![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ANARCHY IN THE HK, PART 390 (DC ELECTION EDITION)
Previously on Senseless Acts of Bloggery:
[The protests are] expected to go on all summer long. […]
Update: they did. And they haven’t stopped. And they’ve gotten progressively worse.
Wikipedia can help you fill in the gaps, but suffice to say it’s gotten worse. Two unarmed protesters have been shot (neither fatally, but in both cases that was sheer luck), and a week ago protesters ended up trapped in Polytechnic University in a siege that came this close to becoming the Tiananmen 2.0 we’ve all been expecting.
Thankfully it didn’t.
It’s been quiet since then, mainly because this past Sunday was the District Council elections, and the protesters – wisely – stopped all activities for two strategic reasons: (1) the likelihood that the govt would use them as an excuse to cancel the elections, and (2) the likelihood that if the elections went ahead, the pro-Beijing (blue) candidates would get creamed by the pro-Democratic (yellow) candidates – hence the govt’s alleged interest in looking for any excuse to cancel the elections.
Indeed, the District Council elections were being touted by both sides as a de facto referendum on the 5 Demands and the current turmoil. And while I hate labelling general elections as de facto referendums on a specific issue, there’s little doubt that a lot of people were going to vote based on their feelings about the protests, even though the District Council doesn’t have much power to do anything about them – the DC really just exists to manage local issues and report them to LegCo. But if nothing else the elections were expected to serve as the strongest indicator of public sentiment about the situation.
And so they were.
1. Short version: The DC has 479 seats across 18 districts, of which 452 were up for grabs. When voting started, the pro-Beijing camp controlled all 18 districts and the vast majority of seats.
They now control one.
The pro-Democratic camp own the rest, and with 389 seats, they now have a much larger majority than the pro-Beijing camp had before the voting started.
2. Total voter turnout: almost 73%.
3. So, you know, that’s a pretty decisive message to CE Carrie Lam and her admin: we’re sick of tear gas and police brutality, neither of which is working and is actually making things worse, so you need to change gears and work out a political solution.
Predictably, her interpretation of that message is: “We’re sick of protesters, please stop them.” Hence her press conference in which she said (paraphrased), “Beijing doesn’t blame me for the results, and I’m not giving in to any more demands from protesters.” (The first part, I suspect, explains the second.)
4. And so nothing has changed. Which is no surprise. For one thing, a recent report claims she’s increasingly isolated herself in a Trump-like bubble of yes-men protecting her from reports of police brutality. Also, Lam didn’t listen when 2 million people marched against the extradition bill that started this sorry mess – why should she honor the results of an election just because her side lost?
5. Meanwhile, it's been fun watching Chinese state media contort themselves trying to explain the results after a couple of weeks urging HK’s “silent majority” to show support for the govt and the police. Most have resorted to the usual conspiracy theories: the CIA agents rigged the results, protesters threatened to beat up people if they voted blue, etc. Some simply declined to report the results: “There was a District Council election in HK today. Turnout was high. Now, sports.”
6. One other fun detail: On Monday, when we all woke up to find out the results, there was at least one incident of spontaneous champagne parties on the streets of Central celebrating the election results.
Which I mention just to point out that in the 23+ years I've lived here, I can't think of a single election in HKSAR history where people celebrated the result with champagne in the streets. Privately or at political party HQs, yes. On the streets, no.
I'm just saying.
7. What happens from here is anyone’s guess, as usual. Protesters have already released the protest activity schedule for the next month, and we can only presume that there will inevitably be violence as long as the police keep handling things as they have been. Lam has made her feelings clear that the beatings will continue until morale improves, regardless of whether it actually works.
This weekend will be an indicator of things to come. All I’m sure of for now is that the protesters are not going to leave it at this. Lam’s decision to ignore the concerns of 2 million people in June got us into this mess. Her decision to ignore the election results isn’t going to get us out of it.
Born to lose,
This is dF
BONUS TRACK: For those of you asking, "Wait, HK has elections? I thought the protesters were demanding democracy?"
We have elections, but not for everything. The District Council election is the only election where everyone can vote. For the Legislative Council, we can only directly elect 35 of 70 seats. For the chief executive, we have no say at all. This is what the protesters have been demanding when they call for universal suffrage – one person, one vote, for all elected offices.
[The protests are] expected to go on all summer long. […]
Update: they did. And they haven’t stopped. And they’ve gotten progressively worse.
Wikipedia can help you fill in the gaps, but suffice to say it’s gotten worse. Two unarmed protesters have been shot (neither fatally, but in both cases that was sheer luck), and a week ago protesters ended up trapped in Polytechnic University in a siege that came this close to becoming the Tiananmen 2.0 we’ve all been expecting.
Thankfully it didn’t.
It’s been quiet since then, mainly because this past Sunday was the District Council elections, and the protesters – wisely – stopped all activities for two strategic reasons: (1) the likelihood that the govt would use them as an excuse to cancel the elections, and (2) the likelihood that if the elections went ahead, the pro-Beijing (blue) candidates would get creamed by the pro-Democratic (yellow) candidates – hence the govt’s alleged interest in looking for any excuse to cancel the elections.
Indeed, the District Council elections were being touted by both sides as a de facto referendum on the 5 Demands and the current turmoil. And while I hate labelling general elections as de facto referendums on a specific issue, there’s little doubt that a lot of people were going to vote based on their feelings about the protests, even though the District Council doesn’t have much power to do anything about them – the DC really just exists to manage local issues and report them to LegCo. But if nothing else the elections were expected to serve as the strongest indicator of public sentiment about the situation.
And so they were.
1. Short version: The DC has 479 seats across 18 districts, of which 452 were up for grabs. When voting started, the pro-Beijing camp controlled all 18 districts and the vast majority of seats.
They now control one.
The pro-Democratic camp own the rest, and with 389 seats, they now have a much larger majority than the pro-Beijing camp had before the voting started.
2. Total voter turnout: almost 73%.
3. So, you know, that’s a pretty decisive message to CE Carrie Lam and her admin: we’re sick of tear gas and police brutality, neither of which is working and is actually making things worse, so you need to change gears and work out a political solution.
Predictably, her interpretation of that message is: “We’re sick of protesters, please stop them.” Hence her press conference in which she said (paraphrased), “Beijing doesn’t blame me for the results, and I’m not giving in to any more demands from protesters.” (The first part, I suspect, explains the second.)
4. And so nothing has changed. Which is no surprise. For one thing, a recent report claims she’s increasingly isolated herself in a Trump-like bubble of yes-men protecting her from reports of police brutality. Also, Lam didn’t listen when 2 million people marched against the extradition bill that started this sorry mess – why should she honor the results of an election just because her side lost?
5. Meanwhile, it's been fun watching Chinese state media contort themselves trying to explain the results after a couple of weeks urging HK’s “silent majority” to show support for the govt and the police. Most have resorted to the usual conspiracy theories: the CIA agents rigged the results, protesters threatened to beat up people if they voted blue, etc. Some simply declined to report the results: “There was a District Council election in HK today. Turnout was high. Now, sports.”
6. One other fun detail: On Monday, when we all woke up to find out the results, there was at least one incident of spontaneous champagne parties on the streets of Central celebrating the election results.
Which I mention just to point out that in the 23+ years I've lived here, I can't think of a single election in HKSAR history where people celebrated the result with champagne in the streets. Privately or at political party HQs, yes. On the streets, no.
I'm just saying.
7. What happens from here is anyone’s guess, as usual. Protesters have already released the protest activity schedule for the next month, and we can only presume that there will inevitably be violence as long as the police keep handling things as they have been. Lam has made her feelings clear that the beatings will continue until morale improves, regardless of whether it actually works.
This weekend will be an indicator of things to come. All I’m sure of for now is that the protesters are not going to leave it at this. Lam’s decision to ignore the concerns of 2 million people in June got us into this mess. Her decision to ignore the election results isn’t going to get us out of it.
Born to lose,
This is dF
BONUS TRACK: For those of you asking, "Wait, HK has elections? I thought the protesters were demanding democracy?"
We have elections, but not for everything. The District Council election is the only election where everyone can vote. For the Legislative Council, we can only directly elect 35 of 70 seats. For the chief executive, we have no say at all. This is what the protesters have been demanding when they call for universal suffrage – one person, one vote, for all elected offices.