Advertisement
Advertisement
Mad as hell

Occupy Central is Hong Kong's 'mad as hell' moment

Self-serving arguments from property tycoons and government officials are demeaning to an educated population who support the local democratic process

"Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?" asked punk rock icon Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols. He directed that leering remark at disenchanted English youth in the 1970s, but he could just have easily been describing the emotional undercurrent of disenfranchisement that feeds the Occupy Central movement.

The movement has been vilified with the kind of fear-mongering reserved for medieval witch-hunts. Doomsayers are warning about the kind of chaos and turmoil that resembles a zombie apocalypse rather than civil protest.

Brusque declarations and a blunt white paper from Beijing are predictable, but the arguments from Hong Kong's business establishment have been disappointing because they are unsophisticated and out of touch with events in the rest of the world.

Their views are shaped through yesterday’s Hong Kong. They cannot envision the future

A protest and show of support of this magnitude for local democratic process will actually be a healthy event for Hong Kong's development as a financial and business centre. International investors welcome political dissent and positive change towards a more civil society rather than outright insurrection. Similar protests regularly come and go in London and New York without invoking the apocalyptic scenarios. Hong Kong has experienced large-scale marches and protests before with little trouble so there is no reason to believe Occupy will cause chaos.

Terse warnings by property tycoons and Hong Kong's former central banker Joseph Yam Chi-kwong proclaim that protests will be bad for business and social stability. They have predictably backfired as more than 700,000 people participated in an Occupy plebiscite. Between the greater social good and political expediency, our business leaders chose the latter. Between the truth of history and their own business, they chose their own business.

These self-serving arguments are demeaning to an educated population. Describing how Occupy will hurt businesses only draws the cynical response that what is good for the tycoons' business is not necessarily good for Hong Kong. It also shows that most of our tycoons and government officials lack international perspectives. Almost all of them have never lived or worked extensively in a democratic and developed country. Their views are shaped through yesterday's Hong Kong. They cannot envision the future.

For someone who once served the people, Yam surprisingly says Occupy creates political risk that endangers Hong Kong's status as a financial centre. But, he forgets that five years ago, global financial markets endured the worst implosion in history. Most major financial institutions and central banks barely survived an event far worse than a protest.

Yam's opinions are a parochial contrast to remarks made earlier this month by Bank of England governor Mark Carney. The former governor of the Bank of Canada spoke at the Conference on Inclusive Capitalism. He expressed the view that business leaders and policymakers needed to restore "social capital" to capitalism. While Carney recognised capitalism's virtues, he also called for "a sense of vocation and responsibility". While the rest of the world's central bankers comprehend the need for change, Yam demands blind obedience to the old system.

Rule of law, which is most important to investors, is stronger in Hong Kong than on the mainland. That will not be easily replaced overnight, no matter how many free-trade zones are opened in Shanghai.

Any attempt to achieve a more democratic society through free elections is good for any financial centre. Ultimately, financial markets and international investors want to see strong, publicly accountable institutions in Hong Kong and on the mainland.

Today's Hongkonger cannot be fooled or cajoled into specious arguments. Everyone has unrestricted internet access and can seek their version of the truth. Hong Kong's economic oligarchs and an unrepresentative and unresponsive government are seen to be the very source of instability in the lives of average people, making Hong Kong an almost impossibly expensive place to live and raise a family.

Occupy is Hong Kong's "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more" moment drawn from the Oscar-winning movie . In the movie Howard Beale, a TV anchor, exhorts American viewers to overcome their collective malaise and sense of helplessness. "First you've got to get mad. You've got to say, I'm a human being. My life has value." And that is what participants in the Occupy poll are actually saying with their ballots.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: Mad as hell
Post