There is one minor but important correction that this isn’t China’s decision to use a nomination committee. This is defined within the basic law.
I think one detail that hasn’t been been emphasized enough in this entire debate is that no one has ever given an actual figure on what percentage of the nomination committee a potential candidate needs to receive before he can become a candidate. If that number is something like 50%, then we could argue there is some intentional political oppression. But if that number is only 10%, then it might as well be a public nomination. There is no real difference. No actual figure has been determined yet. All of this is still on the negotiation table. But what I don’t really like in all of the media coverage is that in painting this protestors as pro-capital-D-DEMOCRACY, western media seems to forget that for the most part, most western civilizations operate on indirect nomination as well. UK and US rely on party systems. If a nomination committee is barbaric, then many western civilizations would be barbaric as well.