'Democracy or nothing' is no choice for a better Hong Kong
Franklin Koo says the debate on what Hong Kong needs for a better future has been too narrowly framed from the start. Pro-democracy activists should rethink their method for success
When we were young, we were often taught to solve problems with only one clear and correct answer. There was a reason for that; it was much more efficient, easier to grade, and the solution safeguards against any evaluator harbouring prejudices or subjective views. For instance, we were often given multiple-choice questions.
However, while this method is a cost-efficient way of testing, real-life problems are never solved in such a fashion. The methodology is too simple to account for other important factors and, in many ways, it hinders our ability to make objective and informed judgments.
Consider this question: Please choose one of the following that may lead to a positive future for Hong Kong: A. Fascism; B. Anarchy; C. Democracy.
The majority are likely to choose C, simply because the other alternatives are not desirable for a positive future. However, the framing of the issue has already limited the scope and complexity of other pressing issues. This is a common conceptual problem, leading us to believe that C is the only correct solution for a positive future. But is democracy really what the doctor ordered to cure ailing Hong Kong?