Political Pluralism in Hong Kong - Essay Example

?Insert Political pluralism in Hong Kong Political pluralism is the perception of liberal democracies which requires the dispersal of power among different economic and philosophical organized groups (Ma 38). Pluralism does not require the concentration of political power on a single group or elites. The philosophy holds that diversity in political issues is important to society and that disparate organized or cultural groups should be allowed to enjoy independence in society. These groups include; religious groups, labor unions, professional groups, and minority ethnic groups. Hong Kong seems to be keen on ensuring that pluralism is successful within its jurisdiction. Chan (198) says Hong Kong's current path to a complete democracy has been influenced by the country’s internal development of democratic structures over the past two decades. As at now, the struggle for establishing and strengthening internal democratic structures in Hong Kong has led to the pan-democratic agents locking horns with the hesitant government of China. The main challenge to democratic pluralism has been the inherent reluctance of the People’s Republic of China to welcome a Western-model democratic structure taking foot in Hong Kong. The central government of China does not appear to approve of the inevitable Western influences that would subsequently follow, and might spillover to China’s mainland. Ma (38) argues that China is wary about such a development because the West could use Hong Kong as the launch-pad for the subsequent complete democratization of the mainland China. As such, Ma (38) notes that the growth of democratic structures and culture in Hong Kong is basically hinged on the very core of the China’s central administrative authorities in Beijing. The authorities however continue to implement paternalistic policies, despite the fact that the Beijing regime seems to have ceded some ground on politically liberalism and pluralism in both territories compared to the state of affairs in the twentieth century. In light of the connection between the two societies, Chan (198) predicts that Hong Kong's development of democracy will grow at a slow pace. This gradual development will likely play out when the society is compared to the pluralism of the Western political culture where political organizations take rotations at the helm of leadership and competitive will of the people is the cornerstone of the processes (Ma 38). Despite these challenges, Hong Kong boasts of its internal organizations as the most liberal in the whole of China. The region’s people are arguably not just agents of democratic processes which manifests in their relentless support for a universal suffrage or its equivalent in the election of the Chief Executive and the members of the Legislative Council, but also adherents of the free expression of political views. Ma (38) has pointed out that Hong Kong also takes pride in civil rights protection, constitutionalism and a government leadership that is not tainted. The close supervisory roles of the reputable oversight organizations like the anti-corruption agency have also increased the level of faith in the regime’s leadership. In light of these tremendous steps involving constitutional pluralism, Hong Kong is experiencing a great level of horizontal transparency. Chan (198) points out that the much needed vertical accountability regarding competitive assumption of political offices based on the people’s will and the rotation of political parties in power has not yet been realized, however. Neo-liberalism in organized groups As Chan (198) has stated, Hong Kong organized groups replicate institutions of neo-liberalism, and as such they are representative the democratic will of their members in the selection of the Chief Executive. The system appears to favor competitiveness in the choice of leadership and public policy which rests with businesspersons, professional bodies, scholars and social welfare organizations (Hague and Harrop Martin 12-47). The organizations are mandated to select through an open, competitive process, representatives to a committee made up of 800 persons that then votes for the top-most political leader. Lawyers, for instance, are entitled to nominate their representatives through a competitive process to fill the 800-man slot that is equivalent of an Electoral College, as do managers who are in charge of financial services, tourism experts, academicians, and caterers. Although, some organized groups are given more slates than others, the main guiding principle is equity. Altogether, an estimated 200,000 members of the territory’s 7 million citizens are fit to vote (Chan 198). The low turnout in the elections, however denies the territory a clear, accurate political representation. Dispersed political power Ma (38) has pointed out that Hong Kong’s pluralism is a replica of the democratic processes in fledged Western countries in the sense that power is not concentrated in the hands of the ruling elite. For instance, by virtue of the delegate’s role in electing the top-most holder of office in the land, organized groups undeniably have a vital role to play in the running of the political affairs within the jurisdiction. This close, participatory relationship through people’s representatives is based on dispersed political powers and public policy-making initiatives within the territory. Government’s impartiality Hong Kong’s supreme political leadership prides itself in playing the impartial arbiter’s role in the operations of organizations where matters political arise. As such Hong Kong citizens enjoy a more impartial government role in terms of overseeing the affairs of various organizations within the region (Chan 198). However, China’s handling of Hong Kong as a semiautonomous territory within its borders, has complicated matters for the impartiality of Hong Kong’s highest leadership as far as the handling of organizations is concerned. China is not willing to allow the various organizations to enjoy a wider mandate in political spheres. The end result has witnessed the creation of a pseudo-electorate system for electing the political leadership where Beijing has a hand in the election of the chief executive. Pseudo-electorate system Despite the political pressure from Beijing, which threatens to scuttle a nascent democratic culture in Hong Kong, Ma (38) suggests that organized groups like that of lawyers seem to be in favour of a more transparent system for electing the chief executive. Judging by the recent elections, Chan (198) says the organizations have argued that Hong Kong’s citizens prefer competitive electoral processes in the country; hence it needs to move with speed in strengthening its democratic processes. Conclusion The rise of political pluralism in Hong Kong, and the equal level of resistance from China demonstrate a conflict between two political civilizations. In light of this, the more Hong Kong moves to strengthen the independence of its various organizations along Western models of civilization as supported by a majority of Hong Kong citizens, the more Chinese civilization struggles to stamp its sectarian authority in the smaller territory. China’s influence on Hong Kong has reversed and to some extent continues to slow the pace of political pluralism in the region. Works Cited Chan, M. Joseph, and Lee, L.F. Francis. Media and Politics in Post-Handover Hong Kong. New York: Routledge, 2013. Hague, Rod and Harrop, Martin. Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction. London: Palgrave, 2013 Ma, Kit-Wai Eric. Culture, Politics and Television in Hong Kong. New York: Routledge, 2013. Read More