An email exchange

Tsang Shu-ki (11/07/2003)

Some friends proposed to discuss the development of political democracy in Hong Kong after the historic 1^st July rally. One of them made the following perceptive remarks in an email:

“Dear all,

I think this is worth our efforts. Let me just write down what immediately comes to mind.

I suppose it might be useful for us to first clarify what we mean by “development of political democracy”. We should focus on what we want to cover in our discussion.

1. Does political democracy mean the one-person-one-vote system for electing the Chief Executive and Legislature? Are we basically to give reasons and put a date as to when such a system should materialise? 2007, for instance? Is it a matter of finding an effective way (in developmental stages) of reaching that goal? We should also consider how working towards political democracy might affect and be affected by our economic and cultural development as well as our multi-facet relationship with Beijing.

2. Do we want to relate our discussion of political democracy with values and attitudes that we want to see developed as part of our political culture? That is, if we believe that values and attitudes constitute democracy just as much as, if not more than, political structure. Can we identify the major values and attitudes needed for our development of political democracy?

3. Is our focus on outcome (structure of political democracy), or process? What are our considerations for process? Is the larger social outcome part of our picture? For instance, what kind of a society do we envision would emerge at the end of a “battle/political maneuvering/mobilization” for democracy? Would the society be more politically vibrant, mature, cohesive, respectful of differences, resourceful and purposeful, rather than embittered, divided, demoralised, disoriented, drained and as a whole weakened? What process best fits the developmental needs of our society?

Where do we want to place our emphasis as we make our voice heard?

Enjoy your summer.

Best,

XXX”

I thus responded:

“Dear XX,

Those three categories of questions that you outlined are indeed the key ones. If I may add to each (following your order) a little bit more in terms of context:

1. Form, timing and interacting dynamics with Beijing:

(a) How do we confront Hong Kong's specific constraints: (i) underdevelopment of the political elite; and (ii) the daunting problems that the economy has to cope with in the coming years and the social implications?

(b) What about our thinking along the line of “democratic reversion” (民主回歸)?

2. The type of democracy: liberal democracy (individualism plus representative democracy) versus social democracy--which is related to what you called “values and attitudes” as well as community participation and empowerment outside the strictly “political” arena.

3. Processes and results: how should we address the heterogeneity and divisions within the Hong Kong population? The actual process of maneuvering and mobilisation would certainly affect the end result, which in the local case may turn out to be good or bad, as you rightly pointed out.

Our answers to these crucial questions will determine whether our stance is any different from that of others who are coming to advocate direct and “full” elections in place of the present doubtlessly flawed system and discredited leadership.

Cheers,

XX”