VUVUZELAS FOR DEMOCRACY
Jun. 25th, 2010 10:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
defrogThe Hong Kong govt gave itself another hit of democracy today, with LegCo approving The Donald’s Democracy Upgrade 3.0 reform package 46-12.
As always, the backstory is complicated as hell to explain, but The Wall Street Journal (of all things) has a pretty good summary of the situation and what was at stake.
All I can really add from the ground is that we’ve been enduring the debate about the Democracy Upgrade 3.0 package for months now, and the general consensus at the Def Citadel is this:
Which is ironic, considering Donald Tsang and pan-democrat Audrey Eu debated the upgrade on television a week ago – and most people agree that Eu handed Tsang his ass. That’s what happens when yr main argument in favor of yr own package is, “Pass it now, let’s not waste time discussing its merits.”
Because look how well that works out in real democracies like the USA.
That said, the opposition’s argument essentially boiled down to “We want full democracy in 2012 and we won’t accept anything less”, which was always unrealistic. To be sure, they were right to force discussion of the bill by challenging it, and I do think they’re right to point out that the upgrade is by no means the guarantee of universal suffrage by 2020 that Tsang is promising. The last time we heard that promise, the target date was 2007, only for Beijing to decide we weren’t “ready”. They could very easily come to the same conclusion when 2020 rolls around.
But that’s also why I think it’s silly for the pan-democrats to pretend that we live in this fantasy world where Beijing has no say in Hong Kong’s affairs and that they’ll let you have yr way if you just shout at them long enough – or, if yr the League of Social Democrats, resort to cheap theatrics. The Democratic Party leaders were at least smart enough to know that killing the package wouldn’t bring full democracy to HK any sooner than what the Tsang Admin was willing to give them. Yes, it sucks. But that’s what we’ve got to work with. Deal with it.
Anyway, as is the way in modern politics, the whole exercise was noisy and pointless and probably won’t make a scrap of difference.
On the other hand, we found a use for the vuvuzelas they were selling at McDonald’s.
Meanwhile, the next big dust-up will be over the functional constituency seats, which the pan-democrats would still like to see scrapped altogether, says Audrey Eu:
Because look how well that works in real democracies like the USA.
All right, I’ll stop now.
Bedtime for democracy,
This is dF
As always, the backstory is complicated as hell to explain, but The Wall Street Journal (of all things) has a pretty good summary of the situation and what was at stake.
All I can really add from the ground is that we’ve been enduring the debate about the Democracy Upgrade 3.0 package for months now, and the general consensus at the Def Citadel is this:
1. Democracy Upgrade 3.0 is a cosmetic joke that essentially adds ten new seats to vote for, though the last-minute changes the Democratic Party managed to hammer in make all of them electable by the general populace, which means for the first time ever, the majority of seats in LegCo (rather than half) will be directly elected by the people (with the rest of the seats elected by functional constituents, which basically means rich businessmen), and even that may come with a price.
2. At the end of the day, it was a bullshit-slinging contest between the Tsang Admin that concocted the upgrade and the pan-democrat politicians who opposed it. The TA’s bullshit won.
2. At the end of the day, it was a bullshit-slinging contest between the Tsang Admin that concocted the upgrade and the pan-democrat politicians who opposed it. The TA’s bullshit won.
Which is ironic, considering Donald Tsang and pan-democrat Audrey Eu debated the upgrade on television a week ago – and most people agree that Eu handed Tsang his ass. That’s what happens when yr main argument in favor of yr own package is, “Pass it now, let’s not waste time discussing its merits.”
Because look how well that works out in real democracies like the USA.
That said, the opposition’s argument essentially boiled down to “We want full democracy in 2012 and we won’t accept anything less”, which was always unrealistic. To be sure, they were right to force discussion of the bill by challenging it, and I do think they’re right to point out that the upgrade is by no means the guarantee of universal suffrage by 2020 that Tsang is promising. The last time we heard that promise, the target date was 2007, only for Beijing to decide we weren’t “ready”. They could very easily come to the same conclusion when 2020 rolls around.
But that’s also why I think it’s silly for the pan-democrats to pretend that we live in this fantasy world where Beijing has no say in Hong Kong’s affairs and that they’ll let you have yr way if you just shout at them long enough – or, if yr the League of Social Democrats, resort to cheap theatrics. The Democratic Party leaders were at least smart enough to know that killing the package wouldn’t bring full democracy to HK any sooner than what the Tsang Admin was willing to give them. Yes, it sucks. But that’s what we’ve got to work with. Deal with it.
Anyway, as is the way in modern politics, the whole exercise was noisy and pointless and probably won’t make a scrap of difference.
On the other hand, we found a use for the vuvuzelas they were selling at McDonald’s.
Meanwhile, the next big dust-up will be over the functional constituency seats, which the pan-democrats would still like to see scrapped altogether, says Audrey Eu:
"There is no reason our political system should protect the powerful, the rich, people with connections, people with influence and people with resources.”
Because look how well that works in real democracies like the USA.
All right, I’ll stop now.
Bedtime for democracy,
This is dF
