Stop separatist pollution on HK campuses
Chief Secretary for Administration Matthew Cheung Kin-chung and Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung said on Monday it is inappropriate to use speeches at universities’ opening ceremonies for new academic year to advocate Hong Kong independence. They were responding to separatist remarks by heads of student unions at the opening ceremonies at local universities last week. However, in the same morning, the president of the Student Union at the Chinese University of Hong Kong made separatist remarks at his university’s ceremony. The concerted show of disrespect for the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region was another sign of desperation consuming the separatists and their masters and supporters everywhere these days.
The separatist comments by student union leaders at local universities in recent days were nothing new, considering the fact almost all the student unions are controlled by radical activists. That is why the illegal campaign of “Occupy Central” in the fall of 2014 was spearheaded by student groups commanded by radical elements. It should be noted, however, that many students do not believe in Hong Kong independence or agree with the student union leaders on that matter. It is no secret that university students in general don’t have a choice when it comes to “joining” student unions or a “voice” in speaking their minds because “internal democracy” within student unions is always conditional at best. As a result most university students simply ignore what student union leaders have to say most of the time.
That said, members of the public have the right and obligation to speak up against separatist advocacy on local campuses because the universities are publicly funded and nobody should be allowed to poison the minds of young students with dangerous ideas, particularly Hong Kong independence and “seeking justice by breaking existing law”. Some university officials insist it is their responsibility to ensure free speech on the campus, but they cannot deny that there are boundaries for freedom of speech and everything one discusses publicly affects local society one way or another and therefore has consequences. They will be blamed for failing to prevent students from ruining their own future by participating in illegal activities and getting punished by law as a result. After all, they are first and foremost educators who have the power to try to stop students from becoming sacrificial offerings of other people’s political beliefs of ambitions.
University officials are morally obliged to tell students that freedom of speech has never been absolute and never will be in reality simply because different societies maintain certain limits over what one can advocate publicly, presumably in the best interest of the local community. Any act of defiance can and usually will lead to undesirable and even tragic results. In Hong Kong’s case, the separatism advocates seem oblivious to social and/ or political repercussions because they cannot care less about the adverse impacts their actions will have on public interest, but they know very well that Hong Kong independence is impossible no matter who is behind it. It’s a doomed cause and those who try to promote it will always end up suffering painful defeats — there are no ifs or maybes about this.