Hong Kong Elections Assess Democracy Movement
On Nov. 24, Hong Kong took to the polls in record numbers to elect District Representatives and in the process helped assess the impact of last year’s pro-democracy movement. Though these officials only handle daily administration for constituencies of less than 20,000 people, the elections have attracted global attention. In 2014, college students protested China’s de facto control over the appointments of politicians in the territory, a policy established after Britain handed over Hong Kong to China in 1997. The nonviolent demonstrators created large traffic jams in the financial districts and faced retaliation from police. China proposed a plan to allow a direct, popular vote for the chief executive in 2017, but stipulated that the Chinese government would have to approve the list of potential candidates. Pro-democracy and establishment forces vetoed the proposal, leaving the traditional system unchanged.
Though some former protest leaders won seats, voters generally elected establishment candidates. The pro-Chinese parties conducted a “relentless professional campaign” against the democracy candidates, who generally lacked coordination and struggled to stand up for their cause. Though The China Post merits the results as a victory for Beijing, pro-democracy parties won 30 more seats than they did in 2011, unseating some veteran politicians. While these candidates did not win an outright majority, pro-democracy forces can begin to claim success in building up moment for their cause.
The pro-democracy forces see the District Council as a starting point to effect change on a local level and gain experience in the political realm. However, some view the movement as too dangerous, preferring the “stability and peace” promised by Beijing’s parties. Views of the demonstrations tend to break down on a generational divide. While the young have taken to the streets, the city’s older generation fears potential reprisals from China, similarly to the results of the violent leftist riots of 1967 in Hong Kong. The recent elections highlight not only an ideological gap but also differing opinions of practicality and history.
Forty-seven percent of eligible citizens voted, the highest number for any District Council election. Alice Wu, a political consultant, said the participation rate “sent a clear message to politicians and Beijing that political apathy is a myth … people care about politics and the way it is conducted.” Therefore, the elections illustrate what the pro-democracy forces posited all along: Hong Kong can peacefully and efficiently handle its own politics.
While the distribution of seats in the councils did not change drastically from 2011, the recent election marks the pro-democracy movement’s progression from the streets into mainstream politics. The results may provide these politicians an impetus to concentrate on full political autonomy, as well as economic issues and local concerns that traditionally fell by the wayside. The new, pro-democracy District Representatives therefore have a chance to legitimize themselves and shape the way the uncertain public views the movement.