Given its monumental impact on the global image of China and the political development of Hong Kong, the 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill Protest has unsurprisingly generated a significant surge in scholarly and journalistic attention. Its unprecedented scale, duration and complexity have drawn worldwide interest, making it one of the most closely studied protest movements in contemporary East Asia. In this growing body of literature, Cheng and Yuen’s forensic analysis stands out as a major contribution. The book’s central concern lies in examining how the 2019 protest movement was mobilized and sustained, with a particular focus on the organizational structure of the movement. It critically interrogates the widely held perception of the protest as “leaderless,” offering a theoretically ambitious intervention into three key areas of scholarship: the conceptualization of threats, pathways of mobilization, and the nature of hybrid regimes. The empirical depth of this study is truly remarkable, offering a level of granularity and comprehensiveness rarely seen in contemporary protest research. Based on eight years of extensive, on-the-ground research, the work draws on a remarkable empirical foundation: onsite surveys of 16,386 protesters, opinion polls of 3,581 members of the general public, 77 semi-structured interviews with activists, and a meticulous analysis of 470 online petitions, 626,919 forum threads and over 22 million social media comments. This book is an indispensable resource for understanding the 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill Protest and the broader dynamics of political mobilization.
The book is well structured into three major parts. Part one contextualizes the gradual radicalization of Hong Kong politics within the evolution of political order under colonial rule. The authors describe this order as a “liberal oligarchy,” where fundamental liberties were tolerated despite the absence of democratic institutions. However, this hybrid equilibrium, together with its implicit endorsement of nationalistic discourse, which had persisted through the early years after 1997, was increasingly challenged by a new generation of activists. Part two draws a direct connection between the 2014 Umbrella Movement and the 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill Protest, illustrating how the former movement laid the groundwork for the latter. It highlights how the rise of voluntarism and an anti-leadership ethos – both of which crystallized during the Umbrella Movement – profoundly shaped the style and organization of the 2019 protests. Disillusionment not only with state authorities but also with conventional pro-democracy leadership spurred ascendance of the masses and civil society networks that undermined hierarchical coordination. It also explains how the Extradition Bill was framed as an existential threat to life of individual citizens in 2019. Yet, in part three, the authors challenge the popular perception of the protest as a “leaderless” movement. Through incisive analysis of how professional bodies, secondary school students, hobby groups, religious organizations and countless anonymous members of the concerned public mobilized latent networks, shared resources, exchanged ideas and information, and collectively curated the movement, the authors demonstrate that the 2019 protest was carried out and sustained through a decentralized and horizontal structure.
The book’s core arguments are persuasive and powerful. The concept of “leaderful mobilization” offers a nuanced lens through which to understand the dynamics of protest and social movements. As Cheng and Yuen argue, this form of mobilization is neither structureless nor entirely spontaneous. Rather, it is underpinned by pre-existing networks and organizational infrastructures. Informal structures that emerged in the course of the protests facilitated the division of labour and the pooling of resources, which in turn sustained and coordinated a diverse range of protest activities. Crucially, the authors foreground the agency of ordinary citizens. The determination of ordinary Hongkongers to defend their shared future played a pivotal role in shaping the trajectory of the 2019 protest. Leadership, they contend, emerged organically – not only through the efforts of seasoned political activists, but also through the proactive engagement of politically inexperienced individuals. In such a process, no organizations or individuals have the authority to dictate the movement direction, but unity is possible through constant negotiation among participants. Cheng and Yuen’s articulation of the theory of mediated threat significantly also enriches our understanding of threat as a catalyst for mobilization. They argue that threats should not be analysed solely in structural or individual terms; rather, attention must be paid to the processes of mediation through which threats are culturally framed and relationally situated. In the case of the Anti-Extradition Bill Protest, activists successfully constructed the proposed legislation as an existential threat to the core values and identity of Hongkongers. This framing enabled the protest to mobilize millions by linking an abstract, generalized threat to the personal survival and lived realities of ordinary citizens.
The book offers compelling answers to many key questions essential for understanding the 2019 Anti-Extradition Bill Protest. Like other major scholarly contributions, it also opens new avenues for inquiry. One puzzling phenomenon, for instance, is the remarkably strong and spontaneous response of Hongkongers to media campaigns and their generous donations to complete strangers. Equally intriguing is the willingness of more confrontational protesters to disclose their plans and actions online despite heightened risks of police surveillance and infiltration. These behaviours suggest a high level of interpersonal trust – an issue that the book touches upon but does not explore in depth. Moreover, while the authors thoroughly examine how perceived threats mobilized action, the dynamics of threat perception also involve calculations of both the “cost of inaction” and the “cost of action.” In retrospect, many Hongkongers may have underestimated the consequences of their involvement, assuming a degree of institutional self-restraint from the authorities, e.g. respect for legal procedural propriety, or leniency in sentencing. To what extent did this “miscalculation” shape the trajectory and eventual demobilization of the movement? How might we account for this collective “underestimation of risk” – was it naivety, hope or strategic misjudgement? These questions warrant further investigation.
In short, this book is indispensable for anyone seeking to understand not only the 2019 Hong Kong protest but also the broader dynamics of contentious politics, political mobilization and state–society relations under hybrid regimes.
