When people ask me if I’m from China, I happily say yes. China is my country; it is where I am from. Based on that alone, most of my friends from home would automatically assume that home would be somewhere in Mainland China, maybe Beijing or Shanghai. But no—I’m from Hong Kong.
More than a handful of times, I’ve heard my friends reject the idea that they’re from China, instead saying, “No, I’m from Hong Kong.” In fact, my brother once filled out a form writing:
City: Hong Kong; Country: Hong Kong
That day my brother got a history lecture.
“Sir, Hong Kong was handed back to China in 1997.”
Sovereignty was transferred from British colonial rule to the People’s Republic of China in 1997 under the conditions that Hong Kong would be governed under Hong Kong Basic Law for the next 50 years. This allows the citizens of the city to enjoy a certain level of political freedom which their brethren in China do not. For the past 15 years, Hong Kong established itself as an international financial hub. The Basic Law allows the city to have a capitalistic economy, permitting private companies and corporations to develop and grow.
But despite their economic freedoms, the people of Hong Kong are still fighting for complete democracy. This is because, instead of a free and fair democracy, our Chief Executive—much like the U.S. president—is elected by a 1,200-member committee of elected and selected people from 28 functional constituencies.
After this year’s controversial election, where Leung Chun-Ying won with a majority of the votes, Hong Kong is embroiled in yet another controversy with the proposal of a revised “National Education.” Potentially taking effect in 2015, the new curriculum is based around the values of the PRC, specifically those of the Communist Party. Proposed textbooks describe the current Chinese government as a “progressive, unselfish and solid ruling bloc,” worrying parents who fear the curriculum will brainwash their children.
Just a day before the Hong Kong Legislative Council Election, tens of thousands of peaceful protesters gathered outside the government headquarters demanding that the education plan be withdrawn. Leung forged a tentative compromise by allowing schools to decide whether or not they want to opt into the program over the next few years. However, the debate shouldn’t be about whether National Education should be enforced, but rather, what it should consist of.
“One Country, Two Systems”—that was the model for the reunification of China and Hong Kong originally proposed by Deng Xiaoping. The two systems are working, as China still uses the socialist system while Hong Kong has its own capitalist economic and political systems. However, what about the “one country” part?
Yes, the CCP is always pressuring the Chief Executive, trying to put a handle on the pace of democratic reform in Hong Kong. As a Hong Kong citizen, I, too, am angry with the CCP. I am by no means a Communist, and I am also not pro-China. But I’m still from China. Just as I am angry at what other countries have done to China in the past, I am also angry at how the CCP has inflicted pain upon its own people, on my own ancestors.
Recently, unrest has spread to Hong Kong regarding the perceived aggressive posturing by Japan over the status of the contentious Diaoyu Islands. In this issue, Hong Kongers have united with those in the Mainland in supporting the “unity of our sovereign soil.” This is the greater Chinese identity that I wish to be developed in Hong Kong. To construct a unified Hong Kong-Chinese identity, we must go beyond collective pains or historical gains and forge a positive cohesive narrative fueled by a common curriculum. For this reason, a unified national public education system for China and Hong Kong must be established. The debate ought to be in the details.
Understandably, Hong Kong residents are worried about the central government’s influence on the island—frankly, I am too. But we have another 35 years to worry about the political changes before the Hong Kong Basic Law expires. During this time, we should keep fighting for our own democracy, while still embracing our Chinese identity. Hong Kongers should be angry when Japan rewrites the tragedies committed against the Chinese people during World War II. We should also be proud of how far China has come financially and, to certain extents, socially.
The discourse surrounding the National Education movement shouldn’t sink to clamor about brainwashing; it should instead focus on uniting China and how to best merge Hong Kong’s students into the fabric of Chinese society. We are “One Country, Two Systems”—that is what Hong Kong prides itself on. We do not equate the Chinese Communist Party with the country. We know the difference.
