Yes but a few words: Vote? Don't vote?

More than ten years ago, between the "Defend the Star Queen Movement" and the "Anti-High Speed Rail Movement", some young social activists started to "stay behind". I was not yet thirty years old at the time. Once, the day before the parade, I said in my office, "Don't leave after the parade tomorrow." A very respectable senior dropped a response: "What's the use of that?"

I don't remember how I responded at the time. But if at the time I thought it was "useless" to go home and sleep after every parade, the senior's response would have reminded me: "It's useless for you to stay behind."

What happened later was that more and more people believed that the actions that had always been "like rituals" were "useless", so they had to "cut off the table" from the past practice in their actions and programs. Everyone knows what the result of this change will be.

Today is the day of the first election since Beijing changed the electoral system of Hong Kong's Legislative Council. None of the "yellow camp" political parties ran for election (unless you consider "new thinking" to be "yellow camp"), but every direct electoral constituency has so-called "non-establishment" candidates who have won enough nominations and passed vetting to become candidate. The prevailing atmosphere of the Yellow Camp is to boycott the election.

On the other hand, the government has exhausted all means to urge votes. It seems that the top authorities have a requirement to try their best to increase the voter turnout rate, and all senior officials have to "turn in their homework", so that today's free public transportation "going to the doctor in a hurry". In this case, isn't it humiliating the government to let the voter turn out at a low altitude?

When the senior said that, he was actually asking me: "After staying behind and being taken away by the police or even arrested, what happens after that?" I don't know if he will vote today. But now my thinking is similar to what he thought back then: "Even if the government loses its fight, people make fun of it online for a week, what will happen after that? Will Hong Kong be a little freer because of this? Will Hong Kong be closer to universal suffrage because of this? Hong Kong Wouldn't it be so unequal?"

The younger brother is ignorant of learning, and I really can't think of what will happen in the future.

Some people will probably say, "voting will be interpreted as agreeing with the electoral system!" I understand this statement. Unfortunately, the meaning of each of our actions is not determined by ourselves. But at the same time, are we (we) going to be decided by the two current camps to decide the meaning of the vote? For example, if I vote for a non-establishment candidate, does it mean that I support the new electoral system (in fact, I also don't support the old electoral system) and agree that launching a white vote campaign should be defined as an illegal act?

If the "non-establishment" candidate in the constituency is acceptable, and the election of this person can squeeze out an "establishment" candidate, voting may help to slightly reduce the power of the "establishment". Yes, this vote is worthless in the long run of history, but it still makes a little bit more sense than not voting. To put it more clearly, I think the former is more interesting than the latter, rather than showing dissatisfaction with the electoral system reform by not voting.

Besides, I recently made a very unscientific observation. Establishment candidates don't lash out at each other these days. Most of them attack and criticize "non-establishment" candidates. Instead of accusing "non-establishment" candidates of supporting "black violence", they questioned their unclear position or speculation. If this kind of offensive is effective, the main result it can bring is to prevent voters who do not support the establishment system from voting or voting in vain. Therefore, if the government really wants the voter turnout to be as high as possible, the establishment faction participating in direct elections will not think so. Because the fewer non-establishment voters cast valid votes, the better it is for them.

If you think about it further, the strange relationship between the government and the establishment faction participating in direct elections reflects another structural problem of the Hong Kong version of one country, two systems. But that's another story.