Recently, the news has been flooded with reports of the Hong Kong protests against an extradition bill which would allow fugitives in Hong Kong to be extradited to Mainland China with the approval of Hong Kong courts.

I think that last clause is extremely important, because some media reports have been portraying the incident as if the Chinese authorities could just grab anyone off the streets of Hong Kong.

Of course, the people of Hong Kong, who are known to be extremely vocal and zealous about their democratic rights, took to the streets to protest. Anyone who has been following Hong Kong’s affairs would remember the 2014 Umbrella Movement, in which Hong Kong students and professionals protested the pre-screening of candidates for the Chief Executive of Hong Kong.

I’m not here to give an opinion about Hong Kong-Mainland China affairs, or my views about who’s right and wrong.

But it’s interesting to observe the developments of the Hong Kong protests. As with many civil rights movements, the protests started as a peaceful show of resistance. Gradually, it escalated into semi-violence, when the protesters stomped the Legislative Council building on 2 July 2019.

That was when things became serious, because causing physical damage to a public building meant that the line between a peaceful demonstration and social unrest had been crossed.

It didn’t take long for support of the demonstrations to wane, as the protests caused great social inconvenience and even violence.

A series of clashes have ensued between the protesters and riot police, as well as other movements and the protesters.

On 22 July 2019, members of a pro-Beijing triad armed with iron bars and wooden clubs attacked protesters dressed in black, the alleged dress code of the pro-democracy movement, injuring over 45 people.

---

Personalities lauded as heroes are often those who had the courage to show resistance to champion a cause. Martin Luther, Nelson Mandela, Malala Yousafzai, among others, were subject to violence, imprisonment, torture, threats to their lives. Notwithstanding the hardship they endured, they overcame these difficulties and succeeded in achieving their goals.

Yet, is activism always beneficial to the society? Sometimes, we have to speak up to get things done. It’s the only way that society can advance, and it may sometimes come with huge costs.

For example, in the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, around 241 people were killed and some 7000 injured, after the Chinese Communist Party sent the military in to crackdown on students who were vying for economic and political reforms.

Could we say that such demonstrations, activism and even protests bring net benefit to society even when the social costs, such as civil unrest and threats to life have been taken into account?

It is difficult to quantify social benefit. After all, the views of a civil group may not correspond with that of society at large. For example, LGBTQ movements campaigning for legalisation for same-sex marriage may directly contradict with the beliefs of conservative religious groups. As such, even if their aims have been achieved, it may prejudice the rights of other civil groups.

Should we speak up? If yes, to what extent should we campaign for our beliefs? Must we continue to the end such that the ends justify the means, or should we stop where things get out of hand?

I concur with the latter point of view. I do not think the ends justify the means. Crashing into the state legislative council building is excessive, even if they had managed to get the extradition bill withdrawn.

So the next time we wish to campaign about something, maybe we could think twice before stepping out on the streets with banners and umbrellas?