Opportunists: "Awesome Taiwan moves, awful Hongkong dudes"Translated by Chen-t'ang 鎮棠, Title by Mayi Mason, Edited by Vivian L., Written by 翼雙飛 (Wing Wing)
|(Photo: Sherman Wong @ VJMedia)|
Young faces holding sunflowers, uncles and aunts giving out resources and materials to backup demonstrators, banners with charismatic slogans hanging up in the air. The protest campaign over a controversial China trade deal (CSSTA) that developed into an “Occupy Legislature” movement was also called "The Sunflower Movement", where sunflower symbolises passion and vitality. Quite a number of Hong Kong politicians and famous radio hosts travelled to Taipei to showed their support. We know because they posted selfies on Facebook. Our ‘leaders’ seemed to think Taiwanese student movement symbolised youth and romance, their protests must be peaceful and rational.
Behind each and every sunflower, there are something that these opportunists dare not say. Things like, students broke the glass door, removed and trampled the plaque of the Legislative Yuan right after they entered the government building. Is such criminal vandalism considered non-violent, "peaceful” or “rational"?
On 13 June, Hongkongers used bamboo sticks to pry open the door in our LegCo. These opportunists shook their heads and cried, "These are violence. They will scare off the public." Yet, when Taiwanese protesters broke down doors, they immediately rushed over there to "gain experience". They did not seem a bit "scared off" by the Taiwanese "thugs". Now people say they have double standards, they say, Taiwanese protesters did not wear masks to cover their faces. But when you google “Sunflower Students’ Protest” (or 太陽花學運), an image search will bring you photos of demonstrators wearing masks right on the first page.
If you show them these photo, they will say the type of masks are different; Legislative Yuan and LegCo are different; or Taiwan police and HK police forces are different.... You can name as many differences as you wish, but why are you determining an action being violent by the criterion of showing the faces or not? According to such logic, a robbery carried out with masks is a robbery, but it is not if the robber wears no masks? It is up to those opportunists to decide upon whether they are violent or not.
The delineation between violent and non-violent confrontation is not clearly set out, and will not be set out by these bounders. Why? Because if they do not set it out clearly, they can comment whatever they want. According to her, HK protesters are violent, HKers are then thugs; and even Taiwan protesters broke the door, they are peaceful and rational. Taiwan and HK protesters both stormed the legislature, but opportunists give Taiwan protesters a leg up, but a big slap in the face for HKers.
Besides radio hosts, some politicians, activists, columnists love to stand on "moral high grounds" to be back-seat drivers when Hongkongers are paying real efforts to fight against the government, and point their fingers at those "violent protesters", saying that confrontation should be "nice, peaceful and rational".
[Translator's opinion: Communist tyrant Mao once said, "A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another."]
Compared to ignorant housewives who often said "these radical people only know how to bark around", these "nicer people" are actually more sinful. They know the government is suppressing the public with their own authority, yet they still make use of their influence to make people think those who protest are "thugs". Such behaviour is no different to kicking the demonstrators when they are down.
To those "nice people" out there, please make it clear who you should be helping. Taiwanese people do not need you to take selfies there, and stop kicking others when they are down. SAR government will play its role in "condemning" such "thugs", they do not need you to speak for them either.