Cracking down on threats to "National Security"

Before COVID-19 took over the world, much of the world's attention was focused upon the massive and unprecedented protests in Hong Kong. Ostensibly, it was framed in the Western media primarily as a courageous last stand against the CCP's dictatorship, which was transforming Hong Kong from a free society (admittedly, one that was never in fact truly democratic - certainly not under British colonialization) into another "oppressed Province of China".

Though there was anti-Chinese (often framed as "anti-CCP", though I'm not sure that every such critic makes such a distinction) sentiment even before COVID-19, the pandemic ramped it up to the next level. I'm starting to get the impression that people feel no reasonable person could support the actions of the CCP. And because the Chinese people haven't risen up against such an "obviously evil Party/modern-day Nazis", the only possible explanations are: (1) the people of China are being oppressed by the CCP through a combination of brainwashing, "social credit scores", nationalism, and other factors; or (2) Chinese people are authoritarians that approve of the CCP's behavior, because culturally speaking, they're used to Emperors and dictators and prefer life that way.

Neither of these interpretations are particularly flattering to either the spirit of intelligence of the Chinese people, of course. And while I think that these two factors do exist among the population (pretty much every possible viewpoint will exist in a population of 1.4 billion people), I'd argue that at the end of the day, it really isn't particularly difficult to understand why the majority of the Chinese population either approved of the violent crackdowns in Hong Kong - or at the very least, didn't feel it was worth protesting against.

 On January 6th, 2021, supporters of former President Trump stormed the Capitol building in Washington D.C., under the belief that the presidential election in November was fraudulent, and that Trump was in fact still the rightful President of the United States. To our understanding, it seems their goal was to compel (through force if necessary) representatives of Congress to overturn the election results, and install Trump as President, rather than Biden.

While it can be argued that this insurrection ("protesters", if you wish to use a more charitable interpretation) was handled with minimum force - which brings into question why authorities are unwilling or unable to use the same discretion when dealing with protests such as Black Lives Matter, but I digress -it was, at the end of the day, a concrete demonstration of the State's willingness and ability to forcefully evict (and later prosecute) those that might threaten the power and legitimacy of the government.

And generally speaking, a majority of the American population agreed with this action, viewing the insurrection as an attempt to subvert the concept of democracy in of itself, and many feel that the FBI and other authorities should have opened fire on the insurrection much more readily, just as they plausibly would have if it had been a bunch of dark-skinned Black Lives Matter protesters doing the same thing.

Now, my point isn't that the Hong Kong protests and the January 6th insurrection are equivalent. That much can be seen from the difference in my choice of words describing the two situations. However, the attitude of the population towards the respective two situations is similar in both China and America, which may help those of us in "The West" to understand Hong Kong.

To put it simply - justified or not, a democratic Hong Kong that does not bend to the authority of the CCP is perceived by (many) Chinese people to be a significant threat to the legitimacy and stability of China's political system, just as it would be terribly damaging to America as we know it if people were allowed to just go and overturn elections with force when it doesn't go their way. We can argue until our faces are blue that the two situations aren't the same! One is a "pro-democratic protest for freedom", while the other is a "affront to the sanctity of democracy". But the point is, the respective issue is perceived the same way by citizens of that country. In this framework, is it any wonder that your average Chinese citizen is perfectly comfortable with heavy-handed crackdowns in Hong Kong (and other regions), and might even cheer it on?

I'm not saying this to justify the CCP's behavior, by any definition. But by putting yourselves in the shoes of a PRC citizen, I think it's easier to see why people aren't exactly eager to overthrow a seemingly tyrannical totalitarian political party and engage in another revolution. It's not because Chinese people are genetically predisposed to liking authoritarian strongmen, or that they're all brainwashed and incapable of independent thought. It's that at the end of the day, when you believe that something is a threat to something you deem important, you're willing to use fairly extraordinary measures against it. That's pretty human, and key to understanding and communicating with one another effectively, rather than simplified rhetoric intended to incense and divide.