Occupy Leaders Convicted - What Next?
"That an uneducated but astute old man could predict the outcome, you have to ask why all the gifted souls in the democratic camp couldn't."
As Occupy Central kicked off in September 2014, my wife's 98-year-old grandad ventured, "It will all end in tears."
This man has a history. He'd fought the Japanese invasion of Hong Kong to flee by the skin of his teeth on a junk out of Aberdeen. He went through the 1967 riots, fearful for his life as his colleagues brandished the 'Little Red Book.' He's seen things that would make your hair turn grey.
And it did end in tears. Chu Yiu-ming is crying as his co-conspirators go off to jail. Claudia Mo is sitting in LegCo ranting against 'evil Carrie Lam' as her emotions run out of control. It's all somewhat bitter and sad but so predictable.
That an uneducated but astute old man could predict the outcome, you have to ask why all the gifted souls in the democratic camp couldn't. Years of studying law and decades of social activism didn't help them.
The trial of the leaders of the 79-day Occupy Central concluded yesterday. Some are guilty as charged; others are found not guilty. The authors of the illegal action, Tai Yiu-ting, Chan Kin-man and Chu Yiu-Ming, received 16 months in jail. In compassion, the judge suspended Chu's sentence, given his age and ill health. Meanwhile, Tanya Chan's sentencing is on hold. The poor lady's condition demands an urgent operation. I wish her well. She's passionate, although a misguided person and the stress of recent weeks must be taking its toll.
The younger people charged walked away from court with community service orders, except one with a criminal record. Today, legal scholars are busy passing comments. Many have skin in the game as advocates for one side or the other; thus, their observations are tainted. We could debate the merits of the sentences without achieving a resolution. In the end, the judge made his call. I respect that. As the old saying goes, "Don't do the crime if you can't do time."
Tai and the others expressed no regret. This stance earned them a rebuff from the judge for their failure to apologise to the people of Hong Kong for "excessive inconvenience and suffering." Predictably, supporters portrayed them as 'martyrs' and 'prisoners of conscience.' These assertions underline the distortions of truth that shaded aspects of Occupy. The other is the falsehood of a peaceful protest. Then, despite grandstanding claims they'd accept the court's decision, today came news of an appeal.
Occupy Central left our fair city divided. Our institutions suffered damage with enormous strains felt in many quarters. The Police Force suffered the most. Gains made throughout the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s were suddenly swept away as public trust waned, with police officers becoming the meat in the proverbial sandwich.
Officers trained to deliver a 'quality service' in a new era of policing found themselves on the receiving end of relentless insults. Then came the violence. At work, they were spat at and abused daily; then, at home, they faced rifts in ideologically divided families. The wounds have not healed for some, as resentment and deep feelings won't fade soon. Yet, they remain resilient and committed to their duty despite the challenges.
And yet Tai and his group remain convinced they did the right thing. It's a blind mantra to them. While some sectors call for reconciliation and compromise, Tai offered no such option. As a law professor, he knew he faced a conviction for his actions. Thus, I find the 'prisoner of conscience' label egotistic and an insult to genuine political prisoners. No matter. Rational thought plus pleas for adherence to the rule of law are unlikely to change ideologically fixed minds.
So what next? Indeed, Hong Kong must move forward on reforms, especially given the non-functioning LegCo. The Basic Law also mandates we act. Carrie Lam is probably right to hold off on bringing forward new proposals for more democracy in the current climate, with hostile attitudes on all sides. Constructive and meaningful debate is not possible. It's wise to let the dust settle and then reconsider.
But have the so-called Democrats learnt anything? They remain a divided entity that detests each other as much as their political opponents. The constant fragmentation within their ill-disciplined ranks plays straight into the hands of the opposition.
Moreover, at the grassroots, down at the district level, the Democrats have only isolated strongholds. The DAB and others are better organised, with experienced, proactive workers at the frontline dealing with citizens' day-to-day issues. The Democrats, except for Lee Cheuk-yan's trade union, have no similar structures.
Also, the likes of Claudia Mo and Albert Ho failed the communication test at the grassroots level. Their message plays well with students, middle-class types, and those with anti-China views. It fails to impress working folks struggling to hold down two jobs but can't get to work because a protest blocks a road.
In short, the Democrats are uncoordinated, mercurial and stubbornly blind to their failings. Everything that goes wrong for them is a conspiracy or united front action. In reality, their ineptness is more damaging. Further, a refusal to engage with Beijing places them outside where the actual game is taking place. Running off to Washington or London to bleat about 'human rights' only feeds suspicions of their motives.
Simultaneously, a more significant transformation is at play. One of the cornerstones of Western political thinking is that only democracy can provide the environment for economic growth and innovation. That theory is falling apart under the weight of China's progress.
Likewise, Western thinkers assert that the emergence of a middle class will stoke calls for democracy. Well, that's not happening. China moulded the best elements of the West's economic model into its system without embracing Western-style democracy. In the process, they've lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in decades. This stunning achievement exposes Western theories as wanting.
With District Council elections in November this year and LegCo in 2020, we should be able to see if Occupy Central affects the outcome. These elections could potentially reshape the political landscape, and it's worth watching.
April 2019
This man has a history. He'd fought the Japanese invasion of Hong Kong to flee by the skin of his teeth on a junk out of Aberdeen. He went through the 1967 riots, fearful for his life as his colleagues brandished the 'Little Red Book.' He's seen things that would make your hair turn grey.
And it did end in tears. Chu Yiu-ming is crying as his co-conspirators go off to jail. Claudia Mo is sitting in LegCo ranting against 'evil Carrie Lam' as her emotions run out of control. It's all somewhat bitter and sad but so predictable.
That an uneducated but astute old man could predict the outcome, you have to ask why all the gifted souls in the democratic camp couldn't. Years of studying law and decades of social activism didn't help them.
The trial of the leaders of the 79-day Occupy Central concluded yesterday. Some are guilty as charged; others are found not guilty. The authors of the illegal action, Tai Yiu-ting, Chan Kin-man and Chu Yiu-Ming, received 16 months in jail. In compassion, the judge suspended Chu's sentence, given his age and ill health. Meanwhile, Tanya Chan's sentencing is on hold. The poor lady's condition demands an urgent operation. I wish her well. She's passionate, although a misguided person and the stress of recent weeks must be taking its toll.
The younger people charged walked away from court with community service orders, except one with a criminal record. Today, legal scholars are busy passing comments. Many have skin in the game as advocates for one side or the other; thus, their observations are tainted. We could debate the merits of the sentences without achieving a resolution. In the end, the judge made his call. I respect that. As the old saying goes, "Don't do the crime if you can't do time."
Tai and the others expressed no regret. This stance earned them a rebuff from the judge for their failure to apologise to the people of Hong Kong for "excessive inconvenience and suffering." Predictably, supporters portrayed them as 'martyrs' and 'prisoners of conscience.' These assertions underline the distortions of truth that shaded aspects of Occupy. The other is the falsehood of a peaceful protest. Then, despite grandstanding claims they'd accept the court's decision, today came news of an appeal.
Occupy Central left our fair city divided. Our institutions suffered damage with enormous strains felt in many quarters. The Police Force suffered the most. Gains made throughout the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s were suddenly swept away as public trust waned, with police officers becoming the meat in the proverbial sandwich.
Officers trained to deliver a 'quality service' in a new era of policing found themselves on the receiving end of relentless insults. Then came the violence. At work, they were spat at and abused daily; then, at home, they faced rifts in ideologically divided families. The wounds have not healed for some, as resentment and deep feelings won't fade soon. Yet, they remain resilient and committed to their duty despite the challenges.
And yet Tai and his group remain convinced they did the right thing. It's a blind mantra to them. While some sectors call for reconciliation and compromise, Tai offered no such option. As a law professor, he knew he faced a conviction for his actions. Thus, I find the 'prisoner of conscience' label egotistic and an insult to genuine political prisoners. No matter. Rational thought plus pleas for adherence to the rule of law are unlikely to change ideologically fixed minds.
So what next? Indeed, Hong Kong must move forward on reforms, especially given the non-functioning LegCo. The Basic Law also mandates we act. Carrie Lam is probably right to hold off on bringing forward new proposals for more democracy in the current climate, with hostile attitudes on all sides. Constructive and meaningful debate is not possible. It's wise to let the dust settle and then reconsider.
But have the so-called Democrats learnt anything? They remain a divided entity that detests each other as much as their political opponents. The constant fragmentation within their ill-disciplined ranks plays straight into the hands of the opposition.
Moreover, at the grassroots, down at the district level, the Democrats have only isolated strongholds. The DAB and others are better organised, with experienced, proactive workers at the frontline dealing with citizens' day-to-day issues. The Democrats, except for Lee Cheuk-yan's trade union, have no similar structures.
Also, the likes of Claudia Mo and Albert Ho failed the communication test at the grassroots level. Their message plays well with students, middle-class types, and those with anti-China views. It fails to impress working folks struggling to hold down two jobs but can't get to work because a protest blocks a road.
In short, the Democrats are uncoordinated, mercurial and stubbornly blind to their failings. Everything that goes wrong for them is a conspiracy or united front action. In reality, their ineptness is more damaging. Further, a refusal to engage with Beijing places them outside where the actual game is taking place. Running off to Washington or London to bleat about 'human rights' only feeds suspicions of their motives.
Simultaneously, a more significant transformation is at play. One of the cornerstones of Western political thinking is that only democracy can provide the environment for economic growth and innovation. That theory is falling apart under the weight of China's progress.
Likewise, Western thinkers assert that the emergence of a middle class will stoke calls for democracy. Well, that's not happening. China moulded the best elements of the West's economic model into its system without embracing Western-style democracy. In the process, they've lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in decades. This stunning achievement exposes Western theories as wanting.
With District Council elections in November this year and LegCo in 2020, we should be able to see if Occupy Central affects the outcome. These elections could potentially reshape the political landscape, and it's worth watching.
April 2019
Copyright © 2015