[Film Critic] When Hong Kong Laughed at China

[Film Critic] When Hong Kong Laughed at China

Written by Sean Tierney

I recently re-watched Her Fatal Ways, the 1990 comedy starring Carol ‘Dodo’ Cheng as Sister Cheng, a mainland security officer sent to Hong Kong with her cousin, played by writer/director Alfred Cheung, on official police business. Watching the movie now, more than 25 years later, it’s interesting to see the way China and Chinese people from the mainland were, and were portrayed. In 1990, Hong Kong was certainly far ahead of China in many ways. It was easy to look down on mainlanders as uncouth bumpkins, or at least to be benevolently patronizing. Today, the difference gap has closed in many ways.

Her Fatal Ways opens with Sister Cheng and Cousin Shing arriving in Hong Kong by bus. Our first glimpse of Sister Cheng is of her hand, which holds a cigarette. She smokes while singing a patriotic song. A fellow passenger spits on the floor, hitting Cousin Shing’s foot. He responds with profanity. Sister Cheng then chimes in with a brief lesson on the etiquette of spitting, which ends no better than the first incident. In the span of less than a minute, the film has illustrated its protagonists using the stereotypes of the day.  

While simple, bludgeoning parody would have been the easy way out, Albert Cheung (who appears in the film as Cheng’s cousin) lampoons virtually all sides of the political and cultural sphere. Sister Cheng’s Hong Kong professional counterpart is Inspector Wu, played by ‘Big’ Tony Leung (Leung Kar Fai). He’s a young, urbane police detective who dresses stylishly (for the time). It turns out that Wu’s father is an unrepentant Nationalist. Sparks inevitably fly, but so do laughs and the discovery of common ground.

Hong Kong has always been a dynamic city that changes with breathtaking speed. But no one could have foreseen the scope and speed of social and cultural change in China. Sister Cheng seems like the ghost of another age, and indeed she is. I remember meeting people from the Soviet Union in the 1970s, and they were in many ways just like her; marveling at many of the things around them while steadfastly holding to the ideology that told them how wrong it all was. A young person from today’s China would understandably find Her Fatal Ways offensive. They might find the characterization insulting, overblown, or inaccurate. But for people who remember that time, the portrayal is remarkably astute and, in many ways, sympathetic without being patronizing. 

Hong Kong and China shared a common past, a common ethnicity, and in some ways a common culture. But the recent history of the PRC, as well as it’s closed nature for much of its first decades, helped create a large culture gap that language (and food) alone couldn’t reconcile. Today, Hong Kong and China seem in many ways interchangeable, in financial, technological and cultural terms. In other ways, the roles have reversed; Hong Kong cinema now relies on the beneficence of mainland co-productions. And in still other ways, the differences that remain have become markedly acute. Whereas Sister Cheng’s occasional breaches of professional behavior during interrogations were seen as funny or utilitarian, the reality of mainland security officers operating in Hong Kong is now seen as a much more menacing problem. 

In 1990 people could fall back on a belief in One Country Two Systems and thus keep some of the thornier implications of Her Fatal Ways at arms’ length. But that risk is much more prevalent now than it was in 1990. In 2017, a movie about public security running roughshod through the streets of Hong Kong would not be greeted so airily. 

- - -

Also Read:

LCSD Summary: Her Fatal Ways

IMDB Page

Fong Chi-hang: Subjectivity in HK Football Team

Subjectivity in HK Football Team

Translated by Vivian L., written by Brian FONG Chi-hang
Original: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20151118/19377462 

• Hong Kong held China to a 0-0 draw in a World Cup qualifier match on Tuesday night at Mong Kok Stadium

Hong Kong’s World Cup qualifier match against China came to an end on Tuesday night as the city’s team battled its rival to a valiant 0-0 draw. Prospect for team Hong Kong aside, we have witnessed the birth of a new era as the games progressed—a new age of the "Hong Kong subjectivity".

To say football [or soccer as the Americans say] has nothing to do with politics is a lie that cannot fool anyone with half a brain. In fact, football [translator's comment: or any team sports for that matter] more often than not embodies the nexus between sports and politics. Football is the battleground between bitter rivals both on and off court (for example England─Argentina or Japan─South Korea). It also reflects the conflicts between a state's centralised power and its peripheral groups (centre-periphery conflicts).

Political scientist Benedict Anderson defined a nation as an imagined community [translator’s note: In contrast with an actual community where members interact with each other face-to-face, an imagined community is constructed socially, and imagined by the people who perceive themselves as part of that group]. Awareness of such a community is usually through symbols.

Star players pegging away on the pitch, fans cheering for their heroes, team flags and banners filling every corner of the fully seated stadium—the game of football provides the perfect concoction of the construction of subjectivity of the “periphery” community.

Examples of centre-periphery conflicts exemplified in football symbolisms are abundant.
Football clubs Barcelona and Athletic Bilbao are both the mascots and arenas of the Catalans' and the Basques' defiance against the Spanish state. In Verona, Italy, one lives and breathes a sense of the proud Venetian identity. Go to a Cardiff City game and you will see the mutual grudge between the Welsh and the English in action. Over in the French cities of Bastia and Rennes, the regional identities of the people of Corsica and Brittany cannot be more apparent in their home teams.

Today’s Team Hong Kong may not be the best squad in the city’s history, but it is certainly the team that carries the strongest sense of subjectivity of the Hong Kong identity. The match-up between HK and China inadvertently set the stage where Hongkongers defied “the Chinese Celestial Empire” at a time when China’s oppression towards the city is in full throttle while Hongkongers reap an ever-strong sense of Hong Kong subjectivity.

As team HK delivered two electrifying draws against China, every cheer and chant that echoed all around the city marked the birth of the Hong Kong Subjectivity. Our time has come and the political discourse between Hong Kong and China will never be the same.

(Author Dr. Brian FONG Chi-hang is the Associate Director of the Academy of Hong Kong Studies at The Hong Kong Institute of Education)

Cheng Lap: HK is a dangerous time bomb in case China has not yet found out

HK is a dangerous time bomb in case China has not yet found out

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, edited by Karen L., Written by Cheng Lap (鄭立)
Original: http://chenglap-blog.logdown.com/posts/258649-causes-of-conflict-in-sino-hong-kong/ 

Recently, in Hong Kong, several anti-smugglers protests broke out. For the Hong Kong-China conflict, one will naturally see its inevitableness due to the tug-of-war-like political structure when one observes at the scene here in Hong Kong.

To start with the incomplete authority of the Government of the HKSAR is far and away the cause. Precisely, HKSARG has no approval authority on whom and how many Chinese can travel in and immigrate to Hong Kong, and neither is the amount of Individual Visit Scheme (IVS) cities controlled by the HKSARG. "The problem of Hong Kong is an external one," some of my friends from the police force who involved in the Umbrella Revolution once said so. It can be seen that to most of the people, they wrongly assume the HKSARG has such authority, but as a matter of fact it hasn't.

In addition, half of the Legislative Council (LegCo) comprises members of the functional constituency group, who walk into the seat with zero votes. That is, the case in Hong Kong is an oligarchy, and above such government, there is the "comprador bourgeoisie" (includes landlords, merchants and civil servants) back in the colonial era. The Chinese Communist Party attempts to take charge of Hong Kong by controlling the "comprador bourgeoisie" as Brits did. And this time, given their worship over the nabobism and unlimited power among the corrupt Chinese bureaucrats, it only takes a slight effort to do so. Why? The existence of functional constituency leads to the forevermore-below-half elected seats of the membership. By a no-brainer deduction, interests will side with the oligarchs.

By controlling the functional constituency group, executive has more or less managed to control the legislature. One of the separation of powers has merely gone. Social problems like over-population and the everlasting unfavourable results afterwards are not likely to be solved given the imbalanced power of the LegCo. Translation: bills avoiding those problems that are supposed to be passed have been opposed since they do not earn benefits for the vested interests. It has been seen enough vested interests strengthening their self-interests this way.

In 1998, HKSARG dismantled its original LegCo. And the then provisional LegCo, which its bigwig members were basically appointed by the CCP, aimed to abolish the vital policies by the colonial government which had maintained the social stability:

- Rent control. The main policy that limits rent increase. It comes as a wonder to many people why there are less dissatisfaction living under the colonial regime than the CCP. Rent control is one of the many answers as the colonial government restricted both the growth of rent and property price. This policy has fallen apart since 1997 when the oligarchy started to take charge. After that, the property price and rent have been skyrocketed, and those landlords and property owners are laughing their way to the bank. To foreigners, Hong Kong is a place about pricey and tiny flats. And to locals, this is daily life suffering endlessly -- everyone is being exploited and is made to paying rent of some HKD$10,000.

- Public Order Ordinance. Police's authority enhanced and the freedom of assembly and demonstration denied as well, they turn protests against the government from a right to some dangerous thing  -- one might get arrested and detained exercising one's right of protesting peacefully, be searched of one's house out of coming-from-nowhere speculations or get a difficult time. A deterioration of police-civilian relationship is what is leading ahead of Hong Kong. The city has long been famous for peaceful demonstrations, whereas the government decide to neglect their views. Worse still, police force are implemented to stop them from protesting and to file prosecutions against them. All these will only lead Hong Kong to form a ideology as "If a peaceful protest does not bear fruit, why bother?". As I mentioned before, the harder the government blackens and suppresses the peaceful protesters, the more hardcore protesters come to the front of protests.

The change before and after 1997 is lifting the restrictions on the vested interests, as well as allowing the police to attack the public, to which CCP is to blame. It is simply too naive for them to belittle the establishment of a colony and to assume a little effort will do. The communist party think they can rule the place with compradors without knowing that a sound separation of powers behind is more than necessary. Although Hong Kong was removed from the colony list in 1972 (Link 1, Link 2), the CCP still treat Hong Kong as one of them. The CCP has taught their students "Colony is a political entity where the invader controls the compradors" and when the students become the leader of the country, they mistakenly expect applying what the colonisers do is going to guarantee a stable regime as UK back in the colonial era.

The Communist Party itself do not have the separation of powers. Thus there is no any sort of rightful checks and balances to monitor over the compradors. Such regime will inevitably lead to an old-style colonialisation -- all about exploitation, suppression, confrontation and independence.

The election is by no means fair in Hong Kong. In the LegCo, a member might be from over 100,000 votes in geographical constituencies , or 0 votes from functional constituencies. The latter ones are the vested interests and most of them have invested shops and have benefited from IVS and smuggling (Imagine the rent of 1,000-feet shop is worth HKD$1,000,000/USD$129,000 per month -- impossible in the rest of the world). And how did the government deal with the side effect? Suppress.

Letitia Lee, one of the leader from the Blue Ribbon thugs.

Yet, the political infighting involved in Hong Kong at the same time. Some thugs sponsored by Chinese funds and the Falun Gong are putting their Communist-style confrontation in Hong Kong. At first Hongkongers felt "it doesn't matter to me anyway", but gradually they found out that when it comes to things related to the CCP, peaceful tactics are futile, or basically laughing stock.

The government neglects every protest of Hongkongers. They even set up a 3-metre barrier to ban citizens from going inside. In other words, they damage channels and spaces for the government-public communication and protests. Applying police force against protesters, they think that if legal protesting becomes harder and inefficient, the public will give up someday.

Yet the government has miscalculated the situation. The Umbrella Revolution first started with a class boycott with few dozens of people, then tens of thousands of protesters for two to three months of street confrontation -- the root is the miscalculation of the public response. Every riot starts with the thought of "once the authority suppresses, protesters disperse", while the new generation of Hongkongers is now possessing the thought of "more suppression, more confrontation" -- the police ended up using more weapons like tear gas and batons which is a further deterioration to the situation. The more participants in the issue, the more unconventional and guerilla-style confrontational tactics appear -- from a peaceful protest to wearing masks; from willing to cooperate to grabbing fellow protesters from the police force; from protesting to the government to starting anti-smugglers movements.

When the suppression escalates, the tactics of participants escalate causing a vicious cycle. The next bottleneck might be on the "boundary". From the viewpoint of historians, this is a repetition of the period during the end of a colonial era, like Boston Tea Party or the Netherlands' Eighty Years War. The confrontation will take place outside of Hong Kong, maybe in China or overseas. Whatever the government attempts to escalate the suppression against the protesters, it can do nothing outside the jurisdiction of Hong Kong.

Since 1997, the education of Hong Kong has been infiltrated with elements from CCP, such as giving salute to the Five-Star Flag, singing March of the Volunteers (PRC's national anthem) and indoctrinating about the CCP. This "Umbrella generation" is grown under such pro-CCP education. But as a teacher, I found that students never for a day like such indoctrination -- the students hate CCP even more after being sent to the military training camp in there. Students found these coercive behaviour strangle which causes a more anti-CCP generation than ever.

Although most of the Hongkongers assert new immigrants are "diluting" the population of Hong Kong, quite a few of the "Umbrella Generation" are the offspring of new immigrants, and some may even receive their primary education in mainland China. Lives have not been easy for them since the moment coming to Hong Kong. Caught between two stools, a strong sense of anti-CCP awareness appears to them -- there is no way can they go back in China and live happily ever after. It is the sole road for them to strengthen their own Hongkonger identity, so as to be more "Hongkonger" than a "Hongkonger".

This reasoning may sound off, but it makes every sense of it. Historically speaking, Napoleon was the French emperor, but he was from Corsica; Adolf Hitler was the Führer of Germany, but he was from Austria; Joseph Stalin was the leader of USSR, but he was from Georgia. These "foreigners" have nothing in the first place. Hong Kong received almost a million new immigrants alike, and this very thought has grown more than prevalent among such generation.

Also, Renminbi (Chinese Yuan) is not a freely convertible currency, whereas HKD has pegged to USD through Linked Exchange Rate system. Hong Kong is the only Common Law jurisdiction in the Greater China region. Our legal system is similar to the UK and the US. Our currency, passport and legal system are internationally acknowledged. Any cities in PRC, including Shanghai, cannot attain that, even their property price skyrockets or they have a record-high GDP.

(Source: Pixabay)

This is one of the blind spots when people look into HK-China relationship -- there is a vital and inseparable interest behind. The biggest wealth of Hong Kong is the system independent from the CCP, and the compradors know this. They know the CCP will not act rashly in Hong Kong, and so they try all means to gain interests in Hong Kong with the support of CCP. The HKSAR passport and those related companies have become springboards for many important CCP figures in leaving CCP. The compradors do not care to aggravate conflicts or the other way round. They can leave Hong Kong whenever they want even if anything bad appears. High-ranked officials in Hong Kong, including CY Leung's family, are basically abroad. Imagine any major unfavourable issue happens in Hong Kong, these officials could land at some overseas countries safely leaving behind a RMB economy bomb with the citizens.

Many people have a thought that empowering elites the full authorities is what makes things work, and makes things work well, however, in the case of Hong Kong, it reveals the absolute power has every ability to turn people corrupt. It is because the one could use the absolute power in hand to serve one's self-interests and to get away with the responsibilities. A friend of mine from the CCP, who is rather open-minded, says that many people undermines the complexity of the Hong Kong society. China has taken a dangerous time bomb. After the 70s, Hong Kong can no longer be seen as a colony, but few people are aware of that.

Maron: Put A Stop To "Construct A Democratic China"

Put A Stop To "Construct A Democratic China"

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, edited by Kristee Q, written by Maron
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/03-27-2015/22006/ 

Richard Tsoi and Lee Cheuk-yan. (aTV)

The tertiary student sector appears to be "bidding farewell to Greater China" - deflecting from the pan-dem's trajectory of "constructing a democratic China".

The Greater China faction has fabricated tales to draw support for "constructing a democratic China", such as the discourse of "de facto governance of Hong Kong by CCP". There are two logical errors in this proposition. First, if Country X governs Hong Kong, then Hongkongers have to fight for democracy and freedom for the people from Country X? No, of course not.  Are Hongkongers "universal democratic fighters"? Second, the relationship between China and Hong Kong is the relationship of the rapist and the victim. When the victim cannot escape from the iron fist and sympathises with the rapist, this is called "Stockholm Syndrome". When rapists have democracy and freedom, will they not rape others? A leopard will not change its spots.

Another discourse to be considered is the "geopolitics of HK and China". As China is close to Hong Kong, then it has to interfere with our affairs. Vietnamese refugees have seriously affected Hong Kong in the past, so we have to "construct a democratic Vietnam"?

Also, "a democratic China benefits Hong Kong" discourse says democracy in China will be conducive to HK's autonomy. Chinese people hate HK's prerogative (border/passport/tax revenue...), and there are no signs  that this discourse is an effective path, or worse, they will use "the majority rules" and metamorphosise Hong Kong into an utterly Chinese entity. Autonomy? Daydreaming. Such discourse is beyond logic.

The Pan Dem's theory and actions are beyond comprehension. What have they accomplished in the many years following their hollow slogan of "constructing a democratic China"? They don't have a plan,but  rather the utilisation of another Ponzi scheme to extract money from pan-dem supporters! They offer all kinds of sops and excuses, such as China banning them from entering the mainland -- is there any country allowing such an opposition party from entering its own territory? Stowing away is a common tactic adopted by revolutionaries, why isn't there anyone adopting the tactic? Don't tell me it's illegal, the Occupy movement is technically illegal too, so isn't it more worthwhile to stow away so as to achieve the goal of "constructing a democratic China"? The basis of such construction should be in China, not Hong Kong. Try to explain in 1989, why Lee Cheuk-yan had to sign his confession letter and return to Hong Kong? Why not instigate rebellion in those  political prisoners in Qincheng Prison and create a Chinese Storming of Bastille? It seems that these "seniors" are afraid of death. They love fame and fortune from the local political arena, and as a natural progression of this fear they have started to dream of "constructing a democratic China". It is absurd to continue the formulaic procedures of chanting slogans at every  Tian'anmen Massacre vigil. Those who appear  on  stage are unabashed, and appear complacent when they do so. To be frank, it is just a joint celebratory  wanking party.

Waiting for the  situation to change in China is spineless and  passive. Those evil Greater Chinese ignoramuses do not want to take the huge risk in China, yet they are willing to wait and take credit once there are some signs of democratic development there. Even the appearance of mass movements does not mean that all Chinese people want democracy. Wukan villagers have said they did not seek the overturn of CCP. Chinese people do not want democratic China nor to overturn the CCP regime - that's it! Why force them? We should respect their choice. Pan-dems want political gains, and to  bind China and Hong Kong together by chanting slogans like "No democratic Hong Kong when there is no democratic China". They often fantasise about the reform in China. They have not realised that most  Chinese people do not want to change, and Hongkongers do. Hong Kong is our land. A leftard, Ben Lam, said Chinese are our war-fellows -- he is ignorant and therefore unimportant to HK. Apple Daily and Ming Pao are both leftard-leaning. Hongkongers have to wake up, and not turn Chinese people into cannon fodder -- it is unrealistic and unethical and the bottom line is that it is ineffectual.

Stop "constructing a democratic China". Stop being a nuisance.

敘述，所以存在／還是被敘述，所以存在：試以臺灣為例—淺論香港主體意識的重構

敘述，所以存在

還是被敘述，所以存在

試以臺灣為例—淺論香港主體意識的重構

Written by Mak Heung-fai 麥向暉

Original: CityU Monthly 2015 April Edition

（蒙城大編委授權刊載，稍後將提供英文版）

(English version will be available soon. Authorised to be shared by CityU SU Editorial Board.)

當是非對錯，尚且糾纏於本土、偽本土、港獨還是一國兩制，而無日無之，距政改方案徹行的時間點，又迫在眉睫，此誠危急存亡之秋也。問題之紛至沓來，固謂亟待解決，然而，至關重要的解釋論述—「我是誰？」，仍然束之高閣。這個概念，顯然是身份認同問題，雖道是尋常，亦看似與眼下的脅逼無關宏旨。其實，身份與信念關係千絲萬縷，恰恰是辨除偽本土、港獨、一國兩制等偽命題之箭矢。拙文以為，身份問題只有重構屬於香港「主體意識」的前提下，才能理解何謂真本土、以至香港之核心價值，卒之決定去留統獨。泛論之，必難以道明，姑且引情狀相類的臺灣以略談—究竟我們「敘述，所以存在；還是被敘述，所以存在」？

Photo Credit: 劉明堂, 何豪毅, 黃謙賢/Taiwan People News

「主體意識」：存在的自我賦予

「主體意識」四字，於香港人，或許陌生非常；一海之隔的寶島，卻心領神會。跳出主權和從屬的非黑即白，擺脫政治角力的制肘，以一地為中心，重新追本溯源，找尋屬於該地原有之文化源頭，並以之為底基，旁及外來的多元文化，肯定一地之獨特性，進而在歷史、文化、經濟上加以闡揚，此之為「主體意識」。惟務須申明者為，主體意識在政治上，往往被外間解讀為「獨立」，實抹黑異見之舉也。前述之主體意識，乃從中性而言，一種自我本位的肯定，一旦就此作政治論述，政見不同者或重新把這拉入黑白二元的困局。臺灣之大漢族主義者，國民黨為首，認為臺灣為中國領土，不可分割，遂誣蔑持論者和民進黨人為伍，即「臺獨」。當然，「主體意識」跟「獨立」貌合，但神離，前者具較大包容性；後者排他性則較明顯，並據主體意識的意涵，採相對極端之論調。礙篇幅所限，不另多贅。

在上述前提下，臺灣自然不是中華民國，該處之落地者乃不折不扣之「臺灣人」。筆者起初也不明所以，在外人角度，臺灣完全跟中華民國劃上等號，而何以謂臺灣人，非為中華民國人？答案在於各人對臺灣「主體意識」的理解。上文就主體意識，淺嘗輒止，也不妨引套之。即是臺灣本來就有不假外求，迥異於別國的文化源頭，甚至民族源頭。最早居於臺灣者，原住民也，諸如泰雅族、阿美族、以及新近認可之拉阿魯哇族等，他們才是臺灣的主人，亦即是臺灣民俗的源頭，其活跡範圍遍及全臺灣，日後族與族之間的生活記憶，成為臺灣主體意識的主要來源。

「我們是臺灣人，不是中華民國人」

文化與歷史的追溯與認知，一直為國民之根本，關乎人民身份之認同。可惜礙於語言隔閡，文字闕如，而且各族尚停留在部落階段，各自為政，主體意識迄自未能凝聚，旋為西方列強所入侵，胎死腹中。直到日治「內地延長主義時期」，有「臺灣孫中山」之稱的蔣渭水、霧峰林家的林獻堂諸人成立「臺灣文化協會」，復興既有文化。臺灣史學家連璜杜撰、首部以臺灣為主角敘述的《臺灣通史》並時出世，始喚醒臺灣人的本土情懷，臺灣的主體意識由是發端。

成也蔣氏，敗也蔣氏，蔣渭水為首之協會，始終秉持着中國國族主義。在打着三民主義植根在臺之口號、復興原住民文化的同時，選擇性排斥部份臺灣的特殊文化，譬如臺灣之傳統劇種「歌仔戲」，雖發祥地是宜蘭，協會認為不值一哂，沒有戮力推揚，觀點反倒較同時代的林呈祿遜色。林則旗幟鮮明，處身日治政府同化政策當道之時，發動「臺灣議會設置請願運動」。簡言之，高度自治也。1928年謝雪紅之臺灣共產黨，政治取態遠比前兩者激進，矢言臺灣徹底獨立。三者相互激宕，60年代的彭明敏某程度上取萃其中，高唱臺灣的主體意識，再據此走上「臺獨」路線。緣是臺灣的主體意識毫無懸念，一連串野草莓、太陽花等本土運動，便從此概念流出。

歷史的「表徵」—「歷史記憶」與「歷史事實」

文化與歷史，關乎人民身份之認同，外來政府欲得政治的合法性，自然要從這兩方面着手，而歷史又有跟文化互為包容的傳統，如是者，篡改人民的「歷史記憶」，由政府取得話語權，敘述人民的「存在」，刻不容緩。論者才疏而孤陋，姑妄引臺灣中央研究院院士王明珂教授之理論，寥作淺解。「客觀存在的史事和文物，足以佐證一段往事之痕跡者，曰『歷史事實』，同時，人類種群，千差萬異，但無一例外，各自傳頌有關本族或本村源起的神話、傳說、靈獸等文化意象，一種主觀塑造自身存在的敘述方式，曰『歷史記憶』。」據王明珂教授之論，即便一河之上、中、下游各有一村，而客觀的材料可證明彼此有非常密切的關係，「歷史事實」也庶幾一致。然，親訪三村，問其傳說而繫乎其村之發軔，竟然大相逕庭，如上游可謂己乃山神之孕、中游道靈獸所生、下游言破石而出，傳說作為「歷史記憶」，決定了三村之分離獨立、生活習俗等，儼然非我族類，縱使「歷史事實」證明三村同源，他們依舊否定。

正因三者有着堅立千仞的自我主觀「敘述」，所以彼此的客觀「存在」便產生不同的分歧和差別。換言之，「歷史記憶」的敘述，會改變「歷史事實」的存在。若執政者有其用心，刻意竄改一地人民的「歷史記憶」，進而變易政權屬外來入侵的「歷史事實」，遂為自己的政權取得合法存在：人民因為「被敘述」，所以才向掌握話語權的人，以附首稱臣的方式「存在」。如此，極為危險。

存在的「被敘述」

上述情況一度發生於臺灣歷史中，最為明顯者，莫如日本和戒嚴時期的中華民國。臺灣史上，當然外來者，有宋朝、清朝時期的中國以及荷蘭，然而，論規模之盛、影響之大，斷然不及日本和中華民國。日本駐臺灣總督兒玉源太郎之副手民政長官後滕新平，於始政時期（1895－1919）已着眼於「歷史記憶」的修改，後來同化時期（1919－1937）進一步提升，皇民化時期（又作皇民化運動時期，1937－1945）則達致高峰。中日八年戰爭，總督小林躋造對當地人的「歷史記憶」大幅竄改，意圖重新打造成「皇國臣民」，使之盡為日本帝國利用，於是推廣國語（日本語）家庭、改姓名運動，臺民改為日本姓名、發展日本神道教，取締台灣傳統信仰、研習日本史等。長此下去，「歷史記憶」的再造勢必令「歷史事實」的臺灣主體意識被消弭，臺灣人形同「被敘述」為日本人，而以「皇民」的方式「存在」。

戒嚴時期（1949－1987）之中華民國與日本只是伯仲之間。蔣介石斯時剛失去中國江山，

(二·二八事件；圖片來源︰未知)

於是擬以臺灣為反攻基地，得以反攻大陸，可戰敗隨蔣抵臺之外省人以及軍隊，紀律敗壞，經濟處理又不善，而本身臺灣人被殖民統治百年之久，蔣亦畏共產黨潛伏臺灣，乃借戒嚴為名，極力打壓一切日治前後的風俗。益有甚者，原住民俱在禁制之列，如學校範圍內，不得用土著語言說話，違者罰款，製造「白色恐怖」，嗣後釀成「二‧二八事件」，戕害冤殺臺灣居民；與此同時，大力推行華夏文化，如將國語定為單一法定語言、修讀中國二千年的歷史等等，臺灣人無疑迎來第二次「歷史記憶」的改造，「被敘述」為中國人，而以「漢人」的方式「存在」。猶幸以上舉措，伴隨日本帝國倒臺、戒嚴時期撤消作罷，彭明敏、施明德等人又重申臺灣的主體意識，讓既有的「歷史記憶」連帶「歷史記憶」得到相當的恢復。儘管國民黨老調重彈，指臺灣為既有領土，亦無阻臺灣人繼承前人真正之主體意識、自我敘述的「歷史記憶」，因此和「歷史事實」契合，而確立以「臺灣人」的「存在」、一種獨立於日本、中國，並和兩者平起平坐之身份。

從未存在過的「香港本土派」

臺灣人還可如此，香港呢？似乎不容樂觀。其主體意識，只有近年，特別雨傘運動失敗後，始有萌芽之象，然，一直拘泥在真、偽本土之別，樞要之主體意識反倒不曾用心。論者不敏，以為主體意識之討論蒙塵，非獨謂時人冷感，實是英國政府刻意為之。蓋香港1842年開埠以先，與中國關係密切，唐軍屯兵、宋帝逃難，皆施於港，細心者，更留意到遠古時代，香港已有人聚居，縱遠古之人，隱歿久渺，莫之能求，惟此種種，悉為香港主體意識的一部分，又適英國作為宗主國，最為忌殫者，無他，慮香港人的主體意識醒覺，省察自身之獨特性，而發現英國僅借武力侵犯此地也，緣此發難，終結英國的殖民統治。

英國乃剛柔並濟，積極拉攏、打壓、分化這種主體意識。中學教育上刻意省略思辨性的哲學、改歷史為選修課，核心課程又以英國史為主，至於有關中國者，別目「中國歷史科」，顯然是受1953中文科檢討委員會報告書（Report of the Chinese Studies Committee）中，對中史教學「不宜過多政治化」的指示影響，香港史之課程，甚至1998年始獲準納入世界史講授課程之一部份。英方此舉，力圖避免惹起港人過多的本土意識，或者意識形態上向中國靠攏，斯時大學教育，仍未普及，故不詳細交待（按：大抵50年代末的香港大學，斯有英人安德葛在歷史系講授開埠以後的香港史，羅香林在中文系之香港史課，則偏重於香港開埠前的歷史），總之，英國漸次改造香港的「歷史記憶」，淡化港人對香港主體意識的理解，相關之體察、考量，自然不成氣候。後來，70至80年代末，英方苦心孤詣下，香港經濟騰飛，卓然成為亞洲四小龍之首，置身紙醉金迷的氛圍，日日絲管，夜夜笙歌，主體意識，落得個無關痛癢。妄論之，現時中國對港的治術，蕭規曹隨，不過主導者由英方換成中方，課程增逸，全然倒置為國族主義為中心思想的論述而已。可憐香港，由始至終，都是「被敘述」，所以「存在」：以英國治民、中國人民的身份「存在」。徒然97回歸挨近、雨傘運動，港人才偶爾思索之。

本土學術？

順帶一提，香港的主體意識，與本土學術不無關係。香港的主體意識一旦廓清，港人便可避免游談無根之弊，何為「真本土派」、「偽本土派」，不攻自破，所以，何去何從，是「統」、是「獨」，端見於此。惜哉香港主體意識的自我論述，在近數年方驟然冒起，而且觸及者，多流於「本土」真偽之皮相，鮮見坊間討論擊中主體意識此要害，更遑論本地學術界了。正當臺灣學者、中央研究院院士杜正勝提出「臺灣地圖左轉90度」論，從學術（歷史觀）角度敘述自身的主體意識，得到廣泛迴響；香港之主體意識，在本土學術之中，迄今未見辯述，或許，源於本土研究多在迎合國際，即學術國際化大潮中，不為大專院校的支持，而遭受消磨、冷落，民間更是和聲罕聞。香港的主體意識，乃被中國、香港政府取得話語權，橫加敘述。

人言人殊。這篇文章，追求獨立者或可以謂之提示香港底基的彌補，國族主義者可以貶損為鼓吹獨立，無論何者，一則此文影響力並沒有如斯可觀，二則「身份認同」的而且確須要釐清，拙文之要旨，即建基於「香港人」與「中國人」的身份平等而互不排斥的情況，思索我們當如何敘述自己的「存在」。以上之論，殊為鄙見，商榷之處，前輩同業，望加指證。

Hoi Yee Cheung: Dongjiang Water...AGAIN?

Dongjiang Water...AGAIN?

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Hoi Yee Cheung (海意翔)
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/03-08-2015/21595/ 

Dongjiang water supply...AGAIN. Probably there aren't much left to be discussed between HK and China. I don't understand, really. Does buying Dongjiang water have anything to do with "blood is thicker than water"? It is just a deal, a transaction. Buying water does not have anything to do with "blood is thicker than water". We buy Thai rice, so "blood is thicker than rice"? We buy Japanese and Korean electronic appliances, so "blood is thicker than appliances"?

It is so brazen-faced to relate a transaction with "blood ties". Zhang Xiaoming said "try as much as possible to ensure clean water delivery to HK". For real? No! Dirty water, indeed. Also, isn't the seller responsible for "trying as much as possible to ensure delivery"? Thailand tries as much as possible to ensure rice delivery, too. Shouldered basic responsibilities and felt complacent? And ask us to be grateful? Is Beijing treating Hongkongers aTV staff? We ARE ENTITLED TO get this all. We aren't as silly as aTV staff.

But thank you for mentioning Dongjiang water all the time -- now we know the problem, which makes us all Hongkongers fools. You have reminded us that, we buy water and discharge them to the sea, that we spend 260 times more than Singapore buying water from Malaysia.

Zhang Xiaoming might change his words a bit, "Buying dirty water so expensively from us? Are you nuts? Oh right, we have 'blood ties', that explains it all!"

Siu Kiu: Modern Chinese History Should Be Called the Era of "Red Peril"

Modern Chinese History Should Be Called the Era of "Red Peril"

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Edited by Kathy Griffin, Written by Siu Kiu (蕭喬)
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/03-01-2015/21448/ 

(Source: Reuters/VOA)

When the Communist regime is someday overturned, its years of rule may come to be regarded as the "Red Peril" in Chinese history.

This is not simply an opinion about the Communist regime, it is a fact. One of the localist slogans has been "to build a culture nation" in Hong Kong. But why "culture"? You have to look at the country across our border. The idea of building a "nation state" belongs in the last century. Now that the Cold War is over and we have seen the outcomes of countries dictated by the Communists, "building a culture nation" seems a more appropriate goal.

China was culturally dead at the moment when the Communists "founded" the PRC in 1949. From 1949 to 1978, all of China was immersed in an era of "extreme Communism". Extreme politicisation was prevalent, embodied by the push to uphold Marxism-Leninism or Maoism, combat Confucianism, pursue collectivism and economic equality, the Cultural Revolution, all sorts of political struggle. These activities in the name of a single political ideology strongly affected each and every aspect of life in China, including politics, the economy, society and culture. Even Confucianism, which had prevailed for thousands years of Chinese history, permeating social relationships from the family to the state, was completely denied and rejected. "Father is dear, mother is dear, but not as dear as Chairman Mao" was a popular slogan during the Cultural Revolution. China became (and still is) culturally dead.

How did the old China "disappear" from the world? We could make a satirical comparison with its neighbouring countries. In Japan, we can find many things that we would regard as “Japanese” in the qualities, traditions and architectures there. Kinkaku-ji or the Apartment of Tokugawa Ieyasu, for example, has been retained for its significant cultural heritage. Japanese soft power is embodied in the kimono, the traditional clothing of the country, which is seen as a symbol of elegance and decency in the eyes of foreigners. Japanese pop music culture is also still part of the global mainstream. In fact, the genuine strength of the country lies in its cultural influence. The rise of Japanese culture happened during the economic miracle era of the 1950s to 1970s. Similarly, Korean culture thrives in Korea (and beyond). You can "find the culture of the country in that country".

Do not think this is a matter of course. In a Communist country, the culture of the country can be completely eliminated. And this is what happened (and still is happening) in China. The current China is not a Sinitic China, but a foreign Communism regime, drawing its breath from Russian or foreign culture. In this China, all forms of traditional culture have been destroyed, including ethics, especially during the Cultural Revolution. The Chinese you see today retain the faces of Chinese, but they do not act as they would have in the past. A culture is defined not only by its tangible parts, such as the Lunar New Year (which is now called "Spring Festival"), but also its intangibles, such as one's cultivation. We have seen the qualities that are deep down Japanese - bushido, and the considerate character - especially in the Fukushima nuclear disaster. This is the collective character underpinning the culture of the nation. But what about Chinese? They are no longer cultivated and civilised as they were in the past. They only carry the selfish gene, and Confucian values no longer exist in their minds.

You can barely argue with Chinese people, as you are not on the same channel. A Chinese citizen might say, "I have my own reasons", "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun", "Money talks", or "We have our own culture". In Hong Kong, we have a different culture – we do not eat dogs, they do.  They have re-interpretation for each and every word. Socialism, "with Chinese characteristics"; Rule of Law (法治), in China would be "governing the country according to law" (依法治国) and so on. Chinese culture has long vanished to thin air, leaving "Chinese-style" culture. It is not difficult to see who is more dependent on whom for safe food when it comes to grey goods smugglers. But they will say, "Without us buying things from you, you, Hong Kong, are dead." So when we talk about the issue of Hong Kong Independence as a nation, we have reason to support this idea of "build a culture nation".

The Chinese today are pathetic. Who is to blame? Probably the "Red Peril" of Communism, but really, the Chinese people themselves. Hong Kong is fortunate enough to have been taken by the British, so we could be slightly removed from the historical tragedy. The current China has nothing to do with Chinese culture anymore. Genuine Chinese culture, however, has been restored in our neighbouring countries. We can see influences of the Tang dynasty in Japan, the Ming dynasty in South Korea, the Qing dynasty in Taiwan, and the Song dynasty in Vietnam. When an ethnic Chinese (huaren) region wants to build its own nation and aim for real strength, it does not have to think this comes solely from rely solely  economic strength or military prowess – it can also come from a cultural foundation. Hong Kong has such a foundation and it should cherish it, or we will fall to the Red Peril.

Atsuna: Why Do Chinese Suffer From Global Discrimination?

Why Do Chinese Suffer From Global Discrimination?

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/02-25-2015/21402 

(Reads: Arrogant locusts; not considerate, get lost!)
(Source: aTV)

Chinese people are good at “the pot calling the kettle black”.

Such country (which “rule by law” is above all) is more than eager to teach Hongkongers “rule of law”. The party is above the country; politics supersedes everything in China; yet they are criticising Hong Kong being ‘over-politicised’. The incident of Eugenia Ye, the failed proposed social secretary of Smarties (HKUSU), was criticised as ‘politicising universities’; combatting smugglers in Shatin and Tuen Mun was criticised as ‘political stance superseding rationality’. Later, condemnations towards urination or defecation might be criticised as being too ‘politicised’.

It would be too troublesome if everything has to be politicised. But CCP treats Hong Kong as a colony (though dare not to admit), and HKSARG plans to betray Hong Kong under its manipulation, being politicises is actually a way to protect ourselves. Chinese people felt otherwise, because the Newspeak of CCP does not only abbreviate things, but also distort meaning of words. "Wenming" (文明) is not being civilised, but rather not to be “locusts”; "lingdao" (領導) has nothing to do with leadership, but chiefs who can earn extra benefits and bribes; so, “politicised” does not really matter to political stances, but rather, a synonym of “discriminating we Chinese”.

There are a lot of rich people, and they are not stingy at all. But they might wonder, “Why am I hailed in China when I spend a lot, but despised in anywhere else?” Some rules are implicated when you want to earn money in China – the core one being “having guanxi”. If you want to have guanxi, you flatter your superior. They are well-trained as they are guanxi masters when they drink a lot. Hongkongers lose in this aspect. But when they are out of such jungle of money, they know few about the real world.

They don’t know why Tibet is poor but westerners still welcome Dalai Lama; why Japanese are always reporting the adulterated food; why Hongkongers are not accommodating enough to allow them to urinate and defecate. They live in a country where normal logic does not work. When you are censored in every aspect, all common sense are no longer common. Democracy, human rights, rule of law, public hygiene, transaction are not almsgiving – they might have heard of these but might not understand. So they cover up their ignorance with void reasons. So even if China rises, they might be the most susceptible Hercules. If you disagree with them or say something they can’t understand, “it’s discrimination”.

In the Shatin anti-smuggler protest, Ms Chen from Shenzhen said that those who oppose smugglers are “angry teens” (fenqing 憤青), and those who oppose Individual Visit Scheme are miso-affluent. She does not know the GDP per capita of China is 7 000 USD, but that of Hong Kong is 38 000 USD. During the Umbrella Revolution, Chinese ate their melon seeds inside the “GFW” and said “these are schemes by foreign forces”. You have to know, ignorant people like to express their views too, but they just don’t know what they are talking about.

Law Pui-lam: Desinification and Hong Kong's Self-determination

Desinification and Hong Kong's Self-determination

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Edited by Vivian L., Written by Law Pui-lam
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/01-28-2015/20825 

(Photo Source: Reuters/BBC)

On 8th January 2015, I wrote "Desinification Is The Right Course" for my column on Passion Times. A reader said I failed to distinguish the party and the country, and that, the reader reckoned, was a common failing among localists. Apparently, this reader thinks that the CCP should be separated from China. I believe many people, especially those who are against the localism camp, think that the culprit of ruining China, Hong Kong and Taiwan is the Chinese Communist Party, not China. And we should rid the world of CCP, not of China.

When I was penning that article, I quoted an example from CCP's internal struggle. I pondered over the title and content of my piece, wondered whether it was best to eliminate any connotation of the Chinese Communist Party. In the end, I opted for de-sinicisation entirely as I concluded that one cannot talk about the wrong of the CCP without considering the wrong of sinicisation.

The problem of CCP is the problem of sinicisation
Technically, it seems reasonable to consider the party and the country as two separate entities. In short, the present China is ruled by the authoritarian CCP. We can overturn CCP, but we cannot overturn China.

But can we really separate CCP from China?

CCP seems to be easier to define, from the perspective of organisation or regime; but the concept of China is more complicated. In general, "China" is the country we talk about, but defining "a country" is much more difficult than that. [Translator's note: Country/nation/state are all 國家 guojia in Chinese.]

"Nations are notoriously difficult to define," George Kateb has claimed in his book Patriotism and Other Mistakes. In fact, the notion of "nation" includes tangible things such as territory, geographical landscape and historical sites; while it is also defined by people's memory, the history, culture, and interpersonal relationships (such as clans). According to Kateb, these memories, history, culture and interpersonal relationships are things that are glorified by the people and the subjective imagination of people.

Territory is more specific, but it is inherently bound to the ruling regime. Over the past 2,000 years, the boundaries of the Middle Kingdom have changed as the dynasties waxed and waned. The current mainland Chinese territory is the territory owned by the Chinese Communist Party - and the two are inescapably intertwined. That leaves the only things that can be ideologically separable from CCP being, perhaps, the geographical landscapes and the historical sites.

People might argue that the concept of China refers to things more intangible, like history, culture and interpersonal relationships. But these things are intricately tied to CCP as well.

Communism is a product of the West. But the workings of CCP, from organisations to operations, is closely connected to Chinese culture and interpersonal relationships. I have argued in my article "Impossible for China to Have A Democratic Regime", that the Chinese society, especially the interpersonal relationship in rural societies, is dominated by clans and families. In the landmark study of Chinese peasant society, China's Peasants, Potter and Potter also posited that the political struggles in rural China is but clan and family struggles. CCP has not changed the traditional interpersonal relationship, but rather it has carried the deep-rooted traditions forward. In fact, we can still understand the politics of CCP by considering the clanships among the cronies of Xi Jinping, Li Keqiang and Bo Xilai.

Governance with CCP characteristics
Such paternalistic clan culture translates as a top-down bureaucratic culture in the political sphere. "Parent-politics", or gerontocracy, not only had been the norm of Imperial China for thousands of years, it is also how CCP operates. We saw in 1989 Tiananmen mass movement that even Zhao Ziyang, the General Secretary of CCP at the time, the supreme high command of the party, had to succumb to Deng Xiaoping to call the shots!

Besides such interpersonal relationship, other cultural values are just as well deep-rooted. Some mainlanders I knew emigrated overseas to flee CCP. But when the subject of discussion falls on the legitimacy of Xinjiang to call for its independence as it has its own language, religion and culture, their dissent often are so hysterical that it borders on a complete loss of reason. During the Umbrella Revolution, I discussed the future of Hong Kong with a Chinese friend. He said mainlanders cannot fathom the idea of Hong Kong taking its political future in its own hands, not to mention being independent from China. Why so? It all boils down to "The Great Unity" invented by the Draconian emperor, Qin Shihuang.

"The Great Unity" has stirred up countless warfare and slaughters, as well as the prohibition of all regional and ethnical autonomy and self-determination. To realise "The Great Unity", CCP was adamant in taking back Hong Kong in 1997, and has been ever so fixated on seizing Taiwan. What is more horrid is that "The Great Unity" is not only a scheme of the rulers, but it is also shared by the common people. In fact, around the time of Hong Kong's handover in 1997, some Hongkongers joined the Chinese in demanding "reunification" and disapproving the proposal of an independent Hong Kong.

On the surface, the ideas of CCP and China seem separable. But examples above have already shown how closely tied the two are. When we are talk about "desinification", or proclaim that we are Hongkongers, and not Chinese, many still find it unacceptable. Kateb argued that what's at play is actually "patriotism" where a person identifies with his fellow countrymen, a certain group or a race.

It's more than just rejecting CCP
Yet, as Hong Kong's local identity blossoms, more and more Hongkongers identify themseleves as Hongkongers rather than Chinese, and support the idea of self-determination, Hongkongers are not merely rejecting the visible hand of CCP, but also demanding desinification--the removal of "Chineseness". These are all because Hongkongers are no longer contend with having an authoritarian regime that exercises parentalism over their heads, and dismiss "The Great Unity" altogether. Only when Hong Kong is desinicised can the city develop to be a rational, modern society and leap forward to the direction of nation-state.

Reference:
1. George Kateb (2006), Patriotism and Other Mistakes, New Haven: Yale University Press.
2. Sulamith Potter and Jack Potter (1990), China's Peasants: The Anthropology of a Revolution, New York: Cambridge University.

Atsuna: Commoners Can Be Accomplices of The Authoritarians Too

Atsuna: Commoners Can Be Accomplices of The Authoritarians Too

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/02-14-2015/21191 

If the "political correctness" indoctrinated to the minds of some Hong Kong or Taiwan celebrities, they will be backfired by those mainland "fans". Chapman To once said in his Facebook page, "Some unreasonable mainland netizens were born in the 1990s, those "fans" of celebs should be youngsters who should be supporting their idols unfailingly. Or at least in normal countries, they should be those least interested in politics. Although there were many student campaigns in the track of history, they criticised the authority. Chinese youths are more peculiar, mentioning the national interests all the time and linking the party's interests to themselves.

Arthur Schöpenhauer once said, "The cheapest sort of pride is national pride, for if a man is proud of his nation, he has no qualities of his own of which he can be proud. Otherwise, he would not have recourse to those which he shares with so many millions of his fellowmen. But every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can [be proud adopts], as a last resort, pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and glad to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, this reimbursing himself for his own inferiority."

So it is more than understandable when Chinese youth can turn a blind eye on things like Liu Xiaobo and Chen Guangcheng. Be calm over injustice (such as illegal land acquisition by the government, using backdoor 'guanxi' benefit their jobs or studies and be utterly patriotic than the Blue Ribbon thugs. The silence is finally broken -- to defend for the national interests. Sort of a compensating, isn't it? But they simply stop thinking and let the party decide on what to speak.

In Zhang Yihe's book. She wrote, "A scholar thinks that, 'If the subjects follow and get used to the method of thinking pig the rulers, then they are accomplices." Chinese get hysteric when they heard Taiwan independence, Hong Kong independence, Tibet independence, or Xinjiang independence. They do not even ask why. If some people even dare not to curry CCP's favours, such as putting a cap on IVS, they just became the "spokespersons of the Chinese Foreign Ministry" with evil faces. Their "enthusiastic attachment" to politics are but beyond one's imagination. It is hard to imagine they live in a country where "Communist Party" becomes a banned searching keyword on Baidu.

Milk formula? Poison. School buildings? Jerry-built. High-speed rail? High-speed accidents. Money and Guanxi? All fixed. People's lives are under the "Russian Roulette", depending on one's luck. Youngsters know the corruption of the country, and the problems in the Communist Party, but when the national interests is involved (high-rank officlas' interests, to be specific), they get "untied". People say "Where they sit affects how they think", but in Chinese logic, leaders decide how the people think. Or else why commoners think of the national interests all the time as if they were cadres?

So stop saying Chinese tourists are commoners. Ask them their views on TWI or HKI, or curb on IVS. You will know they are "accomplices", as Zhang said. When there are disasters upon Hong Kong, Chinese netizens enjoy a lot with Schadenfreude. Leftards are pinpointing at "fascist Hongkongers", but why did they turn a blind eye to hate speech from the Chinese people? Wouldn't it be too scoundrel?

Atsuna: Why Is Military Training A Must for Kids in Hong Kong Mums' Minds?

Why Is Military Training A Must for Kids in Hong Kong Mums' Minds?
Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Edited by Karen L., Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/01-26-2015/20786 

Hongkongers radically do not have a clue how to hit the country's spot: bootlicking seems to be the best tune, but in fact it goes to the wrong way.

When the people from mainland China are "in cahoots with foreign powers", Hongkongers rather give in the world and accommodate China as the new one; When the people from mainland China are learning English with eagerness, Hong Kong on the contrary ruins the generation's English by the "Mother Tongue Education", and even promots "Putonghua as the medium of instruction for Chinese subject" (PMIC); when the mainlanders cast doubts on the military training on students, Hong Kong rather fervently advocates "military summer camp", and now goes so far as to "Hong Kong Army Cadets"!

In China, it is compulsory for high school students (Grade 10) and university freshmen to participate in military training (MT). Military Service Law in 1955 provids the grounds for MT, but before the Tian'anmen Massacre in 1989, students were not forced to do so.

A Chinese writer therefore marked  1989 as the first year of MT, and since then nearly all freshmen have to receive MT for at least a month. Peking University being the staunch supporter of 1989's student movement was even given a year of MT for every student. Even though this one-year MT rule didn't maintain for a long time, it is crystal clear of its motive taming the revolutionary students.

No wonder Chen Danqing, a painter, said on his Weibo, "MT on students acts in no good purposes. This is a form of education turning men into slaves, and should it only exist in authoritarian states like North Korea. Do we opt to training a healthy, independent and free-thinking future generation, or simply obedient machines one after another?"

News covering severe corporal punishment in the training has made Chinese starting to cast doubts on the purpose of MT. Alone in 2014, there is quite some scandals happened. In Hunan, 42 injuries in total, and one of them is a teacher, who is in critical condition. All beaten by the instructors; In Liaoning, a female high schooler committed suicide after criticised of a disqualified posture; In Xi'an, a male student fell on the ground during training, and was certified dead during the way to hospital.

Well, just as I expected, flunkies popped up in time and categoried these as "exceptional cases". They criticised the youngsters are unable to face adversity, and said things such as "Many Chinese parents condone and spoil their only children, and MT can help build up their kids' team spirit and discipline". It does sound familiar, isn't it? These are precisely the reasons Hong Kong mums sending their children to MT camps!

The "Hong Kong Youth Military Summer Camp" and "Hong Kong University Student Military Life Experience Camp" are free in charge. I believe those mums will not value Chen Zuo'er's words ("Brainwashed by the Western theories and have to be refill their brain with the correct thoughts") much, but still pushing their young adult daughters and sons to participate in these camps. Why? Discipline training and advantages taking. In some weirdo university students' minds, "Work life is surely going to be much harder than studying. Through the camp, I can prepare myself to be more tenacious!”

Apart from parents, there are some school headmasters who force their students to join "discipline training camp. The harshness is indeed not comparable to MT, but running around the field, standing still under the sun and doing conditioning are matters of course. Be it MT or discipline training camps, through torturing your body, the endgame is about tearing down one's self-worth and turn people into more "disciplined" selves.

The main course includes severe conditioning punishment due to some slightest issues. Everyone gets to running around the field and doing press-ups. The "team spirit" the camp has attempted to build is based on collectivism. If one cannot be found obedience, it will make them all "villains". Those cocky or go-one's-own-way students are therefore the targets. Added with looped scolding and peer pressure, the students are "re-moulded" as "good" students who will succumb to authority.

Mere punishment is known to be insufficient. This is where the existence of "self-repentance" lies to complete the program. Under some sentimental music, exhausted students are forced to think through what they did wrong to their parents, their teachers and even the universe. Some may even kneel before the teachers and cry, swearing that they will start with a clean slate. If an outsider is to watch the scene, he or she might have thought the students have commited some sort of serious crime.

Not a few parents strongly believe such training camps can turn their kids into tougher ones, as it is known that students are supposed to suffer there. Yet, when they get out from the bars....I mean camps, they might be good boys and girls for a few days, however, it is but a on-the-spur-of-the-moment thing. Expecting a weekly camp to get rid of bad habits that has been accumulated for years, isn't it too greedy?

Knowing that the environment can change a person, Hong Kong mums get used to compare their kids with the same age from mainland China. These mums blame their kids for being less industrious than the ones there. Satirically, for years, these mums have instructed the domestic helpers to take care of all the "irrelevant" matters for their kids so that they can focus on practical skills such as English, Mandarin, piano, painting, dancing, etc – What so surprise if such kids cannot endure hardships?

Julian Yip: That's How Our Next Generation Grows

That's How Our Next Generation Grows

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Julian Yip
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/01-17-2015/20621 

In a district consultation forum back in 2013, 689 (Translator's note: nickname of CY Leung, as he only gained 689 votes) said, "If a four-or-five-year-old kid asks CY, where should he live after marrying...." The kid popped up.

In the Policy Address 2014, the kid popped up again. 689 again said, "A kindergarten kid asked, 'CE, where should I live when I am grown?'" In Polict Address 2015, there goes the kid again, "A five-year-old kid once asked me 'CE, where should I live when I am grown? Are there sufficient land in HK?'"

When kids in Hong Kong have grown to five, besides thinking about the land and housing problem, they need to learn how to "love China", according to the Our Lady's Kindergarten in Wong Tai Sin.

Post by Hong Kong Columns - Translated.

When the kids do not even know how to love their parents, you need to learn the concept of "nationalities are based on countries". When the kids might not know how to write their own names properly, they have to write "I am Chinese". You are what the teachers said - Concept of "Hongkongers"? Excluded.

CY Leung has supported the establishment of "HK Army Cadets Association" as an honorary sponsor. His wife, Regina Tong, will be the chief commander of the army cadets. A secondary school has issued a notice, urging Form 1 students to attend this activity. In Hong Kong, after you have understood the concept of "nationalities are based on countries" and thought about land and housing problems in Hong Kong, you now have to participate in activities of New Red Guards. Selfish adults earn piles of Renminbi by messing Hong Kong around, but they are not satisfied yet. They turn kids into victims, and ruin their childhood by sending them on the way to flatter the Communist Party.

It is already bad when these adults do not prepare a better growing environment for the kids, why are they so brazen-faced to take advantage of the kids and curry flavour to China? They are utterly not ashamed. How will our next generation grow in a world where adults can be so unprincipled, selfish and immoral?

Adults who are counting Renminbi notes will say, "The most important thing is that I can earn money."

Gnimm: Christina Chan, You're right.

Christina Chan, You're right.

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Gnimm (逆嘶亭)
Original: http://gnimmm.com/2015/01/08/youreright/ 

When we mention Christina Chan Hau-man, most people will think of her sidetrack gossips on entertainment magazines. Now, as the situation deteriorates, she is now well-acclaimed as if she is an aggrieved prophet. She herself has long been despondent and stayed away from politics. This is the only result of a person who steps much forward the others. She took an arrow and shoot against "Greater China morons". And now the Snow Lion Banner of Tibet has less and less exposure.

Recently a video clip was uploaded. It was Christina participating in a protest on a tree. I felt sentimental. It was four years ago at night. She was skimpy, as the media described. She was holding a mic, condemning the "go-through-the-motions" formalism of 1st July demonstration. She asked the other protesters to reflect the effectiveness of standing out on streets, and said things that were not much understood at that time. She said, "Should we keep on doing so? We have to think why we are out here. If we do not escalate our action, then staying here will be nothing but a tradition like 1st July demonstration." I can barely hold back my emotions.

Tempus fugit. A 'prophet' is bound to bear such pains. She had to withdraw, long before the Umbrella Revolution, long before people made their own shields and burnt rubbish bins. She, after all, is just a person. We felt helpless when we saw leftards calling people to "vote and deliberate" in Mong Kok [trying to be leaders in the movement], and now it seems that we can do nothing to those totem-praising, "peaceful, rational, non-violence, non-swearing" (PRNN) "yellow ribbons". It is not difficult to imagine how much Christina had to bear, especially when she was on her own. She knew she needed to grab the attention from cameras, so she did use many new tactics, making herself on headlines of newspapers. She then became the target on the bull's eye.

In a calm manner, she said the truth, "Is it useful to do the formality again, just like last year?" Four years have passed, even after the largest scale of occupation in the history of Hong Kong, the majority of Hongkongers still do not understand this truth. In the clip, her friends held the gate outside the old Government HQ, and she called for support. Yet, some fake-allies urged all protesters returning to the original position and to sit and wait until they were carried away by the police, and stop blocking the gate. She was clever and daring, and knew the way such fake-allies act. She shouted, "Never retreat and hold our bottom lines!" Yet in the movement against the development of Northeast New Territories in 2014, Raphael Wong, one of the chief fake-allies, was so brazen-faced to say "People did not think so" in front of journalists to halt the kind of charging Christina proposed. All people who think they are fighting for democracy for Hong Kong owes Christina an apology, because we allow people like Raphael Wong to get in our way when he felt excited when protesters were getting arrested.

Also, the forlorn Christina Chan promoted an idea of self-determination, an idea that is still not understood by PRNN yellow-ribbons. From 1997 to 2003, from 2003 to 2010, from 2010 to 2014, we are still thinking the meaning of civil disobedience, and tarrying with legal wordings. Hongkongers have the priority in enjoying resources of Hong Kong, the final say to our population policies, the right to have one-person-one-vote in electing the government - these are still "not accommodating and fair" to many people who think they are rational. The internal affair of Hong Kong is not yet solved, then not to mention how the Communists suppress people in Xinjiang and Tibet.

"Amid such chaotic world, we have our responsibilities .... for stability maintenance/weiwen." These PRNN yellow-ribbons brandish themselves travelling, and stuck the yellow banner with "I want genuine universal suffrage" wherever they go. But in fact, they have not cherished those pioneers who carry responsibilities at the beginning. And the way they "embrace" democracy is, but, another kind of stability maintenance/weiwen. They do not mind "doing the formality again just like last year", nor doing origami of yellow paper umbrellas for many hours. They are merely jumping on the wagon, or a kind of Joneses mentality.

She did not join the revolution, nor she exposed herself. The revolution ended, not even smelling a scintilla of gunpowder. At the time, did anyone always bear the idea in mind - that continuous escalation of movement has to be continued everyday more radically than yesterday? No. Few were struggling, but the majority of the protesters were not convinced. Some even said "Policemen are our neighbours, the government is our archenemy". Eventually people wait, and tally, for an inconclusive end, which was executed by the batons of the so-called law enforcement agency.

So, her thorough withdrawal was right. Her time belongs to her. People in this place do not worth her precious decade to "enlighten" others. She is neither Albert Ho nor Lee Cheuk-yan, she could go to somewhere else and develop herself, and for those twerps who can stay in the political sphere for two decades, you may now be crystal clear about their "true colours".

Atsuna: Sheep in HK, don't boast about your plumpness in front of lion

Sheep in Hong Kong, don't boast about your plumpness in front of lion

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/12-01-2014/19860 
[When the article was published, the Umbrella Revolution was not ended yet.]

(Source: PassionTimes)

Lu Xun said, "It does not matter if a lion brags about its big size. But it does matter if the subject becomes a pig or a sheep." Hongkongers, you better boast less about how "rational and peaceful" you are. It is the Communist Party you are facing. You may regard the HKSAR Government as no more than a puppet. Nonetheless it carries the violent genes of its "Northern Overlord".

How long has CY Leung taken over Hong Kong? Two years only has the Hong Kong Police transformed back into "jerks with badges" at the old times, or become Chinese-style "Gong'an" (police) or "Chengguan" (city management squad) who beats up dissidents and protesters. If you still, under such circumstance, decide to brag how peaceful and rational you are used to be, you are just confessing to the Communist that we are simply docile objects without bargaining powers.

Even if all 7 million people in Hong Kong took to the street, the HKSAR Government will not slightly budge. It is not Gau Wu (Translator's note: another form of occupy movement) generating the public pressure that would have led to their submission? To them, it is no more than wandering around the streets and resuming work the next day after that?

Many people think that China was among the victors in WWII, but not Japanese. They rather attribute their defeat to USA instead due to the admiration of the strong. To the same reason, they have always looked down upon China. In Chinese view, Japanese only respect stronger countries and belittle weaker ones. And the Communists herself in China "goes the extra mile". Not only do the Commies want to admired the stronger ones, they want to fear the weaker ones — that's the core value of the Chinese communist regime. Upholding peace and rationality, like us, will be treated as weaker ones in the eyes of such authoritarians.

In the entire Umbrella Revolution, only a single piece of glass was broken. Somehow the shattered glass triggered many criticisms. The Yellow Ribbons condemned such "violence" for that behaviour ruined the moral high ground of the Umbrella Revolution. And they felt shameful to have broken foreign media's high expectation.

Hong Kong calls itself as an international city, whereas there is a lot of room for improving its "internationalisation". A slip in the "English proficiency ranking" by some Western private education institution is enough to set Hongkongers moaning and groaning.

Hongkongers long for aura of morality as children without independence long for praises — more shining it be if the giver belongs to foreign media. It would be fairly nice if we can achieve democracy and freedom in a peaceful manner. But any reasonable person knows that won't be the case, but purely sheer fantasy. Inevitably, there is bound to be "violence" against an authoritarian regime. Look at the Ukrainians as an example. You would not find any Western media to condemn them as being not peaceful enough given their extreme situation there.

Whenever brave warriors charge the police, people at the back will discourage them and ask them to "be calm, and refrain from provoking police officers". I won't say all of them are turncoats. I believe that they want democracy as we do, but they are just cursed to implement "Peaceful, rational, non-violence, non-swearing" spirit regardless of the situations.

To be honest, everyone might once be a leftard. People as such condemn the government, be part of a peaceful and rational demonstration, and check in on Facebook. Altogether, they regard themselves as being on the moral high ground. But as you spend more time to understand politics, people as such will eventually reduce to "radical localists". The clock of Hong Kong is tickling. Unchanged for 50 years, a joke indeed. CY Leung getting the post, comes with faster speed of "merge and acquisition".

From leftard to "radical localist", it takes time. We have no time. Hongkongers need to have "genetic mutation" if we want to live. From sitting there and waiting to be arrested (Occupy Central), to bearing with tear gas and truncheons at the beginning of the revolution, and now producing self-made shields, charging the police, throwing eggs and stuff to the police - two weeks ago, you dare not think about it. But it is just "the fittest of survival". It's okay not to charge in the front line, but at least stop saying "Don't charge!". Because you are facing an authoritarian regime. Your peace and rationality might not anger them; you are just "exempted" from being beaten immediately, but your rights may be deprived politically anyway for such evil regime. Not charging, that's fine; but you should be ready to scramble protesters with the police. Protect everyone who dares to charge, because attacking is the best defence. Without them, we are just plump sheep in the eyes of lion.

Peace and rationality is equally important to genuine universal suffrage - these are important universal values we hold dear. But as sheep do not flaunt their plumpness in front of lion, you have to be sober in prioritising things when the authoritarian is greedily showing its own desire over Hong Kong. In such critical moment, upholding "peace and rationality" is just a slow suicide which makes you feel good about.

Wing Wing: Her Beloved Hong Kong

Her Beloved Hong Kong

Translated by Vivian L., Written by 翼雙飛 (Wing Wing)
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/10-30-2014/19460 

(Photo credit: Passiontimes)

Do you know someone like this?

She is young, probably in her 20s, and an avid photographer on Facebook and Instagram. The photos she takes, however, are but a compilation of mundaneness that the world can live without—selfies snapped at an awkward angle, afternoon tea in some fancy hotels, boat parties, boarding gates, group-selfies featuring a pack of pouting girls.

Then came the Umbrella Revolution. One day, out of the blue, this otherworldly young lady proclaimed on Facebook, “These occupiers are messing up Hong Kong. Please stop disturbing other people’s lives and destroying my beloved Hong Kong!”

That last remark practically drove me to madness.

Over the last few years, the residents of Sheng Shui have been forced to endure the ceaseless streams of Chinese smugglers “shopping” in the border town, carts loaded with smuggled commodity running over their feet, and their once quiet lives turned upside down.
A survey found that 10 out of 10 residents of the primarily residential northern district do not want the multiple-entry permits to be continuously issued to China’s individual visitors.

To these she has said nothing. She has not once blamed the smugglers for messing up Hong Kong or disturbing the lives of Sheng Shui residents. Her life of mundane extravagance continued on unaffected.

Besides the swarm of smugglers that have been snapping up daily necessities in bulk, Hong Kong has to entertain an impossible number of visitors from across the border. Over the past year, Chinese travellers accounted for more than 40 million arrivals into Hong Kong (during which period the whole nation of Japan only accommodated around 10 million visitors worldwide).

Hong Kong’s retail industry has been gravely distorted by this numbers game. Small, well-worn shops that have long been the locals’ lifeline—eateries, stationery stores, bookstores, grocers—have been replaced by high-end outlets that target tourists and jewellery chains that line the city’s high streets with windows full of gold.

With the floodgate for Chinese tourists wide open, Hong Kong’s world-class and only railway transport system has suffered constant malfunctions and outages, Hongkongers have even grown accustomed to waiting for the next train that they can never squeeze into.

To these she has said nothing. She has not once blamed the Chinese tourists for messing up Hong Kong or disturbing the lives of Hongkongers. Her life of mundane extravagance continued on unaffected.

Last year when HKTV was denied a free TV service licence despite being a more qualified candidate than certain existing licensee, Hongkongers protested against the government’s decision.

Not only was the decision made behind closed doors, the government ignored the demands to disclose the grounds for the rejection.

What has been the pillars of HK society—fair competition and just procedures—have been toppled by a system that relies on the mere words of certain top officials and under-the-table deals, essentially turning HK into an authoritarian regime.

To these she has said nothing. She has not once blamed the government for messing up Hong Kong’s business environment or disturbing the lives of businessmen and HKTV employees. Her life of mundane extravagance continued on unaffected.

Early this year, three pesticides have been removed from the regulatory list at the request of Chinese authority. That is to say, from then on vegetables containing said pesticides would be allowed to be sold in our markets, and be consumed by us.

To these she has said nothing. She has not once blamed the government for messing up Hong Kong’s food safety or disturbing the dietary affair of Hong Kong citizens. Her life of mundane extravagance continued on unaffected.

Now, thrust upon us is a phoney universal suffrage proposal that gives Hongkongers “the vote” to elect our Chief Executive from a few pre-selected puppets approved by Beijing.

Many people who care about Hong Kong want a genuine choice when choosing the one to lead the city, they wish to elect a leader who answers to the people’s needs and concerns. For that they have been hit by pepper spray, choked by tear gas, beaten by police batons, and have called the dusty roads in downtown Hong Kong home for the past month. To what end have Hongkongers endured all that? All for a genuine election, to stop a puppet government—one that is like Leung Chun-ying’s cabinet and the two before him—from ruining our beloved Hong Kong. We have lost enough. It’s time to take back what used to be us, what we deserve.

The occupiers are people who care about Hong Kong. They are willing to go to great lengths to save Hong Kong from a hopeless future. Meanwhile, those other people described at the beginning of this article have been blind to what Hong Kong has become. Their lives of mundane extravagance continued on unaffected. They have never cared, as if what goes on in the society has nothing to do with them. Until now. The people who care enough to speak up for our future are “messing up Hong Kong”, they say. What about the government that has been the culprit of a myriad social problems? They say nothing.

Occupiers destroy “her” beloved Hong Kong, she says? Has she even cared enough to know what is going on in Hong Kong? To find out what people’s lives have become? I doubt she has ever truly loved Hong Kong as her home. “Love” spoken so frivolously makes me sick.