• Sat
  • Aug 2, 2014
  • Updated: 12:09am
PUBLISHED : Sunday, 09 September, 2012, 12:00am
UPDATED : Sunday, 09 September, 2012, 2:39am

Vote to maintain Hong Kong's identity

Philip Bowring says, civic duty aside, Hongkongers should turn up at the ballot box today to make this clear: above all, they reject the plan to speed up integration with the mainland

BIO

Philip Bowring has been based in Asia for 39 years writing on regional financial and political issues. He has been a columnist for the South China Morning Post since the mid-1990s and for the International Herald Tribune from 1992 to 2011. He also contributes regularly to the Wall Street Journal, www.asiasentinel.com, a website of which he is a founder, and elsewhere. Prior to 1992 he was with the weekly Far Eastern Economic Review, latterly as editor.
 

It is election day. If you are eligible and have not already voted, please do so as soon as possible. For sure, the limited nature of Hong Kong's democracy limits the value of just one vote. Nonetheless, it is hard to complain either about the government or the limited franchise if you do not use what you have.

You may not know who to vote for. It is amazing how many long-time resident foreigners have little grasp of who is who in local politics. Understandably, they may also be baffled by the mechanics of the new so-called super seat election of district councillors in which all can vote if they do not qualify to vote in one of the functional constituencies. So here is my voting guide, followed by the reasons for it.

In the geographical constituencies, do not vote for any of the candidates of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong or the Federation of Trade Unions. Both are the mainstream Communist Party United Front operations and will ultimately always put the party's interest, and that of Beijing, before their proclaimed commitment to democracy, Hong Kong and the welfare of the middle- and lower-income groups. On all but minor issues, they can be relied on to support whatever the executive-led government wants.

Do not vote, either, for the Liberal Party, which will be grossly overrepresented in the Legislative Council, thanks to the small-circle business groups of the functional constituencies.

So which of the mainstream, liberal democratic parties - the Democratic Party or Civic Party - should one vote for? Or should one go for the apparently radical People Power, or one of the parties built around a single individual? On the choice between Democratic and Civic parties, much should depend on the quality of the candidate or on tactical voting in the hope of maximising non-communist representation.

People Power may attract democrats of radical inclination - though many may find its tactics unappealing and some question its backing and motives.

That leaves what are effectively one-person parties of the likes of Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee's New People's Party's and Cyd Ho Sau-lan's Labour Party. As individuals, such people have merit, with reputations for being active and independent-minded. However, their existence has added to the problem of fragmentation of the non-communist camp.

Next is the question of voting for the district council seats. First, ignore the People Power call to boycott this ballot: vote for one of the Democratic Party candidates, Albert Ho Chun-yan or James To Kun-sun, or for Frederick Fung Kin-kee, the hard-working one-man band of the Association for Democracy and Peoples' Livelihood who previously represented Kowloon West.

In the end, the pro-government camp will keep control of the legislature but it matters a lot who and how many other voices are heard. It also matters that Leung Chun-ying be given an early lesson in public dissatisfaction with his record to date.

It may seem unfair to take swipes when he has been in office just two months. He deserved to win the chief executive selection, if only because his opponent was so incompetent. But there are already a number of disturbing aspects to his performance.

Most shocking, if only because the decision was entirely his, has been the appointment as development secretary of a man whose household has been supplementing its already high income at the expense of low-wage earners in subdivided flats. One would have thought that revelations of bureaucratic greed that surfaced in the last days of Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's administration would have made Leung sensitive to this issue. But, as with the Communist Party, different rules apply. Not backing down in the face of popular outrage is more important than the principles of good government.

Now we have the national education issue, which goes to the heart of what gives Hong Kong its own identity, a special part of China in the same way as, for example, the Basque region is a special part of Spain. For sure, national education pre-dates Leung. But Leung has allowed it to become a big issue. People can see it is not just a means of teaching more Chinese history but of teaching history doctored to suit a party which was once cruel and is now simply corrupt.

In turn, that focuses attention on how far Leung is committed to Beijing's goal of speeding up the integration of Hong Kong into the mainland through physical links, easing of flows of people, and participation in national flag waving over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, etc, rather than focusing on its Asian and international business role and the separate institutions that support that.

Emphasising Hong Kong's identity is not anti-national. It simply acknowledges that it has special characteristics derived from history and Cantonese traditions that it wants to preserve. It is hard to see how Hong Kong can retain its own legal and other systems once the border with Shenzhen dissolves. Hong Kong's special position is based on relations with the outside world, not on its most immediate neighbour. Integrated, Hong Kong will be a second- or even third-tier city in China, the Trieste or Tangier of the nation. Go vote against that.

Philip Bowring is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator. His wife is a Civic Party candidate in Kowloon West

Share

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive
 
 

 

22

This article is now closed to comments

laubell
;;;;;
fanjiang
My issue is not that people cannot express their opinions. They can and should in this free society. My issue is that such biased and uninformed article, written by someone with an obvious self interest, is allowed to be printed in one of the few quality daily newspapers in Hong Kong. Surely there must be some quality control.
The article uses the word Communist four times in his article. He is accusing a large section of the electoral candidates as members of the Communist party. Please Mr. Bowring, show us the facts here - otherwise this is just scaremongering.
He is telling people to note vote for the liberal party, because they are over-represented - what if the Liberal party ideals are attractive to me? Where is the analysis on what the Liberal party stands for?
I did not vote for any of the so-called communist parities, nor for the Liberal party in my geographical constituent vote today. So I have no so-called left leaning bias. I just wish that the press can use more rational and sensible analysis to inform the public of the choices that they are about to make.
And yes, we are getting a taste of a free society - being allowed to vote, however imperfect the system is. I do hope that we can move to universal suffrage for the next election, but at least I am enjoying a right that was not available to Hong Kong people during most of the 150 years of British rule.
blurgh
It's not a regular news article, it's a column. They're supposed to be opinionated and biased. That's how they work!
Camel
"Emphasising Hong Kong's identity is not anti-national. It simply acknowledges that it has special characteristics derived from history and Cantonese traditions that it wants to preserve."
Special Characteristics means it embraces more the western British traditions and values than its own in their over the decades by their colonial lords indoctrined eye "retarded" culture and traditions. Just for your information, Hong Kong was a British colony, its not anymore even some would like it back. And democracy? When in the history of Hong Kong did the HK people have enjoyed democratic rule? When did the Hong Kongers have had universal suffrage or elections under British rule?
Hong Kong People should vote and should take the elections seriously. Hong Kong people should learn about politics and what political consequences their vote would have on their life and society. But to maintain HK Identity? What Identity?
martinturner
Those who criticise Philip for expressing his opinions on the election (in an opinion column on election day) may note that elsewhere in this paper are (gosh!) other views:
Jason Ng tells us to reject the moderate democratic parties in favour of LSD and People Power.
****www.scmp.com/comment/blogs/article/1030842/electile-dysfunction
Look a little further and find all sorts of opinions. Then make your own mind up how to vote. This is our taste of how a free society operates. Enjoy it while you can.
fanjiang
I'm surprised that the SCMP allows such biased comments to be published. Comments like calling some of the parties "mainstream Communist Party United Front operations" are not necessary - some politicians may be closer aligned to China, but do you have proof that they are Communist Party operatives? I am not a supporter of these parties, but I can't help but feel a sense of McCarthyism in these comments.
Hong Kong is inextricably linked with China, and the people share the same blood. HK institutions and freedom have to be protected, no compromises on that. But one cannot ignore the reality that we are part of China, and that is also HK's competitive advantage. How many HK-listed companies are China based? How many employment/business opportunities do they provide? The water that we drink comes mostly from Guangdong. How many HK men marries mainland women?
The links are inextricable. Thinking of China is an evil communist regime will bring us back to the cold war. The Chinese government has pulled millions of people above the poverty line in the past 25 years. No doubt the corruption, the suppression of freedom of speech, and the current legal system are undesirable. HK should lead by example with our freedom and rule of law. But slinging mud at the motherland is not the way forward.
Ah, but the final line in the article gave it all away. The writer is the husband of a Civic Party candidate. All rationale arguments can be thrown out of the window.
rsallen
So you disagree - fine. You've argued your case well. Why try to suggest that opinions that differ from your own shouldn't be published? A quality newspaper publishes a range of opinion pieces across the political spectrum.
shouken
Behind Philip Bowring's lecture on whom to vote for, I can see a very well-defined "Us-Us-Us" mentality. His largest objection to national integration (he may deny it) for HK is that integration will make HK into 2nd- or 3rd-tier. Admirable scare tactic! Who cares about what happens to the rest of China, as long as we (HK) remain top-tier and "special"? Who can argue with someone who apparently puts 7.3 million HKers first and foremost in his consciousness? Well, 70 years ago Hitler also wanted to elevate the German race, 70 million people, on top of the world and did everything he could to ensure that happened. That was why Adolf became wildly popular with the Germans. I remain respectful of him, because to me he at least was selfish for at least 70 million people. But still, selfishness is selfishness.
Reading Bowring, you cannot miss the fact that Hong Kong's core value is about hating Beijing, hating the communists, and by ramification, hate the current HK government. Hate! Hate! Hate! If one only look at the bad things, who? (I repeat) Who, can be good? Democracy likely will only get HK, as a maximum, to where the US currently is, a government widely perceived as the pawn of the 1% on Wall Street. I give about 200 years before this new world-wide religion (democracy) implodesin every society. But maybe I am wrong. After all, the imperial system lasted 2000 years.
lucifer
What a stupid and pointless response.
If anything, China needs to preserve Hong Kong the way it is, so that at some time in the future, if China is ever able to become a true pluralistic and democratic society governed by the rule of law, they have something they can reference and professionals who can help them along the way. Their current model is doomed and further integration is only going to take Hong Kong down with them.
rsallen
Congratulations on fulfilling Godwin's Law with your pointless and ill-informed Nazi analogy.
****en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
toxxygen
Godwin's Law is never wrong.
rsallen
"Such column is heavily biased and is not objective at all. I would give you a poor journalistic grading. "
This is an opinion column: there is no requirement for opinion pieces to be objective. In fact, they are by their very nature subjective. The author is free to recommend candidates to the readers and the readers are free to accept or reject his suggestions.
doctorh
That's where you're wrong - when writing for an opinion for a formal newspaper, the opinion column must be supported by facts and persuasive arguments lest it be considered just a lewd comment by a writer. When working at a newspaper, even an opinion must be sound and as objective as it can be supported by sound arguments.
I find none of that in this opinion piece, which is better relegated to blogs and forums rather than in a newspaper. Trust me I would know since I work in the media business. :)
rsallen
Whether you agree with it or not, this is a perfectly reasoned article, expressing the view of the writer. It seems that you are unwilling to have people express views which differ from your own. Your comment, on the other hand, is arrogant and patronising.
And I suggest you look up the word 'lewd' in a dictionary.
doctorh
Everyone has their own views - if you find mine arrogant and patronising, then it simply proves that you also cannot accept my views which are different from yours. To me, you just presented a self defeating argument.
And also a FYI before you start blasting off comments: There is an alternate meaning for the word "lewd" - the original latin meaning for it means "unlearned", "ignorant". Blatantly stating the CCP is one sided and cruel ignores the whole picture completely and is an ignorant view.
maverick
Thanks for revamping the website. If it were for the comments I have read over the last few days, I would never have confirmed my suspicion of the true colour of this newspaper.
babyhenry
Wow what a load of Junk.
Telling voters who to vote for as if they are not smart enough to make their own decision? If anyone can't make a decision independently, but to have to read your piece for their final choice or follow "other advice" to make a their choice, they should do HK a favor and not vote.
doctorh
Secondly, do not advocate to other people as to who to vote or who not to vote for. I think HK people should be capable enough to know who to vote and who not to vote. Such column is heavily biased and is not objective at all. I would give you a poor journalistic grading.
toxxygen
This is editorial...
questexasia
Commend removed by poster
doctorh
Your conception that integration with the Mainland will make HK lose its identity is currently wrong. HK's dynamics won't change ecause of integration with Mainland anymore than it will become more foreign just because it has more foreign workers from other countries in the city. What makes HK stand out is the established rule of law/justice, order, quality of life and fundamental core values which shouldn't change even with an influx of Mainland people. If they do change, one has to question how strongly these values are held in the first place.
"People can see it is not just a means of teaching more Chinese history but of teaching history doctored to suit a party which was once cruel and is now simply corrupt." I think the question is whether you have enough evidence to claim this as an absolute reality at all times. Granted, the CCP has committed many atrocities against its own people but in the last 30 years, it has also done much great by reform and opening up. Many folks once living in poverty are able to experience a better life and unless you think this is a minor thing, I guess you have never lived in poverty and will never understand what it feels like. As for improvements, for sure the government needs to do more to get rid of corruption, improve the lives of people and it is a work in progress, not a finished work. The British government has done atrocities to people of other nations as did US too. Would you classify them as "cruel" as well?
lucifer
I totally agree with you. In fact, they should rehabilitate Bo Xilai as soon as possible so that he can help introduce Hong Kong's citizens to red songs and the greatness of Chairman Mao. If Hong Kong people would just stop and realize that their fate is already sealed and stop resisting the inevitable integration with the glorious motherland, we could all be one happy family.
 
 
 
 
 

Login

SCMP.com Account

or