Checking Maduro's phone messages

UPDATED: Results of Sunday's Hong Kong, Chile elections

Q. When do the Chinese have their best elections? A. Just before bleakfast... 

Well, there's no election in "mainland China" today, but there is a sham election in the Chinese "Special Administrative Region" of Hong Kong. To prove that they have nothing to learn from American Democrats, the Chinese Communists (CPC), who control the central government as well as those of the SARs, are inviting patriotic citizens (only) to vote today in the first election since Beijing amended the laws to reduce the number of directly elected lawmakers and vet candidates to ensure that only those loyal to China can run.

Only 20 of the 90 seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo) are up for grabs. "Independent" candidates approved by the government are in tough against official CPC candidates. No matter who wins, the Communists will remain firmly in control. There will be no repeats of the pro-democracy protests and demonstrations that rocked Hong Kong in 2014 and 2019, but were crushed by security forces. 

A sweeping "national security law" was quickly imposed, effectively silencing most of the city's opposition activists and led others to flee abroad. Night has already fallen in Hong Kong, and officials are slowly counting the handful of votes that were cast. Said one voter, "Although there is a chance to vote for pro-establishment and democracy candidates, there are few democratic choices, so Hong Kong people do not feel enthusiastic when it comes to voting." 

Carrie Lam, head of the Hong Kong government, attributed the low voter turnout to general satisfaction about the way the city is being run under the progressive leadership of the Communist Party and the much beloved Chairman Xi Jinping. 

Voters in Hong Kong had a simple choice. They could vote Communist... or Else. Chilean voters, by contrast, are today offered a clear choice between Hard Right and Hard Left, in a runoff between two presidential candidates offering starkly contrasting visions for the future.

In the country’s most divisive elections since it returned to democracy in 1990, leftie Gabriel Boric, a tattooed former student protest leader, has pledged to empower women and indigenous people and  create "a fairer Chile". He will build back better, he says, by increasing spending, which will be paid for by raising taxes on the rich. Sound familiar?

His conservative opponent José Antonio Kast is pro-life and against "gay marriage". A staunch defender of former president Augusto Pinochet, Sr Kast has promised to dig ditches along the country's northern border to slow the invasion of illegal migrants. 

After years of "liberal democratic" rule, the sharp choice has resurfaced deep divisions in one of Latin America's most stable democracies. Although Sr Boric is not a card-carrying Commie, he is at the head of a coalition which includes Communists, and conservative Chileans are convinced that his "progressivism" would push Chile into a Venezuelan-style economic tailspin. 

Both candidates claim that it is their rival who instils fear among voters. Sr Kast frequently rails against the influence of the "gay lobby". At his final campaign rally on Thursday, he said, "This Sunday we are going to say 'no' to intolerant people! We will defeat fear… We will win by a wide margin because this is what I have been hearing the length of Chile!"

And now the results. May I have the envelopes please?

Sr Kast's prediction was wrong. The people of Chile, apparently having forgotten the Allende years, voted for the crypto-Commie, Gabriel Boric, 56% to 44%. Let's see if they suffer "buyer's remorse" quicker than the Americans who voted for Sleepy Joe.

[Did anyone vote for President Brandon? I haven't met anyone lately who admits to having done so. Ed.]

In Hong Kong, to the surprise of no-one, pro-Beijing (read: Communist) candidates romped to victory, virtually unopposed, as the city saw its lowest-ever voter turnout. It was the first LegCo election since China made sweeping and controversial changes to the city's electoral system. Officials argue the changes were needed to ensure stability, but critics say they weakened democracy. 

On Monday, Beijing also unveiled a statement outlining "democracy with Hong Kong characteristics". In a white paper released hours after election results were announced, China said Hong Kong was now entering a new stage of "restored order" as a result of the Beijing-introduced changes.

In the Excited States of America, the Democrats are set to propose an amendment to change the name of H.R.1/S.1, presently stalled in the Senate, from the "For the People Act" to the "Democracy with Democratic Characteristics Act". Stay tuned.

Chinese dictator sends congrats to Sleepy Joe

The South China Morning Post passes on a report from Xinhua, the official news agency of the People's Republic of China (read: Communist China) that Chinese President (read: dictator) Xi Jinping has sent a warm message to Old Joe Biden congratulating him on being elected President of the People's Republic of America.  

Agent 78 has taken me to task, in the past, for calling Mr Xi a "dictator", but the fact is that the  constitution of the PRC has been amended to allow Mr Xi to remain president for life, without having to bother with sham elections. [What does a "sham election" look like? Can you give an example? Ed.]

And Mr Xi has long enjoyed dictatorial powers, including the power to silence critics and suppress mockery. Over two years ago, the Commies banned Winnie the Pooh -- the book, the film, the merch, everything -- after mischievous "enemies of the state" started drawing comparisons between the beloved bear and the rotund President Xi. Like this.

I don't know what all the fuss was about. The American media posted caricatures of Still-President Trump all the time, and were allowed -- nay, encouraged! -- to do so. And I'm sure that freedom will extend to "President-elect" Biden as well. After all, Democratic America isn't a dictatorship... right? I'm sure a caricature of Sleepy Joe will appear in WaPo or the Times any day now. Stay tuned???

Winnie the Pooh film banned in China

Are you looking forward to taking the kiddos to see Christopher Robin, the new Disney film based on A.A. Milne's famous Winnie the Pooh books? Lots of Chinese were hoping to see it, but Agent 88 sends word that they're SOL, as the film has been banned in China.

No official reason has been given for the film's having been "denied release" (as a spokesthingy for The Mouse put it), Winnie the Pooh has become a symbol of resistance to the Communist Party that rules China after bloggers started to compare Chinese President Xi Jinping to the friendly but clumsy, slow-witted and tubby toy bear.

The new film tells the story of a now middle-aged Christopher Robin, whose mundane life takes a turn when he is unexpectedly reunited with Pooh, Tigger, Piglet and other animals from his childhood. Coming soon to a cinema near you. (Not you, Chen!)

Further reading: Winnie the Pooh has been mentioned before on WWW, just once. See "Fired on the first day of work", 7/4/14, one of Walt's most-read posts!

Chinese commies make dissident vanish in middle of radio interview

There's a cautionary tale from China this week. Voice of America Mandarin reports that a retired professor from Shandong University was in the middle of a telephone interview on their Issues & Opinions programme when police burst into his home and dragged him away, kicking and screaming. His last words were "I am entitled to express my opinion. This is my freedom of speech!"

Professor Sun Wenguang has been a thorn in the side of the Chinese Communist regime for years. He was a co-signer of Charter 08, a pro-democracy manifesto that got co-author and Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo sent to prison, where he died last year without seeing the light of day, let alone receiving his prize. Professor Sun appeared on Issues & Opinions to discuss what he calls the Chinese governments "throw-money diplomacy". He recently wrote an open letter to Chinese President Xi Jinping criticizing him for spending too much money on foreign loans and investments instead of improving the lives of Chinese citizens. The letter was widely interpreted as a critique of China's "Belt and Road" international infrastructure program, which is actually much more akin to colonial conquest using huge loans instead of armed forces.

The 84-year-old academic was talking about this issue on Wednesday night, using the WeChat app on his cellphone, when he heard the dreaded knock in the middle of the night. "Here they come again. The police are here to interrupt again," he told the stunned VOA audience, counting off the six police officers who barged into his home.

"What? What, did I say anything wrong?" Prof Sun asked the intruders. "Listen to what I say, is it wrong? People are poor. Let's not throw our money in Africa. The seven, eight of you here, listen up, throwing money like this is of no good to our country and society. It's of no good." The professor continued to talk for as long as he could. "What are you doing? What are you doing? Let me tell you, it's illegal for you to come to my home!" After that, there was only silence, as the cops switched off his phone and made him disappear.

VOA Mandarin has since attempted several times to reach Professor Sun by cellphone and WeChat, but have been unable to get any response. Their correspondent in Beijing called the Information Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China for comment, but the mobile phone open to the public was turned off, and the landline was not answered. The Public Security [sic] Department of Shandong University and the Shanda Road Police Station of the Jinan Public Security [sic] Bureau refused comment.

The story is an alarming one -- or should be -- for those of us who live in so-called liberal democracies, where freedom of speech and even freedom of thought are becoming progressively (pun intended) more attenuated day by day. Canadians of Chinese origins living in Markham ON already know this. Some Chinese-Canadians upset by the Liberal government's open border, let-em-all-in immigration policy organized a protest last Saturday. It was only reported in one of Toronto's four lamestream media outlets, and the video shot by Ming Pao Daily was ruthlessly suppressed for giving the lie to the narrative that Canadians welcome "refugees". The CBC went so far as to ban one WWW reader from commenting on its website, and warned him that providing a link to the video might be "hate crime".

Lesson: Don't think that the knock in the night experienced by Professor Sun could only happen in China or in Russia. Political correctness rules in the "liberal democracies". If you want to survive, follow these five rules:
1. Don't think.
2. If you think, don't speak.
3. If you think and speak, don't write.
4. If you think, speak and write, don't sign your name.
5. If you think, speak, write and sign your name... don't be surprised!

Hong Kong protesters: they're baaaack!

When we tuned in last week, Hong Kong's pro-Communist CEO, Leung Chun-ying (aka CY Leung) had refused to step down to appease the 1000s of students and others demonstrating for free and fair elections in the former British colony. The protesters then defied Mr. Leung's ultimatum to vacate the areas they were occupying. So, in order to get them to go home without losing too much face, Mr. Leung promised the student leaders a meeting with his flak-catcher, Carrie Lam, on Friday.

Most of the demonstrators -- credulous souls -- went home, leaving just a few hundred camped out on Gloucester and Harcourt Roads, blocking a key thoroughfare in Hong Kong Island's Central and Admiralty districts. But sure enough, on Thursday the duplicitous Leung called off the promised talks, saying the protesters' refusal to end their campaign had made "constructive dialogue" impossible.

He also said (again) that he would not resign. In an interview with Hong Kong broadcaster TVB, he said the protests had "spun out of control" and did not rule out the use of force to end them. When asked about the protest camps, Mr Leung said, "We've resorted to all kinds of persuasions... We absolutely would not prefer clearing the venue, but if one day the venue has to be cleared, I believe the police will use their professional judgement and training using minimum amount of force."

So the pro-democracy protesters -- saddened but not surprised -- are back in the streets, in even greater numbers than before, paralysing parts of Hong Kong. In an open letter to China's Supreme Leader, Xi Jingping, a coalition of three protest groups proclaimed, "We cannot allow one person, Leung Chun-ying, to destroy the Hong Kong core values we so cherish."

Hong Kong's Chief Executive CY Leung has insisted China will not change its mind on the format for elections in 2017, despite weeks of protests.

In the Basic Law under which Hong Kong was handed back to China in 1997, the Communists promised direct elections in 2017. But of course their idea of a free and fair election is one in which they choose which candidates are allowed to stand. Mr. Leung told TVB today that Beijing would not change its mind on the election format. "In achieving universal suffrage in 2017," he said, "if the prerequisite is to put down the Basic Law and the decision made by the National People's Congress Standing Committee, I believe we all know that the chance is almost zero."

The Basic Law (Hong Kong's mini-constitution) states that "the ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures". It was the NPC Standing Committee's decision on the make-up of that nominating committee that sparked the protest movement, since that format effectively gives ultimate control not to the people but to the Beijing regime.

Further reading on WWW: "Why Hong Kong's 'Umbrella Revolution' matters"

Comment from Ed.: Do you know when the Chinese have their best elections? Answer: just before bleakfast!

What's going on in China?

That's what Walt would like to know. I'm waiting for first- or even second-hand reports from Agents 78 and/or 88 to get behind the video clips on the TV news. Via satellite, I've been able to see clips aired on Hong Kong's TVB, showing large, angry demonstrations in the streets of Shenzhen, Beijing and Shanghai. One report says there was trouble in no fewer than 28 cities.

The ostensible target of the protests is Japan, which this past week purchased a couple of small islands to which China (and Taiwan) lay claim. The islands themselves are just dots of rock, but the sea around them is full of fish, and beneath the ocean floor there may be quantities of... you guessed it... oil.

So... 1000s of young people are protesting Japanese imperialism by throwing rocks at Japanese consulates, businesses... even Japanese cars. Walt [whose Putong'hua is severely limited. Ed.] was able to understand yells of "war" and "now". Is the Beijing government likely to declare war on Japan, or even send a force of marines to take back the rocks? About two platoons should do it, but trust me, it's not gonna happen. (Lifetime pct .090)

Why, then, would the Communist government allow these near-riots? And trust me again, if the government didn't want the demonstrations to take place, they wouldn't. Remember Tiananmen Square!

Walt's guess is that the "spontaneous" demonstrations, which seem to include large numbers of printed banners and pictures of Chairman Mao, are being permitted, perhaps even fomented, to deflect attention from the strange disappearance and reappearance of Xi Jinping, the heir apparent to Hu Jintao, the outgoing paramount leader of the People's Republic of China. Or maybe not.

Mr. Xi was widely expected to be acclaimed as General Secretary of the Communist Party of China late this year. In due course he would also become President and Chairman of the Central Military Commission. When you wear all three hats, you indeed Da Man. It's like winning the Triple Crown.

But a funny thing happened on Xi's way to the throne. Around September 2nd, the presumptive emperor dropped out of sight, and remained so for about ten days, missing at least three scheduled public appearances. To the extent that the social media operate in China, tweets and twitters of "Where is She?" [That's how you say "Xi". Ed.] flashed across the land and around the world. But there was no answer until, like Lazarus, Xi emerged on Thursday, with no explanation or apology given.

Was Mr. Xi really suffering from a bad back, as was rumoured, or does he have a more severe health problem? Or is it his political health that's in question? Has there been a power struggle within the Forbidden City? The Chinese government no longer operates out of the ancient abode of the imperial court, but the metaphor is still valid.

And what will happen next? Will Xi succeed in succeeding? Or will he quietly step aside "for health reasons" in favour of... who? Or Hu? What does it all mean? To stop all those questions and rumours, perhaps a little diversion was thought to be in order...

Just one problem with that. When you let a tiger out of his cage, it's hard to predict what he will do, and harder still to get him back in the cage. The demonstrations I saw on the idiot's lantern today seem grossly disproportionate to the degree of bother the average Chinese would feel about two tiny islets being taken over by the Japanese.

The marchers seemed to be pelting the police and soldiers -- and there were 1000s of them too, armed with teargas and water cannon -- with abandon equal to that with which they attacked the Japanese buildings. I had the sense of a lot of pent-up anger and frustration being released. And I wonder when and where it will stop.