Advertisement

Power, Transparency and Control: Hong Kong People’s Adaptations to Life

  • Joseph Y. S. ChengEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper attempts to examine how the concepts of power, transparency and control are perceived in the life of ordinary Hong Kong people, and how the latter have been adapting to their perceptions and evaluations. The 2008 global financial tsunami and its aftermath will likely have a serious impact on their values. Hong Kong people’s experiences may in some ways represent those of modern men, especially those in East Asia. Democracy is premised on the ideal that life is meaningful through political participation. For most Hong Kong people, this is too demanding an ideal and they instead opt for economic power at the micro-level to secure an optimal measure of control over the socio-economic aspects of their own life. But even this objective has proven extremely difficult to fulfil because of the asymmetry in power between the individual on one hand, and authoritarian regimes, big businesses, organized interest groups, etc. on the other. Very often exit is not a viable option. There may be a tendency to seek satisfaction from religious pursuits, voluntary work, or other external agencies.

Keywords

Power Transparency Control Hong Kong people Exit Satisfaction 

References

  1. 1.
    Birkinshaw, Patrick. 2006. Transparency as a human right. In Transparency–The key to better governance?, ed. Christopher. Hood, and David. Heald, 47–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press for The British Academy.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cheng, Joseph.Y.S. 1989. Introduction–China’s modernization programme in the 1980s. In China: Modernization in the 1980s, vol. ix–xix, ed. Joseph.Y.S. Cheng. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheng, Joseph.Y.S. 1989. Political modernisation in Hong Kong. The Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 27(3): 294–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cheng, Joseph.Y.S. 1990. The basic law: Messages for Hong kong people. In The other Hong Kong report 1990, ed. Richard.Y.C. Wong, and Joseph.Y.S. Cheng, 29–63. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheng, Joseph.Y.S. 2005. Introduction: Causes and implications of the July 1 protest rally in Hong Kong. In The July 1 protest rally–Interpreting a historic event, ed. Joseph.Y.S. Cheng, 1–26. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheng, Joseph. Y.S. 2008. Consumers losing out in a “free market”. South China Morning Post (Hong Kong). 31 December.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cheng, Joseph. Y.S. Hong Kong’s Legislative Council elections in September 2008: Maintaining the political status quo (now under review by Issues & Studies).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Drafting Committee for the Basic Law. 1988. The draft basic law of the Hong kong special administrative region of the People’s Republic of China (for solicitation of opinions). Hong Kong: Drafting Committee for the Basic Law.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fener, Lewis. 1963. What is alienation? The career of a concept. In Sociology on trial, ed. Maurice. Stein, and Arthur. Vidich, 127–147. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Foucault, Michel. 1980. The history of sexuality, vol. I: An introduction. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freidson, Eliot. 1968. The impurity of professional authority. In Institutions and the person, ed. Howard.S. Becker, Blanche. Geer, David. Riesman, and Robert.S. Weiss, 25–34. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freidson, Eliot. 1972. Profession of medicine. New York: Dodd, Mead.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Friedman, Edward. 2009. How economic superpower China could transform Africa. Journal of Chinese Political Science 14(1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heald, David. 2006. Transparency as an instrumental value. In Transparency–The key to better governance?, ed. Christopher. Hood, and David. Heald, 61–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press for The British Academy.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hirschman, Albert.O. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hughes, Richard. 1968. Hong Kong: Borrowed place, borrowed time. London: Andre Deutsch.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huntington, Samuel.P. 1993. The third wave–Democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    King, Ambrose.Yeo.-chi. 1975. The administrative absorption of politics in Hong Kong. Asian Survey 15(5): 422–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lau, Siu.-kai. 1962. Society and politics in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lord, Kristin.M. 2006. The perils and promise of global transparency. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oliga, John.C. 1996. Power, ideology, and control. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    O’Neill, Onora. 2002. A question of trust–The BBC reith lectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Radcliffe, C.J., and Radcliffe.First. Viscount. 1953. Freedom of information: A human right. Glasgow: Jackson, Son and Co.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ramo, Joshua.Cooper. 2004. The Beijing consensus. London: The Foreign Policy Centre.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roberts, Alasdair. 2006. Dashed expectations: governmental adaptation to transparency rules. In Transparency–The key to better governance?, ed. Christopher. Hood, and David. Heald, 109–118. Oxford: Oxford University Press for The British Academy.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Russell, Bertrand. 1938. Naked power. Power–A new social analysis Chapter 6, 57–71. London and New York: Routledge. (reprinted in 1995).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    South China Morning Post (Hong Kong). 17 June 1987.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Storey, Ian., and Lee.Poh. Onn (eds.). 2009. Regional outlook–Southeast Asia 2009–2010. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    United Nations. 1946. General assembly resolution 59(1) at 95 United Nations documents A/64. 14 December.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Westwood, Sallie. 2002. Power and the social. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Williamson, John. 1990. What Washington means by policy reform. In Latin American adjustment: How much has happened?, ed. John. Williamson, 8–19. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wrong, Dennis.H. 1995. Power–Its forms, bases, and uses. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.City University of Hong KongHong Kong (SAR)People’s Republic of China (PRC)

Personalised recommendations