Excellent podcast,

though I have to disagree with Jeremy’s comment comparing the Hong Kong question to Arizona in the USA. Sure there are obvious parallels – perceived abuse of public services, perceived job competition, fear of becoming a minority / losing identity, a view of the immigrants as uneducated, uncivilized, what not… yes, some of this seems pragmatic, some of it is overblown and irrational.

But it pretty much ends there. We haven’t had state-sponsored media outlets in Mexico City castigating Arizonans for not being “Mexican” enough. The Mexican government does not get to essentially appoint the Governor of Arizona, and have influence over school curriculum - (and on and on... anti-sedition act, etc). I might also say that compared to the CCP, the existing Mexican government has less of a bad rep when it comes to actively smashing local identities and forcing them into a unified, nationalistic system.

Much of this is touched on in the podcast but I want to place my emphasis: the irritation over visiting/immigrating Mainlanders is a piece (and a proxy) of the larger concern of Beijing’s influence and the question of Hong Kong’s future. I feel this is something unique to the Chinese SAR and has little in common with the US Border States, or anywhere else in the world.

I would add as a side note – Mexican immigration into Border States has arguably helped lower the cost of services in the US, making life a little easier for many. Here in Hong Kong there is a strong feeling that mainlanders are driving up all kinds of costs, making buying anything from a flat to baby formula, or just getting your kid into a good school, that much more difficult.

Might also help explain why, say, any given favorite local noodle shop has just been replaced by yet another D&G outlet. Just a thought.

明er nails it, and I'm wondering what Kaiser is smoking. It hardly seems irrational for Hong Kong residents to be upset at the influx of mainlanders who want the option of free education and healthcare yet plan to spend most of their lives in the mainland.

This is not an issue of culture clash. The core problem is that Beijing is perceived as undermining Hong Kong's democracy and its quality of life, and people are taking their frustrations out at the obvious beneficiaries: mainlanders who are now treating the island like a private top-tier hospital/kitchen/whatever. The solution is for China to clean its own act up so that mainland residents also have good healthcare, education and a decent quality of life.

I love Hong Kong and am happy to see people making a fuss about this. It's an amazing diverse and inclusive city, and painting this as ethnic tension misses the point completely.

被傳媒大力渲染的雙非闖急症室，導致本地孕婦深受影響的報道，他就有一個冷靜的觀察，說每年有約九萬嬰兒出生，當中有四成是經預約的內地人嬰兒，無預約闖急症室只佔他們當中的3%。

「據報導2011年有1656個雙非衝閘(急症室)個案。但其實，據政府報告*指出，其中更有約3成並非無預約的雙非孕婦，而是”已預約在公立醫院分娩的個案， 但未能及前往已預約的醫院分娩。” (另，報告有點語意不明到說25%是單非個案，但不清楚是否在那3成之中，因單/雙非暫時一同處理)

Chau的文章提出一個視點，有效對應被鼓吹右翼民粹者忽略及有意扭曲的，就是香港政府及利益團體並非毫無計劃，被迫回應，或根本沒能力解決一些迫切的社會問題。雙非孕婦問題是沒有宣諸於口的人口政策及產業利益輸送的一環，其核心「精神」是有錢人的後代才能來港定居，因為四萬到十多萬的分娩費及來港的其他開銷，並非一般人負擔得起。小部分付不起錢要冒險闖急症室者，只是這個龐大的「優生學」人口政策及醫療買賣操作的不方便洩密者。

灰記在此只想提醒那些把資源被分薄、租金昂貴、樓價飆升、物價高漲、都市面貌變遷，總之任何「負面」東西都歸咎於內地蝗蟲的人，這些他們形容的「侵略」是有著特區政府和本地不同既得利益集團的積極籌劃、參與，當中亦有不少香港人自願參與及得益，是否要把這些在中港日常互動中得益的僱員和小老闆也一概打為為「侵略者」服務的「港奸」呢？正如有同行facebook網誌寫道︰

「但請各位，冤有頭債有主，內地人來港消費（雖然我都見到眼冤），是你香港的旅發局日日在內地大賣廣告，吸引內地人來香港這個購物天堂花錢的；內地孕婦來港生育（不計小部份非法入境衝急症室走數的個案），是你香港的私家醫院和私家醫生倒履相迎、奉為上賓，港府合法批准入境產子的。出了問題，怎能怪在他們身上？當然，行為不文明，可以當面指正，遇上部份人不聽勸告，還惡言相向，可以揭露批評，但不等於要一竹篙打一船人。

老K，请你的那些朋友下次高谈阔论之前做点基本的功课，别人云即云！

明er & Orbital - agreed.

The dicussion fails to engage with the issues that actually matter to people in HK. It's easy to see how Kaiser could be so easily turned by the Apple Daily ad when he sees the whole situation through the prism of a bellicose, knee-jerk 'ethnic conflict'. What's becoming clear here is how HK and the mainland are seperated not only by different values, but indeed different interests. The immediate interests of the HK people are fundementally opposed to those of the people rushing in from across the border, and yet we are governed not by an unresponsive regime that legislates not for our interests, ultimately, but for those of a seperated population from whom we feel increasingly distinct.

I was also made uneasy by the ad, but it hardly negates the issues, concerns and arguments involved. HKers feel themselves backed into a corner, with their identity and idependence under threat from a force that can't be resisted, and are rendered powerless by limp, perputually embryonic semi-democracy to set the agenda for a government that should be our guardian. People who feel themselves backed into a corner with no other recoruse naturally lash out and in this context the 蝗虫 phenomenon is understandable, not matter how contemptable. As 2047 looms nearer, people are seeing that the future does not look bright for all that HK is and represents.

I've spent a lot of time since I started uni telling people that loads of my fellow HKers are completely up themselves and that I frankly prefer being in the mainland. This still holds true, but I've found this flare-up of the HK v Mainland dichotonomy send me instinctively to the side of my birthplace. However you feel about HK or HKers, their grievances are real and need to be addressed. Forgeting the media imbroglios of the past month would do nothing to erase them.