese immigrants.

The reason they are able to do this is that they were able to drum up support for the Hong Kong agenda. Right-wingers who were told they should care about the freedom of Hong Kong were unfortunately redirected into supporting an agenda of mass immigration.

The neocon shill and sadistic homosexual Paul Joseph Watson should be condemned for promoting this bizarre agenda to the internet right-wing.

He psychologically exploited and abused you in order to promote an agenda of war and mass Chinese immigration, and he is currently refusing to answer for this. Why would he answer for it? No one asked him to explain why it was that we should care about Chinese freedom in the first place – he just said that based Chinese Antifa was really cool, so we should all get behind their agenda.

Now – millions of immigrants.

What I do want to do here is take credit for the fact that he backed off of talking about this all of the time. His last tweet about Hong Kong was in November.

Because I pushed the issue so hard, he had people coming at him like, “bro, what are you doing? Are you getting paid by the State Department to promote a CIA conspiracy?”

Of course, by that point, the damage was already done.

Maybe the internet right-wing couldn’t have stopped this agenda, but we do have power in that our talking points tend to spread, despite the mass censorship. The response to this “Chinese freedom” media assault on the people needs to be: “I DON’T CARE! DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE COMMUNIST REVOLUTION HAPPENING IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!”