林保華

Taiwan and HK united in resisting China
Taipei Times  2014.9.14
By Paul Lin 林保華 
In June this year, Beijing released a white paper entitled The

Practice of the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ Policy in the Hong Kong

Special Administrative Region.
It spelled the death of the “one country, two systems” policy and

a “high degree of autonomy” for Hong Kong.
On Aug. 31, the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People’s

Congress announced Beijing’s decisions on universal suffrage in

Hong Kong, and the following day Hong Kongers gathered in a protest,

prominently displaying the Chinese characters for “civil

disobedience” on the main stage.
On the same day, the Taiwan-based New School for Democracy and

another 20 Taiwanese civic groups held an international press

conference to show their joint support for Hong Kong’s Alliance for

True Democracy.
During the event, Hong Kong City University political science

professor and convenor of the Alliance for True Democracy Joseph

Cheng (鄭宇碩), and University of Hong Kong Faculty of Arts student

and Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS) secretary-general Alex

Chow Yong Kang (周永康) participated via video conferencing.
During the conversation Chow said: “In the future, Hong Kong’s

younger generations will never again believe in talk about one

country, two systems, a high degree of autonomy for Hong Kong or

Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong, nor will they talk about the

return of democracy anymore.”
“What they will talk about is determining their own fate, that the

people of Hong Kong will decide their future for themselves,” Chow

said.
In other words, Hong Kong’s young people will never again place

their faith in Beijing. They will follow their own path and decide

their own future, Chow added.
The HKFS and Scholarism, another student activist group, have both

been active in Hong Kong’s civic movements pushing for universal

suffrage.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) tends to exercise more self-

control when dealing with students to avoid making itself look bad,

but in the end, the party could not help itself from lashing out.
As the members of Scholarism are only high-school students, it would

not look good if the CCP attacked them, so instead it chose to come

down on members of the HKFS, who are tertiary students, and the

CCP-led media have referred to them using derogatory names.
Over the past few days, Chow’s talk of deciding one’s own fate has

been attacked by left-wing newspapers as representing “Hong Kong

Independence.” Are Hong Kongers really just meant to be slaves of

the CCP?
What is more, self-determination is a basic human right as outlined

in the UN Charter.
The UK government is preparing for a referendum to decide whether

Scotland should be an independent country — due to take place on

Thursday.
Like the UK, China is also a permanent member of the UN Security

Council, so how should they be punished for openly acting against

the UN Charter?
Civil disobedience is not necessarily the only way to independence,

nor will Chow’s talk about Hong Kongers deciding their own future

lead to the territory’s independence. It is simply a matter of

promoting peaceful and rational non-cooperation.
As well as protesting in the streets, on Sept. 3, a Hong Kong

cartoonist who goes by the alias “White Water” posted a cartoon on

Facebook showing nine ways that Hong Kongers could boycott Chinese

products: not using banks invested in by China, boycotting products

from Chinese electronic companies, refusing to use Chinese social

media Web sites and software, not buying shares in Chinese companies

mainly operating in China but incorporated overseas, not traveling

to China, not using China Mobile’s services, not buying Chinese

electronic goods, not watching Chinese television programs and not

drinking Tsingtao Beer.
Before 1997, some of my friends in Hong Kong had already started

refusing to purchase clothing made by the company of businessman and

“patriotic monster” Tsang Hin-chi (曾憲梓).
If “patriotic” businesspeople or media outlets in the territory

start making unreasonable statements, the boycott could be expanded

to include these outlets.
If the CCP continues its oppression in the territory, the sense of a

distinctively local Hong Kong identity will only grow stronger among

Hong Kongers.
Taiwanese can also start to resist China in their own lives by

saying no to the CCP.
For example, they could choose not to purchase products made in

China and consider boycotting shares in and products made by

Taiwanese companies close to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his

confidantes, just as they boycotted HTC’s products when HTC Corp

chairwoman Cher Wang (王雪紅) made inappropriate statements. From

here, the desinicization can be further expanded.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Drew Cameron