Guardian Columnist: Hong Kong Protesters Motivated by Economic Jealousy

In
The Guardian, Martin Jacques makes the case that the
greater context for the
upheaval in Hong Kong is more complicated than it appears to
many Westerners, but overplays his hand when he dismisses the
pro-democracy complaints against the Chinese government as being
essentially a red herring.

A prominent intellectual and noted expert on Chinese
affairs, Jacques lived in Hong Kong for years and even wrote a book
called “When
China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth
of a New Global Order.”

He correctly bristles at the misconception that Hong
Kong enjoyed democracy under British rule and that China is
revoking the privilege of universal
suffrage. Indeed, the British never allowed
citizens of Hong Kong to elect it’s governors, which were appointed
from “6,000 miles away in London.” Why he finds it preferable for
Beijing to select Hong Kong’s leaders from 1,200 miles away is
unclear.

Jacques credits the Chinese for honoring the continuation
of the British traditions of “rule of law and the right to protest”
since taking over sovereignty of Hong Kong in 1997, as evidenced by
the current protests. But he makes no mention
of the 1989 crackdown in Tiananmen Square, the

subjugation of Tibet or the
ethnic Uighurs, or any of the Chinese Communist Party’s
infamous
authoritarianism.

He thinks far too much has been made of the protesters’ demands
that China honor its stated committment to “universal suffrage” and
to allow Hongkongers to directly elect their chief executive.
Rather, he suspects the protesters are motivated by economic
jealousy of mainlaind Chinese, who’s fortunes have soared in the
past two decades while theirs have stagnated:

Herein lies a fundamental reason for the present unrest: the
growing sense of dislocation among a section of Hong Kong’s
population. During the 20 years or so prior to the handover, the
territory enjoyed its golden era – not because of the British but
because of the Chinese. In 1978 Deng Xiaoping embarked on his
reform programme, and China began to grow rapidly. It was still,
however, a relatively closed society. Hong Kong was the beneficiary
– it became the entry point to China, and as a result attracted
scores of multinational companies and banks that wanted to gain
access to the Chinese market. Hong Kong got rich because of China.
It also fed an attitude of hubris and arrogance. The Hong Kong
Chinese came to enjoy a much higher standard of living than the
mainlanders. They looked down on the latter as poor, ignorant and
uncouth peasants, as greatly their inferior. They preferred – up to
a point – to identify with westerners rather than mainlanders, not
because of democracy (the British had never allowed them any) but
primarily because of money and the status that went with it.

Much has changed since 1997. The Chinese economy has grown many
times, the standard of living of the Chinese
likewise…Understandably, many Hong Kong Chinese are
struggling to come to terms with these new realities. They are
experiencing a crisis of identity and a sense of displacement. They
know their future is inextricably bound up with China but that is
very different from embracing the fact. Yet there is
no alternative: China is the future of Hong Kong.

Jacques is entitled to a worldview based on his own experience,
research and analysis. But it takes some bold projection to assume
that a
17 year-old protester risking life and limb against riot police
isn’t really interested in participating in democracy, he’s acting
out, frustrated that mainland Chinese are more prosperous than they
were before he was born.