Thoughts and Photos: July 1st 2005. March for Democracy

Awaiting a democratic Hong Kong

I wasn’t sure if I wanted to go. Not because I don’t believe, but because I know walking will not change things.
 

The first protest was the first step. This is a much longer, slower process that a one day walk.

But I turned up because we had to. I knew that the numbers will be small. Which is all the more reason to go.
 

I stood waiting for the crowd. I knew I wanted the shots of the people walking towards us.

And when the protesters arrived. I remembered why I was there.
Sometimes it feels lonely to think this, believe this, want this.
Sometimes it feels it’s just me and a few others behind a computer.

 

 

But on this day. I am reminded I am not the only one.

 

The crowd was hot and tired. There was not the ebullient quality of the
first protest in 2003. This is no longer a public out pouring of
frustration. It wasn’t the first time we had gathered since SARS. We
are no longer angry. It is no longer the political awakening of a
people. It is those of us who are in for the long march, who remain. We
walk to make a point.

 

In the last year we have been battered by a series of illegal blows to
the basic law. We had been told we will not be given democracy in 2007.
We watched the skewed election bring a new chief executive. He was
voted in by 800 people hand picked by the Chinese government. No one
was eligible to run against him. I felt like I lived in a small African
country whose name I could not pronounce. Growing up I never understood
that fake elections was something in my own back yard.

The crowd was smaller and I felt a sense of frustration towards the
organizers. This year they had  a "theme," I suppose every year there
was one. This year was "democracy for Hong Kong," and "Stop Collusion
between business and government," which I take to be against big
business. I know it’s an important aspect of what is going on here,
from the tunnels, to land sales, to reclaiming the habour and west
Kowloon cultural center. But it’s such an esoteric idea, so removed
from every day life.

I can’t understand why the civil front wouldn’t fight for minimum wage.
I think if we fought for the minimum wage we would have a lot more
people. Who cares about big business when you can barely feed a family.
I understand that if you stop the collusion between government and big
business, it would mean minimum wage, but that’s five steps ahead. The
point of the protest should be short and to the point, not a five page
essay. I feel the "theme" showed up the movement’s often educated and
middle class slant. Out of touch with everday people.

 

 

What we need to tackle this through education, through explaining,
through telling people why "returning the power to the people", Wan
Ching Yu Men," is important. We don’t have political education in Hong
Kong, most people don’t truly understand what universal suffrage is,
and why having it will make a different. We should not have to hit the
streets to ask for the Chief Executive to step down, we should know
there is a system to vote him or her out when the time comes.

 

But although much was made of only 20,000 plus people attending this march instead of the 500,000 from 2003. It’s not comparable. That one march was a show for dissatisfaction toward the government and anti-article 23. This was for universal suffrage. This was a different protest, different demands.

 

It wasn’t until 2003 people like me, even thought we could possibly achieve that goal for ourselves. This protest was 20,000 more people walking for democracy than in 2003.

 

And we shall go on. In different more constructive ways of doing this. I am not disappointed by the numbers. July 1st is only symbolic. It’s all the work that is being done in the other 364 days added up that counts.

 

Photo Set: March for Democracy: July 1st 2005.