How to Democratize Hong Kong

Hong Kong has never been a democracy and it is certainly not one now. It has, in fact, become decidedly less democratic in the last few years. And that is a reason for the friends of a democratic Hong Kong to feel down-hearted. But there is no need for despair. There is need rather for a strategic retreat and for tactical rethinking.

Democracy is, after all, more than a governmental system; it is, first of all, an ideal – one  that  is never fully realized but can only be approximated. It is the ideal of a group of people who together rule themselves. This is most easily pursued in a small group of mature, informed, and like-minded people. But states and, in particular, modern states are not like this. There are vast numbers of citizen of all ages in all kinds of condition, with degrees of knowledge or ignorance, who are anything but like-minded. The ideal of democracy thus becomes easily confused. And, worse, we lose sight of what lies behind it which is a conception of human nature as capable of a proud self-determination.

No political order, whatever its arrangements may be, can be considered genuinely democratic unless it is animated by this understanding of human nature and by the consequent ideal of shared self-rule. In order for a society to be democratic, the ideal of democracy must, in other words, be a live idea to its members. They must, moreover, be willing and able to relate to each other in terms of this ideal. They must be capable of a democratic practice not just at the level of government but in their daily interactions. Only in this way can a democratic politics be most fully realized.

There is today no democratic politics in Hong Kong. But it is still possible to foster the idea of human self-determination, to engage in democratic practices, and to nurture the ideal of democratic rule.  To this end it is all important that there still exists in Hong Kong today the opportunity for association. The time for protest marches may be over; the electoral and legislative process has been stripped of its democratic elements; policy is no longer made by Hong Kongers themselves but by patriots in Beijing. There are, however, still ways to nurture the spirit of democracy and that has to be the task now for dedicated Hong Kong democrats. There are a number of ways this task can be pursued. Here are six thoughts on this topic.

  • Associate with others dedicated like you to the exploration of democratic ideals. Democracy is a social ideal built not only on the notion of self-rule but also that of mutual support. You can have democratic thoughts when you are alone. But you cannot be a democrat on your own.
  • You don’t need to fret all the time about Hong Kong or Chinese politics. Devote yourself, instead, to the study of other times and places: the development of democracy in ancient Greece; the French Revolution and its aftermath; the founding of the American Republic. There are important elements of democracy to be found even in early Chinese history. Look for them.
  • Study political philosophy. Reading Aristotle’s Politics and Ethics might be a starting point. Combine this with Aristotle account of the democratic constitution of Athens. Read Hegel’s Philosophy of Right together with Marx’s critical notes on that book. Read Hannah Arendt. They all open your eyes to other and broader ways of thinking about politics. Authoritarians want you to believe that there is no alternative to the status quo. It is important to see how wrong they are.
  • Learn from those who have lived under authoritarian regimes how to say things without exposing yourself to danger. One can write or speak about ancient Egypt and mean the here and now. Make the spaces between your words do the work. Be eloquent with your silences.
  • See your opponents not as oppressors, which they certainly are, but as victims of a narrow and demeaning view of themselves, of what it is to be human. Pity them, not for the constraints they impose on the liberty of others, but their own inner lack of freedom.
  • Above all, make sure that you and your group rule themselves in a democratic fashion. Be aware of the danger of being undemocratic in the pursuit of democracy. Practice democracy locally, in relation to those next to you. Make this the ferment that will eventually transform all of society.
  • Finally, remember that all this takes time (A generation? A century?). Be patient. In the drought my nasturtiums died in the garden. But now the rain has brought them back and we can suddenly hope to see them bloom again.

The Triumph of Institutional Nihilism: Hong Kong’s new M+ Museum

On the outside Hong Kong’s new M+ museum has all the charm of a cigarette box; inside it is as heart-warming as an oversized car garage.  There is nothing intimate, personal, attractive, alive, or memorable about this building. Many years in the planning and fantastically expensive, it is a structure without recognizable architectural merit put into an anonymous development area, the work of an over-rated firm from Switzerland. Herzog & de Meuron is the current go-to place for the kind of people who commission new museums across the globe and it is responsible for a series of architectural disasters such as San Francisco’s De Young Museum and the Vancouver Art Gallery. The Hong Kong museum now joins that group. It is part of a new institutional genre representing the full marketizing of “art” and “culture” for the sake of governments and corporations who see a need to adorn themselves, for millionaire and billionaire “benefactors” who are trying to enhance their financial and reputational status, and for “art professionals” set on making a decent living from all this. M+, like its sister institutions, is in fact nothing but a monument to a cold institutional nihilism.

M+ is the dream project of Hong Kong bureaucrats with no special taste for art but determined to put Hong-Kong on the “artistic” map. According to the bloated promotional verbiage the new building is already “among Hong Kong’s most iconic landmarks, both monumental in its architectural form and radically open in its position in the urban landscape.”  Iconic, certainly not; and does the phrase “both monumental … and radically open” mean anything?  Anyone who has actually stumbled through the concrete wilderness of the area will equally wonder about the implausible claim that “the West Kowloon Cultural District is one of the largest and most ambitious cultural projects in the world.” The new museum is, in reality, meant to bolster Hong Kong’s increasingly dubious claim to being “Asia’s world city.” It is intended to draw tourists who have otherwise not much to look at in this city where so many traces of the past have been obliterated or ruined. It is also meant to confirm the city’s claim to being an international art market. And in this description, it is the words “international” and “market” that matter. What Hong Kong’s thoroughly parochial bureaucracy has produced has little to do with art. There is a real art scene in Hong Kong but it is far from this museum and not large enough to establish a local identity on which a living museum could be built. The M+ that Hong Kong has ended up with is, in effect, no more special than K 11 or IFC 1 or any other of its many shopping malls – the only difference being that it is unlikely to draw the same crowds.