Six months apart (the Spring and Autumn Annals of 2014, as the editors quip), two seismic social movements took place in societies that were, for different reasons, exercised by the trajectory of their interactions with mainland China/the PRC. Both movements adopted the tactics of physical occupation of strategically and symbolically important locations. The movement arcs involved protracted entrenchment of occupied spaces and the mass mobilization of ordinary people following sparks of “spontaneous insurgency” (p. 1). Both movements were involved in wrestling for public opinion and witnessed failed attempts at escalation. Each movement had its own iconic symbols in the Sunflower and Umbrella. Both grew out of a period of increasing civil society activism, in which new repertoires of connective action were honed, reflecting significant changes in identity and political culture.
On the other hand, whereas activists occupying the Legislative Yuan in Taipei were surrounded and cut off, Hong Kong witnessed multiple dispersed protest sites. The Umbrella movement involved more people, greater disruption and more violence, and yet it was the Sunflower movement that won significant concessions from government. The Sunflower movement prompted a major policy climbdown, a repudiation of the President's perceived authoritarian modus operandi and détente policies, the establishment and electoral success of a new generation of political actors and parties, and it motivated a more progressive political agenda on which the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) secured the presidency and a legislative majority for the first time. Resolution of the Umbrella movement led to arrests not just of activists but also of actors adjacent to the movement, a general tightening of political space and the erosion of social freedoms culminating in the National Security Law that effectively neuters the privileges of one country, two systems.
Beyond these well-known “facts of the case,” both movements represented “expressive and deliberative performances,” requiring an approach that goes beyond resource mobilization and political opportunity structure approaches to consider cultural repertoires and the symbolic performance of meaning and identity. This is where this volume makes a significant contribution to other work on structures, leadership and mobilization methods. The editors promise a more granular approach to the dynamics and texture of each movement, an appreciation of the spatial dynamics whereby public spaces were reappropriated and reorganized, and the spectacular expressive dimensions manifest in artwork, artefacts and ephemera through which claims were articulated. To a great extent, the chapter authors deliver on that remit.
Edmund Cheng shows how they were hybrid movements of connective and collective action, with frequently overlooked leaders, divided as they were by age and preferred tactics, acting as choreographers. Ming-sho Ho, Chun-hao Huang and Liang-ying Lin provide a fascinating analysis of the digital archive produced by the Sunflower movement, which they frame in terms of “democratic nationalism” and remind us of the significant input of overseas Taiwanese. Wai-man Lam provides a useful study on the evolution of political activism, which helps situate the Umbrella movement as a continuation and break with expressions of civic and political identity. Ian Rowen analyses the effects of substantial increases in mainland Chinese tourists to Taiwan, and especially Hong Kong, to assess fears of local populations as a motivating factor. Brian Hioe draws on the visual culture of the Sunflower movement to explore the carnivalesque participatory spectacle that upended normal order in society as well as defining the political aesthetics and movement discourse within Taiwan and to the rest of the watching world. Swapping the visual for aural, Sebastian Veg provides a novel analysis of music as a vehicle to explore tensions manifest in the Umbrella movement, as activists rejected the Chineseness of Cantopop themes for the more locally rooted identities of indie bands. Judith Pernin looks at filmmakers and activist documentary in Taiwan and Hong Kong, and reminds us of another difference between the two: that the Sunflower movement should be seen as a continuation of a long history of democracy activism, while the Umbrella movement represented a new form of activism in Hong Kong. Turning to the aftermath of the movement, Lev Nachman analyses the political parties that emanated from Sunflower movement activism, and finds that the New Power Party and Social Democrat Party were established largely for tactical reasons rather than an ideological rift with the DPP. Finally, Ngok Ma looks at the politicization of professional organizations in Hong Kong, a significant shift that speaks to widespread feelings of support for political activism that find other ways of expression among different cohorts.
For such momentous events, there is not yet a commensurately substantial body of academic literature, certainly not one that compares the two movements. This volume therefore represents a valuable contribution, with a novel comparative perspective on both movements as “participative performances that mobilized cultural frames to act out new forms of civic identity and community deliberation” (p. 14).
