Hi folks, welcome to Part 2 of my series on Hong Kong, where I call home. Last time, I laid out my key argument for my belief that “Hong Kong is not over”, that Hong Kong still preserves a fundamentally different system from the rest of China, and that the national security law (NSL) is only necessary for long-term prosperity. However, my belief is not blind, I see two serious issues that will prevent Hong Kong from being great again, one is
Congrats on an extremely cogent analysis. I was one of those senior administrators offered a position to join HK's butler service in the early 80's, but ultimately deferred to pursue a career on Wall Street because of my fear that I would personally be unsuitable to foster meaningful change in an apolitical environment. I did later return to HK to launch a major media/telecommunications enterprise, but again found that the fear of Beijing governance post-1997 among local elites significantly inhibited a strong vision of economic growth bounded by a common political vision. That fear ultimately manifested itself in the ruinous street riots and calls for pro-independence. I share and support your vision for a bottom-up approach. However, I fear that this development will need to be a generational undertaking as we await for the retirement of pro-independence voices from both within and, more importantly, outside of Hong Kong. Additionally, this bottom-up movement will not become possible until the vast majority of Hong Kongers gain fluency with both the language and cultural norms of the Chinese Mainland.
When unifying grand plans and utopian visions fall apart (happens all the time), then pragmatism becomes a unifying force. We can all work together to make our lives a little easier regardless of our ideologies or experiences or life situations. Maybe bringing community attention to local issues like recycling, schools, and parks will bring about the pro-democracy movement without the independence streak. I have in mind the civil rights movement in the US, which began with local efforts to desegregate schools and public facilities, and over time the grassroots action turned into a massive civilizational change and a new American utopian vision of liberal plurality. The solidarity movement in Poland started as a labor movement for better conditions in Gdansk and ended in the fall of communism. Start with small actions and the vision will follow later, maybe. One example of failure I can think of is Occupy Wall Street in the US, which sparked a lot of discussion but failed to achieve political change, I think because it was a protest first and then a political movement. I hope you run for office!
Thank you for writing this. This is the best writing I have seen on Hong Kong yet. I lived in Hong Kong from 2016 to 2021 (after spending most of my life in Beijing from 1998-2015) and sadly left because of my frustrations that there was no political solution proposed for the 2019 protests. The default paths seemed to be either sticking with the butler government or completely dismantling 1C2S. Your writing gives me a whole new way to think about my experiences and future possibilities. Thank you.
Interestingly, now I am in Canada and I've discovered that the country has become a US vassal state. While the structure of each entity is different internationally, there are similarities in that Hong Kong has no master and Canada's master is now somewhere else. In both cases, there is no real political thinking and the only real way forward as improbable as it may seem today is for both places to develop their own political thinking.
Thank you for your deep-dive analysis of HK. Your "butler government" metaphor helps me understand the dilemma facing HK transitioning from over 150 years of colonization to finding their place in greater China's orbit. It would be a shame to simply transfer governance responsibility from the British to the PRC but that is an easy cop-out and fits their "butler" training.
It will take a very masterful politician to thread the needle between "democracy" and "independence." To make matters worse, while HK is attempting to find their way, mainland China is struggling with their own existential challenges and will not relish much turmoil added to the soup. HK has a brief opening to take a bold step into leadership, not only domestically, but, as you mention, to assist greater China to align with changing global forces. There are a lot of moving pieces here and so much could go wrong. Where does one find a master politician to lead an apolitical populace?
Excellent and extremely informative. There's every reason for Hong Kong to regain its unique place within the global systems of finance and creativity. For the good of China and for the good of the world.
Robert you are a shining light. Thank you for sharing your insightful perspective. Your lived experiences on both sides of the ideological divide provide a unique viewpoint on the complexities of fostering change in Hong Kong's historically defined political and economic environment.
It underscores the profound impact that political uncertainty can have on economic development and social stability - relating to your earlier note describing an overblown fear of the NSL.
As a boomer In the 1960s, we stood up to the elite establishment. We rebelled with political activism and liberalism. I had the same experience in South Africa prior to the installation of its first democratic government.
We sought to change politics, culture, and society and we achieved that. It will always be the the young people who can achieve this. That is why the generational aspect of the bottom-up approach you mentioned will always be the driving force. Older people not so much.
Lastly, your point about the necessity for the majority of Hong Kongers to gain fluency with the language and cultural norms of the Chinese Mainland is crucial. Cultural understanding and language proficiency are key to fostering mutual respect and cooperation, which are essential for any bottom-up movement. But intercultual communication of this nature is always a two-way street. Authentic communication from mainland voices will be needed as well.
Your insights provide a valuable contribution to the discourse on Hong Kong's future. Thank you for the hard work Robert. Shine on.
I very much enjoy your response to Stephen Roach’s piece and thanks for the fair analysis of the good and bad of HK. As a Hong Konger myself albeit no longer living here, I remember and believe in the rebounding nature and nimbleness of my fellow citizens.
I do agree without a true and capable head that works for the people of HK, HK will struggle a bit, but with its natural advantages accumulated for years (and its amazing views, food, parks, and efficiency) it will take time but will re-establish itself as the unique and vibrant entrepôt!
I was about to suggest the obvious course of action, that you start a new party and in the process at least initiate larger public discourse on points you have articulated so well in this piece.
Thanks for an insightful article. What is your view of Hong Kongs role in technology, in relation to it's neighbor Shenzhen? Thinking along the lines of Hong Kong being a super-connector in the past, however finance moved further to Singapore and Shenzhen has grown to become a strong technology center, where does that leave Hong Kong?
Hi Hans, I think there is definitely big potential there. Let me give you two examples: 1) Frank Wang, founder of DJI, largest drone maker in the world, was educated in Hong Kong University of Science Technology and got funding from HKUST for drone research. 2) Tang Xiao'ou, founder of SenseTime (who recently passed away), taught artificial intelligence for many years at Chinese University of Hong Kong ... not to mention many other top HK-educated talents joining Tencent, BYD and Huawei. I think there is a common theme here, being that HK is a magnet for talents. And it's very easy to understand. Good talents need a good environment to work and live. In terms of "working", HK has the freest environment compared with any other city in China. In terms "living" though, it has lagged behind in terms of high living costs. Also, because HK has no manufacturing base, it has to cooperate with greater pearl river delta cities. But I think it's possible for HK to have more manufacturing center as well,(at least for advanced manufacturing and research purpose) if the policies are right.
Hong Kong is/was the home of the largest micromotor manufacturer, I can't recall the name right now, but they started out in the days of the Walkman and now drive micro-drones. Genomic research, advanced medical search still take place inside Hong Kong, and another top industries is post graduate education.
This is a very interesting analysis and I came to the same conclusion that HK should be China's experimental centre. I think Beijing should create an effective dual-firewall structure: between Mainland China-HK and then between Greater China-World. Hong Kong needs to have free internet flow, information flow, capital flows, and to be the experimental hub for Mainland China. Regulations, education, healthcare, social security systems, capital markets structure etc etc can all be amended and played around with first in HK before being adopted in the Mainland if those in the Mainland believe it is in the best interests of the wider country.
But unfortunately the ship has sailed with HK being a global city. The national security laws might make sense from the perspective of Beijing and other "patriots" (as they have been labelled) but they have scared many westerners. Consequently Singapore and Dubai are the big winners from the decline of HK. Making HK the experimental centre for China does not mean that HK becomes the global city it once way, but rather will be China's gateway to the world. At least that is my logic.
I agree. And to be honest Hong Kong never seems to me like a “world city” to the same level of NYC or London or even Singapore. It’s never have been a home for any substantial number of people other than non-Cantonese speaking Chinese. Ethnically it’s very homogenous. The nativism and xenophobia are also commonly found in the so-called “pro-democracy” movement.
I think Singapore is a south-east Asian city where the ethnic Indian community provides connections with India and the ethnic Chinese to China, and through history to western nations. Hence why there is the veneer of being a world city. HK has a much deeper capital markets and candidly has the sense of chaotic creation that Singapore lacks. It is just that the mainland is so dominant it makes it feel more Chinese than a true polyglot community.
Not the place for it, but Donald (The Duck) Tsang was a very corrupt man. Not greedy for money, that was his wife's sin. Greedy for power, and greedy for recognition. He built his powerbase in the N.T. working with the Heung Yee Kuk in mal-administering the village house scheme, dividing the fat profit from government infrastructure, public parks, etc among the N.T. Industries, which he helped in turn get an outsized proportion of seats in the legislature. It's a long story, one best told over several weekends of draft beers in pub outside one of the old KCR stations north of Lion's Rock Tunnel. (edit: typical, I forgot the important point by the time I reached the end. The problem with corruption laws is they tend to focus on pecuniary gain. Sometimes the worst corruption has little to do with money or the direct exchange of money - James Madison, Hitler, Stalin all come to mind).
Well written as usual. But I would add that for almost ten years the PAP has been acknowledging the their not the Bees Knees:
Quote from 'The Limits of Authoritarian Governance in Singapore's Developmental State'. Chapter: New Politics and Old Managerialism: Welcome to the New Normal, pg 136. By: Michael D. Barr:: "The sad reality of the newly limited scope of the government's claims was on display for all to see in Lee Hsien Loong's final rally speech of the 2015 campaign. On that occasion perfectionist hyperbole was replaced with the presentation of a long list of government failures and problem issues"
And they were playing the game on easy mode for decades, they inherited one of the grates pieces of real estate in the world, much infrastructure already done by the British, and they were in a neighborhood that in the 1960s people were afraid would go Red and so they may themselves the city state where every transnational corporation can base themselves and have carte blanche; by definition, few could follow the path that they did because there's only so many transitional corps and there fore there can only be a few base cities for them in the world.....
Sadly, Hong Kong has no prospect for democracy or autonomy given Xi's obsession with control. Yet I'd expect China to tout the fraudulent "One Country, Two Systems" status of Hong Kong as the basis for further imperialism into Taiwan. In reality, Hong Kong's 1C2S will exist to the same extent as the Tibetan or Xinjiang "autonomous regions": as lies that pretend to empower the people they are smothering.
All I can say is, these are very different cases. Practical concerns will dictate different governance structures. But if your belief is that ideology, such as "imperial grandeur" is behind all of this, there is nothing I can convince you here.
Hi, I am a little puzzled over the title of your Substack post. As I understand it, you are disputing Roach’s claim that “HK is over”(which is to say HK’s future prospects are bad). So why does it pain you to say that “HK is not over? It seems to imply that you would like Roach to be right in saying that HK is over.
Congrats on an extremely cogent analysis. I was one of those senior administrators offered a position to join HK's butler service in the early 80's, but ultimately deferred to pursue a career on Wall Street because of my fear that I would personally be unsuitable to foster meaningful change in an apolitical environment. I did later return to HK to launch a major media/telecommunications enterprise, but again found that the fear of Beijing governance post-1997 among local elites significantly inhibited a strong vision of economic growth bounded by a common political vision. That fear ultimately manifested itself in the ruinous street riots and calls for pro-independence. I share and support your vision for a bottom-up approach. However, I fear that this development will need to be a generational undertaking as we await for the retirement of pro-independence voices from both within and, more importantly, outside of Hong Kong. Additionally, this bottom-up movement will not become possible until the vast majority of Hong Kongers gain fluency with both the language and cultural norms of the Chinese Mainland.
indeed, indeed. This is going to be a super long-term, generational project.
When unifying grand plans and utopian visions fall apart (happens all the time), then pragmatism becomes a unifying force. We can all work together to make our lives a little easier regardless of our ideologies or experiences or life situations. Maybe bringing community attention to local issues like recycling, schools, and parks will bring about the pro-democracy movement without the independence streak. I have in mind the civil rights movement in the US, which began with local efforts to desegregate schools and public facilities, and over time the grassroots action turned into a massive civilizational change and a new American utopian vision of liberal plurality. The solidarity movement in Poland started as a labor movement for better conditions in Gdansk and ended in the fall of communism. Start with small actions and the vision will follow later, maybe. One example of failure I can think of is Occupy Wall Street in the US, which sparked a lot of discussion but failed to achieve political change, I think because it was a protest first and then a political movement. I hope you run for office!
Thank you for writing this. This is the best writing I have seen on Hong Kong yet. I lived in Hong Kong from 2016 to 2021 (after spending most of my life in Beijing from 1998-2015) and sadly left because of my frustrations that there was no political solution proposed for the 2019 protests. The default paths seemed to be either sticking with the butler government or completely dismantling 1C2S. Your writing gives me a whole new way to think about my experiences and future possibilities. Thank you.
Interestingly, now I am in Canada and I've discovered that the country has become a US vassal state. While the structure of each entity is different internationally, there are similarities in that Hong Kong has no master and Canada's master is now somewhere else. In both cases, there is no real political thinking and the only real way forward as improbable as it may seem today is for both places to develop their own political thinking.
Thank you for your deep-dive analysis of HK. Your "butler government" metaphor helps me understand the dilemma facing HK transitioning from over 150 years of colonization to finding their place in greater China's orbit. It would be a shame to simply transfer governance responsibility from the British to the PRC but that is an easy cop-out and fits their "butler" training.
It will take a very masterful politician to thread the needle between "democracy" and "independence." To make matters worse, while HK is attempting to find their way, mainland China is struggling with their own existential challenges and will not relish much turmoil added to the soup. HK has a brief opening to take a bold step into leadership, not only domestically, but, as you mention, to assist greater China to align with changing global forces. There are a lot of moving pieces here and so much could go wrong. Where does one find a master politician to lead an apolitical populace?
Excellent and extremely informative. There's every reason for Hong Kong to regain its unique place within the global systems of finance and creativity. For the good of China and for the good of the world.
Mr. Wu's vision is worthy of pursuit.
Robert you are a shining light. Thank you for sharing your insightful perspective. Your lived experiences on both sides of the ideological divide provide a unique viewpoint on the complexities of fostering change in Hong Kong's historically defined political and economic environment.
It underscores the profound impact that political uncertainty can have on economic development and social stability - relating to your earlier note describing an overblown fear of the NSL.
As a boomer In the 1960s, we stood up to the elite establishment. We rebelled with political activism and liberalism. I had the same experience in South Africa prior to the installation of its first democratic government.
We sought to change politics, culture, and society and we achieved that. It will always be the the young people who can achieve this. That is why the generational aspect of the bottom-up approach you mentioned will always be the driving force. Older people not so much.
Lastly, your point about the necessity for the majority of Hong Kongers to gain fluency with the language and cultural norms of the Chinese Mainland is crucial. Cultural understanding and language proficiency are key to fostering mutual respect and cooperation, which are essential for any bottom-up movement. But intercultual communication of this nature is always a two-way street. Authentic communication from mainland voices will be needed as well.
Your insights provide a valuable contribution to the discourse on Hong Kong's future. Thank you for the hard work Robert. Shine on.
I very much enjoy your response to Stephen Roach’s piece and thanks for the fair analysis of the good and bad of HK. As a Hong Konger myself albeit no longer living here, I remember and believe in the rebounding nature and nimbleness of my fellow citizens.
I do agree without a true and capable head that works for the people of HK, HK will struggle a bit, but with its natural advantages accumulated for years (and its amazing views, food, parks, and efficiency) it will take time but will re-establish itself as the unique and vibrant entrepôt!
I was about to suggest the obvious course of action, that you start a new party and in the process at least initiate larger public discourse on points you have articulated so well in this piece.
Thanks for an insightful article. What is your view of Hong Kongs role in technology, in relation to it's neighbor Shenzhen? Thinking along the lines of Hong Kong being a super-connector in the past, however finance moved further to Singapore and Shenzhen has grown to become a strong technology center, where does that leave Hong Kong?
Hi Hans, I think there is definitely big potential there. Let me give you two examples: 1) Frank Wang, founder of DJI, largest drone maker in the world, was educated in Hong Kong University of Science Technology and got funding from HKUST for drone research. 2) Tang Xiao'ou, founder of SenseTime (who recently passed away), taught artificial intelligence for many years at Chinese University of Hong Kong ... not to mention many other top HK-educated talents joining Tencent, BYD and Huawei. I think there is a common theme here, being that HK is a magnet for talents. And it's very easy to understand. Good talents need a good environment to work and live. In terms of "working", HK has the freest environment compared with any other city in China. In terms "living" though, it has lagged behind in terms of high living costs. Also, because HK has no manufacturing base, it has to cooperate with greater pearl river delta cities. But I think it's possible for HK to have more manufacturing center as well,(at least for advanced manufacturing and research purpose) if the policies are right.
Hong Kong is/was the home of the largest micromotor manufacturer, I can't recall the name right now, but they started out in the days of the Walkman and now drive micro-drones. Genomic research, advanced medical search still take place inside Hong Kong, and another top industries is post graduate education.
This is a very interesting analysis and I came to the same conclusion that HK should be China's experimental centre. I think Beijing should create an effective dual-firewall structure: between Mainland China-HK and then between Greater China-World. Hong Kong needs to have free internet flow, information flow, capital flows, and to be the experimental hub for Mainland China. Regulations, education, healthcare, social security systems, capital markets structure etc etc can all be amended and played around with first in HK before being adopted in the Mainland if those in the Mainland believe it is in the best interests of the wider country.
But unfortunately the ship has sailed with HK being a global city. The national security laws might make sense from the perspective of Beijing and other "patriots" (as they have been labelled) but they have scared many westerners. Consequently Singapore and Dubai are the big winners from the decline of HK. Making HK the experimental centre for China does not mean that HK becomes the global city it once way, but rather will be China's gateway to the world. At least that is my logic.
I agree. And to be honest Hong Kong never seems to me like a “world city” to the same level of NYC or London or even Singapore. It’s never have been a home for any substantial number of people other than non-Cantonese speaking Chinese. Ethnically it’s very homogenous. The nativism and xenophobia are also commonly found in the so-called “pro-democracy” movement.
I think Singapore is a south-east Asian city where the ethnic Indian community provides connections with India and the ethnic Chinese to China, and through history to western nations. Hence why there is the veneer of being a world city. HK has a much deeper capital markets and candidly has the sense of chaotic creation that Singapore lacks. It is just that the mainland is so dominant it makes it feel more Chinese than a true polyglot community.
Not the place for it, but Donald (The Duck) Tsang was a very corrupt man. Not greedy for money, that was his wife's sin. Greedy for power, and greedy for recognition. He built his powerbase in the N.T. working with the Heung Yee Kuk in mal-administering the village house scheme, dividing the fat profit from government infrastructure, public parks, etc among the N.T. Industries, which he helped in turn get an outsized proportion of seats in the legislature. It's a long story, one best told over several weekends of draft beers in pub outside one of the old KCR stations north of Lion's Rock Tunnel. (edit: typical, I forgot the important point by the time I reached the end. The problem with corruption laws is they tend to focus on pecuniary gain. Sometimes the worst corruption has little to do with money or the direct exchange of money - James Madison, Hitler, Stalin all come to mind).
Well written as usual. But I would add that for almost ten years the PAP has been acknowledging the their not the Bees Knees:
Quote from 'The Limits of Authoritarian Governance in Singapore's Developmental State'. Chapter: New Politics and Old Managerialism: Welcome to the New Normal, pg 136. By: Michael D. Barr:: "The sad reality of the newly limited scope of the government's claims was on display for all to see in Lee Hsien Loong's final rally speech of the 2015 campaign. On that occasion perfectionist hyperbole was replaced with the presentation of a long list of government failures and problem issues"
And they were playing the game on easy mode for decades, they inherited one of the grates pieces of real estate in the world, much infrastructure already done by the British, and they were in a neighborhood that in the 1960s people were afraid would go Red and so they may themselves the city state where every transnational corporation can base themselves and have carte blanche; by definition, few could follow the path that they did because there's only so many transitional corps and there fore there can only be a few base cities for them in the world.....
Sadly, Hong Kong has no prospect for democracy or autonomy given Xi's obsession with control. Yet I'd expect China to tout the fraudulent "One Country, Two Systems" status of Hong Kong as the basis for further imperialism into Taiwan. In reality, Hong Kong's 1C2S will exist to the same extent as the Tibetan or Xinjiang "autonomous regions": as lies that pretend to empower the people they are smothering.
All I can say is, these are very different cases. Practical concerns will dictate different governance structures. But if your belief is that ideology, such as "imperial grandeur" is behind all of this, there is nothing I can convince you here.
Hi, I am a little puzzled over the title of your Substack post. As I understand it, you are disputing Roach’s claim that “HK is over”(which is to say HK’s future prospects are bad). So why does it pain you to say that “HK is not over? It seems to imply that you would like Roach to be right in saying that HK is over.
Have I misunderstood the title of your post?
Haha, I only meant to echo his wording, and, writing long essays on what I think to be obvious could be painful as well!
The hong kong protests is a manufactured crisis orchestrated by CIA
NED funded NGOs -- but that amounts to the same thing.