The coming of the election period again｜Yu Pinhai

The election period is here again.

I often reflect on the purpose of elections. Isn't it to solve social problems and improve people's lives?

Other imaginations, especially indulging in a certain ideology, can only make people confused.

This time the Legislative Council election is quite special. Some people think that it has not moved in the "progressive direction" as they understand it, and they are even more reluctant to accept that the central government is using a different path to correct the chaos of the Legislative Council.

Whether the change will "success" or not, everyone has different opinions.

I am willing to accept the change with a positive attitude. The focus is not on the number of directly elected seats, but whether it can solve Hong Kong's political dilemma, especially for deep-seated problems.

There is reason to believe that this change will allow the Legislative Council to focus on solving problems-it amplifies the role of the election committee, thereby ensuring the effective operation of the parliament, and changing the old model of the political colosseum.

In fact, the Legislative Council has never been the leader in governance, let alone the decision-making body. From the colonial period to the present, Hong Kong has been "executive-led." It is impossible for the Legislative Council to override it.

That being the case, why would anyone imagine it as the highest authority in Hong Kong?

Why Panmin failed

There are several phenomena worth considering in this Legislative Council election. First, the pan-people no longer have the enthusiasm to participate in the election. This is not only because they cannot pass the qualification review, but more importantly, they cannot stand the verbal violence of radical groups on the Internet.

The past few years of moderate and pan-minded people have suffered catastrophes, which is unbearable, but politics is like this.

As the so-called one mistake, the whole game is left behind. In the face of major social transformation, if you cannot adhere to the principles and only know how to follow the trend, you will inevitably be eliminated by the situation.

Since Panmin cannot support the leadership required for the drastic social transformation, it has nothing to do with social changes and can only "rest."

On December 7, 2017, the Legislative Council discussed the amendment of the "Rules of Procedure". During this period, the pan-democratic members went to protest before the ban.

(Photo by Li Zetong)

I have known many pan-democratic friends for decades. I have always appreciated their persistence and care for the grassroots. I also yearn for democracy and freedom like them.

However, I also bluntly denounced the pan-people's long-standing politicians in the field of people's livelihood, and even blindly turned to violent resistance, and bluntly pointed out that their prejudice against the central government is doomed to failure.

In the past few decades, Panmin has strengthened Hong Kong people’s emphasis on electoral democracy. If they use the same efforts to promote fair and just social distribution, the government may have invested more resources in people’s livelihood, and today’s society will not be so torn apart. .

In fact, everyone agrees that society must be reformed, but focusing too much on the electoral form is blind, regardless of priority.

Social and political reforms can be advanced at the same time, and the political system must serve social reforms and improve the lives of citizens.

Ignoring people’s livelihood, and blindly calling for "universal suffrage," the result is that society loses focus.

What's more sad is that the discourse of the pan-democracy has been distorted to the point of absurdity, which confuses the relationship between freedom and democracy and national sovereignty. "Rehabilitation of June 4th" has become "Down with the Communist Party of China", and "one country, two systems" has become "self-determination and independence."

Many people feel sorry for Panmin's not actively participating in this election, and even angry.

Unfortunately, it's natural, so you don't need to be angry.

Hong Kong’s peaceful and non-political groups are not the "filial and virtuous grandchildren" of the pan-people. They don’t need to be a concubine for the rapid political collapse of the pan-people in recent years, because politics itself is realistic. If politicians solve problems, they will be accepted. They can’t even solve problems. Deteriorating society and living environment can only be eliminated.

The establishment needs a new atmosphere

The Panminist has retired, what will the establishment do?

The establishment has enjoyed a lot of resources, but has always lacked the ability to discuss politics. No wonder everyone thinks that they are "raised" and are just "chess pieces."

To be fair, many of the established members I know are extremely imaginative and combative. Perhaps it is the outdated political ethics that restrains them.

Since the "Xia Luo New Bureau", the situation has changed. "Electing talents and appointing talents" has replaced "loyalty waste." Hope to bring a new atmosphere of political discussion.

On October 27, 2021, the one-year extension of the Legislative Council has also come to an end, and the establishment members take a group photo in the Chamber.

(Photo by Li Zetong)

Recently, some news has focused on how the establishment candidates coordinated, speculating whether the Liaison Office of the Central Committee is "strategizing."

Amplifying this kind of speculation is meaningless, and can only satisfy populist thinking-in past many elections, a third person "coordinated" among the pan-democratic parties and even initiated "primary elections."

Since the Pan-Democratic parties representing different interests can accept the informal election process to exclude or nominate certain candidates, why does it become a fuss to hear that the Liaison Office is coordinating among the various parties in the establishment?

The Liaison Office of the Central Government is the representative of the central government stationed in Hong Kong. It is not surprising that it communicates among different organizational groups, and it is even the responsibility.

What everyone should ask is why the established political parties cannot coordinate their interests and positions on their own and need help from others in communication.

In the past, although the establishment had an absolute majority in the Legislative Council, they were scattered, representing the interests of the business community, belonging to professional teams, and representing the grassroots on their own hills.

They should have been united on key issues, but this is not the case. In many livelihood matters, there is a chaos that individual interest groups override social welfare.

We have seen labor organizations "kneel down" on issues concerning labor rights and be "led" by business councillors.

We don't know why the establishment is in harmony with each other, but since it lacks independent opinions, it is not surprising that it is coordinated.

The chief executive should be the organizational leader

When it comes to the establishment, one cannot fail to mention the SAR government. As a part of the establishment, why has it lost its combat power in the huge social turmoil, and cannot steer the course of Hong Kong and stabilize the people's hearts?

Some people think that the chief executive is neutral, but I can't agree.

The chief executive must belong to the establishment and is the incumbent leader of the establishment. He should maintain close ties with the establishment parties and act as the coordinator of the overall interests of the establishment.

The Basic Law does not accept that the Chief Executive belongs to a certain political party and is affected by political party politics, but it does not mean that he must stay away from political parties and cannot communicate more with individual parties.

The vice chairman of the CPPCC from Hong Kong can also play a similar coordinating role.

When the new Legislative Council election arrives, it is of great significance to think about the loss of the pan-democracy and the establishment of the system, especially since this election is closely related to it.

In the face of the riots, the pan-people and the establishment were completely chaotic. In the end, the central government used a piece of "Hong Kong National Security Law" to stabilize the overall situation.

This result is really ironic. Over the past two decades, the central government has been waiting for Hong Kong to legislate, but we cannot complete the work and we have to let the central government take action.

This just shows that both the pan-democracy and the establishment are too accustomed to colonial governance, unable to understand the meaning of "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong and a high degree of autonomy" and do not understand what "one country, two systems" means.

Once you get used to letting others do your job, you will lose your habit of speaking in the end.

With the implementation of the "Hong Kong National Security Law" and the revision of the election system, the central government has put forward high requirements for good governance and good governance in Hong Kong.

(Xinhua News Agency)

The national constitution clearly states that all powers in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region are granted by the central government, and the Basic Law also provides comprehensive and specific provisions for central powers.

In the 2014 political reform dispute, the central government used the term "total governance" to emphasize this fact, but at the same time insisted on Hong Kong's implementation of "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong and a high degree of autonomy."

There is no contradiction between the two. However, some people insist on their own definition of "one country, two systems" and ignore the nature of the relationship between central and Hong Kong.

That being the case, why should the central government care about your misunderstanding?

The Pan-Democratic Party’s prejudice against the Mainland and the central government has misled many Hong Kong people. They are too superstitious about Western interpretations of China, lack independent thinking and judgment, and have created many unnecessary conflicts.

The establishment is also in a similar situation. They do not know their role in "One Country, Two Systems" and do not know how to communicate with the society. Dissatisfaction with the work, can not believe that the establishment can communicate on their own, or coordinate their positions from the perspective of public interest.

These appearances allow some people to take the opportunity to spread false theories that the central government undermines "one country, two systems" and denies "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong."

Let me ask, does the central government, which has "full governance", need to "intervene" in Hong Kong affairs at such a turning point?

Since the Central Government can use its existing power to establish a national security law for Hong Kong when the Legislative Council is unable to perform its responsibilities, why is it "cautious in words and deeds" on small matters?

The Legislative Council could have resolved the "rabbit" problem on its own. Why did it wait until the Liaison Office was forced to criticize it publicly?

If Hong Kong’s operating mechanism fails, the Central Government is of course obligated to intervene. It has also intervened in due course. It is an exaggeration to accuse it of excessive intervention, and to say that it intervenes secretly is a random interpretation.

Hong Kong is a place under the rule of law. Illegal behavior should never be tolerated, even to the point of being out of control. Hong Kong’s establishment forces are like corpses. How can the central government who bears the ultimate responsibility stand idly by?

In hindsight, the pan-people may hope that the central government or the Hong Kong government will stop the deterioration of the riots in 2019 as soon as possible, so that they will have more people continue to participate in politics today.

The Liaison Office of the Government has its own division of labor

To this day, it is estimated that no one underestimates the tools and methods the central authorities have in handling political conflicts in Hong Kong, and no one doubts its determination to maintain national security and social stability.

From any angle, Hong Kong’s system cannot tolerate political actions that challenge the sovereignty of the central government.

The Chief Executive, as the chief executive of the Special Administrative Region who is responsible to the central government, and the Liaison Office of the Central Government in Hong Kong, they are all part of the establishment. They have no suspense. They have the responsibility to "lead" the establishment group under the Basic Law and the principle of "One Country, Two Systems". , Including from a policy and political perspective.

The establishment should represent the broadest community of interests in Hong Kong. It is not neutral in terms of policy. It must stand on the side of the interests of the majority of citizens and cannot be swayed by any interest group, especially vested interest groups.

Politically, they are even less likely to be neutral. They must be on the side of the country. They must not only safeguard national sovereignty, but also safeguard "one country, two systems". Accordingly, they must maintain the precise implementation of "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong and a high degree of autonomy", which will harm any damage. Hong Kong’s stable and prosperous political behavior, especially illegal behavior, must be stopped immediately and forcefully, including the responsibility to stop any naive and speculative political behavior as soon as possible.

If the government and the Liaison Office of the Central Committee of the People's Republic of China can exert their leadership earlier and start their words and deeds, some people will probably not be in jail.

The Liaison Office of the Central Committee held a brainstorming session earlier with the participation of representatives from many think tanks in Hong Kong.

(Profile picture)

The government and the Liaison Office of the Central Committee are an important part of the establishment. It does not mean that the established political party is equivalent to the government or obeys the Liaison Office of the Central Committee, nor does it mean that the established party must support all government policies.

The government, the Liaison Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the established political parties absolutely have the role of mutual balance and division of labor, and the established political parties can also tolerate a variety of different views and interests.

As the head of the government, the chief executive should "lead" different interest classes for specific matters, including political consultations with different organizational groups.

During the negotiation process, the Chief Executive should play a "leadership" role, but this is not to say that the establishment should follow the instructions.

As for the Liaison Office of the Central Committee, as the "liaison department" of the central government in Hong Kong, it should work with Hong Kong's establishment forces to uphold the Basic Law and "One Country, Two Systems" at a higher level.

Some may question why the "opposition" is excluded from the discussion.

In fact, Hong Kong is not a parliamentary system, and there is no opposition in the British system.

Another example is the United States. If Democrats become president and Republicans control Congress, who is the opposition?

In the final analysis, classifying certain politicians as opposition parties is just slogan politics. It is a peddling of political mercy and a habit of electoral politics.

The establishment and the pan-democrats are just groups of different political opinions. They have different opinions on certain policies, but they also agree on many policies.

Wang Guangya, the former director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office, once clearly believed that many pan-democratic politicians were part of the establishment.

In the final analysis, whether it is an establishment is not a legal issue, but a political issue. Some people have always hoped that they will always be the "opposition", but this can only be said to be the character and ideology of individual politicians, or even political design.

For the list of candidates for the Legislative Council, please refer to the "Hong Kong 01" election website.