Hong Kong’s Democratic Movement – A Unique Protest Culture that Guarantees Success Never

Hong Kong’s Democratic Movement – A Unique Protest Culture that Guarantees Success Never

Source: Guardian

When one thinks of protest, one can picture that the people are unsatisfied by the government and have decided to take action over certain matters, to show the government (whether or not elected democratically by the people) that what it is doing is against the will of the people. Ultimately, the function of a protest is to make the government listen to the people, with the implicit threat that otherwise the people will make sure their demands are met – even if that means overthrowing the government.

We have seen thousands and thousands of protests in the world, and many end in bloodshed. It is no doubt sad but one has to pay a price for what one wants, and on the road to democracy and to freedom, prices often are high. Yes, blood will be shed, and yes those in power, democratically elected or not, will most certainly use propaganda to label the protests as “violent” or “irrational”. However, when a government goes against the peoples will’, or worse, betrays its people, the rational response is to behave “irrationally” – it is only human nature. After all, not all violence is visible and will directly cause death: bloodless violence does not mean that no harm is done. This type of violence carried out by a regime, or by people in power, will almost certainly trigger violence led by angry people – the people who no longer trust the government and doubt the credibility of those in power.

People protest with the aim of changing what is wrong in society. People want to make sure the changes happen. For better or worse, changes will bring new ideas to the regime, or even a new government that will listen to the people and respect their will. Demonstrations reinforce to those in power the fact that it is the people who give the government the privilege to serve, reminding the world of the foundations of democracy: A government is accountable to its people.

We have seen how Ukrainians rejected their government earlier this year. Of course we have all seen the videos of musicians playing music in front of fully-armed police troopers. Of course we have all watched the videos of Ukrainians explaining to the world what they are trying to achieve. All of these seemed peaceful and rational. However, when their voices were not heard, they marched on. They threw rocks at the police, who are supposed to be the servants of the people and protect the people, but instead were obeying a regime that ordered them to kill civilians. The police used their truncheons on the people, and snipers shot to kill.

The word “riot” is always used by governments seeking to bolster their own legitimacy in the face of a people who have decided that they will no longer accept their lies and betrayals! Words are amazing things: they control how the public see a certain issue, they plant ideas in our minds without us knowing, they are the best invention for those in power to continue brutality, and they are the killing machines which those who are high up deploy to manipulate the world’s point of view in the international arena.

In Hong Kong, the situation is completely different. Not that Hongkongers do not wish to have democracy, not that the government is less tyrannical than others, not that there are not protests. The key difference is the existence of “professional protesters”. These are those who take pains to appear to be helping Hongkongers on different issues: may it be broad topics like referendum and democracy, or local-scale issues like the construction of incinerators or the expansion of land-fills in certain areas. However, their goal is to take control (or hijack) the issue by representing the people. These people are high profile and are shape themselves as the frontline fighters in Hong Kong.

They violate the natural rules of protest. They promote peaceful, rational, non-(physically) violent and non-verbally-violent protests, but all these strictures apply only to protesters: That is to say that when the police use violence against protesters, they would tell protesters to remain non-violent and accept their fate – to be brutalised.

How do they do that? Let’s sum it up in a ten step routine they apply to EVERY PROTEST:

  1. An issue is brought up, and a small concern group is formed by the individuals being affected directly by the issue (e.g. Northeast New Territories Development Plan which will affect some villagers more directly than others, but it is important to acknowledge that the Plan will dissolve Hong Kong’s border which will lead to a catastrophic butterfly effect – so the issue is broader than it is being portrayed to the public)
  2. “Professional protesters” get involved and present themselves to be the approachable “protest experts” to the concern group
  3. When the “protest” comes around, the “professional protesters” will allow the concern group/the subject of the matter to speak on stage to attract more people and media, generating public support. These “protesters” will wait for the perfect moment, very patiently, sometimes days for days (e.g. the anti brainwashing-national-education-curriculum protest)
  4. When the moment comes, the “professional protesters” will take to the stage and hijack the protest
  5. The “professional protesters” will make a moving statement praising the concern group/affected individuals for their courage and determination to take the matter on, making everyone’s blood boil and bringing the atmosphere to a climax
  6. The “professional protesters” will then call for a photo opportunity for the media to take pictures to commemorate the event – a trophy for them, as their image as frontline fighters is reinforced once again
  7. They then will give the stage back to the concern group, and begin negotiating with them what the next step should be, behind the scenes. The group and the supporters will be left there to carry on chanting, shouting slogans, or worse, singing songs. They will talk the concern group down and the typical reasons they give to call it a day are, “we have achieved a great deal” (the ultimate goal is far from being achieved!), “you guys are really tired”, “the government and the public have heard our voice”, “let’s be strategic and focus our energy on our next move”, “the public is clearly on our side, look at the turnout!”
  8. The tired concern groups are talked down and their passion is weakened. Because of the “credibility” these “professional protesters” enjoy, the concern group believes in the key advice given by these “protest experts” – it is a long term game
  9. When they persuade the concern group successfully, the “professional protesters” retake the stage and announce on behalf of the concern group that, “we have made our voice heard today/tonight! We could not have done all this without you and the support of the people of Hong Kong, right? (every one shouts YEAH!)” and then, “let’s give ourselves a round of applause!”
  10. The “professional protesters” will then talk their way out and conclude the protest. The protest ends peacefully without challenging the regime, the government, the people in power – in fact the protest is concluded without achieving any of the goals originally set, let alone any demands being fulfilled.

Protests in Hong Kong end peacefully, every time, but no one ever asks why even though 99% of these protests preserve the status quo. No one follows up, and the “professional protesters” carry on looking for other topics and issues to dominate in order to build their reputations as the “face of democracy, and the power of the people” despite the fact that they have done, almost always, more harm than good.

Truth be told, people’s movements require no leader. Unfortunately, Hongkongers do not seem to be able to function without a leader in any circumstances – that is exactly why many Hongkongers began to use the term “Kong-sheep” to describe ourselves: desperate to follow.

In some recent occasions, anonymous protesters have volunteered to participate in protests even though the subject matter does not directly affect them. These protesters do not buy into the routine “professional protesters” practice throughout all these years, but believe that when the government is dysfunctional and can no longer be trusted, the people should overthrow it.

Source: Daily Telegraph

To Hong Kong’s eternal grief, these volunteers are always abandoned on-site without fail. The “professional protesters” will always stop them by taking the moral high grond: “this is not what the concern group wants! They want a peaceful and rational protest!” “Violence is bad in any circumstances (no matter what the government has done and what bloodless violence the regime has engaged in)!” All these may sound perfect at the point when a true peoples’ movement begins, but to a dictatorship or a government that is not accountable to its people, it is more than music to their ears!

Without disrupting the system by disobeying those in power, the people have zero chance to achieve what they demand – something these volunteering protesters understand. They are bold, but at the same time, they understand how corrupt the authorities and uniformed forces are. That is why they want to protect themselves with masks or cover – what we see as “black bloc” in many protests. However, the “professional protesters” will jump out to condemn these individuals as spies planted by the authorities and convince the “subjects of the protest (concern group)” to believe their story.

The individuals volunteering as protesters risk their personal safety for what they believe in, and for the concern group’s interests. However, they are being dismissed and often betrayed by the “professional protesters”.

Often times, lawmakers, who come across as being pro-democracy (a stand which once taken seems to lend a teflon quality to all adopters), are the first to condemn these “irrational acts” and even side with the authority to “prevent” any “violence” from happening again by endorsing the reinforcement of security around these events. Some even criticise protesters for wearing masks (surgical or otherwise Guy Fawkes masks) and demand that them surrender themselves to the police. If you read the news, you will find out who these people are.

Source: The Telegraph

Traitors of the people often come in disguise. Only when we realise who those traitors are can we break free from the burdens that have been laid on us all over the past decades, and really take control of the society that we want to make better.

If we continue to believe that the representatives in the legislative council will be able to resolve our problems, and lower our guard, we will be sold out. Because many of them, politicians or “experts”, are no different from the corrupt. Perhaps with the exception of the care with which they have painted their masks to gain the seats that you and I pay for.

Advertisements

Kowloon City – the Next Tsim Sha Tsui/Causeway Bay?

Financial Secretary, John Tsang said in his blog post (is that the only way the HKSAR government know how to communicate with the people?) that the new Kai Tak Cruise Terminal (a white elephant BIG time!) will bring about a lot of tourists and business to the surrounding area and the eateries in Kowloon City are very important in terms of attracting more tourists!

He said that Kowloon City should turn itself into a “Town of Delicacy” and should learn from Lan Kwai Fong’s success in promoting it as an attraction of Hong Kong.

The restaurants in Kowloon City are a great mix! You can enjoy Islam food, Thai cuisines, Hunan spicy meal, or anything you can think of, and end your feast with a uniquely Hong Kong desert – Chilled Mango Sago Cream with Pomelo, or if you dare durian pancake!

BUT what does John Tsang really mean? Did he mean knocking down all the old buildings (great for photos!) which were limited in height as our old airport was right in the middle of Kowloon City? Did he mean turning all these independent local eateries into chain restaurants where by characters will be completely lost and leave our Kowloon City with vibrant colour a soulless town just like Mong Kok, Tsim Sha Tsui and Causeway Bay where by you can find no restaurant but those chains that are not only soulless but charge you obscene amount of money with a tinny portion that barely fills a 5-year-old’s stomach?

I always love going to local independent eateries. The fun part is ordering your food! Watch the waiter scribbling down the names of the dishes in the most unusual calligraphic style (or shorthand) on a piece of paper which will be sent to the kitchen is just so very charming in its own way! In a chain? You order something, the waiter write down a bunch of meaningless numbers on the order form (or ask you to tick the boxes on the order form, as most chains do) and punch your order into the computer, and a soulless piece of paper gets ejected out from the machine…

You just can’t beat the human touch of these little shops and restaurants!

Another thing is, once chain restaurants started to open in Kowloon City, you are guaranteed to see chain cosmetic shops, chemists, chain jewelry shops, luxurious accessories shops crowding over. Little independent shops and restaurants will be forced out as these chains and international brands can pay rent that no one can afford. There is no doubt that in five years time Kowloon City will be just another Mong Kok, Tsim Sha Tsui and Causeway Bay. New statistic shows that there are MORE jewelry shop than convenient stores in Causeway Bay! That’s single-industry economy for you!

The HKSAR Government is working tirelessly to kill off all the non-China-focused services and businesses. Walk down the street in those tourists areas, nothing is meant for the people of Hong Kong nor any tourists in the world but Chinese “tourists”! At the moment, tourism contributes no more than 4% to our GDP, but by converting each and every inch of Hong Kong into “China Focused Service Zones”, Hong Kong will truly become complete and utterly reliant on China, especially the tourists from China. Then what’s going to happen? The so call “truth” nowadays (i.e. “If it wasn’t for China [to look after Hong Kong], Hong Kong would have been long dead”), will really be the truth!

The HKSAR government does not service the people of Hong Kong, they are appointed by China to serve China and the people of China. All policies favour and are meant to please China! You and I are no different in this particular context: we are the minority and are being discriminated by the HKSAR government – as long as you are not Chinese you are on the same boat with the Hong Kongers with yellow faces – Yup, by Chinese I mean those who’re from China (they never think that Hong Kongres are Chinese anyway, unless Chinese need Hong Kong for example when there’s a flood or earthquake).

Third line: Write your posts in Tibetan! Idiot!
Fourth line: Why use Chinese (language)? Speaking Chinese (language) and writing Chinese (language), (to) crticise China, you are a stupid XXXX!

Source: Free Tibet

BTW, please respect us Hong Kongers. Just like we won’t look at an American or Aussie and say “you were English too!”: Please Stop pointing at Hong Kongers and call them Chinese, it is an insult!

Over and Out!

China’s Brutalises HK with the Tricks It Used in Tibet

You don’t believe that China is colonising Hong Kong? Take a look at the HK SAR Gov OFFICIAL STATISTICS:

  1. As of end of 2012, Hong Kong’s total population is 7.17 million
  2. According to Hong Kong SAR Government, between 1st July 1997 and 31st December 2012, total new immigrants from China (one-way permits) amounted to: 760,000
  3. Since 2003, HKSAR Government started to attract new immigrants via investments scheme. As of 31st March 2013, total number of immigration applicants via the investment scheme was 28,168 and 17,749 of them have been approved – the majority of them are from China
  4. The HKSAR Government launched the “Quality Migrant Admission Scheme” in 2006, and loosen the restriction on China students studying in Hong Kong. According to the Census and Statistics Department, as of end of 2012 the number of Chinese that entered Hong Kong but have not lived in Hong Kong for seven years (i.e. non permanent residents) via the “Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals” and “Immigration Arrangements for Non-local Graduates” reached over 70,000 – and the number continues to raise

  5. According to the HKSAR Government’s press release issued on 20th February 2013, the Hospital Authority estimated that there are 150,000 anchor babies who were born in Hong Kong by their Chinese mothers (non Hong Kong residents) but living in various provinces including Guangdong. Over 17,000 students travel across the broader from China to study in Hong Kong every day. These numbers are growing on a monthly basis

  6. Over ONE MILLION of new immigrants from China are now living in Hong Kong and call themselves “new Hong Kongers” in a matter of 15, 16 years. Given that the local’s birth rate is low, the number of “new Hong Kongers” will quickly catch up with the number of “Hong Kongers”

Hong Kong SAR Government is not serving the people of Hong Kong/Hong Kongers – it is an organisation backed and handpicked by CCP. Their priority is to please China and their sole purpose is to assist China on executing all the plans they have. China wants to get rid of Hong Kongers, no doubt about it – why would a dictator, a tyranny want to have people that do not like itself and do not obey?

From V for Vendetta:

He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent.

Over and Out!

Chinese and China – Experts in Moving the Goal Posts

Here’s an article in today’s Bloomberg News:

China Rejects Open Nomination for Election of Hong Kong Leader

The Hong Kong public can’t nominate candidates for the next chief executive election under the city’s de facto constitution, China’s top official in the former British colony said, rejecting a lawmaker’s proposal.

The city’s Basic Law states that candidates for the chief executive position have to be nominated by a “broadly representative” committee, Zhang Xiaoming, director of China’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong, said in an open letter to Alan Leong, the head of the Civic Party.

 

Flags of China & Hong Kong

A Chinese national flag, left, and a Hong Kong SAR flag fly outside the Legislative Council Complex in Hong Kong. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

Zhang’s comments are the clearest China has made in rejecting demands from Hong Kong opposition lawmakers to allow for democracy in line with international standards in 2017, when it has pledged to allow election of the city’s leader. Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying, who was picked by a committee of billionaires, professionals and lawmakers, is facing rising calls to start consultation on arranging the vote.

“The proper way forward is to follow the Basic Law and the National People’s Congress Standing Committee’s procedures, rather than straying from the law and going the wrong way,” Zhang said in the statement published on the office’s website, as he rejected Leong’s invitation to discuss the proposal at a seminar.

Leung said in an interview in June he wants to deliver on the electoral reforms, though increased democracy may lead to China’s refusal to appoint a leader elected by the city’s people. Allowing for a full exercise in democracy in Hong Kong will also contrast with the political system in China, which has been ruled by the Communist Party since 1949.

Pro-democracy groups in Hong Kong have suggested options including opening the nomination to candidates who receive support from at least 2 percent of registered voters.

China’s “One Country, Two Systems” policy granted Hong Kong its own legal system under the Basic Law for 50 years from 1997. The city allows residents civil liberties including a free press and freedom of assembly not permitted in the mainland.

Basically what China’s said was “Anything that is not stated in the Basic Law is not allowed” – Hang on a minute, Basic Law is a constitution for Hong Kong but it was NOT drafted by the people of Hong Kong and we as Hong Kongers have NO right to interpret or amend it but China has. Mind you, Chinese are the experts in moving the goal posts, so no matter what you do or say, they’ll find a way to “win the argument”.

Now, the Basic Law didn’t say anything about people of Hong Kong are allowed to breath, eat, drink, etc. We’re all breaching the law! Hurrah!

What a whole load of rubbish. By the time they’ve completed their colonisation scheme (with substantial amount of new immigrants in HK who are all CCP members/brainwashed to trust nobody but the party), of course China will have no problem about “giving” Hong Kong democracy and universal suffrage, they’ve got a lot of Chinese voting the way China wants it!

Democracy is never given, it’s something that people fight for.

BTW, if one day, Article 23 is passed, this blog will be gone and so would I…

Over and out!

Not Only HKers Want Independency!

Just bumped into this, haven’t got a chance to read through all the stuff, but seems interesting:

http://namyuekok.freeforums.org/

This is really a bookmark for myself, but people who like my blog would be interested in hearing this too (I suppose)…

Over and out!

Democracy in Hong Kong? Leungs Pratically Says “NEVER!”

People want democracy in Hong Kong? Simple answer is: as long as China continues to have sovereignty over Hong Kong, that’s impossible.

During an interview with Bloomberg, CY Leung basically admitted that China controls the way what “democratic election” is about:

Increased democracy in Hong Kong may lead to China’s refusal to appoint a leader elected by the city’s people

One Country Two System? A complete utter LIE from day one!

Put it quite simply: how could a communist dictatorship govern a city-state that’s semi-democratic (part of the legislature is elected by the people) and practices capitalism? Hong Kong courts practice Common Law, and all are innocent until proven guilty, and China is completely the opposite (guilty until proven innocent); education system: completely different; lifestyle: completely different; culture: share some similarities but not quite; etc.

Why did the Brits agreed to hand Hong Kong over to China is still a mystery. China never owned Hong Kong to start with! It was the Qing (translation from Chinese: Great Qing Country) who owned Hong Kong (HK Island and Kowloon Peninsular), which was ceded to England perceptually. The New Territories were leased to the Brits for 99 years (I hate keep repeating myself, but once again 99 years in Chinese language is the equivalent of eternity). If the Brits wanted to “hand Hong Kong back” to a country, they really should have gone to Taiwan which holds the treaties about the above because Kuomintang was the one that overthrew Qing.

In any case, the Brits should have known better that Chinese cannot be trusted (Hong Kongers aren’t Chinese – Chinese is a concept/term that is so vague which covers a lot of things the Western world refer to, which is a massive topic). They must have seen the impossibility of this “One-Country-Two-System” crap. What were the Old China Hands thinking? Do you honestly think that by living in China for a few years you’re able to understand Chinese? Have you read the famous book The Ugly Chinaman and the Crisis of Chinese Culture by Bo Yang. It is such a shame that the book I Don’t Want to Be Chinese Again was not out earlier.

The UN allowed the Chinese to bully them over the issue of taking Hong Kong and Macau off the list of colonies in the 70s was beyond believe. All the nations in the UN are guilty for helping China to conolise Hong Kong. They should right their wrongs.

A friend forwarded this article to me which is very encouraging.

When Western Media Covers HK – Why Do Many Caucasians Support Chinese but Condemn Hong Kongers?

Featured

I have been following this news about Hong Kong being most racist in the world, and so glad that the name of Hong Kong has been cleared after some tough work our friendly blogger did:

The western media does not seem to pay a lot of attention to HK except when HK is being condemned for being a racist country (please do not tell me calling Hong Kong a country isn’t PC). I have some rather difficult to digest thoughts to share:

  • Self-abased but self-important
    Chinese are ashamed of the history baggage they all share – being beaten at many wars by Japanese and Western countries. The low self-esteem amongst the Chinese is not spoken, they are not even aware of this problem. For example, when you asked them about WWII, all they focus on was Japan’s invasion and what a humiliation that was to China, but fail to discuss the war on a different level.
    They cannot face the deeply rooted problems Chinese all share, nor could they admit the problems and try to correct them (well detailed by Joe Chung’s book “I Don’t Want to be Chinese Again” – no English translation available yet. This book is banned, obviously, in China but have a lot of awakening facts and argument about Chinese people). The so called history baggage has been suppressing Chinese. However, given the recent decades of economic advancement, Chinese seem to have become extremely self-important because of the new wealth they have – just look at the luxury shops and see how they behave, as if “one can do anything he wants as long as he has money”. The extremely self-abased people are now loaded with money, a new tool for exploitation from an individual to a global level, they are not extremely self-important. “Extreme self-abased turns into extreme self-important” – a phrase Hong Kongers use on its own people
  • “Persecutory delusion”
    Chinese is tuned or trained to believe that they have been suffering from discrimination across the world and the western world, in particular, have mistreated Chinese for centuries. Every time there is any sort of incidents caused by their behaviour (for example, the formula powder shortage problem), Chinese would come out shouting they are being discriminated. This deeply rooted mindset cannot be changed. They enjoy being the powerless victims when things happen to them, because of the point below
  • White guilt
    Western world did start war in China, even colonised some Asian countries or imported Asian for cheap labours for decades. This somehow imposed a guilt amongst the Caucasians thinking they need to protect the “yellow skin fellows”
  • Who are Hong Kongers?
    Hong Kongers are seen by the Western world a more civialised country than China (because the British government had taught Hong Kongers a lot of universal values and simply because the world know that communist countries cannot work). Hence, Hong Kongers are being seen equals on the level of “social sophistication”. Unfortunately, because of the skin colour, Caucasians still can’t quite see Hong Kongers with yellow skin as their equals! Caucasians in general do think they are more superior than the coloured people – many deny and say this type of comment is racist. But I think people prefer to stick to those who are similar to themselves – in terms of appearance, believes, tradition, etc. We often generalise things, and judge people by their skin or they way they dress. Generalisation is built-in self-protection mechanism – we hang out with people look and behave similar to ourselves, so we know what to expect and what not to do, the most extreme is we stereotype others so that we will be extra carefully when we meet someone who looks and speaks differently than ourselves. Here’s a massive conflicts!
  • How should we treat Chinese?
    Because of the White Guilt, Caucasians want to save those “poor coloured people”. This fits perfectly when the Chinese love to promote their “victim” identity. Although they are not shy about their wealth, they have no problem emphasizing their imaginary victim identity which trigger the sympathy of kind-hearten people (may it be Caucasians or local Hong Kongers) – the people from Hong Kong (as said before, a more civilised country) must help educate the less educated and less civilised Chinese! Please remember, China’s economy is amongst the top three, the people who play this “victim” game aren’t those poor ones – they are the ones who can afford to travel around the world and buy expensive handbags, etc (a fantastic example here in recent news). However, the western world, perhaps being blinded by the White Guilt, yes, the Brits have taught the Hong Kongers a lot things (values, justice, honesty, etc), but back then the Brits have the absolute power, it was relatively easier for them. Now that China has Hong Kong’s sovereignty and has an upper hand over Hong Kong (the worst is many Hong Kongers believe that if it wasn’t for China, Hong Kong had died) Hong Kong, as a nation of 7 million people, is in no position to educate or transform China, a nation with 1.3 billion people.

**let me repeat one more time: the term “Chinese” in my blog when referring to human beings is “national Chinese” not “racial Chinese”**