22 years ago, as part of the decolonization process, the UK fulfilled the terms of a treaty concluded in 1898 with the Manchu Qing empire, and transferred Hong Kong to the People’s Republic of China. The colony, which in 1997 was one of the largest financial centers of the world economy, has become a special administrative region of China.
Under the terms of the Hong Kong transfer agreement, until 2047 this territory retains its autonomy in all matters except defense and foreign policy: its own police, financial regulation, monetary system, and immigration policy. The attributes of independence guaranteed by China are important for residents, and any attempts to take them away cause resistance in the form of mass protests, which once again swept Hong Kong this summer.
Using the example of these mass actions, which the whole world is watching without exaggeration, one can trace the evolution of protest as a tool for the struggle for ... Unfortunately, filling this gap with some tangible goal is impossible, since the development of the situation has shown that neither the goal of the protest can be formulated its leaders, which simply do not exist, nor the participants themselves. Indignation seems to be in the air and fuel aggression, the victims of which are completely random people. Vladimir Putin’s statement about the opposition who protested in 2011, “There’s no one to talk to,” which he made during New Year’s congratulations to Pulov’s journalists, can easily be attributed to those who block the streets and Hong Kong airport.
On numerous frames from the centers of confrontation between people and the police there is not a single human face. All have black shirts, yellow construction helmets and respirators or medical masks. The centers of resistance are coordinated in the messengers, and the main and only task now is to wreak havoc. Yes, the last wave of protests began with the bill on the extradition of local residents to China, Macau and Taiwan, but the bill has long been suspended, and the banners have slogans for democracy, which (so far) is complete order in Hong Kong.
Violence, without any justification, is annoying for local residents.
The liberal press covers the clashes as a struggle of citizens for their rights, but it is impossible to endlessly justify vandalism and looting. Money loves silence, and Hong Kong's reputation as a major financial hub is undermining every day. Today, there are no guarantees for the operation of public transport, just as there are no guarantees that you will suddenly not be held hostage by a raging crowd.
The absence of any structure and leaders among the protesters does not only prevent political negotiations, but also formulate a banal protocol of disagreement. Chaos spreads over the network like a viral flash mob, and then splashes onto the streets - and go: hit, crash.
I think that many states are looking at what is happening and trying to find an antidote against senseless violence, which is gaining unprecedented proportions and nourishes itself. In the era of a new global confrontation of the largest economies, it seems that all means are good, if only to deprive your competitor of a good night's sleep. But I’m not sure that this wave of protest moods can be saddled, taken under control or used for one’s own purposes. Chaos and chaos to sow destruction without purpose and meaning. We, outside observers, can only watch if the new “round of entropy” comes to naught or the world continues to slide into causeless madness.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.