the writer speaks too negatively about the government of Hong Kong for me to be entirely trusting of the content. Maybe Hong Kong is desperately in need of new direction, but we'll never know for sure.
They wrote thousands of words but did not even mention China’s genocide against the Uighur people. How neutral can they really be?
Edit: A nice little tidbit also is that I’ve written comments on all sorts of contentious topics. But only when bringing up this specific factually based truth my comments tend to be downvoted within minutes. I wonder why.
Unless I missed some part here, you’re probably referring to this part of one sentence as the only mention, correct? If so, I find this not very credible when we look at the length of the post alone. But yes, technically you’d be right and I should have phrased my comment better.
> That’s due to the operation of detention camps for ethno-religious minorities
Calling it a genocide reminds me when some people compare the modern day American football to slavery: such inaccurate and click-baity name calling makes anyone who is sympathetic towards China an accomplice on the order of Nazis, and gives the Chinese government an easy target to refuse. I get that it raises eye-brows and generates attention, but ultimately it detracts from any effort to stop such brutality. It seems lazy.
