How Hong Kong became successful

In the early 90s, Hong Kong was presented to us as a clear example of the effectiveness of British colonial rule: a thriving economy, democratic freedoms, social guarantees. For the average person, Hong Kong success seemed to be something eternal and unchangeable: “well, firstly, there are English people there, and secondly, there is capitalism there.” So it was always good there.

Many of our compatriots are simply unable to imagine the situation of poverty, corruption and violence in the lands controlled by Western Europeans. I'm not even talking about Europe itself, where, according to New Times and Novaya Gazeta, workers simply transferred from palanquins to carriages, and from carriages to personal cars, while enjoying the privileges of "habeas corpus".

The corporate media is doing everything possible to make people forget about the struggle and the price that was paid for the human existence of the working people of developed countries, a normal life that half a century ago was an unthinkable luxury for most. Every year, newspapers and magazines never tire of reminding us of the Hungarian events of 1956, the next anniversary of the Solidarity protest, and the anniversary of 1991. But no one is interested in writing or talking about the equally significant workers' uprisings of the recent past - uprisings that changed the history of their countries.

The liberation struggle of the workers and youth of Hong Kong in the spring and autumn of 1967 belongs to such erased pages of history. In the mid-20th century, Hong Kong was not yet the financial center of Southeast Asia that it later became. Most of the city's population was employed in light industry, producing cheap plastic utensils, artificial flowers, and toys. The working day in poorly ventilated, dirty factories lasted 16 hours a day, and the workers who worked there were in the position of semi-slaves. In a strange irony of fate, the majority of them were refugees from China who dreamed of finding in the British colony the notorious “French loaf” that they had lost in the PRC.

Living conditions were comparable to working conditions. Homeowners have raised housing prices in the city to unprecedented heights. The workers huddled not even in apartments or rooms, but in living cells, which they rented out during sleep. The youth had no future. Only one out of three students graduated from school - the rest had to leave school early and help the family. It is not surprising that the younger generation has been at the forefront of social protests.

The events in Hong Kong were significantly influenced by the situation in neighboring countries. In December 1966, unrest began in the nearby Portuguese colony of Macau. Despite the intervention of the Portuguese army, after a general strike in January 1967, Lisbon was forced to satisfy most of the protesters' demands. Young people were also inspired by the Cultural Revolution that began in neighboring China, news of which electrified the political atmosphere in Hong Kong.

The first unrest began in early April 1967, when hundreds of young people took to the streets. They were not organized and did not make clear political demands. Their discontent was directed primarily against the Hong Kong police, which were famous for their corruption and incompetence. Colonial "bobbies" covered almost all the city's crime, from prostitution to the opium trade. Criminal cases were initiated only after bribes were given, and violence by “guardians of the law” against ordinary citizens was commonplace.

The demonstrations quickly escalated into fights with police riot police, which involved the entire population of Hong Kong - angry citizens threw heavy objects and garbage from the windows onto the heads of the police.

The next stage of unrest began exactly a month later. This time, the workers were at the forefront of the struggle. On May 6, 1967, clashes began between workers and management of an artificial flower factory in San Po Kong. Police special forces came to the aid of management, which led to a new round of clashes. 21 workers were arrested and dozens were injured. When workers' representatives went to the police station to demand the release of their detained comrades, the British police detained them too. But here the authorities made a mistake. The next day, thousands of workers and students took to the streets of Hong Kong. They chanted "blood for blood!" and waved little red books with quotes from Chairman Mao.

The situation was heating up. In Beijing, demonstrators besieged the British embassy. In Hong Kong itself, students distributed communist newspapers and installed a loudspeaker on the roof of the Bank of China broadcasting revolutionary songs and speeches. On May 16, the “Hong Kong and Kowlung Committee for Anti-British Hong Kong” was formed. Its head was Yung Kwong, a member of the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions. A virtual dual power arose in the colony.

British authorities responded to the protests by closing opposition newspapers, arresting activists and dispersing demonstrations. However, democratic forces countered the lawlessness of the British security forces with a combination of military and economic actions. A wave of strikes paralyzed entire areas of industry and also caused disruptions in food supplies. Stones and Molotov cocktails were increasingly thrown at the police. Government offices, banks and newspapers loyal to the regime were also attacked.

The regime's unwillingness to compromise led to an escalation of violence. The demonstrations at the residence of the British governor did not stop, but the shots of the urban guerrilla war were already ringing out. On July 8, 1967, revolutionary forces shelled the Sha Tau Kok police station. Five police officers were killed in the shootout. In August, a bomb campaign was launched against the authorities. Over the course of five months, dozens of bombs were planted throughout the city. Most of the charges were just firecrackers, but their explosions were enough to create an atmosphere of panic and instability.

Perhaps British rule in Hong Kong would have ended thirty years earlier, but here the Chinese leadership intervened. For Beijing, the British colony was a “window to Europe” through which China traded with the capitalist West. The CCP leadership has made it clear to the Hong Kong rebels that it is not prepared to retake the city at this stage. By the end of 1967, the colonial police and army suppressed the revolutionaries, who lacked Chinese support. More than 50 people became victims of street fighting (among them were many demonstrators, including children, beaten to death by police), and more than 5,000 people were arrested.

A remarkable talent of the British ruling class is its ability to learn from what has happened. The defeat of the 1967 uprising in Hong Kong was followed by an unprecedented wave of transformation.

For decades, British authorities have argued that investment in social infrastructure is neither feasible nor effective. However, after the revolutionary events of 1967, London suddenly found both money and political will for social reforms in Hong Kong. Since 1971, the city began mass housing construction, the creation of social security institutions, and the reform of the medical service. The authorities have increased the number of places in schools and even built the MTR public metro line. Government structures were also reformed. The Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (ICAC) was created to combat corruption. Surprisingly, after all these “anti-market” measures, Hong Kong did not go bankrupt, but became a showcase of British colonial rule, an example of Her Majesty’s care for overseas citizens.

The lesson of Hong Kong in 1967 is that force is the best way to deal with the ruling class. When capitalists and officials face the threat of losing power and property, they become flexible and open to dialogue, and capitalism suddenly “acquires” all those wonderful features that the Western world is so proud of.

On the other hand, the events of the last 20 years show that the rulers are using every opportunity to regain their lost positions, drive us back into living cells and fasten us to the conveyor belt. Only a world revolution can guarantee the irreversibility of social changes that will transform normal life from the lot of the “golden billion” into the norm for everyone.