Why We Had to Resort to Violence? A Hongkonger’s Open Letter to the World

Netizen K
Netizen K
Nov 1 · 12 min read
(Manan Vatsyayana/Getty Images)

RRavaged by the tyranny of the Hong Kong police, the people of Hong Kong are in a state of abject desperation. Millions of us have participated in a series of peaceful demonstrations against the extradition law — a bill that will enable Beijing to prosecute dissidents and destroy Hong Kong’s judicial independence. In response, the government retaliated with brute force. Hong Kong is now a de facto police state, and our civil movement took a more radical turn.

As a Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong was once hailed as a beacon of liberalism in a continent of authoritarian. The one country two systems model — stipulated by the Sino-British Joint Declaration, a legally binding international treaty — enables Hong Kong to operate as an autonomous legal, political, economic and cultural entity. The Hong Kong Basic Law — the equivalent of Hong Kong’s constitution — guarantees freedom of speech, personal autonomy and the rule of law, which are Hong Kong’s core values. While the Basic Law promises Hong Kong a pathway towards universal suffrage, but with Beijing’s interference, the dream of democracy continues to elude Hongkongers for over 22 years since the handover. And now, Beijing is determined to take away what is left of our precious freedom.

It took a long time until Hongkongers finally decided that peaceful rallies are futile against the oppressive force of Beijing. Five years ago, millions of us assembled in the call for universal suffrage. While we shocked the world with an astonishing display of civility, the Umbrella Movement failed to garner sufficient momentum to push through any meaningful political reform. Many of us believed that the downfall of the Umbrella Movement was precisely due to this civility. In spite of all the pacifist mentality runs through our vein, we firmly believe that it is now a moral imperative for us to defend human right and dignity at all cost, even if it means we have to resort to violence.

A protester protected himself from tear gas thrown by the police. (Lillian Suwanrumpha/Getty Images)

The Necessity of Intolerance Against the Intolerant

At first glance, resorting to radical means in the name of liberty against Beijing seems to be self-defeating. After all, toleration is the cornerstone of civil liberty. Liberalism is founded on the respect of value pluralism, exemplified by this famous dictum of Evelyn Beatrice Hall — “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It is for this reason some critics claim that Hong Kong protestors are degrading their moral ground to the same level as Beijing.

However, this is a misunderstanding of the concept of toleration. In The Open Society and Its Enemy, esteemed philosopher Karl Popper introduces the paradox of toleration — tolerance without limits with lead to the disappearance of tolerance. As Popper himself succinctly puts it,

“if we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.”

The rise of Hong Kong’s valiant resistance is precisely a defence against the forces of Beijing in eroding our civil liberty.

Our immense fear for Beijing was intensified by the bookseller disappearance incident. In 2015, staff members of a book store selling politically sensitive books were vanished. While there was no record of them crossing through the border, they were later found in China detained by the authority. Most Hongkongers believe that they were kidnapped by Beijing. With the extradition law, it will open up a floodgate leading to the recurrence of such incident, backed by legal procedures. This will be a prelude to an authoritarian rule in Hong Kong, terrorising political dissidents. Freedom of speech — one of the fundamental values of Hong Kong — will become null and void. Therefore, our current battle is the end game for Hong Kong’s future.

Futility of Communication

Despite the need to stand up against forces of intolerance, pacifists maintain that it is only through rational communication we can seek common ground and resolve differences. They insist that we should express our dissenting voice only through peaceful and communicative means. Initially, the protestors did follow this classic pacifist resistance blueprint. On 12th June, over a million of us have joint a peaceful rally to voice out our demand. The number has doubled to two million on 16th June. But the government simply resorted to rhetoric in an attempt to fool the people and the police force to terrorise peaceful protestors.

Over 2 million Hongkongers participated in the 16th June peaceful rally against the extradition law and police’s attack on peaceful civilians and journalists. (Hector Retamal/Getty Images)
On 18th June, Carrie Lam, the chief executive of Hong Kong, stressed that the controversial bill will not be scrapped, despite the 2 million protestors turnout two days ago. (Carl Court/Getty Images)

The basic prerequisite for a successful dialogue is the presence of sincere intentions among all parties in search of mutual understanding and truth. When the government turned a deaf ear to the voice of the people, insisting on pushing through a law that violates the Sino-British Joint Declaration, the people realised that confining themselves to peaceful communication is doomed to failure. The government gives us no choice but to take our action to another level to make our voice heard.

After causing a havoc in our society, the government is finally willing to halt the extradition law, but protestors now face unjust prosecutions, and the brutality of the police has become a cause in and of itself for protest. The authority continued to resort to rhetoric to avert independent investigation of the police conduct. Most absurdly, when the police were caught on camera violently attacking a defenceless protestor in a yellow t-shirt, the police spokesperson, in response at a press conference, expressed bafflement at why his colleagues were hitting a “yellow object”. The police’s dehumanising speech acts were even extended to routinely insulting the city’s people as cockroaches, reminiscent of the Nazi’s depiction of Jews as rats.

Police frequently aimed firearms at protestors. A 18 year-old was shot right in the chest.
(Lillian Suwanrumpha/Getty Images)

Having dismissed the need for dialogue for months, our Chief Executive claimed to have changed her mind amidst chaos. But what she described as a “dialogue” is a one-off event in which 30 citizens were able to speak. Shortly after this political show, our Chief Executive decided instead to invoke a colonial-era emergency law that gives herself the power to bypass the legislature to pass draconian laws to further suppress protestors.

Police Brutality, Selective Law Enforcement and the Malfunction of Institutional Justice

For sure, the insincerity of the authority alone is insufficient to vindicate all protestors’ actions. It is the ultimate betrayal of the Hong Kong police that makes the use of radical means a moral necessity. While the Hong Kong police have long been criticised for their excessive use of force, 21st July marks a turning point of the whole movement. A group of mafias in Yuen Long violently attacked protestors with metal rods. People were screaming for help, blood was smeared on the floor, but the police were nowhere to be found, even after numerous calls to the emergency services. Later, some police were seen giving these gang members pats on the shoulder without making any arrest. It is at this moment Hongkongers completely lost their faith in institutional justice.

Everything goes downhill swiftly since 21st July. There were more gangster attacks. Needless to say, the police were nowhere in sight. Meanwhile, the police become increasingly blatant with their brutality. They fired rubber bullet at a foreign journalist, causing permanent sight damage. An adolescent was shot by police with firearm right in the chest, 3cm away from the heart, and the police purposefully delayed medical support. And recently, a CCTV tape of a hospital was leaked, catching the police red-handed in torturing a 62 years old civilian, thrusting a baton at him who is tied on bed and punching his genitals. These are just some of the many atrocities the police force is perpetuating. Worse still, there is no independent mechanism that held the police’s action accountable. We have to pressurise the authority to put the police in check and free the arrested protestors. Facing the vehement onslaught of gangsters and the police, we are even compelled to take the law upon ourselves to ensure personal safety.

A foreign journalist was shot in the face with a projectile fired by the police. (Isaac Lawrence/Getty Images)

Principles of Legitimate Violence

To be sure, violence without bounce will result in complete chaos and anarchy. And this is not what Hongkongers want. Given that escalation of resistance is inevitable, what we need is principled and appropriate uses of force with the right targets. The following three considerations are important in guiding our valiant resistance:

1. Necessity: whether it is necessary to employ forces.
2. Proportionality: whether the use of force is proportionate to the objective at hand.
3. Precision: whether we direct our forces at the right target.

Now, let us examine some of the controversial actions of the protestors, and see if Hongkongers can live up to these principles.

Self-Defence

A recurring example cited in the government’s propaganda against protestors is the attack on dissidents. For instance, the government condemned protestors for beating a taxi driver till unconscious. But what the government did not mention is that the driver deliberately rammed his vehicle towards protestors, severely injured a woman. This is attempted murder. And knowing that the taxi driver will not face any prosecution, protestors have no choice but to take the law at their own hands. A failure to act may result in more casualties. To date, the driver is still not prosecuted, and a pro-Beijing organisation did a high profile fundraising for the driver to “reward” such action, thereby provoking more violence. Was the protestors’ action proportionate? I will leave you to be the judge. But when the taxi driver is recovered in one piece and be rewarded for his crime while the victim is left broken, I personally cannot help but wax indignation.

Anyhow, I believe that in cases where someone conducted attacks on the protestors or take actions that will compromise protestors’ safety, we have to take proportionate actions to defend ourselves and deter such behaviours, especially in the absence of a legitimate law enforcing entity.

Vandalism

Knowing full-well that peaceful demonstrations are now futile, Hongkongers takes economics disruption — ideally at the expenses of pro-Beijing businesses — as the leverage. What started as a boycott now escalated to extensive vandalism. Here, the protestors demonstrated a great sense of precision — vandalising only the properties of selected organisations, with no theft and human casualty.

The most severely damaged targets are MTR metro stations. Why is it necessary to vandalised the stations? And why do we believe our destructions are proportionate? The MTR, with the Hong Kong government as the largest shareholder, has repeatedly shut down stations to trap protestors. The mayhem took place in the Prince Edward MTR station on 31st August sparked fierce controversy. Protestors were violently beaten up inside the station, and journalists and first aiders were denied entry. This incident was followed by a high number of mysterious protestor “suicides”. It was widely rumoured that there were civilian deaths as a result of the police’s actions. The MTR did not seem particularly keen to ease this public concern — they refused to release the CCTV footage and give us a full account of what happened. Hong Kong people deserve the truth. Convenience and ease of travel pale in the face of what is at stake. We have to take the necessary steps to procure the truth — the whole truth.

The police fired pepper spray at defenceless protestors inside the MTR. (Ring Yu/AP Photo)

Another frequently vandalised targets are the restaurants owned or franchised by the Maxim Group. Annie Wu, the heiress of the catering empire, has leveraged her positions of power to misrepresent the Hong Kong’s situation and defame the protestors at the United Nation. She also pressurised a secondary school to expel students who join the protest or class boycott, bringing political censorship and tyranny into the classroom. We are powerless when those with influences abuse their power to support tyranny and suppress human rights. The least we can do is to press economics pressure on the pro-Beijing force.

Starbucks Coffee — franchised by the Maxim Group — became a prime target for vandalism.
(Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

Admittedly, there are documented situations in which protesters have vandalised the wrong targets. Hongkongers, who are a pacifist at heart, have issued apologies for the mistakes and even in some cases helped cleaning up.

Clashes with the Police

In a de facto police state, violent clashes with the police during protests are inevitable. The police — who is supposed to stand on the side of the people — turned against the people with malice and cruelty. Now, the Hong Kong police are the public enemy.

Here, it is important to address a common rhetoric during the Umbrella Movement — not all cops are rotted. They are simply following orders from the high command and Beijing. Some may (erroneously) suggest that channelling our resentment towards the police is misguided.

Hannah Arendt, in her discussion on the order-obeying Nazi officers, coined the concept of the banality of evil. Arendt observes that not all Nazi officers are vicious at heart. Many of them are just very normal people, who simply executing orders without a soul and questions. Nonetheless, by dint of their mindlessness, they are culpable of imposing terror and atrocity upon the victims.

Perhaps, some Hong Kong police are just blindly obeying the authority. But it is precisely this mindlessness that sustains the terror permeated in Hong Kong. We must condemn the police force without reservation. And needless to say, we must defend ourselves in the face of countless human right abuses. Allowing the police to get hold of our brother and sister through inaction will be a recipe for human right catastrophe.

The police went as far as to attacking bystanders irrespective of whether they are protestors or not.
(Carl Court/Getty Images)

Hongkongers Stand as One

Our current movement is leaderless and decentralised. While this effectively prevents the government from dissolving the protests and political parties from hijacking the movement, it renders coordination difficult. The actions of undercover police pretending to be protestors add further complications. It will come to me as no surprise if some protestors’ actions are out of proportion. And what counts as proportionate is in itself a topic for much debate. But one thing for sure is that it is our responsibility to ensure our revolution to gear towards the right course. And we will not be divided easily. One key mistake of the Umbrella Revolution was that the pacifists are too keen to cut their ties with the more valiant protestors, resulted in serious fragmentation. But this time, we will collectively stand as one to shape our political legacy.

Our demands are loud and clear. The police force must be dismissed immediately. We must ensure the extradition law is legally rendered null and void. The government must revoke its label on our fight for human right as a riot. We must free all the unjustly prosecuted protestors. We must have an independent mechanism to investigate police misconducts. And ultimately, the much delayed democratic reform must be initiated, which is the only way to ensure the survival of Hong Kong’s autonomy.

The Global Battle Against Beijing’s Intolerance

Hong Kong’s battle matters not just to Hong Kong people, it holds the freedom of speech of the world at stake. While our morally bankrupted government and Beijing are engineering propagandas in a vain and ludicrous attempt to gain the moral high ground, the true nature of Beijing has revealed itself — its obsession with control and oppression is spreading its wing to the US, in the form of economic sanction.

The Goebbels-style propaganda — controlling information flow and repeating falsehood until it becomes the truth — is losing its force in the age of social media (unless of course you dwell in Mainland China where every sensitive information is censored by the Great Firewall). Knowing this full-well, Beijing now leverages its wealth and its billion-size consumer population to extend its Great Firewall and silence voices they dislike. China’s recent censorship on NBA for Daryl Morey expressing support for the Hong Kong in Twitter is a case in point. Should we succumb to a global empire that cannot even tolerate a tweet (and Winnie the Pool)?

It is to our delight that the US House of representative has passed the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, which will allow the US to censure conspirators of Hong Kong’s tyranny, through freezing their US-based assets and deny their entry into the States. This law is important for the ironic fact that many Hong Kong and China officials, despite their self-proclaimed love for China and hostility for democratic values, held citizenships in the US and the UK. Now, we need the bill to pass through the US Senate to be taken into effect. And we need the UK to take concrete actions in light of the gross breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

Protestors waved various national flags in the call for international support (Tyrone Siu/Reuters)

With our firm conviction for our unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Hongkongers are fearless in the face of Chinazi. We need the world to stand with us.


About the Author

K, a protestor and a graduate from the University of Hong Kong and the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Netizen K

Written by

Netizen K

I am a Hongkonger and a graduate from the University of Hong Kong and London School of Economics and Political Science.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade