10 years, counting...

Being a Hong Konger living abroad, the most common question I get asked is whether life has changed much since the 1997 handover. My answer has been changing over the decade, perhaps more so than life in Hong Kong itself.

We live in an exciting time. Hong Kong is in effect a huge experiment (which probably make us lab rats)—a former British colony and now a Chinese city under Deng’s “one country, two systems” ideology—with an open hypothesis. But the excitement can perhaps be described as bittersweet. We as a city survived 150 years of bowing down to the Queen and submitting to a government led by her lords and knights. We also survived the shame inflicted and cultural sabotage brought by the white man. We were made to believe that we were subjects/subordinates of the better, taller, and wiser. And unfortunately many of us internationalized such propaganda and helped perpetuating the oppressive power structure. July 1, 1997 marked the end to this injustice and self-governance once again became within reach. For that we ought to celebrate; but the bitter aftertaste lingers on.

10 years went by; the bowtie replaced the bagpipes, but the arrogant face and way of governance stays unchanged. The city we call home is still under rules we did not ask (and vote) for; full democracy is still a fantasy we hear and talk about frequently but cannot realize just yet. Our post-handover leaders somehow think that they are now the better and wiser (but probably not taller), telling us when we need what and what we are just too naïve to be given. We are forced to rely on our blind faith, if there’s any left.

The first decade of HKSAR was more eventful than anyone would have anticipated: the 1997 Asian financial crisis, followed by the epidemics of bird flu and SARS shocked the entire globe. These BBC-worthy news stories coincided with other more “domestic” turmoil such as the ridicule of Article 23, the flop (and scam) of various government-sponsored infrastructural schemes (Cyberport, Disneyland, West Kowloon Cultural District, Ngong Ping 360, and our favorite—Star Ferry, just to name a few). To paint an even more pessimistic picture: pollution is worsening everyday, unemployment rate is up, so is the cost of living (Hong Kong is ranked number five in the world, while New York is #15), and the Gini index. Sure we are financially rich as a city, but the disparity between the wealthy and poor is only growing, which, as history reminds us, eventually shall lead to massive social upheavals; the various government-lead reforms (and re-reforms) are seemingly going nowhere, our social safety net is thin and flimsy (e.g., poor public health care system); the quality of our politicians as well as their “visions” is a joke; and perhaps the most devastating of all, the quality of our cultural life is utterly pathetic.

Hong Kong is probably the only metropolis I’ve seen/been that does not have a vibrant street culture. Street musicians are extremely rare and quality not guaranteed. In contrast, other “world cities” such as London, NYC, Montreal etc. all have audition systems to ensure that they are offering their citizens and tourists good performances. Our Museum of Art, both its architecture and exhibits, is provincial at best. Our three most widely read newspapers are better labeled as tabloids. And please name me one internationally known musician/band we have produced locally? Iceland with the population of 200,000 has at least half a dozen—clearly, quantity is not correlated to quality. Our public radio station is restrained by politics, defeating the purpose of its original existence; our school system is archaic and driven by blind guesses, as opposed to empirically driven theories; our clubs and bars are expensive meat markets (Shanghai’s babyface hit the world’s top 50 clubs list, Hong Kong, “Asia’s world city” has zero); our skyline might be impressive, but as individual buildings, they are better described as hideous (except I. M. Pei’s) and many of them remind us of Freudian complexes. The past decade has recurrently assured us that our city cares more about infrastructure than what is in them; hardware over software; institutionalized culture rather than grass root and local art; top-down rather than bottom-up.

Hong Kong, where are you heading?
One of the most telling and yet disturbing facts observable during the make-believe HK CE election was that our politicians have a fixation on maintaining HK’s financial status, at all cost. The rhetoric that was most prominent, coming out from the mouths of both Mr. Tseng and Mr. Leong, was their vision on how to ensure that comparative advantage of our city will perpetuate. We ought to strive to become, as they have decided, Asia’s financial center with a world-class state-of-the-art cargo hub, IT and services. Asia’s world city, Donald’s wet dream.

This vision of prosperity may warrant our support but it becomes lamentable when it is made the number one priority, sacrificing other needs of our city. Financial success should be viewed as a bonus of good governance, which should emphasize on people’s overall well-being. Shouldn’t a governing body first care about its people before it meddle the financial health of others? Hong Kong is often praised as the freest economy in the world. But it has a bad record in economic disparity. It seems that the well-worshiped model of trickle down economy is no more than an excuse for the rich to take advantage of the poor. Essentially, we are governed by the rich and powerful and they don’t seem to care much about the less fortunate. Or at least that seems to be the case thus far.

But there is hope
In 2003, we witnessed 500K people demonstrating peaceful for freedom and democracy. Thankfully we have made the July 1 march a tradition that is both highly symbolic and a good reminder of our identity as a city—a city of china. It should be no surprise that the best that comes out of a place, be it a nation or a city, is more often than not results of something that is spontaneous and not institutionally organized. The most memorable movements and music events and art are product of a public with a conscience, with a conviction, and with hopes and dreams.

Instead of more hardware, what our city needs is a lot more non-actions from the government. We need to unlearn our phobia for social disorganizations so that there will be more freedom and space for people—the true steward of the city—to use their creativity and skills. We need less ready-made commodities that do not contribute to the long-term economic success but a more affordable, organic city to LIVE in. That means we probably should stress less when our GDP growth is staggering, that our inflation rate is dropping, that buildings are not reaching their occupancy rate. A “decaying” city, when positioned properly, is conducive to great revitalization because it encourages bottom-up entrepreneurship. To have a vibrant “world class” art scene, for instance, we need audiences and an affordable climate and freedom, not more galleries and museums and cultural district. Sure Vienna has a museum quarter, but the best “cultural events” occur on the streets; the best artists (not necessarily the most famous) are attracted to a heterogenous city in where they could live and interact with each other.

What can I do for this city?
Perhaps the most important thing we as a city must do is to accept ourselves as who we are. As one of the many metropolitans in China (the population of Shanghai will soon be our three-fold, the population of Nanjing, an arguable second-rated city, is pretty much identical to ours), perhaps we need to humble ourselves and realize that we need not fight to become number one, or more bluntly "Asia's world city". We just couldn’t afford to sacrifice more of our heritage and potential for an ideal that does not necessarily benefit the common people.

We as a people, hence, must reevaluate what is important and reconsider our way of life. Once we've made our priorities straight, we could then demand our government to govern accordingly. Let’s hope that changes—life style, aspiration, vision etc.—is what we see as HKSAR reaches its adolescence.

Christian Chan
July 9, 2007
New York, USA