Posted by I am astounded that many older Hong Kong Chinese still have a strong affinity to the United Kingdom and the pine for the “good old” days of British colonial rule. I think it is a combination of “basking in reflected glory” and mass “Stockholm Syndrome” that causes this strange phenomenon. I for one, was happy the see the backside of Governor Chris Patten and his colonial cronies after the handover in 1997; so much so the BBC filmed me with a T-shirt that said “welcome back” with a Chinese flag on the front and “bye bye UK” with a British flag on the back. Almost 20 years have passed since the handover and I still believe that Hong Kong is much better off as part of China. Self-determination and rule, no matter how flawed, is always better than that of a foreign power thousands of miles away. How some locals think they were better off as “second class citizens” astounds me as it goes hand-in-hand with the attitude that all things British (i.e. white) are superior. True, institutions such as the rule of law and good public administration (including the government bureaucracy, courts, police force and the Independent Commission Against Corruption or ICAC) were and continue to be a strong foundation for Hong Kong today – so no pithy Monty Python comments from the movie Life of Brian about “what have the Roman’s done for us” please. But Singapore inherited much the same and continued to prosper under local rule since 1965 so it is clear that you can maintain and build such institutions on your own without the aid of flunkies and de facto dictators being sent out from the Home Office in London.
The British are not exactly warm and friendly folk when it comes to foreigners despite their desperate attempts to project “cool Britannia” and to this day, despite all the bad things that their ancestors did during the days when the sun never set on the British Empire, the majority of Britons still have a favourable view of their colonial past. Mind you, these are the same plonkers who just voted for Brexit so that is kind of understandable. While most Britons still wax eloquently about Margaret Thatcher’s rule, her administration did nothing but screw the people in Hong Kong. With the passage of the British Nationality Act in 1981 (effective in 1983), Thatcher created a wholly new category of second-class citizen called the British Overseas citizen which was principally targeted at Hong Kong. With the stroke of a pen, more than three million people in Hong Kong lost their full British Citizenship and ended up with a crap passport called the BN(O) (for British National Overseas) following the passing of the Hong Kong Act of 1985 which did not give them the right of abode in the United Kingdom. That other overseas colonies, notably Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands (mostly white population) were given full British Citizenship made the move look very racist (which it was) although such politically correct thoughts were not well entrenched in Britain at that time. I mean, Thatcher fought a war with Argentina to liberate the people of the Falkland Islands but wouldn’t even give Hong Kong people a lousy piece of paper. The fact that Britain passed the British Overseas Territories Act in 2002, five years after the 1997 handover, that effectively restored full British Citizenship to remaining citizens of British colonies or dependant territories makes the racist intent of the 1985 Hong Kong Act crystal clear to all but the most sycophantic of British apologists. Undoubtedly, most of these were part of the 50,000 select few that the Governor of Hong Kong could grant full British Citizenship to under the 1990 British Nationality Selection Scheme (the Save Your British Lackeys scheme). That’s even worse odds than on the Titanic where 62% of passengers in First Class survived versus 27% of those in Coach. I am heartened to see that the use of the “second class” BN(O) has rapidly gone the way of the dodo with only 143,000 left outstanding in 2015 as people opted for the Chinese Hong Kong SAR passport instead. It will be interesting to see the new design post-Brexit though as the only difference on the cover between the BN(O) and a full British passport is the words “European Union” at the top.
Of course, the British couched their racism in pragmatism as put forth by MP Peter Blaker during debate in Parliament. “The hon. Gentleman is at liberty to say that we should admit for permanent residence in Britain all the BDTCs residing in Hong Kong—about 3 million—if they wish to come. That position is not supported by me or, I think, the majority of our fellow citizens. That would impose an impossible burden. One must indeed look at the numbers issue.” This argument was and is complete hogwash because granting the right of abode in the UK doesn’t mean that millions of Hong Kongers would move to Britain en-masse. Indeed, Portugal did exactly that for their subjects in Macau when they handed it back to China in 1999 by granting all the residents born before 1981 full Portuguese citizenship. The irony is that by virtue of being in the EU, it means that the Chinese living in the Portuguese colony of Macau could freely move to the UK while those in the British colony of Hong Kong could not. In the end, I think very few Chinese in Macau moved to either Portugal or Britain and stayed put. People are loathe to leave their home and family to foreign lands unless something horrible like war or famine displaces them.
The point of this missive is not to bash the Brits and their evil racist colonial ways; even though that description is very much true and they deserve it. But I had to provide the background so that readers who are less familiar with the history of Hong Kong can understand what happened to another segment of the population; notably those from South Asia who were mostly left stateless by the British in 1997. Under Chinese law, those non-Chinese left in Hong Kong were technically not Chinese citizens because they are not ethnically Chinese nor born in China. Many had been living in Hong Kong for several generations, brought in by the British during colonial times to control the local Chinese population for the most part as part of the police or the military although others came as traders and businessmen. The Nepalis in particular were mostly descended from renowned Gurkhas in the British Army. These people could not return to their ancestral homeland as they technically were no longer citizens of those now independent countries nor were they, just like the Chinese in Hong Kong, given the right to abode in the UK. Technically, these people would become stateless after the handover even though they could cling to their useless BN(O) passports for a while. The British knew this was coming and even debated it in Parliament but chose to make no exception for this group of people (also probably because they weren’t white even though many served in the British military). The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress finally clarified its position in 2002 and put Hong Kong Immigration in charge of Nationality Laws within the SAR. As a result, over the next decade, most of the stateless South Asians living in Hong Kong have been naturalised and given Chinese citizenship as a permanent resident of Hong Kong. In the 2006 census, there were 30,444 Indians, 20,864 Nepalis and 16,776 Pakistanis living in Hong Kong.
The irony is that, during the 16 years I lived in Hong Kong, some busy-body foreign NGOs would always raise the flag and write about racism in Hong Kong and the treatment of the South Asians. These people, invariably white and often British as well, remain oblivious to the fact that they caused this problem. Despite what foreigners like to preach, Hong Kong is not a multi-cultural city. It is a modern, open and international city with many expats, foreigners and minorities but Chinese still make up 95% of the population. Nonetheless, all the citizens, especially the South Asians, should have the right to education and given the opportunity to assimilate in a way that makes employment possible. I remember all these idiotic white people saying access to an English education was necessary for the South Asians. In fact, I think the opposite is true. What they need is access and help in assimilating into a Chinese society and get an education in Cantonese as well as English or else risk being continually being marginalised in the job market. Understand this simple concept: They are not privileged white people who can get by with only English unlike the expats who think its OK to live 20 years in Hong Kong and can’t speak Cantonese. Nonetheless, it is with gladness that I saw this report in the South China Morning Post the other day about a Pakistani police officer in Hong Kong who made international headlines.
“Police Constable Ifzal Zaffar made headlines around the world after he climbed up the crane on a construction site near the Western Harbour Tunnel and persuaded the distressed man to come down by reassuring him in Urdu.” I don’t know if that makes him a hero but the constable sure has my respect for doing his job well and the way he conducts himself. The story is more symbolic than just one event though because Ifzal Zaffar is one of the first “graduates” of Project Gemstone (11 in the first class) which is a move by the police force to recruit non-ethnic Chinese officers and give them additional language training. This is a move in the right direction because being a Chinese city, it is hard for an average person (i.e. not some white privileged expatriate) to find employment if he doesn’t speak Cantonese. According to Zaffar, “It shows them nothing is impossible. You can try and improve your Chinese and join the police force or other government jobs in Hong Kong, so you can be successful. I have never really faced prejudice myself. Hong Kong people are so friendly. I don’t think they would think like that.” Kudos to him for working hard and double kudos for his great attitude and outlook on life. Triple kudos for not trying to blame racism on every problem that minorities in Hong Kong have (which is where most NGOs and white expats start their thinking) because it is as incumbent on them to make the effort and to assimilate as much as it is for society to provide aid for them to get there.
A great little human interest story right? I mean, how could you take anything negative out of this? If you thought that white privilege was endemic in the West, you haven’t seen anything until you listen to these pompous dicks when they are expatriates in Asia. Here’s a screenshot from the SCMP’s Facebook page commenting on this story.
Hey Carlos… primitive and racist… what do you think this is 1890 Macau under colonial Portuguese rule? So you think that Portugal is sophisticated and advanced when it comes to race relations and human rights? You mean like in Lisbon where “They treat us like animals,” Sousa says of the police. “It’s a black neighbourhood – they treat us like we’re all here to be exterminated.” Heck, even Rihanna thinks Portugal is racist as hell. So spare me your condescension and moral superiority. The Pakistani police officer doesn’t think Hong Kong is racist. Prakash Chatlani (also South Asian) doesn’t think so either. The Chinese don’t think so. So how does any of this involve a white European and your stupid sensibilities? Here’s a hint: It doesn’t. So why don’t you just fly your politically-correct liberal gwailo 鬼佬 ass back to Europe and stop telling others what to do and think. Are the Chinese racists? By modern Western sensibilities, yes. We call South Asian “ah-cha” (I’m told because of their tendency to say “cha” a lot in their speaking) which over-sensitive liberals somehow think is derogatory but then they think the same when we say “gwailo”. I’m never going to stop using both until the day I die regardless of what brainwashed politically correct liberals think. But I have never heard anyone, let alone politicians, say we should “send them all back to Pakistan” in all the years I’ve lived here… unlike in the West where I hear that shit all the time. I don’t see Chinese cops harassing and beating up South Asians on the street just because they are different… unlike in the West where that happens all the time. I don’t see Chinese skinhead and neo-nazis running around defacing mosques, churches and temples… unlike in the West where that happens all the time. So remind me again who is advanced and who is primitive Carlos? What an arrogant hypocritical prick like so many Westerners.
Hong Kong and the Chinese approach to race relations is very different than in the West. It is not perfect and, as it relates specifically to the South Asians, I think that integration and education are the keys to making life better for this ethnic minority in Hong Kong. After a slow start following the handover (it appears the British colonial administration after abandoning all their former soldiers here didn’t think there was a problem so no programmes were in place), it seems that the government is finally putting in programmes to address this shortfall. This is welcome and should be encouraged, funded and modified as time goes on to and we learn what works and what doesn’t. But how we in Hong Kong go about handling our race relations and minorities cannot and should not be analyzed and judged through the lense of the Western liberal. Unfortunately, Westerners tend to do this all the time and, as I have written on numerous occasions, there’s little we can do other than understand that Westerners seem to feel it is their duty (white man’s burden) to spread their moral and cultural superiority to the rest of the world despite the fact that they have probably a much poorer track record on harmonious multiculturalism and racism than we do.
How is Hong Kong’s approach different (and dare I say better) than the West? Well, other than the aforementioned lack of police beatings and outward racism and violence… heck shouldn’t that be enough? If not, this interview with the founder of the Muslim Council of Hong Kong is very interesting:
On growing up in Hong Kong: “I didn’t feel any type of discrimination. For secondary school I went to a Chinese school, Diocesan Boys’ School, in that school I was the only Pakistani. There were 30 other Indians, but I didn’t feel like I was being marginalised. If I felt I was being unfavoured, I didn’t think it was because of my race or religion. Outside of school, I was too young to feel any type of animosity or racism… Now I can relate back and think maybe I was discriminated against, but what I feel in Hong Kong there is more of a passive discrimination. What my mum would always say is that if she sat on the MTR, people would get up or put their hand over their face.”
On living in Scotland: “But when I lived in Scotland for 10 years; what we felt was that [Islamophobia] wasn’t just something that happened once. There were a series of events. You want to forget it but you can’t. People would shout ‘get out of our country’ and ‘you don’t belong here’ at the bus stop. Once I was attacked, but I don’t think that was for my appearance necessarily. I got off the bus and these drunkards hit me called me a ‘Paki’.”
I think I agree with most of what Adeel Malik had to say. His words are very well thought out and ring true. There is a passive racism in Hong Kong but, as I have said before, that doesn’t concern me that much because I don’t think you can completely eliminate stereotyping; the tribal mentality is ingrained in our DNA. Where work needs to be done is on helping to integrate minorities through education and language programs so that they can function in a Chinese society. It is encouraging to see that steps are finally being taken in this direction so that we don’t see marginalisation and ghettoisation in our society as has happened in West. But to do this, the minorities also have to make an effort to integrate into this society because, despite what the liberals would like to think, Hong Kong is a Chinese city. I know that it is de rigeur amongst the intellectuals to promote diversity and multiculturalism. I think it’s a lot of bunk. When I say integration, I don’t mean that they have to adopt Chinese culture wholesale. Minorities should be free to live their lives as they see fit, eat the foods they want, hang out with the people they prefer to, and practice their religion in peace. What I do mean is that their reality is not the same of some privileged white expatriate who can get by in English for 30 years and writes annual letters to the editor in the SCMP complaining about the deteriorating standard of English in Hong Kong. Minorities do need Cantonese language skills for most of the jobs here and they do need access to a decent education including English classes. At the same time, don’t expect the Chinese to be as politically correct and accommodating as in the West. We will continue to serve pork “siu mai” and “cha siu” in our school cafeterias. We will take our dogs for a walk on the street even if some think they are unclean (that is unless we are cooking the dog – although that is technically illegal in Hong Kong). We will not be declaring Ramadan a public holiday anytime soon. If that makes us racists in your eyes, well tough. Like your countrymen back home are so fond of telling us when we live or visit Europe of America, “go back to where you came from”.