李怡，1936年生，香港知名時事評論家、作家。1970年曾創辦雜誌《七十年代》，1984年更名《九十年代》，直至1998年停刊。後在《蘋果日報》撰寫專欄，筆耕不輟半世紀。著有文集《放逐》、《思緒》、《對應》等十數本。正在Matters連載首部自傳《失敗者回憶錄》：「我一生所主張所推動的事情，社會總是向相反趨向發展，無論是閱讀，獨立思考或民主自由都如是。這就是我所指的失敗的人生。」

Memoirs of a Loser 188: My Most Satisfying Interview

Sep 5, 2022

In the previous articles recalling Jimmy Lai, I mentioned that he is a "Greater China faction" who supports Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong and one country, two systems.

This orientation, I think, is mainly based on the attitude of the entire Western world towards China and Hong Kong at that time. Western companies are happy to see cheap labor, land use rights, and an investment environment free from pollution after China's opening-up, as well as China's huge market. Western political circles also have wishful thinking that China's economic development will inevitably bring about social freedom, democracy and the values of abiding by rules. And as Hong Kong is the base for advancing China, China will certainly allow Hong Kong to maintain one country, two systems, in order to serve China's interests.

The Western world pays little attention to the aggression against Hong Kong people. There are many places in the world that are worse than Hong Kong. The prospect of Hong Kong people's independence has made the West elusive. Therefore, what the West is willing to support is to strive for democratic universal suffrage under the Basic Law under one country, two systems.

The localization trend emerged in about a decade after 1997, and the supporters of pan-democrats began to lose. In 2010, after the Democratic Party entered the Liaison Office of the Central Committee to discuss and negotiate a political reform plan, every election was challenged by the localists. In the "emergency" voice, the pan-democrats asked voters not to distribute their votes to the local faction, so that the establishment faction would "benefit". Thus, there is the saying that voters are required to "tearfully vote" for democrats they don't like.

Jimmy Lai also ordered the press to support pan-democratic candidates in every election. I edited the forum version because I wanted the articles to be good-looking, so not only did I not cooperate with and support the pan-democrats, but on the contrary, it would provide space for the pan-democrats to have a debate with the local people. Because readers love to see the battle of different opinions, and the truth becomes clearer and clearer. Finally, Jimmy Lai dismissed me as editor-in-chief, turning the most lively forum into a mouthpiece for the pan-democrats.

However, as I said earlier, I have no complaints about it. He is the boss, has his democratic concept, and also has ideas that fit in with the consciousness of the international community.

Later, Foxy, an online sharing software, disclosed information about Jimmy Lai's political donations, stating that from 2006 to 2011, he donated HK$13.69 million to the Democratic Party and HK$14.55 million to the Civic Party.

Political donations are common in democracies, but with the CCP's high level of involvement in Hong Kong politics, few businessmen are willing to donate to the democrats. The sources of political donations from pan-democrats or local people mostly rely on the "street stations" set up on the roadside during the demonstrations. Jimmy Lai's large donations to the pan-democrats are big news, and the more important news is that in 2009/10, his donations accounted for 99% of the donations of non-members of the Democratic Party and 68.2% of the Civic Party. Although he is a "big reservoir" for the pan-democrats, he also proves that the donations of the pan-democrats from ordinary citizens are pitiful.

The trend of public opinion in Hong Kong is very clear. Under the CCP’s ban on democratic universal suffrage and the harassment and intrusion of the mainland on Hong Kong people’s lives, Hong Kong people’s awareness of defending their homeland has been rising. Although the pan-democrats also fought against the Communist Party and fought for democracy, not only did they not actively support the local consciousness, but instead suppressed the local faction, resulting in the loss of supporters and the depletion of financial resources.

Although I no longer edit the forum, I still write editorials at Apple. I am loyal to my own perception, and I am not swayed by Jimmy Lai and Apple's pan-democratic stance. I propose that all democracies have been native democracies since the dawn of humanity, never top-down gifted democracies. It is impossible to beg the power to give some political rights to the people, and the Basic Law does not help. The broadest citizens must be connected with local interests, and even if the strength is not strong enough to stand against the mighty, it is still a twisted force.

I emphasize that "self-determination" does not mean "independence". Self-determination is a basic human right and a right stipulated in the Universal Covenant on Human Rights. Independence is one of the goals pursued by self-determination, but not the only one. The result of self-determination is not necessarily independence, but can be One country, two systems, or one country, one system fully integrated with China. I also pointed out that the English word for "independent" is independent, and its word structure comes from dependent, which refers to the opposite state of dependence and attachment. Its antonym is not united (united), united refers to the opposite state of division, that is, there is division before union (unification). An independent person means that he has independent thoughts, independent personality, autonomous consciousness and free will, and his actions and choices are basically not affected by others.

I have repeatedly emphasized in my editorial that Hong Kong citizens have the freedom of speech to promote Hong Kong independence. Because there should be no restrictions on freedom of speech, as long as it is not part of the action and poses no "clear and immediate danger".

My remarks on the side of the locals and young people received a lot of attention in those years, especially among young people. On February 6, 2015, RTHK invited me to attend the "Friday Home" program. Under the aggressive host, I briefly talked about several major issues that the society was concerned about at that time. I wasn't prepared and didn't know what the host would ask, but since most of the questions I had written or at least had in my head, I answered them without thinking. Immediately after it was broadcast on TV that night, it was widely disseminated on various web pages. The responses from netizens lasted for several months, and the vast majority were positive. I myself think it was the most satisfying interview of my years.

Among the netizens' responses, what moved me the most was "Mr. Li Yi, Thank You" written by Ma Heihui. In a short article, this young man has insight into my intentions and intentions for writing and speaking in my 80s, and sincerely thanks me. Resonating with young people makes me feel that all my efforts have not been in vain.