Hong Kong's Umbrella Revolution—a wiki-protest: Our op-ed writer this week opines that the organization of Hong Kong's "Umbrella Revolution" resembles how Wikipedia is organized.
Three weeks ago, the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong have made headlines around the world, including on Wikipedia's own front page in ITN. A lot of attention has been given to the sheer significance of the showdown, likening it to David and Goliath[1] and worrying that neither side had an exit strategy.[2] However, amidst this binary portrayal of the protests as democrats versus the government, only the most sharp-eyed reports spotted that this "Umbrella Revolution" is actually a highly inhomogeneous movement with a social hierarchy that is similar to none other than our dear Wikipedia.
Benny Tai, leader of the Occupy Central movement, admitted to media that he had lost control of the protests.[3] This is an accurate description, except that Benny Tai himself had never wanted to take full control of the movement anyway. As the idea of Occupy Central brewed beneath the surface over the past year, Benny Tai stressed repeatedly that he advocated deliberative democracy within the movement,[4] and that he's merely serving as a figurehead for the movement.[5] Much like Jimmy Wales on Wikipedia, the protest leaders are influential figureheads in the movement, but to say they have control is both an overestimation of their power and a misrepresentation of the movement's nature.
This is examplified on the fearful night of 28 September when police first deployed tear gas canisters against the peaceful demonstrators and threatened the use of gunfire if the crowds didn't disperse. The protest leaders pleaded all demonstrators to leave in order to avoid bloodshed. Most left, but about 10,000 recongregated shortly after and endured 87 rounds of tear gas.[6] The next morning, a stronger movement emerged which isn't even afraid of tear gas anymore.
On Wikipedia, editors debate on decentralized talk pages associated with each article and organize themselves into WikiProjects to collaborate on particular topics. People volunteer as they see fit and there is no need for a central authority.
Same for Hong Kong. As the protests unfolded, they became an organic movement that organized itself. Communication was entirely decentralized, with messaging applications and social media widely used to spread the latest news and plan actions. Both physical and online noticeboards were used to advise supporters on what to bring to the protest site. With the threat of the police interrupting mobile communications, the crowds turned to FireChat to secure their information flow.[7] Teams of volunteers emerged spontaneously from the crowds, some to defend the barricades, some to transport food and equipment, some to update the rest of the world by social media, and even some to do the recycling.[8] They went on ad-hoc shifts so that some would keep the protest running smoothly while others can go back to their day jobs or go home and rest.
Wikipedia editors come from all walks of life. We disagree and fight over many things, but we are all united by one vision: to make knowledge freely available to all. We work together under a few common principles and regulate ourselves, occasionally exercising the tough love of banning those who don't follow the rules.
The demonstrators are also, surprisingly, a disparately inhomogeneous bunch. They come from the economic right and left. There are patriotic democrats who want to use Hong Kong to democratize China, and regionalists who simply want to seal off Hong Kong from Beijing. There are even some who joined the protests simply because they were enraged by the police's disproportionate use of force against the demonstrators.[10] But they are united by a common goal and a few common principles. They have all taken to the streets to demand genuine democracy in Hong Kong, and they all adhere staunchly to the principle of non-violence. When the police charged at them with shields, sticks, and pepper spray, they stood still and turned the other cheek, restraining each other from striking back.[11]
And this is why the Umbrella Revolution is so powerful: Because nobody is in control, the arrests of leaders such as Joshua Wong didn't curtail their efforts, instead provoking more people to take to the streets and join their cause. Because their collaboration was bottom-up and spontaneous, there wasn't a weakest link which could be exploited to bring the movement down. Because of their belief in non-violence in the face of a violent crackdown, the movement had caught the world's sympathy.
Nobody knows how long the protests will last and demonstrators are settling in for the long fight.[12] But what is certain is that the Umbrella Revolution has already revolutionized political activism in the same way Wikipedia revolutionized knowledge dissemination a decade ago.
Discuss this story