Justice and Anger in Hong Kong's Anonymous War

The school year in Hong Kong has begun... with a massive student strike. As the ongoing civil protest movement enters its fourth month, it begins to look more and more like an unprecedented series of events that will only be understood in retrospect.

It may indeed be many, many years before we begin to see the significance of this widespread, sustained popular uprising. Immense energies have been expended by people from every sector of society, and new modes of collaboration have been invented that have generated large coordinated purposeful actions, without the emergence (as yet) of any leadership. Media and communications technology are playing a big role in this apparently "faceless" movement, as protesters plan activities on the internet, gather at agreed-upon locations, and engage in creative demonstrations.

This is supposed to be a "nonviolent movement." It certainly appeared that way in June, when millions took to the streets in opposition to a bill proposed in the Legislative Council that would have authorized extradition to mainland China of alleged criminals for prosecution.

As the Summer passes, however, a fierce and complicated struggle is being played out in this unique city and on video screens the world over. For those of us who watch from afar, it has been inspiring, but also frightening and perplexing. We are seeing the historic rise of a generation of courageous young people willing to risk everything by taking a stand for the noble cause of human dignity and freedom, and against the machinations of the world's largest, most controlling and soul-suffocating dictatorship.

We are, of course, rooting for these freedom fighters. Oh my, yes! But we are also worried about them. We are seeing more and more videos of barracaded protesters - clad in black, wearing gas masks, and some of them hurling projectiles - facing off against an ominous deployment of police in full riot gear (looking like a dystopian Darth Vader army) pumping preposterous quantities of tear gas, pepper spray, and other "non-lethal" (but far from harmless) materials into the crowd.

Make no mistake: the police and Hong Kong's pro-Beijing government are responsible for initiating and escalating this situation of conflict, beginning with the first cannister of tear gas they fired at defenseless protesters five years ago at the start of what became known as the "Umbrella Movement." Since then, there have been continual tensions between government officials and large groups of dissenters. The long, snake-like arm of Beijing doesn't even try to hide it's egregious manipulation of everything it can reach.

It's remarkable that Hong Kong's democracy movement has remained mostly nonviolent for so long. But during this long hot Summer, protesters (some of them, at least) have seemed to grow increasingly angry and aggressive. This is understandable but it's a reason for concern. There is the chance that the core principles of nonviolence - its reliance on self-discipline, sacrifice, bringing evils to light, and the conversion of enemies into friends - will be lost. The most radical level of nonviolence is very difficult to sustain in a prolonged conflict. It is especially frustrating when the enemy (the Chinese Communist Party) is unnaturally stubborn, or worse, offers false friendship. Many people are likely to give up in the long run, and it would be harsh to blame them. They just want to live their lives in whatever space of freedom they can carve out for themselves. But widespread disillusionment would defeat their cause. Beijing and its local puppets are counting on it.

There is the possibility that some desperate Hong Kong people, driven by an anger that mingles with the fires of their passion for justice, might seek to reframe their struggle in terms of legitimate self-defense against an alien regime. They might try to include the justifiable application of physical force when necessary (many already appear to be inclined toward this option). But the present movement lacks the leadership and positive social coherence required (at the very least) to assume "public authority" for directing the use of force. It appears (on global video screens, and with the help of China's huge propaganda machine) that some of the recent protest "disruptions" walk a fine line between demonstrative civil disobedience and lawless vandalism. (If reports are true that some protesters smashed up a subway station, that would be most unfortunate. We hope that such events come from fringe elements, or perhaps even 'fake protesters' planted to deliberately perpetrate violence in order to smear the movement - it's hard to believe that Beijing has not infiltrated the protest and put its own paid agents in the streets, as well as among the police.)

In any case, there is little room for even the semblance of error in this direction. Without a structure of verifiable accountability, physical force too easily degenerates into open violence (this is precisely the point protesters are rightly trying to make regarding the behavior of the police). If this happens, the anonymous resistance will devolve into guerrilla warfare, which is even harder to direct, more likely to turn toward vengeance and destruction, break into factions, perpetuate increasing cycles of violence, and get a lot of people killed.

It should be noted that thus far no one had died as a result of actions by either side in the past three months. This is astonishing (especially to those of us living in the USA, who have become sadly accustomed to the bloody casualties of random non-political acts of violence). In Hong Kong's "war," there have been many injuries, but no fatalities ... yet. That does not mean that the violence lacks intensity. From what we have seen, it's clear that so far the violence has emanated predominantly (indeed overwhelmingly) from one side. Under the pretext of perpetuating a strange conception of the 'rule of law,' it aims not to kill but to repress political dissent and create a climate of fear.

In the streets, nothing the protesters have done thus far comes anywhere near justifying the ferocious behavior of the Hong Kong Police, who seem to think that crowd-control is best achieved by 'preventive first strikes' that are outrageously disproportionate to anything a crowd could conceivably do. If the people have lost patience, it's because they have been goaded and prodded relentlessly by a police force that answers to no one... or worse, one that does the bidding of Beijing.

The protesters are also not easily distinguished and held accountable, which only strengthens the pretext of those bent on indiscriminately repressing them. Clearly not all protesters are angels. But it's difficult to identify who might be responsible for objectionable actions or tendencies. It's hard to gage the spirit of the protest movement, its strength, or what internal disagreements might lie behind its united front. The people are anonymous. They have been driven to it for their own safety's sake. We don't know them. Often they don't even know one another. Who knows what direction they will take if they survive the relentless pressures against them? Now more than ever, the movement needs people who think things through.

Agnes Chow TingWe do know the leaders from the pro-democracy groups, especially those who emerged from the 2014 student led "Umbrella Movement." Joshua Wong, Agnes Chow Ting, and other brave young people have grown up just like our own kids.

They have tried the political process and have been stonewalled. They are participants and supporters of the current movement, but are not its leaders. Some were recently arrested in a gratuitous fashion, as if the government - frustrated by efforts to crush a movement without visible leadership - just couldn't resist the urge to focus the blame on a few faces. They will find scapegoats who will have much to suffer, and who will need our prayers, concern, and advocacy. We may be able to help them. We can at least recognize the courage of their stand, their witness to the value of the human person.

Even though it lacks conventional leadership, the Hong Kong protest movement remains clear and unified in affirming its demands (see below), which seem eminently reasonable: they want the real autonomy secured by the treaty that established Hong Kong's current status in 1997; they want free and fair elections of their own government, an independent investigation into police brutality, the legitimization of their movement, and the complete unambiguous withdrawal of the extradition bill from the legislative agenda. Beijing, however, has also openly made its view clear: Hong Kong is "a Chinese city" and it had better get used to being run politically like any other Chinese city.

Ay, there's the rub.

Because Hong Kong is not like any other Chinese city ... not yet. It was separate from the China of Mao Zedong's revolution and its ravages, and from the China of the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989. It has only been under Chinese control (a very peculiar, delicately negotiated control) since 1997. Here is where the origin of the tensions can be found.

Hong Kong today supposedly holds a "special autonomous status," which China agreed to preserve "for fifty years" (i.e. through the year 2047) back in 1997 when the former British colony was handed over to Chinese control. This is what accounts for the "one country, two systems" explanation of Hong Kong's status. Theoretically, it is 'part of China' while retaining its own economic system (and status as a global financial center), its own framework of civil liberties (including freedom of press, assembly, and religion), and its own domestic political and juridical institutions.

The agreements that led up to the handover in 1997 involved a collection of awkward negotiated compromises between Britain and mainland China. The whole process leaned heavily on the "promises" of a Leninist one-party-State whose reputation for lying and cheating is notorious even by modern political standards. Not surprisingly, the Chinese Communist Party-state rigged Hong Kong's supposedly autonomous politics from the start. Beijing effectively controls the selection of Hong Kong's "Chief Executive" and two thirds of its Legislative Council (there are processes through which this is done, but Beijing has them firmly under control). Only one third of the LegCo is elected by the people. Pro-democracy candidates dominate here, but at best they can only be a temporary brake to slow down the speed of Beijing's determination to swallow the city into the one system of New China.

Protest Movement demands, circulated on the internetCan this protest movement do anything better?

The New China has harnessed the engines of material prosperity (without scruples) while preserving one key feature of Marxism: subjection and control of persons, subsuming of the personality to a collectivist identity. This identity, in turn, is (thanks to Lenin) interpreted and imposed by an elite group, the Party dictatorship, which - in vast China - has effectively become a pervasive quasi-imperial bureaucracy.

This so-called "Communist Party" endures on the strength of a fierce nationalism that feeds (like a parasite) off China's ancient traditions as much as its current material powers. It aims to impose its version of Chinese nationalism throughout its domains. It promises material comfort and prosperity within an exaltation of the supremacy of the Nation-State as defined by the Party. Quite simply, China today embodies the ideal of Fascism.

It is the monster that Hong Kong's protesters must grapple with. What hope can they possibly have?

They will probably lose the current battle. Many will go to jail or be otherwise socially marginalized. But their stand will be remembered, and they can use the time to learn from mistakes and to search for the roots of human freedom, for the source of the human person - that which gives the person an inviolable dignity that cannot be subordinated to any ideology.

Herein lies Hong Kong's path to freedom, the hope of Hong Kong people for a free society. It is a long, arduous path, but it remains possible.

It is a path for all of us. Hong Kong people can help to point us in the right direction.