Second Opinion 1/3/2012 Paul Curley
The kerfuffle surrounding the lifestyle choices of would-be Chief Executive Henry Tang Ying-yen has not only had the benefit of providing our community with some much-needed comic relief, it also must have caused Hong Kong’s political masters in Beijing to wonder if universal suffrage, one-person one-vote democracy could possibly produce anything worse.
In national elections held during the final days of World War II, the British public unceremoniously ejected then-Prime Minister Winston Churchill from office, despite the fact that Mr. Churchill undisputedly had played a crucial role in leading his country and their allies (including Nationalist China under the rule of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek) to triumph over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. At the time of his election defeat, Mr. Churchill said, “They have a perfect right to kick me out. That is democracy.” Despite the public rebuke implied by his electoral loss, Mr. Churchill hadn’t lost his sense of humor. When, shortly after being dumped out of 10 Downing Street, Mr. Churchill was offered the Order of the Garter for his many services during the war, he was reported to have replied, “Why should I accept the Order of the Garter, when the British people have just given me the Order of the Boot?” Which brings us back to Mr. Tang and the strange mix of comedy and concern aroused by his troubles. Who is this man, and how did our fair community end up with him as the leading establishment candidate to serve as Hong Kong’s chief executive for the next five years? Of course, it is unfair to judge a person based upon the economic circumstances of his or her birth. One cannot choose one’s parents, and intelligence, drive and leadership ability manifest themselves in all sorts of personalities and arise from all sorts of backgrounds. So, it would be very wrong to condemn Mr. Tang simply because he was born the son of a successful and politically well-connected textile magnate. Nevertheless, there is a troubling sense that Mr. Tang was “born with a silver spoon in his mouth” and that there is little in his biography to suggest that he has encountered and overcome the kind of character-building challenges that stiffen men’s spines and which are so often shared by people of great accomplishment, including many of Hong Kong’s first generation of tycoons.
On the surface, Mr. Tang’s record of public service is admirable. He was a member of the Legislative Council from 1991 to 1998, where he represented the rotten borough of the Import and Export Constituency, and he has also served as an Executive Councilor since 1997. Mr. Tang has served successively (that is not to say, however, that he has served successfully) as Secretary of Commerce, Industry and Technology; Financial Secretary; and, latterly, Chief Secretary. His record of service also includes the usual grab bag of appointments to public bodies held by pliable pro-government worthies, such as seats on those committees that govern the Trade Development Council, the Town Planning Board and the University Grants Committee. Yet, despite more than two decades of being present at all the “top tables” of governing institutions of Hong Kong, what has Mr. Tang ever accomplished, apart from playing a key role in the Harbourfest fiasco? Where a Hong Kong citizen might reasonably ask, “What has he ever done for us?” an equally pertinent question might be, “What in God’s name have we ever done to deserve him?” It must be that political leaders in Beijing, as they look on with dismay at the embarrassing and unseemly circus surrounding Mr. Tang’s candidature, and the unhappy prospect of five and a half more years of the same nonsense, now wonder if Mr. Churchill was right all along when he said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
We are now on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Next2ndOpinion/464005150156 ####
Democracy would produce a better result. ( Daily photo)
The kerfuffle surrounding the lifestyle choices of would-be Chief Executive Henry Tang Ying-yen has not only had the benefit of providing our community with some much-needed comic relief, it also must have caused Hong Kong’s political masters in Beijing to wonder if universal suffrage, one-person one-vote democracy could possibly produce anything worse.
In national elections held during the final days of World War II, the British public unceremoniously ejected then-Prime Minister Winston Churchill from office, despite the fact that Mr. Churchill undisputedly had played a crucial role in leading his country and their allies (including Nationalist China under the rule of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek) to triumph over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. At the time of his election defeat, Mr. Churchill said, “They have a perfect right to kick me out. That is democracy.” Despite the public rebuke implied by his electoral loss, Mr. Churchill hadn’t lost his sense of humor. When, shortly after being dumped out of 10 Downing Street, Mr. Churchill was offered the Order of the Garter for his many services during the war, he was reported to have replied, “Why should I accept the Order of the Garter, when the British people have just given me the Order of the Boot?” Which brings us back to Mr. Tang and the strange mix of comedy and concern aroused by his troubles. Who is this man, and how did our fair community end up with him as the leading establishment candidate to serve as Hong Kong’s chief executive for the next five years? Of course, it is unfair to judge a person based upon the economic circumstances of his or her birth. One cannot choose one’s parents, and intelligence, drive and leadership ability manifest themselves in all sorts of personalities and arise from all sorts of backgrounds. So, it would be very wrong to condemn Mr. Tang simply because he was born the son of a successful and politically well-connected textile magnate. Nevertheless, there is a troubling sense that Mr. Tang was “born with a silver spoon in his mouth” and that there is little in his biography to suggest that he has encountered and overcome the kind of character-building challenges that stiffen men’s spines and which are so often shared by people of great accomplishment, including many of Hong Kong’s first generation of tycoons.
On the surface, Mr. Tang’s record of public service is admirable. He was a member of the Legislative Council from 1991 to 1998, where he represented the rotten borough of the Import and Export Constituency, and he has also served as an Executive Councilor since 1997. Mr. Tang has served successively (that is not to say, however, that he has served successfully) as Secretary of Commerce, Industry and Technology; Financial Secretary; and, latterly, Chief Secretary. His record of service also includes the usual grab bag of appointments to public bodies held by pliable pro-government worthies, such as seats on those committees that govern the Trade Development Council, the Town Planning Board and the University Grants Committee. Yet, despite more than two decades of being present at all the “top tables” of governing institutions of Hong Kong, what has Mr. Tang ever accomplished, apart from playing a key role in the Harbourfest fiasco? Where a Hong Kong citizen might reasonably ask, “What has he ever done for us?” an equally pertinent question might be, “What in God’s name have we ever done to deserve him?” It must be that political leaders in Beijing, as they look on with dismay at the embarrassing and unseemly circus surrounding Mr. Tang’s candidature, and the unhappy prospect of five and a half more years of the same nonsense, now wonder if Mr. Churchill was right all along when he said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
We are now on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Next2ndOpinion/464005150156 ####
Democracy would produce a better result. ( Daily photo)
沒有留言:
張貼留言