Even people who are pro-CCP care as the protest affects them.

The head of the HK government and half of the legislators are also appointed by the CCP.

> To keep this in context, the current Hong Kong SAR government is democratically elected[6] according to the provisions of an international treaty signed by the PRC and the UK which took effect in 1997

No, this's misinformation. The HK government isn't democratically elected. The CEO of the HK government is selected by a committee appointed by the CCP. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Committee_(Hong_Kong)

Quote: The Election Committee is a Hong Kong electoral college, the function of which is to select the Chief Executive (CE).

Many countries, including the US and UK, have indirect elections for high offices. Are they also non-democratic?

Personally, my answer to that question is yes, but I’m willing to apply principles equally. Again, this is beside the point of what I was asking, as I’m not trying to get into an ideological debate.

Indirect elections imply that the members who could vote are elected by the people. In HK, the people who could "vote" are appointed by the CCP. This isn't indirect election. This's indirect appointment.

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.