The Hong Kong 'umbrella revolution' pokes at China's conscience

The Hong Kong protests are a plea for China to live up to a promised ideal of universal rights, and not ‘rob the common man of his purpose.'

Protesters listen as Joshua Wong (not pictured), leader of the pro-democracy student movement, speaks to the crowd in Hong Kong Oct. 1.

Despite his iron grip on a one-party state, Chinese leader Xi Jinping sometimes uses friendly persuasion rather than threats or punishment in his drive to create what he calls the “China Dream.” Just recently, for example, he spoke to cadres of the Communist Party and reminded them of this quote from Confucius: 

It’s easier to rob an army of its general than it is to rob a common man of his purpose.

It was perhaps to appeal to that persuasive side of Mr. Xi that tens of thousands of people in Hong Kong have gathered in peaceful protest – with one express and collective purpose of their own. The demonstrators are asking that Xi reverse a recent party decision that only it will choose the final candidates for a coming election of the city’s next leader.

They may have hoped that Xi would come to consider all the people of Hong Kong as possessing natural rights and civic equality, and thus be able to define their future through democratic means and universal suffrage – including open selection of candidates. 

The defining of a “China Dream,” in other words, would not be done through a top-down diktat by a ruling party with no electoral mandate. Rather the people, through polite persuasion and consensus-making, would create a “Chinese Dream,” rooted in the ideal of treating people with respect and dignity, not as inferior or dupes.

Like the Arab Spring protests of 2011 and Ukraine’s uprising in 2013 – or even the 1989 pro-democracy protest in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square – the demonstrations in Hong Kong (dubbed the “umbrella revolution”) have stood for the view that each person is fully endowed to join with others in ordering a free society through peaceful, civil means.

While Hong Kong has a special status within China, it also still acts as its main financial center and a conduit for foreign goods and ideas. In its agreement with Britain for the 1997 handover, Chinese leaders promised to keep a policy of “one country, two systems,” or allowing Hong Kong to be self-governed for 50 years. Now that promise is being broken, and puts in jeopardy Beijing’s reputation for upholding other agreements.

The world has a strong stake in Hong Kong’s crisis – and whether the most-populous nation will now move toward democracy. Despite the Communist Party’s rule since 1949, China has lurched from one vision to another, usually at the personal whim of each ruler. Xi, for example, has done away with the consensus-based model of politics of Deng Xiaoping. Deng upended Mao Zedong’s anti-capitalism vision. 

Without the legitimacy of electoral rule, today’s leaders in Beijing are faced with revolts over pollution, inequality, and, most of all, corruption. They lack the corrective mechanism of democracy. “If corruption cannot be effectively controlled, the people will eventually no longer recognize [the validity] of the ruling party,” stated a recent article in a party journal, Seeking Truth.

In another speech to the party, Xi once summed up the reason for the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. “Nobody came out to resist,” he said of the communist leaders.

He might well have added this: It is easier to topple a dictatorship than to rob the people of their common purpose.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to The Hong Kong 'umbrella revolution' pokes at China's conscience
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today