Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen's remarks about the Cultural Revolution being an extreme form of democracy were merely a slip of the tongue, some say. Others add that, since he has apologised, we should move on rather than dwell on the issue.
But even though Mr Tsang now agrees that the Cultural Revolution was a bad example to cite, he obviously still thinks that democracy is dangerous, and that we should move very cautiously towards the implementation of universal suffrage.
Mr Tsang cited California as another example of democracy gone awry, in the same interview. 'In California, for instance,' he said, 'you have [any number of initiatives that let you] overturn policy taken by the government. That's not necessarily conducive to good government.'
In California, the public can propose state laws and amend the constitution, through proposals known as ballot initiatives. A successful initiative leads to a referendum.
It is true that laws adopted by the state legislature may be overturned in this way. But to qualify for inclusion on the ballot, a petition must be signed by at least 10 per cent of registered voters, and the proposition itself needs to be approved by more than 50 per cent of all voters - not inconsiderable hurdles and a far cry from mob rule.
This is the process that Mr Tsang described as 'not necessarily conducive to good government'. His policy address shows what Mr Tsang really thinks of democracy. In that carefully crafted document, he said: 'We promote democratic development without compromising social stability or government efficiency.'
This suggests that, in his mind, democracy is somehow opposed to social stability and government efficiency. He does not appreciate that, without democracy, it is difficult to have either social stability or good government. These ideas are complementary, not opposed to one another.
