Hong Kong has never been easy to govern. First, the system of governance is inherited from the colonial days and is proving increasingly dysfunctional in the new political landscape. And, since reunification, there has been a growing distrust of the government, whose policy decisions are often suspected of favouring big business and doing Beijing's bidding.
Now comes a new social movement whose issues such as local identity and the politics of planning and the environment have displaced the old politics of welfare. Influenced by the global sustainability movement, and reinforced by many Hongkongers' worries about undue influence from the mainland, the rules of political engagement are being rewritten. When these three forces coalesce, the conditions are ripe for political implosion, as marked by the express rail-link saga.
Much can be said about how public consultation could have been done better on this and other issues. Deeply rooted structural problems - such as the lack of democratic progress, economic uncertainty and reduced social mobility - no doubt complicate matters. There are no simple solutions. Even mature democracies face demands for greater empowerment or rising discontent among the middle class.
Hong Kong faces even greater dilemmas. It is not an independent polity but has to negotiate its constitutional change with the central government. If not interpreted innovatively, the Basic Law could become a political straitjacket, as Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew remarked in 1998.
Hong Kong can't afford stagnation in economic growth or infrastructure development. Without expanding the economic pie, there is no way to create new opportunities for social mobility. Without integration with the mainland, our following generations will miss out on a 'new horizon' of the 21st century that young people the world over hanker to explore and exploit.
Yet there is no small measure of scepticism about the distribution of economic fruits under a political system that many regard as unfair. The government either gets blamed for not acting, or for acting with doubtful intentions. People know the city's destiny cannot be separated from that of China as a whole, but they worry about losing its distinctiveness in the name of integration.
Policy debates are often clouded by larger political uneasiness and, once moral politics take over, the key question becomes: 'Which side are you on?' The result is a society that fails to listen to itself and to the many views that give Hong Kong its sophistication and vibrancy.
