By Lewis Loud
( http://dadazim.com )
Translated by Chen-t'ang
The patriotism of the older generation is so deeply ingrained. The so-called pan-democrats in Hong Kong begins from the 'democratic-reunificationists' (D-Rs). They, in fact, are nationalists, and 'reunificationists'. For these D-Rs, it is not necessary to have immediate democracy (which, they think, could be fought gradually), but they attach lots of importance to reunification. They are more enthusiastic in fighting for reunification than the 'local-leftists'. They subjectively believe China will be better and better, regardless of the future of Hong Kong. This is the 'patriotic politics' in Hong Kong.
No matter the D-Rs or the backbone of the Pan-democrats, they are just 'archaic' as if they were Qing dynasty people living in the 21st century. On the one hand, they bowed and scraped with 'allegiance and patriotism' (although they insist in supporting a China which is yet to exist); on the other hand, they are so conceited in their spirits of 'loving the country and loving the people'.
Feeling self-abased and arrogant at the same time were characterizing these 'traditional' intellectuals. They think highly of themselves in bemoaning the plight of the Chinese. Settled down in Hong Kong, the D-Rs think they are able and responsible to democratize China on the base of Hong Kong. The party will be nerve-racking if these D-Rs did something "against the central government", and 'sentence' them being unpatriotic. They will then surrender as they are 'sinned', according to the Chinese authority. Yet at the same time, their arrogance of 'loving the country, loving the people' allow them to tolerate the misbehaviour of the mainland Chinese.
These 'archaic' politicians always think each and every issue in Hong Kong (welfare, population, smuggling problems, etc.) as a yardstick of patriotism before the CCP. Such issue then became vague controversy of values. They think that they are able and responsible to democratize China on the base of Hong Kong; perhaps suggesting HK being the beneficent and obliged to help China; or condemning people hoping for fairness as traitorous separatists.
Hong Kong may be an observer of China's fate, but they shall not merely hope that the Democratized China will bestow upon Hong Kong. They cannot even mix the politics of China and Hong Kong, and sacrifice the benefits of Hong Kong. It is unrealistic to say if we help democratization of China, then the government cannot tackle this, leading to salvation of Hong Kong by a Democratized China.
We 'outsourced' our fate to politicians, which 'outsourced' the fate of HK to an inexistent China. It's like casting oneself on the mercy and grace of the emperor. Hongkongers should not think vague things too much, like the future of China, and neglect the real things yet to be done in HK.
No matter the D-Rs or the backbone of the Pan-democrats, they are just 'archaic' as if they were Qing dynasty people living in the 21st century. On the one hand, they bowed and scraped with 'allegiance and patriotism' (although they insist in supporting a China which is yet to exist); on the other hand, they are so conceited in their spirits of 'loving the country and loving the people'.
Feeling self-abased and arrogant at the same time were characterizing these 'traditional' intellectuals. They think highly of themselves in bemoaning the plight of the Chinese. Settled down in Hong Kong, the D-Rs think they are able and responsible to democratize China on the base of Hong Kong. The party will be nerve-racking if these D-Rs did something "against the central government", and 'sentence' them being unpatriotic. They will then surrender as they are 'sinned', according to the Chinese authority. Yet at the same time, their arrogance of 'loving the country, loving the people' allow them to tolerate the misbehaviour of the mainland Chinese.
These 'archaic' politicians always think each and every issue in Hong Kong (welfare, population, smuggling problems, etc.) as a yardstick of patriotism before the CCP. Such issue then became vague controversy of values. They think that they are able and responsible to democratize China on the base of Hong Kong; perhaps suggesting HK being the beneficent and obliged to help China; or condemning people hoping for fairness as traitorous separatists.
Hong Kong may be an observer of China's fate, but they shall not merely hope that the Democratized China will bestow upon Hong Kong. They cannot even mix the politics of China and Hong Kong, and sacrifice the benefits of Hong Kong. It is unrealistic to say if we help democratization of China, then the government cannot tackle this, leading to salvation of Hong Kong by a Democratized China.
We 'outsourced' our fate to politicians, which 'outsourced' the fate of HK to an inexistent China. It's like casting oneself on the mercy and grace of the emperor. Hongkongers should not think vague things too much, like the future of China, and neglect the real things yet to be done in HK.
Race replacement is happening right here in HK. But these 'archaic' politicians will say: we have to remain abstinence; we cannot offend China; it is ruthless to talk rationally.
So what's the fact? The livelihood and the welfare of the next generation cannot be well safeguarded, not to mention democracy and freedom. These 'archaic' politicians are merely supporting the 'democratization of China', and neglect the sad fact in HK. It's like the theologists discussing how many angels are dancing on the candlestick regardless of the plague in the Medieval times.
As to be a 'keyboard warrior', it is not shameless. At least they won't keep their mouth shut when Chinese nabbed and grabbed infant formula. D-Rs are not that noble when "loving their countries" on Facebook, or safely be 'anti-Communists', or 'constructing a democratic China' distantly. But at least, these 'archaic' politicians have received donations, votes for their council seats, salary and moral high ground ─ see, putting the countries before HK is, "safe and well".
No comments:
Post a Comment