The Legislative Council election is fast approaching. Buoyed by last year’s landslide victory in the district council election , the opposition parties have vowed to upend the political landscape by achieving their goal of a “35-plus” majority which could serve as a powerful tool to pressure the government. To boost their chances, the opposition camp organised an unprecedented primary election to filter out candidates who are less popular. With young activists outperforming the old-school veterans by a wide margin, the result signalled voters’ preference for a more confrontational approach against the establishment. In the wake of the anti-government protests which disrupted life in the city on all fronts, the escalating tensions between opposing blocs have clouded rational thinking and dimmed chances of breaking the political impasse. Unsightly scenes such as bitter finger-pointing and clashes have become commonplace in the legislature (“ Is there still room for Hong Kong’s political centre? We’ll soon find out ”, July 19). Neither side will budge an inch on their ideology and seek common ground. Meanwhile, the government seems to be living in an ivory tower and is absurdly detached from public opinion. If asked to choose a candidate, I would opt for someone who advocates a more conciliatory approach to this stalemate instead of someone rigidly sticking to their guns. Our society desperately needs reasonable politicians who are willing to act as mediators to bridge the gap between the administration and the people. Unrelenting resistance will only further alienate people. Only with finding a political middle ground and more interaction to promote mutual understanding will the city regain rationality and stability. Gary Lam, Sheung Shui Is this not how the system is supposed to work? In response to “ Dark times ahead for Hong Kong legislature ” (July 17), I would like to ask a few questions. The most important is: are the primaries and subsequent Legco elections not the lawful process for exercising citizens’ right to vote, express their views and influence government and policy? It is my understanding that the turnout for the primaries was notable and the process peaceful and fair. So, the fact that some of the more centrist lawmakers did not receive enough votes for them to feel confident going forward should not be blamed on other candidates, should it? That some candidates have withdrawn because of pressure and, dare I say, threats from the Chinese government seems to undermine the democratic process, does it not? Finally, aren’t candidates who have clearly expressed their intentions for using the lawful elections and legislative process to exercise their rights to be heard and participate in the governing process, simply using the system as designed to make the government responsible to its citizens? Lee Strauss, Tai Tam