WhatDonaldTsangmeant,presumably,wasthatifpeopletookthelawintotheirownhandsandbecameananarchy,thenarevolutioncouldensue.PerhapsitwasaninelegantsuggestionforthepeopleofHongKongnottotakethematter(ofuniversalsuffrage)intotheirownhands.
Butfromalogicpointofview,theargumentisnottotallydevoidofmerit.Indeed,theruleoflawexistspreciselytoruleoutanarchy.Noincumbentgovernmentintheuniversewouldwishforarevolution-notAmerica,notanycountryinEuropeandcertainlynoneofthecountrieswhichhavemilitaryrole,asinPakistan,oranydictatorship,asinMyanmar.Thefunnythingthoughisthatwhenarevolutiondoesoccur,thewinnerisaheroandtheloseratraitor.Thewinnerwouldthereforehavetoarguethattherevolutionwasagoodthing,whilsttheloserarguethattherevolutionwasabadthing.
Allthismeansisthatthevaluerevolutionisrelative!Andthatitisinvariablyprecededbyanarchy.LeninandMaoandtheFrenchRepublicwouldcertainlyhavenoproblemembracinganarchy.Theydid.Conversely,theRussianTsarsandtheChineseImperialdynastiesandtheFrenchKingswouldhavemournedoveranarchy.
It'sallamatterofpower.Seizureofpowerisanintoxicatingforce.Butinademocracy,arulerisselectedatthewillofapeople,notbyforcebutbythesecretballotbox.Theresultisnotmeasurablebyarmiesornaviesorairforcepower.Theresultisdecidedwithoutphysicalcombatandthereforemuchmoredifficulttogaugeandindeedfix.Butthat'sthebeautyofdemocracy.Whatgivesdemocracyabadnameis,however,whentheconceptitself,likerevolutionoranarchy,isattackedonitsown.Peoplewillarguethatcertainculturesdonot"work"underdemocracy.Otherswillarguethathistorically,non-democraticgovernancehasproved,asinthecasesofbenevolentdictators,agoodthing.Inparticular,peopleinHongKongarguethatunderundemocracticBritishrule,HongKonghadthrivedandcontinuestothriveunderChinesesovereigntywithoutdemocracy.Sodemocracyperseisnotnecessarilygood-norsufficientlyso.Afterall,inbusiness,forexample,democracydoesnotreallyapply.
Shareholdersruletheday.HencetheKwokbrotherscontrolSunHungKaiPropertiesandMr.LeeShauKee,HendersonLand,andLiKa-shing,CheungKong.Althoughthereareonly5ofthem,theyactuallycontrol3ofthelargestcompaniesinHongKong.Yetnobodyquestionstheirinfluencenorpowerinthemanagementoftheircompanies.Sowhat'ssospecialaboutdemocracy?Arguedlikethis,democracyisratherweak.Butthatisnotthepoint.Therealpointaboutdemocracyisthatitisthemostcivilizedwayofdecidingwhoshouldgovern.Somebodyhasto-andthequestioniswhatshouldtheprocessbeinselectingthatruler.Democracyistheleastunfairwayofselection.Itisalsoperhapsthefairestwayofde-selection.Itmeansthattheselectedrulercanonlyrulebyademocraticmandate-amandatethatcouldbetakenawayatanytime.Itmeansthattherewillalwaysbechecksandbalances.Sowhilstdemocracyisnotperfect,itisprobablybyfartheleastunfavourableroutetotheselectionofadecentruler.Itisthereforeimportantthatwhenwearguefordemocracy(anduniversalsuffrage)-wedon'tgetboggeddownbyallthetheoriessurroundingtheconceptofdemocracy.Forcertain,therewillbecounterexamplesagainstdemocracy-justlookatthewayinwhichAmericapreachesdemocracyintheMiddleEast,yetthemomentHamaswoninthePalestinianelection,Americadecidedthatthatwasnotanacceptableresult.Sotherearedefinitelyclearexamplesofwheredemocracydoesnotalwayswork.Onehastoarguethatitisperhapstheonethingthatworksmost,andalotbetterthanmanyothers.Inaddition,democracyhasadistinctsenseoffairness:itallowsthosewhohavenopowerofinfluence,eitherbyfortuneorotherwise,tohaveavoice-tohavelocusstandiinacommunityofmen,whereitmatterstotakeintoconsiderationthebroadestspectrumofdesiresandviewpoints.Thisisthemarvellousworkofhumanintelligence-tobeabletocommendthevalueofvalidandsoundargumentsforthebenefitofacivilizedworldinwhichhistoryneednotbedecidedbywarsorbattles.
InHongKong,wewouldbeamuchstrongercommunityifmorepeoplehavemoresayonwhoshouldruntheplace.Onethingisforcertain:weshouldnevertakefreedomforgranted.SofarwehaveplentyofitinHongKong.Ifwehavemoredemocracy,weshallhavemorefreedom-it'scalledpoliticalfreedom,andpoliticalfreedomisthebestweaponagainstanarchy,andthereforerevolution.
鄧永鏘（DavidTang）
中國會、上海灘創辦人
電郵：mailto:[email protected]
逢周日刊出