Foreign Media Reports on ‘Occupy Central’ Just the Same Old Story

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 17 October 2014
by Ding Gang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Nathan Hsu. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
If one should take Western media reports on Hong Kong's "Occupy Central" movement to be a test of their understanding of China, would they make the grade?

Indeed, there have been several bumps along the path of Hong Kong's development, including the demands of demonstrators seeking changes to electoral procedures for selecting the chief executive, as well as a widening wealth gap. However, these problems cannot be resolved through street politicking, a course that will only deepen divisions and heighten antagonism. The proof of this has already been seen in various street political movements all over the world, and is acknowledged even by the Western media.

In 2011, the "Occupy Wall Street" movement sprang up in New York and quickly spread across the rest of the country. Much larger in scale than "Occupy Central," its supporters similarly drew up a none-too-inconsiderable list of political demands. But the U.S. media was slow to report on the movement, and such coverage, when it came, was largely downplayed. Now that the scene has shifted to Hong Kong, such street politics are being regarded in a different light, styled as "the advancement of the democratic revolution."

At a time when the eyes and ears of the Western media reach into almost every corner of China, the issuance of such a bipolar assessment, simplistic and slapdash, is a product of the Western media's failure to change the logic and methods through which it seeks to understand China.

When one uses antiquated methods for interpreting Chinese affairs from decades or even a century ago, views issues as complex as "Occupy Central" through the conceptual lens of Western democratic systems, and subconsciously pigeonholes China into a position opposite the West, how can they expect to get an accurate grasp of the pulse of modern China?

The Beijing of today is far wiser, more capable and more patient in its administration of the country than its former self, and against the backdrop of China's continued development, problems such as this will not come to shake the foundations of societal stability. This is the fundamental conclusion that should be reached on realities in China.

Most importantly, the central government has grown more confident in managing and controlling such matters. One need only look at China's development and its changing position on the international stage over the past decade. With interior cities, such as Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen steadily closing the gap with Hong Kong, it is quite easy to see from where that confidence has come.

Democracy is not just an empty doctrine; the weight of its substance lies in whether it can create a foundation for stable development. This is the basic premise from which an understanding of China and the administrative ability of the Chinese government should proceed. A departure from this premise will necessarily result in a flawed evaluation of China.

In 1995, Fortune magazine published a report entitled "The Death of Hong Kong." On the 10th anniversary of Hong Kong's return to China, Fortune's sister publication, Time magazine, told another story with a 25-page cover story: "Hong Kong Is More Alive than Ever." We can leave to history the task of weighing Western media reports on "Occupy Central," but one point is already certain beyond doubt: The overwhelming majority of students taking to the streets of Hong Kong today will still see their future lives and jobs tied in some way to China. It is they who are the beneficiaries of Chinese stability.

The author is a senior correspondent for the People's Daily.


如果把美歐媒體對香港「佔中」事件的報導視作一次對中國認知的測驗,那麼得分會不會是「不及格」呢?

  香港的發展的確出現了一些問題,比如示威者要求改變特首選舉程序的訴求、貧富差距的不斷擴大,等等。但這不是街頭政治能解決得了的,它只會加大分歧、激化對立,這一點從世界各地發生的街頭政治中已得到證實,西方媒體對此也有共識。

  2011年,紐約爆發「佔領華爾街」運動,並迅速向全美蔓延。規模要比香港的「佔中」大得多,示威者也有不少政治訴求。可美國媒體遲遲不做報導,後來作了報導也是輕描淡寫。如今場景換到香港,認知就不同了,同樣的街頭政治在香港變成了「促進民主的革命」。

  在西方媒體的觸角幾乎已伸進中國各個角落的今天,出現如此簡單甚至魯莽的二元對立的判斷,與西方媒體迄今仍未改變認知中國的邏輯與方法相關。

  如果還用二三十年前,甚至一百年前解讀中國的老一套方法,如果還是按照西方民主制的概念來認識「佔中」這樣的複雜問題,如果在潛意識中就把中國劃入與西方對立的一面,又怎麼可能準確把握現代中國的脈搏呢?

  今天的北京在國家治理方面有遠比以往更多的智慧、能力和耐心,而類似問題在中國持續發展的大環境下,也不可能動搖社會穩定的基礎。這是對中國現實應有的基本判斷。

  最重要的是,中央政府對處理和掌控類似事件有比以往更多的自信。只要看一下過去十多年來中國的發展及其在世界舞台上的地位變化,特別是上海、廣州、深圳等內地城市與香港正不斷縮小的差距,就很容易理解這種自信從何而來。

  民主不是空洞的教條,民主的質量在於它是否可以創造穩定發展的基礎。這是正確認識中國和中國政府治理水平的出發點。離開這個出發點,對中國的判斷注定會出錯。

  1995年,美國《財富》雜誌刊出《香港之死》的報導。2007年,香港回歸中國10週年,《財富》的姊妹雜誌《時代週刊》用25頁的封面報導講述了一個故事:「香港現在比過去任何時候都更具有活力」。我們可以把對今天美歐媒體「佔中」事件報導的評分工作再次交給歷史去做。但有一點已經確定無疑——今天走上香港街頭的學生,他們當中大多數人未來的生活與工作仍將與大陸相聯。他們是中國穩定的獲益者。▲(作者是人民日報高級記者)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Palestine: Ceasefire Not Peace: How Netanyahu and AIPAC Outsourced Israel’s War to Trump

United Kingdom: Trump Is Angry with a World That Won’t Give Him Easy Deals

Israel: In Washington, Netanyahu Must Prioritize Bringing Home Hostages before Iran

Austria: Trump, the Bulldozer of NATO

     

Nepal: The Battle against American Establishment

Topics

India: Trump’s Tariffs Have Hit South Korea and Japan: India Has Been Wise in Charting a Cautious Path

Australia: Donald Trump Is Not the Only Moving Part When It Comes to Global Trade

Ireland: As Genocide Proceeds, Netanyahu Is Yet Again Being Feted in Washington

Canada: Canada’s Retaliatory Tariffs Hurt Canadians

Spain: A NATO Tailor-Made for Trump

OPD 26th June 2025, edited by Michelle Bisson Proofer: See...

Germany: Trump’s Words and Putin’s Calculus

Related Articles

Indonesia: US-China: Tariff, Tension, and Truce

China: US Chip Restrictions Backfiring

Thailand: US-China Trade Truce Didn’t Solve Rare Earths Riddle

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Hong Kong: Amid US Democracy’s Moral Unraveling, Hong Kong’s Role in the Soft Power Struggle