Be Water is an important contribution to our understanding of the dynamics of the Anti-Extradition Protests in 2019. Drawing on 189 interviews and extensive on-site observation, Ming-sho Ho offers an actionist sociological account of the mobilization process. This agent-centred narrative explores how and why Hongkongers chose to participate in the 2019 protests – an unprecedented episode in both intensity and duration. The study challenges structuralist explanations that emphasize objective political opportunities and calls into question rational choice theories that reduce participation to cost-benefit calculations. Instead, Ho foregrounds the strategic agency of ordinary citizens who, despite overwhelming odds, chose to remain defiant in what became known as the “Be Water” Revolution. This was, in Ho’s terms, a process of collective improvisation, driven by deep emotional responses to perceived injustice and police brutality. The resulting moral outrage catalysed a departure from conventional modes of resistance, leading to a proliferation of innovative and creative protest tactics unprecedented in Hong Kong’s history.
Ho’s thesis resonates with several key arguments found in recent scholarly works on protest movements. He aligns with Samson Yuen and Edmund W. Cheng’s analysis in The Making of Leaderful Mobilization (Cambridge University Press, 2025), where they challenge the simplistic characterization of the 2019 Anti-Extradition Movement as leaderless. Both Ho and Yuen and Cheng emphasize the critical role of pre-existing social ties and conventional leadership in democratic movement in sustaining the momentum of the protests. Ho’s metaphor of a “conductor-less orchestra” aptly captures the decentralized yet coordinated nature of the movement. Similarly, Ho shares common ground with Francis Lee’s work Pro-Democracy Contention in Hong Kong (SUNY Press, 2025), particularly regarding the link between the 2014 Occupy Movement and the 2019 protests. While Ho may interpret the term “abeyance” differently from Lee, both see the intervening years (2014–2019) as a period of reflection, adaptation and strategic recalibration by activists – laying the groundwork for the escalation seen in 2019. Although Ho may not have had access to these recent publications during his writing process, his implicit dialogue with them enriches the discourse and invites a more nuanced and constructive discussion on the dynamics of protest mobilization in Hong Kong.
The book also offers fresh insights into several key aspects of the 2019 protest campaign. First, it presents a compelling analysis of how trust is cultivated and sustained among participants engaged in high-risk activism. Ho contends that militants involved in the most dangerous actions typically operate in small groups rooted in pre-existing social networks. Their sense of solidarity is deepened not only by the shared experience of danger but also by the communal life they lead in so-called “safe houses.” Outside of protest activities, these individuals often bond through everyday rituals – eating, drinking and playing video games together – which further reinforce their mutual trust. Importantly, this solidarity is also supported by a network of sympathizers, primarily from the more affluent middle class. Motivated by a strong sense of guilt and a desire to contribute while avoiding frontline confrontation, these supporters provide vital material and emotional resources, including shelter, meal coupons, first-aid support, transportation, protest gear, job opportunities and financial assistance. Such acts of care and mutual aid play a crucial role in fostering cohesion within the broader protest community.
Second, the book delivers a nuanced account of the movement’s global dimension. Rather than merely cataloguing overseas lobbying efforts and demonstrations, Ho analyses how these international campaigns were facilitated by pre-existing transnational networks. He also critically reflects on their prospects and limitations, highlighting the risks of internal divisions and fragmentation, the difficulties of embedding the Hong Kong issue in the political discourse of host countries, and the challenges posed by China’s counter-mobilization strategies. Together, these discussions provide a more comprehensive understanding of both the internal dynamics and the external reach of the 2019 movement.
Ho concludes his analysis on a cautiously optimistic note regarding the future of resistance in Hong Kong, even in the wake of the National Security Law introduced in 2020. He identifies several enduring forms of defiance: the emergence of alternative media, the brief yet meaningful experiment with community newspapers, the growth of independent bookstores, and ongoing efforts in court and prison support work. These initiatives, he suggests, reflect the persistence of civic engagement and resilience despite increasingly repressive conditions. However, Ho is careful to temper this optimism with a clear warning against romanticizing the 2019 movement. While collective improvisation – a central concept in his analysis – was a hallmark of the protests, he emphasizes its inherent limitations. The notion of “crowd wisdom” is, in his view, often overstated and can be conducive to fragmentation and incoherence. More crucially, such spontaneous and decentralized mobilization is not an everyday phenomenon; that is, it depends on exceptional conditions, including widespread public vigilance and acute moral outrage. Although the future of the city remains uncertain, Ho reminds us that its survival as a space for civic agency and political expression will demand both moral commitment and strategic intelligence from those who continue to care for its fate.
One minor yet thought-provoking point in Ho’s analysis is his treatment of the “prehistory” of the “Be Water” Movement. His discussion is confined to a reference to the 2014 Occupy Movement, likely due to space constraints. However, this framing unintentionally echoes a common but misguided perception among many 2019 protesters – that there was a vacuum of meaningful activism prior to 2014. This assumption is historically inaccurate. Resistance in Hong Kong has been a long-standing response to Beijing’s political and economic advances, met with persistent pushback from the local community across multiple fronts: electoral politics, media, civil society and professional sectors. The 2019 protests were not simply a sequel to the events of 2014, nor were they solely the product of the courage of a new generation of activists. Rather, they represent the culmination of more than four decades of collective determination by Hongkongers to preserve their values, identity and way of life. Recognizing this historical continuity is crucial to any meaningful understanding of the Hong Kong story – past, present and future.
This book provides a powerful analytical lens through which to assess the prospects of resistance in the city and beyond. It is essential reading for anyone concerned with the political future of Hong Kong.
