No place for culture of confrontation
Members of the Legislative Council have just voted for the 2012 constitutional reform package, after the government finally accepted the Democratic Party's proposal to expand the electorate for the district council functional constituency.
Many young people opposing the reform called for a siege of Legco. Those who stirred up radical action alleged presumptuously that they were carrying out a 'revolt forced by officials' and 'exercising citizens' rights', but in fact they were playing dangerous games. One reckless move might have triggered fights between individuals with different views or severe police-citizen conflict, which could lead to injury. The consequences of such mass movements are unpredictable.
Having learned bloody lessons from the 1967 riots, Hongkongers regard stability and prosperity as their mainstream core value. Demonstrations since the riots have in the main been carried out peacefully and rationally.
However, commencing from the allocation of funds for the high-speed rail link last year, the League of Social Democrats has brought the radical confrontation culture of Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party to Hong Kong. As a result, any political complaint or appeal, whether big or small, may lead to very confrontational conflicts. If a bloody riot breaks out one day, which leader(s) will be brave enough to step out and take the responsibility? Can they really bear the responsibility if anyone is physically hurt?
Leung Kwok-hung has said 'once there is bloodshed, we will certainly take responsibility'. But other pan-democratic leaders have said the government would be responsible. This would be a shirking of responsibility, and sounds threatening.
If leaders have no intention of taking responsibility for bloodshed, they should think twice before calling on citizens to take radical action.
