"Careless" Carrie Lam's effectiveness in Hong Kong is in the red. After banning masks at public gatherings, more people are wearing masks at gatherings than in the past. She bans an assembly, but people assemble anyway. Protests are so bad, police hit some people guarding a mosque with a water cannon and had to apologize to the imam. Lam was heckled by legislators during her annual policy speech and had to leave the chamber twice, finally delivering her speech on television. A government so defied and can't govern. But, the need for public trust isn't understood by Confucianism nor Communism nor especially Confucian Communism.
Beyond loss of control, the West gets the message loud and clear: China won't back down on its forced expansionism. US Congress continues to pass laws favoring freedom in both Hong Kong and Taiwan. The TAIPEI act is largely symbolic, but still meaningful inasmuch as it gauges China's response. Evaluating Hong Kong's level of autonomy to be treated as a separate territory from China makes sense. Still, China considers the US formulating its own international policy a form of "interference". Think about that...
US international policy must be what China wants it to be, otherwise China labels this as "interference". This can only mean that China considers the US already under Chinese rule. It's no longer about whether or to what extent China can boss Hong Kong and Taiwan. Now, the question is whether China should be allowed to dictate another country's foreign policy.
Another factor is corporate. Gaming companies oust gamers who make "political" statements to defend freedom and human rights, but then Dior gets political by apologizing to China for not putting Taiwan in its map of China. If companies were consistent about being so-called "non-political", then Dior would have refused to agree or disagree with China. But, this isn't about being non-political; it's about agreeing with whatever China demands.