When over 1 million Hong Kong people marched, on May 21, 1989, for democracy and freedom in China and against Beijing's suppression of the student movement, most of the participants were marching for the first time in their lives. Previous protest rallies of this kind had never attracted more than 10,000 participants. In the march, Hong Kong people established a very strong identity with their compatriots in China. Most of the protesters marched again on the following two Sundays.
After the Tiananmen Square incident, many middle-class families planned to emigrate. Irrespective of whether they left Hong Kong or not at the end, these considerations certainly had an important impact on their career development, their family life and their children's education.
In view of the significant role of the city in the political tragedy, Hong Kong was labelled 'a base of subversion'. These concerns eventually prompted Beijing, in 2002, to push for a speedy resolution of Article 23 of the Basic Law, which covers national security. By the summer of 2003, the issue boiled over, prompting another massive protest rally, on July 1, that led to the resignation of chief executive Tung Chee-hwa.
The Tiananmen Square incident accelerated Hong Kong's democratisation process. In May 1999, the executive and legislative councils reached a consensus on the direct elections by universal suffrage of the chief executive and all seats of the legislature by 2003, and on the elections of one-half of the legislature seats by the same means in 1997. Since the community backed the strong push for democracy, the pro-democracy groups challenged the taboo against political organisations and formed the Democratic Party. Its subsequent electoral performance showed its popular support.
Hence, the Tiananmen Square incident was not just an important political event on the mainland, but a part of Hong Kong people's lives.
The local community is pragmatic. When top officials avoid the issue, and when friends doing business on the mainland shun the topic, Hong Kong people understand. But when the chief executive claims to represent them, and toes the official Beijing line against their fundamental values, they react strongly.