"what has the hk govt learned? after the collpase of neo-liberalism…" by anson
如果真心的支持創意工業，為什麼堅持要拆了整整一條利東街？而現在卻找來（支緩）不知明的美國野雞學校，開千五個位做創意工業「教育」？！？
死得。活什麼化！！
１００﹪肯定，利東街的本土文化、歷史承傳、商機生意，都在這些東西之上。
創意工業教育……
我們辛辛苦苦的，作為藝術家和老師，經過很長的時間的努力慢慢使到 local scene活躍起來，得到的是這樣的「回報」？！？
香港整體的媒體／藝術教育計劃／結構是否被打亂了？
咁樣支持「本土」？！？！？離譜Ｄ卦！！！！
在那些人的腦裡，什麼是文化承傳，什麼是文化發展？！？！？
活化活什麼？
an US private art and design school has got a historical site as its campus regarding the re-vitalization plans from the hk govt.
for me, again it shows how problematic and shorted sighted hk govt is.
not merely the fact that the other plan on cantonese opera (i hate this name as it’s very anglo-centric, should be named as xiqu) lost the battle on getting that historical site which shows hk govt’s double standard to support local art and culture. it also demonstrates there is no consideration on the overview and collaborations of various edu sectors in the field of art and design.
at present, there are a few schools doing it and with an private school from US, and with that privilege of getting a “beautiful” campus, it will further upset what the locals have built up, e.g. hk arts school.
i felt very sad about the whole thing.
recently, there are hot debates on shek kip mei art village. for me, it doomed to fail, as there was no long term plan and vision on how it should serve and merge with the local community. as always, they only thought of administration and operation.
and plus the problematic idea of “self-financed” operation.
neo-liberalism has proved to be a failure last year and the show is not on stage, it’s on an atomic bomb site.
then, people have started to think of more state control, and the need of govt run operations and govt policies (is PRC not our idol and model?!?!?!)
still, the hk govt goes on having those stupid “free economy” idea of doing “preservation of culture”.
west kln project as well. it dooms to fail.
and an ngo, community cultural concern has done quite some researches.
in the 70’s when the hk govt planned to do the reclamation for more land. it was for the local community, and to build a big park to solve the problems of the densely old district in tai kok tsui and sum shui po.
of course, the use of land changed without a reason. and then there were massive land sale, land from the reclamation which were originally for the old west kln community.
hk govt earned.
private sectors earned.
high rises anchored at west kln have become the most expansive private housings in kowloon area.
no local community benefits, no more big park for the old community.
rather, it becomes blocks of the rich and the poor, the new and the old, the high and the low, which further enhances the binary oppositional poles and their pertinent problems.
and the self-financed” idea, the “landmark” kinda of stupid idea for “culture and art” of west kln cultural district… in the end, it will become nothing that benefits us…
even if it benefits a few, i don’t consider it a benefit because things should be for a larger HK culture’s advancement, not “art”, not one or two groups.
and because, in the beginning, and in policies makers’ hearts, plans are NOT to benefit the pubic and the needed, but to “earn” money.
balance of money making and preservation of culture and concern to the grassroot can’t be done by “free-economy”. it must be DONE BY policies.
sorry for my angry tone today.
i feel very upset about the consultation group (it’s the fucking tricks of hk govt — responsibility falls on the group composed of “professionals” and thus, “civil servants” are not to be blamed, in the end, no one is responsible) not supporting a local xiyu group to run the centre but giving it to a private US design school…
terrible, really terrible…
again, don’t tell me it’s free-economy, even adam smith would fuck it and i am very sure he would rather talk about enterprises’ social responsibilities at this very moment to save his ideas of capitalism against neo-liberalism and trans-national capital flow (let alone globalization, save it to be too much a token).
and, what’s PRC is doing now? again, are they not our boss and “good model” to look up to?
after the star ferry, after queen’s, after li tung street, after the fall of neo-liberalism, what has the hk govt learned?
let’s go on the long march…
i am sure we won’t give up… after all these years…
=========================================
some comments from friends:
should we accumulate the “sins” and “questions”, and comply a list, then publish it all access we have?
pls add your questions and comments.
gumgum:
The first one I can think of is, I feel very very angry that it is the same ppl who destroy the wedding card street cluster becoz they say “the govt cannot help business making money”, but now they pay extra money to help an USA 三流學店 unknown private college to do business and earn local money.
anson:
– preservation and development of hong kong culture should be the main rationale of re-vitalization of historical architecture. supporting local art groups, local institutions and heritage including chinese medicine thus is essential
– hk govt should be responsible for the decisions in the end, not a consultation group.
– for govt’s policies, people can express their opinions and views. what if the general public hates this decision? is there anyway to override the decision made by the consultation group?
– hk teritary education has its system, an overall structure. all courses, programmes offered have to be approved. even the prviate ones.
have the govt & consultation group taken into considerations of what would happen if the unknown private schools do not fit hong kong, or even not qualified? (there are so many of those colleges in north America and we all know they only aim at grabbing money from overseas students, those who are rich and couldn’t enter local universities. and they will be given a certificate, no matter what the standards of the students)
who, which govt body, and when to check on the qualifications/standards of the programme offered?
– this is a bad example of neo-liberalism, which has already collapsed last year in the US, and thus affects the whole world.
– balancing budgeting while taking care of cultural concerns should be done via policies NOT free-trade.