What we need most in a divided society is Respect

Translated by Cindy Ong

Let’s be more inclusive and respectful in this torn-apart society!

Hong Kong has always been known for its openness, embracing freedom of thought. It nurtured Mr. Sun Yat-sen’s dreams of liberation and laid the foundation for the 1911 revolution, which led to Mr. Sun Yat-sen being credited as the founding father of modern China. Since then, Hong Kong has always been a symbol for freedom of thought, where different perspectives and cultures flourish alongside each other, where pluralism prevails. This continues to hold true even as rapid economic development in the 1970s and 80s saw Hong Kong transforming from an industrial society into a cosmopolitan city.

The post-modern world is increasingly pluralistic and globalized. Whether it is economic or technological development, an internationally oriented approach, which results in unavoidable interdependence across economic systems, also means cosmopolitan cities invariably becoming a mark of a developed economy. Many countries today have identified as their urban planning goal, transformation into a cosmopolitan city, as a way of demonstrating their achievements, with a view to attracting foreign investment and tourist dollars. Such cities, permeating with cosmopolitanism, are modern, multi-national, multi-cultural and civilized. These cities are often imbued with a sense of optimism and immense economic potential, bringing businessmen looking for opportunities and partners into their fold. People who live here and who aspire to come here are drawn to its pluralistic nature, a by-product of cosmopolitanism. They are attracted by its ability to accept all and accommodate all, by the promise that anyone can find their place here, regardless of their views and culture. This description used to apply to Hong Kong.

The past year however, witnessed unprecedented conflict in Hong Kong’s value and political system, which not only divided the civil society but also escalated into an inter-generational conflict. Many youths and students, regardless of their points of view, dismissed the efforts of the older generation to be constructive. They openly criticized the older generation for being outdated, think that this generation only knows how to compromise, lacking in both the courage and capacity to build the future of Hong Kong. To have one generation so flagrantly reprimanding the older generation is unheard of in Hong Kong.

Majority of the Hong Kong residents are uncomfortable with these developments, as they witness Hong Kong’s shift toward extreme pluralism, where intolerance reigns. However, if we were to turn our attention to the world around us, we would realize that this is not peculiar to Hong Kong. It is in fact a microcosm of globalization. The clash between Islamic and Western values, periodic anti-government demonstrations by students in Taiwan and South Korea, open and strong criticisms of the Singapore government among its younger generations, protests against the Security Act by the Japanese are but a few examples. Of pertinence here is not who is right and wrong, but the apparent intensification of value related conflicts.

Cosmopolitanism is a spawn of globalization, and following the above, cosmopolitan cities are marked by pluralism. Advancements in info-communications technology coupled with labor mobility, saw large companies and organizations take a more global approach in their recruitment. The large influx of foreigners into a city not only altered the social fabric of the city, bringing pluralism, it also threatens the employment opportunities and survival of the locals, resulting in resistance and the rise of nativism. This eventual division appears to be an inevitable phenomenon born of cosmopolitanism. However, in the face of diversity, we need to adopt an inclusive mindset, in order that pluralism can be a positive driving force for social development. To do that, we would need to strengthen our society’s capacity to be inclusive; to balance the divisive forces that exist. The first step towards building an inclusive society is tolerance, which is only possible with respect. To respect differences in opinion and allowing these differences to flourish allows us to reap the advantages of diversity and pluralism. Otherwise, they can turn into destructive social forces.

Today, we see in Hong Kong the negative forces of pluralism enlarging, spiraling downward into a social crisis. To reverse the tide, we need to make every commitment and effort toward building an inclusive and respectful society, to restore Hong Kong to its glorious heydays, where we were known for being truly pluralistic.

《在撕裂社会需要重拾的价值观—— 尊重》

李荣安教授著

香港社会撕裂了，我们需要更多的包容与尊重！

香港开埠以来，一直是个思想开放、思想自由的地方。它孕育了孙中山先生的自由梦想，奠下他推动辛亥革命的基础，以至他后来建立新中国，成为中国国父。自此以来，香港就象徵着能承载自由思想的福地，多元文化及不同意见都可以在这里百花齐放。随着七八十年代经济的迅速发展，香港更由制造业蜕变为一个国际都会（Cosmopolitan City）。

步入二十一世纪之后，世界越趋多元，全球化越趋明显，现代社会无论经济也好，知识技术发展也好，都似乎必须具备国际化的元素；于是，任何经济体系的经济发展，都无可避免地相互依存。而国际都会亦已经成为了发达经济的一个象徵，今天很多国家的城市经济规划，都以达致国际都会为目标，以展示其发展成就，借此吸引外来投资，也成为吸引游客的据点。国际都会处处渗透着世界主义（Cosmopolitanism）的色彩，而世界主义的主要特点在于其现代性、国际性、多元性和文明性，让人觉得这个城市具备经济发展潜力和希望，要做生意的人都纷纷涌来寻求商机和生意伙伴。因此之故，多元性就是世界主义的不然产物，住在这里和渴望到这里来的人，都会因为这个地方能容纳百川，相容并包，任何人都可以拥抱不同思想和看法、都可以各自精彩。

过去一年以来，香港在价值观念和政见上发生了前所未有的冲突。这些冲突甚至达到你我不容的地步，继而出现从未有过的隔代冲突。不少新一代的青少年和学生，不管自己的政见与上一代是否相同，都硬生生地拒绝了上一代几乎任何的建设和努力，并公开地指责上一代已经［out］了，认为他们只懂得妥协，没有勇气和能力为下一代去建设香港的未来。下一代如此公然而且带点粗暴的指骂上一代，这是香港前所未有的。

处身香港，看见她的多元价值观走向极端，甚至相处不容，彼此排斥，大部分市民都感到极不好受。不过，如果我们放眼世界，会发现香港的现况也许只是全球化时代下的一个缩影而已。伊斯兰价值观与西方价值观的强力对决；台湾和南韩的学生不时发生反政府示威；新加坡的新生代在社交媒体中也变得开放地批评政府，表达较强烈的个人观点；日本民众亦正进行反安保法的示威。在这里，我并不是在谈谁对谁错的问题，而是指出价值观的明显冲突，在全球化的今天越演越烈。

全球化催生世界主义。承上所述，国际都会的显著特征使价值观多元化，也即是多元性。由于媒体发达以及移民数量大增，大公司及机构也渐渐步向全球招聘。当多元价值观以及海外人才大量地涌进一个城市，威胁了城市本土新生代的生存和就业机会；这些城市都出现了反抗的现象，本土主义也同时应运而生。多元甚至于分化是世界主义的必然现象。面对多元性，我们必须同时发展包容性，那么，［多元］才可以变成社会发展的动力。因此，我们要致力谋求和巩固实惠的包容力量，以平衡多元性的分化走势。有容乃大，包容性要从尊重开始。包容和尊重不同的意见，发挥多元化和多元性的优势。否则，多元化和多元性就会变成摧毁社会的力量。

在香港的今天，我们看见多元性的负面力量越来越大，可能会变成一种社会危机。我们要及时苏醒，致力包容和尊重，使向以多元见称的美丽香港变得更美丽。