It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
The Viktor Tsoi wall in central Minsk, where the Chinese character “崔” is used to write his Korean surname. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
June 21, 1962, is the birth date of Viktor Tsoi, a Korean-Russian rock star from the late years of the Soviet Union who now enjoys cult status across Russian-speaking countries, 30 years after his tragic death.
Rocker, actor, dissident
Tsoi was born in Leningrad to an ethnic Russian mother, Valentina Guseva, and an ethnic Korean father, Robert Tsoi. Tsoi's father traces his origins to today's North Korea via Kazakhstan, as his family was deported to Soviet Central Asia during Stalin's rule.
Viktor Tsoi studied art, but soon dropped out of school and started playing rock music in the 1970s. During that period, rock was mostly banned by Soviet authorities as a symbol of “Western decadence” incompatible with communist ideology.
After meeting one of the most influential alternative Soviet musicians of the time, Boris Grebenshchikov, in 1980, Tsoi's career would take a turn. By 1982 Tsoi had created his own band, Kino, which propelled him to rapid fame across the Soviet Union. Kino's first album, “45”, was recorded in 1982 together with Grebenshchikov's band, Akvarium. Another album, “Noch,” was recorded in 1986 and released in the US on a double-album titled “Red Wave: 4 Underground Bands from the USSR.” Portrait of Viktor Tsoi on his memory wall in Minsk in Belarus. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
Altogether Tsoi composed and recorded over 90 songs that became instant hits through unofficial channels, including underground concerts and bootleg tapes, at a time when, due to censorship, tape recorders were difficult to obtain.
Regardless, the lyrics of his songs spread by word of mouth, attracting underground audiences with their messages of youth empowerment, independent ideas, and absence of praise for the Communist Party. The song “And from now on we are the ones in charge” (Дальше действовать будем мы), for instance, has a line that goes: “So we came here to claim our rights: yes!” (И вот мы пришли заявить о своих правах: “Да!”)
After perestroika, which allowed more space and tolerance for alternative ideas, particularly in the arts, Tsoi and Kino would be allowed to perform officially and to be interviewed on Soviet television.
In 1988, Tsoi appeared in a film called “The Needle” (Игла) by director Rashid Nugmanov that was filmed in today's Kazakhstan. It caused a sensation with its depiction of drug addiction, an issue that was unmentionable under Soviet ideology and considered an exclusively “Western” condition, in spite of affecting many young Soviets, particularly after the Soviet war in Afghanistan.
The movie, which also features songs by Kino, is available on YouTube:
On August 15, 1990, Tsoi died in today's Latvia at the age of 28, after his car collided with a bus. His untimely death became the subject of many myths, including the idea that he had committed suicide, or had been killed by the Soviet secret service. Tsoi the icon
Thirty years after Tsoi's death, he continues to have countless fans in Russian-speaking countries and communities and has inspired a wide range of people, from musicians to astronomers.
On YouTube, some videos of his songs have over 37 million views. Some of his hits have also been covered by contemporary stars of the Russian rock and pop scene, such as the Tatar-Bashkir singer Zemfira in her remake of the song “Cuckoo” (Кукушка):
His songs are also remixed and played by DJs across Russian-speaking countries and communities. Global Voices talked to DJ Hem, a native of Tashkent who lives in Helsinki and runs live DJ sessions of Soviet music on YouTube, including a special Tsoi Birthday Party on June 21. Here is DJ Hem's take on the Tsoi phenomenon:
The band Kino was the second band from Leningrad that I had ever heard, with the song “Aluminium Cucumbers“, which with its content and lyrics somehow dramatically changed my perception of rock of and Soviet rock.
I think Kino's popularity is due mostly to Tsoi's heroic aura — his bearing on stage, his style of performance, his voice, his entire image… This was missing on the [Soviet] stage, and in life.
Back then this was an issue for the entire country that had just completely changed its direction. Generations of people who had grown up on images of [Communist] heroes suddenly experienced an internal vacuum because of perestroika. People had no experience of living without heroes. Thus, a hero had to show up, and this happened with Viktor Tsoi.
The lyrics of his songs are unlikely to get old. And the songs with a civic subtext sound very contemporary in the context of the current Russian life, and still relevant. What is extraordinary is that the Russian rock and pop scene hasn't produced to this day any group or singer who could just with three chords touch the soul of such a large number of people!
Here is DJ Hem's Tsoi Birthday Party session:
In 2018, Russian director Kirill Serebrennikov made a film called “Leto” (Summer, in Russian) about Tsoi's life and the making of Kino's first album in the early 1980s. The movie was selected for the Palme d'Or category at the 2018 Cannes film festival.
Tsoi is also an inspiration beyond the world of music and movies: he is an icon of the contemporary urban landscape in a number of post-Soviet cities that display murals, statues, and graffiti celebrating his songs. One popular Tsoi-related graffito is “Tsoi is alive” (Цой жив!).
In Minsk, the capital of Belarus, there is a memory wall devoted to Tsoi in a park in the city center: Tsoi wall in Minsk. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
In Almaty, the former capital of Kazakhstan, a statue of Tsoi was erected on June 21, 2018 in honour of his numerous connections to the country. This tweet from May 2019, when the country experienced anti-government protests, features the Tsoi statue in dissident icon mode:
“И больше нет ничего Все находится в нас» Виктор Цой вышел с плакатом «Перемен» в Алматы pic.twitter.com/tWCSiOfvlD — Timur Nusimbekov (@mr_mysyk) May 30, 2019
“And there is nothing else All is within us.” [Lyrics from Tsoi's song “Changes” (Перемен)]
Viktor Tsoi came out to protest in Almaty with a poster saying “Changes”
Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine, also has its own Tsoi wall as can be seen in this video:
But there is no doubt the thing that will continue to inspire new generations of fans are his lyrics, which people still learn by heart and are quoted and referenced in daily life by Russian speakers around the globe. Among some of his best are the following, from the song “A pack of cigarettes” (Пачка сигарет):
Sitting and looking at an alien sky from an unfamiliar window I do not see a single familiar star, I walked all the roads, here and there, Turned around – and couldn’t find my tracks.
But if you have a pack of cigarettes in your pocket, Then things are not that bad for today. And an air ticket to sit on a plane with silver wings, That as it takes off, leaves nothing but a shadow on earth.
A large billboard representing Milada Horáková and a slogan beneath reading “Zavražděna komunisty” (Murdered by communists) hanging on Prague Old Town Square. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
This year, it was commemorated with particular force because exactly 70 years ago, on June 27, 1950, Milada Horáková, a lawyer, politician and Nazi resister, was hanged along with others after a show trial under the orders of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
Remembrance Day was inaugurated in 2003 with the date chosen to honor the memory of Milada Horáková. Feminist, resister, survivor
Comics released in 2020 to mark the 70th anniversary of Milada Horáková's death, by Zdeněk Ležák and Štěpánka Jislová. Photo by Filip Noubel, used with permission.
Milada Horáková‘s biography reads like a Hollywood movie: She was born in 1901, in what was then still the Austrian-Hungarian Habsburg Empire, into a middle-class family. She managed to study law at a time when very few women did and became active in women's emancipation movements.
Czechoslovakia, which emerged in 1918 from the Habsburg Empire, allowed women's vote as early as 1920, ahead of many other European states, thanks to Senator Františka Plamínková, the founder of the Women's National Council for whom Horáková started working in 1924.
From 1927, she worked in the social welfare department, promoting reforms aimed at women's equality. During World War II, she entered the resistance movement against the Nazis, along with her husband, but both were arrested in August 1941.
Horáková, who spent four years in camps and prisons, managed to represent herself at her own trial, and therefore avoided the death penalty. She returned to her work in 1945, and agreed to run as a member of parliament for the Czech National Socialist Party. She quickly became a target of the communists for her outspoken criticism of their agenda to curb democratic freedom in post-war Czechoslovakia.
She was eventually arrested on September 27, 1949, along with her husband and others, and charged with treason in June 1950 in a sham trial that was meant to show that the new regime would not stop at anything — including sentencing women to death — to impose its policies, with zero tolerance for the slightest criticism. The trial was scripted on similar parodies of justice already carried on in the Soviet Union.
She gave her final speech on June 8, 1950, during her trial, in which she refused accusations of treason with strong determination. Here is a segment of her speech in this video in Czech: SEE BELOW
She was eventually sentenced to death. On June 27, she was given 20 minutes to see her sister and her daughter before she was hanged. She was cleared of all accusations posthumously in 1991, when she was awarded by President Václav Havel the Order of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, the highest state honor made for outstanding contributions to the development of democracy, humanity and human rights
In 2017, an English-language movie was made about her life by David Mrnka: TRAILER BELOW
A still painful assessment: 40 years of communism
After communism collapsed in Czechoslovakia in 1989, authorities faced a difficult choice when justice for victims of the previous regime surfaced. Eventually, they opted for a process of non-judicial lustration — the purge of government officials — that prevented all employees of communist-era state security from holding office in the higher levels of civil service, including the judiciary, until at least the year 2000. In Czechoslovakia, this status lasted until 1992, and from January 1, 1993, in the Czech Republic.
The government also allowed the Communist Party to continue to function. The Party, renamed the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (known in Czech under its acronym KSČM), remains small during elections but plays a key role in tipping alliances and voicing support for Moscow and Beijing influence in the Czech Republic. It now holds 15 out of 200 seats in parliament.
A number of political forces and civic movements have recently stepped up their criticism of KSČM and the communist legacy in Czech society. This year, the civic movement Dekomunizace (De-communisation) launched a visual campaign across Prague, the capital, hanging large size billboards with images of Horáková and strong messages such as Zavražděna komunisty (“Murdered by communists”).
While some higher education institutions and political forces support the campaign, others have described it as offensive and divisive by reopening old wounds.
The most outspoken critic has been KSČM, which stated in a Facebook post:
The regional committee of KSČM for Prague strongly protests against the distortion and rewriting of historical truth and against the spread of anti-communist hatred, which is again fomented in the capital. The current aggressive campaign against the KSČM fits into the scenario of the European Parliament resolution ‘On the importance of European memory for the future of Europe,’ adopted in September 2019. This resolution puts communist and Nazi ideology, socialist and Nazi regimes on an equal footing.
Journalist Petr Šabata wrote in a column published on the portal of Seznam Zprávy on June 26:
Yes, Milada Horáková was murdered by communists. But to reduce the memory of her life to the communists would be once again unfair to this unbreakable woman. Because Milada Horáková had a rich and original personality and her life has multiple layers and provides a lot of inspiration.
For Michal Gregorini, the official representative of the movement Dekomunizace, the aim of the movement is to prevent the loss of historical memory, as he explained in an interview to the news portal iRozhlas on June 22:
Why Milada Horáková? It was just 70 years ago. It might seem as being a very long time ago, in the previous millenium, but my mum remembers it, so it is actually in the very recent past. That is why we remind everyone about her.
The campaign also included an “audio-collage” as sound segments of her trial were broadcast in Prague metro on June 27.
Responses in the field 'sex at birth' on new ID documents will be unchangeable
Posted 21 June 2020 15:37 GMT Transgender people protesting against article 33. Credit: Bankó Gábor/Prizma
Being a transgender person in Hungary is about to become even harder, after the government passed a law that will demand all citizens write their “sex at birth” on their national IDs. And the response in this field cannot be changed.
“I have no hope of getting my gender recognised now,” said Ivett Ördög bitterly, sitting behind her home desk, which has now become her office, with her dark hair and eyes, a colourful floral shirt, and big earrings.
She is a software developer, a very successful one, but she has struggled a lot in the workplace. Why? Because she was biologically born as a man.
She told her story with half a smile and plenty of concern and desperation. Desperation over what is happening in her country. Ivett Ördög. Courtesy photo, used with permission.
Ivett is a transgender woman who said that her rights “are being violated by an European Union (EU) country.”
On May 19, the Hungarian Parliament passed the Omnibus Law, by 134 votes to 56.
This is the law whose 33rd article forces all citizens to write “sex at birth” on their national IDs.
This result of the law is that no Hungarian citizen will be able to legally change their gender and those who have undergone a physical transformation are vulnerable to potential discrimination upon document-checking.
Document checks are fairly frequent in Hungary, where identification is required to pick up a parcel, pay with credit card and get on a bus.
“It could become dangerous,” said Ivett, explaining why she doesn’t use public transport or go to the doctor’s anymore.
She didn’t get her gender legally recognized, so anytime that someone checks her ID, they will see that she was a man, and this scares her.
Just imagine […inaudible…] being pulled by policemen, and you show your ID and they don't believe you it's your ID. What do you do then? Policemen can get quite brutal at times, and then I can't even call the police! Because – they are already there. […] Especially in a country that is so homophobic, and, obviously also trans-phobic, it's not safe. Definitely not safe.
Hungary has shed 8.46 percentage points on the 2020 ILGA-Europe Rainbow Map — an online index that ranks all 49 European countries to see how laws and policies impact LBGTI people's lives. That was the most drastic drop in Europe.
Click to see infographic about LGBTQI discrimination in Hungary.
Dorián Palai, a transgender man, explained that when someone checks their ID, they might be tolerating, but they might also start to make fun of them, “out” them or even attack them.
“Your whole life will depend on other people’s kindness,” Palai said .
Despite the fact that Palai secured recognition of his gender, he has still been discriminated against by medical professionals. Their rudeness, especially when he took his clothes off, left him utterly dejected.
When I left the medical center I started to cry, because it was not just frustrating — it was very frightening. And also very disheartening.
Ivett told Global Voices that she has sent all the papers to have her gender recognised, but she was told the government was “reorganizing” legislation for gender recognition.
Little did she know that this reorganization was actually Article 33 of the Omnibus Bill.
Many transgender people believe that the law was passed precisely to close the debate on gender recognition and prevent all transgender people from getting their gender recognized.
One such person is Zsófia Szabó, who left Hungary because she was discriminated for being a transgender woman. She now lives in Sweden and manages the Prizma organisation to help the transgender community in Hungary.
She said the purpose of the Omnibus bill is to “throw transgender people to the trenches.”
But Zoltán Koskovics, an analyst for the Center for Fundamental Rights, a conservative research institute in Hungary, said in an interview with Global Voices that the legislative procedure was transparent and necessary to “fill a legal gap”, because the Hungarian law didn’t have a legal definition for “sex”, so it was creating uncertainty.
He noted that the Hungarian constitution doesn’t recognize the category of “transgender,” but protects every citizen from discrimination.
Palai disagrees with that take and said that he doesn’t feel like “a real citizen”.
But where is the EU in all of this? Hungary is, after all, a member of the European Union, as of May 1, 2004.
Dunja Mijatović, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe tweeted that the new omnibus law is against the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence.
I regret that parliament in #Hungary adopted today a law that makes it impossible for #transgender people to obtain legal gender recognition. This is contrary to @ECHR_CEDH jurisprudence & a blow to trans people's human dignity.
— Commissioner for Human Rights (@CommissionerHR) May 19, 2020
But a spokesperson for the EU Commission said in an interview with Global Voices that “the procedures for legal gender recognition are a matter of national competence and fall outside the scope of EU law.”
Ivett said that the EU has failed to enforce respect for human rights in countries like Hungary. She now wants the chance to leave the country and obtain citizenship somewhere else, in order to have her gender legally recognized.
The problem is that she would have to live in that new country for at least 10 years, without moving away, before she can get the citizenship.
“What the EU can do right now is to help transgender people to leave Hungary and get citizenship elsewhere really quickly,” she said.
In the meantime, Hungarian activists are trying to fight this law.
Áron Demeter, the program director of Amnesty Hungary, said Amnesty will ask the Hungarian Commissioner for Fundamental Rights to bring the law to the Constitutional Court, which is the only institution that could annul article 33.
Posted 19 June 2020 18:33 GMT Photo: Screencap from video clip featuring dinosaur chasing a time traveler by Serbian Progressive Party.
Serbia has entered a an election silence before a vote scheduled for Sunday, June 21, which is probably a good thing.
Since the biggest opposition parties have declared a boycott, blaming the government for a failure to provide conditions for fair elections — including freedom of media — the issue of voter turnout has taken on particular importance.
In order to undermine the legitimacy of the ruling parties, some opposition groups like “Don’t Let Belgrade D(r)own” (“Ne da(vi)mo Beograd” in Serbian) staged protests.
The most recent one was in front of the Parliament, featuring their symbol, the rubber duck.
Tweet: Today in front of the Parliament #Boycott2020, tomorrow at the closing of the trial to Jutka in Kruševac #JusticeForMarijaLukic #JusticeForAllWomenOfBrus Video: Today we are in front of the Parliament. We call upon the citizens to join the boycott of the fake elections on Sunday. While the fight for free and democratic Serbia is taking place, another struggle is taking place tomorrow in Kruševac, the trial of [suspected sexual predator] Milutin Jeličić Jutka and we hope for justice for Marija Lukić and all women of Brus.
On June 17, the day before the silent period, the ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) concluded its series of controversial election videos with one addressing people who would abstain from voting.
The video titled “Don't remain in the past, vote for the future!” vent viral across the Balkan region. In a warning tone, the clip presents citizens who would stay at home on election day on Sunday as potentially responsible for the demise of the economy and chaos that would ensue if the opposition unites.
This messaging was complemented by a footage showing “people going crazy” — fighting in the streets and looting.
If the video had ended there, that would be pretty standard scaremongering.
However, the campaign ad then went to a very strange place.
By the time you realise you've made a big mistake, it will be clear that you can't pay the rent. When you can't pay the rent, the only thing left for you to do is build a time machine, go back in time and vote. When you use the time machine you've built to return back in time and vote, you might accidentally travel to distant past and get eaten by a dinosaur! Why would you like to be eaten by a dinosaur? Don't remain in the past, vote for the future!
The ruling SNS has named it's electoral list after their leader Aleksandar Vučić, who is currently the president of the country, despite these elections being parliamentary rather than presidential ones.
The SNS has spent its campaign promoting Vučić's cult of personality, drawing on the president's time during a pandemic and generally draining state resources. This is unlikely to earn the party any attention from anti-corruption authorities, however. Screen shot of the website of Socialist Party of Serbia, with their election slogan “We stand firm” (Ми стојимо постојано) in the header.
Its nominal competitor, the Socialist Party of Serbia, a junior member of the populist ruling coalition, has made campaign missteps of its own.
Their follow-up slogan “We stand firm” (“Mi stojimo postojano” in Serbian) was taken directly from the song “Hey Slavs” – the anthem of disbanded Yugoslavia.
The irony of the fact that this party, and its late leader Slobodan Milošević, were among the chief perpetrators of the bloody destruction of Yugoslavia, has been largely ignored by the mainstream media.
Also glossed over are ideological inconsistencies. Such as the fact that the socialist party's website has as a key feature a photo of its leader the Serbian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ivica Dačić posing with Donald Trump — a politician who would usually be considered an opposite of socialist.
All these paradoxes aside, Serbia is getting ready to vote. The number of people who are supporting the boycott will remain unknown until Sunday evening.
Posted 8 June 2020 Screen shot from Alexei Navalny's YouTube channel showing how Brodsky's graffiti is painted over in white on May 25, 2020.
The 80th anniversary of the birth of Russian poet and Nobel laureate Joseph Brodsky was marked this year in Russia by an incident on May 25 highlighting the special place writers still hold in Russian political culture.
Iosif Brodsky (known as Joseph Brodsky in the English-speaking world) holds iconic status in Russian-speaking culture: he is considered a master of Russian poetry, one of the very few approved of by that giant of Russian poetry of the 20th century, Anna Akhmatova. Brodsky won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1987, one of the only six authors who write in Russian to receive the award (the others are Ivan Bunin, Boris Pasternak, Mikhail Sholokhov, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Svetlana Alexievich). He is was also a political dissident who was finally allowed to leave the Soviet Union in 1972, after having been imprisoned, and detained in mental institutions and forbidden to publish.
Even though he was invited back to Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, he never returned to his native land. Yet he became extremely popular in Russia—his work was widely published and studied, and even included in the Russian school curriculum. The anniversary of his birth, May 24, 1940, is an annual observance, and the celebration of what would have been his 80th year was anticipated this year.
One of the many tributes paid to Brodsky took the form of a photorealistic mural painted by artist Oleg Lukyanov on a wall on the street where the Brodsky museum is now located in St. Petersburg, which is also the location of the “one-and-a-half room” where he lived before being able to leave the country.
On May 25, however, the image was painted over in white by the administrator of the school to which the wall belongs. The school alleged that Lukyanov did not have permission from the city authorities to paint on the wall.
This tweet from the pro-government TV station REN TV shows the wall before and after:
В Петербурге объяснили, почему закрасили граффити-потрет Бродского. В аддминистрации отметили, что сам писатель вряд ли бы одобрил свое изображение на школьном заборе. И рассказали, что рисунок не был согласован с профильными комитетами города, поэтому и был замазан … pic.twitter.com/bmnh3XjfSv — РЕН ТВ | Новости (@rentvchannel) May 25, 2020
In Saint-Petersburg the authorities explained why they painted over the graffiti-portrait of Brodsky. The administration noted that the writer, most likely, would ot have approved to have his image painted on the wall of a school. And they said there had been no prior agreement with the relevant committee of the city, thus is was painted over. Literature as resistance: A well-established Russian tradition
But the matter did not end here. The Russian media and blogosphere rapidly shared the news, turning the wall into a symbol of freedom of expression in a country which for the last 20 years, under the influence of Vladimir Putin, continues to restrict artistic freedom and freedom of expression, and has become obsessed with controlling the public sphere.
By May 26 the white paint began to be covered by quotes from Brodsky himself, with fans also bringing candles and flowers. As the popular independent TJournal news platform tweeted (not without humor):
История с изображением Бродского в Петербурге не закончилась. Вчера граффити закрасили, но на его месте стали писать стихи, которые потом тоже закрасили.
The story about Brodsky's image in Saint-Petersburg is not over. Yesterday the graffiti was painted over, but people started writing verses over it, before being painted over as well. It seems this story will require a lot of paint. Memes and humor fuel the only remains of alternative political life
The backlash took on even larger proportions as writers, artists, and meme-makers jumped on the case to express their frustration with censorship in Russia and with the servile, cowardly reactions of public administrations to the appearance of any narrative that does not follow the Kremlin line, particularly in public space.
In Russian and Soviet history, there is a long list of writers, and particularly poets, who have displeased rulers and paid a high price because of their refusal to be censored: Pushkin, Mayakovsky, Pasternak, Akhmatova and many more—the list is long.
In this video, prominent authors including Aleksandr Genis and Tatiana Tolstaya—both renowned for their refusal to support Putin, unlike many other Russian intellectuals—discuss the issue in an online show called White Sound Tolstaya launched in April 2020 together with journalist Ksenya Burzhskaya. In this episode from June 4, Tolstaya dubs Putin “the Emperor”, while writer and journalist Yakov Gordin, explains Brodsky's current popularity in Russia among young people under 25.
Well-known Russian journalist and music critic Artemy Troitsky posted photoshopped images of the white-washed wall featuring among other things, a Bansky-style image in which Putin is depicted as the wall's cleaner:
Потрясающий перформанс на зависть Павленскому и Верзилову происходит стихийно в Питере. Сначала в ДР Бродского И.А. поклонники сделали художественный граффити. Затем его замазали белым (см.) и народ начал творить: от детородного слова до профессиональной графики в стиле Бэнкси. pic.twitter.com/d9GUgh7f5Z — Артемий Троицкий (@aktroitsky) May 26, 2020
The meme featured in the tweet below draws a comparison between the censoring of the Brodsky mural and the recent amendments to the Russian Constitution that would further extend Putin's rule if approved in a July 1 vote (lower image):
They painted over Brodsky, let's paint over the Constitution
And the image shared in this tweet shows one of Putin's typical television addresses to the nation, whitewashed over in the same manner as the Brodsky mural: pic.twitter.com/PsRtItNPwr — Net.gov (@Net_gover) May 26, 2020
Alexei Navalny, one of Putin's few political opponents, also commented on the case in an eight-minute video on his YouTube channel that has been viewed by over 100,000 people. In the video—which is titled called “Paint over. Destroy. Forbid”, a member of Navalny's team makes a long list of street art recently banned and painted over in Russia:
The Duterte administration's war on media has entered a new phase
Posted 18 June 2020 Rappler CEO Maria Ressa (center), former Rappler writer Reynaldo Santos Jr. (left), and lawyer Theodore Te (right) held a press conference after their hearing at the Manila Regional Trial Court. Photo by Kodao Productions, a content partner of Global Voices. A Manila court convicted one of the Philippines’ leading journalists on charges of cyber libel in a case widely seen as the latest attack on dissenting voices and press freedoms in the country.
Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 46 Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa sentenced news website Rappler’s chief executive editor Maria Ressa and former reporter Reynaldo Santos Jr. to 6 months and 1 day up to 6 years in jail and ordered them each to pay P400,000 (about US$8,000) for moral and exemplary damages on June 15.
Ressa and Santos are the first journalists in the Philippines to be found guilty of cyber libel since the law was passed in 2012. They were allowed to post bail pending appeal under the bond they paid in 2019, which cost 100,000 pesos (2,000 US dollars) each.
Rappler, an independent website of international renown has been targeted by the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte. The court, however, found Rappler itself to have no liability in the cyber libel case. Targeting Rappler
Press freedom advocates in the Philippines and across the world swiftly decried Ressa’s conviction as part of the Duterte administration’s campaign to terrorize and intimidate journalists.
The case against Ressa and Rappler was filed in 2017 by businessman Wilfredo Keng over a 2012 Rappler story covering his alleged links to Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona, who was being impeached on corruption charges at the time.
Keng’s case was initially dismissed in 2017 because it was beyond the statute of limitations. Moreover, the article itself was published four months before the cybercrime law was enacted.
But the case was subsequently readmitted by the Philippine justice department, which extended the period of liability for cyber libel claims from one year to 12 years and argued the article was covered by the law because it was ‘republished’ in February 2014, when Rappler updated it.
While Duterte and his spokesmen deny any links to the cyber libel case, Rappler has been on the receiving end of regular ire from the president and his allies for actively investigating and exposing the administration's bloody war on drugs, social media manipulation and corruption.
Rappler reporters were banned from covering presidential press briefings in 2018, for what Duterte characterized as “twisted reporting” during a presidential address.
Pro-Duterte trolls deride Rappler as a peddler of “fake news” and hurl invective at its reporters.
The cyber libel case is but the first in a total of 8 active legal cases against Ressa and Rappler which include another libel case and tax violation allegations. All were filed after Duterte came to power in 2016.
The Duterte government moved to shut down Rappler in January 2018, claiming that it violated laws on non-foreign ownership of media outlets — a claim that is demonstrably false. A protester calls for ‘mass testing, not mass silencing’ at a rally held on June 4, 2020, the day the Philippine Congress passed the anti-terror bill. Photo by Kodao Productions, a content partner of Global Voices
Curtailing dissent
The College of Mass Communication of the University of the Philippines (UP), the country’s premier state university, condemned the decision as a dangerous precedent that gives authorities the power to prosecute anyone for online content published within the past decade:
The State can prosecute even after ten, twelve or more years after publication or posting. It is a concept of eternal threat of punishment without any limit in time and cyberspace.
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) said the charges that Rappler faces is only the latest in “a chain of media repression that has seen the forced shutdown of broadcast network ABS-CBN and a spike in threats and harassment of journalists, all because the most powerful man in the land abhors criticism and dissent.’’
The government forced the country’s largest television network, privately-owned ABS-CBN, off air last May after the pro-Duterte congress refused to renew the station’s broadcasting license.
Growing persecution of media comes against the backdrop of an anti-terror bill passed by the legislature that allows the president to create an anti-terrorism council vested with powers to designate individuals and groups as “terrorists.”
That designation in turn allows warrantless arrests and 24 days of detention without court charges, among other draconian provisions.
Authorities have brazenly denied the bill threatens freedom in the country. AERIAL SHOT: 5,000 human rights advocates and activists observe physical distancing as they commemorate Philippine Independence Day and hold a ‘Grand Mañanita’ against the Duterte government's Anti-Terrorism Bill today, June 12, on University Avenue, University of the Philippines- Diliman, Quezon City. Photo and caption by Kodao Productions, a content partner of Global Voices
Holding the line
At a press conference after her court hearing, Ressa vowed to hold the line:
Freedom of the press is the foundation of every single right you have as a Filipino citizen. If we can’t hold power to account, we can’t do anything.
A few days before Ressa’s conviction, thousands defied the lockdown to join anti-terror bill protests in Manilla despite threats of violence from the police.
Protesters ironically described their demonstration as a “mañanita” — the word that Police General Debold Sinas, a Duterte ally, used to justify his birthday party celebration, which took place amidst severe restrictions on gatherings.
Double standards for Duterte allies and the weaponization of laws against critics were a constant theme in tweets that used the #DefendPressFreedom hashtag in response to the Ressa case.
Standing up for @mariaressa Ray and @rapplerdotcom not because I think they are above the law but because their case shows how the Duterte govt twists the law so it becomes a weapon against civil liberties. #DefendPressFreedom#HoldTheLine
LOOK: Timeline on Maria Ressa's Cyber Libel Case Today, June 15, the Manila Trial Court convicts Rappler CEO and executive editor Maria Ressa and former researcher-writer Rey Santos Jr of cyber libel.#DefendPressFreedom#StandWithRapplerpic.twitter.com/68E0rgnPQz
Posted 30 June 2020 12:52 GMT National Security Law coming to Hong Kong. Image from the Stand News.
The National People's Congress (NPC) Standing Committee in Beijing has unanimously approved a national security law for Hong Kong — a move many expect to effectively end the autonomy the city enjoyed under “One Country, Two Systems.”
Throughout the legislative process, Beijing has refused to reveal to the public the draft of the law that will take effect in Hong Kong on July 1, 2020, the 23rd anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong to China.
Sources in Beijing have briefed media that under the new law, individuals convicted of “collusion with foreign forces” will face a lifetime in jail.
During the past few weeks, public figures within Hong Kong's establishment, such as university intellectuals, have been pressured to express their support for Beijing’s imposition of the national security law on the city.
Yet this so-called support is blind faith — none of these supporters have even seen the draft text. Draft a secret
Washington D.C.-based organization, the Hong Kong Democracy Council highlighted this “absurdity” on Twitter:
It cannot be overstated the absurdity that the CCP Standing Committee just voted to approve the new #NationalSecurityLaw at a special meeting – NO ONE – not even HK's Chief Exec has seen the texts of the new law.
— HKDC – Hong Kong Democracy Council (@hkdc_us) June 30, 2020
While the draft law was not disclosed to the public, the NPC revealed some of the details to the media in a briefing on June 20: The law would criminalize acts including secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with external forces. The new law will override local legislation should any conflicts arise. Beijing will set up an agency in Hong Kong to collect intelligence and “monitor supervise, coordinate and support” local government. Some cases — “very few” as stressed by the NPC — will fall under Beijing's jurisdiction. This implies that the offenders could be put on trial in mainland China where a hearing can be conducted in secret. The Hong Kong government will set up a commission chaired by the chief executive under Beijing's supervision to oversee the implementation of the new law. The chief executive will appoint designated judges to preside over cases.
The latest source information from NPC suggested that breaking the law will carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Activist group Demosisto disbands
For the last two days, rumours have been spreading online that media tycoon Jimmy Lai and political activist Joshua Wong will be arrested as soon as the law is enacted on July 1:
Jimmy Lai and Joshua Wong to be arrested as soon as National Security Law is passed on 30th June, sources https://t.co/LSvJxg1wrz
— Dimsumdaily Hong Kong (@dimsumdaily_hk) June 28, 2020
At the same time, a fake video of an internal meeting of Wong's pro-democracy group Demosisto has circulated widely on Weibo and other social media platforms.
It claims that the organization combined with the government of the United States to overthrow the Chinese Communist party. This has led to a general belief that Joshua Wong and other key members of Demosisto are prime targets of the new security law.
Soon after the law was passed on June 30, four keys member of Demosisto — Wong, Nathan Law, Jeffrey Ngo and Agnes Chow — announced their resignation from the organization on social media. The group has reportedly disbanded and will cease all operations.
Former Hong Kong Chief Executive and current vice-chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference Leung Chun-ying moreover has invited people to report and facilitate the arrest of suspects and “fugitives” who have fled Hong Kong:
1/2 Ex-#HongKong leader Leung Chun-ying has offered bounty of up to HK$1m from the 803 Fund to encourage people to report & facilitate the arrests of those who violate the national security legislation. https://t.co/v14oZLwtbCpic.twitter.com/1hETXCQ6hn
— Hong Kong Free Press HKFP (@HongKongFP) June 30, 2020 July 1 rally banned but set to go ahead anyway
Despite the ban, pro-democracy activists continue to mobilize for the rally, while CHRF has filed an appeal against the ban.
On June 29, a day before the national security law was passed, Raphael Wong, chairman of the League of Social Democrats urged Hongkongers to overcome their fear and carry on protesting on July 1.
Wong said that Chinese authorities “want the activists to go exile, so that they lose their moral authority and political impact.”
So just leave the fear aside and do what needs to be done: protest, vote. See which side has more support. They said they have 2.93 million people supporting them, we will show that we have 3.92 million people say ‘no’ to the law. Whether we manage to get more than or less than 35 seats in the upcoming Legislative Council election, we will get more votes. If we have more people in the street, their threats will become a joke. Hongkongers, carry on!
The details of the July 1 rally are as follows:
#71Rally FIVE DEMANDS, NOT ONE LESS RESIST NATIONAL SECURITY LAW
Date｜1st July 2020, Wednesday Starting Point｜Victoria Park Assemble｜2PM Start｜3PM End Point｜Tim Mei Avenue, Admiralty *Letter of No Objection Pending pic.twitter.com/jikKDUc11o
— Civil Human Rights Front 民間人權陣線 (@chrf_hk) June 25, 2020
CHRF has hosted the July 1 rally since 2003 and this is the first time the police has banned the event. On June 4, thousands of Hongkongers defied a police ban and spontaneously gathered at Victory Park for the vigil to remember the Tiananmen victims.
The rally on July 1, when the national security law will already be in effect, will be the strongest test yet of Hongkongers’ determination to resist an incoming authoritarian regime.
As Hong Kong marks a year since the beginning of the anti-China extradition protests, Hong Kong online media outlet Stand News curated a series of articles to reflect on the opposition movement. In the following report, Stand News interviewed a number of mainland Chinese who faced threats and stress as a result of their support for the Hong Kong protests. The original Chinese report below was published on June 16 2020. The following edited version is translated by Winnie Ko and published on Global Voices under a content partnership agreement.
Huaming (a pseudonym), is a mainland Chinese who arrived in Hong Kong as a student in 2014 — the same time that massive pro-democracy protests, better known as the Umbrella Protests, were exploding.
Since then the city’s political environment has undergone radical changes. His study in Hong Kong gave him the opportunity to experience a unique social movement. He regularly shared observations about everyday and political life in Hong Kong via his Weibo account.
On the morning of November 17, 2019, when the Hong Kong Police Force decided to seal off the Hong Kong Polytechnic University Campus, Huaming woke up and he noticed his Weibo account was full of comments. One person scolded him for being “pro-Hong Kong independence” and “young trash”. Another threatened him: “Dude, when are you returning to China? I will pick you up from the airport.” Doxxing
Since July last year, many mainlanders who expressed support or sympathy for Hong Kong’s anti-China extradition law movement were doxxed and reported to schools, employment units, party branches and even police authorities.
This process has seen their names, family pictures and telephone numbers publicly disclosed. Cyber-bullying can turn into real life harassment. In some cases, they were called on by the Chinese Public Security after they returned to China, while their families in China were also interrogated by the authorities. The malicious comments on his social media led Huaming to conclude that he had been reported.
I did a search on my user account on Weibo and found a user with hundreds of thousands of followers had screenshotted one of my posts and exposed me as a mainlander studying in Hong Kong. (The user's post noted) that I support the demands of young people while making no contribution to (Chinese society).
Huaming deactivated his account immediately and the online harassment died down after a few days. He also changed the public name of his WeChat account, deleted nearly all the articles he had written and sorted through his contact list:
I blocked about 300 to 400 accounts with suspicious names, those with the Chinese flag as profile pictures and people with a warrior-like tone.
He then changed his name on Facebook, edited the privacy settings and deleted all texts and pictures related to the Hong Kong protests. Suffocation
In the past year, stories about mainlanders who support Hong Kong’s anti-China extradition movement having their personal data exposed by colleagues, friends or even relatives on social media, have become commonplace.
Quite often, conversations on personal timelines or chat rooms were screenshotted as evidence of their “political betrayal” of the “motherland.”
Under Weibo's official hashtag “motherland’s anti-Black clad operation” (祖國反黑), there are many doxxed posts and numerous “cockroaches lists” (Hong Kong Police called protesters “cockroaches”). These posts are often shared tens of thousands of times.
The most popular doxxing outlets on Weibo are “Dawn Cicadas” (孤煙暮蟬), with six million followers, and “God’s eagle” (上帝之鷹), with 2.2 million followers. Huaning said:
Once they set you as target, their followers dig up all your personal information.
Yunqi Wang, a mainlander using a pseudonym, describes a “suffocating” existence. Wang came to Hong Kong in 2015. She graduated from university and enrolled in a Law PhD program just as the anti-extradition movement began.
The majority of her fellow students come from the elite class in the mainland. They considered it normal that Beijing should project supreme power over Hong Kong despite “One Country Two Systems.”
While she disagrees with such views, she could not express her opinion in class:
Because it is safer not to speak up. You pay a high price for expressing your views. What if they took a picture and reported you?
She increasingly feels that there is a wall between herself and her friends and family.
There is a big information gap between us. Many people learned about the events in HK because the journalist from (Chinese state-owned) Global Times was beaten up. They would ask, how can you turn a blind eye to such violence? A good friend from secondary school scolded me, I deleted friends one by one — it hurt.
In November, wracked by emotional stress, she decided to suspend her studies.
My mental status has been affected by the movement and I haven't been well. I attended the remembrance event of the university student Tsz-lok Chow after he passed away. The siege of the Chinese University of Hong Kong came on top of everything else and my emotions reached a tipping point. I felt that I couldn’t hold on anymore.
Many involved in the protest movement have experienced mental health challenges. But for mainland allies, these feelings have been amplified by incidents of discrimination.
Some pro-protest shops specified that they would not serve customers from the mainland after the outbreak of COVID-19:
I don’t know what the definition of a Hongkonger is. If they refer to someone residing in Hong Kong and speaking Cantonese, that is me! Glory Café [a famous pro-protest restaurant] made it clear that it doesn’t serve customers from the mainland or those who speak Mandarin. This made me think — I treat Hongkongers as comrades, but do they treat me as one of them? I wasn’t actually accepted…I am not patriotic in China, I hate the nation and the party, but in the eyes of Hongkongers I am a Chinese. My identity is vague, whether as a Chinese or as a Hongkonger. ‘Tree Hole Project’
Conflicts between the mainland and Hong Kong are not new. Liqi Zhou (pseudonym) moved to Hong Kong with his parents while he was in high school and has experienced the ups and downs in mainland-Hong Kong relations over the past two decades.
Zhou said these relations worsened gradually, and attributed this to the varying degrees of repression imposed by Beijing on Hong Kong since the handover.
Unfortunately, he said, resentment that should be targeted at the regime is often heaped onto individuals.
We know that there is more than one voice in China, we care about the minority who are between the gaps, speaking Mandarin and from the mainland, yet feel connected with Hong Kong, and therefore feeling its pain. We know you face pressure from the friends and relatives, omnipresent propaganda, persecution, doxxing, punishment and the spread of antagonism inside Hong Kong. Life is tough. We know you find it difficult to join the front lines and peaceful protests — even saying something publicly comes with immense pressure. This Tree hole is to let everyone know, no one is an island nor an outsider.
Defendants can expect six to 10 years in jail unless they plead guilty
Posted 20 June 2020 0:39 GMT Screen capture from the Stand News youtube video.
Hong Kong's anti-China extradition protests are now a year old. Hong Kong online media outlet Stand News curated a series of articles to reflect on the opposition movement. Global Voices is publishing edited versions of these posts under a content partnership agreement. The original Chinese report below was published on June 12, 2020, on the Stand News.
A key turning point of the Hong Kong anti-extradition movement in 2019 was the June 12 protests that took place near the Legislative Council.
In response, riot police indiscriminately deployed tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the protesters, including against those situated in peaceful sit-in areas.
On the same day, Stephen Lo, the city's then-police commissioner, defined the June 12 protests as a “riot”, implying that those who participated could be subjected to a charge carrying a maximum term of 10 years in jail.
Chief Executive Carrie Lam stood by the commissioner's judgment and the riot label. However, a majority of Hong Kong citizens disagreed with the definition.
Four days later, on June 16, two million Hongkongers took to the street chanting slogans that included “students are not rioters,” “we are not rioting”. The five major demands of the anti-extradition movement also included “the withdrawal of the riot label.”
However, the government has not responded to the demands and protesters continue striking. The number of arrested protesters continues to rise.
The Stand News submitted an inquiry about the number of arrests to the police authority.
Between June 9, 2019, and May 31, 2020, Hong Kong police arrested 8,986 individuals during protests. So far, the department of justice has pressed charges against 1,808 protesters and the most frequent charge is “rioting”.
In one court case heard at a district court on May 4, a 21-year-old lifeguard who participated in the June 12 protest pleaded guilty to a charge of rioting.
The magistrate stressed that the anti-extradition protesters “directly undermined the rule of law” and “disregard law and the safety of police officers.” As a result, the sentence has to take account of public interest and act as a deterrent to future crimes, the magistrate said.
The starting point for riot charge sentencing is six-year-imprisonment. However, as the defendant pleaded guilty, the sentence was reduced to four years in jail.
The 612 individuals presently facing rioting charges will have to go through similar judicial processes.
Once they are found guilty, they will have to spend a few years of their youth in jail, their plans for the future put on hold.
Below is an infographic of the age profile of 598 “rioters” who have their cases registered at courts (14 of the 612 cases have not reached court yet).
Age 11-15 (14 cases); Age 16-20 (207 cases); Age 21-30 (324 cases); Age 31-40 (37 cases); Age 41-50 (11 cases; Age 51 and above (2 cases). Image from the Stand News.
The average age of defendants is 23. The oldest is 61 and the youngest just 13. Fourteen of the “rioters” are under 16 years old. Around a third are younger than 20.
The infographic below shows that just over 38 percent of the “rioters” are students:
Student: 38.29%; Catering sector: 4.85%; Construction sector: 4.68%; White collar: 4.35%; Service sector: 2.68%; Education sector: 1.51%; Medical sector: 1.34%; Others: 20.40%; Unemployed: 5.69%; None disclosed: 16.22%
Below is a breakdown of their arrests.
More than 46 percent of the arrests took place during violent clashes between protesters and riot police at the Polytechnic University on November 18, 2019:
June 12, 2019, protests outside legislative council — 1 case June 26, 2019, protests outside the Police Headquarter — 1 case July 14, 2019, clashes with police in Shatin — 3 cases July 28, 2019, protests in Western Hong Kong island district — 42 cases August 5, 2019, clashes with police in Wong Da Sin district — 1 case August 11, 2019, clashes outside Tsim Sha Tsui police station — 29 cases August 13, 2019, peaceful sit-in at Hong Kong International airport — 3 cases August 24, 2019, protests in Kwun Tong district — 3 cases August 29, 2019, protests outside Shum Shui Po police station — 17 cases August 31, 2019, protests in Hong Kong Island district — 17 cases September 7, 2019, clashes at Shatin Metro station — 2 cases September 21, 2019, assembly at Yuen Long Metro station — 3 cases September 21, 2019, protests in Tuen Mun district — 1 case September 22, 2019, shopping mall protests in Shatin — 3 cases September 22, 2019, clashes outside Mongkok police station — 2 cases September 29, 2019, protests at Admiralty district — 99 cases October 1 2019, China national day, guerrilla-style protests in various districts across Hong Kong — 49 cases October 6, 2019, protests against mask ban — 28 cases October 13, 2019, protests in Tseung Kwan O district — 2 cases November 3, 2019, clashes in Mongkok — 1 case November 10, 2019, clashes in Mongkok — 1 case November 11, 2019, roadblock action at Chinese University of Hong Kong — 9 cases November 13, 2019, roadblock action in Sheung Shui district — 2 cases November 16, 2019, clashes in Mongkok — 6 cases November 18, 2019, police siege of the Polytechnic University — 284 cases January 19, 2020, assembly at Central district — 3 cases
Watery protest in Hong Kong. Image from the Stand News.
Hong Kong's anti-China extradition protests are now a year old. Hong Kong online media outlet Stand News curated a series of articles to reflect on the opposition movement. Global Voices is publishing edited versions of these posts under a content partnership agreement. The original Chinese version of the post below was written by Francis Lee, Professor in the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
The month of June marks the one-year anniversary of Hong Kong's anti-China extradition protests.
Since the outbreak of COVID-19 in late January, the Hong Kong police has banned all public assemblies and rallies, citing disease control regulations known as the Prohibition on Group Gathering.
The regulation has made it impossible for any organization to call for massive protests. The risk for individual protesters braving the streets, meanwhile, is growing, as Beijing prepares to impose a game-changing national security law on Hong Kong.
Today, the protests are much smaller than they were in June 2019, when hundreds of thousands of people regularly took to the streets in the biggest anti-government demonstrations in history.
But opinion polls show that Hong Kong people’s anger towards the police and government authorities remains unchanged. Running the numbers
A recent poll conducted by The Chinese University of Hong Kong's Center for Communication and Public Opinion Survey* in late May showed 45.8 percent of interviewees felt zero trust towards the government and 47.5 percent felt zero trust towards the police.
Over 60 percent of the interviewees opposed Beijing’s decision to enact a new national security law, bypassing Hong Kong Legislature. This finding differs markedly from Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam's claim on June 16 that only a small minority opposed the law.
The interviewees in the poll were also asked if they support or oppose the continuity of the anti-China extradition protests, regardless of form or strategy. The poll found that 39.1 percent support the protests with 39.2 percent opposed. Supporters of the pro-China establishment claimed the result indicates that the movement is losing support. That interpretation may not reflect the reality, however.
Historically, polls have shown that around 20-25 percent of Hong Kong citizens did not support anti-extradition protests in the first place. The global COVID-19 pandemic meanwhile has exerted further pressures on the city's economy, further weakening the appeal of protests.
With that in mind, the fact that the protests that brought the city to a months-long standstill have retained support from a solid two-fifths of respondents is nothing short of remarkable.
That poll saw 70 percent of interviewees support the termination of the massive peaceful sit-in protests.
Responses in the CCPOS survey differ significantly across age groups.
Among those aged 15-24, the rate of support for continuing anti-China extradition protests is 71.9 percent. In the next age category, 25-39, support drops to 51.9 percent. The protests have only 35.6 percent support in the 40-59 age range and 20.3 percent support among those aged 60 and older.
For some who oppose the continuation of the anti-China extradition protests, opposition is strategic rather than hostile towards protests per se.
Commentaries on various social media outlets in recent weeks have highlighted doubts that protests can generate positive effects in the current repressive political environment, since riot police are able to use as much force as is needed to overwhelm and arrest protesters.
These commentaries often stress that with Beijing determined to dismantle ‘One Country, Two Systems’, Hong Kong's future depends on diplomatic interplay between the U.S and China, rather than on street protests.
This cost and effect calculation is particularly evident in responses regarding Beijing’s imposition of a national security law on Hong Kong.
Although 63.5 percent of interviewees worried that the law would harm Hong Kong citizens’ freedom and rights, only 59 percent of those same respondents supported the continuity of the anti-China extradition protests, while 15.1 percent opposed further protests. Expanding the ‘repertoire of contention’
Although restrictions enforced during the COVID-19 pandemic have limited the scale of protests, they have not stopped them completely. Beginning in late April, a number of “protest song” flash mobs sprang up in major shopping malls.
On May 24, thousands participated in an illegal rally against Beijing’s decision to impose the national security law on the city — the first large protests since COVID-19 restrictions went into force.
Then, on June 4, tens of thousands joined up for an annual candlelight vigil in Victoria Park and a dozen other districts across Hong Kong. This year was the first time the vigil was outlawed by authorities, who cited disease control restrictions.
Finally, on June 9, thousands of protesters rallied in Central district to mark the anniversary of the one million-strong rally against the China Extradition Bill.
All these actions have taken place despite the likelihood of arrests for participating in illegal assemblies.
Doubts over the sustainability of the anti-China extradition protests have been raised since the protests were less than a month old.
After the victory of the pro-democratic alliance in the district elections in November, supporters of the movement have started advocating for the idea of a “yellow economic circle”, wherein pro-establishment businesses are subjected to popular boycotts, while “yellow”, or pro-movement businesses, receive popular support.
Supporters have also called for the setting up of professional groups and labour unions to prepare for a future general strike.
This is the likely future direction of the protests, with resistance seeping into everyday activities, leaving the establishment facing a long war of attrition.
Then again, disease control restrictions cannot last forever, and the possibility that Hong Kong will once more witness massive mobilizations — the increased cost of collective action notwithstanding — cannot be discounted. * Disclaimer: The author of this post, Dr. Francis Lee, is the main coordinator of the CCPOS poll, which surveys 800-1200 respondents and has been published on a monthly basis since June last year.
