The Hong Kong Free Press counts 21 lawmakers who have thus far decided not to seek reelection “as pro-Beijing party unveils election candidates” (October 22, 2025).
Their reasons, feelings of futility or weariness, need for more family time, pressure from on high, what have you, don’t really matter. Nobody is anymore allowed to do anything but ratify the Chinese Communist Party regime.
Anti-Beijing candidates can no longer stand for election. Gary Chan, chairman of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), the pro-Beijing party that dominates the legislature, says that residents “should have more choices under the new electoral system.”
Chan (shown above, fourth from left) is referring to the system installed in 2021 that prevents non-“patriot” legislators from running for office, thereby reducing the number of fundamental choices to zero.
HKFP: “In March 2021, Beijing passed legislation to ensure ‘patriots’ govern Hong Kong. The move reduced democratic representation in the legislature, tightened control of elections and introduced a pro-Beijing vetting panel to select candidates. The Hong Kong government said the overhaul would ensure the city’s stability and prosperity. But the changes also prompted international condemnation, as it makes it near-impossible for pro-democracy candidates to stand.”
“Debate” and “disagreement” issuing from persons willing to do the job of pretend-legislating are allowed, sort of, as long as the to-and-fro is conducted within sufficiently narrow confines and in the proper pro-CCP spirit.
An op-ed published in China Daily—the views of which “do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily,” which publishes nothing but views reflective of those of China Daily—asserts that all Hong Kong lawmakers “must proactively engage with the public and media to explain and defend government policies. Constructive criticism is welcome, but it should be solution-oriented, not nitpicking of government initiatives, or needlessly stirring public sentiments for political gain.” Hong Kong needs “patriots with a firm stance,” “upholders of the executive-led system,” “true representatives of public opinion.”
The problem of externality
What the writer, Tony Kwok, lays down as beyond the pale is what happened in the days of yore, when “anti-China, subversive legislators stoked public hatred, which culminated in the 2019 insurrection. Within the LegCo chamber, they deliberately and recklessly obstructed proceeding.”
There was abuse of procedural rules. Collusion with external forces. Filibustering. And other horrors not in the accepted style of one-party totalitarian rule. Public sentiments were stirred. All this, Kwok quacks, served to “undermine the ‘one country, two systems’ principle.” Yes, he is contending that resistance to the CCP’s undermining of the one-two principle is proof of the opposite. It’s a crock, Kwok.
The writer also touts the virtue of “fostering an inclusive society.” Including by excluding democracy and forbidding fundamental opposition to bad policy and the doctrines and effects of “socialism with Chinese characteristics”? But we must not inquire further. We don’t want to be colluding with any external facts here.
