http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10319188/ Thousands rally for democracy in Hong Kong Protesters take to the streets and demand election reform By Charles Hadlock Correspondent NBC News and news services Updated: 7:24 p.m. ET Dec. 4, 2005 HONG KONG - Tens of thousands of people in Hong Kong marched in a rally Sunday demanding democracy and a timetable for the right to vote. It is the type of rally that is certain to rattle Beijing and embarrass Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang, who has refused to budge on his election reform proposals or offer a timetable on when the former British colony will move closer to one-man, one-vote. One of Hong Kong’s main thoroughfares was closed as it filled with pro-democracy demonstrators, who marched peacefully from Victoria Park past towering skyscrapers to government offices in the heart of the city. Democratic elections were promised when China took control of Hong Kong from the British in 1997. Beijing, however, has been unwilling to let the territory decide for itself when democratic reforms can take place. Hong Kong residents do not get to vote on their leader. Hong Kong's chief executive is anointed by Beijing and picked by a China-backed committee of 800 electors. Only half of the members of its 60-seat legislature are directly elected. Tough spot for Tsang The Tsang administration's reform plan would double the size of the chief executive selection committee and add 10 seats to the legislative council, five of which would be directly elected. "Donald Tsang is a good leader, but he's only elected by 800 people, which means he only has to please them," said Andrew Wong, 40, who works for an export business. "I've brought my five-year-old daughter here to teach her what democracy is." A government spokeswoman declined to comment on the march and demands of organizers. The last pro-democracy rally was on July 1, 2003 when more than 500,000 people turned out to protest a Beijing-backed anti-subversion law. The local government shelved the idea and Hong Kong’s chief executive at the time, Tung Chee Hwa, later resigned. Sunday’s pro-democracy rally puts Tsang in a tough spot of trying to please his political masters in Beijing and a local population growing impatient for the right to vote. Walking among banners that read “You want a clown or a chief executive?” and “Oppose bird-cage political reform”, Paul Tsang, 83, said Hong Kong lacked direction without a plan for democracy. “Early in the morning, you wake up with a schedule, to eat breakfast and do things during the day,” the retired army officer said. “It’s ridiculous to do something without a schedule.” Anson Chan, who was Tung’s powerful head of the civil service for four years after he took over from British governor Chris Patten in 1997, joined a pro-democracy march for the first time. “I just feel there are moments in one’s life when you have to stand up and be counted,” she told reporters. Charles Hadlock is a producer for NBC News currently on assignment in Hong Kong. Reuters contributed to this report.
I believe the whole China will be one-man one-vote some time in the future, but there is a long way to go. I guess Hong Kong could easily be the first place to start, the earlier the better.
It's understandable Hong Kongers are nostalgia to their old colonial masters in Britain. I sympathize with their feelings. Ugh, long lost glory days ...
I have to say, HK'ers are great at demonstrating and talking, but when it came down to the elections, they didn't get out and vote. I'd have more support for them if they exercised what they marched for.
In 1989, they supported most financial aids and huge moral support by going on the streets everyday. During those major floods and other catastrophes, they were also the ones who donated much much bigger proportionally. Personally, I think them are much advanced in democratic mind than average mainland Chinese. It was a British colony, which was not exactly their fault to begin with. You wouldn't have the right to vote then, which doesn't mean that you cannot demand it now. Of course, there are those beneficiaries of the colonization, but the majority are just average citizens. As for those dissing of China with some cute little words by every chance from some of the Western media, I am used to that long long ago. I would simply ignore those little things, but focus on the actual events they are reporting. They are normally more crediable to certain degrees than official Xinhua news report in China. I guess it's just human nature to expose anything bad in others, and we Chinese do that to, when it comes to reporting US news
Did the British ever care about Democracy in Hong Kong? If not - were there pro-Democracy movements back in the day? Were such organizations/gatherings allowed? I also heard some thing that Hong Kong born were only considered UK citizens if they were white? (i find that difficult to believe). How were Royal Governors or viceroys selected (appointed) in the past? I'm not dissing anyone - just trying to gain some historical perspective. A lot of Westerners regard China as some sort of oppressive, dictatorial, evil regime. Just wondering how things were under the British.
Langal you're correct in general except for the last British governor Chris Patten put in many democratic moves. While these were widely considered as cynical moves to make the PRC look bad since the PRC would and did repeal them, they were still very far sighted and appreciated by many residents of Hong Kong. You're right also that the UK didn't grant British citizenship to Hong Kong residents except for the white ones. This was something of a sore point for awhile in the years just after Tiananmen when many of Hong Kong's more well to do residents were nervous about a crackdown by the PRC once they moved in. Many of them ended up moving their families to Canada and Australia.
Yes we all know how really the people of Hong Kong love the Beijing government and thought Tung Chee Hwa was really great. Sorry Wnes but I have to give your speculation a
The Manchu Royal family will return and take back China. 5000 mounted bannermen with spears will be garrisoned in Hong Kong to quell any civil unrest.
And they will turn and flee under a barrage of withering cannon and musket fire of Her Majesty's fleet. God Save the Queen!
Actually under current condition in Hong Kong not many people really cares about democracy. Democracy doesn't produce great leaders (just look at United States), but democracy won't produce ruthless dictators for the most part. In many ways a government run by a wise king is more efficient than the democracy form of government.
its just a bunch of unhappy people trying to start trouble, and the press is lapping it up like cats on spilled milk. They make it sound like it's some sort of siberia torture camp over there when the reality is it's very very comfortable living in all aspects (unless you're poor, in which case it doesn't matter where you live in the world). Tales of torture and late night arrests of people who are never seen again has been GREATLY exxagerated
A wise king? I don't know if you had Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore in mind when you wrote that. Last time I checked, Hong Kongers could still smoke crack without being executed, chew gums without being arrested, watch porns without being Peeping Tom'ed, and move in and out of the island as freely as they were under their old British masters. So the question is, what do they really want?
So you are preferring Man-ruling than Law-ruling? Average citizens should just live on the mercy of that wise king? What if that king turns out to be not so wise?
They want to vote for their leader, I guess, which they couldn't before, they can't now. But they still want it. I don't think it makes China look bad. Chinese don't get the right to vote for president. Hong Kong is part of China, although a special district, they have the same rights as other mainland Chinese. The right to choose your leadership and representatives is something an advanced society should have, and I firmly believe they will get there some day. I don't see any harm to any party involved from a demonstration.
There's a saying that under a democracy the country gets the ruler they deserve. Compare this to Confucian dictum, which I think you are getting at, that the ruler gets the country he deserves. For instance a bad ruler gets a country plagued with troubles. The problem with the Confucian idea is that the people have no say in the leadership and its up to the leader to reform themselves rather than having the people get to change leadership if the leader is doing a bad job. So yes under a democracy you occasionally do get poor leaders but that is by the consent of the people and the people still have the ability to change leaders. Not with a kingdom except under violent revolution.
