The results of the opposition primaries , part of a plan to secure over 35 seats in the Legislative Council, indicate that many Hongkongers are tired of traditional pan-democrats, who have perhaps been regarded as the villains on the road to democracy in Hong Kong. I am not trying to start a generational battle, but it is crystal clear that people are more willing to put their faith in radical, unknown young localists who believe in “ mutual destruction ”, instead of the old approach advocated by experienced political celebrities. In a polarised society and amid a chaotic political environment, all potential Legco candidates from the opposition camp seem to have no choice but to consider either mutual destruction or transformation. If you watched the primary debates in each district, you would have noticed a common phenomenon: young candidates, who proclaimed themselves part of the “fighting camp”, criticising traditional pan-democrats, especially Democratic Party candidates, for among other things, their remarks, voting records, attendance and dealings with the central government. Neither their public policy philosophy nor their vision for the development of Hong Kong was discussed during election forums. The entire focus was on how to achieve mutual destruction in Legco. Will the victory of the “fighting camp” in the primaries fundamentally transform the existing political environment, the road to democracy and relationships within the democratic camp? Is Hong Kong, as many believe or hope, at a turning point in history? Answering these questions requires one to distinguish the nature of mutual destruction from transformation. Why security law should not end Hong Kong’s democracy push In advocating mutual destruction, the “fighting camp” is trying to trigger the collapse of an existing order, which will be replaced by a new one ultimately. But this point of view is realistically impossible, most obviously due to the lack of comprehensive planning, of consideration of how to deal with the central government and of Hong Kong’s position in the new cold war between two superpowers. Lessons from history suggest that once the old system starts to collapse, the lack of agreed plans for what should replace it leads to revolutionary groups fighting among themselves and to the re-emergence of supporters of the old system. This is certainly a chance for Hong Kong to embark on a new chapter, and I hope the potential candidates from the next generation will also consider a transformation plan for Hong Kong’s future. Louis Yim, Shau Kei Wan