Currently appearing in the Straits Times is one of the least compelling arguments I’ve ever heard. Hong Kong’s pro-Beijing stooges are running candidates in the geographical constituencies in the next election, as well as in the “functional” constituencies, which are decided by a small group of hand-picked voters. As the Straits Times dryly notes, “Pro-democracy candidates tend to sweep directly elected Legco seats [i.e., the geographical constituencies] because they enjoy support from the population.” Oh, that. But Mr. James Tien, chairman of the pro-government Liberal Party, thinks that should change.
Mr Tien said: ‘If the central government sees a willingness among Hong Kong people to vote too for conservative businessmen, it will then have more confidence in the territory and might allow Hong Kong people universal suffrage earlier than is otherwise the case.’
And Mr. Ma Lik, of the reassuringly-named Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong (democratic in the “Democratic Republic of Congo” sense, it seems), agrees: ‘The central government would become more apprehensive about speeding up democratic development in Hong Kong if the democrats won a landslide victory.’
So, Beijing won’t let you vote, because they know you won’t vote the way they want. But, if you vote the way they want, maybe they’ll let you vote again later, and for more things, at which point you can…um…vote the way they want again, or risk the dreaded “instability”. If this is an advertisement for “one country, two systems”, then don’t expect to see Taiwan rushing to sign up.
Not that I disagree, but this is the smart blog, right? So I will just note that the Chinese are operating with the not-totally-crazy notion that majority rule ain’t so hot and there’s a right way to do things, even before the people have spoken (lately, frankly, I’m feeling pretty Chinese in this regard). The badness of the argument, as you point out, seems to follow from having people vote at all. But there are a couple of possible reasonable justifications.
Voting, on the Chinese conception, could be a ritualized, rather than truly active, form of participation. Consent, without advice.
Or, if we remember that the right answer exists prior to the voting, voting can be a way for the people to demonstrate their trustworthiness, pretty much as Mr. Tien says. When they’ve done that, maybe they really will be granted some leeway in future votes to depart a bit from the party line (I don’t want to guess at the sincerity of the Chinese authorities; I’d rather keep this theoretical.)
Honestly, doesn’t the lefty elitist in you sympathize even a little with the Chinese on this one?
Ummm, no. I know lots of lefty elitists who would agree, but…
Belle, how’s Singapore doing in the democracy pageant these days? How freely could you or John criticise the state? The place scared the shit out of me when I passed through a few years ago. But I know the trains run on time.
Voting, on the Chinese conception, could be a ritualized, rather than truly active, form of participation. Consent, without advice.
You might want to change “on the Chinese conception” to “on the Chinese Communist government conception”. The rest of us know what voting is for, thank you very much.
And am I wrong to say that if Iraqis vote for some not-so-pro-US candidates and Rumsfeld or Cheney say something about their having chose the wrong candidates and maybe we’d limit their voting rights for a while, ogged wouldn’t exactly be defending their words?
Hei,
Of course by “Chinese” I meant “the current Chinese government;” no offense intended.
And of course I wouldn’t defend the scenario you describe, nor did I defend the Chinese government, actually; I just wanted to point out that it wasn’t a completely loony position: it just follows from the belief that the correct course of action can be known quite apart from the expression of the people’s will in voting.
You’re right that Taiwan is watching what is happening in Hong Kong and realizing that reunification would mean the end of complete, Taiwan-style democracy. However, I think the Chinese national government’s primary audience is actually Chinese mainland citizens. Probably (1) in those regions that are bustling and modern like Hong Kong and (2) areas in which the boot of the corrupt and authoritarian Party are coming down hard.
And the point is to discourage any movement for democracy in these potentially dissatisfied mainland regions.
Umm, wasn’t that the system the Turkish Armed Forces used for several decades? You know, the pro American, NATO member, etc. guys. I seem to remember that even in the last elections there was some concern about the Army reaction to the results.
I’ve heard from a Turkish guy that the Turkish military intervened in politics to try to “keep the separation of mosque and state”. I don’t know to what extent this account is true or complete.
The Turkish military has traditionally been the guardian of Ataturk’s modernist, secularist ideals and has been in charge of civilian government succession rather than the other way around.
It has acted many times to limit the power of Islamists and religious conservatives who want to get into government.
The most recent Turkish government consists of Islamists who promised to play nice and not go all Sharia on the country, and the military has allowed them to exercise power.
But if these guys ever started implementing some of the stuff you see in Iran or Saudi Arabia, there’s a significant chance that you’d see tanks in the streets and politicians and parties getting banned.
some concern about the Army reaction to the results
Well, a high U.S. official (Wolfowitz) did urge the Turkish army to react to the decisions of the elected government. Fortunately, the Turkish army had a higher respect for democracy than Wolfowitz did.
Read this entry yesterday morning Hong Kong time (via Feedster). Saw Richard at Peking Duck referenced your entry and posted this comment at his blog.
That Straits Times article is a nice summary of the lunacy going on in Hong Kong. (Though ST articles tend to be archived for pay-for-view in a short period of time.)
I’d recommend against the use of “liberals” though to describe the pro-universal suffrage group. The Liberal Party is the pro-business collaborators, who work with the powers-that-be (in this case Beijing and Tung Chee Hwa). The far left (or ultra-leftists) are the pro-Beijing DAB led by Ma Lik and Tsang Yok Sing. Ma Lik also made similar comments in SCMP to James Tien’s.
It’s Beijing’s rather silly attempts to sell their United Front in Hong Kong to Hong Kong voters prior to the Legco elections. For those that can, Register to vote prior to 16 May 2004!
I’ve also written a bit on Ma Lik and his friends commentary on Hong Kong and Henry Cheng’s comments suggestion to Hong Kong democrats to move to Vietnam or North Korea.
Does anyone really think Taiwan is going to get a vote on its reunification.
Quizz-time: Can anyone think of a recent precedent where a large and well-armed country invaded a smaller, weaker country on the grounds it didn’t like the way it was run, and to hell with international opinion?
If I’d been running China that day, I’d have sent the tanks in forthwith and phoned up the White House to remark on the excellence also for ganders, isn’t it?
although a part of that is certainly casino gambling because it was a movie about, partially slot for, and potentially by, music people. internet poker I want to read the book it was adapted poker room from, too…the original setting of poker London as opposed to Chicago is bound gambling to read differently. Doing this would online poker be a good exercise. That brings me gambling online
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review