RURAL PROTEST IN HONG KONG A HISTORICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS By Hung Ho Fung B. Soc. Sc. (1995) The Chinese University of Hong Kong Thesis Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofM.Phil in Sociology in the Graduate School of the Chinese University ofHong Kong 1 ||^^^^( 1 6 服 199 ^j ^^^S^^s"k^W ^^^p^ /, f Summary This paper is an attempt to explain the puzzling rural stability despite drastic rural development in the colonial period in Hong Kong, bi the first part of the thesis, previous research on the problem is reviewed critically. Then insights are drawn from the current literature on social movements and peasant resistance in order to formulate an alternative framework in explaining the phenomenon. From a comparative case analysis based on the six cases of rural social conflicts, I locate two crucial factors of the emergence or non-emergence of rural protests. The first is the absence or presence of suppression by the rural elite. The second is the absence or presence of autonomous organization in the villages. The non-occurrence of manifested rural protests was a combined effect of the absence of autonomous organizations and presence of elite suppression. Highly confrontational collective action with high participation rate would appear when the elite suspended their suppression of mobilization and relevant autonomous organizations existed. When only one of the two conditions of non-emergence of rural protest was fulfilled, intermediate forms of collective action would arise: either confrontational action with low participation rate or non-confrontational action with high participation rate. Viewed in this light, to explain the ‘rural stability' in Hong Kong entails the investigation of why the rural elite were always suppressive to grassroots mobilization and why there were little autonomous organizations in the village. These can only be understood in terms of the specific historical trajectory of 2 colonial state building in rural Hong Kong and development of various rural organizations. What this study implies is that the "rural stability" in Hong Kong - or we can extend the conclusion to the case of urban stability as well - is a historically and contextually specific phenomenon. Whether such stability will continue into the future is not guaranteed. At last, but not least, the reified image of a "stable" New Territories in particular and Hong Kong in general has to be abandoned. 3 m_^ 這篇論文嘗試釋殖民地時期香港鄉郊地區在急促發展的同時能保持 高度穩定之現象。論文的第一部份批判地檢視了針對此一問題的現有 文獻。接著，我從西方社會運動及農抗爭的討論出發，建構解釋此一 現象的另途框架。 通過基於六個鄉郊社區衝突案例之比較分析，我發現了影響鄉郊抗 爭發生或不發生的兩個重要因素。第一個是鄉郊菁英的壓制，第二是 有關農村社區内是否存在自主組織。抗爭的不發生其實是缺乏自立組 織與菁英壓制相加的結果。相反，若社區内存在自主組織及缺乏菁英 壓制，高度對抗性及參與率高的抗爭便會出現。若只符合兩個導致抗 爭的產生的因素之一，則會引起中介性抗爭的產生：低參與率的對抗 性運動或高參與性的非對抗性活動。 因此’要解釋香港的鄉郊社會穩定，便等於要解釋為何鄉郊菁英經 常壓制草根動員，及為何農村的自主組織會那麼缺乏。這又可從本地 殖民國家建造，及本地農村組織的歷史發展之角度去考察。 這篇論文又指出，香港的「鄉郊社會穩定」一或許我們也可將結論 推至市區一是以一定的歷史脈絡作前題。這個穩定性在未來能否繼續， 仍是一個未知之數。 Acknowledgements From the formation of the research problem to the final revision of this thesis, my M.Phil research is inseparable from the generous support of my teachers and friends. Without their inspiration and help, this thesis can hardly become a reality. I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincerest acknowledgements to the following people. My deepest gratitude is owed to my supervisor. Prof. Stephen W. K. Chiu. It is through his commitment ta and enthusiasm in the study of Hong Kong society that I am introduced to the questions and puzzles about the post-war development of Hong Kong - a place where I was bom, grew up, and regard as my home. Without his continuous inspiration, suggestions, comments and encouragement and other helps, I would have got lost in the course of the research. My collaboration with him in various research projects and writings is invaluable to me, though they might not be directly related to my M.Phil research. Through the coUaboration with Prof. Chiu, I Ieara what is fine scholarship and high quality research. I have to thank him for giving me such great opportunities. Special thanks should also be given to the chairman of my thesis panel. Dr. Lui Tai-lok. I leam a great deal not only from his formal instruction but also from the casual tea-time chatting with him. As the graduate director of the Department of Sociology, Chinese University ofHong Kong, he provides earnest support of various kinds to me and other graduate students. He is very successfiiI in creating a cozy atmosphere for our work without compromising his high academic 4 standard. Dr. Chan Kin-man's support and comments are important to my research as well. His inspiring and enthusiastic teaching is one of the significant factors for my decision of pursuiting an M.Phil degree of Sociology at CUHK three years ago. &i August 1996, Prof. Chiu and I presented a paper on the history of the New Territories at the International Workshop on “Hong Kong: Polity, Economy and Society under Colonial Rule" organized by the SinologicaI fastitute, Leiden University, the Netherlands. The critical comments from our discussant. Prof. Eduard B. Vermeer and other participants of the Workshop are crucial for the reformulation of the research problem of my thesis. I have to thank the Sir Edward Youde Memorial Fellowship for its generous financial support. The support is beyond economic terms, as the encouragement it gives me is also invaluable. I would also like to express my gratitude to my friends in the student organizations when I was an undergraduate student Foremost among them are a number of “activist-cum-sociobgists，，who led me into the wonderful enterprise of social science. They also gave me the incentive and courage to abandon my carefully planned engineer career and became a sociology student No matter they realized it or not, they had participated in a decision which had changed my life. Their emphasis on the “unification of theory and practice”，together with my experience in the student and community organizations, always remind me ofthe reason for my choice, and become a moral guidance ofmy study and research, 5 And the support and encouragement form my fellow classmates can never be forgotten. The friendship and companion ofEIaine Yam, Samuel Tse, Rebecca Lai, Thomas Tse, Cecilia Yuen, Amy Yuen Chiu Man-yiu, Koo Wai-sze and Lee Ka-man are really a very important part of my memorable days in the Sociology Department ofCUHK. • 6 Table ofContents Summary p* 3 Acknowledgements p. 5 Chapter 1 The Paradox ofRural Stability p. 8 Chapter 2 Literature on Collective Action p.20 Chapter 3 Elite Intervention and Organization: Independent Variables m the Analysis ofRural Protest Intensity p. 35 Chapter 4 Conceptual Framework for Case Analysis p. 69 Chapter 5 Extreme Cases p. 73 Chapter 6 intermediate Cases p. 99 Chapter 7 Discussion and Conclusion p. 135 References p 142 7 Chapter 1 The Paradox of Rural Stability Introduction In 1899，when the British landed on the "New Territories" resided by the Great Clans and the Hakka villagers, they were seen by the latter as barbarians to be driven away from their native land. An armed uprising was organized against the occupying troops. However, 68 years later in 1967，the colonial government seemed to have become a legitimate government over the rural elite. The rural leaders allied with the authority and was active in persuading their constituents to cooperate with the British to suppress the rebellious leftists. Over the 1970s, the wheel of urbanization rolled over all comers of the New Territories. Agrarian i communities were uprooted one after the other. But surprisingly, this never gave rise to large scale rural unrest challenging the colonial authority. -The tranquillity of the grassroots villagers under the stress of rapid rural development is as puzzling as the remarkable stability in the urban areas over the period of colonial rule from a comparative perspective. In the postwar development literature, the conservative modernization literature argues that rapid development creates instability in society which ultimately leads to conflicts and protests. The rural society has been viewed as a traditional force which often resists the coming of modem values and social institutions. The radical dependency literature also predicts a high level of rural unrest in a developing society, but for different reasons. The imposition of political subjugation in the form of imperialism and colonialism is often sufficient cause for rebellion. Rapid 8 development is always accompanied with social upheaval in most Third World countries. Why did this not happen in Hong Kong? In fact, many students of Hong Kong society have tried explaining this stability - despite - rapid growth paradox. However, as we will see, their approach is quite problematic and a revision of explanation is required. My thesis is such an attempt in finding an alternative explanation. Local literature on social stability of Hong Kong as well as foreign literature on peasant protest and social movement will be reviewed before the substantial analysis of the issue. 9 Current Literature on Social Stability in Hong Kong The "paradox of stability" (relative social and political stability in spite of rapid development) attracts the attention of the first generation sociologists of Hong Kong. There is already a sizable literature addressing the problem (e.g. Lau 1982). In particular, "administrative absorption ofpolitics" is a well known notion explaining the political stability of Hong Kong. According to King (1981)，the British rulers relied on the strategy of synarchy and methods of elite-mass integration to ensure the stability of the colony. Under the synarchical principle, members ofthe Chinese elite were coopted into the administration process of the government, either by recruiting them into the Executive Council, Legislative Council, Urban Council and other formal consultation channels, or by consulting the elite informally on specific issues. In this way, any emerging leader in the community who was capable of mobilizing the grassroots and initiating political action against the state was coopted to be a partner ofthe government.