The Morality of Hong Kong: an Opinion Piece

When he was jailed during the Birmingham campaign, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote a letter. A newspaper containing a statement by eight clergymen from Alabama was smuggled into the hands of Dr. King and shortly after reading the statement, he began to write a response. Years later, King wrote about the letter in his book: Why We Can’t Wait²:

“[the letter was written] on the margins of the newspaper in which the statement appeared while I was in jail, the letter was continued on scraps of writing paper supplied by a friendly black trusty, and concluded on a pad my attorneys were eventually permitted to leave me.”

Why was Dr. King so keen on writing a response to the newspaper? What had the clergymen written that impassioned him to write what we now know as the Letter from Birmingham Jail?The clergymen had written a letter in which they criticized the Birmingham campaign for being too bold. They represented a facet of the American people that considered sit-ins, protests, and general civil disobedience as too disorderly. Their letter was framed as a call for unity in a divided country– the case for negotiation and reconciliation was made. So, what happened?

What happened was that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered one of the hardest, most brutal rebuttal pieces of rhetoric in human history.

Of course, the Birmingham protestors had considered negotiation– they HAD negotiated. As Dr. King points out, there had been a dialogue with the authorities of Birmingham. The fact of the matter was simply that the authorities had failed to deliver.

What is fascinating about the letter is how Dr. King embraces disorder. Civil disobedience is a polarizing ideal. The letter doesn’t minimize the unrest that the Birmingham Campaign had brought about– to the contrary, the letter elevates that tension: King anoints it. What makes the rhetoric of Dr. King so fantastic is his insight into the nature of change and the fundamental principles of revolution. Dr. King makes the case that social tension is an important and necessary process of social change. A simplification of Dr. King’s argument would be that tension elevates social issues to the very top of our collective consciousness until the issue is no longer deniable– self-evident. Dr. King’s armament of theological, historical, and moral argumentation pierces through the clergymen’s letter. However, as we venture through the turn of the century, does Mr. King’s philosophy stand up? Let’s take a look at Hong Kong.

To contextualize³:

·After an incident involving a Hong Kong national in Taiwan, the Extradition Bill was introduced in April 2019.

·It is believed that China attempts to exert influence over Hong Kong. The case is made that the Chinese government attempts to establish cultural and societal narratives in Hong Kong. A way in which the Chinese government may exert control is by arresting and (with very dubious legality) extraditing Hong Kong citizens that threaten the CPC’s narrative– such was the case of a bookseller, as reported by the New York Times⁴.

·Concerned over the autonomy of Hong Kong and the apparent threat to their freedom of speech, a great number of Hong Kong citizens took to the streets protesting the bill.

·The bill was withdrawn, only to be brought back later on. The protests continue as of the drafting of this article.

This year, many news outlets have reported on an escalation of violence in the Hong Kong protests. An article by the BBC⁵ from October 6th, 2019 reports on how the protests in Hong Kong have evolved into riots. The fact of the matter is that protests have been violent. Private property has been damaged. Public property– like the metro station– has also been wrecked. The city has become the battleground for an urban turf war. The battle has been fought with umbrellas and bricks, tear gas and batons– at least until recently, when reports of police firing live rounds and rubber bullets emerged⁶. All of this violence forces the world to set its eyes on Hong Kong, just as Dr. King would have wanted… right?

The moral engine driving forward the Hong Kong protests is incredibly complex and multi-faceted. Dr. King’s core protest philosophy, the creation of tension, is found amongst the foundation of the Hong Kong protest movement. Undeniably, the leadership in Tamar– purposefully or not– has been negligent to the needs of the people of Hong Kong. The protestors believe that the only way to validate their cause is civil disobedience– and it very well may be; the government seems unreasonable enough to incite protest. Nevertheless, in Dr. King’s letter, it is clearly expressed that the Birmingham campaign was to remain peaceful. The nonviolent nature of the civil rights movement was a staple of its identity. It would seem though, that the hand of the Hong Kong protestors has been forced to the point of upheaval, but is it justified?

The only legitimate answer to that question is that it’s complicated.

On one hand, China does have a legal claim to Hong Kong. The handover of Hong Kong from the United Kingdom to the Chinese government occurred in 1997, under the leadership of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. However, there was a catch: Hong Kong would retain some of its progressive liberties, at least 50 years after the handover⁸. A rebuttal to the legal argument could come from Dr. King’s: Letter From Birmingham Jail. In his letter, Dr. King makes the distinction between moral and immoral laws. As a man of religious faith, Dr. King believed in a moral authority that surpassed that of any institution– such moral law would be upheld above any other. Those transcendent, universal principles in which Dr. King believed, are what we now call Human Rights.

The protestors in Hong Kong fight for the basic principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness– yet, at what cost? The city has slipped into a state of uncertainty and life for the average Hong Kong citizen is incredibly difficult. The divide between institutions and people has never been greater as the city is wrecked in the battle between two radically different narratives.

I can not judge or praise the Hong Kong protesters. Doing so would be making a claim and a disservice to a very complex situation. The only thing I can think of is what I would do if anyone would ever threaten my democracy.

Sources:

² King, Why We Can’t Wait. 1964.

³ “The Hong Kong protests explained in 100 and 500 words.” BBC, 14 Oct. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49317695. Accessed 24 Oct. 2019.

⁴ Palmer, Alex W. “The Case of Hong Kong’s Missing Booksellers.” The New York Times Magazine, 3 Apr. 2018. The New York Times, www.nytimes.com/2018/04/03/ magazine/the-case-of-hong-kongs-missing-booksellers.html. Accessed 24 Oct. 2019.

⁵ “Hong Kong protest march descends into violence.” BBC, 6 Oct. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49949548. Accessed 24 Oct. 2019.

⁶ “Hong Kong police fire gun and use water cannon on protesters.” BBC, 26 Aug. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49465836. Accessed 24 Oct. 2019.

⁷ Cheung, Kin. Protesters set fire to a shop on October 20. CNN World, www.cnn.com/2019/06/09/world/gallery/hong-kong extraditionprotest/index.html. Accessed 25 Oct. 2019.

⁸ Ramzy, Austin. “On Hong Kong Handover Anniversary, Many Fear Loss of Freedoms.” The New York Times, 1 July 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/world/asia/ hong-kong-china-handover.html. Accessed 25 Oct. 2019.

This piece was originally published in The Jag student newspaper