Here in India, we can post whatever we embellish. As Indians, we enjoy greater rights, but the reality portrayed in our neighborhood China seems a new virtual universe. In fact, the industrial giant has a separate industry for censorship. This industry promulgates an information void that has drifted the economy away from the stark reality, so much so that they find peaceful pro-democracy protests of Hong Kong as another instance of Western interference. These protests have been designated as riots by the Chinese Media and qualify the pro-democracy activists as rabble-rousers. Yet hidden in the welter of censored news is the agony of the sufferers in Hong Kong. Is this alternate reality really that void?
The Global Reality and that in China stand at two separate parallels with not even a zilch of interconnection. What can one expect from the government which stigmatized pro-democratic protests in Hong Kong as riots? The Chinese influence is believed to have disgorged from the Extradition Bill that was supposed to allow the transfer of alleged criminals to Taiwan and China. China, through its policies, has persistently questioned the value of Human Rights. It is believed to have infuriated the pro-democrats. They find it anti-humanistic to extradite alleged citizens of Hong Kong because of the exclusivity of the Chinese legal system and intensive censorship. It has rendered pro-democrats inquisitive about the extent of Socialism overshadowing Hong Kong.
The legislative council that has to pass the bill is mostly pro-china. In fact, the council itself doesn’t fully adhere to the constitutional principle of “One Country, Two Systems” which prescribes “Universal Suffrage” for the Legislative Council. “One Country, Two Systems” is a principle that entails a Semi-autonomous status to Hong Kong as well as Macau. Perhaps, the autonomy is just a facade since out of 70 legislative seats only 30 are democratically elected. Rest 40 seats are believed to be under the beck of big business industries, which find their interests suffused in the so-called “Chinese model of Socialism”. Therefore, the extradition bill is believed to just aggrandize Chinese influence on Hong Kong.
Although the bill has been temporarily suspended, the pro-democrats and activists want a complete withdrawal. The Chinese find these demands superficial and anti-socialist. Consequently, they are meddling with political and economic affairs of the region. The Case of Hong Kong’s missing booksellers demonstrated a direct hit to Freedom of Speech entailed by article 27. Similarly, many pro-democracy activists have been indicted by the Chinese government for inciting the public for a rally outside Beijing’s liaison office in the region. This has aroused an unprecedented massive demonstration, especially among the anti-socialist activists.
However, the story in Chinese Economy has been feigned by the Government. On one side, Chinese media pictures Hong Kong demonstrations as a threat to “One Country, Two System” and on the other Britain accuses China of having breached the conventions of the principle. The former obviously has been influenced by specks of Chinese socialistic ideology and political Censorship. This is not the only instance of Chinese breaching the boundaries of this principle along with a creation of information void among its own countrymen. In 2014, at least ten thousands of local residents took to streets under the so-called Umbrella Movement to extirpate Chinese ideologies from Hong Kong’s political system. Censorship was augmented along with the banning of Instagram. Their ceding of power shows their voracity to integrate Hong Kong under Socialist influence much before the predefined time cap of 2047. Maybe the Chinese communist party has taken “one country” phrase more seriously than the principle in its entirety.
The picture published in China is quite different from what we can even imagine. The rebels are categorized are anti-systemic. They portray eurocentric ideologies as a hindrance to their sovereignty. The Chinese government avers the socialist regime in these regions as a means of real prosperity. Its stringency of laws is transcending the national boundaries. Perhaps, these laws are cataclysmic on individual freedom. One cannot voice his opinions on such demonstrations through strict supervision. Censorship is abundant and social media is forbidden. Keywords like “democracy”, “demonstration” or “Hong Kong” have been censored. So, next time you look for Hong Kong on Chinese web portals, believe me, they might not be true as they project an alternate reality in the minds of a layman.
-Truth
Destiny with Truth 