關於 mass media example ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

เรื่องของจังหวะ...

บทความนี้ได้ข้อมูลมาจากหนังสือที่ดีมากๆๆๆๆเล่มนึง อรอ่านหลายรอบมากเพราะเขียนดีจริงๆ หนังสือชื่อ The Practice and Science of Drawing โดย Harold Speed
แนะนำว่าให้ไปหามาอ่าน คนที่ชอบศิลปะจะสนุกสนานไปกับมันมาก. ไม่จำเป็นต้องวาดรูปได้ก็สนุกเพราะมีข้อมูลลึกๆชวนคิดเกี่ยวกับศิลปะมากมายแบบที่หาเล่มอื่นเทียบยากค่ะ

ขออภัยถ้าอ่านแล้วงงๆ อาจจะแปลเป็นภาษาไทยไม่ค่อยถูกต้อง ช่วย comment แนะนำได้เลยนะคะ🙏

คำว่าจังหวะในบริบทของศิลปะนั้นพูดถึงพลังของลายเส้น, น้ำหนัก และสี โดยคำนึงถึงการจัดวางของมันว่ามีผลต่อความรู้สึกของเราอย่างไร เปรียบง่ายๆเสมือนกับเสียงของโน้ทดนตรีในบทเพลง
ทำนองในดนตรีนั้นส่งผลต่อความรู้สึกของมนุษย์แบบไม่ต้องการคำอธิบาย. ดนตรีและจังหวะในภาษาของเส้นและสีสันในโลกของศิลปะก็ทำงานแบบเดียวกัน. มันคุยกับเราได้เหนือการใช้ภาษาพูด
บางทีการเขียนภาพเหมือนจริงมากๆก็เป็นอันตรายต่อการสูญเสียจังหวะไปเพราะถ้าหากศิลปินให้ความสำคัญกับการคัดลอกสิ่งที่เขียนมากไปก็อาจจะส่งผลทำให้เขาลืมเรื่องของจังหวะในลายเส้นและสีซึ่งถ่ายทอดออกมาจากภายในและเป็นหัวใจสำคัญของการสื่ออารมณ์เหนือคำพูด

การพยายามหาความสัมพันธ์ในธรรมชาติระหว่างรูปทรง, สี ,ลายเส้นและ น้ำหนักเพื่อนำมาสร้าง ‘จังหวะ’ ในรูปภาพนั้นเป็นงานของศิลปิน. คุณไม่ควรที่จะลดละความพยายามนี้แม้ว่าคุณกำลังหมกมุ่นกับดีเทลวิจิตรและเหมือนจริงขนาดไหน
ภาพที่ไร้จังหวะก็ไม่ต่างอะไรกับดนตรีไร้ทำนองที่น่าเบื่อ

Line and mass
ถ้าเราถอดชิ้นส่วนของรายละเอียดในรูปภาพทุกรูปและมองทุกอย่างแบบ abstract เลย เราก็จะเห็นได้ว่ามันมีส่วนประกอบหลักๆคือ เส้น(line) และ กลุ่มก้อน (mass) บางคนก็พูดว่าเส้นนั้นเป็นแค่ขอบของกลุ่มก้อน หรือกลุ่มก้อนนั้นเป็นเพียงพื้นที่ระหว่างเส้น. จะคิดหรือมองแบบไหนก็ตาม 2 สิ่งนี้คือส่วนประกอบหลักๆของทุกๆรูปภาพ

ภาษาของเส้น
Unity and Variety
ภาษาของเส้นนั้นสามารถทำงานได้ด้วยตัวของมันเองโดยไม่ต้องอาศัยความเป็นรูปธรรมลองนึกถึงเส้นเรขาคณิต มันสื่ออารมณ์แบบ abstract ได้ด้วยตัวของมันเอง ตามธรรมชาติส่วนใหญ่แล้วภาษาของลายเส้นก็มักจะทำงานเป็นเรื่องเดียวกันกับสิ่งที่มันเป็น ยกตัวอย่าง ลองนึกถึงภาพของแม่น้ำเราก็จะนึกถึงเส้นแนวนอน คงประหลาดถ้าพยายามใช้สามเหลี่ยมอธิบายความเป็นน้ำ

ทีนี้เวลาพูดถึงคุณภาพของลายเส้น อยากให้คิดเป็น 2 แบบหลักๆคือ
1. Unity - ความสามัคคีกันเป็นหนึ่งเดียวกัน
2. Variety - ความหลากหลาย

*สองอย่างนี้ดูจะขัดแย้งกันแต่มันขาดกันไม่ได้ *

ความสามัคคีเป็นหนึ่งเดียวกันคือทักษะการบริหารเอาหลายๆสิ่งเข้ามาอยู่รวมกันได้อย่างมีเอกภาพ แต่ก็จะไร้ชีวิตชีวาหากขาดความหลากหลาย

ยกตัวอย่างของภาษาของความสามัคคีก็คือ เส้นที่มีความซ้ำๆ เส้นที่เว้นเท่ากันหมด เส้นตรง วงกลม เส้นขนาน เป็นต้น
เส้นที่มี unity มากที่สุดจะเป็นอะไรอย่างอื่นไปไม่ได้นอกจากวงกลมและเส้นตรง

ยกตัวอย่างความหลากหลายของเส้นนั้นอาจจะง่ายกว่า มันก็คือความไม่เท่ากันในรูปทรงต่างๆไม่ว่าจะเป็นอะไรก็ตาม แต่ถ้าพูดถึงรูปทรงที่มีความหลากหลายที่สวยงามก็คงหนีไม่พ้นรูปไข่ ตัวอย่างที่ดีคือรูปทรงของใบหน้ารูปไข่งามๆ เพราะการเลี้ยวตัวของเส้นรอบไข่นั้นไม่มีความเหมือนกันเลยแม้แต่จุดเดียว ต่างจากวงกลมซึ่งเลี้ยวในจังหวะเท่ากันเป๊ะรอบวง

ในหนังสือมีการยกตัวอย่างยาวเหยียดมากๆในเรื่อง unity และ variety แต่ขอยกแค่บทเดียวมาพูด

แล้วจังหวะแบบไหนหละถึงงาม
พูดตรงๆว่าเรื่องนี้ไม่มีกฎตายตัว สิ่งที่หนังสือเอามายกตัวอย่างนั้นก็เป็นเพียงแค่ตัวอย่างที่นึกตามได้ง่ายและมีให้เห็นในธรรมชาติ

หน้าคน
ผู้อ่านลองนึกถึงใบหน้าคนที่ดูดี มันจะมีการจัดวางที่มี 2 หลักการนี้ผสมเข้าด้วยกันทั้ง unity และ variety
ใบหน้าของคนเรานั้นจะมีความเท่ากันเป็นสมมาตรของซ้ายและขวา ผนวกกับระยะห่างของการจัดวางนั้นก็ดูมีระเบียบเท่าๆกันแต่รูปด้านprofile ของใบหน้านั้นจะมีความหลากหลายอยู่มาก มีการยึกยือไปมาของเส้นที่เลี้ยวเข้าออกแบบไม่มีอะไรเท่ากันเลยก็ว่าได้
นี่คือตัวอย่างของการทำงานร่วมกันอย่างลงตัวของ unity ความสามัคคีและ variety ความหลากหลาย
นึกเล่นๆดูว่าหากหน้าเรามีความหลากหลายมากเกินไปก็คงจะไม่น่ามองสักเท่าไหร่ อาจจะน่ากลัวด้วยซ้ำ

สรุปคือ
ความหลากหลายแบบไร้ขอบเขตนั้นก็ทำให้เกิดความยุ่งเหยิงและไม่น่ามอง แต่ความนิ่งเกินไปแบบเส้นตรงนิ่งๆก็ช่างน่าเบื่อไร้ชีวิตชีวา

ฉะนั้นจะสังเกตได้ว่าความงามมักจะเกิดเมื่อความหลากหลายนั้นอยู่ภายใต้กฏเกณฑ์ของความสามัคคี

ขออนุญาตแบ่งเป็นหลายๆตอนนะคะเพราะมันยาวเหลือเกิน เดี๋ยวอ่านแล้วจะหลับเสียก่อน
The story of the rhythm...

This article is informative from a very good book. I have read it many times. It's very good. The Practice and Science of Drawing by Harold Speed.
I recommend that you go to read this. People who like art will enjoy it very much. There is no need to draw a picture. It's fun because there is deep information. I think about many art. It's difficult to find other books.

Sorry, if I have read this, I may not translate it in Thai. Please comment and suggest. 🙏

The word beat in the context of art speaks about the power of doodle, weight and color. Considering how it affects our feelings. It's simply like the sound of a musical notebook.
The melodies in music affect the human feeling without explanation. Music and rhythm in the language of lines and colors in the world of art work the same way. It talks to us beyond the use of speaking language.
Sometimes writing a very surreal image is harmful to losing a beat. If the artist focuses on copying the writings, it will make him forget about the beat in the lines and colors that are broadcasted from the inside and the heart of the media. Emotions beyond words.

Trying to find a natural relationship between shapes, colors, patterns and weight to create ' rhythm ' in the photo is the artist's work. You shouldn't lose this effort, even if you're obsessed with Fine and Real Detail.
A can't translate picture is no different than a boring music.

Line and mass
If we take off the detail in every photo and look at everything abstract, we can see that there is a main ingredient in line (line) and group (mass). Some people say that the line is just the edge of that group or group. Just a space between the lines. Whatever you think or look, 2 of these are the main components of every photo.

Language of lines
Unity and Variety
The language of the line can work on its own without concrete. Think of the geometry, abstract emotion by itself naturally. Most of the language of the stripes are the same thing. It's for example, thinking of the river's image. We think of horizontal lines. It's strange if we try to use a triangle to describe water.

Now, when I talk about the quality of the pattern, I want you to think about 2 types. Mainly,
1. Unity - Unity is united.
2. Variety - Diversity

* These two seem to be conflicting but they can't be separated *

Unity is unity. Management skills bring many things together unity. But lifeless without diversity.

For example, the language of unity is repeated, the same line, straight line, straight line, parallel circle, etc.
The line with the most unity will be nothing else, nothing but circles and straight lines.

For example, the diversity of the line may be easier than it is, the unequalities in various shapes, whatever it is. But if you talk about beautiful diversity shapes, you can't escape the oval shape. The good example is the shapes of the face, beautiful oval because of turning. The egg circumference is not the same at all. The same point is different from the circle, which turns in the same rhythm.

In the book, there is a very long example in the unity and variety. But I just lifted up one chapter to say.

What kind of beat is this? It's beautiful.
Frankly speaking, there is no rule. What a book has taken for example is just an example that it is easily recognized and naturally.

A human face.
Readers, think about the face of a good looking person. There will be alignment with these 2 principles mixed together with unity and variety.
Our faces are equally as symmetrical of left and right. Annexation with the distance of the alignment is equally organized. But the profile picture of the face is very diverse. There is a lot of the trending. The lines that turn into design are nothing equal.
This is an example of how unity, unity, unity, and diversity variety.
Just for sure, if our face had too much diversity, it wouldn't look at it. It would be scary.

In summary,
Unbounded diversity is messy and unlikely. But too stillness is boring, lifeless.

Therefore, it is observed that beauty is often born when diversity is under the rule of unity.

I ask permission to divide into several episodes because it's so long. I will read it and I will fall asleep.Translated

（支聯會2020年8月19日聲明 Statement by Hong Kong Alliance, 19 August 2020 ）

強烈譴責教育局篡改歷史
抹掉軍隊「六四」屠殺真相

報載有關通識科教科書經「自願送審計劃」送交教育局審查後，出版商涉嫌配合當局的所謂「優化意見」政策，刻意「河蟹」起來，淡化、粉飾、扭曲，以至刪去「現代中國」單元中多個被視為敏感議題的教學資料，其中涉及「維權運動」和「六四事件」。

以齡記出版的《高中新世紀通識：現代中國》為例，原版列出「維權運動」的原因時，提及當局「認為維權運動造成社會動盪，因此我們大多以打壓的方式處理，例如拘禁維權人士、封鎖網上相關言論等…」，修訂後改為「維權運動可能造成社會動盪，民眾應以理性的方式和我們反映問題及表達不滿，例如通過國家信訪局網站作出申訴…」。 可是事實上，上訪者多遭遇截訪、關押甚至酷刑，受屈者即使循司法程序尋求公義，亦經常遭到有關當局的滋擾和逼迫，造成更大和更多的冤案，如此的修訂資料無疑是文過飾非，為當局的惡行塗脂抹粉。

該書在修訂「六四事件」資料時的手法同樣拙劣不堪。 原版提及觸發事件的「貪污問題」和「官倒現象」等起因，以及過程中的「軍隊清場」和「武力鎮壓」等解說如今完全被刪除，甚至「六四事件」字眼也被抹掉，修改為「造成民眾普遍不滿，更削弱政府管治效能，威脅中國社會穩定」云云，閃爍其詞，簡直完全抹煞事件始末的客觀和準確陳述。這樣的修訂手法不僅是偏向性混淆事實，更有意掩飾，不惜篡改真相，將血跡斑斑的「六四」屠殺慘劇，避重就輕的寫成維穩篇章，其政治意圖昭然若揭，卻是有違教育專業原則。

須知歷史教學是認識和探究的學習過程，有關教學材料的整理、編製和鋪陳須持平公正，盡量展示和引述正反兩方面資料，從而引導學生以多角度討論、思考和判斷。 歷史教學並不是政治宣傳，而歷史教材因此絕對不是以「政治正確」掛帥，經修改以凸顯黨國政策和正面形象。 極權國家慣常以操控的教育手段「修改」歷史，從而「捏塑」人民的歷史記憶，「箝制」人民的思想，以配合其管治策略。 香港人，特別是香港教育界，必須有所警覺。

為此，支聯會抗議教育局的審核教科書機制淪為政治審查工具，並強烈譴責掩飾真相的歷史教材修訂。 歷史絕對不容當權者肆意抹煞，支聯會當前運作的「六四紀念館」，以及籌建中的網上「六四記憶。人權博物館」，正是要好好保存有關的寶貴和真確歷史資料，讓史實和記憶傳承下去。

(Statement by Hong Kong Alliance, 19 August 2020)

Hong Kong Alliance strongly condemns the Education Bureau for distorting history

Stop erasing the truth of the Tiananmen Massacre

Media have reported that after Liberal Studies textbooks were sent to the Education Bureau for review through a ‘voluntary submission scheme’, publishers have cooperated with the so-called ‘optimization comments’ policy, downplaying, whitewashing, distorting, and even deleting many teaching materials deemed ‘sensitive’ in the Modern China unit, including the ‘human rights movement’ and ‘June 4 incident’.

For example, take ‘High School New Century Liberal Studies: Modern China’ published by Ling Kee. The original version says the authorities ‘believe the human rights movement has caused social unrest, so they mostly deal with it in repressive ways such as detaining human rights defenders, blocking relevant online comments, etc’. This was revised to ‘[the] human rights movement might cause social unrest. [The] public should report problems and express dissatisfaction with [the authorities] in a rational manner, for example, by making a complaint through the website of the National Public Complaints and Proposals Administration…’ However in reality, petitioners are often intercepted, imprisoned and even tortured. Even if the aggrieved seek justice through judicial procedures, they are often harassed and persecuted by the relevant authorities, resulting in more injustice. Such revised information is undoubtedly a whitewash to cover up the authorities' evil deeds.

Revisions of information pertaining to the ‘June 4th incident’ in the book are also problematic. While the original version gave ‘corruption’ and ‘official profiteering’ as triggers of mass protests in 1989 and made reference to ‘clearance by the army’ and ‘suppression by force’, this has all been deleted in the revision. Even the words ‘June 4th incident’ have been erased. Instead, the proests are described as having ‘caused public dissatisfaction, weakened governance effectiveness, and threatened the stability of Chinese society’, which is evasive and completely obliterates the objective and accurate account of the incident. Such revisions are not only biased, obscuring the facts, but they even try to conceal and distort the truth. The blood-stained tragedy of Tiananmen Massacre becomes a chapter on stability maintenance. The political intentions are obvious. They violate the principles of education.

It is important to note that history teaching is a learning process of recognition and inquiry. The collation, compilation and presentation of teaching materials should be balanced and fair, presenting and citing both pros and cons, so as to guide students to discuss, think and judge for themselves from multiple perspectives. History teaching is not political propaganda. History textbooks should therefore definitely not be modified to highlight party-state policy and improve its image. Totalitarian countries often use control over education as a means to ‘modify’ history, thereby molding people's historical memory and suppressing people's thinking in conformity with their governance strategy. Hong Kong people, especially the Hong Kong education sector, must be vigilant.

Therefore, Hong Kong Alliance protests that the Education Bureau’s textbook review mechanism has become a tool for political vetting, and strongly condemns revisions of history textbooks that conceal the truth. History must not be arbitrarily erased by those in power. The goals of the currently operating June 4 Museum and Online Tiananmen Massacre Memorial Museum under development by Hong Kong Alliance are precisely to preserve the relevant precious and true historical materials so that historical facts and memories can be preserved and passed on.

#教育局 #政治審查 #歷史 #六四真相 #六四屠殺 #通識科 #篡改歷史 #六四紀念館 #六四記憶人權博物館

【#TheDiplomat: 沈旭暉隨緣家書英文版🇭🇰】很久沒有向國際關係評論網 The Diplomat 供稿，但國際線十分重要，不應放棄。這次他們希望分享23條、國安法、反恐法風雨欲來的「新香港」前瞻，願國際社會能多了解快將出現的危機：

While the world is preoccupied with a fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been tightening its political grip on all aspects of Hong Kong’s civil society. Rumor has it that Beijing will push through legislating national security laws under Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law by unconventional means, such as massively disqualifying pro-democratic legislators or even directly applying a national law, widely argued as a major step to destroy the rights and freedom of Hong Kongers, and bring Chinese authoritarianism to Hong Kong.

After the 2019 protests, the administration of Carrie Lam, who theoretically is still leading the special administrative region of China, has little political capital at stake, with its legitimacy reaching rock bottom. The pro-government camp has dwindling prospects for the city’s upcoming Legislative Council election. The government‘s ”nothing to lose“ mentality is apparent from its recent blatant reinterpretation of the Basic Law’s Article 22 (another article that limits the influence of China’s offices in Hong Kong’s internal affairs). The debate is nothing new, but the pressure this time is quite different.

This article highlights the different strategies Beijing could adopt to enact Article 23 insidiously or under disguise to avoid backlash from the international community, while continuing to reap benefits from the city’s globally recognized special status. This seems to be part of Beijing’s brinkmanship to bring Hong Kong protesters and their supporters to their knees and move the city closer to authoritarianism. To counter these moves, Hong Kongers must define the boundaries beyond which Hong Kong falls into authoritarian rule and make a case as to why the city’s downfall is detrimental to the international community‘s interest.

The Long-Term Controversy Over National Security Laws

Back in 2003, the implementation of Article 23 was thwarted by the moderate pro-establishment politician James Tien. In face of overwhelming public disapproval of the law, he withdrew support and votes from his Liberal Party. However, 17 years later, it is hard to imagine Beijing following the old legislative playbook: start with a public consultation, followed by public discourse and political debate, and end with the majority rule. This playbook only works in peaceful societies ruled by a trustworthy government with integrity.

The aftermath of 2003, as well as the 2019 protests, should have taught Beijing and the Hong Kong government a lesson: pushing through national security legislation in a flawed parliament controlled by the minority pro-government camp would inevitably set off another full city-scale protest — and undoubtedly more fierce and focused this time. Given the current government’s numerous displays of dishonesty, it is conceivable that they will embark on a less-traveled path to implement Article 23.

Strategy One: “Anti-Terrorism”

In principle, one possible strategy could be to directly enact Chinese national law across Hong Kong, which can be achieved by declaring a state of emergency in the city. However, this is risky business as it would tarnish the integrity of “one country two systems” and subsequently Hong Kong’s international standing. Beijing, a risk-averse regime, is also unwilling to see Hong Kong’s status as a middleman for laundering money disappear into thin air.

Instead, Beijing could be concocting a narrative that would see Chinese national law applied to Hong Kong while not damaging Hong Kong’s international standing and Beijing’s own interests. The key word in this script is “anti-terrorism.” As early as 2014, pro-Beijing scholars have been claiming the emergence of “local terrorist ideology” on Hong Kong soil. Since the anti-extradition bill protests last year, government rhetoric frequently described the protests, which caused no deaths at all in the entire year, with phrases like “inclination to terrorist ideology.” That was a signal to the world that Hong Kong’s internal conflicts had ballooned into a national security issue. This gives the government the legitimacy to justify the implementation of Chinese national laws across the highly autonomous region to counter terrorism. The Chinese government knows that if it can persuade the world that terrorism exists in Hong Kong, and that it is as severe as the terror threat facing many other nations today, the international community will be less critical of Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong. Enacting Chinese laws directly is a convenient path that will save Beijing from having to tackle Hong Kong’s internal conflicts, basically turning the Hong Kong issue into a nonissue.

Strategy Two: Stacking the Legislature by Disqualifying Candidates

An even bolder strategy was probably foretold by a recent incident where the Hong Kong government and Beijing’s agencies for Hong Kong affairs (HKMAO and the Liaison Office) jointly criticized lawmaker Dennis Kwok for filibustering, framing it as “misconduct in public office” and “violating his oath.” It is incomprehensible to claim that filibustering goes against a lawmaker’s main duty; rather, it is common understanding that legislative work includes debating the law and representing public opinion against unreasonable laws. In a parliament controlled by the minority, pro-democratic members representing the majority of Hong Kongers are forced to express their objections using means like filibustering. Wouldn’t a lack of different political opinions turn the legislative branch into a rubber-stamp institution?

The above allegation has set a dangerous precedent for twisting the logic behind a certain provision in the Basic Law to target opposing lawmakers. In other words, to fulfill Beijing’s interpretation of the principal requirement for holding public office in Hong Kong, one could be required to take a meticulously legalistic approach to uphold the Basic Law down to its every single wording. A public official, by this new definition, not only needs to support “one country, two systems” or object Hong Kong independence, but also must abide by every single provision in the Basic Law. Worst of all, based on the previous cases, whether an official’s words or actions oversteps a provision is up to Beijing’s interpretation of his/her “intent.”

If this approach is applied, in the next election, there might be additional official questions for screening candidates like the following: “The Basic Law states that the enactment of Article 23 is a constitutional duty. Failing to support Article 23 legislation violates the Basic Law. Do you support it?” This question would suffice to disqualify even moderate or even pro-establishment candidates like James Tien. Even if any pro-democratic candidates were elected, once Article 23 re-enters the legislative process, they could risk ouster by raising objections.

Despite the absurdity of this tactic, the Chinese regime may just be tempted enough if such a strategy could resolve two of China’s current nuisances — voices of dissent in the Legislative Council and the previous failure to implement Article 23.

Strategy Three: The “Boiling Frog Effect”

Article 23 is not yet implemented, but the dystopian world that the protesters pictured in 2003 is already becoming reality. Regular citizens have been persecuted for “sedition” for sharing their views on social media or participating in legal protests; workers face retaliation for taking part in strikes; corporations are pressured to publicly side with the government’s stance; employees who have the “wrong” political views are fired; schools have been closely monitored for teaching material; protest-supporting fundraisers were framed for money laundering; a retweet or like may lead to persecution, under a colonial-era law. Only now have Hong Kongers woken up to their new reality — although the Basic Law technically protects citizens’ rights to speak, rally, march, demonstrate, and go on strike, the government could enfeeble civil rights by bending antiquated laws and legal provisions. The frequent abuse of law enforcement power on a small scale, such as improper arrests and police violence, is desensitizing the public and the international community. In a few years, Hong Kong will become unrecognizable. This is indeed a clever play on Beijing’s part to slowly strip away Hong Kong’s autonomy and freedom, without causing much international attention.

Counter-Strategies Against Beijing’s Brinkmanship

Beijing’s overarching goal is to hollow out Hong Kong but, at the same time, avoid major backlash from the international community, which could spell the end of the privileged global status of Hong Kong not granted to other Chinese cities. Beijing also aims at preventing single incidents that could cascade down into mass protests as seen in 2003, 2014, and 2019; and eliminating any resistance forces from within Hong Kong’s legislature. The tactics outlined above are typical in a game of brinkmanship.

In response, Hong Kongers in Hong Kong and on the so-called “international frontline” must know their strengths and bargaining chips on this negotiating table with Beijing.

Unlike Xinjiang and Tibet, Hong Kong is a city with transparency and free flow of information. Hong Kongers need to make a case to the world that the protests are not acts of terrorism. Some suggestions include comparing the Hong Kong protests to similar struggles in 20 or so other counties in the world at the present time, none of which were classified as terrorism; collecting a large amount of concrete evidence of the disproportionate use of force by the Hong Kong police; and showing how enacting Chinese national laws in Hong Kong will end the city’s autonomy and spell disaster for international community‘s interests.

The Legislative Council is the institution that can counteract Beijing’s “boiling frog” strategy and to keep Hong Kongers’ hope alive in the system. Those who plan to run for legislative office must be prepared to be disqualified from running. If only individuals are banned, there need to be alternative candidates as back-up plans. However, if and when the disqualification process is applied broadly to entire camps of candidates (for example, all who object to Article 23), the pro-democracy camp must make a strong case to the Hong Kong and global public that this is the endgame for Hong Kong democracy. Then the incumbent popularly elected legislators will hold the internationally recognized mandate from the public and serve as the last resistance.

These recommendations delineates how the slogan “if we burn, you burn with us,” often seen in the protests, may play out in the game of international relations. If the national security laws are “passed” by a legislature that is jury-rigged in this manner, or if related national laws are directly implemented in Hong Kong, Hong Kongers should signal clearly to the world that it goes way beyond the promised “one country, two systems.” Crossing this red line by Beijing should be seen by the world as a blunt violation of its promised autonomy to Hong Kongers. At that time, if the international community led by the United States and the United Kingdom decided to revoke the “non-sovereignty entity” status of Hong Kong and regard the SAR as an ordinary Chinese city, it shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Dr. Simon Shen is the Founding Chairman of GLOs (Glocal Learning Offices), an international relations start-up company. He also serves as an adjunct associate professor in the University of Hong Kong, Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and associate director of the Master of Global Political Economy Programme of the CUHK. The author acknowledges Jean Lin, Coco Ho, Chris Wong, Michelle King, and Alex Yap for their assistance in this piece.

▶️ 高度自治 vs 全面管治
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwt8wZl8jHQ