Voters in two Hong Kong constituencies delivered the wrong results again yesterday – even after the Chinese Communist Party twisted the law to expel their previously elected representatives and, where necessary, pressured civil servants into barring replacements from the ballot, and went to the trouble of organizing the usual stunts and thugs.
Presumably, Gary Fan and Au Nok-hin will at some point be ejected from the Legislative Council for incorrect thinking, and the people of New Territories East and Hong Kong Island will be told to hold yet more by-elections. We will carry on doing this until you vote for the clueless shoe-shiner zombies we tell you to vote for.
One of yesterday’s other by-elections was for a functional constituency packed with white-elephant infrastructure beneficiaries – fairly easy for the United Front to win. The other was Kowloon West, where the impressive and high-profile pan-dem Edward Yiu lost to the drab/DAB pro-Beijing stooge.
Optimistic pro-dems might blame this result (and the narrowness of the pan-dem victories over the lame Bill Tang and Judy Chan) on the low turnout. That was partly because it was a nice day for hiking, partly because the sexier candidates have all been disqualified, and partly – I suspect – because some citizens don’t see the point. The turnout could have been even lower if Bill and Judy hadn’t been so repellant and annoying they were asking to be slapped.
The pan-dems really need to ask why they are doing this. What is the purpose of taking part in increasingly rigged elections to an already rigged and mostly toothless legislative body? Why help Beijing legitimize this charade?
Indeed, what is the point in being pro-‘democracy’ when the CCP has made it abundantly clear that Hong Kong will not have representative government? You might as well be pro-unicorns. The pan-dems, jointly or as sub-groups, need achievable – or believable – aims (perhaps, I would wildly guess, to do with people and their lives rather than abstract constitutional structures). As things are, they are destined to end up being the two ‘No’ votes and the three abstentions against the 2,958 in favour.
Which reminds us that Hong Kong is a side-show to the main event up in Beijing. Some of the faceless commenters quoted in a lengthy SCMP article seem to suggest that the Party should be separate from, but not have supremacy over, the State. But one says: ‘Xi Jinping and the party leadership hope to dispel lingering doubts over the constitutional legitimacy of one-party rule’, which sounds like a roundabout way of saying ‘…the constitutional legitimacy of not having constitutional legitimacy’. The piece can summarized as: Yes, it’s a dictatorship.