CHAPTER 3 HONG KONG’S CASE
3.7 U NDERSTANDING THE C OLLECTIVE A CTION IN H ONG K ONG
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
On September 29, with just few thousands of people supporting the demonstrations, the police decided to finally clear out the area by closing all exists and forcing demonstrators to go through police lines. The OCLP and HKFS reported this to the citizens, (which in this case appealed to their sense of community due to their identity as Hong Kong citizens) and thousands arrived only after two hours of the first report. From this moment the protest would grow to one of the biggest demonstrations in the Hong Kong’s recent history (Li A. , 2014).
Since that moment the demonstrators stated their clear objectives and aims. Their ultimate goal is to achieve open candidacy for the Chief Executive (CE) post and its direct election from the population by 2017. The idea behind the direct election is to break the power of the committee conform by the tycoons, oligarchs and pro-Beijing figures. The second demand they had, was the resignation of the current CE Leung Chun-ying, as he had favored Beijing in electoral reform of the past August. The protestors officially do not recognize the figure of Leung Chun-ying as they reject his election through the Electoral College78 (Iyengar, 2014).
3.7 Understanding the Collective Action in Hong Kong
Occupy Central with Love and Peace (OCLP) movement follows clearly the methodology described by McAdam’s dynamic interactive model. Since the government in Beijing put in question the possible elections of Chief Executive via direct vote, the leaders created specific protocols. The leaders of this group made a “manifesto” and a “manual of disobedience” available in their official site79. In their “manifesto” this group clearly declares that their objective is to “strive for the election of the Chief Executive by universal
78As mockery the protestors refer to the CE Leung Chun-ying as “689”, for the total of votes he received from the Electoral College that to their perspectives only follows the interests of the tycoons, oligarchs and pro-Beijing figures.
79 For further information please Access: http://oclp.hk/index.php?route=occupy/eng
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
and equal suffrage in 2017” (讓愛與和平佔領中環., 2015). Furthermore, in their “manual of disobedience” the leaders declare that they are a nonviolent movement. As they argue, violence only provokes more violence and fear hence they reject it. This manual establishes that their members must strictly follow the non-violence principle.
Furthermore, although the OCLP movement was organized, had clear objectives and behavioral guidelines, the rise of its popularity fluctuated (see Figure 5). In fact what made the OCLP group gain stronger support was the triggering fact that the police started clashing with the students. This led people following the students to join the OCLP, when it became clear that the students were allied with the group. This fact increased the size and reach of the mobilization.
Figure 5. Universal suffrage via OCLP?
Source: (University of Hong Kong, 2014)
Moreover, just like the Sunflower movement, this movement would gain its representative symbol (umbrella) when the police began removing people by force. During first sit-ins the security forces clashed the students several times, for protection some of the members used their umbrellas. The movement readapted their “interpretation process” through their attribution of “threat” and created a collective identity by taking the umbrella a distinctive garment and tool of the group. Thus, they implemented a “new repertoire” (an
anti-gas-‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
shield) to create an “innovative collective action” against the “environment uncertainty” to keep a “sustained contention”. From this fact the symbol of the movement would emerge.
One additional element attached to the meaning of the umbrella would come from 2003 the movement. At that time the umbrella was also used as a symbol, when holding it with the arm completely stretch above the head, which was linked to the statue of liberty created by Chinese students in the Tiananmen Square in 1989. Thus, in the recent protests all these elements converged into the real meaning of the umbrella (讓愛與和平佔領中環, 2015; Li A., 2014)
It would be through this symbol along with the outfit (black and yellow), also accompanied by a yellow ribbon providing the sense of mourning for democracy, which would express a clear sense of unity among the group (Kaiman, 2014). All together these elements, as Tilly mentions, showed the worthiness, unity, the numbers, and commitment of the leaders and their constituencies (WUNC) that lasted from September 28 till December 14, 2014 (Buckley, 2014).
In regards of the goals pursued there are several factors to take into account. The principal goal of the protestors has turn from a medium to a long-term objective threatening its maintenance. Beijing accepted to postpone the date of the election of the CE by 2017 to dwindle the political opportunities leading to a big challenge from the OCLP, Scholarims and HKS. Nevertheless, as McAdam argues, at the end this could be manageable if the union behind the group is the Hong Konger identity.
Thence, following this criterion, it can be argue that the rising identity80 of Hong Konger, which is in direct contrast with the PRC’s control over the territory, provides the collective actions a clear opportunity to keep pushing democratic claims. The additional challenge would be to propose a coherent method to achieve this goal that might lead to two possible
80 This idea of the rising identity is based on the facts presented previously and also the demographics of the segment of the population that identify as Hong Konger, which are the young generation.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
outcomes: a) a political alliance with pro-democratic parties or, b) the creation of a new political party to “institutionalize” the claims.
As seen in the past June 18, 2015 Beijing followed through with the only option it could consider: give Hong Kong residents the right to vote but only for those pro-Beijing candidates. Therefore, legislators and citizens rejected the “reform” provided by the PRC on that same day. Moreover, the increasing attempts of the Chief Executive to sell the idea that pro-democracy legislators and activist are provoking that the majority of people would not have right to vote has further infuriated the society. Although the large protest that paralyzed Hong Kong took place more than 9 months ago, the society keeps demanding democracy, defending their identity and requesting self-determination. (The Guardian, 2015)