The protests in Hong Kong have evolved quite a bit and attracted significant media coverage over the past 6 months. What at first was a passionate response to the extradition bill that would have “legally” allowed anyone to be sent to the Mainland to face trial, has ballooned to a large scale demonstration against the Communist regime. Furthermore, there has been an increased schism between different people groups each championing different methodologies and ideologies, a schism further fueled by cultural and social divides. Whatever your political leanings are, this Vox video primer does a suitable job in introducing the context and the situation.
My time in Hong Kong has given me ample opportunity to record my reflections, which is informed by my upbringing and unique position of being someone from Hong Kong, but also not quite from Hong Kong. I must also admit that my own upbringing is of a privileged middle class Asian American (Canadian), with a predominantly, if not exclusively, Western upbringing and education, and having my most formative adult years influenced by the most liberal of places and institutions in America.
I have never felt any closer to living in a police state than as I have recently experienced in Hong Kong, as I found myself constantly looking over my shoulder and even seldom talking to my friends in whispers about “political” matters, concerned who might overhear us. On social media, sensationalist media clips (whether pro-China or anti-China) do accurately portray a piece of reality, but fail to cover the full story. The US congressional support of the pro-Democracy movement is seen as a minor victory, but one must also acknowledge that America has its own agendas (and the President his own). Nor do the generalizations (black = good, police = bad) that are often so convenient to use any more helpful. A Bloomberg article casually implies such an assumption with the following intro to one of its articles:
The black-clad protesters who have battled for the political destiny of Hong Kong this year are also the future of its economy (Note 1).
Oh no…use an eagle or literally anything else! QQ.
But the reality is a lot more complicated, just like there really isn’t a clear bad guy or good guy in Game of Thrones until those white zombies started showing up. There are people driven by pure ideology, others airing out their deep resentment towards the Mainland, and those who possess more nihilist tendencies and just want to watch the world burn. Clearly, not all protesters are violent, nor all police officers brutal. Exceptional cases cannot be used to generalize whole groups, especially given when some actors have masqueraded their opponents to discredit their movements (Note 2).
I wear black as a stylistic choice, but it doesn’t mean I naturally throw Molotov cocktails. I have friends who are in the police force, but they do not inherently act with racist or violent tendencies. Would students inspired by political ideology violently and completely trash their university campuses that act as exemplary symbols of free speech and expression of human dignity? I have witnessed passionate protests at Berkeley (its history is almost synonymous with protest culture), but never have such passion resulted to this level of civic and institutional destruction. The mafia and local gangs are definitely involved (some even say they are coordinated with the police force, or higher political powers), but without any independent reviews or investigations, who can say definitively?
Subway codes for back-channel communication and protest assembly.
In the midst of all this, something that has never stopped escaping me, is Margaret Atwood’s (author of The Handmaid’s Tale) prologue to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (I know, this is quite a pivot). You can read the prologue here without getting the book, though the book itself is a literary classic.
Though the essay-prologue is an examination of “utopian” literature with reflections of their corresponding societies along with critical lessons to be gained for the mercurial present, the contrast between Huxley’s Brave New World and George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four at the introduction of the essay is nevertheless a profound piece of commentary that must undoubtedly be referenced here.
Margaret Atwood writes:
In the latter half of the 20th century, two visionary books cast their shadows over our futures. One was George Orwell's 1949 novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, with its horrific vision of a brutal, mind-controlling totalitarian state - a book that gave us Big Brother and thoughtcrime and newspeak and the memory hole and the torture palace called the Ministry of Love and the discouraging spectacle of a boot grinding into the human face forever.
The other was Aldous Huxley's Brave New World (1932), which proposed a different and softer form of totalitarianism - one of conformity achieved through engineered, bottle-grown babies and hypnotic persuasion rather than through brutality, of boundless consumption that keeps the wheels of production turning and of officially enforced promiscuity that does away with sexual frustration, of a pre-ordained caste system ranging from a highly intelligent managerial class to a subgroup of dim-witted serfs programmed to love their menial work, and of soma, a drug that confers instant bliss with no side effects (Note 3).
Within the defined boundaries of these two different “utopias”, Atwood describes the progress of American history as a pendulum that swung across this gamut. Cold War begins the swing towards Nineteen Eighty-Four, punctuated with the fall of the Berlin Wall. This was counterbalanced with the subsequent Sexual Revolution, the rise of Consumerism and proliferation of strip malls and access to pleasure. Post-911 America created yet another inflection point with collective fears of large scale surveillance and unchecked government authority.
It is easy to continue Atwood’s paradigm into the present. The prolific integration of technology into everyday life gave humanity an unprecedented level of access to pleasure and leisure. Younger millennials are described, among other things, as a generation that is “more pleasure seeking” (Note 4). One might as well highlight the eminence of contemporary hookup culture that is further enabled by dating apps (you know which ones). But the pendulum also doesn’t neglect its other reality. The rise and ubiquity of the major tech companies has everyone, even (ironically) the US Government, concerned about their power, influence and manipulation of user data (Note 5), especially when such data falls into the hands of abusive agents (Cambridge Analytica, anyone?). In reality, the pendulum is swinging at such a rapid rate that indeed, Atwood’s question:
Would it be possible for both of these futures - the hard and the soft - to exist at the same time, in the same place?
Is answered with a succinct “yes”.
In China, such paradigms are evident as well, albeit with a different patina. Though Hong Kong has received a lot of attention and is undoubtedly the focus of this reflection, what is happening in Western China with the Uighurs is exponentially much more horrific in terms of human oppression and violation of human dignity. One Washington Post article described this as a “cultural genocide” happening quietly in our midst (Note 6), while a NYT report revealed the scale of this operation and involvement from even the highest levels of the Communist government (Note 7).
Pleasure and wealth also likewise abound, as China’s rise to a global economic power flirts with their vision of the Brave New World. Anecdotally speaking, we (Asian Americans) joke (not seriously) how Mainland Chinese citizens are frequenting all the flagship luxury stores in Europe and America; we joke because there is some truth to it. My favorite stereotype (no discrimination intended), courtesy of the Fung Brothers, is that the “rich Fob (or Mainland) girl's outfit probably costs more than your car” (Note 8). Veterans Day in America has been turned into Single’s Day in China (now a global phenomenon), with record sales even surpassing those of Black Friday’s (Note 9). Even NBA collects 10% of its global revenue in China, with NBA China valued at a mere $5 billion USD (Note 10). Who can fault them as a business for wanting to make more money? That’s a financially sensible thing to do as a business. Obviously, unified cries of outrage against the American company reveals that collective worldview is more than just business and profits.
In a way, these “utopian” paradigms show that the US and China have more in common than people would like to admit, despite their different political systems. Don't forget, America also has its own police issues as well, on top of its racial and cultural divides. It is precisely the similarities that abound in both countries that provide a different lens to view the messy situation that is currently in Hong Kong.
The existing viewpoints often pit the side that is pro-Democracy, represented by the protesters, the students and the United States, with the side that is more affiliated with the Communist regime, such as the established government institutions, the police force in Hong Kong, and the People’s Liberation Army (seriously, don’t mess with them). Most people, either within Hong Kong or abroad, who try to join this convoluted conversation get forced into one of these two sides that seem to have nothing in common.
The discussion of similarity in the paragraphs above provides a third option, one that is more inclusive with its focus on human dignity. This view stems fundamentally from my own religious beliefs and Christian faith, a view that treats each individual as unique and significant because he or she is made in the image of the Creator God, and thus, everyone is an image-bearer of God Himself.
Thus, this ought to be a conversation beyond political ideology, beyond the debates between Democracy versus Communism, or America against China. For such debates continue to solidify Hong Kong as a landscape of proxy war between sovereign powers, rather than as a place of potential reconciliation between different peoples. Political debates perhaps do more to galvanize each side to their own respective corners rather than allow people to come together in unity (as American politics has sadly shown, and continue to show).
If the discussion is shifted beyond political ideologies, the protesters in Hong Kong and abroad should fight, and fight hard...but not in the name of Democracy, but rather in the name of human and individual dignity, for that is precisely what is being fought for. Hong Kong citizens want universal suffrage to elect the Chief Executive, because they see that it is a righteous expression against the current system which is unfair and finding all ways to abuse individuals and silence their cries for justice. Individuals righteously fight against injustice, and the oppressive acts committed by the Communist government, though Communism (Marxism) itself as an ideology was never originally intended to be oppressive. Margaret Atwood writes in another article:
As Orwell taught, it isn't the labels - Christianity, Socialism, Islam, Democracy, Two Legs Bad, Four Legs Good, the works - that are definitive, but the acts done in their name (Note 11).
Interestingly, I believe that the citizens of the People’s Republic of China are Hong Kong’s biggest ally and not the United States. More must be sought to unite these two different groups, rather than separate them. I recognize that it is the unique history of Hong Kong that has shaped the city to what it is now. Perhaps mixed in the region’s identity is a sense of clinging, clinging to a cultural superiority with its past ties as a British colony. (On a side note, British colonization is predominantly seen in Hong Kong as a positive aspect of the region’s history.)
Whatever distinctions that may exist, whether personal or collective, must be set aside, if the goal to achieve the expressions and desires for individual dignity is to be pursued. The NBA “bent its knee” to China’s massive market potential, despite its American roots (Note 12). The pro-Democracy protesters in Hong Kong and abroad perhaps may want to make a similar move, and also take advantage of that same powerful influence (people = power), by courting and gaining the sympathy and support of the citizens in China (not the Communist government). It is imperative for all to buy into the advocacy of human rights and individual dignity, and collectively pursue truth which surpasses the debates of political ideologies...the fundamental truth that ultimately, we are all human.
We all bleed, and we all die.
-
Note 1: Black, Jeff and Dormido, Hannah. “Hong Kong Needs Its Angriest Generation More Than Ever.” Bloomberg, 5 Dec. 2019, https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-angry-hong-kong-protesters-are-future-workforce.
Note 2: Marcolini, Barbara. “Police Dressed as Protesters: How Undercover Police in Hong Kong Severely Injured People.” The New York Times, 22 Sept. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/world/hong-kong-police-protests.html.
Note 3: Atwood, Margaret. “Everybody is happy now.” The Guardian, 17 Nov. 2007, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/nov/17/classics.margaretatwood.
Note 4: Wolfensberger, James. “Younger Millennials ‘More Pleasure Seeking,’ Less Thrifty Than Older Millennials, Says Study.” Mic, 28 Feb. 2013, https://www.mic.com/articles/28263/younger-millennials-more-pleasure-seeking-less-thrifty-than-older-millennials-says-study.
Note 5: Lohr, S. and Isaac, M. and Popper, N. “Tech Hearings: Congress Unites to Take Aim at Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google.” The New York Times, 16 July. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/technology/big-tech-antitrust-hearing.html.
Note 6: “China is achieving its ‘beauty’ by means of cultural genocide.” The Washington Post, 25 Nov. 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/china-is-achieving-its-beauty-by-means-of-cultural-genocide/2019/11/25/f80c0d66-0faf-11ea-bf62-eadd5d11f559_story.html.
Note 7: Ramzy, A. and Buckley, C. “‘Absolutely No Mercy’: Leaked Files Expose How China Organized Mass Detentions of Muslims.” The New York Times, 16 Nov. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/16/world/asia/china-xinjiang-documents.html.
Note 8: Fung Bros. “18 TYPES OF ASIAN GIRLS.” Youtube, 7 May 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qW1a3UOAIaw.
Note 9: Kharpal, Arjun. “Alibaba breaks Singles Day record with more than $38 billion in sales.” CNBC, 11 Nov. 2019, https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/11/alibaba-singles-day-2019-record-sales-on-biggest-shopping-day.html.
Note 10: Zillgitt, J. and Medina, M. “As impasse over pro-Hong Kong tweet simmers, what’s at stake for the NBA in China?” USA Today, 9 Oct. 2019, https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2019/10/09/nba-china-hong-kong-whats-at-stake/3912447002/.
Note 11: Atwood, Margaret. “My hero: George Orwell by Margaret Atwood.” The Guardian, 18 Jan. 2013, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jan/18/my-hero-george-orwell-atwood.
Note 12: Weiss, Bari. “The World’s Wokest Sports League Bows to China.” The New York Times, 7 Oct. 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/opinion/nba-china-hong-kong.html.