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?

Tofulism: Chain Store That You Might Want to Blacklist

Chain Store That You Might Want to Blacklist

Written by HKCT Editorial Team
Integrated report

(Source: Fion via PassionTimes)

Allowing mainland Chinese to jump queues and smearing neighbouring store - are these proper business practices?

Few days ago, a writer called "Sham Shui Housewife" on Grassmediaction described what happened in Tofulism Sham Shui Po branch. Kung Wo was an older tofu shop in Sham Shui Po, with fair price level and food product. Around a month ago, there is a new neighbour next to Kung Wo - Tofulism, a chain store having their branches in Tuen Mun, Tseung Kwan O, and Yuen Long.

Tofulism has adopted predatory pricing strategy, aiming at driving out Kung Wo, and so they set a much lower price, and used promoters instead of playing recordings. Yet they called customers who continue to go to Kung Wo as "country bumpkins", and implied the food quality of Kung Wo is bad.

The story hasn't ended yet - the same store, different branch has something more to tell. The Tuen Mun branch was complained by Fion, who queued for tofu puddings, but were jumped queue by a mainland Chinese. Fion told her to get to the end of the queue, but a mainland shop assistant from the shop said "You don't need to queue, I call the shot here."

Chinese links:
https://grassmediaction.wordpress.com/2015/01/15/anti_tofulism/
http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/07-30-2014/18144

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: United We Fail - Should HKFS Dismantle?

United We Fail - Should HKFS Dismantle?

Translated by Poppie, Written by Gnimm
Original: http://gnimmm.com/2014/12/27/badunity/ 

(Screen capture from aTV)

[Translator's note: After the Umbrella Revolution, there are different opinions towards the performance of Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS). Students from HKU has proposed HKUSU to quit HKFS (as the current FS is composed of eight students unions of 8 universities). They have called upon a referendum in school to decide whether to stay or quit. HKFS has since responded the bill by saying this will only please the Communist Party as pro-government student organisations has been established since 1989, eg Hong Kong Tertiary Student Alliance, or HKTSA.]

I am not sure if the Communist Party would be the happiest one if college student unions quit Hong Kong Federation of Students. But I do know that the pan-democrats and leftards will be the most frustrating ones if it happens. From my point of view, that is a pretty good reason to propose the issue to upset those who have been dragging the democracy development of Hong Kong for twenty to thirty years. There's no point of being together and accusing each other if different SUs are not of similar minds.

To respond to the proposal of quitting HKFS from HKU, HKFS reacted quickly to show they have always been non-profit and with not dependent on [strong] power. However, after the Umbrella Revolution, people realise the discrepancy between the truth of the organisation and its self-portrait and description. The things about being composed of all universities' student unions therefore being responsible to member; the election of university representatives and the whole structure of HKFS respects different voices are all measurements to attract people. 

HKFS knows very well that the current agenda is not easy to be moderated. So as the general direction. People are inherently lazy. Being "Greater China supporters", supporting integration of Hong Kong and China, tolerating new immigrants are all under the general line of the federation. There are very few people who will advocate for change. The existence of HKFS is very solid as long as we all think it is better than nothing. What HKFS is really afraid is that some new power can walk the walk and not to abided by rules. Then it would be abandoned and ignored completely. Not even getting any spotlight. Then, pan-democrats and leftards cannot piggyback on students.

There are always doubts on whether university reps and the consensus system is as important and running smooth as HKFS claimed it to be. The decision of accepting the government to join the debate has never been consulted within the organization. Using "pseudo-escalation", but putting protesters at risks - such acts were never agreed by the members. The relationships between HKFS and its member has been abused. HKFS claims they are the elected organisation when they need the say; they put the blame of not monitoring well on the members when the split proposal comes out. This is the same as the Democratic Party saying all their decisions have supports from the voters. Shameless.

It is without doubt that the universities have their own organisation. However, it is clear that all the organisations are small and cannot compete with FS. Even though there are Current Affairs Committees Councils, University Affairs Committees under HKUSU, all with self-autonomy and measures to speak out, it is still incomparable against HKFS. This has nothing to do with whether FS is pressuring the universities but the fact that HKFS has always been regarded as the entity that represents the eight universities. Their status is above others. FS is using this non-influential units to prove that it is unnecessary to quit FS. They are using it as an excuse for their incapability. This is simply unreasonable and unconvincing. It is pathetic for them to frame reasons in order to guarantee their status and avoid the so-called "split of power".

The image of HKFS has been ruined. Unless there is another new determined cabinet to take over, there will not be any progress in the tertiary student sector. It does not matter if the bill of HKUSU does not pass this time. What truly matters is that, the next group of people will be there to fight after making a breaking point. The initial phase of the advocacy has to be fierce and high-profiled.

Quitting FS will definitely not cause a split in the tertiary student sector. It will also never lessen the whole power of FS. It is because there will only be progress when there is competition. The die hard supporters of HKFS should regard this as a voting within a political party instead of a challenge to the authority of HKFS

The tertiary student sector is a very vague concept. It is the people, which means it is also the crowd with no opinion. Splitting into two sides and the one who is capable of being a leader will become stronger in the competition and lead the crowd at the end. The enlightenment of freshmen will be accelerated. The strength of the tertiary student sector will be consolidated. It is important to have a leader and this leader has to be trained. This is a simple fact that will not change even with the democratic systems. Split, in whatever sense, is only doing good deed. It should be done and is worth doing. The sooner the better.

Gnimmm: Condescending "Beasteachers" and Laurel-resting Students

Condescending "Beasteachers" and Laurel-resting Students

Translated by Ciel K. and Karen L., Edited by Karen L., Written by Gnimmm
Original: http://gnimmm.com/2014/12/01/%E4%B8%80%E9%96%8B%E5%A7%8B%E8%AA%95%E4%B8%8B%E5%B7%B2%E7%B6%93%E8%92%BC%E8%80%81/ 

(Clipped from ATV)

Relating "teachers" with "beasts" is something I never wish to do, and yet most of the them in Hong Kong, even not the worst, are no more than "workers who teach", and certainly far from reaching the standard being teachers. They are ignorant enough to assume that they have already fulfilled the ultimate requirements of being a teacher: building positive values for the students and training the students to think critically. But ironically neither do they have a clear set of principle for themselves, nor do they realise the fact that schools are in fact some social organisms.

Most of the teaching staff are typically shallow-minded. Getting into the administrative sector years later does not help them get rid of the paternalistic ruling: No freedom at all times. This is the prime reason why the students in Hong Kong are becoming this well-tamed. These teaching staff restrict the students in every possible way to ensure nothing goes wrong with themselves. Added with the regular quashing on students in the name of authority, their students suffer due to the lack of life experience.

To solve the problem caused, we have to go deep into their mindset and their way handling matters. It is rather their habitual practice persuading the bad students aside and isolating them from the peer. Isn't this trick perfectly the same to those armed with power and wealth in the society? This trick serves as a defence avoiding public discussions that would place them in disadvantage.

In the school context, positions between students and teachers have never been equal. Teacher is a side of vested interests in the establishment, responsible for setting rules. Yet interestingly, people seem to forget that the legitimacy of teachers is originated from the trust of both parents and students, and that they owe a say of being a victim or not. It is the same as the police force abuse the power, people have the right to claim it back, given that it is authorised by the citizens themselves for the sake of protecting the place.

That is why it is justifiable for students to point out teachers' mistakes and to stop them from abusing the power ever again. This is not a case reconstructing "red guards" in the Cultural Revolution, but merely empowering the students themselves.

Students in secondary schools, therefore, shall be entitled to enjoy freedom of speech and freedom of religious belief. They are born with such freedom discussing political issues which is not some sort of grace spared by some "honourable" principals, whereas some beasteachers constantly please their superiors and "thoughtfully" advise the students to cherish the principal's leniency. What a new definition of ridiculousness! And its tone closely resembles Zhang Xiaoming's words "The fact that you [pan-dems] are allowed to stay alive, already shows the country's inclusiveness".

Believing themselves to be infallible,  the administrative personnel, the Directors of General Affairs and the social workers choose to solve the problems within their own "system". Observing and adopting perpetually this distorted set of methods, students therefore lose their innately ability to process some formulae in dealing with problems along the way.

This also explains the reason that a number of students from the non-prestige schools only realise that they had never faced the genuine challenges when they get into the universities and that they have a hard time outperforming their peers who have been used to go against the bureaucratic management in school of serious matters. Due to the pedanticism in secondary schools, the students are isolated from the real world.

Numerous indisputable examples are there. Factually, independence on secondary school students is relatively lower than that on universities students, however, most of the schools are willing to share with the students some clear-cut rules about rights they should have. This paternalistic ruling is what makes the students' unions and house captains figureheads-only.

It has been vague towards the line of power between secondary schools and their students' unions, not to mention that students' union does not exist in each and every school. These students' unions, if not all, have not been once released statement to the outside world. All these are linked to some students' confusion between executive committees and student residents' associations, which then followed by harsh criticisms from their peers.

Students' unions in secondary schools are merely puppets without genuine influence on the school policies. It can tell by their usual duties: simply pursuing welfare and reflect opinions. Even if such unions are bold enough to raise a petition or whatsoever, all they can get is at most an expression of certain stance but not some true efforts that make changes.

On the face of it, through the permission of students' unions, the schools attempted to seem avant-garde. In these cages, student-based authorities are there generated one by one acting as a consultant organisation reflecting students' opinions to school. Yet obviously enough, being as some consultant means to have no share of the power.

A students' union with power is at bottom castles in the air, whereas the make-believe power successfully deceives the students as if the fake universal suffrage deceives quite a number of citizens. For the secondary schools, every single year, there will be some annual meetings launched by the students' union which all the students can question the members of their performance throughout the year. During the process, the students frequently overlook that the school itself is the one holding the upmost authority within a school.

As a result, the power of the school expends, to an extent that the staff do not need to think of how to convince the students of the school's decisions as they know the students have to and are to comply anyway. The teachers who blindly stick to these rules are all accomplices to students' individual growth.

Failure of recognising this serious problem in the system is due to ignorance, while the refusal of change knowing the problem is an unenlightened behaviour. And it is self-abandoned for the students thinking that they will eventually graduate six to seven years later and that it will not affect their lives afterwards whether the school has made befitting response to students' views.

How does the school rules embody? This is the question worth thinking through. When one have suited in the "whatever" way of living, one will lose the vividness of life and there is no turning back.

You should know that teenagers are the only ones who will stand through the wind. The schools and teachers in this society wish you all students abandon your fearlessness, focus solely on studies and studies and pay no attention to them, given that there is forever more a natural conflict of interest between them and you.

If those who are young in age fear troubles and punishments and turn away from the question of life and death, the world will be at a standstill till Doomsday. And I, in line with lamentation, am swollen with anger!

Bill Chou: Patriotic Generation - Political mission for tertiary institutions in Macau

Patriotic Generation - Political mission for tertiary institution in Macau

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Bill Chou (仇國平)
Original: https://www.facebook.com/macauconcealers/photos/a.158212900914486.37247.153478958054547/766513590084411/?type=1 
[Bill Chou is the former associate professor of Department of Government and Public Administration, University of Macau]

(Photo Source: TDM)

According to the report of Macau Daily, Zhao Wei (趙偉), the Rector of University of Macau (UMac), asked teachers to be politically neutral, and fired me because I violated such regulation. Yet recently, Zhao Wei was slapped by the Tertiary Education Services Department (GAES) in the face – GAES will assess the performance of institutes of the tertiary education sector according to the standard of "Love country, love Macau". In other words, university teachers in Macau have to "uphold the banner of 'Love country, love Macau'", and cannot be "politically neutral".

GAES has issued a press release on 5th January 2015, saying that they will assess the ability of graduates according to six abilities, one of them being "Love country, love Macau". In the future, tertiary institutions will "enhance" patriotic education in terms of curriculum and co-curricular activities according to such assessment. When Chinese education authorities did not draw a clear line between the party and the country, the "patriotic standards" in Macau will have no choice but to be "par with" that in mainland China, probably including the "Seven Speak-nots" issued by the General Office of Chinese Communist Party Central Committee, that is, not allowed to mention historical mistakes made by CCP, universal values, freedom of press, citizens society, judicial independence and privileged capitalist class. In subjects like history and politics, teachers might not teach whatever they want. Politically incorrect or non-patriotic concepts might not be allowed in class.

This is absolutely not castle in the air. When I was still in UMac, I was asked by Wang Jianwei, the department head, to reduce the criticisms to public policies of China, and enhance criticisms on USA. And some students are hired by the school or department in order to supervise my speech in class. I once tried to hold a Xinjiang Policy Academic Symposium, but was halted by Wang Jianwei because of political sensitiveness. When "Love country, love Macau" became a yardstick in measuring graduates and effectiveness of universities, such intervention to academic freedom will become natural.

People always say, "Today's Macau will be tomorrow's Hong Kong". Under CCP, Hong Kong and Macau are under the same office, and the policy will be similar. Rao Geping, Basic Law Committee member and Peking University Law School professor, said Hong Kong needs "decolonised" education and students have to be instilled with "national awareness". Chen Zuo'er, president of Chinese Association on Hong Kong and Macao Studies (CAHKMS), said Secretary for Education should be under the supervision of Central Authorities. If Macau makes universities fitting in such patriotic education, it's hard to say HKSARG will not implement national education in primary, secondary and tertiary education.

======
Chinese version below, authorisation from reproduction acquired from Macau Concealors:
【愛瞞博客】澳門高等院校的政治任務: 打造愛國愛澳新一代 (一)

文：仇國平 （前澳門大學政府與行政學系副教授）

根據「澳門日報」報導，澳門大學校長趙偉說，要求教師政治中立，並因我教學政治不中立而解僱我。最近，趙偉被高等教育辦公室打嘴巴: 高教辦即將以學生的 「愛國愛澳」表現，評估高等院校的成效。換言之，日後大學教師教學要高舉愛國愛澳旗幟，絕不可以教學政治中立。

高教辦在1月5日發出新聞稿，指為了評估高等院校的成效，將會就六個學生能力範圍制訂指標，評估畢業生的黎波里能力。其中一個能力範圍，就是「愛國愛澳」。將來，當院校知道學生的愛國愛澳表現要接受當局評估，自然會在課程上以至課外活動，加強愛國教育。在現時中國的黨國一體下，澳門的愛國標準難免和內地接軌，包括有可能仿效中共中央辦公廳向大學下達的「七不講」指令，不能在課堂上講授中共的歷史錯誤、普世價值、新聞自由、公民社會、公民權利、司法獨立、權貴資產階級。歷史及政治等較具爭議的學科，教師不可隨意教授各種學說。被視為政治不正確、不愛國的觀念，可能不准向學生教授。

這絕不是危言聳聽: 當我還在澳大的時候，曾被系主任王建偉教授要求，減少對中國公共政策的批評，以及加強對美國的批評。而部份學生，被招攬為校方/ 系方監督教師在課堂上言論。另外，我曾經舉辦中國新疆政策學術研討會，被王建偉以政治敏感為由要求停辦。當「愛國愛澳」成為評估畢業生以至大學成效的指標，這些干預學術自由的舉動，便變的理所當然了。

坊間常說: 今日澳門，明日香港。港澳政策屬中共同一個政策系統，兩地政策部份互通有無。身兼基本法委員會委員的北京大學法學院教授饒戈平日前表示，香港需要推行「去殖民地化」教育，培養國家意識。前中國國務院港澳辦常務副主任、全國港澳研究會會長陳佐洱，香港教育局長要接受中央監督。倘若澳門成功在大學內推行「愛國愛澳」教育，難保港府以「去殖民地化」做幌子，在香港大中小學推行國民教育。

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".

Kevin Chu: On the Role of "United Front"

On the Role of "United Front"

Translated by Karen L., Edited by Chen-t'ang, Written by Kevin Chu (建燁)
Original: http://home.macau.ctm.net/~sonpou/1212/Yip.htm 
(Translator's note: Kevin Chu is a current-affair commentator from Macau.)

As "United Front", known as "Tongzhan" in Chinese, explicitly states, it means "centralising the battle fronts". This term is originated from Vladimir Lenin's piece at the time of Soviet Union and is regarded as one of the three weapons of Chinese Communist Party (CCP)'s revolution. Viewing "uniting secondary enemies in attack of primary enemies" as the principle in political competition, CCP thinks highly of "United Front" for both inner- and outer-party issues.

CCP stands out, unquestionably, when it comes to implementations of "United Front" tactic. Expelling Chinese Nationalist Party to Taiwan back in the days is remarkably listed as one of its "achievements". Indeed, CCP succeeds in political struggles one after another conjointly through "United Front". The revelation of broken promises comes along in the meanwhile.

Before the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC), Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai, both significant leaders of CCP at the time, gave people their solemn pledge of the future of democracy through Jiefang Daily and Xinhua Daily. Yet, in the end, is there any Chinese on their motherland ever embracing the warmth of democracy? Have anyone ever witnessed one direct election of the President of the PRC? With an endless harassment of the unhealthy political system, how is it possible for a country to alter its economy and livelihood from the ground up?

CCP vowed likewise to bestow ethnic minorities the right to self-determination once, however, not long after the establishment of PRC, Mao Zedong, the founder and chairman, when reviewing the national historical records, indicated that it was a move of expediency gaining their support towards the regime and that there was no need emphasising the right to self-determination anymore.

Mao also claimed that it was not necessary to have expressions such as "the establishment of CCP's regime" and "the fall of the  Kuomintang of China" in order to avoid any deprivation derived from the secession (More on P. 4-5 from the Chronicle by Mao Zedong 1949-1976: Volume I compiled by the CCCPC Party Literature Research Office). To this day, as a matter of fact, self-determination among ethnic minorities still belongs to one of the basic national policies. They see the importance to prepare ethnic minorities of their ability towards self-administration, so as to diminish the inner conflicts once the integration gets in afterwards. And it doesn't stop right here.

Members of Parliament of the United Kingdom, as media from Hong Kong, recently said that Beijing's officers have transmitted a message disqualifying Sino-British Joint Declaration. In the matter of implementation time, the countries should discuss in peace. There will only be problems left if they do not settle with a mutually agree time for implementation.

The term "United Front" from Lenin, surprisingly filled with such stream of thought that is penetrated of Chinese-spy-style. In The Art of War, it reads, "To govern the army properly, it is noted that there is no one closer than spies, deserve receiving more advantages than spies, know more secrets than spies." Likewise, in Wubei Zhi, it reads, "Spying is inevitable when it comes to verse military forces. Harm so caused is unavoidable during the process."

For the term "United Front", the ultimate purpose "uniting secondary enemies" is to employ spies. All is as what Mao said before, "Who is our enemies? Who is our allies? These are the primary problems of revolution we have to solve" (Analysis of Classes in Chinese Society (1925), Mao Zedong). Generally, the symbolic meaning of the term is rather negative, given that its definition sometimes carries the behaviour of bribery. Yet, I stand on the ground that this "United Front" tactic is eventually no more than a tactic that its nature is directly proportional to the user.

To advance insight towards "United Front", along with its historical background, it is one way to achieve ideal liberal education. On the basis of the common use of "United Front" nowadays among CCP and some other related parties, one is able to not only gain knowledge about the past, but fathom today's China from the mist.

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.

PassionTimes: Popularity of police plunged, notoriety irreversible

Popularity of police plunged, notoriety irreversible

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Editorial Team of Passion Times
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/12-22-2014/20146 

(Photo: Passion Times)

HKUPOP had a poll on the degree of satisfaction on the police force of Hongkongers. The results reveals that the degree of satisfaction has dropped to a new low since 1997, with only 29 points. Ming Pao had a coverage on 22nd Dec. After analysing the data from HKUPOP, Ming Pao said the degree of satisfaction youngsters aged 18 to 29 decreased from 40 points to -41.7 points. In other age groups, middle-aged people between 30 to 49 dropped from 51.4 to 30.4, while people over 50 has slightly dropped from 56.8 to 55.

As CY Leung tackled political issues with the police, which then lost its political neutrality. Under Andy Tsang, a hawk-style Commissioner of Police, the reputation of police has plunged greatly. For example, when blue ribbon thugs attacked occupiers, the police just let them go. At the same time, at conspicuous places in police stations, blue ribbons were everywhere, and it is hard not to imagine the thugs are related to the police force. Besides, the police framed a female reporter from PassionTimes for attacking police officer when she was sexually assaulted by people from blue ribbon gangs. Selective law enforcement cases are simply uncountable. Andy Tsang did not punish those who did not follow Police General Orders and show his sophistry. It is doubted that whether Hong Kong Police is doing things in mainland Chinese ways.

After all, when the police used inappropriate violence, had covered up for blue ribbon thugs, selective law enforcement and sophistic explanation, people has shown their stances in such poll - Hongkongers no longer trust the police force, and it is hard to resolve the relationship between the police and civilians in the long term.

Choi Chun-wai: HK-China Relationship in Post-Occupy Era

Hong Kong-China Relationship in Post-Occupy Era

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Karen L. and Poppy, Written and edited by Sam Choi Chun-wai 蔡俊威, Chinese version edited by Fong Hiu-ying 方曉盈, Originally on Ming Pao (This article was published on 7th Dec 2014)
Original: Pentoy 

(Photo: Passion Times)

When the occupy movement reaches an end, the focus seems to be blurred. Police is again utilised as a tool to solve political problems, and the main theme switched from political reform to police-public confrontation - the happiest third party would be CY Leung and his cabinet. Under such circumstance, Hong Kong has become more "messy", and thus someone will be much more trusted by Beijing. Since the "conversation" with the students, the authorities have started to stop defending, and start attacking. In terms of political reform, the government does not need to think too much. The authorities smeared at such political campaign that the world is watching. Looking at the disintegration of such campaign, it just did unveil the disguise of respect.

What is more important is that: the moment the focus is blurred, the moment HK-China relationship has entered a Post-Occupy Ice Age. China will impose more radical policies, and so things will get worse. To Hong Kong, Beijing has a love-and-hate-and-scared attitude. Love: Hong Kong is a tool for China to develop; Hate: many Hongkongers' minds have never been "unified"; Hate: the political power and awareness in Hong Kong might enter China, faltering the authoritarian regime. Now, Beijing feels Hongkongers are not "obedient", therefore Beijing wants to accelerate in the speed of "reunification of Hong Kong". CCP will not mind to use the worse tactic: "to grab Hong Kong in its hand, never mind forsaking the "old Hong Kong"."

War on Ideologies

It is an ideological problem at the end of the day. Therefore, as the first step, in the forseeable future, China will enlarge and enhance such front struggle and turn it into a long-term war. The strategic order on cultural front of CCP, "strengthening our on base and occupy others' bases as well", will be extremely followed. Oversea Version of People's Daily once issued an article, saying "'Anti-road-occupation' is just only the prelude of the struggle, and 'anti-Occupy-Central' is a long-term war in decades and decades." The clearance of the police is just a palliative way, and the root is the ideological scramble (to strengthen the understanding of HK-China relationship based on Beijing's interpretation, and grab the right to re-interpret on the Western values which are deep-rooted in Hongkongers' minds), including "requiring the entire members of public in Hong Kong to reacquaint "One country, two systems" and the "Basic Law", and to recognise the importance of being national sovereignty, safety and development as Chinese citizens, and the rights and duties of the public."

The ideological war can be achieved through certain ways:

Education: Dyed in Red

First, Beijing will embark on education. They will snatch the dominance in reinterpreting the history and core values of Hong Kong.

Ideologically, how the knowledge is produced and transmitted can be a threat and a weapon. Knowledge and information can alter the recognition of the public towards the society, the world, the politics and HK-China relationship In education, the regime will relentlessly get the current education system down.

In achieving this goal, Beijing will further "change" the school and civic education in Hong Kong. The Liberal Studies (LS) in NSS is criticised to be the culprit to make the students be pan-politicisation and to provost the occupation. Some pro-Chinese groups and LegCo members have already listened to the orders, and suggested to "revise" or even to cut down the LS subject, not to mention adding more "materials allowing students to learn more about One Country, Two Systems and our motherland". Even, the Education Bureau has to adopt a less politically sensitive translation on the term "critical thinking", from 批判性思考 to 明辨性思考 (Translator's note: The former one has more 'criticising' meaning, the later one has more 'distinguishing rights and wrong' meaning. Anyway, such revision is the result of Regina Ip's question in LegCo).

The more critical field is actually on the tertiary education and academia - places where knowledge is genuinely produced and transmitted. Few years ago, Joseph Lian Yi-zheng, a Hong Kong scholar and columnist on HKEJ,  mentioned such concern, which aroused certain discussions then. Undeniably, CCP already started in this field. More and more Chinese scholars entered tertiary education institutions, undermining the productivities of Hongkong-based knowledge (and undeniably, there are Chinese scholars who are Hongkong-based). The phenomenon of mainlandisation of Hong Kong society actually took place much earlier in the academia. As the breeding ground of ideologies and places with academic freedom, the tertiary education has "turned red", to some extent. It is said that employing overseas returnees, or haigui, mainland scholars should be put on the first priority, and there will be a lot of "funds for study" in order to keep them here. On the contrary, the local scholars have less "lebensraum" in their studies. Recently, some scholars in China even condemned tertiary education in Hong Kong is much "pan-politicised" (Translator's note: Don't look at me, it just means politicised, but Chinese people loves getting simple things complicated), and that implies Beijing wants to suppress the teaching-and-learning of the "political side of Hong Kong". Lian even pointed out the "Party branch secretary" ruling universities might be within a stone's throw. We might refer to the experience in Macau (Translator's note: the rector of University of Macau, Zhao Wei 趙偉, is the only university chief in Hong Kong and Macau who comes from Mainland China). Once we look at the staff establishment of the faculties, the mainlandisation problem is a worse case - this is the key.

Besides culling the local knowledge production, these people also rely on the interlocking ecological pyramid. On the students side, according to the University Grant Committee (UGC), under the internationalisation policy for local tertiary institutions, UGC-funded institutions can allow 20% non-local students, including China and overseas, to take bachelor degree courses, and there are no restrictions for graduate school courses. In the past three academic years, around 80% post-graduates come from China. It is often discussed that the reason for mainlandisation is the plunge of local applicants, and therefore graduate schools take up more Chinese students. But if local scholars are no longer cherished, then due to various reasons including political ones, their upward mobility is halted, and therefore the ecological pyramid breaks down. Don't we need to face the origin of such problem? In humanities subjects, the case is worse. Less and less projects are Hongkong-based. It means universities, which supposed to be our base for academic study, no longer aim at nurturing intellectuals who have Hong Kong roots. Now, it is often said that Beijing lost the confidence of the entire generation Y of Hong Kong. But if we lose the knowledge generation which is based on Hong Kong (including how and what to write in the history of Hong Kong), then we will lose the autonomy of interpreting Hong Kong. And if we lose our subjective consciousness, we will lose each and every generation of Hongkongers.

Infiltration of United Front in Creating Conflicts

Secondly, Beijing will create more conflicts though abundant of infiltration of united front. Many highly-orchestrated people join the script of anti-occupy Central since the idea of Occupy Central has been mentioned. What we learn from history is that the more people being orchestrated, the more torn and bipolar the society is. In the post-occupy era, Beijing will further pit parties against one another, and more groups in both sides (pro/against China) will be formed. We can see that when the new generation is so ‘reactionary’, Beijing will capitalise youth issues to organise united front tactic in order to create a new generation that complies with Beijing.

Besides the united front, a "closer" population integration policy also helps to speed up the establishment of a new generation and vote rigging. We cannot ignore the Beijing’s infiltration of professionals. Without a doubt, there are plenty of mainlanders who live in Hong Kong consider the interest of Hong Kong the most important. But looking back at the strategy Beijing to Hong Kong, we cannot rule out the possibility of China infiltrating Hong Kong. The famous ‘Tsang Siu-fo case’ proved that the Communist party is good at infiltration. During the 50s, Tsang was a reliable officer in the police force and one of the first ethnic Chinese to be promoted to Scotland Yard to receive special training. He made it to Assistant Superintendent of Police within 11 years and worked in 'Special Branch' (Hong Kong’s CIA). He was also selected as a bodyguard for the then-governor of Hong Kong, Sir Grantham. Such elite has been found to be a spy inside police and British military Hong Kong to gather colony and British military intelligence for the Chinese government. Now, with policies allowing mainland Chinese students staying in Hong Kong after studies, those who listen to Beijing will further percolate into the sectors of education, law, finance, medical and other professionals, and even take part in Hong Kong’s politics.

Construct An Instinct of Self-censorship

Thirdly, a phenomenon of trepidation is about to breed in Hong Kong – self-censorship. Aside from education, moulding a social voluntariness of self-restraint is another example towards the spitefulness of ideological struggle. During the occupy movement, farces with citizens "pledging allegiance" are staged in turn. Be it forced or otherwise, all the personages among billionaires and businessmen have to declare their political status. In the predictable future, this allegiance culture will not settle with civil servants sitting on the rail. Only will those robots leaning to the party's favour survive. A considerate number of disciplinary forces and service departments have publicly stated their support for the government during the time, revealing the discomforting direction of politics in the mist. This might be a loophole for Beijing to politicise the whole bureau in Hong Kong.

What is worse lies in Hongkongers' inner fear of repercussions declaring "incorrect" political statement. Such highly infectious virus originated among the public figures, and then spread to the professionals. To the present day, it has already started to breed among the commoners. Many citizens are frightened of being "banned", or "literary inquisition" (not only being illegal, but also being labelled by Chinese authorities). Some even worry that their personal information will be sent to mainland China, or thus be blacklisted. Dithering comes first when deciding to file reasonable complaint against those ruffianly police's attack on civilians.

Déjà vu, is it? When we hear mainland Chinese dare not say anything under frequent suffering of injustice, we can't help but wonder. Yet it is an instinct developing naturally under the life in authoritarian state. In the minds of mainland Chinese, continuously do they consider "Big Brother is watching you" in making every decision, including the slightest ones. Such worriment is rather natural indicating that the program of self-censorship has been rooted in their minds. In the now of Hong Kong, it shows footprints of white terror that is supposed to exist only in authoritarian states. Undoubtedly Beijing will oversee its proliferation to exclude possibility of malfunction. All of these come down to the very question we have to think through – if it goes in Beijing's way, how will Hong Kong become in the Post-Occupy Era?

The CCP Has Unveiled The Disguise of Respect

Maria Tam, a member of the Committee for the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR, once said that the autonomous right of Hong Kong SAR is just slightly higher than that of the those Autonomous regions in mainland China.

Wang Lixiong, a specialist in the Tibetan sovereignty debate, also shared his view on "One Country, Two Systems" in an interview based on the CCP's administration experience in Tibet, that the "Two Systems" has always been an expediency during transition, and never does the respect for the people involve.

It will be a no-going-back mono-route once the CCP can have full control over Tibet with assurance. What post the disturbing atmosphere is that both the CCP's officials and the state-owned media started to respond voices from Hong Kong society with disdainfulness since the 1 July protests in this year. Those used-to-be formulae, such as "we respect the compatriots from Hong Kong to express themselves freely" and "their request should be heard", are no longer on the table. Cutting to the chase, the CCP has unveiled the disguise of respect.

This hostile nation against anyone getting in the way. For the sake of its rise, it by all means achieve this goal. Some online posts in mainland China websites show that one of the views people there have for the big-scale outbreak of the occupy movement, is "an act of conspiracy between some international powers against China and some local powers which look for resuming colonial Hong Kong". While Beijing, without a trace of hesitation, announced that Sino-British Joint Declaration has been nullified, it is time for us all to ponder what should the HK-China relationship be during the subsequent post-occupy era.

In Beijing's eyes, it is the love-hate system in Hong Kong that interferes with its rise. As mentioned above, it is necessarily straightforward that Beijing will in various ways eradicating British "brainwashing-and-trust-winning" construction of political culture – Hong Kong's existing system, culture, knowledge and value on the battle field of ideology.

It is the collapse of rites and music that fears Hongkongers the most. Take the 50-million-scandal man. Before the issue can be settled rightfully, the spirit of integrity has been "fixed". Added with Carrie Lam's defending as "The concept of "asset" is not clarified in the Basic Law" in the LegCo, there seems nothing left in the system anymore.

The Loss of Rebellion Sense Kills Room for Democracy

In analysing the post-Occupy era, it is not my aim to propose localism or to draw a clear line between insiders and outsiders. The article serves as a reminder that politics does not only confined to the political system.

The occupy movement purely intends to fight for the democracy of the system. No matter what the outcome be, it is inevitable that the post-occupy era will come to us afterwards. By the time, it will be Beijing's turn to play, yet everybody should know that her game, which we referred as "war" has never limited to the political system. Her ideal is to adopt full ideological struggle in Hong Kong.

If we only focus on one aspect, everything will be in vain if we lose other battles even we obtain democracy. The tug-wars between Hong Kong and China are in all fields. There are numerous examples for this: Puerto Rico was granted democracy and autonomy but their economy, education, culture and ideology were emasculated by the United States. Catalonia excels Spain in culture and economy but the water supply was once cut by Francoist Spain. Without water, autonomy is hard to achieve even for a strong region. Why did the Cross Strait Service Trade Agreement (CSSTA) cause such a student movement in Taiwan? Because the people are afraid Taiwan would get too close with China and no longer have their autonomy. The obedient Macau is ruined in its original economy and ecosystem. Beijing is directly governing it without a scintilla of worry.

Under such era, there is no doubt that Beijing would fight more vigorously in ideology. If we lose the ability, willingness or awareness to defend, democracy will be nothing but a dream.

Atsuna: Hongkongers, are you ready for the first death?

Hongkongers, are you ready for the first death?

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/12-09-2014/19969 

Umbrella revolution is a Pandora's box - you can see who is bastard, who is not. When we are witnessing HK Police turning into ruffians, and CCP nullifying the Sino-British Joint Declaration, and you are still talking about "unchanged for fifty years"? You must be kidding. Right, we are about to enter 2015, the eighteenth year since the change of sovereignty. China is no longer China after PRC, Hong Kong is no longer Hong Kong after this revolution. Bastards are getting more important, ruffianly police are "maintaining the law and order", the authorities are continuously weakened - Hong Kong has reached a point of no return. Yet, some people are persuading for withdrawal, but their eyes are blindfolded - if we lose this time, the dark ages will fall upon us, and the evil forces will ring the death knell for our original Hong Kong.

Police abusing violence has become the sign of collapse of the civilised Hong Kong. It does not only represent the authorities have become a tool for political suppression, it also declares "2+2-5", as in George Orwell's 1984. If you are on the "right" side, you have the right to rape "rule of law". Ruffianly policemen beat protesters' heads with their batons, and surround you with their fists if you dare to "walk slowly", and even dare to say "say one more word and I will rape you in the police station" to female protesters. Although there are a lot condemnation on Facebook, these ruffians are not punished even they violated the Police General Orders (PGO) - not a legally binding document, and in other words, it is not illegal if they violated it, at most violation will be subjected to disciplinary actions. Wait, security chief Lai Tung-kwok still comes out from time to time on TV to support the police force ... Disciplinary action? Stop dreaming.

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 is an act in UK in restricting the authorities of the police, and is completely shown to the public. In Hong Kong, PGO is not a legally binding document, and is not completely shown to the public, especially the part related to violence and use of arms - the police has continuously denied the public's access. It will be harder to lodge a complaint if the public does not know the line on using violence.

After all, police are part of the public. Even they are enforcing the law, they are still under the constraints of law. Even PGO is a paper tiger, beating and charging are criminal offences, but why these ruffians are still safe? Because criminal offences need to be investigated by police, after collecting the evidence(s), the Department of Justice will then decide whether to prosecute or not. In normal circumstance, if policemen did not get their job done (searching for evidence(s) and find out the perp(s)), their seniors will condemn them. But we have now entered the "era of new Hong Kong". Ruffians beating people - no prosecution; female CPPCC deputies beating policeman - not attacking police. We have no more rules, but "undermined rules" - see if you are on the "right" side.

We might be astonished when we see so many bastards in the police force, not because police had good characters before this, but because the revolution has opened a "broken window". Broken windows theory suggests that if some bad behaviours are not dealt with, then there will be more people following, or even aggravate the situation - example: not fixing a broken window will cause more people to break the window, or even an arson case. Although "Seven ruffianly policemen" beat Ken Tsang (the protester from Civic Party) are immediately suspended from their duties, the formal arrest procrastinated for a month. Pro-China brown-noses like Ann Chiang swiftly helped "raising funds" for them. We are not fixing the broken windows, and encouraged people to break more windows, so ruffian acts can often be seen on YouTube.

Ruffianly policemen themselves are also a broken window. Although it is no longer news when they enforce act selectively, they now become free security for pro-China groups and its hirelings. They escorted Blue Ribbons thugs to go away despite they are red-handed, now they helped Chiu Luen (Chiuchow Associated Minibus Company, the pro-China minibus company which applied for an injunction in the court) to "look after" their terminus. Will it be possible if they bully Hongkongers for Chinese? Hard to tell! "New Hongkongers" and those across the border know where to exploit loopholes. There are more barbaric tourists since Tourism Board forced travel agencies to "kneel down". Police is legal to exercise violence. If they are sided, they encourage people to violate the law. In "New Hong Kong", dare you think about stability and prosperity.

Thomas Jefferson once said, "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of constitution so the second one will not become the legalized version of the first." Ruffianly policemen are criminals under the protection of law. They mercilessly attack protesters' heads with batons. It is their luck we haven't had a person dead yet. But luck might be used up. Xu Zhiyuan, a Beijing writer, wrote a book called The Totalitarian Temptation, which, in the preface, reads: "In struggles with totalitarianism, one has to be intellectually and psychologically ready. Slight confrontation will not be effective." Because a totalitarian government cannot allow common sense. Actions like protest, hunger strike or peaceful occupation cannot force it to make concessions. If you are not daring enough, you will be counter-attacked severely. Although you might not be the one, the situation might not be controllable in the future. Hongkongers, are you ready for the first death?

Yoyo Ko: Japanese and Chinese

Japanese and Chinese

Translated by Karen L., Written by 高慧然 (Yoyo Ko)
Original:http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/supplement/columnist/%E9%AB%98%E6%85%A7%E7%84%B6/art/20141118/18938294 

I have received several letters from my readers since the publication of my article Japanese Is Indeed Different. Polarised as they are – Little do some question its side towards Japanese respect on lives, while others sailed into my opinion of the ignorance of Japanese cruelty on Chinese back in the day.

It is commonly known that most of the Chinese are killed by Chinese themselves, so does the brutality they are subjected to. 

As for the how, it can be traced far back to the Song state during the Spring and Autumn Period. By the time, commoners exchange their children for that of the others as a source of food, whereas in our modern history, nearly 100 years ago, there were blood-soaked steamed buns recorded by Lu Xun. [Translator's note: Lu Xun, a leading figure of modern Chinese literature, described in his work Medicine that people at the time believed steamed buns which were soaked with human blood could save lives. That is why some traded them for money.] If we look closer, examples one after another are there in front of us since the establishment of the Red China in 1949. 

Affirmatively speaking, to me, Chinese is never ever a nationality which knows how to respect.

There is a significant difference on the nature between Japanese and Chinese. It is not that Japanese will necessarily be nice to the others, but they will, to themselves. Chinese, in the opposite, they make 100% sure to treat their people badly.

"Even a vicious tiger will not eat its cubs" was an old Chinese saying. Yet ironically enough, Chinese had evolved to feel at ease digesting others' children and to comfort themselves, "at least we’re not having our own kid."  

You should not rest on the conclusion that Chinese has abandoned such beastly behaviour. Instead, they have transformed it – some sell contaminated milk formula, some sell poisoned vegetables, some sell gutter oil. 

For the sake of economic development, today's Chinese demonstrate devastation on the land, water and air leaving no chance of survival for next generations. Isn't it another form of utilization to satisfy their appetite by consuming the future?

This is not a normal Japanese would ever do.

Atsuna: Why aren't there disciplinary teachers in universities?

Why aren't there disciplinary teachers in universities?

Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Written by Atsuna
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/11-13-2014/19655 

At the recent Commencement Ceremony of Baptist University of Hong Kong (HKBU),  the Vice-chancellor (VC), Albert CHAN Sun-chi, refused to hand out graduation certificates to students who held up yellow umbrellas on stage. He told them they should "respect themselves".

As a CPPCC deputy, Chan believes there should be "big principles" by which a school develops itself. But should this "principle" be one of "illustrating illustrious virtue", or following instructions from the Communist Party like a flunkey? No wonder Confucius said, “Men of antiquity studied to improve themselves, men today study to impress others.” Now when it comes to getting education, acquiring knowledge plays second fiddle to learning how to make concessionary steps and to mentally "castrate oneself as if he is a eunuch".

After the ceremony, HKBU issued a statement saying participants should respect the views of others who were in attendance.. Tang Fei, the chairman of the HKFEW (a pro-China educationalist federation), said students should not deliberately embarrass other parties, as this was not behavior expected of people who had received higher education.

I do not know how can holding an umbrella be "not respecting those at the scene" nor understand how this embarrassed Albert Chan. Is he physically disabled? Moreover, exactly because students have received higher education, they should not tighten their lips and "consider the faces of the seniors". This might be a "solemn" response, but it is just hypocrites who go with the flow. Albert Tam, a fiction writer, says: "It is a VC's responsibility, not right, to hand the certificate to students. Students can refuse to receive it, but if the VC refuses to hand the certificate to them - then he's not doing his job."

Yet, many Hongkongers are "villagers" who are a long way to being mature, and who are afraid of the "crime” of being disobedient. They believe those "adults" who have the say are always right, and blame those "bad kids" who dare to challenge the authorities. In a society like this, a university might then need disciplinary teachers to nit-pick students on Facebook when they use foul language, or to withdraw the right of graduates to receive their certificate if they make a silent statement on stage.

And if that is still not enough? Better learn from the vast piece of land across the border! Liaoning Daily, a CCP mouthpiece, issued an open letter to all university teachers in China, entitled Teachers, Please Do Not Say China in This Way after a "decoy operation" in the classrooms of 20 universities in Shenyang, Beijing, Wuhan, Guangzhou, Shanghai etc that lasted over two weeks. They reported that they found out most teachers acclaimed the separation of powers in the west, and treated "not entering the party" as a stylish thing. The editor wrote: "Being pessimistic should never be the 'main rhythm' of a mature society." But the reality says otherwise. The more mature a democratic society is, the more pessimistic criticism it will hear. In exuberant authoritarian states, on the other hand, you are bombarded by one-sided praise.

The end of the article asked teachers to "treat China well", because students were "sunflowers" who faced and listened to their teachers as the sun. HKBU and PolyU are just treating undergrads as secondary school students, while the place above Hong Kong is even blatantly treating them as primary school students who just happen to inhabit adult bodies. Because in their eyes, university is just a place to get a certificate. Their view is that students who are eager to learn just care about marks and grades because these will determine whether they can go on to a PhD or a successful career. They care little wether you are brave or charismatic.

Merely emphasising that "undergrads are just students", but not treating them as individuals in a fair manner, is the consequence of a place with the wrong ‘metabolism. Students should not listen to these Colonel Blimps.

Wing Wing: Will Well-known Italian Brands Act on Disinvestment?

Will Well-known Italian Brands Act on Disinvestment?

Translated by Karen L., Written by 翼雙飛 (Wing Wing)
Original: http://www.passiontimes.hk/article/11-03-2014/19504 



I read a piece of article, named "Famous Italian Brands’ Disinvestment Panic" from Oriental Daily's headlines which is spreading everywhere on the Internet in this morning. In the paper's interview, Fabio De Rosa, the Italian Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong & Macao, pointed out that since the start of the umbrella revolution, the sales of its members have taken a tumble.

He also warned that if the occupy movement sustains by the peak season of consumption in Christmas; some of its members will consider disinvestment in Hong Kong. At the end of the piece, Oriental Daily listed some celebrated brand members of the Italian Chamber, such as a.testoni, Fendi, Giorgio Armani, Prada and Salvatore Ferragamo.

What struck me at the very first moment was confusion, given that social upheavals including overthrow of regime, social instability, demonstration, strike and occupy movement rather happen globally. It should stand as no surprise since Hong Kong is certainly not the origin, not to mention the most violent and severe one.

If you hesitate in resting your conclusion this way, a visit to Mong Kok will clear your mind. Jewellery shops in the occupied Nathan Road remain normal operations, only when the influx arrival of blue ribbons and police will force the shops into closing state.

How many jewellery shops are there in the world like the ones in Hong Kong could carry on business as usual even located in the occupied area? If this should be labeled as "turmoil" and can cause such a slump enough to bring withdrawal decision on the table, where should these brands settle themselves instead? Knowing that the level of instability in the rest of the world is far more astonishing, where should they go other than Hong Kong?

Internet is the key anyways. Put aside the deduction and go straight to the branches of the shops Oriental Daily mentioned.

The first one, a.testoni, remarkably set up a branch in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine in February 2012. It is known that the political situation there has grown tense with the Maidan Nezalezhnosti being the centre of protest activities and the city hall being occupied. Yet to the present day, a.testoni still has not backed out the business from Kiev.

Hong Kong's scale of demonstration pales in comparison with that of Kiev. It is predictable that there should not be many citizens and tourists able to purchase shoes during that coup period in Kiev, however, they have not made an uproar grumbling about the tough environment for business or the consideration withdrawing from Kiev.

The rest of the brands Oriental Daily mentioned are Fendi, Giorgio Armani, Prada and Salvatore Ferragamo. All of them have set up their branches in Bangkok, Thailand. Alternately, Salvatore Ferragamo even has six branches there.

No reasonable man would ever assume stability in Thailand. The government of Hong Kong has severally issued red and black Outbound Travel Alert System on the country due to Bangkok's regime overthrow activities.

In October 2013, Salvatore Ferragamo opened a new branch in Siam Paragon Shopping Center. And on 21 January 2014, Hong Kong's Outbound Travel Alert System on Thailand has leapt from the red one to the black one. The number of tourists there in February and March sank 8-9% comparing with last year's data while up to today, this branch still stays.

Even the Thailand's extent of putsch is not sufficient to make brands leave, in what persuasive grounds would Hong Kong's umbrella revolution be powerful enough to lead to brands' disinvestment? It adds more incredulity as the number of mainland tourists recorded during the Golden Week has shown a 1.55 % increase comparing with last year's data.

Tourists from mainland China still go shopping in Hong Kong. The difference there is that they shift to non-occupied areas. These Italian brands could make adjustments in places like Sha Tin or Tung Chung tying in the consumers.

The flood of counterfeits in mainland China has advanced numerous hearts towards pursuits of genuine brand products. Hong Kong, a city nearby, to international brands is a goose with golden eggs. Even the sales suffers a small setback, it is still more than profitable. If these brands leave for real, I doubt there will be another place much business-favourable and much safer.

For this reason, I would like to offer Paul Chun's movie quote to this Mr. Fabio De Rosa, "TRYING TO SCARE ME?"