It was a happy Sunday, a long-due Mother’s Day roadshow in my constituency to chat with the people. The ever-dragging tail of the pandemic has put my regular meet-up session on hold for quite a while. I’ve enjoyed these street level engagements where people share their stories and views on different social issues as they help me to grasp the true pulse of the city. The positive ambience, the smiles and the friendliness almost dialed me back to the pre-riot time.
However, the message “Nixie, your personal data is on Telegram. Please take good care of yourself and your family!” popped up on my cell. As shocked as I was, I clicked through the link and found my name, contact number, address, Hong Kong ID number and family information online. The interesting part? It comes with a list of convictions, namely being a member of a pro-establishment party, being pro-government and supporting the Hong Kong police, with the number #C929 crowned to me.
Doxxing played an important role during the violent campaign and riots in 2019. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data received complaints and uncovered over 5,700 doxxing-related incidents, according to a recent Legislative Council document. The office had written to 18 operators of websites and social media platforms on at least 297 occasions to request the removal of 5,905 hyperlinks. These doxxing links often include personal data of politicians, government officials or even civilians. Whether or not you are just a distant family member or a kid in the kindergarten, it doesn’t matter! You are still their target. It is intended to threaten, intimidate and harass people to create fear in our society, with the ultimate objective of shutting down people with different views.
Rioters and cyber terrorists were often called “human rights defenders” or “freedom warriors” by the Western media. When rioters vandalized shopfronts of the so-called pro-government owners, their barbarian behaviors were embellished as “Renovation”; when petrol bombs were hurled by rioters into the scenes of confrontation, pro-violence politicians and media called these arson mobs “Fire Magicians”. These violent behaviors were heavily underreported intentionally. Many Hong Kong residents asked: What happened to their human rights? What happened to their freedom of speech?
Some countries are often vociferous about upholding human rights and freedom of speech. But the freedom they advocate seems limited to the aristocratic bunch, and “human rights” are only used as a bejeweled sword to attack the countries they consider as rivals
Some countries are often vociferous about upholding human rights and freedom of speech. But the freedom they advocate seems limited to the aristocratic bunch, and “human rights” are only used as a bejeweled sword to attack the countries they consider as rivals. A common practice of these political bourgeoisies believed that only their democracy is true democracy. If you do not play by the big brother’s book and stand in line, they will come and “stand with you” and destroy your home country or home city. It seems like democracy in their dictionary translates to “My way, the one and only way”.
At the beginning of the Sino-US trade war, I was honored to attend a short course at the Stanford Center at Peking University to exchange views on Sino-US relations along with my fellow party members of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong. I remember asking some rather naive questions: Since we Chinese have our different history and culture, why must the US impose its ways of doing things on us? Why can’t we just do it our way that fits our social situation and culture? The answer began with a series of interrogative sentences, including what my name is and why I chose the word “impose”, followed by some angry accusations including the same old tune that China betrayed the trade agreement, etc. You know the drill. I was not only shocked by the professor’s emotional outburst, but the fact that, despite having years of firsthand experience in China, this China expert does not seem to know China at all.
Politicians from the opposition camp have also shown a knack for sophistry and double talk. They vetoed the government’s proposed electoral reform package for the implementation of universal suffrage in 2015; they provoked, organized or participated in the illegal “Occupy Central” campaign, paralyzing the city’s traffic arteries and business hubs for 79 days in 2014; they had no qualms about promoting the notion that “Violence may sometimes be the solution to a problem” in their attempt to incite and justify violence. They have even gone as far as to inviting foreign interference in Hong Kong’s affairs and urging foreign governments to sanction their own city. And they suddenly turned and asked why Hong Kong has come to such a situation. It is time for these politicians to come down to earth, stop blaming others for the consequences of their misjudgments and malfeasances, and recognize that no one is above the law.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.