[MsMowz]

I understand your point, but what I was asking for is a non-ideological distinction. Every point you have made is from the ideological position that supports liberal democracy, but those who support people’s democracy would levy the same accusations in reverse. I’m not interested in hearing either of those points of view, because there simply cannot be a productive discussion on those terms.

I would like to understand the empirical situation. You suggest that I’m equating the two, but I’m actually just ignorant on the _substantive_ arguments. If you would be kind enough to enlighten me on that front, I would truly appreciate it.

[delta-v21]

In DC, people tried to overturn the US Congress, which's elected by and representing the American people.

Where in HK, people protested against the HK government which is appointed by the CCP, and the HK legislature where half of the seats are appointed by the CCP and the rest is elected with vetting by the CCP. The HK gov (both exec. + leg. branches) don't represent the HK people, they represent the CCP.

That's the non-ideological distinction. US Congress is authorized by the people. But the HK gov (both exec. + leg. branches) are authorized by the CCP. And unlike US, people in HK have no peaceful way to influence the politics in HK by voting.

[openasocket]

You can't just ignore the ideological elements of this, because they are at the heart of why people feel differently about these events. If I attack someone because I want to rob them, I'm the bad guy. If I attack someone because they are about to hurt some children, I'm the good guy. The only difference here is the intent of both parties, and you can't simply brush that aside because it isn't "empirical".