Showing posts with label Hong Kong. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hong Kong. Show all posts

Wednesday, 3 June 2020

The Dress Rehearsal Not The Show?


by Les May

EVERY year we have a ‘flu season’.  It runs from week 40 of one year to week 20 of the next. There are two peaks, one before Christmas and the other after. Sometimes these are caused by different influenza ‘types’.  People like me toddle off to the medical centre and get a ‘jab’ each October which gives us short term immunity to the strains circulating in the world that yearIt’s all well understood. Some years it is worse than other, but by and large the system works.

  • But it only works so long as the influenza virus behaves itself reasonably well. It didn’t in mid 1917 or early 1918.  Somewhere in the middle of America a new, more virulent strain emerged which was more deadly to the youngish than the old.   It spread through the training camps preparing young American men to fight in the Great War.   Woodrow Wilson despatched 300,000 of them to Europe in crowded troop ships.  The rest, as they say, is ‘history’.

No one could foresee the emergence of Covid19, so the need for massive quantities of PPE and the death traps that care homes became could not be foreseen either.  Or so the story goes.

But what we do know is that every so often the influenza virus ceases to behave in manner we have found a way of dealing with. When it will do this cannot be predicted, but that at some time it will is a certainty.  It is, in that famous phrase, ‘a known unknown’.  We know it will happen, but we don’t know when.  In the past century this has happened four times; Spanish flu 1918-20, Asian flu 1957-58, Hong Kong flu 1968-69, Swine flu 2009-10.

Had the virus which emerged in China last year been a new and more virulent form of our old enemy, the influenza virus, something akin to the 1918 form, Johnson and the Tories would have been equally deep in the ‘do-do’, because they still would not have had enough PPE.

The fact that the virus causing Covid19 is ‘new’ has allowed the government to shield itself from the more serious criticism that it had become complacent about the possibility of having to deal with an influenza pandemic, not just ‘seasonal flu’.   It is not only the government which has become complacent, we, the public, have as well.

Every year we have reminders of the slaughter in the Great War, we have memorials to those killed and many of us will remember the names of relatives who were amongst them.  The people who might have known the names of relatives who died of Spanish flu themselves died in the 1980s and 90s, so it has never embedded itself in the public consciousness.

Influenza usually has a mortality rate in the region of 1 to 2 people in a thousand which is probably slightly less than that of Covid19.  Spanish flu had a mortality rate estimated as high as 1-200 per thousand people infected in some areas. Even at low mortality rates if enough people become infected the number of deaths will be large; so far more than 300,000 people are thought to have died from Covid19. Spanish flu killed some 50 million people.

Equally important is the social disruption a flu pandemic will cause.  The means by which the person to person transmission can be reduced are identical to those which have been applied to combat the spread of Covid19, social distancing, good hand/nose/mouth hygiene school closures, work from home etc.

Politicians who are capable of thinking strategically would recognise that a flu variant equal in killing power to that which caused the 1918-20 pandemic could arise at any time and would have in place strategies for coping with it.  On this basis the Johnson government, and perhaps the people advising it on public health matters, have failed miserably, but would any recent government have done any better?   Once you are in thrall to market forces you buy where things are cheapest.

Such strategies would include not just larger stocks of PPE, but would include support for a national garment sector making such PPE which could increase production rapidly in case of need, ditto manufacturers of face masks, ventilators, anti-viral drugs, realistic assessment of the capacity of care homes and similar facilities to isolate sick residents, etc.  Had these already been in place because someone had recognised the possibility of a new and more virulent form of influenza arising, the number of deaths from Covid19 would probably have been lower.

*********************

Wednesday, 27 November 2019

Pro-Beijing camp’s landslide loss

SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST:

Time for Beijing to rethink Hong Kong script after pan-democrat landslide, Chinese analysts say

  • The results of the district council elections will boost the power of the non-establishment camp and possibly influence the race for the city’s leader, observers say
  • A central government official agreed that Beijing was surprised by the landslide win for the pan-democrats
The results of
Hong Kong’s district council elections
on Sunday were worse than expected and Beijing should start considering how the outcome will affect the 2022 race for the city’s chief executive, mainland specialists on Hong Kong affairs have warned.
“Beijing was psychologically prepared, but it did not expect [that the pro-establishment camp] would suffer such a severe defeat,” Wuhan University law professor Qin Qianhong said.
A central government official agreed that Beijing was surprised by the landslide win for the pan-democrats.
“We know it was going to be a tough fight as some pro-establishment candidates said they faced verbal abuse when they walked the district, but the number of seats [the pro-establishment camp] won was below our expectation,” he said.
A record 2.9 million voters, representing 71.2 per cent of the registered electorate, cast their ballots in the weekend polls, up from 47 per cent in the 2015 district council election and 58.3 per cent in the 2016 Legislative Council election.
The pan-democrat camp won 392 of the 452 seats to control 17 out of the city’s 18 district councils.


The results mean the pan-democrats look set to take up all the 117 seats for district councillors in the 1,200-member Election Committee that selects the chief executive.
Tian Feilong, an associate professor at Beihang University’s law school in Beijing, said that as a last resort Beijing could exercise its right to refuse the appointment of an “unacceptable” chief executive candidate.
“[The results] will boost the direct or indirect political power of those not in the pro-establishment camp,” Tian said.
“[But] if a candidate that is not acceptable to Beijing has emerged, Beijing would not appoint them.”


Qin agreed that the Basic Law gave Beijing the power to turn down undesirable candidates, but that there were risks.
“The result could be another massive street movement,” he said.
Li Xiaobing, a Nankai University academic specialising in Hong Kong politics, said it would be a concern if pan-democrats allied with different sectors in the Legco and chief executive races over the next few years.
“If it was just a few people, then it is easy to handle. But now they have formed a group and become a power,” Li said.
“If they join hands not only among themselves but with different sectors, then it would have … an impact on the Legco and chief executive elections. Beijing would have to address it with countermeasures.”

The pro-establishment bloc ended up with about 40 per cent of the votes on Sunday but an additional 800,000 voters turned out on the weekend, compared to the 2016 Legislative Council elections, and more than half of them voted for the pan-democrats.
“The election has polarised politics in Hong Kong. It has forced those in the middle to take sides. I think most of these people opted to take the extreme side [of pan-democrats who did not denounce the radical protesters]. It is a big political lesson,” Tian said.

In their campaigns, the pro-establishment bloc promoted the need for stability and a return to social order after more than five months of protests in the city but the strategy appeared to have little impact on the new voters.
“Hundreds of thousands of young people were new registered voters … These people were those affected the most by what happened in the past five months,” Nanjing University law professor Gu Su said.
Gu said Beijing might now have to agree to chief executive nominations that were acceptable to both camps.
Song Sio-chong, a professor at the Centre for Basic Laws of Hong Kong and Macau at Shenzhen University, said many middle-class people who did not vote in the past also came out to support the pan-democrats this time.
“This election is entirely politicised and there was no mention of community affairs. It prompted the middle class, who were sympathetic to the democrats, to vote. The extensive work by the pro-establishment camp at the community level in the past has become ineffective. What should we do next? It is a big question,” Song said.
He said Beijing should reconsider its strategy and give the pro-establishment parties more flexibility.
“A major reason for the defeat of the pro-establishment is that it was tied to the Hong Kong government in the anti-extradition bill campaign. There was not enough room for the pro-establishment camp to have its narrative and to respond. They could only respond passively in line with the government’s position.”
Gu agreed. “The way the pro-establishment camp supported the government was too direct. Some changes are expected in their relations with the Hong Kong government.”


Pro-Beijing camp’s landslide loss in district council elections ‘a chance for reflection’ on Hong Kong

  • Commentators in mainland China say the poll might kick-start some deeper thinking on public opinion and the central government’s approach to the city
  • High-profile tabloid accuses the West of helping opposition forces in the race

Prominent mainland Chinese commentators called for reflection on Beijing’s handling of Hong Kong after the
pro-democracy camp’s landslide win
in local elections on the weekend.
Hong Kong’s district council elections are traditionally low-key events to choose representatives for community office, but Sunday’s poll was seen as a de facto referendum on more than five months of
anti-government protests
that have gripped the city.
The pro-democracy camp, defined by their general support for the protests, won control of 17 out of the 18 district councils, all of which previously had a pro-establishment majority.
Beijing has accused the West, especially the United States and “opposition parties and politicians” in Hong Kong, of fuelling protests triggered by a now withdrawn extradition bill that have since developed into calls for democratic reforms and an investigation into police use of force against the protesters.
Mei Xinyu, an economist affiliated with the Ministry of Commerce, said on Monday morning that “the landslide defeat in the Hong Kong district council elections could be a good thing if it resulted in deep reflection”.
“The mess in Hong Kong and a big defeat in the district council elections will hopefully kick-start rumination on its own Zunyi Conference,” Mei said in an online post, referring to a meeting of Communist Party leaders in 1935 that resulted in a personnel reshuffle and endorsed Mao Zedong’s leadership of the party and military.


In an opinion piece published after the election results, state tabloid Global Times said the outcome should not be understood as a sign of support for “mobs”.
“It is both inconceivable and totally impossible that most Hongkongers would encourage violence, support political confrontation against the mainland, and back the city to become a bridgehead for US political forces to pressure China,” the article said.
But it also accused “Western forces” of backing the opposition in the elections.
“It must be pointed out that the West has been helping the Hong Kong opposition in district council elections in the past week,” it said.
The article cited various overseas media reports last week as evidence of that help, including reports that
Simon Cheng Man-kit
, a former employee of the British consulate in Hong Kong, claimed to have been tortured during 15 days of detention on the mainland amid the protests.
It also referred to Australian media reports about
Wang Liqiang
, who claimed he was a mainland spy but was described by Shanghai police as a fraud.

Global Times

editor-in-chief Hu Xijin
urged pro-Beijing supporters not to be discouraged by the results, saying they should see them “as a foundation for the country to face the practical issues in Hong Kong and a focus to improve future work”.
“With the country so strong, the happenings in Hong Kong will not turn things upside down … staying united is most important,” Hu said.


As the ballot count continued into Monday morning, influential mainland commentator
Ren Yi
compared the elections in Hong Kong to a “referendum”, calling it “the only credible opinion poll”.
“Both the pro-establishment and pro-democracy camps have been politicising the elections, asking people to vote to have their voice heard on the political unrest … All parties [in Hong Kong] are driving people to vote in the ‘referendum’,” Ren wrote on his Chairman Rabbit WeChat account.
Ren, who has more than a million followers on Weibo, is regarded as very influential among Chinese officials.
“Hong Kong has been lacking a credible opinion poll, there has not even been a credible exit poll, so presumably both camps have no clear understanding of the election results and need to understand public opinion through this election,” he said, adding it would be necessary to study the demography of voting results.
Ren has published frequently on Hong Kong with a hawkish view towards the protesters.

Friday, 8 November 2019

Hong Kong protests: student dies

A HONG KONG student who fell during clashes between police and protesters earlier this week has died, marking the first death from injuries sustained during anti-government demonstrations that have overtaken the city.

Hong Kong’s Hospital Authority confirmed that Chow Tsz-lok, 22, died early on Friday morning after suffering brain damage following a fall during protests on Sunday. Chow, a computer science student at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, was found injured early Monday morning in a car park in Tseung Kwan O in Kowloon, where he was believed to have fallen one story.
Chow’s death is believed to be the first fatality linked to police action during a protest. Protesters had been trying to disrupt a police officer’s wedding, which was being held in the area. It was unclear why Cho was in the car park or why he fell.

Police had fired multiple rounds of tear gas nearby, but security footage showed that police had not fired heavy rounds of tear gas in the car park before Chow fell.

The death is likely to escalate protests and fuel public anger at the government as demonstrators continue to demand an investigation into the behaviour of the police, accused of using excessive force on protesters.

Wednesday, 16 October 2019

Hong Kong is exporting its protest

 techniques around the world

by Mary Hui


The “Be Water” nature of Hong Kong’s protests—fluid, flexible, and fast-moving—has taken on a new form half way across the world in Catalonia: as a tsunami.

After a Spanish court on Monday (Oct. 14) handed down lengthy jail terms to nine Catalan leaders for their roles in a 2017 secession attempt, tens of thousands of Catalans took to the streets to protest against what they saw as heavy-handed political persecution and blatant repression of the region’s political rights.

The protesters were answering the call to action from a group called Tsunami Democràtic, which launched in September (link in Spanish) urging mass peaceful and civil disobedience actions in order to safeguard Catalonia’s freedoms. Following the sentencing, protesters quickly gathered at plazas and on streets across the region, cutting off major thoroughfares and blocking traffic before heading en masse to their next target: Barcelona’s El Prat airport. As they set off from the city center, a group of youth shouted, “We’re going to do a Hong Kong!

Tuesday, 10 September 2019

WITCH-HUNTS! or WHICH-CUNTS?

Echoing Big Mick Bakunin, JOHN COOPER CLARK might say:  
'Distruction is a Creative Urge 
'Transgender is the way of the World! 
'August is the silly season,
'So do away with the patriarchal penis, 
'Cultivate a matriarchal cunny-become a Cool Dude!
'Distruction is a Creative Urge!
'So let's have a bit of a Purge!'
 **************
CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL ON THE FREEDOM CENTRAL COMMITTEE
Trans-maniac Trauma Grips Friends of Freedom
by Brian Bamford

THE WEEKEND in the run-up to the Glorious Twelfth day of August, and the start of the shooting season for red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica), was this year a busy and anxious time for the secretary of the Friends of Freedom Press Steve Sorba.  On Friday  the 9th, August Secrretary Sorba sent out a message to all of his fellow directors urging them all to give some thought to some facebook comments of one of their colleagues which he thought 'transphobic'.


 Here Comes a Dynamic Duo: Batman & Robin


FREEDOM since the departure of the wayward, Andy Meinke last year, has been run as a kind of Sorba and Saunders' show, with seemingly Simon Saunders pulling the Director of the Friends of Freedom, Steve Sorba's strings.   They could be likened to Batman and Robin staring in a matinee Comic Opera, the problem for the average commentator is deciding which is which.  
It this latest case the allegations of 'transphobia' against the distinguished former militant miner, Dave Douglass, has been made by the posh East Anglian former public schoolboy (in the USA this means 'private schoolboy') Simon Saunders, who now presides over the so-called 'Freedom collective', which busies itself with day-to-day management at Freedom Press.  Some both here and abroad will think this odd.   On the 9th, August an e-mail from Secretary Sorba, based on a complaint from posh boy Simon Saunders, spells out the dilemma in Steve Sorba's communique to his fellow Freedom Friends of Freedom Directors

'Hi Everyone,'


'I have received a message from Simon [Saunders] that we may well need to reflect on over the weekend. Sorry for the short notice.


'Apologies to David as I would have liked to speak to him in advance but there is no time now so I pass it on below.


'I don’t pick up work emails at the weekend but copy me in using my personal email above if you need to.



'I paraphrase:


'It has been brought to my attention that Dave Douglas has made public comments supporting a pamphlet which is fundamentally transphobic (and in places homophobic as well). Describing trans people as "cocks in frocks", and all just men with mental health issues etc and describes their supporters as a "gang of ponces", which rather than encouraging nuanced or sensitive debate, actively undermines it. (https://tinyurl.com/y3msflq6 )

'The Freedom Collective has a public pro-trans position and has committed to defending trans people against what has become increasingly a form of moral panic where even rights which have already stood for years without comment are being attacked. Having someone who agrees with that pamphlet's approach, which blames trans people for the sum of recent bookfair confrontations and finds transphobic bullying funny elected to the board would place us in an extremely difficult situation.

'Dave's post has been picked up by trans people and he's been accused of having a transphobic position. This means that if he's elected to a Freedom-related post there is every chance the Friends will come in for a lot of criticism and it will stir up yet another useless argument to no good end that I can see.
This topic is an extremely febrile one in the movement at large, and essentially by appointing him we'd be causing enormous drama that we (and probably Dave too) really don't need right now
.

'No doubt David would like to reply to these comments as I am sure that he is being misrepresented.

I suggest that we await this reply and discuss the matter further on Monday when we all meet up.'


 Readers must judge for themselves who is pulling the strings here?

********

 Saddle Skedaddlers Squeeze Thoughtful Analysis


THE significant paragraph (underlined by me) that gives away Secretary Sorba's own attitude and character is the next to the last one in which he shows his own clear lack of personality:  How can an anarchist with a true spirit of independence run away from a drama or a moral controversy, as Secretary Sorba is proposing here?  It is the spirit of the skedaddler rather than the political radical.  Sorba's own facebook interests show a fondness for cycling, which he shares with his fellow 'Director Friend' Carolyn Wilson.  The Saddle Skedaddlers, if you like are far from noble.

Ofcourse, Mr. Sorba is first and foremost a publisher, a businessman, and not an anarchist, his main relationship with Vernon Richards seems to have been that they both shared a passion for Italian opera.  Sorba  it turned out had the most to gain by the closure of Freedom as a hard copy publication and it is he who wants to keep the premises in Angel Alley as it fits better with his own business interests as a publisher

Posh boy Simon Saunders, who provoked the dismissal and no-platforming of Dave Douglass a retired miner from South Sheilds, has acted in a similar way to the recent pressure put on Hong Kong business community by China's ruling communist party in Beijing when on August 9th (the same day Sorba sent out his message) the Chinese aviation authority [CAAC] accused management at Cathay Pacific of not doing enough to discipline their employees who have been alleged to have been involved in the demos that have hit the territory over the last couple of months.  

The warning from CAAC came shortly after John Slosar, Cathay's non executive chairman, said the airline 'wouldn't dream of telling [employees] what they have to think about something' as it reported profits of HK$1.35 billion ($172m) after two years of losses.

The latest reports from Hong Kong suggest that the pilot, 30-year old Liu Chung-yin, who was arrested with 16 others for allegedly having participated in a violent demo on the 28th, July, has now been detained. 

“If you’re a boss, you’re thinking, ‘Oh my God!’” said Carol Ng of the Hong Kong Cabin Crew Federation, a union that represents airline workers. “‘I just want to do business here.  Now they’re screening my staff.’”
This kind of fear could do real damage to Hong Kong’s economy, Ms. Ng said, “much more than the protests or rallies themselves.” 

The attentive reader will detect the parallels between the Freedom episode with Dave Douglass, a tough northern workingman living in South Shields being witch-hunted and no-platformed by a self righteous middle-class southerner, to the mind control now being applied by the Beijing communists bosses on the workers on Hong Kong.  This may be giving Mr. Saunders at Freedom, a little too much credit, because he merely spends most of his time fiddling with his smart phone and going on Face book like some demented Internet Nosey Parker who is on record of creating a blacklist of veteran anarchists who he thinks should be declared persona-non-grata.  Yet he has been quick to complain when others have described him as a paid Morning Star hack.

I use these terms advisably based both on my own observations of Simon Saunders' body language behaviour when he aided Andy Meinke in bungling me into Angel Alley outside the Anarchist HQ, while the Friends of Freedom sat on their butts upstairs, on reports of his general attitude of entitlement, and overall pushy demeanour in which he comes over as a bit of a boss, and also as a conversational analyst I'm curious about his form of language.  But when considering the recent predilection at Freedom Press for appointing folk who to put bluntly are 'a slate short'.  Readers here and in the USA, should consider the history of Freedom as presented by Chris Draper in his history of Freedom*:  Toby Crowe took the editor's chair around 2000 when Charles Crute (apprenticed by Vernon Richards) was forced out, Mr Crute had looked to involve the Northern Anarchist Network in Freedom so as to broaden both the paper's geographical appeal or to as the anarchist Peter Neville said handing over part of Freedom to the writings and reports of 'Northern workingmen'.  In the end Toby, who was for a time Secretary of the Marxist Socialist Party of Great Britain soon fell-out with the NAN and the solidly northern writers like Derek Pattison; Harold Sculthorpe (a Friend of Freedom); me (Brian Bamford) who was at the time the Northern Editor of Freedom, and quite separately with Chris Draper in North Wales.  In truth Toby came over as a bit supercillious he'd been an infant school teacher giving stars to toddlers, and he eventually moved on and took to the cloth, perhaps the editors that followed Charles Crute felt a little insecure in the editor's chair because monomania seemed to become a feature of the these later editors.  They seemed to be uncomfortable in their own skin  Later when he realised that people in the Anarchist Federation like Gerry Spenser, a civil servant in Liverpool, couldn't deliver the reports or stories from the North he came back to me and begged me to send his stuff:  as Harold Sculthorpe told me at the time: 'Toby wants to be friends, Brian'.  Chris Draper had similar appeals from Toby Crowe to deliver him material. By that time we had lost confidence in him as an editor and Northern Voices was by then being produced by the anarchists up North.

What followed the departure of Toby Crowe has been generally agreed to be a poor editorial effort.  So what began with Toby Crowe ended up with Charlotte Dingle as editor, who at one time boasted that she had 'a border-line personality disorder'.   One of the current Freedom Friends who knew her told me a little while ago that Charlotte was indeed really being modest in describing her condition as 'border-line'.  When recently I described Simon Saunders as having 'a totalitarian mind set' the historian, Dave Goodway, another Freedom Friend director, said: 'many anarchists have totalitarian mind sets'.  Simon too with the aid of his mum has used his somewhat disoriented condition to advance his career.  First at the Ipswich Star and later at the communist Morning Star.* 


During the Spanish Civil War the Spanish communists accused the Spanish anarcho-syndicalist CNT of admitting anyone into their organisation including Fascist sympathisers.  Well, after 2000 Freedom under the influence of Donald Rooum began an open doors policy which quickly led to its decline as a serious publication.   Vernon Richards who had retired to Suffolk told the anarchist carpenter Peter Turner that he was impressed by Toby owing to his IT skills.  These events have been well documented on the NV Blog by Chris Draper.**   

All this reminds me of what Malcolm Muggeridge had said about people like Kim Philby, the Russian spy, when he helped him get a job on The Observer in the 1950s. Of this the journalist Clive Irving wrote:

'Malcolm Muggeridge, a highly entertaining political commentator in print and on television, who had worked with Philby at MI6 during the war. Muggeridge advised Philby to contact the editor of The Observer, a left-leaning Sunday paper that, Muggeridge told Philby, “is that Salvation Army for the ideological drunks and bums of our time”.'

Has Freedom Press in the end become a kind of rest home for 'the ideological drunks and bums of our time'?  Andy Meinke memorably described Freedom as a 'hangout' declaring boastfully that 'Kropotkin started it (Freedom), but we fucking finished it!' 

Why is Secretary Sorba so enslaved by Posh Simon?

Why did he make such a fuss over 'a storm in a teacup'?

SECRETARY Sorba desperately wants to hang onto the Freedom property at 84A, Angel Alley because he wants an address in central London that he can use to promote own business interests in publishing.  Some would regard this as conflict of interest.  But unless one of the other Directors question this he is safe in his key position at the top.  Thus the Freedom show will stay on the road because there is no sign of any challenge from the rather subservient Directors.

None-the-less it is understood that a new Director Nick Heath failed to turn-up at the crucial Freedom Friends meeting dealing with Dave Douglass on the Glorious Twelfth, and it is understood that he stayed away because he resents how he was previously hounded-out as leader of the Anarchist Federation by his Trans community critics only last year.***

Furthermore it seems that three other Friends had concluded before the meeting the the whole complaint about Dave Douglass Facebook comment was 'a storm in a teacup'.  Yet the prime movers on this occasion challenging Dave Douglass was Simon Saunders and his Trans mates, and Steve Sorba wants to keep-in with Simon so what we had here in trade union terms is a case of 'Constructive Dismissal' in which Dave Douglass was elbowed out by Secretary Sorba who told Dave that he had 'Embarassed the Committee (Friends) by his "transphobic remarks".'

Dave in response said that he refuted the claim that he was not 'transphobic', but said that as he didn't want to embarrass the committee of anyone.  Hence he agreed to stand down.
    
*************
*  


***
northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com › 2018/01 › anarchist-federation-splits


*******************************



Saturday, 31 August 2019

The Privatisation of Totalitarianism

by Les May

MANCHESTER and Hong Kong are 6000 miles and 200 years apart.  The Peterloo Massacre took place at St Peter’s Field, Manchester on Monday 16 August 1819 when cavalry charged into a crowd of 60,000–80,000 who had gathered to demand the reform of parliamentary representation. It took four Reform Acts, 1832, 1867, 1884 and 1918 before every man over the age of 21 had the right to vote to select who should enact the laws which governed him. The 1918 Act added about 5 million men to the 8 million previously entitled to vote.  Many, perhaps a majority, of the men who fought and died in the First World war did not have the right to vote.

Some women gained this right in 1918 but it took another ten years before all women over 21 could vote in Parliamentary elections.

In Hong Kong on Sunday, March 26, 2017, a committee dominated by a pro-Beijing elite chose Hong Kong's next leader Carrie Lam as the new Chief Executive of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region,  People's Republic of China.  She was ‘elected’ after she gained 777 of the votes of 1,194 Hong Kong notables and was regarded as Beijing’s favoured candidate.

China is a totalitarian state ruled by the Communist party which is run by a small elite. Beijing’s fear is that if a more democratic system of government is instituted in Hong Kong the people of mainland China will demand the same and the Communist party will lose control.

Being able to vote to select who will enact the laws under which you will live is an essential, but not sufficient attribute, of a democracy. The right to hold and express a different view to your fellow citizens is another essential requirement of democracy. This is the way we bring about change. Change is the one thing the Chinese Communist party leaders fear. In their eyes the status quo equals stability; change equals instability.

Not only is the right to hold and express a different view an essential component of democracy it is also necessary if we are to feel equal to our fellow citizens and to have any sense of personal autonomy. Totalitarianism is the total antithesis of this.

The men and women at St Peter’s field were there because they saw extension of the suffrage as a way of improving their material lot in life at a time when trade had slumped following the ending of the Napoleonic wars. The demonstrators in Hong Kong are not on the bread line, a fact which the apologists for the Chinese government who appear on news programmes make much of, they want to be able to choose lawmakers with views different from those of the Chinese communist party leadership, or not, as the case may be.

In Hong Kong as in the rest of China totalitarian conformity and the suppression of dissenting views is imposed by the state. That’s not the British way of doing things. Our totalitarianism has been privatised. In some circles and on some matters we are no longer allowed to hold and express a dissenting view.

Here are three examples. In July of this year I wrote a review of a booklet under the heading ‘Transsexuals vs Cocks in Frocks*. Someone saw this and in a post on Facebook described it as ‘funny’ and went on to express broadly similar views. He happened to be a member of a self styled London based ‘anarchist’ group. This group, behaving more like good Marxists, had a produced a statement about so called ‘trans’ issues and everyone was expected to follow it. He resigned.

Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats from 2015 to 2017 is the sort of Christian who believes that homosexual sex is ‘sinful’. When asked about his attitude to it he denied this. Later it emerged that he had done this only because he felt under pressure from his party to do so. Farron’s continued association with evangelical anti-gay-lobby groups was seen as a ‘lack of care’ to the LGBT community. I think this probably means that he declined to shield them from hearing views they did not like.

Farron eventually resigned saying ‘The consequences of the focus on my faith is that I have found myself torn between living as a faithful Christian and serving as a political leader’, but not before he had been subjected to false allegations by the former head of the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats, Chris Cooke, who made unsubstantiated complaints to the party about Farron's personal conduct when ‘drunk’, and later admitted that he ‘made up a story to cause trouble’.

What I find sad about both these cases is that neither of the people affected was prepared to take a stand on the right of individuals to hold and express a different point of view to that of their fellow citizens. Someone needs to remind the people who complained that freedom of expression applies to people you disagree with as well as those whose views coincide with yours. The alternative is the echo chamber of social media where you need only listen to views that coincide with your own.

The third example concerns the nature of the complaints of ‘anti-semitism’ made against the Labour party. There is a tendency amongst Labour supporters to view these as an attempt by some Jewish people to prevent criticism of the policies pursued by the state of Israel and an attempt to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn. But to those of us who believe that the right to hold and express a different view to our fellow citizens is essential requirement of democracy, it seems more sinister.

Many of the complaints seem to be about what people say or have said. An otherwise excellent 85 page report from the Institute for Jewish Policy Research with the title Antisemitism in contemporary Great Britain: A study of attitudes towards Jews and Israel by L. Daniel Staetsky says on pages 63 and 64 ‘However, what Jews are exposed to far more frequently are people who hold, and from time to time may express, views that make Jews feel uncomfortable or offended. A person expressing such a view (e.g. ‘Jews think that they are better than other people’) may hold this view in isolation and may indeed hold a weak version of it, but when it is casually voiced in front of a Jewish individual, it can cause considerable upset and concern.’ (my emphasis)

Taken at its face value this means that one section of the population is demanding the right never to be offended and the right to tell us what we should think about them. This is a demand for exceptionalism.

In Hong Kong thousands of people are running the risk of provoking the Chinese communist party into ordering the Peoples Liberation Army (all despots like to claim they are acting in the name of ‘the People’ and setting them free) to clear the streets, in order to express their wish to select their own lawmakers. Let’s not betray them by handing control of what we think and what we say to any bunch of people who are afraid to hear views that differ from their own. Freedom is having the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. 

*   northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com › 2019/07 › review-transsexuals-vs-cock...