I say "emperor" because, 65 years (and a day) ago, the Communists established an autocratic regime as bad or worse than anything China knew in the 1000s of years of imperial rule. The people of China are subject to totalitarian control that demands they bend their individual inclinations and welfare to that of the all-powerful state. And that's why Hong Kong's "Umbrella Revolution" matters, not just to the Hongkongese, not just to the Chinese, but to the whole world.
Back in the bad old days, when Hong Kong was a British colony, its people enjoyed the freedoms we take for granted. And, under the deal made between Britain and the Communists for the handover of HKG to China in 1997, they were to continue to do for another 50 years. Hong Kong's existing social system was supposedly guaranteed, along with the rule of law, until 2047.
Even better, the "one country, two systems" deal provides that the Hong Kong "Special Administrative Region" would become a full democracy. Under the British, there was an elected Legislative Council, which was to continue (and has), but the people were not entitled to vote directly for the "Chief Executive Officer" who would replace the British governor.
In the new fundamental law which governs the Hong Kong SAR, the Communists promised to institute a system of "one person one vote". When the present CEO, Leung Chun-ying -- "C.Y. Leung" to the Western press -- was "elected" in 2012 (by a committee of 1200 "representatives of the people"), Beijing said that "next time" (in 2017) there would be a direct election in which everyone could vote.
Too bad that the people of Hong Kong took that to mean that they could nominate and vote for whoever they pleased -- even (gasp) a non-Communist. (Mr. Leung is not officially a Communist, but it is thought that he keeps his party card in his other wallet -- the one he takes on his regular visits to the imperial capital.) As it turned out, what was really meant was that voters could choose among up to three candidates vetted and approved by Beijing.
Not much of a choice, then. Martin Lee, one of the founders of Hong Kong's Democratic Party, told a rally, "What's the difference between a rotten orange, a rotten apple and a rotten banana? We want genuine universal suffrage, not 'democracy with Chinese characteristics'."
That's a part of what the protests are about, but only a part. The greater battle is for the heart of Hong Kong -- its institutions and legal system -- as bequeathed to them by the British, whose ideas about the governed having a voice in how they're governed date back 799 years.
Let us support those who are risking arrest, injury or worse fighting for democracy in Hong Kong. As we do so, let us bring to the front of our minds the freedoms we take for granted, particularly the freedom to vote for (or against) whoever we like.
The next two months will see elections taking place in most American states and Canadian provinces, for offices ranging from senator down to dog-catcher. The people of China would love to have the freedom of the ballot. Some are prepared to die for it. If you have it and don't use it, don't be surprised if one day you lose it.
No comments:
Post a Comment