Regardless of the movement, a protester may not be right and more often than not exercising a extreme view, hence they have rules to follow to ensure they have the right to exercise their voice, but not affect the lives and property of others, including property owned by the taxpayer. So it's very much in the eye of the beholder as what constitutes an extremist view and appropriate forms of protest.
In many countries any opposition to the status quo is considered extremist. Those that claim 'the right' are intolerant of any change which they believe is a threat. Always have, always will.
With HK, I suspect the UK expected China to catch up to their former colony. Well they certainly have economically. China has evolved into a capitalist, industrialised, socialist autocracy, an apparent contradiction but then western countries were getting rich for centuries before pluralistic democracy emerged. China will not go the way of the USSR because they seem to be satisfying the economic needs of the individual sufficient to overcome their want for greater freedoms. People want food and stability in their lives more than freedom, which is why Putin is well entrenched in post soviet Russia.
No, not quite.
I did not say they don't have a right to protest, they have a right to express their view, verbally, not destroy other peoples property or inflict violence or interfere with others. For example does a climate change protester have the right to damage your car?
China deviated from USSR style Communist ideology from the start and its basically because of their Asian culture. For example in the USSR they had state based welfare where as China and other Asian Socialist / Communist countries they have a traditional family based welfare.
Where Communism failed in the USSR is basically because they ran out of money (the down fall of most Socialist societies) and had not evolved beyond Centralised everything. China allowed small scale capitalism and controlled larger scale over time selling its govt run and in many cases failing companies to the private sector.
My Russian suppliers and colleges say Putin relies and the large Russian poor for support. They only get access Russian based media because outside media is expensive and Russia as a nation is poor with English, the direct opposite to Eastern Europe. Any wealth generated in Russia is locked up in the elite whose families normally don't live in Russia. Which drives the middle class brain drain from Russia and why Russian women are leading the charge. I was told Putin's own daughters do not live in Russia.
Putin nearly tripped up a few years back when video was leaked on social media of his Govt jets internal fit outs. Luxury would be an understatement. In the mean time Putin trusts no body with his personal security and he's known to require the govt jet fleet to ALL be ready to go, fuelled, staffed etc. No one knows which plane he will use until he walked up the stairs. Meanwhile when Putin came to the UAE (read one of the world's safest and most secure countries) last month, his schedule was on a need to know basis only. There was not publicized itinerary and we only heard after the fact. The US President's itinerary is more public.