I can never make observation from a macro perspective. I normally comment case by case. The madness leads to the sadness of seeing this social turmoil leading us no where. Ms Chan's incident prompted the "Occupy Central" to condemn the arrest accusing of white terror. They are supposed to be professors who can think impartially and independently. When I made my observation from past work experience and my understanding of the procedure, I could see people from some forum branded me with some sort of political affiliation. For this, I of course do not give a damn. I am neither "somebody" nor have any political stance. Hong Kong people are so easily incited and their sentiment easily flared up. Many just share a common brain devoid of wisdom. Political figures come out so readily to condemn for fear they would fail the expectation of their supporters but ironically they fail their duty as leaders of the people who can be more insightful and play a leader role. There are too many political opportunists who suffer from phobia of not making public speech.
The political motivated prosecution accusation is absurd if people are willing to calm down to see the matter. At best one can only take issue on the "time of arrest" as politically motivated if they associate or suspect that it has to do with the involvement of Ms Chan in the "Occupy Central" movement. The prosecution itself happened before the very first time some one spelt out the idea of "Occupy Central" for the impending election of CE. The precise accusation should be "Why arrested Ms Chan at this time? "Why there is an unreasonable delay?" "The time of arrest is political motivated and the authority tries to threaten and deter people from participating in Occupy Central." Unfortunately, as I can see from the media, the accusation has generally become "political prosecution". If I want to make accusation, I would make an unassailable one. What dampens the situation is that the stupid is leading the blind.
Some readers may wonder why I wrote this in English. Only people who know me well know that I have to use Penpower to write Chinese which takes hours. To write in English only takes minutes. I can also let the English speaking only people know the absurdity of this incident in a nutshell.
Bill,
回覆刪除Remember練乙錚? He is the reason we met, and it's the exact same episode all over again.
My conclusion at that time was exactly the same as yours this time around: if we neglect to think critically and blindly follow what others are saying, what kind of society would it become even when we have democratic election? I don't think I'd want to live in that kind of society.
If we look at the facts, it is quite obvious that that police in this case are utterly insensitive to politics, otherwise they wouldn't be have this mess on their hands. One can quite rightly say that they are stupid, but they are not political. That, of course, would not make good headlines and the "martyrs" wouldn't have something to martyr about, so they would opt to make it political at the cost of critical reasoning.
Nonetheless, a case could be made that the law that allows this kind of arrest is out-of-date, but that would be an entirely different line of argument, just like one could make a case arguing that the libel law is out-of-date back in 練's time. From then on we can move on to substantive debates instead of producing hot air. I hardly see anyone making this type of arguments in either episode as of yet.
By the way, I type Chinese with MS Mandarin Pinyin. It's much faster but it is prone to typos and words with same sound.
We can safely conclude HK is terminally "ill" and the damage is irreversible. The stupid creates the martyrs and the martyrdom is fortified by the cheers and jeers. If the people are blind, you can manipulate and guide them wherever you want them to, be that haven or pitfall (I do not want to say heaven or hell). We will "meet" again and again as long as these phenomena persist.
刪除Thank you for the suggestion of MS Mandarin Pinyin.
標少，希望你不介意我批評幾句，
回覆刪除(1) "They are supposed to be professors who can think impartially and independently"代表你還是很天真，對政治依然有童話式幻想。如果你接受政治是污穢，和平時代沒有政治家，只有政棍，你便不會那麼激動。
(2)"Many just share a common brain devoid of wisdom"代表你有一般知識份子的驕傲之心，看不起，也無法明白「普通人」。如果你放下驕傲，以憐憫之心看事情，便會明白現實社會是普通人的社會，社會發展從來是鐘擺式前進/後退，單亠事件/時期不代表社會在前進/後退。
當然不介意批評，但要争辯幾句。
刪除我講的教授，他們並非政治家，更不是政棍，故此我對他們應具獨立思考，還有點期望。你說得對，我既天真亦驕傲，可是我只是一個有膽看不起非凡人物的平凡人。普通人也希望有不一般的見解，我寫文章不就是展示這種心態嗎？我從來都沒有講過「你讀得書少」、「你是普通人」，我只會講「你以前身處高職，咁都唔識」「你是甚麼專員博士，為何亂噏一通」，這就是平凡人看不起非凡人嘛。我自己是普通人一個，怎會看不起自己，只盼黎民於變時雍。
標少，
回覆刪除你說"Hong Kong people ... Many just share ..."，所以我將 Many 理解為Hong Kong people，即普通人，但似乎你原意是指那些當權的，或當領袖的。當然地，大家有權對他們有要求，但不是期望。有要求是因為他們有責任，當他們的表現未達要求，標少當然可以理直氣壯罵他們。