新公民議會

社會觀察 x 獨立評論 x 多元觀點 x 公共書寫 x 世代翻轉

  • Home
  • English
  • 評論
  • 民意
  • 時事
  • 生活
  • 國際
  • 歷史
  • 世代
  • 轉載
  • 投稿須知

Understanding the Seizure of the Legco in Hong Kong

  • English Article
  • 時事
  • 民意

As every bully knows, if you push your hapless ‘victim’ far enough, they will eventually lash out in an attempt to defend themselves. And in that case, who exactly is to blame?

Couple weeks ago, hundreds of mainly youngish protestors in Hong Kong broke into the Legislative Council (Legco) building – the place where the local government works – and unleashed their fury on it. They smashed glass doors, graffitied the walls with slogans like “anti-fugitive law” (a reference to the legislation that ignited the protests in the first place), “universal suffrage” and “Carrie Lam step down” (Lam is the city’s current Chief Executive). And they tore portraits of past Legco presidents off the wall, broke computers and messed with the building’s electrical wiring. However, they also paid for the drinks they took from the cafeteria, put a note in the library that said “protect antiques, no damages,” and didn’t really hurt anyone in the process. Overall, they caused about HK$60 million in damage and ground government meetings to a halt for the near future.

HongKong protesters stand up for their rights. photo: Vox
HongKong protesters stand up for their rights. photo: Vox

This was big news in Hong Kong, of course – as well as around the world – and the reaction to it was swift and polarizing. Lam, pro-establishment lawmakers, business heads and religious leaders, among others, condemned the violence of the protestors’ actions (with said lawmakers dubbing it “the darkest day of the 176 years of Legco history”), while pro-democracy lawmakers and many young, fed-up citizens, although not necessarily condoning the violence, asked people to try to understand the reasons behind it. Essentially, the event divided Hong Kong society even further over the controversial extradition bill (also known as the fugitive bill, which would have created an extradition arrangement with mainland China for the first time).

I recently went to Hong Kong myself, arriving there a day or so after the Legco break-in occurred, and was greeted by nonstop news coverage of it. TVs in restaurants were showing guys in black shirts, hardhats, goggles and work masks slamming battering rams into the glass door of a building and then running amok inside, before eventually scampering away before the police arrived. It was a startling and unexpected spectacle for me, as I hadn’t read the news in a couple days and had no idea what was going on. But now, as I’ve had some time to digest these events, I’d like to try – like the pro-democracy lawmakers suggested – to understand what happened. Because isn’t a bit presumptuous to judge someone without first attempting to understand them?

The first thing to note is that most Hong Kongers (and all the people I spoke to in person) seem to support the protesters. What they don’t support, however, is the use of violence or the smashing government buildings. And, in fact, the kind of violence associated with the Legco occupation appears to be an aberration in the ongoing protests. I happened to witness one while I was there, and, although it was massive – like a sea of black-shirted people in the streets – it was generally peaceful. Whole families came out, people chanted what sounded like uplifting slogans, it was organized, and the streets were kept clean. It felt positive, somehow, as though all those people had turned up to express their solidarity and feelings about the government in a healthy way, without wishing to harm anyone. And aside from that one protest I attended, life in the city every other day was completely normal, so it wasn’t like the protesters had damaged the fabric of society or anything.

The other thing to keep in mind here is context. If you go back to the Umbrella Movement of 2014, where hundreds of thousands of people came out to demonstrate against the nondemocratic way Hong Kong’s Chief Executive is selected, you’ll see that the government’s response was basically nothing, as it simply ignored the protesters’ gripes. Then, more recently, when about 2 million folks took to the streets on June 12th to show their opposition to the extradition bill, the government again failed to react to protesters’ demands, which currently include the complete withdraw of the suspended fugitive bill, the release of arrested protesters without charge (like what happened during Taiwan’s Sunflower movement), and an independent investigation into the excessive use of force by police. Also, according to some analysts, the lack of universal voting rights in Hong Kong has led to growing resentment among citizens and widespread distrust of the government, and many people have begun feeling hopeless – and helpless – about their future prospects. In fact, there are reports of young people committing suicide over the extradition bill, a shocking and disturbing indication of how important these issues are to them.

So given this all of this, is it fair to flat-out condemn those radicals who attacked the Legco? I mean, if you were trying to tell someone something over and over again, and they wouldn’t listen, what would you do? Maybe you’d try to find another way to get their attention, which is kind of what those protesters did. By taking over one of the most ‘sacred’ and visible spaces in Hong Kong, they put everyone on notice – the Hong Kong government and their puppet masters (the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)), as well as the world at large – that this is extremely serious business for them, and they won’t be going away quietly.

And we also need to acknowledge that violence breeds violence. If you consider the CCP’s actions in recent years regarding its increasingly severe oppression of the Uighurs and Tibetan minorities in China, as well as its general lack of respect for Hong Kong’s autonomy as outlined in the handover treaty signed with the British, you might say that Beijing was one of the more subtly violent governments on Earth. Seen from this perspective, the words of young Hong Kongers somehow ring true, such as those of 18-year-old Sunny Lau Nok-Hing, who thinks the violence of the protesters was “a response towards the legislative violence under this unfair political system.”

As every bully knows, if you push your hapless ‘victim’ far enough, they will eventually lash out in an attempt to defend themselves. And in that case, who exactly is to blame? Is it the bully, who day by day took away his victim’s fundamental rights just because he could, or the victim, who after being mistreated for so long, suddenly decided to stand up for himself and punch the bully in the face?

Author / Peter K. Thompson

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • More
  • Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Related

CCP HongKong Legco protest
2019-07-18 Peter K. Thompson

Post navigation

唐三藏的肉 → ← 杜絕台灣政治帶職參選歪風

Related Posts

國民黨誰來匹配缺乏國際觀的侯友宜?

國民黨選總統民調第一,無人可及,當然就是侯友宜。可惜他所欠缺的是國際觀,這點國民黨內以及親藍媒體都不便否認。 那麼國民黨內有足夠國際觀,肯屈居副首匹配候友宜的有力大咖,又有誰?你我想來想去,捏指韜算,有這種份量,自己就可獨立選總統,幹嘛要當人家副首?何況,侯市長新近又不小心陷入「疑美」或是「和中」的泥沼。即使民調再高,他不足的「國際觀」,加上「疑美」,甚至被認為有「反美」傾向,令支持侯市長選民,非常狐疑和不安! 很不幸的,侯市長國內民意的超前,未必經得起外部力量的牽扯,到底最終、總體民意為何?沒人敢鐵口論斷!國民黨內舉行「初選」會是必然之舉。而侯友宜的國際觀必然受各方嚴格檢驗。 想想看初選時,趙少康會怎麼檢驗他?韓國瑜會怎麼批評?郭台銘呢?還有背後有深藍影子的張亞中會怎麼說?初選的裁判官朱立倫會不會因緣濟會,出入可也,都很難說? 世間公論:朱立倫的民調太低,世態炎涼,有心無力,力不足以舉泰山兮!或許心存黨國命祚,有黃花崗七十二烈士的壯烈情懆,為黨犧牲——- 我不做副首,誰做副首,吾往矣! 朱立倫若有此壯烈犧牲的情操,國民黨內呼之欲出的內鬥或內亂,或許多少可化之無形;而侯友宜的兩大問題也可能順勢解決,為甚麽呢? 你我小公民們大概都記得幾年前,「維基解密」透露出 AIT 祕電國務院,透露朱立倫是受美國保護的「重點人物」。侯市長若能以朱立倫為副首,所有批評侯的反美傾向,「綠皮藍骨」、隱性的的黃復與,都可不攻自破。 而且,朱主席留美多年,身出紐約市名校的著名商學院,和東北角的長春蕂聯盟名校無異;或許朱可能稍通法文,上法國餐廳,用法文點菜一定勝任,絕對不會把中餐看成法式料理。起碼朱能在生活小事上和外人通達無礙,水乳交融。 你我小公民們可不能認為侯市長把中餐看成法國菜視作小事。胡某人可舉昨天所發生的事,稍作注釋:大概是飽受「法國菜事件」的閒言閒語,侯市長一不做二不休,捧出一盤熱騰騰的水餃,昭示全國同胞,這是他除夕夜最愛吃的,也是他以為才是堂堂正正的「中國菜」,其它的中餐都是以紫亂朱的變種、假冒的中國菜,稱之為「法國菜」可也! 現在全國的大小公民們大概可以了解胡某人的「微言大義」了!所謂中餐、法國菜,都不是問題的本質,侯市長的擴大認知的能力,非常有限,才是問題:中餐看成法國菜不是問題,把水餃端出來說這是市長所認為「堂堂正正的中國菜」才是問題。 每當有人問侯市長您若更上層樓,有甚麼雄才大略、建國大網,侯市長總是回答「我只以新北市民福祉為念」!多少年來侯市長以此取悅新北市民和許多台灣人民,博得難以匹敵的聲望!但是,有朝一日,侯市長可能更上層樓,台灣人民開始焦慮起來,侯市長除了那套「老梗老套」外,他還有甚麼?他有潛力發展甚麼?—- 難道他除了吃水餃外,不吃其它中餐,或想嘗試其他「胡食」,吾道一以貫之 ?看來國台辦那位女發言人說的沒錯,台北有很多山東餃子館! 朱立倫主席您大概也認知到,即使你願為黨國犧牲,屈居副首,所謂「任重而道遠」其沈重,一定超乎您的想像!要來的絕不止「烽火連三月」,一切內外檢視,炮火連天,豈止三月烽火!黨內初選一開始,誰說吹響的不是「世代更替」的革命號角?一定嚴格檢查所謂大咖,到底有多少斤兩,尤其是搶到「頭香」者,是不是浪得虛名?—— 趙、韓、郭、張諸大爺們,您們願意朱主席充當侯市長的副首嗎? 作者/胡嚴

好吃水餃的侯友宜

中國北方人說「好吃不過水餃!」說得也是,水餃真的好吃,但是全世界好吃的只限於水餃嗎? 對此問話,侯友宜市長的回答,當然是「是」,absolutely  ,唯一而且絕對的肯定。 韓國人或許對此回答會不甚滿意,他們會這樣回應:「水餃」嗎?哼!哼!那麼我們的「泡菜」呢?—- 何況,誰敢說「水餃」不是韓國人發明的?你們中國人唐朝時遠征韓國,被我們打退,帶走的唯一戰利品就是如何包「水餃」! 所以愛吃不愛吃「水餃」,都可能造成兩國外交爭端;尤其對「食的文化」有強烈沙文主義傾向的法蘭西人:你們居然敢把簡易不上抬面的「中菜」看成是「法國大餐」,把「雜碎」看成是四星級的法式佳肴,這不是「侮辱」甚麼才是「侮辱」? 更令人生氣的,有政治超級大咖,居然把「水餃」抬出來,夫子自道一番,硬拗,等於是說:「法式土司」就是法國飲食文明,唯一且無法超越的成就! 以小見大,你我小公民們可以公正地說,沒有國際觀,即使小如一顆水餃,也會釀成難以收拾的外交爭端!何況其它? 當然,你我小公民們不敢把我們舌頭的味蕾,當成我們唯一的「中樞神經」。我們只是想告訴所謂的超大咖政客,肉食者鄙;若不幸被認為所知有限,不要只為了尋找亷價的「政治正確」,藉勢藉端,鎖定瑣碎名目,攻擊異己,不願潛藏學習,日見其功。 萬一小公民們進步比你迅速,你還在故步自封,繼續耍弄你的老梗和老套,有朝一日落後太多,人們看穿你的底細,新北市國王沒穿新衣,原來只是如此,哀莫大焉!水能載舟水能覆舟,載覆之間,只在一瞬。朱雀橋邊野草花,烏衣巷口夕陽斜,以台灣政治變化的迅速,按月計算,需要數季嗎? 作者/徐吁

侯友宜的國際觀

俗諺:知微見著。尤其要知道封裝緊密、不輕易言論的政治人物的細微心思和內心格局,你我小公民只能藉著細心扒尋他無意中透露的口風,而窺視其心中的奧秘。 侯友宜市長除了萬變不改其宗的「以新北市民福祉為念」的老套外,最近兩起「放風聲」的異舉,倒頗值注意。 第一起,全國人民現在都知道他說:「我(侯)不是強國的卒子!」。這個有損國際外交的輕言,到處傳播,聲浪越滾越大。太多人,包括外國友人,都在問侯市長所稱的「強國」到底是誰? 第二起,是侯市長強烈批評蔡總統的年夜飯是「法國大餐」,令多數國民錯愕。明明總統府公佈的圖片,是簡單的中餐(較起眼的是兩小片烏魚子和一條小小炸黃魚),因防疫需要而分盤吃,卻被侯市長炒成「法國大餐」。令人最奇怪的餐中黑色甜點小麵包,被說成是「黑金」!—— 看來有一天侯市長把生活樸實的總統官邸,看成路易式皇帝的凡爾賽宮,日夜笙歌,酒酣耳熱,我們也不用太奇怪了! 這兩件看來是小事,卻可窺視侯市長內心的隱密和格局:他說他不是「強國卒子」的國際觀,或許是壓抑多年的黨國「血性」,不小心洩露出來。黃復興黨部的深藍伯伯您們太誤會人家了:侯市長怎麼會是「藍皮綠骨」! 「法國大餐」是不是多年來由基礎警員爬上來,一路飽受長官們的霸凌,經年累月所累積的創傷症後群?雖然有朝一日當過「警察頭子」,仍然恨恨不平,把總統官邸視作邪惡壓迫的象徵。裏頭發生的一定是腐敗叢生,吃的是法國大餐,而不是一瓶水,一碗魯肉飯,—- 過新年吃起「法國大餐」,令人憤憤不平! 台北市有許多學識高明、歷練豐富的言論重鎮和官僚世家,一定也非常吃驚:他(侯)當過部長級的官員,一定出國考察多次,和友邦官員交際,只會上中式餐廳,所以不知所謂「法國大餐」,是何等模樣?所以,把簡易中餐,看成了「法國大餐」是可以令全民同情和了解的! 看來世間傳聞:侯市長國際觀有限,不是空穴來風!台北市的官宦世家最愛說:為官三代,才懂得穿衣、吃飯。當然三代所吃的飯,若僅限於中國菜,只和國內政治人物交際,怎麼會有世界觀?世人說:連吃飯小事都沒準備,何遑大事?您能說人家說重了嗎! 沒有世界觀,當然容易口出簧言,不知輕重,例如前面所說的「我不是強國的卒子」。或許有許多國人會以為作者戴某,言語太過,怎麽就這樣下斷語。事實上,侯市長的幕僚羣私下也有此等認識:為甚麽他們安排侯市長先訪問新加坡,而不是美國?是不是要先鍛練一下侯市長的「世界觀」,再往美國,面對多方「深層政府」的詰問,才能勝任,未雨綢繆。幕僚們護佑其主,想盡辦法,任勞任怨,算是辛苦了! 不幸萬一,新加坡那位眼高過頂、目中無人的第一夫人,若聽到「台灣」又再「呵!呵!呵!」,聰明的侯市長幕僚們,你們該有甚麼對策 ? 作者/戴震

<strong>「農曆春節」雜感</strong>

—農曆春節是專屬於中國的概念嗎?台灣是否應該保留農曆春節假期? 雖然為了湊出今年的春節連假,行政院人事行政總處也算是煞費苦心,在年前年後各安排一次禮拜六的補班補課,但至少10天的春節連假不僅是近幾年來最長的一次,除了少數人士(例如行政院政務委員張景森)認為未來宜考慮縮短連假長度以外,一般人並不會嫌連假太長,甚至可以說大多數人都樂在其中,而且除了台灣與中國以外,越南、韓國等國,乃至於東亞以外多個有較多亞裔人口聚居的國家,或也設定全國性的農曆春節連續假期,或與各該國亞裔同享春節的喜氣,可以說農曆春節已經成為一種世界性的節日或文化現象。 但,原本應該是共享新一年喜氣的春節假期,卻有一群人基於他們狹隘的假民族.真帝國主義觀點,想要將春節的所有權與詮釋權據為己有,並在網路或實體場域四處出征,並進而導致影響所及的各國,對他們的行為展開論議與非難。 以實體的情況來說,中國在美、英及新加坡等國的留學生或僑民,是近日向各國抗議春節被翻譯為農曆新年(Lunar New Year)、並主張應該翻譯為中國新年(Chinese New Year),甚至引發各種社會事件與騷動的主力。 在美國紐約州紐約市,眼見春節被翻譯成Lunar New Year、遂而撕毀商家海報,並因此被商家報警移送警局,事後還忝不知恥在網路社群喊冤的,是中國在當地的僑民;而在英國,明明是大英博物館與韓國文化觀光部合辦、以向英國社會介紹韓國農曆春節為內容的活動,也在中國「環球時報」等該國官方小報式媒體、以及網路輿論領袖的協同煽動下,遭到當地的中國留學生抗議,指稱是韓國人「偷」了中國的春節概念、並指責協辦的大英博物館是英國殖民主義歷史的代表,甚至還有中國網路小粉紅社群,與這群在英國的中國戰狼留學生分進合擊,群起出征大英博物館官方推特帳號的本次活動宣傳文,將相關推文弄得烏煙瘴氣,最後導致大英博物館館方刪文避禍。 即便是在另一個以華人佔人口多數、同樣也有慶祝農曆春節的國家—新加坡,在該國的國立大學之一—南洋理工大學,中國留學生也成為勇於鬧事的一群,不僅毀損校方製作張貼,以多國共度農曆春節為由,將春節譯為Lunar New Year 的海報,強行將海報上Lunar New Year的文句塗改為Chinese New Year,該校中國留學生會更強硬回應校方,宣稱「為堅守中華文化,寧可放棄新春活動主辦方的位置,也不願意在『原則問題』上退讓」,即便校方以多樣與包容為出發點駁斥這群中國留學生的論調,他們也在所不惜。 在網路社群方面,中國的小粉紅網路戰狼,與他們在美英等國的海外留學生同夥同樣積極,在美國的中國留學生,在推特之類的社群網站,揚言將殺害不願意稱農曆春節為Chinese New Year的該校師生,並因此引起輿論譁然;中國本國的小粉紅也四處出征多位稱農曆春節為Lunar New Year的名人或輿論領袖,從蘋果執行長提姆.庫克,到近日主張「應該將韓越菲等國共有的農曆春節譯為Lunar New Year,而非Chinese New Year」的韓國誠信女大教授徐坰德,都成為他們網路暴力荼毒的對象。 從這一系列的出征事件,可以看出中國的偽民族.真中華帝國主義者,並沒有與人共享文明概念的觀念,在面對一個並非該國所獨有、而是由多國所共同分享的概念—例如農曆春節—時,不吝用各種行動向世界展現他們的專斷、鴨霸與獨裁心理,不僅無視於他國農曆春節與中國農曆春節在節日行事上的差別(例如除夕團圓飯或年夜飯,中國北方多會有水餃等麵食,台灣人傳統上會有三牲、或至少魚肉與雞肉,而新加坡及馬來西亞華人則會有撈魚生),更想要壟斷關於農曆春節從節日名稱到內容的詮釋權,這證明中國人所謂的中國民族主義,內在存在高度的專斷性帝國主義思維,也不會去珍視概念下行事及儀禮等內容的多樣性,更遑論與不同國家共同分享此一概念的可能性。如果中國人的多數,對於與其所謂中華文化有關的事物,仍然要抱持類似觀點的話,那可以確定的是,中國這個國家在意識形態上與文明開化的距離,恐怕將永遠無法拉近。 另一方面,在台灣,有鑑於「中國擅長從與他國之間具有交集的文化事物,試圖偷渡其文化意義的帝國主義概念」的事態一再發生,以及在追求建國的過程中,所協同產生、類似「明治維新」「脫亞入歐」的意念,台灣社會的網路輿論場域,對農曆春節或新年之類的假期,新的「以陽曆新年徹底取代農曆春節」的發想,也正在逐漸抬頭當中,甚至也有論者主張「希望政府能夠在法定假日上廢除春節」。 恕筆者直言,以一個英美式古典自由主義或保守主義者、希望「除非問題已經大到非劇烈變革而不可為的程度,否則社會的變遷應該盡可能以溫和漸進的方式來推動」的角度來講,筆者不樂見由政府官方力量強行推動「廢除農曆春節、並以『新曆年(陽曆新年)』取而代之」的構想。理由如下: […]

Recent Posts

國民黨誰來匹配缺乏國際觀的侯友宜?

國民黨誰來匹配缺乏國際觀的侯友宜?

國民黨選總統民調第一,無人可及,當然就是侯友宜。可惜他所欠缺的是國際觀,這點國民黨內以及親藍媒體都不便否認。 [...]

More Info
好吃水餃的侯友宜

好吃水餃的侯友宜

中國北方人說「好吃不過水餃!」說得也是,水餃真的好吃,但是全世界好吃的只限於水餃嗎? 對此問話,侯友宜市長的回答,當然是「是」,absolutely  ,唯一而且絕對的肯定。 韓國人或許對此回答會不甚滿意,他們會這樣回應:「水餃」嗎?哼!哼!那麼我們的「泡菜」呢?—- 何況,誰敢說「水餃」不是韓國人發明的?你們中國人唐朝時遠征韓國,被我們打退,帶走的唯一戰利品就是如何包「水餃」! [...]

More Info
侯友宜的國際觀

侯友宜的國際觀

俗諺:知微見著。尤其要知道封裝緊密、不輕易言論的政治人物的細微心思和內心格局,你我小公民只能藉著細心扒尋他無意中透露的口風,而窺視其心中的奧秘。 侯友宜市長除了萬變不改其宗的「以新北市民福祉為念」的老套外,最近兩起「放風聲」的異舉,倒頗值注意。 [...]

More Info
<strong>「農曆春節」雜感</strong>

「農曆春節」雜感

—農曆春節是專屬於中國的概念嗎?台灣是否應該保留農曆春節假期? [...]

More Info

搜尋

精選文章

川習會的中美矛盾是戰略,不是貿易!

2017-04-08 韓非

八仙樂園爆炸案:缺乏常識造成的災難

2015-06-28 異想

彰化縣民輪替後的哀與愁

2016-03-06 許家瑋

新文明病:儲物症(Hoarding disorder)似正在增加

2015-04-13 楊庸一

訂閱本站

輸入你的電子郵件訂閱新文章並接收新通知。

Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way
Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way