HONG KONG — They sleep by the thousands on what are normally the busiest boulevards of this crammed, nonstop city. They live on crackers, bananas and bottled water. They clean up their trash, even taking the time to pick out plastic and paper for recycling. Their shield of choice, andthe symbol of their cause, is the umbrella: protection against the sun, rain — and pepper spray used by the riot police.
The pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong appeared headed for a showdown with the authorities on Wednesday, with larger numbers expected over a national holiday and some organizers threatening to escalate the conflict by seizing government buildings. Yet it has been a diligently clean, exceedingly polite and scrupulously peaceful insurgency, one that supporters are calling the Umbrella Revolution.
“An umbrella looks nonthreatening,” said Chloe Ho, 20, a history student distributing apples, chocolate and wet towels on a six-lane downtown expressway occupied by protesters. “It shows how mild we Hong Kong people are, but when you cross our bottom line, we all come out together, just like the umbrellas all come out at the same time when it rains.”
Hers is a movement without a clear leader, one in which crowds of largely young people are organizing themselves and acting on their own, overtaking months of planning by veterans of the city’s pro-democracy camp. The spontaneous, grass-roots nature of the protest is one of its strengths — it has adapted quickly and seized the momentum from the government — but it may also make it difficult for the movement to accept any compromise that the Chinese government might be willing to offer.
The mass sit-in — and for hardier participants, sleep-in — in several of Hong Kong’s key commercial districts has presented the Chinese leadership with one of its biggest and most unexpected challenges in years. The protesters are demanding the right to elect the city’s leader, or chief executive, without procedural hurdles that would ensure that only Beijing’s favored candidates get on the ballot.
China’s state-run news outlets have depicted the protests as the handiwork of a conspiracy aided by the West to topple the Communist Party. But what leaders in Beijing and Hong Kong face is something even more alien to party thinking: an amorphous movement that does not answer to any particular individual or agenda.
The protesters’ desire for democratic elections was first articulated by organizations dominated by academics and students, but the movement that has blockaded the city streets since the weekend is a cacophony of voices, with demands including face-to-face dialogue with the Chinese government’s handpicked chief executive, Leung Chun-ying; his immediate resignation; and more ambitious, and unlikely, concessions from the central government.
“The strengths of these protests are that it’s so decentralized, so first of all you can’t crush them through arresting the leaders,” said Maya Wang, a researcher at Human Rights Watch in Hong Kong who has monitored the demonstrations. “The weaknesses are, of course, that there could be confusions and splits as the situation quickly develops. So far it has worked remarkably well, but it might not further along the way.”
Tensions in Hong Kong over election rules built for months and reached a peak on Friday, when students stormed past the police and occupied the forecourt of the Hong Kong government’s headquarters. The standoff there drew more protesters who gathered outside, growing into a noisy carnival of disgruntled residents calling for democracy. On Sunday afternoon, however, the police moved in with tear gas.
The televised spectacle of students scattered by tear gas triggered an outpouring of anger against the Hong Kong government that drew tens of thousands onto the streets on Sunday night. On Monday, the crowds were even larger, and they grew again on Tuesday.
The protesters have commandeered city buses, using them as bulletin boards for signs and messages. They have built barricades from bamboo scaffolding and borrowed cars to fend off possible police incursions.
What Prompted the Hong Kong Protests?
Hong Kong belongs to China and operates under a policy of “one country, two systems.”
“I came here because I don’t want to lose my Hong Kong,” said Bo Au-yeung, 20, a saleswoman at a clothing store who had volunteered to run a supply station. “I don’t want Hong Kong to be the next China.”
The society that has sprung up on the baking-hot roads has already developed its own rhythms. The days begin mostly with university students, retirees and middle-class office workers who have taken time off or been given leave by sympathetic bosses.
In the evenings, as temperatures cool and the workday ends, the crowds expand and become more diverse. Teenagers do their homework on the streets. And then the die-hards settle in for the night, sleeping under the skies on newspapers or foam before heading home in the morning for a shower and a nap.
“We want to stay clean to show that we are normal citizens fighting for our democracy,” said Billy Chan, 21, a computer science student who was heading home on Tuesday morning to wash up.
Other supporters arrived in the morning, saying they wanted to ensure that crowd numbers remained strong enough to ward off the police and impress those watching through the many television cameras. Joe Tang, an 18-year-old student wearing a black T-shirt decorated with a yellow ribbon, the uniform of many protesters, said he was a little embarrassed to seem so idealistic.
“It sounds stupid, but I came for liberty and democracy,” he said, as he prepared to hunker down for a day in the hot sun under an umbrella.
Many participants in the Umbrella Revolution acknowledged that their movement could well fail, scattered by a fresh police crackdown or just petering out. But many also said that their street movement, with its fastidious attention to hygiene and good manners and signs apologizing for “causing inconvenience” to other residents, was more than a reflection of Hong Kongers’ neat ways.
The trash sorting, constant speeches from megaphones and self-organized medical teams send a message of determination to leaders, and the world, they said.
The Voice of a Hong Kong Student Leader
A look at the fears and motivations driving the anti-Beijing protests in Hong Kong.
Video by Jonah M. Kessel and Mona El-Naggar on September 30, 2014. Photo by Bobby Yip/Reuters.
“With such a big area, if the waste is not handled well, it will cause hygiene problems and increase disorder,” said Chan Sau-ching, a 21-year-old medical student, who was helping sort trash. “In this protest, we want to show our citizenship and our will to have a democratic government. Although this cleanup is a small thing, it is something that shows the values that all Hong Kong citizens should have.”
The people of Hong Kong are such obsessive users of their smartphones that subway stations broadcast reminders for commuters to look up from their devices and watch where they are walking. Now, protesters are using smartphones and social media to share news and rumors about the protests, and form impromptu organizations that keep the crowds clean, fed and healthy.
Alex Au Yeung, 25, a student at the City University of Hong Kong, uses the WhatsApp messaging service to coordinate staffing at first-aid tents set up around the protest zones. After responding to injuries from tear gas and pepper spray over the weekend, the medical volunteers now treat people suffering from the heat as well as the cuts and scrapes that come with sleeping on a highway.
Supplies, too, are coordinated online, through Facebook pages and Google documents that list what is needed, and where: bottled water, packaged snacks, face masks and umbrellas. At the Methodist House, a church complex near the main sit-in, volunteers sorted donations that were then carted half a mile to the protest area. By Tuesday, the storage space at the building was full, and volunteers were turning away donations.
Jeff Chan, a movie cameraman who had just spent two hours sorting trash, said he and about 200 other members of Hong Kong’s film industry had thrown themselves into supporting the protests. Cameramen, production and post-production units each had separate tasks. He said his motivation for cleaning trash was very simple: “I just can’t stand to see garbage.”
The gatherings seemed to share some common elements with the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations of 2011, which attracted thousands of protesters to an encampment in a Lower Manhattan park. As in Hong Kong, the Occupy protesters eschewed a traditional leadership hierarchy but forged an ecosystem all their own, often organizing their own medical care and food distribution.
Both protests were also galvanized by televised images of clashes with law enforcement. In New York three years ago, video of a police commander pepper-spraying a group of protesters contributed in elevating Occupy from the relative obscurity of its early days to an international spectacle.
In Hong Kong, by Tuesday night the crowd of protesters in the Admiralty neighborhood had swelled to even greater numbers than before, and crammed, sweating bodies stretched to Central, the next subway stop. The demonstration appeared to be gaining cohesion, and people within earshot of loudspeakers roared as Lee Cheuk-yan, chairman of the pro-democracy Labor Party, hoarsely exhorted Mr. Leung, the chief executive, to resign. Hundreds lined up at nearby toilets, one of the many tests of protesters’ patience.
A little down the road, Chui Yik-keung, a 19-year-old student of leisure management, was trying to doze on an inflatable mattress that refused to inflate. He and his classmates lay in the shadow of the hulking concrete quarters of the Chinese military garrison in Hong Kong, whose soldiers some protesters have speculated could come out to crush them.
“I’m not afraid,” said Mr. Chui. “I don’t believe the Chinese soldiers will come out. If they do, will they ever get past here? I don’t think so.”
http://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/68/article/1913
張潔平：佔領香港筆記──從廣場到馬路的72小時突變
2014/09/30
關鍵字:
一切都發生得太快，打亂了所有嚴密佈局的計劃，無論是起事者的，還是管治者的。而一切又發生得太自然，像一場壓抑已久的高燒，淋漓盡致。
香港人大概從來沒有想過，有一天自己會去佔領全城的馬路。爭取民主普選是一場長達30年的談判，而如果爭取失敗，則有一套按部就班的抗命行動──這大概才是香港人做事的方式──在9月28日之前，他們自己也這麼認為。
「佔領中環」運動醞釀了整整20個月。從去年一月，法學教授戴耀廷在報紙上提出構想開始，歷經輿論預熱、民主商討、公民投票，先禮後兵，直到全國人大真的否決了香港真普選的希望，才啟動行動，預備要「佔領中環」。如果行動按原計劃進行，這恐怕會是世界歷史上姿態最卑微的「公民抗命」：我們講盡道理，不得不「抗命」，「抗命」的方式，不是最初構想的「癱瘓金融中心」，而是選擇在節假日，以對公共秩序影響最小為前提，坐在馬路中間（這條馬路節假日會被批準為行人專用區），等待被捕，用自我犧牲，結束整場運動。
「佔中」核心團隊的成員曾私下告訴我，在人大決議給香港普選「落閘」之後，他們原本對行動本身已經非常悲觀。「香港人太現實」，他說：「知道沒用的事情不會去做」。「佔中」內部，對願意走出來、坐在馬路中間「自我犧牲」的人數預期是5000人，佔領時間是最多兩天。這是一個悲觀的預期，形勢逼他們只敢做最壞的打算──他們把行動日定在10月1日中華人民共和國的「國慶」，因為中國領導人不願意在喜慶節日生血光之災，便可能避免殘酷鎮壓。
誰也沒想到在9月的最後一個星期，全港學生大罷課之後，形勢突變。
9月26日晚上10點30分，在結束了一個星期的罷課之後，連日集會的學生、市民正待散去，學民思潮召集人、17歲的黃之鋒在短暫宣告後，突然帶頭翻越圍欄，衝入「公民廣場」──這一塊政府總部門前空地，是規劃的公眾集會用地，曾在2012年反國教運動中成為最主要的抗議地標，並因此得名「公民廣場」，而在2014年7月17日，接近人大表決香港普選方案的日期，港府突然封閉這塊用地，直至8月底再度開放時，四周已經滿滿修建起兩米高的鋼鐵圍欄，實質性破壞了這塊一千平米空地的集會效應。那一天晚上，在「重奪公民廣場」的口號帶領下，學民思潮的黃之鋒、學聯的秘書長周永康、副秘書長岑敖暉等100多名學生，不顧一切衝了進去。黃之鋒很快被警察按倒在地，用胡椒噴霧制服，並直接拘捕，其他百餘名學生則由趕來增援的警察團團圍住，困在「公民廣場」之中。正在散去的人群洶湧起來，聚集在公民廣場的鐵欄杆外不肯離去，並有更多人趕來聲援，人們整晚高喊口號：「釋放學生！」「學生無罪！」「警察可恥！」
這一夜，因為一個試圖進入常規集會空間而被阻止的舉動，引發了形勢第一次的根本轉變：你不許我進入公民廣場，我就去外面開拓新的廣場。
9月26日，據學聯的估計，有數千名市民在政府總部四周的區域通宵留守。這片不規則的區域包括了政總建築物旁側的一條馬路，一個圓形交通路島，和立法會後門旁的一小片空地，留守的人們開始把這里叫做「自由廣場」。這一個夜晚，集會者第一次見識了胡椒噴霧──警方6度施放胡椒噴霧試圖驅散集會，並曾動用警棍，並無防備的學生則撐開雨傘抵擋胡椒噴霧，並搬動鐵馬在「廣場」的各個入口設置路障，抵擋警方清場。附近天橋上圍觀的支持者也撐開雨傘擲下，讓它們飄落到集會者手中，在整晚緊張對峙的氣氛中，定格了頗為浪漫的畫面。
他們終沒有能夠阻擋警方。周永康、岑敖暉等闖入公民廣場的學生在9月27日一早的清場行動中被帶走。而集會者亦因此決定，死守這裡不走，直到警方釋放所有學生為止。「佔領中環」運動的發起人戴耀廷、陳健民、朱耀明以及泛民主派許多重要人士很快趕來到現場聲援留守學生，到了夜晚，在新的「自由廣場」──恐怕是世界上地形最複雜、最不規則的廣場──聚集起將近五萬人。
學生們在馬路上、天橋上、草地上、以及四周的工地上或坐或躺，並成立物資站、急救站，接納市民源源不斷送來的食物、水與抵擋胡椒噴霧的雨傘、口罩。他們還搭起了帳篷廁所，不過因為多數人覺得不夠衛生，立法會外的公共廁所仍然排起長長的隊伍。
9月28日凌晨1點40分，經過佔中與學聯的共同商討，佔中發起人戴耀廷宣佈，佔中放棄原定的計劃，決定即時、就地啟動。僅僅十幾個小時以前，他還聲明不會提前開始佔中，也沒有計劃把佔中地點轉移到政府總部。但造勢不如就勢，這十幾個小時裡，現場人群的生動能量顯然改變了他們的決定。
這個決定令不少支持佔中的市民叫好，卻也引起現場學生的爭議。許多學生在凌晨兩點左右離場，他們說自己是來支持學生運動，呼籲釋放被拘捕的學生，卻沒有打算要「佔領中環」。但留下來守夜的年輕人，仍然接近萬人。
彷彿對這一變化措手不及，儘管留守者進入高度警惕的防備狀態，但這一個夜晚，警方沒有任何行動。守了一夜的學生在白天疲乏離去。在「自由廣場」人數最少的時候，9月28日下午1點30分，警方宣佈，開始清場。他們實施人群管制，封鎖政府總部附近示威區的所有入口，只準出不準入，並稱「任何公眾人士強行進入將被檢控，場內人士將被拘捕」。學聯及佔中則立刻通過網絡告急，呼籲市民前來支援，一起守住這裡。
誰也沒想到，短短兩個小時之內，四面八方趕來的群眾就聚集在進入政總示威區的各個通道上，不但對警方封鎖線形成了反包圍之勢，更隨著聚集人數越來越多，由於無法進入政總示威區，反而一直蔓延到了附近的交通干道上。人們乾脆坐下，就地在馬路集會。
9月26日，從「公民廣場」的封閉演變為開拓「自由廣場」，是抗爭的第一次空間轉化。9月28日，從「自由廣場」的封閉演變為佔領馬路則是第二次，這一次，也徹底地轉變了抗爭的性質。
到下午4點半，人們已經完全佔領了金鐘的車行主干道，並向東蔓延到灣仔，向西蔓延到中環。寬闊的車行路和起伏的高架橋上坐滿了人。天橋上也擠滿了人。被封閉在「自由廣場」內的學聯同學們看到手機里轉播的場外畫面，泣不成聲。佔中三子也激動不已，這是近兩年來承受著巨大壓力的他們，不敢想像的畫面──戴耀廷當初在報紙上大膽構想，也只說「一萬人佔領中環」而已。
不過，作為行動最初的召集與組織者，他們還來不及對隔離在外的數萬群眾（不斷增加中）做出呼應，警方的行動就已經令事態再次急轉。
根據梁振英下午3點半記者會上的表態，警方會「果斷依法適當」對付「佔中」。當晚6點開始，警方突然對和平示威人群使用催淚彈，據後來警方公佈的數字，在9月28日夜晚到9月29日凌晨，香港警方共在9個地點，發出了87枚催淚彈。這是自1967年左派暴動以來，警察第一次對香港市民使用催淚彈（2005年WTO在香港召開會議期間，警方曾對南韓示威者使用過催淚彈）。
所有人都震驚了。當天下午有家長帶著孩童來參加集會，沒有人想到兩三個小時的集會就會引來催淚彈。而更令人震驚的是，催淚彈並沒有驅散人群。被激怒的集會者回到原地坐下，有更多的人被電視直播畫面或者網絡圖片震驚，決定出門前來聲援，從6點警方拋出第一枚催淚彈開始，從中環到灣仔馬路上的人群不減反增，晚上更增加到是十數萬人，更蔓延到九龍的旺角地區。
晚上10點20分，學聯突然發佈聲明，稱從多個渠道獲得消息指警方已經以橡膠子彈驅散示威者，呼籲示威者全面撤離，「保留實力，擇日再會」，佔中也即做出相似表態，「一旦開槍或啟動音波炮，呼籲市民全面撤離」。然而，仍然有大批市民選擇在馬路上徹夜留守。一直到9月29日白天，人群依然沒有散去，反而越聚越多，在港島從中環一直鋪到銅鑼灣，在九龍也從旺角蔓延至尖沙咀。
催淚彈變成一個有形而具體的「鎮壓標誌」，不僅激化了局勢，促使更多普通市民走出來坐在馬路上，也實際上加劇了運動性質的轉化：這已經不是由幾個領袖人物發起的「佔領中環」運動，也不只是學聯或者學民思潮發起的學生運動，而成了一場因為「敵人」團結起來的，真正去中心化的全民運動。
這個「敵人」，表面上是催淚彈，實際上是抗爭者賦予它的政治含義──一個作為北京政府傀儡的香港政府，對香港過半數市民民主訴求的不承擔，甚至協同打壓。這個時候，是否要遵循「佔領中環」的理念和議程已經不重要了，每一個坐在馬路上的人，都帶著自己個體的憤怒和訴求，他們的最大公約數，恐怕只有那個人大已經明確否決了的真普選。
被困在「自由廣場」之內的主台很快就失去了作為主台的意義。9月28日，佔中三子、民主派大佬、學生領袖都坐在主台上，沒有警察去拘捕他們，催淚彈都瞄準了馬路上的群眾。9月29日，警察撤防，也沒有群眾再進入「自由廣場」。3公里長的馬路已經成了新的「廣場」，而且無邊無際，無人可以真正代表。
在這條馬路上走一遍，你可以看到真正的香港精神：那種井然有序、令人驚嘆的自組織，和平理性的抗爭方式，浪漫的歌聲和字條，周圍店鋪的友好，深夜裡和警察一起清掃垃圾的年輕學生。還有一邊施放催淚彈，一邊全副武裝向前推進的警察，扶起在煙霧中摔倒在地的市民，送到安全區。你知道這是不管多麼憤怒，都沒有改變的香港，良好的公民社會根基，讓自主和自律在絕大多數公民身上完美統一。
但你也知道，在對面的陰影裡，還有一種力量，也不會改變。一旦「廣場」無邊無際，無人代言，無法收場，這也是真正的危險臨近的時刻。
【編輯推薦延伸】
沒有留言:
張貼留言