At the advent of the 10th anniversary of Hong Kong's return to China, a survey conducted by academics showed a rise in Chinese identity among the city's youth. Those who identified themselves as Chinese Hongkongers rose to 22 per cent, up from 16 per cent a decade ago, while those who called themselves Hongkongers dropped from 34 per cent to 29 per cent for the same period.
Although this helped to show the changing mood in youngsters, it nonetheless drew its conclusions from the perceived dichotomy of 'Hongkongness' and 'Chineseness', a divide that was framed by academics and had been adopted for identity studies in past decades.
However, critics here have recently raised doubts about the usefulness of this dichotomy as a yardstick for one's sense of belonging, because the assumed separation between the two identities may no longer be valid.
One such critic is John Chan Koon-chung, a renowned Hong Kong commentator who now spends half his time in Beijing. Pointing to Shanghai and Beijing residents, who are proud of their regional identity without reflecting on their national identity, he argued that the division between Hong Kong and Chinese identities was arbitrary.
The distinction between Hong Kong Chinese and Chinese Hongkongers used to serve a purpose. It helped sociologists capture the state of mind of Hongkongers living under a benevolent colonial government in the 1970s and 1980s. Hongkongers tried to carve a unique identity, separate from mainlanders, who were living in politically turbulent times. Consequently, the Hong Kong identity was formed to reflect ambivalence towards colonial rule, to impart the meaning of 'self' and as a means to survive amid social instability based on real, as well as imagined, differences.
But, in recent years, political concerns that had helped to accentuate 'Hongkongness' have been offset by other, equally powerful, if not stronger, forces. Robust economic growth and a vibrant social scene have drawn many Hongkongers to work, or reside, on the mainland.