Middle class to be hurt by 'Occupy'
Updated: 2013-04-25 05:34
By Yang Sheng(HK Edition)
|
|||||||||
The Hong Kong Economic Journal reported on Wednesday that Tai Yiu-ting, a law scholar at the University of Hong Kong (HKU), is trying hard to attract middle-class workers aged 40 or above into the "Occupy Central" campaign he is preparing to launch soon. The opposition members of the Chief Executive Election Nomination Committee are scheduled to meet Tai on Thursday to exchange ideas. They represent the engineering, education, social services and higher-learning functional constituencies, the middle-class professionals who work in Central that Tai wants badly as his followers. However, the middle class just might be the largest group of victims of "Occupy Central".
The middle class emerged under British colonial rule with well-educated professionals as its mainstay. These people are typically law-abiding citizens who prefer rational thinking and are politically detached. They are also referred to as the "silent majority" because they are comfortable with the status quo and lack public pitching by mass media, political parties and/or social groups. The middle class is usually the mainstream value-set of a society that can provide social progress with positive energy.
Who makes up the middle class then? A US scholar has categorized them broadly as "all those who are neither rich nor poor". In today's Hong Kong, where no clear definition of the term has emerged, it is safe to say most if not all of those here can be seen as members of the middle class. They are not as obscenely rich as corporate fat cats and business tycoons and not members of the grassroots bracket either. They earn a decent living with professional skills and management knowledge rather than depending on welfare support from the government.
Central is known as the heart of free capitalism in Hong Kong. The creators of "Occupy Central" have openly admitted the political drama is intended to make this heart stop beating, render the SAR government unable to maintain Hong Kong's prosperity and stability and force the central government to meet their demands for what they call "genuine universal suffrage". Therefore the nature of "Occupy Central" has absolutely nothing in common with various peaceful demonstrations we have seen in the past, big or small.
Those worst affected by it will be the office workers in Central and their families, numbered in millions. They form the bulk of Hong Kong's middle class and the foundation of the city's tax apparatus. Of the 3.4 million working population in Hong Kong about 37 percent contributes 90 percent of the total salary tax. If the central nervous system of the international financial center and trade hub that is Hong Kong is paralyzed, it will only mean an unbearable blow to the lives of middle-class taxpayers and fiscal income of the SAR government. If the middle class withers as a political sacrifice it may become part of the poor class. With Hong Kong's Gini co-efficient remaining high, the city may be rocked by serious social disturbances it has never seen before if the buffer zone between the very rich and dirt poor is gone.
Although "Occupy Central" is said to be non-violent, its nature is anything but. Democracy is not only about the election system. And universal suffrage is not a magic pill that can cure all political, economic and social ills, or how should one explain why so many countries that have universal suffrage still find themselves in one crisis or another every now and then? Today the US, which bills itself as the "most powerful democracy in the world", and developed European countries, which boast the longest democratic tradition in the world, are all struggling to recover from debt or fiscal crises; while in Asia the largest democracy in the world - India - and the showcase of democracy that is the Philippines, are suffering from smoldering social discontent because their democratically elected governments cannot fix the problems that hurt people's livelihood most; and in the Middle East the countries that have jumped on board the democratic election bandwagon at Western powers' urging now find themselves torn apart by violent internal strife.
After generations of political and cultural assimilation by Western powers Hong Kong people tend to believe that Western socio-political bearing is always more advanced. Now they need to find out why the US economy is in such a terrible state and why so many euro-zone nations are on the verge of bankruptcy.
I recently listened to Professor Lau Siu-kai, former chief advisor to the Central Policy Unit, on his view of Hong Kong's current affairs. He said he was not optimistic about "Occupy Central", which has already gotten many people very worried before actually starting. As a veteran in sociological studies at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Lau has considerable knowledge about the phenomenon called "non-violent resistance". This kind of social movement needs many favorable conditions to succeed, including a charismatic leader, flawless organization, impeccable planning and the ability to respond promptly to sudden changes, not to forget anti-infiltration and anti-split capabilities. Having nothing to compare with India's late father of non-violent civil disobedience Mahatma Gandhi in terms of widespread popularity and influence, the opposition camp of Hong Kong, if not careful enough with "Occupy Central", can easily implode and become a dispensable accomplice of certain local politicians and Western anti-China forces in an attempt to hijack Hong Kong society for political benefit.
A public opinion poll conducted by the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong recently found some 70 percent of respondents opposed to "Occupy Central". The opposition camp called it politically-biased and unreliable. However, in a similar poll by the Public Opinion Program of HKU on behalf of Ming Pao and published on Tuesday, the majority of respondents are once again against "Occupy Central" with only 25 percent in support. This time the opposition parties could not but admit "Occupy Central" had failed the popularity test and blamed it on "sub-par publicity and promotion drive."
In theory the "Occupy Central" advocates are all well-educated persons of vision and should know much better than the average man in the street does about the flaws of modern democracy and the serious damage it can inflict on a society when applied blindly. It is therefore baffling why they are still pushing so vehemently for democratic quick-fix in Hong Kong. If they are not a bunch of bookworms who have never seen the complex and treacherous political reality outside their ivory towers, maybe they have another motive behind "Occupy Central" that people don't know yet.
The author is a current affairs commentator.
(HK Edition 04/25/2013 page9)