‘소수’로서의 홍콩인

Abstract

Even after the significant decrease in Hong Kong’s politicalindependence following the transfer of its sovereignty from theUnited Kingdom to the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong isstill regarded globally as an independent nation under the name of“Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” and has beenguaranteed political and economic autonomy for 50 years under“One country, two systems.” Upon closer analysis, there is an evenclearer contrast between ‘the Majority’–China, and ‘the Minority’–Hong Kong. From a cultural neuroscience perspective, it isinevitable that the people of Hong Kong will establish a newidentity and culture through conflicts with China. Just as identity,henceforth defined as “-ness,” is not fixed but changes constantly,“Hong Kong-ness” is also a changing concept. Recognizing that“-ness” is developed through education, training, and transmissionof ideas, we explore the concept of “we-ness” ― the Chinese-HongKong identity ― as a direct result of brain plasticity and thecurrent relations between China and Hong Kong. Since the handover, Hong Kong people have been indoctrinated with the “nation” of China in their brains through consistentefforts of the Chinese government and authorities. Defining brainplasticity as “the ability of the brain to modify the original conceptof “-ness” to a new “-ness”,” the “nation” of China has beenaffecting the brain plasticity of the Hong Kong people. When theindoctrination of the “people of the nation of China” for Hong Kongis complete, “Hong Kong-ness” as an identity will disappear. Ademand of “Sinocentrism,” “nationality,” “nation,” and “China-ness”from mainland China is being created and pushed in Hong Kong,belittling the Hong Kong culture. Historically, a dominant cultureof the majority of people has always belittled the minority, oreaker, culture. An intervention of Chinese nationalism in HongKong is leading to a rise in Hong Kong localism, a “HongKong-ness” that is as diverse as the country’s immigration history. However, since China regained sovereignty over Hong Kong, the“nation” of China has not allowed the two countries’ identities tocoexist in peace. Is there room for compromise between“China-ness” and “Hong Kong-ness”?