Democracy fighters’ new demand: punishment

Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement takes another curious twist. I should probably be paying closer attention, but why, exactly, are Benny Tai and his two Occupy SCMP-BennyTaiTrioCentral-founding colleagues ‘surrendering’ to the police? The trio announced this intention yesterday at a press conference that seemed to have a slight Last Supper undertone to it.

There is no warrant out for their arrest, and if the cops wanted them they are not exactly hard to find. Apparently, they will confess to ‘organizing an unauthorized assembly’ (or should that be ‘authorizing an unorganized assembly’ – sounds more accurate). A former prosecutor guesses this could get them either a slap on the wrist or five years in the slammer, so at least we can be clear about that.

Of course, they could be charged with wasting police time. Fortunately for them, there are no laws against overly strenuous publicity-seeking, gratuitous self-sacrifice, willful over-complication of political campaigns, or taking oneself a teeny bit too seriously.

On the other hand, we find today it is illegal to bomb bores, which you would have thought should be compulsory, or at least optional. What would a world without bores look like? Here’s a tantalizing glimpse…


SCMP-PairLeftBombToday is a rare, but nonetheless irritatingly, busy day, so we swiftly conclude with something that can only be described as out of the fifth dimension. Yesterday, I mentioned late pro-democrat Szeto Wah. Today we get this thing about the two guys in Lion Rock Country Park trying the hard way to acquire some pork. The connection: Szeto used to roam the countryside blasting away at boars with a hunting rifle, as part of a regular (legal) cull. Cosmic, or what?

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Democracy fighters’ new demand: punishment

  1. Tiu Fu Fong says:

    There’s a lot of distance between a lot of protestors and Scholarism & HKFS. Significant parts of the Occupy movement are increasingly talking about using violence against police.

    “CY will dream nostalgically of when he only had to deal with Scholarism and HKFS”.

    The movement is far from unified, as convenient as that would be for the government, media and everyone else to conceptualise the whole affair.

    Perhaps we’ll see Black Bloc-style action.

  2. PD says:

    So you do read NSCMP, where the idea of wasting police time was raised late yesterday.

    Last Supper undertone? The theme of betrayal, possibly engineered by the betrayed, or Mary Magdalene creeping undetected into the picture, or simply the end of an era?

    We deserve to know.

  3. Neils Bore says:

    If I had a bomb I would put it under Joshua Wong’s tent !

    If I had another one I would put it under the table next time the three idiots sit down together

  4. Joe Blow says:

    The real Last Supper was the beginning of something big that has been going on for 2000 years and is now bigger and mightier than it ever has been. From that point of view, let it be the Last Supper. Perhaps the beginning of the end of the CCP and the liberation of over 1 billion people.

    On a slightly less ambitious note: Occupy Central is the start of a long and tireless battle in the run-up to 2017. And I am going to enjoy every bit of it.

  5. gumshoe says:

    @neils bore

    Good lord. We got a live one here, folks.

  6. Irritating git from South Lantau says:

    “Of course, they could be charged with wasting police time.”

    I suggest the “Three Musketeers” be charged with wasting their own time.

  7. Stephen says:

    I confess I’m struggling with how these three coughing up alleged crimes to the cops is going to advance the cause of Democracy in this town ? Perhaps cleverer commentators than I could explain?

    Why is it that Hong Kong’s (admittedly hopelessly outgunned) Pro-Democracy Politicians so are shite. Fractured into multiple little parties with none of the leaders able to garner widespread support. Unify, elect a good hero and you should be able to run rings around the Central Liaison Office and its mouthpiece, The Hong Kong Government. You’ll win the argument, might get better governance, might stick one up the tycoons orifice but you won’t get democracy until the CCP is a footnote in history.

    Very sad but perhaps inevitable what’s happening to Hong Kong.

  8. Cassowary says:

    Of course, bombs will make everything better. Violence for peace! Lies for truth! Triads for law and order! I assume it all makes perfect sense if you wear a blue ribbon.

  9. Sergei says:

    I read an interview with Benny Tai a while back. He said he has been through a wild emotional roller coaster ride since Occupy movement began.

  10. Jason says:

    @Neils Bore: Are you our long-time missed RTP and/or Anon?

  11. Maugrim says:

    Stephen, I suspect the three are doing do to officially create an alibi for themselves, ie, that they had exited the occupation before hotter heads went further.

  12. reductio says:


    After detailed textual analysis I conclude it doesn’t seem like anon, (very touchy feely but not clumsily crass, I’ll grant her that). Bit short for RTP, and again too clunky. No, I think we have in Neils Bore a new fellow traveler to have washed up on the Isles of Hem from the dark continent of China Daily.

  13. Scotty Dotty says:

    Agree with Maugrim. They’ve seen the shift from high ground to stupid to violent, and are protecting their reputations

    Joshua et al (The Hungry Musketeers?) seen the same thing and they’re also trying to protect their brands

    Everywhere you look, Occupy is on the glidepath to disaster.

  14. pcatbar says:

    Nail on head, Stephen!

  15. Cassowary says:

    Hong Kong’s pro-democracy politicians are so rubbish because of perverse incentives.

    The system forces them into a little box where all they can do is cooperate with what they see as an illegitimate system, or refuse to cooperate. They have no policy influence. They wield very little actual power. They can’t propose any bills. All they can do is say yes or no. If you cooperate, you are a sell-out. If you don’t cooperate, you will be frozen out altogether. So they have an unresolvable dilemma.

    Back in the 1980s and 1990s, aspiring pan-dem politicians in Hong Kong got taken seriously by wearing a suit, looking respectable, and following the rules. This dates back to the Cold War days when social activists wanted to avoid being branded Communist agitators by the colonial authorities. Unfortunately, the old-school democrats’ 3 decade-long failure to yield results has spawned a succession of increasingly radical micro-parties.

    The radical micro-parties can take advantage of the bizarre system of proportional representation in the geographical constituencies which mathematically favours small parties and short candidate lists (I think David Webb has a great old article explaining how). It was introduced after the Handover, and at the time, its designers thought that this would help the DAB and assorted United Front “independents”. But as the democrats became increasingly fractured, the system began to favour Long Hair, Wong Yuk-man, and assorted banana-throwers. Electorally, there is no incentive to stay united. You’re better off splitting and running on your own ticket than being the number 2 candidate on somebody else’s list.

    Stupidity ensues.

  16. Incredulous says:

    In Hansard today “At the heart of the Chinese argument, conveyed to me at the meeting, is that the joint declaration signed by China and the United Kingdom is now void and only covered the period from the signing in 1984 until the handover in 1997. Given that the Chinese Government gave an undertaking that the policies enshrined in the agreement would remain unchanged for 50 years, this is a manifestly irresponsible and incorrect position to take. It is a live agreement, which is why the Foreign Office rightly continues to produce its six-monthly reports on Hong Kong. Britain is a party to over 18,000 international treaties and agreements. To suggest that we have no right to assess the performance of our counter-parties to such agreements is ridiculous.” Sir Richard Ottaway (Croydon South) (Con) 2 Dec 2014 : Column 164

  17. Gooddog says:

    Hemmers – I fear you have buried the lede….

    China’s progression towards a pure Orwellian totalitarian state accelerates…

  18. Knownot says:

    “Hello. I’ve come for an arrest.”

    “What is your crime?”

    “I don’t know. What do you suggest?”

    “Here is a list. Take your pick.
    If you like one, mark it with a tick.”

    “I don’t see any. But this is Hong Kong.
    Surely I’ve done something wrong.
    I encouraged those poor kids to demonstrate.”

    “That is something we can tolerate.”

    “I’m a thinking criminal.
    My crime is abstract or subliminal.
    Here are my wrists. Please lock me away.”

    “Not today.”

  19. PD says:

    reduction, Caution is necessary, as many of these comments are simply by George Adams. Joe Blow is, for example, very probably him and Neils Bore and anon could possibly be.

    The way to spot them is (a) anyone who comments on the NSCMP site (b) anyone who agrees or disagrees with a known GA persona (c) anyone whose Chinese or US styles doesn’t quite sound right and (d) any words, memes or themes that GA is known to like.

  20. Joe Blow says:

    I have been called many things in my life, but nobody ever called me G. Adams.

    I am NOT George Adams. Try again, PD.

Comments are closed.