Hong Kong is never about Democracy

Historically, Hong Kong is never about Democracy. It is about a refuge, a haven for industrious people to engage in business and enterprise to live well. No politics.  Under the British rule for 150 years, the Hong Kong population was disinterested in the politics of the island colony as long as they were free to do business and look after themselves. The govt of the day could be corrupt or whatever, the people could be second class citizens, but as long as they were left alone, both could coexist under a system of non interference. So what if the Hong Kong people were subjects of the British Empire, bowed to the King and Queen of England? They would bow to anyone as long as they can have a good life. Hong Kong people are practical people, non political but economic animals, at least until the farcical democracy shafted down their throats by Patten, the last British governor of the island in its dying years.

When China took over Hong Kong, it wanted to let the Hong Kong people continue to do what they want, continue to prosper and live well. They thought this was good for the Hong Kong people and for China as long as Chinese sovereignty is recognised. China even pumped in money and resources to make it happen and Hong Kong is better and richer than before.

The recent Occupy Central has changed the political landscape. The Hong Kong people now want not only economic prosperity but independence from China. They do not regard themselves as Chinese, at least those at the demonstration and those supporting them from a distance, but as Hong Kongers. They want independence from China.

The economic animal has morphed into a political animal. This is inconceiveable and intolerable as far as Beijing is concerned. This is worse than the positions taken by Taiwan and Tibet. Both accepted that they were part of China and only demanded for autonomy. Are the students and their backers real in pushing for an independent Hong Kong? Remember what Chen Sui Bian and Lee Teng Hui tried and how closed they were to a war with China.

In the case of Hong Kong, there is no justification whatsoever to talk about independence. Are the Hong Kong people really wanting to trade their economic freedom and good life for this thing called Democracy and independence from China? Nothing is impossible, so they said. But in this case, this is Impossible.

Do the students and their supporters believe that they could hold China to a ransom with Western govts and media egging them on? How foolish! China would do another Tiananmen if they dared to push the independence boundary. Another Tiananmen Square would not be too many when the risk is a broken up China and a people that would be oppressed by foreigners, ridiculed by foreigners and becoming the Sick Man of Asia once again.

The stake is too high and Hong Kong is too insignificant to China’s game plan. Hong Kong can be sacrificed and China has many options other than Tiananmen to deal with the protesters. Youthful idealism is one thing, old wolves in sheep clothings must be sensible enough to know that this is not a game they can win, and the consequences are too severe and would go only one way. They have no cards to play. There is no end game. China would just switch off the power supply.

The Hong Kong people would not only lose their democracy, they would lose their economic freedom and good life. Hong Kong would be shut down and turn into a reservation for the Red Indians similar to those in the US. It will no longer be a haven for free wheeling enterprises, an economic marvel, a jewel of rich capitalism.

Businesses will collapse, property prices will collapse. People will want to flee the island when the doors are shut. What are the students and their behind the scene supporters fighting for? Political power and control? They have all the economic freedom that they want and many democratic rights that the mainlanders did not have. What more do they want? Poverty and ruins? Do they know what they are risking?

This is not about Hong Kong but about the well being of China and the Chinese people.

 Kopi Level - Red

mysingaporenews wishes all our Muslim brothers Happy Hari Raya Haji

The damn solutions

It has been recognised and acknowledged as a natural truth that today’s solution is tomorrow’s problem. And we have many examples of our great solutions that have turned bad, turning into big problems and liabilities. The most commonly quoted solution of the past that has created many deep seated problems today must be the Stop At Two policy. We are now suffering from its consequences today, some 40 odd years later. When it was introduced, the problems it was trying to solve was serious, a growing jobless population and an economy that could not create the jobs to meet the demand. And further harsh and ruthless followup measures and policies were added to reinforced the Stop At Two policy, like no priority for school places for the third child, ligation, abortion, fines etc etc. Some of the victims of these policies are still feeling very angry with what they had to go through.

We have in the course of the last 40 years introduced many policies that were good in the beginning but starting to turn foul or becoming a problem today. The CPF schemes and its related schemes, housing allocation policy, pricing and asset enhancement policies, are now hounding down on the govt.

High economic growth, high inflation and high ministerial salaries are now a burden to the govt. And of course the high population and high influx of foreigners, high prices of car ownership policies, high medical costs and a long list of other policies that are causing the govt to have ‘one head and growing twice as big’.

And we are still pushing for high economic growth and high population growth. This is very troubling. The problems of yesterday’s solutions are being repeated with the same zeal to implement new policies and solutions. They only think about how good the solution is without bothering to look at how bad it can become. If they have the foresight, to think ahead a little more, many of today’s problems would have not happened or would be lesser and not so severe.

Yes, economic growth is important and growing a bigger population is a must for economic growth. If only economic policy is so simple. Again they are not looking at the consequences and problems from these solutions. Did they know, did they bother, did they think about them, talk about them, or they simply do not want to talk about them and do not want to think about them. Tomorrow’s problems are best left to tomorrow’s leaders to deal with, and tomorrow’s people to live with.

Just announced a few day’s ago that they have a new logo for the Army Volunteer’s Corp. Another nice creation. Did they think about the problems and consequences? Every solution and policy is a double edged sword. The frightening thing it seems, they are only interested in hearing the good stuff. No one wants to know about the bad stuff or want to tell the people about the bad stuff. They are OPP, Other People’s Problems.

Is this the way to go? You want economic growth you must want big population? You want a strong defence force, you must want volunteers to carry arms. They are inseparable, just as inseparable as every solution comes with its associated problems. You cannot have your cake and eat it. The govt has to be seriously looking at the problems that can come about with their solutions. They cannot runaway from them.  The Volunteer’s Corp is a very dangerous animal that is being created if any jokers, citizens or not, can join. It can turn into an enemy of the people. Would the terrorists be eyeing it as their training ground?

Where is the solution should the Volunteers Corp turns bad? Where are the solutions to problems caused by high economic growth and high population growth? No, no problems?

Kopi Level - Red

The pictures that tell the mood at HLP

This was the moment Teo Ser Luck was mobbed by his fans/protesters as he started his round. Notice the boy sitting in the foreground, oblivious of what was going on? What did it say?

Ser Luck doing his round. Notice how calm and comfortable he was?

These two pics of children dancing were taken a few minutes after the 'heckling' incident. Anything unusual? Any tension?

This is the famous mound of Hong Lim. Speakers need not bring their own stools or boxes to stand on like in Hyde Park.

These 3 pics are the friendly protesters demanding for the return of their CPF money. There were more younger people coming to join them. Would these people heckle the children?

Is America ready to be Number Two

This was the topic for discussion in the CNA programme Perspective hosted by Teymoor Nabili on  prime time 3 Oct 14. The panel guests included two American dons, Prof Thomas Magnanti and Assoc Prof John Donaldson, the American Ambassador Kirk Wagar and Manu Bhaskaran, a CEO of a consultancy. This is a good programme to watch not so much as to the subject matter but the temperature generated and how sensitive the subject was to the American dignitaries present. Watch the repeats on CNA

From the very beginning the position of the Americans was clear. Teymoor used the Great Roman Empire as an example of everything that goes up must come down.  He hit a wall. No such thing as America being Number Two to a rising China. Even if China becomes the biggest economy, so what? What they avoided saying was that they carried the big guns and could turn the table anytime they like it and China would be history. That’s the message.

It is interesting to watch the nuances and the body language of the American panellists, especially the Ambassador. I could not believe that an academic discussion on an ‘iffy’ question could cause so much uneasiness and sensitivity. And Teymoor, one of the best presenters you can find, was doing his best to balance the tension and you could sense that he too was affected by it. But being an old hand and very adept at what he was doing, he did manage to control the situation very well without upsetting anyone, but still not able to hide the discomfort in him.

The topic was about a hypothetical case in the future, what if the economic statistics are correct and China surpasses America and becomes Number One economically, or the Number One superpower. Of course everyone can dispute on the definition of what Number One means as the overwhelming American military might is unquestionable for a long time to come. The American economy could slow down, but the American expenditure on military would always be maintained to keep this pole position unchallenged and unsurpassed. To the Americans, this is a non issue. They would ensure it would not happen.

Who would ever think of the Soviet Union being what it is today? Who would ever imagine, even 30 years ago, that China could transform itself from a poor backward communist state to challenge the Americans for the pole position in international affairs? Some crystal ball gazers would say that the rise of China is inevitable, like the fall of Singapore as equally inevitable. The chips are all in place for the rise of China and the fall of Singapore. Somehow everything is in place not by intent but it just happened.

Whether China would overtake America as Number One is a moot point as no one would agree with the definition. But the rise of China as a superpower, as an economically and technologically successful nation is on the card.

And it is best not to discuss such a topic with the Americans. It rubs the wrong way and nerves are extra sensitive, like special needs children.  America will never be Number Two! China can never dream of being Number One. No way, not in the near future, not in the distant future.

PS. The Chinese were given a pleasant surprised when they were shoved up the be the Number Two when the Soviet Union self destruct. They too could not believe that they could be Number Two so fast, without any effort on their own.

Kopi Level - Yellow