From: Avron Boretz <xhgy@CRUX2.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject: (none)
Reply-To: Avron Boretz <xhgy@CRUX2.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 17:19:33 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Subject: Re: HK democracy...

--------
>> FROM Avron Boretz <xhgy@CRUX2.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>:
>
>>I cannot tell you all how pleased I am to finally see a clear, well
>>thought out, aware, and historically accurate comment in this latest
>>debate
>
>Well, but I am very confused about democratizing an existing democracy.
>
>I think some people involved in this debate are having truble expressing
>themselves. The question is not whether HK is a democracy, or whether
>HK is not hence needs a quick injection of democracy. The question is how
>do you view the chances that CCP will keep the current HK system (democracy
>or not) for 50 years, and whether install a new system (and agitate CCP)
>can force CCP to more likely keep the promise.
>
>>and even more so, to finally hear it from a truly concerned
>>standpoint, i.e., a citizen of Hong Kong, who can (unlike all of us,
>>foreign devils and Han Chauvinist/imperialists alike) speak for the
>>people of Hong Kong.
>
>I will take your words on your devilishness, but please provide evidence about
>all non-HK people being devils, chauvinists, and imperialists. Or am I having
>unrealistic expectations on an average china-nt poster?



The main question, it seems to me, is not how much democracy Hong Kong does
or doesn't have, but rather, how much say the people of Hong Kong have in
determining their own future, and how much representation they have in the
governing bodies which effect their day-to-day lives.  This is, I think,
what "democracy" probably means to most people in HK who are worried about
the issue, rather than a lofty philosophical ideal.  And this is precisely
what the CCP seems to want to prevent.  What's worse, the recent conflict
between the Brits and the CCP, while I'm not really sure I understand what
the Brits think they're doing, at the very least, they are abiding by the
original agreement, whereas the CCP keeps threatening to abrogate that
agreement -- that is what both frightens and angers me, among others.

As for "foreign devils," I say so tongue-in-cheek, since I am one -- my
point here is precisely what you suggest, namely, that too many people
seem to be generalizing, reifying things like "the CHinese people," the
"nation of China," "Westerners," etc.  My point is that of course you can't
generalize like that, so to say that all western governments and people are
simply and universally blood-thirsty imperialists is just as absurd and
historically inaccurate as to say that the Chinese (CCP) intentions towards
HK are pure, patriotic, and that racism, chauvinism, imperialism, and
colonialist ambitions are limited to the Western powers and Japan.  I keep
reading this subtext in so many of the messages on the net from my PRC
brothers and sisters: Since China was a victim of Western imperialist and
capitalist greed and cruelty from the 18th century through the recent past
(and I agree, of course, that this exploitation and all that went with it is
a fact), China thus can be seen to be morally pure (having been purified
by serving as the sacrifice) and cannot be criticized for the same things
it criticizes its former oppresors of (this is not only CCP propaganda,
it is part of KMT nationalist ideology, too).

Now, saying this, of course, I realize that all such ideologies act the same
way, so that the US has a similar blind spot when it justifies its actions
in Iraq while ignoring or glossing over or mystifying so many other military
adventures -- even, as we now know, Iraq itself, which was hardly a glorious
victory (does the slaughter of perhaps 1-200,000 Iraqi people justify tehe
results?)  Well, I don't want to waste your time with a diatribe about Iraq,
but the point is, I wish people could be patriotic without being chauvinistic,
because in my experience (in the US as well as in China), nationalist
ideology is almost always chauvinistic (We are good, pure, superior, to Them).
This is an unfortunate outcome of human territoriality, something we
probably can't change in our lifetime (if ever), but at least we can try to
use reason to temper the excesses and irrational emotionalism that it
produces (and thrives on).

Thank you for taking the time to read my ramblings!

Avron Boretz
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china