2024 RT Amination Banner.gif

China Daily

HongKong> Opinion> Content
Tuesday, November 03, 2020, 10:30
An open letter to the HK Professional Teachers’ Union
By Ho Lok-sang
Tuesday, November 03, 2020, 10:30 By Ho Lok-sang

To whom it may concern,

As the preeminent trade union with a membership of about 100,000, covering kindergartens, primary and secondary schools, universities and other education institutions, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union has tremendous influence in shaping Hong Kong’s education system, including the contents of school curricula, and how education is delivered in the classroom. While the Hong Kong Federation of Education Workers is frequently perceived to be “pro-Beijing”, the HKPTU is often perceived as “anti-Beijing”. To me, these descriptions have arisen out of a tragic misunderstanding of China’s political system. I described the misunderstanding as “tragic” because while Hong Kong and Beijing share the same values, many people somehow believe that the ballot box is the only way to achieve these values. However, the jury is still out as to whether China’s meritocracy or the ballot box works better.

The 2008 Olympics slogan in Beijing read: “One World, One Dream”. So Beijing certainly believes in “universal values”. These universal values include equality based on respect for the sanctity of human life, freedom, peace, prosperity, and happiness. Human history through the ages has been a struggle to achieve these dreams for all. In China, as well as in the West, people want more freedoms, but we have all learnt that freedoms need to be checked by a sensible use of the law and state power, so that in exercising one’s freedoms, one should not trample upon other people’s freedoms. The state is, ideally, there to prevent abuses by any member of the community that would undermine other people’s rights and freedoms. By using state power and particularly the rule of law, it is hoped that we can achieve the greatest freedom for all.

I would hope that both the HKPTU and the HKFEW adopt a scientific approach in assessing China’s achievements and pitfalls. There is no need to be pro-Beijing in the sense of endorsing every policy proposed by Beijing; and no need to be “anti-Beijing” just because an idea came from Beijing. All teachers should encourage their students to love their own country, and to help improve the country’s governance and overall performance by correcting any mistakes that are made from time to time. But to attack Beijing purely on ideological grounds sets a bad example for our younger generation. What really matters is whether a system or a policy works better to serve its people.

 All teachers should encourage their students to love their own country, and to help improve the country’s governance and overall performance by correcting any mistakes that are made from time to time. 

Recently, I delivered a six-lecture series on “Policy, Politics, and Politicians” at the Dharmasthiti College of Cultural Studies. During preparation for the talks, I discovered one problem with the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. In Article 21, there is a clause that states: “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.” I suspect this clause has much to do with the widely held notion that universal and equal suffrage is a “universal value”. I told my students that this does not make sense, because a way of doing things cannot be the values. A way of doing things is just a way to achieve the values that we pursue.

What are these true universal values that we all share and that we all should pursue? Equality and freedom are certainly two of the most fundamental values that we all share. But where is the evidence that the ballot box will give us the equality and the freedom that we want?  

It is revealing to find that several members of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee — the Party’s and China’s highest body — came from humble backgrounds. Wang Yang, who worked as a factory worker at the tender age of 17, made his way to become China’s vice-premier and a member of the standing committee. Can anyone make a convincing argument that there is no equality in China just because he was not voted in but managed, through hard work, to prove his caliber and suitability for such a senior position?  

The UN Declaration of Human Rights is extremely misleading. I recently read an article by Professor Nelson Chow Wing-sun, who wrote: “The SAR Government need to understand that our younger generation cherish democracy and freedom. They hold these values not in order to challenge the government, but because they think democracy and freedom are what they are entitled to.” But while we all cherish the same values, is there proof that the ballot box will better give us true equality and freedom?

May I invite the HKPTU, and Professor Chow, to humbly study, for example, how China and India have performed in terms of delivering equality and freedom to their peoples. The efficacy of the ballot box in delivering equality and freedom must not be taken for granted. Let’s not confuse means with ends.

 

Yours sincerely,

Ho Lok-sang

senior research fellow,

Pan Sutong Shanghai-Hong Kong Economic Policy Research Institute, Lingnan University

Hong Kong


Share this story

CHINA DAILY
HONG KONG NEWS
OPEN
Please click in the upper right corner to open it in your browser !