Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

"Deformed Democracy" Was a Cancer: Why We Must Vote to Kill It

Blog

"Deformed Democracy" Was a Cancer: Why We Must Vote to Kill It
Blog

Blog

"Deformed Democracy" Was a Cancer: Why We Must Vote to Kill It

2025-12-07 18:16 Last Updated At:18:16

Today, December 7, marks the second election since the Legislative Council finally got back on track. Today, I can’t shake the memory of how a "deformed democracy" ravaged this chamber for years. It was a malignancy—a tumor growing from within—that trapped us in endless chaos and nearly destroyed Hong Kong. This nightmare remains burned into my mind.
 
Let’s look at the receipts from those insane years. Three absurd realities prove how a tidal wave of radicalism washed away a functioning Council. First, post-"Occupy Central," a crop of "political stars" rode a wave of extremism to besiege LegCo, degrading election quality for years. Second, during the "Black Violence" era, District Councils devolved into a "destroyers' paradise" of unprecedented disorder. Third, to appease radical voters, Pan-democrats hijacked the House Committee election for six months, paralyzing governance. The Council became an endangered structure on the verge of collapse, dragging government operations down with it. Without the Central Government stepping in to restore order, Hong Kong was finished. To stop history from repeating, everyone needs to vote on December 7.
  
The truth is, this "deformed democracy" was rotting the soil of Hong Kong politics long before "Occupy Central." The British government deliberately planted "election landmines," allowing politicians using unorthodox methods to rise. They realized the game: be radical, be outrageous, be uncouth, and you get votes. Figures like Wong Yuk-man, Albert Chan, and "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung seized power this way. Once that door opened, the Council’s normal operations were destroyed, turning the chamber into a mud-wrestling pit.
  
That was just the prelude. The subversion peaked with the 6th Legislative Council election following the 2014 "Occupy Central" movement. Driven by a passion for "rebellion," masses of young people blindly voted for fresh faces who built their brands on radicalism, ignoring their complete lack of ability or track record. The result? First-time winners included "Localist" figures dripping with "Hong Kong Independence" sentiment like Baggio Leung and Yau Wai-ching, alongside "Occupy" student leader Nathan Law.

Oath-Taking Circus: Post-"Occupy" radicals Baggio Leung and Yau Wai-ching stormed the chamber advocating independence, turning solemn oaths into a disgraceful farce.

Oath-Taking Circus: Post-"Occupy" radicals Baggio Leung and Yau Wai-ching stormed the chamber advocating independence, turning solemn oaths into a disgraceful farce.

The "Open House" of Radical Chaos
Worse still, opportunists within the Pan-democrat camp saw this worked and jumped into the fray. The prime examples were the notoriously "uncouth and aggressive" Ted Hui and the self-proclaimed radical environmentalist Eddie Chu.
  
When Baggio Leung, Yau Wai-ching, and Nathan Law stormed the Council, political insiders told me the candidacy door had been flung too wide. It became an "unguarded open house"—easy to enter, hard to clear out—guaranteeing chaos. Fortunately, their greed for victory blinded them to the risks. They played games with their inaugural oaths, effectively playing themselves into a corner and getting disqualified (DQ).
  
Even after they were ousted, the "miracle" of their election accelerated the degradation of our politics. Fanatical voters continued to back incompetent politicians just to vent rebellious angst. Even younger members of the traditional Pan-democrats started acting out to cater to this new taste. Ted Hui is the textbook example: violently snatching a female civil servant's phone and throwing foul-smelling filth in the Chamber. It became a competition of who could be the most radical, obstructing bills and making livelihood administration nearly impossible.
 
By 2019, when the anti-extradition bill unrest broke out, the Council became a disaster zone. Then came the second absurdity. During the November District Council elections, held amidst turmoil, radical candidates swarmed to grab seats. At the same time, "black-clad people" physically attacked Establishment opponents with beatings, arson, and intimidation. They won the majority, reducing the District Councils to a "destroyers' paradise." Long-serving community councilors were wiped out, marking an unprecedented and unbearable degradation of our institutions.

Filth in the Chamber: "Uncouth" politician Ted Hui proved his disruptive intent by literally throwing foul-smelling rot during a Council meeting.

Filth in the Chamber: "Uncouth" politician Ted Hui proved his disruptive intent by literally throwing foul-smelling rot during a Council meeting.

Paralyzing the System From Within
Inside LegCo, Pan-democrats brought the street riots into the Chamber, competing to perform "radical shows." The most absurd spectacle was Civic Party member Dennis Kwok holding the House Committee Chairman election hostage. He "played games" for over half a year. Sixteen meetings passed without electing a chairman, blocking massive amounts of government bills. Forced by the situation, even moderate Pan-democrats joined the madness, turning the Chamber into a real-life version of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest."
  
Recently, some claim the reformed Legislative Council has lost its monitoring function. This is 100% a fallacy. The Council back then was thoroughly wrecked; normal operations were paralyzed. What monitoring was there? Government administration was dragged down, pushing us to the brink of "mutual destruction" (laam caau).
  
Thankfully, the Central Government stepped in at the critical moment to pull the Council back on the right track. If "deformed democracy" had continued, Hong Kong would have derailed and fallen off a cliff, destroyed in a single day.
 
To prevent this painful history from repeating, everyone must vote enthusiastically on December 7. Support the Legislative Council moving forward on the correct track.

Lai Ting-yiu




What Say You?

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Grief remains raw a week after the "once‑in‑a‑century" Wang Fuk Court inferno. But while locals pray, overseas agitators plot. They are cynically hijacking the tragedy to rebrand their stalled anti-embassy campaign as a "mourning event."

Think of it as a "triplet" strategy: by bundling the vigil with BNO residency demands, these agitators aim to pump up turnout and force London’s hand. It is a desperate bid to build clout that risks channeling discontent right back to Hong Kong—and authorities need to be watching.

Calculated Pivot: UK agitators hijack the fire tragedy to pump life into their flagging anti-embassy march.

Calculated Pivot: UK agitators hijack the fire tragedy to pump life into their flagging anti-embassy march.

Opportunists Hijack Tragedy for Politics

Make no mistake: the overseas "yellow camp" is going all-out. Major player Hong Kong Watch has issued marching orders to so-called "Hong Kong Community Centres" in Los Angeles, Toronto, and Berlin. Don't let the neutral "community center" branding fool you. These are operational bases for hardline opposition supporters.

Saturday's Toronto event exposes the political underbelly. Alongside the usual protest regulars, you have heavy hitters like Hong Kong Watch Canada chair Aileen Calverley. The theme—"pursuing accountability"—screams politics, not prayer. Expect to see former entertainer Joseph Tay, who fled to Canada in 2020 and now sits on a National Security wanted list.

But the main event is in Britain. The group "Hongkongers in Britain" is staging a massive "memorial" in London, expecting hundreds. The ringleader is Simon Cheng, a former employee of the British consulate with a murky past who secured swift asylum in 2020. Now a fugitive on the police wanted list, he is mixing mourning with his separatist agenda.

Fugitive on the Attack: Simon Cheng weaponizes tomorrow's memorial to strike at the Hong Kong government.

Fugitive on the Attack: Simon Cheng weaponizes tomorrow's memorial to strike at the Hong Kong government.

Friday is just the warm-up act. The real play comes Saturday, when various BNO holder groups converge for a "large march." The mourning angle? That was a last-minute add-on. Their original, stated goals were purely political: protecting BNO settlement perks and killing China’s "super embassy" plan in London.

Shifting goalposts is their only constant. Previous marches relied on a motley crew of anti-China politicians and separatists to sour UK-China relations. But here is the cold reality: British intelligence greenlit the embassy, and Prime Minister Keir Starmer looks ready to approve it. With the opposition campaign hitting a dead end, turnout is nose-diving.

To arrest the decline, organizers are tapping into anxiety among Hong Kong BNO holders about tougher residency rules. By adding a "no change to settlement conditions" demand, they hope to drag more bodies into the street and pad their shrinking numbers.

Fading Relevance Desperate for Numbers

Then came the fire. It was a "once-in-a-century" disaster, and these groups wasted no time weaponizing the grief. By co-opting the tragedy, they aim to lure in regular Hong Kong people who just want to mourn, oblivious to the hardline agenda. It makes their "triplet" protest look far bigger than it actually is.

The playbook is predictable. Once the crowd gathers to mourn, organizers will pour political fuel on the fire, steering the anger toward the HKSAR Government. The goal is simple: export this manufactured outrage back to Hong Kong, triggering "brothers-in-arms" to reignite the ashes of the 2019 turmoil.

This isn't the first time they have built a platform on tragedy. It won't be the last. Authorities need to keep their eyes wide open.

Lai Ting-yiu

Recommended Articles