Last week images of Hong Kong citizens storming the Legislative Council dominated the international press. Global audiences love a revolution, especially when it fits neatly into a David and Goliath narrative: Goliath, in this case, is the authoritarian Chinese state, the ineffectual chief executive and her government, and the police, whose excessive use of force was found by Amnesty International to be a violation of international law.
The protesters’ objective: oppose the government’s proposed amendments to a law that would allow any person in Hong Kong to be extradited to and face trial in China, a country whose legal system has been criticised for pervasive human rights abuses and procedural unfairness. They also demanded that the government retract the designation of a previous protest as a “riot”, hold the police accountable for their unreasonable use of force, and enact universal suffrage and democracy. Brian Leung, the only protester to take off his mask, read out these demands in the form of the Admiralty declaration. On 9 July, Carrie Lam announced in a press conference that the extradition bill was “dead” – but she has been criticised for failing to invoke a formal legal procedure of withdrawal and to meet the protesters’ other demands.
The storming of the legislature is the latest in a series of actions starting from a march in the first week of June attended by 1.3 million people. On 16 June, 2 million Hong Kongers – more than a quarter of the population – took to the streets in an unprecedented show of solidarity.
Yet one crucial aspect of the protests has not made the headlines. It’s a simple slogan, that has been circulated on Telegram groups and the local online forum LIHKG, airdropped on to the phones of passersby on the street, turned into widely shared graphics and zines: “Preserve yourself and the collective; no division.”
Why is this so significant? It’s because unity has not come easily. After the 2014 umbrella movement failed to secure universal suffrage for citizens – who to this day have minimal say over the choice of Hong Kong’s top leader – the pro-democracy camp fractured seemingly beyond repair. Radical activists criticised traditional democratic parties for their protests commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and 1 July 1997 handover, which they saw as ritualistic and ultimately ineffectual. They insisted on an “any means necessary” approach to achieving their political goals of revolution and even independence. In turn, party politicians and more moderate factions criticised direct action campaigners for alienating moderate sections of Hong Kong society as well as international audiences in pursuit of inchoate goals.
Many Hong Kongers found themselves disillusioned about the possibility of change – exacerbated by the disqualification of democratically elected lawmakers, the politicised imprisonment of pro-democracy and pro-independence activists, and the building of a railway station that chipped away at Hong Kong’s legal and territorial jurisdiction.
The anti-extradition law movement has put at least a temporary end to this stasis. From the hundreds of petitions circulated by secondary schools and civil society groups, to a rally organised by housewives and mothers, to the buying of ad space in newspapers before the G20 Osaka summit, Hong Kongers in the city and around the world have shown their creativity and resilience in resistance.
This is not to say that the rifts of the past have been completely healed, or that Hong Kongers have transcended despair and helplessness; we are far more pragmatic than that. Instead, against the chief executive’s attempt to separate protesters who committed “violent acts and vandalism” from peaceful demonstrators, and some commentators’ characterisation of our movement as “divided”, we have developed a common understanding that, though we may pursue different strategies, we will never walk alone.
About 11pm on 1 July, protesters who had stormed the legislature were faced with an deadline set by the police to disperse or face forceful removal. Four protesters decided to stay until the end as the others left, prepared to face the consequences of their actions. Then, just as the others were about to leave, they decided to turn back and to carry the four remaining people out. A young woman was asked by a reporter why she was returning to save the remaining few: “I’m scared [about the police] too but I am even more scared about we may not see them [those four people] tomorrow.”
This was a defining moment of the movement – a demonstration of the unity principle: “I may not agree with what you do, but I promise that I will be there for you when you need it.” It’s in a similar vein as the message chains that spread through Hong Kongers’ Telegram groups and Facebook pages after three people died in suicides related to the extradition bill – of lists of local helplines, of contact information for counselling services offered by trained volunteers.
In the face of rising authoritarian rule, we Hong Kongers will no longer allow our judgments of each other’s capacities and strategies tear us apart. We will also take responsibility for one another, including providing support when some of us refuse help. We know that we will only succeed if we can survive as a collective; as a collective we will only survive if we cover every frontline and care for all in our corner.
• Jacky Chan Man Hei is a former secretary general of the Hong Kong Federation of Students and external secretary of Chinese University Students’ Union; Jun Pang has worked as a researcher in NGOs supporting women’s and forced migrants’ rights
• International suicide helplines can be found at www.befrienders.org. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. In the UK and Ireland, Samaritans can be contacted on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org or jo@samaritans.ie. In the US, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-8255.
Since you’re here…
… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading and supporting The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But we need your ongoing support to keep working as we do.
The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.
Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.
We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you.
View all comments >
comments (155)
Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
All rulers have fear that mobs in streets destroy things, the country may not hold together, and anarchy rules. Beijing, Moscow, Teheran, Jerusalem, Cairo, Istanbul.
They do not know at the beginning of protests how bad it may become, so they crack down with a big whip to make sure. China ought to remember Lenin (or was it Marx?) - Two steps forward, One step back. Hong Kong is still a tax haven and those who helped Edward Snowden had difficulti…
Kids in Hong Kong and across Asia Pacific in general have long been labelled as shallow and materialistic. I think the last few years, starting with Occupy Central, has opened a lot of people's eyes - certainly my own - to the fact that students here are far more switched on than they were given credit for.
I work with a guy who is quite heavily involved in the protests and some of the things he has told me about the way this movement works ... I…
Kids in Hong Kong and across Asia Pacific in general have long been labelled as shallow and materialistic. I think the last few years, starting with Occupy Central, has opened a lot of people's eyes - certainly my own - to the fact that students here are far more switched on than they were given credit for.
I work with a guy who is quite heavily involved in the protests and some of the things he has told me about the way this movement works ... I fear I may come across as a patronising old twat but I think they're amazing.
Quite. This old git is lost in admiration for their sincerity and resourcefulness. Hong Kong's can-do spirit is alive and well, no matter what the 50-cent army would have the world believe.
Ha. After witnessing how many countries embraced so called colour revolutions as miracle cures and only to see them destroying their homes like plagues, whilst being fully aware of how “occupy central” have caused billions in damage and revenue, plus the unaccountable damage to the lives of the hard working people of HK and its status as a international business hub, these protesters are about as “switched on” as sheep being herded towards the cliff. The commie party will as a result accelerate its effort to diminish HK’s importance, along with its future.
The rest of Hong Kong is afraid to join the protest because the neighbour next door will roll in tanks if they no control Hong Kong's democracy. They say it's one country, two systems? To me, it's a one dictatorship, two dystopias.
All rulers have fear that mobs in streets destroy things, the country may not hold together, and anarchy rules. Beijing, Moscow, Teheran, Jerusalem, Cairo, Istanbul.
They do not know at the beginning of protests how bad it may become, so they crack down with a big whip to make sure. China ought to remember Lenin (or was it Marx?) - Two steps forward, One step back. Hong Kong is still a tax haven and those who helped Edward Snowden had difficulties with Hong Kong authorities - so my enthusiasm for the protesters is rather lukewarm.
I fear that irrespective of the grit and commitment of the protesters, once the world's eye has moved elsewhere and local excitement has died down, one by one many will simply start disappearing in much the same way as after Tiananmen Square.
The Central Committee will not simply forget and move on - the challenge to their authority is too great, and the potential to inspire further unrest among Uighers, Tibetans, Tiawanese etc is simply too great a threat to Xi.
Two systems, one country? Bollocks - history shows that the Chinese government/business way is to say whatever is needed to secure an "agreement" and then simply ignore the terms of that agreement and do whatever is needed to pursue the original agenda.
HK's independent judiciary is anathema to Beijing's view of the proper role of the courts, likewise the freedoms notionally enjoyed by those who still live in the former colony. They cannot exist side by side for much longer. Already Beijing is using the false allegation that the protests were inspired by foreign provocateurs as a pretext for further extreme action.
I don't understand your last sentence at all. Those same 'authorities' are the target of the protesters.
"Global audiences love a revolution"... No, the global media love revolutions that undermine the power of the Communists/Socialists (e.g. Hong Kong demonstrations, the Guaido brouhaha in Venezuela)... but they hate, ignore, minimise, deride revolutions that undermine the power of Neoliberalism (e.g. the Occupy Movement).
It's still preferable to the Chinese media that doesn't report on either. Ignorance is strength!
The CCP won't give in. So, as much as these activists deserve to be lauded and respected, their fight is going to yield very little. Certainly, HK would never be a democracy for as long as it remains a part of the PRC. And, as soon as HK loses its regional financial prowess to neighbouring Shanghai, its use to the PRC would be as good as nil.
Advanced nations must do their bit - welcome these industrious, hard-working and well-educated Hong Kongers. Offer them asylum. It's the only win-win scenario.
So proud of Hong Kong and its people
Sheep area cute till they're shorn. That's next.
"This chapter examines the prejudice and discrimination that Mainland Chinese immigrants on the One Way Permit scheme (OWP) often face integrating into Hong Kong society. The Hong Kong census has recently stated that Mainland Chinese immigration is becoming an increasingly significant driver of the territory’s population growth. In recent years however, Mainland Chinese immigrants on the OWP scheme have faced numerous difficulties integrating into Hong Kong society, often experiencing prejudice and discrimination in the form of hostile anti-immigrant attitudes..."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320549194_Mainland_Chinese_immigration_in_Hong_Kong_Analysing_anti-immigrant_sentiment
Is anyone protesting against such discrimination?... No?..... Why?
What's stopping the Mainland Chinese people from protesting this or any issue in Hong Kong?
Oh right, they grew up believing that protesting and assembly of people is illegal. Another reason for daddy China's support for extradition law.
Protests and trade union stoppages happen all the time in mainland China. Funnily they’re never reported in western press, which has less of the same internal democracy.
No doubt I’ll be called a fiftycenter by some propagandised western liberal who doesn’t know any better.
As an occasional traveller to China with daily experience of direct commercial relationships between Western and Chinese enterprises (and how they "work" - I use the term loosely), I can also vouch for the fact that anyone - local or foreign - who gets investigated and charged with anything in China has already been effectively convicted. And that their alleged crimes often simply come down to not acting in a manner that suits the relevant local members of the "purple circle" . Enter the court system, and its already too late for you.
So yes, you do sound like a 50-center.
The NED, oops, Hong Kong democrats, have won this round. Now at least one alleged murderer hiding out in Hong Kong from Taiwanese police can feel safe again. The cops can't touch him. Well done.
The bill proposed is not just between Hong Kong and Taiwan, it's for other countries too, including China. Since China owns Hong Kong, why can't they kidnap the murderer?
That sounds crazy, but China has a reputation for kidnapping book sellers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causeway_Bay_Books_disappearances If China does not kidnap the murderer, you have to wonder why book sellers are more important than seeking justice for murder.
I believe China will not kidnap the murderer because they hope that people like you will use the murderer as a reason to support the bill in its current form.
But in an expression of solidarity with the protesters, Taiwan has already said that they oppose the bill and would not seek to extradite the murder suspect.
Even Taiwan now say they don’t want to extradite the guy.
The untold Story of Hong Kong protests!
Where is this being "untold"? Chad?
Mainland China. In fact, Hong Kong people are doing one of the same tactics as South Korea did in spreading information to their neighbour; airdrops. https://qz.com/1660460/hong-kong-protesters-use-airdrop-to-breach-chinas-firewall/
PR of China, actually.
Yet somehow you don’t know that South Korea held far more political prisoners than the north, many from 1953 till 1992.
To know that would mean acknowledging that USA used a UN mandate while Soviet Union was boycotting UN and PRC wasn’t even recognised, to install a military dictatorship in South Korea.
You probably think they fought against communism for democracy.
There are a lot of stories!
Color Revolution In Hong Kong: USA Vs. China
https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/18/color-revolution-in-hong-kong-usa-vs-china/
Just days earlier, however, crowds estimated at one and two million people took to the streets to protest in Hong Kong. Protest against what?
Fingers point to a gruesome incident that occurred between a Hong Kong couple while on vacation in Taiwan. A young, pregnant woman was murdered, allegedly by her boyfriend. The boyfriend was jailed for the theft of her money and personal effects, but a trial for the killing outside of Hong Kong’s jurisdiction is prevented. And there is no extradition agreement between Hong Kong and Taiwan.
The possibility of a release as early as October of 2019 has been provided as a reason for the expedited passing of an extradition bill.
What was unexpected was that so many Hong Kongers would oppose it.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/hong-kong-can-two-million-marchers-be-wrong/5682059
Let one murderer get away or let millions be subjected to tyranny 25+ years too early? It's not a tough call.
are you referencing this article by kim peterson to make a point? because i read it and quite frankly found it to be a bit of a mess - the article, that is, not your comment. so not sure what you're trying to say ...
You didn’t write any of this, your whole comment was copied and pasted from an extract of that Global Research article. You are either a plagiariser or a 50 center, perhaps both.
The whole of the Chinese people (both those on the mainland and those in Hong Kong) could easily be connected permanently in pursuit of a common goal if the Beijing government had the sense and humanity to finally introduce that Fifth Modernisation suggested over forty years ago now by the courageous pro-reform activist Wei Jingsheng, who pinned his signed letter to the wall in Xidan Street, Beijing, in 1978, before serving 18 years in jail for thus peacefully speaking his mind.
The fifth modernisation he called for (in addition to Deng Xiaoping's other four: agriculture, industry, national defence, science and technology) was democracy.
Until China becomes a democratic nation with strong rule of law and meaningful separation of powers it will always be a country not only at loggerheads with the world's other major powers but at war with itself.
I'll let Wei Jingsheng have the last word:
"Those who worry that democracy will lead to anarchy and chaos are just like those who, following the overthrow of the Qing dynasty, worried that without an emperor the country would fall into chaos. Their decision was to patiently suffer oppression because they feared that without the weight of oppression, their spines might completely collapse! To such people, I would like to say, with all due respect: We want to be the masters of our own destiny...We want to modernize the lives of the people. Democracy, freedom, and happiness for all are our sole objectives."
Wei Jingsheng, The Fifth Modernisation.
Why would the CCP do that? They're primarily interested in lining their pockets.
I wish all the Hong Kong residents the best in their life or death struggle with the Communist Party overlords.
Why is this so significant? It’s because unity has not come easily. After the 2014 umbrella movement failed to secure universal suffrage for citizens – who to this day have minimal say over the choice of Hong Kong’s top leader – the pro-democracy camp fractured seemingly beyond repair. Radical activists criticised traditional democratic parties for their protests commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and 1 July 1997 handover, which they saw as ritualistic and ultimately ineffectual. They insisted on an “any means necessary” approach to achieving their political goals of revolution and even independence. In turn, party politicians and more moderate factions criticised direct action campaigners for alienating moderate sections of Hong Kong society as well as international audiences in pursuit of inchoate goals.
This analysis is first class.
Many Hong Kongers found themselves disillusioned about the possibility of change – exacerbated by the disqualification of democratically elected lawmakers, the politicised imprisonment of pro-democracy and pro-independence activists, and the building of a railway station that chipped away at Hong Kong’s legal and territorial jurisdiction.
This however is more problematic. What has put such huge numbers of people on the streets is not 'disillusionment about the possibility of change' - a progressive concern - but the fundamentally conservative desire to stop the rot, and maintain the status quo. We saw the same thing with Article 23 and the 'moral and national education' controversy. .
Further, the violence of some of the more radical elements has eroded support among peaceful demonstrators. Frankly, prancing around Legco spraying paint and taking selfies came over as an entitled and immature display of student politics - a 'ritualistic and ultimately ineffectual act of violence and vandalism', to coin a phrase. It was calculated to provoke a crackdown, not achieve the very sensible aims of squelching the extradition law and putting Government in its rightful place as an essentially unelected administration that needs to rule by consent.
The enormous and peaceful demonstrations have attracted the attention, the admiration, and the sympathy of the world. And they are working. By all means act collectively - but also responsibly.
I read this as a very optimistic but not very accurate article about the average Hong Kong person.
A couple years ago, there was an article in Hong Kong about a kid on the bus who refused to offer his seat to an elderly woman because '[he] paid the bus fare, why should [he] give up [his] seat?'.
There are exceptional people in Hong Kong too, but I don't know many people under 30 who would willingly offer their seat to a senior citizen.
It's also interesting that you interpret the four kids being forcefully removed by their friends/fellow protester as 'looking out for one another'.
I interpret it more as 'these four kids have committed to staying behind for the cause, but everyone else decided to impose their values on them and so forcefully removed them against their will' (it certainly looked like they didn't want to leave at all - they were practically throwing a tantrum, kicking and screaming while being forcefully removed).
I’m a little perplexed by your comment. You claim it is not an accurate portrayal of the average Hong Kong person yet you make a sweeping generalisation that most people under 30 would not be likely to give up their bus seats - based on one account you read in an article written two years ago. Whatever argument you are trying to make, it’s an incoherent one.
I could also offer plenty of anecdotal evidence showing how people's attitudes have changed here over the last 20 years. There has been a decline in general manners ... littering is on the rise, people are less considerate and more inclined to kick off ... but that is also the case everywhere I go in the world. Personally I put it down to a post 1997 reaction - people seeing their way of life being gradually eroded.
However, watching the protests up close (I work in Admiralty, where they have been centred), I have been struck by the protesters' maturity and thoughtfulness - as I left work one day, the mall underneath my office was jammed with people escaping the tear gas. I could feel it simply from the residue on their clothes. These 'kids' were telling me to take care and be careful as I made my way on foot to get home. This movement has, in my experience, brought out on the best in people here.
A lot of that has been blamed, by Hong Kongers, on the influx of mainlanders, both tourists and immigrants. This explains the somewhat hostile attitude by Hong Kongers to these interlopers.
Not unlike in the past, media reports and local opposition act together to fit in a Western narrative, that ‘freedom are being challenged’, ‘people are being suppressed’, so that a Western public audience would prompt their governments to take intervening actions. What’s ignored in that narrative is subtlety of reality, complexity of issues and different perspectives in an entirely different culture. In Chinese philosophy, that naivety and simplicity in viewing things is quite a shame.
Um, Hong Kongers wrote this piece.
Western media platform local opposition voices political power players.
That's usually the argument from the CCP about any dissenting opinion, yes.
Decriminalise.
The police should be there to keep kids safe & thats plainly not the effect they're having at present.
Hong Kong + Taiwan media outlets have been saying that PRC bussed in PRC police officers to do some of the hard lifting. Not sure whether there's any truth in this, but I'd believe the worst rumours about the CCP actually.
These are extraordinary claims to make - have you got any evidence? I'm in Hong Kong and most sensible people are laughing at such suggestions.
This comment was made on another article. Not sure how it ended up here
There's a remarkable purity about the Hong Kong protesters. At a time when mature democracies are being swamped and media hulls permeated by corrupt speech on social media, the ships are listing and tacking far right under the covert manipulations of shady think tank sock puppetry and foreign agency, Hong Kong is simply fighting for what the West in general has perhaps started to take for granted to the point of almost forgetting, free (politically and openly) critical speech, free and fair elections, and independent rule of law. It reminds a westerner like myself of say 200 to 100 years ago years ago when slow and incremental advances were made towards the modern Western state, if self interested advances stimulated by fear of revolution (French, then Marxist and Soviet), there was a distinct feel good factor for subsequent power.
It's sobering to read the above article about unity and collective interest when the reader hails from now such a divided and stunned political landscape as post Brexit Britain (though when leaving such a crazy car crash situation would have seemed inconceivable).
And is it not a little shaming that the UK, and other Western states, the opposite of collectively seem to have forgotten the virtues they so carefully evolved to sustain and now see those principles of political openness and fairness under siege from within? Can Hong Kong perhaps remind to actually appreciate what it had instead of seeking to damage a hard fought Western status quo?
They were far better under the British when we treat them as equals and gave them the vote.....??
Something once was bad, so anything bad now can be dismissed.
They were better under the British, they think so. Which is a very low bar. Which illustrates how lacking in hope they feel now.
As has been well documented, Britain first floated the idea of dominion status for HK in the 1950s. This would lead to Canada- and Australia-style independence. The Chinese government made it clear this was unacceptable to them. Any change in HK's status as a full colony would result in Chinese non-specific intervention.
Interesting that so many apologists for Pooh are surfacing BTL today.
Re Hauptmanngurski even if Hong Kong was a tax haven, which it is not, I fail to see what relevance that has to the protests and protesters.
One fears that HK will have to sign up to China's project of maintaining a communist economic mega-machine. In any case, they have privileged role in this project as its financial centre.
It is rather in the way that the Scottish and the Welsh have to accept that they are British - this HK no longer has to do but does have to sign up to certain political principles. It's true that HK does have a separate language giving the territory some cultural autonomy but in essence, they are at the centre of the new century's key economic empire - transition to One China will be slow, hard but certainly sure.
Cantonese is a dialect of Chinese, and is spoken by over 100 million Chinese in Guangdong Province.
And parts of Guangxi province too!
I don't envy Hong Kong and its citizens with the vast brooding menace of China's political behemoth towering over it.
China's treatment of any group that it perceives to be a 'threat' in any way would chill me. Look at the Uighurs - thrown into concentration camps in hundreds and hundreds of thousands, their very culture and identity erased - or the treatment of Tibetans. Look at the way that any dissent is crushed by a massive oppressive police state that more and more resembles Yevgeny Zamyatin's 'We.'
Woe to Hong Kong.
In the same way we need a free and fearless media to “speak truth to power”, we need as individuals and as small democracies to speak truth to larger governments. It’s not enough to criticise tinpot dictatorships when there is no danger of retaliation, good governments needs to criticise larger powers when they overstep moral decency even if the consequences may affect trade.
Joshua Wong has already been sent to prison three times.
You forgot to say he was sent to jail by British judge in HK.
In just under 30 years the "one country two systems" model expires anyway- as long as things don't get too out of hand then China will just wait it out
A week is a long time in politics. 27 years is a lot of weeks.
China is playing Go,so time is not important,when you have a strategy .
Right now,it's Sente concept in place.
“Preserve yourself and the collective; no division.”
It's unsurprising that China's communist party, which was born from and found success in the very idea of collective interest and indivisible purpose is so zealously determined to fragment any unifying principle and collective action that may undermine its absolute authority.
Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment