Eldon-Online

Protest - Debate vs Destruction

Perhaps somewhat surprisingly for someone who retired from full time employment almost 15 years ago, and who has been described as being “in his winter”, I still receive lots of approaches from journalists for a comment, even from some who try to disguise themselves as being journalists, particularly when there is something controversial going on in Hong Kong. Recent events have proved no different, and neither has my stance.

I have always tended, even when working full time, to leave political commentary to those better qualified than I am. Matters affecting business and the future are however different, and that is where I find myself at present. My own global associations - i.e. where I have lived, can be split pretty much into three distinct geographical areas - 20% Middle East, 30% UK and 50% Asia (mostly Hong Kong).

I am therefore saddened by what is happening in Hong Kong today where I have spent most of my life and I worry about the future of the protesters - particularly the young. Job security for them must be a genuine risk for the future if all goes badly, and the chance that they may be worse off in future as a result of their protests than they might otherwise have been, does not sit happily in my thoughts. As I suggested in a previous Blog, about hindsight, and perhaps what the protesters have overlooked is that if China had assumed full control of Hong Kong on 1 July 1997 life could already be very much different from today.

The genesis of the current protest movement was discomfort over the introduction of an unpopular extradition bill. The manner of its introduction and the lack of ensuing debate could have been avoided perhaps, and I can understand the level of discomfort that ensued. But that bill has largely been dismissed; not to the satisfaction of the protesters for sure, but that initial issue has been overtaken by the protesters calling for full democracy in Hong Kong (of which more later), or even independence from China as is being called for by some. This is something that was not on the table before July 1997, it was not on the table after, and was never likely to be on the table in future. But consider this. Look at the significant developments that have been, and still are, taking place in the Greater Bay Area. An area of intense and continuing economic growth. Then look at some of the major Chinese companies that are profitable and increasingly global. I don’t need to name them as they are largely household names; not the sort of thing though you would have expected from an apparently repressive, business-unfriendly state. But then, what do I know? I only have my experience to go on.

Just as an aside, I have seen a comment today that is being widely reported in the media apparently from a “victim of the police brutality". The comment from the victim said the police should “concentrate on upholding the rule of law”. Now that is a sentiment with which I fully agree - but what are they supposed to do when people are breaking the law and damaging property? Does upholding the rule of law mean they have to stand still and be pelted with bricks and everything else that comes to hand? Please!

Moving on there seem to be those in Hong Kong who see Britain as the defender of Hong Kong’s rights to democracy. A democracy, lest they forget, that did not find its way to Hong Kong under British control although in all honesty I have no idea whether they tried to introduce it, but that’s another story. However, now take a look at Britain today where the Prime Minister (elected by 0.3% of the population), has decided to shut down Parliament for three weeks in advance of Britain leaving the European Union. He says, of course, that this is not designed to thwart attempts to debate the rights and wrongs of leaving the Union without a deal, as seems likely, but if that is not the purpose then I am having difficulty in finding people who can explain why he is interfering with the democratic right to debate. If that is the sort of democracy craved in Hong Kong, then good luck.

I am in favour of protests that make a valid point and that have been properly and seriously thought through. In this regard, China too has been a supporter of protests in the past. In the 1960s and 1970s when I was signing documentation for the import of goods from China which called for the provision of insurance covering such eventualities I would receive notes from China saying they could not provide such insurance because they believed in "strikes, riots and civil commotion". 

The world is already in a difficult place - there are major protests in the United Kingdom because of the "coup" attempt to close the democratic process of parliament and then the attempts taking place in mid-September to close Heathrow airport by climate change activists. But it does not have to be that way - and especially in Hong Kong. It needs some rational thinking, some cool heads, dialogue and a realisation of what is realistically possible and what is not; also, a real understanding of the actual concerns of the protesters by the administration.

Failure to debate is likely to lead to a destruction of the future.

Populism, Hypocrisy and Morose Delectation

Best intentions aside, constant travelling eventually takes its toll on the ability to put down on paper the thoughts I would like to share - although I have been doing rather a lot of talking lately instead of writing. Regular readers of this Blog will be aware that I write to express my own thoughts - or pass on the wisdom of others (with due accreditation), and it takes time. So yet another excuse for a delay, but have had a couple of days to get some thoughts on "paper" resulting in this .... with another to follow very shortly. I suspect though that in spite of much encouragement from friends and other (sometimes unexpected) readers I will have to give up the Blog-writing eventually especially while I keep on working and struggle to find time, or actually properly retire, but by then anyway my thoughts will become even less relevant than they are already! :-)

But there we are. If you got this far I can only assume that the phrase "morose delectation" caught your eye and you are wondering whether I might explain what I mean by it. Sure - in time!

The particular headings of this Blog relate to issues that have been concerning me for a while now - before the more serious escalations that have taken pace in Hong Kong in recent weeks, and a note on that later.

We are currently riding a wave of populism in politics - where else - but the problem with waves is that they often crash to the shore and disperse. Doing things for the benefit of the public at large is a good thing, surely, so politicians appeal to the mass of people who see the often short-term benefits of the policies they espouse and then on which for a variety of reasons they fail to deliver. But with populism also seems to come isolationism - all these "isms" - tinged with a sense of "mine!" Brexit is a case in point, which again I shall allude to later alongside some comments on Hong Kong, but the popular view demonstrated by the noisy Brexiteers is that leaving Europe is the "will of the people" and must be followed. In simple terms yes; it was the will of 51.9% of the population who voted to leave, against the 48.1% who wished to stay - but without the voice of 27.8% of the population who didn't vote. Hardly a ringing endorsement although the leavers - and now the politicians who want to get re-elected - think it is the popular thing to do. And by the way - I don't have a vote so I could not influence the result one way or the other, although watching it from a distance I was intrigued by the amount of mis or lack of information being peddled. It's a mess whichever way you look at it!

To hypocrisy - and this is the direction in which the world is travelling. You may say it has ever been thus, but with social media perhaps it is harder to hide it now but along with populism there seems to be a greater level these days of hypocrisy. Say one thing - do another, or as a saying I used to hear in my youth went - "do as I say, not as I do". But today it's things like positively nailing your colours to the mast about climate change and carbon footprints - but go jetting off in a private aircraft to and from the event and elsewhere. Or spending the taxpayer's money on renovating your home and then closing the doors so the public cannot see inside. And it extends to others in public roles. Those who push for legislation against things like drugs and are then found to be users themselves. Sports are not immune - witness those who set up foundations to help the less privileged, which is a noble pursuit but who have done so on the back of their name as an elite performer but whose success came from their clever physician - not their own ability. It seems to me that populism and hypocrisy are pretty close bedfellows. People who express one idea, but who then realise that to be "popular" they must change their views whether they buy in to it or not, are truly hypocritical. 

And then we move on to morose delectation. The Germans have one word for it - and I have not been able to find a single one-word example in English, but basically it is the English equivalent of schadenfreude, or the enjoyment you derive from the discomfort of others. You have had recent examples of President Trump making totally unnecessary comments about the downfall of others - his most recent target being Teresa May when he was talking about the relationship with Britain and previously his unwarranted comments of insult about the Danish Prime Minister, and the unnecessary swipe on the senator in the US whose house was the subject of an attempted robbery; a senator who Trump just does not like.

The problem?  Sadly, there are large swathes of people out there who just love all this stuff. The Populism, the isolationism, the "me" and "mine" syndromes where we want to lock ourselves in behind our own walls and not believe there are other people out there. The bullies, the racists, and the religious fanatics - in the midst of a  global economy that seems to be slipping slowly into recession which will only heighten the resolve of the people to be nasty to those they don't like. Where their sense of, albeit unjustified, entitlement will come to the fore. These are all worrying signs for the future. We need to have a world that is more understanding than it is at present - and it's up to us to have strong leaders who can deliver much more than uncompromising aggressive words; leaders who lead because they want the world to be a better place for everyone - not just for themselves and their immediate families and supporters.