Occupy Central
Occupy Central is a civil disobedience movement which began in Hong Kong on September 28, 2014. It calls on thousands of protesters to block roads and paralyse Hong Kong's financial district if the Beijing and Hong Kong governments do not agree to implement universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017 and the Legislative Council elections in 2020 according to "international standards." The movement was initiated by Benny Tai Yiu-ting (戴耀廷), an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, in January 2013.
Umbrella Movement
The Umbrella Movement (Chinese: 雨傘運動; pinyin: yǔsǎn yùndòng) is a loose political movement that was created spontaneously during the Hong Kong protests of 2014. Its name derives from the recognition of the umbrella as a symbol of defiance and resistance against the Hong Kong government, and the united grass-roots objection to the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) of 31 August.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 163:
Full coverage of the day’s events on 28-05
As Hong Kong prepares for a crucial vote on political reforms, divisions have surfaced within the pan-democratic camp. Photo: Reuters
Why we needn’t worry too much about cracks in democratic camp
A few names are being bandied around as speculation mounts over possible deals and compromise with the Leung Chun-ying administration.
Looking at the situation, it is quite evident that some lawmakers are ready to accept the “fake” election package when certain conditions are met.
As conventional tactics have not yielded any results, the members may have opted for a new stance.
This has promoted some observers to describe the scene as the “conservativization” of social movements and democrats.
Meanwhile, the divergence and strife over strategy within the pan-democrat camp appears to have spread to the younger generation. One example is the cracks seen in the Hong Kong Federation of Students.
We may feel bewildered by the complexity of the situation and uncertain prospects.
But I see no reason for pessimism in these developments.
We should bear in mind that divergence, cracks and even rifts within the bloc are not uncommon.
Mayer Zald and Roberta Ash, sociologists at Columbia University, agree that conservativization of social movements tends to happen in a stable society. Activists and leaders may grab some political power as well as pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests and advantages for apportion among members within the camp.
Realizing that their ultimate goal — democracy — can’t be achieved overnight, activists may lose some of their zeal and alter their strategy.
But that doesn’t mean the change in stance is irreversible.
Zald and Ash cited the National Urban League and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People as examples.
The two leading civil rights groups became relatively conservative before the African-American Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s, but then subsequently adopted a more “militant” approach in order to win back the hearts of supporters and compete with newer, more aggressive parties like Martin Luther King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference.
Similarly, old-line democrats in Hong Kong and their allies were largely marginalized in the Occupy protests when youngsters became the leading light in the movement.
Older democrats failed to attach significance to the widespread localism in recent years, nor did they try to align themselves with the shifting landscape and other changing dynamics. This has led to chasm with young people.
This sort of thing happens along with intensified internal strife and competition but one will be naïve to assume that the activists will lose faith after seeing all the explicit or covert power struggles among different factions.
One should accept that some things may be unavoidable in the real political world. It would be a mistake to look at the democrats with disdain if they choose to make some compromises.
Zald and Ash point out that various factions and schools within the pan-democratic bloc would team up before a showdown with the authorities. But once the crucial moment has passed – just like the post-Occupy era – the bloc would be vulnerable to division and even confrontation within the camp.
Like other forms of dispute and reorganization, internal divisions shouldn’t be a source of grave worry.
Coconuts
Democrats tell CY Leung to stand down ahead of election vote
Hong Kong's leader was challenged to step down yesterday as he clashed with angry pro-democracy lawmakers over the government's controversial electoral reform package, which goes to a vote next month.
Chief executive CY Leung dodged the resignation question and told legislators the city was at a "critical juncture", urging them to support the roadmap for leadership elections in 2017 – the first ever public vote for the chief executive.
Pro-democracy lawmakers have vowed to block the package when it goes to the vote in June, calling it "fake democracy" as candidates for leader will be vetted by a loyalist committee, a stipulation laid down by Beijing.
Beijing's decision sparked more than two months of street rallies late last year which brought parts of the city to a standstill.
James To of the Democratic Party asked Leung whether he would step down "to take responsibility" if the package were rejected, a question which Leung did not answer directly.
"If Legco [Legislative Council] members do not endorse the proposal will people ask them to step down?" a riled Leung countered.
Two lawmakers were removed from the heated question-and-answer session for heckling, one holding a yellow umbrella, symbol of the democracy movement, and another shouting "Liar!".
Pro-democracy legislators had also brought cardboard cut-outs of deer, printed with the Chinese character for "horse".
They reflected the Chinese idiom, "Point at a deer, call it a horse", used to refer to deliberate misrepresentation.
Leung argued that the government had "majority support" from residents for the election proposal, citing unspecified opinion polls as backing the plan by 50-60 percent.
The government has asked all 70 Hong Kong legislators to meet with Beijing officials in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen on Sunday to discuss the plan.
But pan-democrat lawmakers questioned what could be achieved, with both Beijing and the Hong Kong authorities consistently saying that they cannot diverge from the candidate screening policy.
"What are we doing in Shenzhen? There is no room for modifications," pro-democracy lawmaker Ray Chan said in a furious exchange with Leung.
Fifteen pro-democracy lawmakers – with 12 opting out – have said they will attend Sunday's meeting with three Beijing officials who deal with Hong Kong affairs.
Authorities have been criticised by pan-democrats for scheduling the meeting on the same day as a march in Hong Kong to mark the anniversary of Beijing's Tiananmen Square crackdown.
Chief executive CY Leung dodged the resignation question and told legislators the city was at a "critical juncture", urging them to support the roadmap for leadership elections in 2017 – the first ever public vote for the chief executive.
Pro-democracy lawmakers have vowed to block the package when it goes to the vote in June, calling it "fake democracy" as candidates for leader will be vetted by a loyalist committee, a stipulation laid down by Beijing.
Beijing's decision sparked more than two months of street rallies late last year which brought parts of the city to a standstill.
James To of the Democratic Party asked Leung whether he would step down "to take responsibility" if the package were rejected, a question which Leung did not answer directly.
"If Legco [Legislative Council] members do not endorse the proposal will people ask them to step down?" a riled Leung countered.
Two lawmakers were removed from the heated question-and-answer session for heckling, one holding a yellow umbrella, symbol of the democracy movement, and another shouting "Liar!".
Pro-democracy legislators had also brought cardboard cut-outs of deer, printed with the Chinese character for "horse".
They reflected the Chinese idiom, "Point at a deer, call it a horse", used to refer to deliberate misrepresentation.
Leung argued that the government had "majority support" from residents for the election proposal, citing unspecified opinion polls as backing the plan by 50-60 percent.
The government has asked all 70 Hong Kong legislators to meet with Beijing officials in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen on Sunday to discuss the plan.
But pan-democrat lawmakers questioned what could be achieved, with both Beijing and the Hong Kong authorities consistently saying that they cannot diverge from the candidate screening policy.
"What are we doing in Shenzhen? There is no room for modifications," pro-democracy lawmaker Ray Chan said in a furious exchange with Leung.
Fifteen pro-democracy lawmakers – with 12 opting out – have said they will attend Sunday's meeting with three Beijing officials who deal with Hong Kong affairs.
Authorities have been criticised by pan-democrats for scheduling the meeting on the same day as a march in Hong Kong to mark the anniversary of Beijing's Tiananmen Square crackdown.
沒有留言:
張貼留言