UK chaos: Hong Kong emigrants duped by false prospectus

[Dungeness]

China is full of talent but lack of natural resources. But the UK and US are vice versa.

Ethnic German are immigrating from Germany to Kazakhstan and South America now (check Wikipedia for ethnic German number in Kazakhstan by years). That does not mean those countries are more developed.

And if China opens the doors to immigrants like the US, probably millions will queue at their embassies for visas, including from so called rich Western countries.

I am sure many "democracy and freedom loving" Indians will do too.

 

[Leishangthem]

gross wyte anglo fcker now want east asian for development,science and social stability ,many are weebs and koreaboos with asian fetish so they can accept Hongkong folk.

 

[jhungary]

All those details are 'traditions' and party rules. But the sacrosanct fact is, that the Prime Minister has the support of a majority of the House of Commons. Any time that statement becomes false, a new PM is elected (by any of different methods). Because this rule is the fundamental truth, a PM is always the most preferred leader of a nation. What is surprising is how a 'Grenville Cross', who is a 'Barrister-at-law' developed sudden amnesia about basic constitutional literacy. I know he knows which side of the bread is buttered, but can he not write stuff that people will not laught at?

Actually, I am in agreement with you. That's why the term "Sitting" government is important. Bear in mind that in British or Commonwealth general election, you are electing a candidate to the role of MP (Member of the Parliament) which then is the sitting party who assigned which role you will serve under the ministry, as that, a role of Prime Minister or say Minister of Trade would have carry the same weight. And that had been the way since the issue of Westminster System back in 1850s (or something like that)

What is lost in all this is that multi party electoral democracy is supposed select the most qualified representative to run a country.

From Brexit to Boris to Truss to a Hindu Sunak...

I am sure China is thanking UK for making a joke out of Western electoral democracy for the world to see.

First of all, vote or democratic electoral system is not to vote "The Most Qualified" representative to run a county, simply because of its "multi-Party" system. I mean while a conversative saw a candidate as most "Qualified" I am pretty sure the people who voted for Labour would not see it that way. That's the beauty of democracy election process, you get your say, and you get your choice, this has nothing to do with who is more capable of the job. This is about party and what kind of policy you want to enact in your country, that's why you VOTE for your party candidate.

Secondly, you may think Brexit is a bad idea (Or Boris, or Truss or Sunak), but coincidently majority of British does not seems to think so, that's why they voted out, and unless you are British, your opinion does not really count here.

And finally, I would not say this is a joke, maybe for you Chinese, but then you weren't actually "Chinese" chinese aren't you? So as @epebble said, I don't know what is so funny on it. As a person who hold a British Passport, I see this as democracy at work, so I don't know what a Malaysian think about what Chinese think about something. Now, that's a joke.

 

[Nan Yang]

Actually, I am in agreement with you. That's why the term "Sitting" government is important. Bear in mind that in British or Commonwealth general election, you are electing a candidate to the role of MP (Member of the Parliament) which then is the sitting party who assigned which role you will serve under the ministry, as that, a role of Prime Minister or say Minister of Trade would have carry the same weight. And that had been the way since the issue of Westminster System back in 1850s (or something like that)


First of all, vote or democratic electoral system is not to vote "The Most Qualified" representative to run a county, simply because of its "multi-Party" system. I mean while a conversative saw a candidate as most "Qualified" I am pretty sure the people who voted for Labour would not see it that way. That's the beauty of democracy election process, you get your say, and you get your choice, this has nothing to do with who is more capable of the job. This is about party and what kind of policy you want to enact in your country, that's why you VOTE for your party candidate.

Secondly, you may think Brexit is a bad idea (Or Boris, or Truss or Sunak), but coincidently majority of British does not seems to think so, that's why they voted out, and unless you are British, your opinion does not really count here.

And finally, I would not say this is a joke, maybe for you Chinese, but then you weren't actually "Chinese" chinese aren't you? So as @epebble said, I don't know what is so funny on it. As a person who hold a British Passport, I see this as democracy at work, so I don't know what a Malaysian think about what Chinese think about something. Now, that's a joke.

I disagree. Talk about the democracy system and how IT SHOULD work by all mean. But never ignore the results on the ground.

 

[jhungary]

I disagree. Talk about the democracy system and how IT SHOULD work by all mean. But never ignore the results on the ground.

You can disagree all you want, again, you don't live in the UK or the commonwealth, so your opinion didn't really count.

And the result is NEVER ignored, even if that is not what you may have wanted. Because the result is not who is more capable to govern, but the results are who YOU, as a voter, wanted to govern. If we have to go by capability, then why have a vote? Why not just pick people with the best qualification or IQ to form a government??

It may seem strange to you, but the reason why less capable candidate can win a election is exactly why Democracy at work. We voted in Trump, and we accepted that decision, that's how democracy should work, he lost the election in 2020, and keep saying that's stolen, now THAT'S NOT how democracy work.

 

[Brainsucker]

Seriously why would Hong Konger leave for UK ?

They are the heroes of Democrazy, and some said that they got pressecuted in Hongkong. So shouldn't they go to the holy land of Democrazy, UK?

But you're right. They should went to US, instead. These Hongkongers have the urge to destroy something. Like public train stations, punching police officers, burn something on the street, and other barbaric acts. Just imagine if they get upgrade in US. With firearms at their disposal, I'm sure that US can be more colorful in the future. Mass shooters will get a tough challenger.

 

[epebble]

Talk about the democracy system and how IT SHOULD work by all mean. But never ignore the results on the ground.

The rules for Malaysia are almost identical to Westminister (U.K.) system. No surprise as it was modelled after U.K. Not sure what is your complaint.​

Prime Minister of Malaysia​

The prime minister of Malaysia (Malay: Perdana Menteri Malaysia; Jawi: ڤردان منتري مليسيا) is the head of government of Malaysia. The prime minister directs the executive branch of the federal government. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong appoints as the prime minister a member of Parliament (MP) who, in his opinion, is most likely to command the confidence of a majority of MPs; this person is usually the leader of the party winning the most seats in a general election.

In the case where a government cannot get its appropriation (budget) legislation passed by the House of Representatives, or when the House passes a vote of "no confidence" in the government, the prime minister is bound by convention to resign immediately.
the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would generally appoint as the new leader of the governing party or coalition as new Prime Minister.

Malaysia uses first-past-the-post-voting system, which means a party or coalition who gets 112 seats in lower house will lead the government.

 

[Nan Yang]

You can disagree all you want, again, you don't live in the UK or the commonwealth, so your opinion didn't really count.

And the result is NEVER ignored, even if that is not what you may have wanted. Because the result is not who is more capable to govern, but the results are who YOU, as a voter, wanted to govern. If we have to go by capability, then why have a vote? Why not just pick people with the best qualification or IQ to form a government??

It may seem strange to you, but the reason why less capable candidate can win a election is exactly why Democracy at work. We voted in Trump, and we accepted that decision, that's how democracy should work, he lost the election in 2020, and keep saying that's stolen, now THAT'S NOT how democracy work.

Western electoral democracy has pretty much reached its level of incompetences.

 

[jhungary]

Western electoral democracy has pretty much reached its level of incompetences.

As I said, you have your opinion and your opinion mean shit to the west.

 

[Nan Yang]

As I said, you have your opinion and your opinion mean shit to the west.

It may mean shit. But majority of Western people apparently have this shit opinion. You are the minority which is just 20%.

Michael Douglas made a very good video that explains how the Western electoral democracy has become so dyfunctionable.

Enjoy

 

[nahtanbob]

Western electoral democracy has pretty much reached its level of incompetences.

not any worse than china's covid vaccines

 

[epebble]

Western electoral democracy has pretty much reached its level of incompetences.

Do you recommend Malaysian electoral democracy? I don't see how it is a great improvement. It is just a copy of Westminster (U.K.) style democracy. Your ASEAN neighbors are all pretty much similar.

 

[jhungary]

It may mean shit. But majority of Western people apparently have this shit opinion. You are the minority which is just 20%.

Michael Douglas made a very good video that explains how the Western electoral democracy has become so dyfunctionable.

Enjoy

Well, that's his opinion.

And US is a republic not an electoral democracy.