Amazing news from Hong Kong: Democrats win one!

In a result that no-one (not even Walt) predicted, the members of Hong Kong's Communist-dominated Legislative Council voted yesterday to rejected a controversial Beijing-backed election reform package that sparked mass protests -- "the Umbrella Revolution" -- last year.

The goal of the the Umbrella Revolution was universal suffrage -- to allow all Hong Kong Residents to vote for the next Chief Executive, in elections due to be held in 2017. But there was more to it than that. Following the Communist model for elections, the Chinese government had proposed that everyone should vote, OK, but only to choose from two or three candidates approved by Beijing. "Choose Commie A or Commie B!" Pro-democracy advocates rightly called that "fake democracy".  

Beijing's decision last August to control the candidates for the next leadership election sparked protests that drew crowds of more than 100,000 people to the streets, where they demonstrated and camped and demonstrated some more. Activists occupied major parts of the city demanding universal suffrage for several weeks. HKG police used violent force against demonstrators, as well as tear gas which the protesters repelled with upturned umbrellas, hence the term "Umbrella Revolution". After more than two months with no concessions -- not even the courtesy of a meeting -- from incumbent Chief Executive CY Leung, the protest camps were ultimately dismantled by police.

After the police finally cleared the streets, the protests moved into "Legco", Hong Kong's Legislative Council, which was the scene of raucous debates, recriminations, demonstrations and walk-outs for weeks prior to last night's vote. Pro-democracy members hoped that if Beijing's proposals were rejected, China would be forced to offer more far-reaching reforms, but there was considerable doubt as to whether the democrats could carry the day.

Then came the drama of last night's proceedings. For reasons unknown -- hey, it's the inscrutable Orient! -- pro-Communist government officials gave their final speeches hours ahead of schedule. Journalists scrambled to retake their seats in Legco's main chamber. Then a bell rang, reminding the solons to get into the hall to vote. With only minutes to spare, a voiced called out for a halt to the proceedings, but the chairman of the council declined. Then pro-government legislators walked out in protest, resulting in the government's "reform" plan, which needed 47 votes to pass, being defeated by 28 votes to 8.

Po-faced Chief Executive Leung said he was "naturally disappointed" that legislators had voted against the wishes of the majority of Hong Kong's people. Presumably he was referring to people other than the hundreds of thousands of demonstrators who had hurled insults (and the occasional egg) at him for the last ten months.

A spokesthingy for the government in Beijing said the "reforms" would remain in force and were legal despite the vote. That's the Communist way -- votes don't matter.

You know what you can do with it!

The Lunar New Year, celebrated by Chinese everywhere, is coming up (February 19th) and Hong Kong's opposition Democratic Party had plans to raise some money by selling a special novelty item. It looks like this.

Yep, it's toilet paper, or as it's known in Chinese, lu wad. [Are you sure about this? Ed.] The image printed on these special varieties, designed exclusively for use in Hong Kong, is that of the HKG CEO,  the oft-ridiculed C.Y. Leung. Mr. Leung is unpopular with ["despised by", surely! Ed.] much of the Hong Kong public, and products mocking him have sold well in recent years.

But not this year! Agent 78 regrets to report that Chinese Communist authorities, not known for their sense of humour, have seized 7,600 toilet rolls and 20,000 packets of tissue from a factory in mainland China on Friday. The confiscated tissues depicted the pro-Beijing leader with a variety of expressions. Some printed the word "lying" on his forehead, while others showed him with fangs - a reference to how his opponents have described him as a wolf.

Lo Kin-hei, a vice-chairman of the Democratic Party said the toilet rolls sold out at Hong Kong's annual New Year fair last year, and called the seizure a violation of the right to freedom of expression supposedly guaranteed in Hong Kong's basic law, adopted at the handover by the British in 1997.

Walt expects that Mr. Lo will soon be reminded that he lives in China now, and that if he persists in that kind of talk he will become Lo Hong-hai.

Hong Kong protesters: they're baaaack!

When we tuned in last week, Hong Kong's pro-Communist CEO, Leung Chun-ying (aka CY Leung) had refused to step down to appease the 1000s of students and others demonstrating for free and fair elections in the former British colony. The protesters then defied Mr. Leung's ultimatum to vacate the areas they were occupying. So, in order to get them to go home without losing too much face, Mr. Leung promised the student leaders a meeting with his flak-catcher, Carrie Lam, on Friday.

Most of the demonstrators -- credulous souls -- went home, leaving just a few hundred camped out on Gloucester and Harcourt Roads, blocking a key thoroughfare in Hong Kong Island's Central and Admiralty districts. But sure enough, on Thursday the duplicitous Leung called off the promised talks, saying the protesters' refusal to end their campaign had made "constructive dialogue" impossible.

He also said (again) that he would not resign. In an interview with Hong Kong broadcaster TVB, he said the protests had "spun out of control" and did not rule out the use of force to end them. When asked about the protest camps, Mr Leung said, "We've resorted to all kinds of persuasions... We absolutely would not prefer clearing the venue, but if one day the venue has to be cleared, I believe the police will use their professional judgement and training using minimum amount of force."

So the pro-democracy protesters -- saddened but not surprised -- are back in the streets, in even greater numbers than before, paralysing parts of Hong Kong. In an open letter to China's Supreme Leader, Xi Jingping, a coalition of three protest groups proclaimed, "We cannot allow one person, Leung Chun-ying, to destroy the Hong Kong core values we so cherish."

Hong Kong's Chief Executive CY Leung has insisted China will not change its mind on the format for elections in 2017, despite weeks of protests.

In the Basic Law under which Hong Kong was handed back to China in 1997, the Communists promised direct elections in 2017. But of course their idea of a free and fair election is one in which they choose which candidates are allowed to stand. Mr. Leung told TVB today that Beijing would not change its mind on the election format. "In achieving universal suffrage in 2017," he said, "if the prerequisite is to put down the Basic Law and the decision made by the National People's Congress Standing Committee, I believe we all know that the chance is almost zero."

The Basic Law (Hong Kong's mini-constitution) states that "the ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures". It was the NPC Standing Committee's decision on the make-up of that nominating committee that sparked the protest movement, since that format effectively gives ultimate control not to the people but to the Beijing regime.

Further reading on WWW: "Why Hong Kong's 'Umbrella Revolution' matters"

Comment from Ed.: Do you know when the Chinese have their best elections? Answer: just before bleakfast!

5 things you should know about the Umbrella Revolution

It is now the middle of the night in Hong Kong. The protesters are still in the streets of Central, Causeway Bay, Tsim Tsa Tsui and Mongkok. (The streets of Mongkok are always full of people, but even more so tonight.) There have been scuffles with the police, but no more tear gas or pepper spray. Not yet.

Yesterday, Hong Kong's CEO, Leung Chun-ying -- that's him on the poster -- offered the demonstrators a very small olive branch. While saying again that he would never resign, he did say that he would delegate one of his minions, Carrie Lam, to talk with the leaders of the "Umbrella Revolution". After thinking about it overnight [and over noodles? Ed.], the protesters rejected the offer. The standoff continues.

Walt has posted two articles on this extremely important confrontation between the supporters of democracy and the rulers of Communist China. See "Hong Kong's 'Umbrella Revolution' -- paying the price for democracy" and "Why Hong Kong's 'Umbrella Revolution' matters", published here Monday and Thursday.

For those who are in the dark about what's going on and why this is important, Walt recommends "Hong Kong protests: 5 things to know about the 'umbrella revolution'". Aleksandra Sagan, of CBC News, answers these questions:
- Who are the protesters?
- What are their demands?
- What is Beijing's role in Hong Kong's government?
- How has the [Hong Kong] government responded?
- What happens next?

Elsewhere on the Net today, a student leader summed up the whole issue in one pithy statement: "We are afraid that in a few years Hong Kong will become China."

On the other hand, if Beijing can be made to keep its promise of a free, one-person-one-vote election for HKG's next chief executive, that could be the chink in the armour of the Communist regime. Stay tuned.

Note from Ed.: Walt has been waiting since the Umbrella Revolution started to use that "chink in the armour" bit. I couldn't restrain him any longer. Please forgive the pun.

Why Hong Kong's "Umbrella Revolution" matters

Walt Whiteman's World is "unavailable" in the People's Republic of China, unless a would-be reader can find a way through or around the Great Firewall of China. Freedom of information, freedom of speech, freedom of association, even freedom of thought, are not allowed to the 1.4 billion people under the thumb of the Communist emperor.

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.