![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
defrogHong Kong had partial democracy last night with by-elections for five (5) districts. I shall now bore you with the results.
I say “bore” because there’s a lot of backstory to this election. In fact, you’d probably be better off reading the Wikipedia page on it. But let me break the basics into bullet points:
1. Hong Kong – the property of China since 1997 – does not have full one-person-one-vote democracy for all govt positions. Half the govt is elected directly, the other half by functional constituencies (i.e. business leaders), and the chief exec by an 800-person panel of businessmen and electors personally approved by Beijing.
2. HK was initially promised full democracy by 2007, but Beijing changed its mind, saying HK wasn’t “ready” (by which it meant “you can’t have it until we’re sure you’ll elect people we like”).
3. HK chief Donald Tsang is currently pushing a constitutional reform package that will see HK get slightly more democracy by adding ten new LegCo seats (only half of which citizens can vote for) and expanding the CE electoral committee from 800 people to 1200 people by 2017. Pro-democracy activists want full-on democracy by 2012, and say they won’t even consider the 2017 proposal until the govt at least drops the functional constituencies.
4. Five hardcore pro-democracy legislators resigned in January for the sole purpose of triggering yesterday’s by-election in the hopes that it would serve as a de facto referendum for universal suffrage by 2012 (the logic apparently being, “If we win our seats back, that proves the public wants what we want” – which is kind of like Orly Taitz running for Congress and claiming, “If I win, that proves everyone believes Obama is Kenyan and wants him impeached”).
5. Last night, all five legislators won their seats back – but with a voter turnout of 17%, the lowest in HK’s history and 25% lower than the last council elections two years ago.
And my first thought was, “Oh Christ, there’ll be no shutting them up now.”
Don’t get me wrong. I’ve said for years that there’s no reason why HK can’t have full-on democracy, and Beijing’s excuses not to let us have it are both transparent and weak.
However, the same could be said for this whole de facto referendum thing. For the most part, it was a cheap publicity stunt from a handful of politicians known for cheap publicity stunts that don’t do a single thing to further their cause. They’ve probably done more to hurt HK’s democracy progress than to help it. (Kent Ewing at Asia Times has a pretty good summation as to why.)
I do understand their frustration – they’re in an impossible position, because Beijing won’t listen to them and never will, so they feel a need to keep the pressure on wherever possible. And the current reform package is admittedly bullshit – adding more seats to vote for doesn’t count as “more” democracy.
But when yr throwing bananas in LegCo and daring the cops to arrest you just so you can claim oppression, you’ve already lost the argument.
And let’s face it, the de facto referendum was always a lame idea. While it’s true that most people in HK think they’re ready for democracy, it’s not their #1 priority. People care more about the economy, job growth and the out-of-control property market than they do about whether they get to vote for the next chief executive in 2012.
But then the running joke in our house is, “Democracy ain’t what it used to be”, so I would say that, wouldn’t I?
I kid. But not by much. It’s hard to look at things like the role of lobbyists in the US healthcare debate and not conclude that representative democracy is the political equivalent of a dead language. They have democracy in Thailand too, and look where that’s getting them.
I’m not saying that totaltarianism is a better alternative. Democracy has always been the most workable option. But that doesn’t make it taste any better going down. HK may be technically as ready for full democracy as anyone else, but it won’t make the HK govt any better or any more accountable than it already is, so ten more years of waiting probably isn't going to make a difference at this stage.
True, the CE might be more accountable if he/she depends on a popular vote to stay in office. On the other hand, one of the benefits of the current system is that when the CE fucks up or does something idiotic, you can always blame Beijing instead of yrself for voting for the dingbat.
That’s all from me. The 80s flashbacks, naughty CPR videos and Vlad Putin furry pr0n will resume shortly.
Bedtime for democracy,
This is dF
I say “bore” because there’s a lot of backstory to this election. In fact, you’d probably be better off reading the Wikipedia page on it. But let me break the basics into bullet points:
1. Hong Kong – the property of China since 1997 – does not have full one-person-one-vote democracy for all govt positions. Half the govt is elected directly, the other half by functional constituencies (i.e. business leaders), and the chief exec by an 800-person panel of businessmen and electors personally approved by Beijing.
2. HK was initially promised full democracy by 2007, but Beijing changed its mind, saying HK wasn’t “ready” (by which it meant “you can’t have it until we’re sure you’ll elect people we like”).
3. HK chief Donald Tsang is currently pushing a constitutional reform package that will see HK get slightly more democracy by adding ten new LegCo seats (only half of which citizens can vote for) and expanding the CE electoral committee from 800 people to 1200 people by 2017. Pro-democracy activists want full-on democracy by 2012, and say they won’t even consider the 2017 proposal until the govt at least drops the functional constituencies.
4. Five hardcore pro-democracy legislators resigned in January for the sole purpose of triggering yesterday’s by-election in the hopes that it would serve as a de facto referendum for universal suffrage by 2012 (the logic apparently being, “If we win our seats back, that proves the public wants what we want” – which is kind of like Orly Taitz running for Congress and claiming, “If I win, that proves everyone believes Obama is Kenyan and wants him impeached”).
5. Last night, all five legislators won their seats back – but with a voter turnout of 17%, the lowest in HK’s history and 25% lower than the last council elections two years ago.
And my first thought was, “Oh Christ, there’ll be no shutting them up now.”
Don’t get me wrong. I’ve said for years that there’s no reason why HK can’t have full-on democracy, and Beijing’s excuses not to let us have it are both transparent and weak.
However, the same could be said for this whole de facto referendum thing. For the most part, it was a cheap publicity stunt from a handful of politicians known for cheap publicity stunts that don’t do a single thing to further their cause. They’ve probably done more to hurt HK’s democracy progress than to help it. (Kent Ewing at Asia Times has a pretty good summation as to why.)
I do understand their frustration – they’re in an impossible position, because Beijing won’t listen to them and never will, so they feel a need to keep the pressure on wherever possible. And the current reform package is admittedly bullshit – adding more seats to vote for doesn’t count as “more” democracy.
But when yr throwing bananas in LegCo and daring the cops to arrest you just so you can claim oppression, you’ve already lost the argument.
And let’s face it, the de facto referendum was always a lame idea. While it’s true that most people in HK think they’re ready for democracy, it’s not their #1 priority. People care more about the economy, job growth and the out-of-control property market than they do about whether they get to vote for the next chief executive in 2012.
But then the running joke in our house is, “Democracy ain’t what it used to be”, so I would say that, wouldn’t I?
I kid. But not by much. It’s hard to look at things like the role of lobbyists in the US healthcare debate and not conclude that representative democracy is the political equivalent of a dead language. They have democracy in Thailand too, and look where that’s getting them.
I’m not saying that totaltarianism is a better alternative. Democracy has always been the most workable option. But that doesn’t make it taste any better going down. HK may be technically as ready for full democracy as anyone else, but it won’t make the HK govt any better or any more accountable than it already is, so ten more years of waiting probably isn't going to make a difference at this stage.
True, the CE might be more accountable if he/she depends on a popular vote to stay in office. On the other hand, one of the benefits of the current system is that when the CE fucks up or does something idiotic, you can always blame Beijing instead of yrself for voting for the dingbat.
That’s all from me. The 80s flashbacks, naughty CPR videos and Vlad Putin furry pr0n will resume shortly.
Bedtime for democracy,
This is dF
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2010-05-18 09:32 am (UTC)Having said that, I voted for Martin Lee's party all those years, without telling my pro-China family members.