So Dr Raymond Wu Wai-yung feels that the flag-burning incident on National Day was caused by a lack of 'civil education' and 'an idea of nation' ('Leftist links flag-burning to lack of patriotic education', South China Morning Post, October 4).
One of the activists involved in the incident said, in the same report, that the current flag of China represents Communist Party rule. The flag burning was, I presume, aimed much more at that than any criticism of China as a nation.
Dr Wu's comment is yet another example of naive thinking from the many worthy people who 'advise' the governments in Beijing and the SAR and who are so frequently reported in the media.
Criticism of the government is frequently put down as criticism of China. The two are obviously not the same thing. It is perfectly possible in any country to love one's nation and to criticise its government at the same time. Any suggestion that 'civil education' will eliminate anti-establishment acts like this is way off the mark. In fact, if Dr Wu thinks about it for a moment he will realise that civil education, if conducted properly and not used as a means to try to pacify the population, could easily bring about the opposite effect in a society that has no meaningfully representative government.
One of the aims of civil education should be to stir people into engaging fully in the political process and into concern about the way things are done in their nation.
This is part of the duty of being a good citizen. However, when there is no real channel for the fruits of such a programme to be heard then the result might well be the sort of action that appears to have shocked the establishment so much on October 1.