Hong Kongers know the values behind the Union flag – but do the British?
It is, in its way, the highest of compliments. The human rights protesters in Hong Kong who brandish Union flags assume that people associate Britain with the things they hold dear: the rule of law, private property, impartial courts, uncensored newspapers, regular elections, jury trials. At a time when our own intellectual elites feel a certain distaste for British national symbols – a distaste that quickly turns to outright disgust in a colonial context – it is interesting to see how we are perceived in some of our former territories.
Hong Kongers have been demonstrating against a proposal that would have allowed them to be extradited to mainland China. Their protests were so vehement – a million people were involved, out of a population of just over seven million – that the Hong Kong government has backed down, suspending the proposal. What is interesting, though, is the way in which Britain briefly became a shorthand for freedom under the law.
The extradition ban was put forward, paradoxically, by the Chinese side when the preliminary handover discussions began. Although most of the territory of Hong Kong had been granted to Britain on a 99-year lease, the island itself had been ceded in perpetuity. China, which wanted all its lands back, therefore had to be circumspect in how it negotiated. In order to reassure Hong Kongers, Deng Xiaoping offered a series of concessions, including immunity from extradition.
Those who hoped that, as the years
passed, China would become more pluralist, have been disappointed. The current regime is more autocratic, more revanchist and more impatient than its recent predecessors – but every bit as corrupt. The fear was that Communist officials would seek the extradition of wealthy Hong Kongers on charges that might magically disappear if enough money changed hands.
Plenty of criticisms can be made of the UK, but I have never heard anyone suggest that we manufacture court cases against people for the purpose of extortion. When they wave our flag, Hong Kongers are drawing attention to an aspect of life in this country that is perhaps more exceptional than we realise.
The deal between London and Beijing produced the “one country, two systems” compromise, whereby Hong Kong would remain autonomous for a further 50 years under notional Chinese suzerainty. Although there have been disputes over the extent of Beijing’s influence, the bargain has largely held. China has not sought to deploy force directly in Hong Kong, or take over its institutions. Nor, though, has Hong Kong exported its enviable system to mainland China.
Yes, China has copied elements of capitalism from Hong Kong. But it has emphatically not copied the structures that prevent capitalism from sliding into oligarchy. A free market depends on free institutions: independent media, impartial courts and, not least, the little platoons – the charities and clubs and voluntary associations that fill the space between state and individual. Without these things, government eventually becomes a racket, a system whereby the elites systematically loot the country.
Extractive states have been the norm for the past 10,000 years. Communist China is, in this sense, little different from an Iron Age slave empire, a medieval European monarchy or a modern African kleptocracy. In each case, a gang comes to power, rigs the rules in its favour, and ensures that its children inherit the same privileges. Britain was arguably the first place on the planet where that pattern was broken: where the rules were elevated above the rulers, where the individual was elevated above the collective, and where every adult citizen was treated as free and autonomous.
To this day, those principles distinguish many places that used to be governed under our common law system from their neighbours. They explain why Bermuda is not Haiti, why Singapore is not Indonesia, why Israel is not Syria – and, yes, why Hong Kong is not China.
Deep in their bones, Hong Kongers know it. When they fly the flag of the former colonial power, they are appealing to the values that they believe raised us above the run of nations, above all the notions of liberty and disinterested justice. I only hope we cherish these things as much as they think we do.