“Flower Factories to Burning Factories”: Hong Kong 1967

by Michelle L., Grace L.,& Saja M., June 2024

Newsreel on the 1967 Hong Kong riots

Within the first 10 seconds of the video, we hear and see the “communist mob” protesting British colonial rule in Hong Kong (Public Domain Footage). The talk of “400 arrests” and the “smashed windows” caused by rioters proves that there is a nationalistic spirit among the residents of Hong Kong (Public Domain Footage). As the video goes we get several clips of the Hong Kong residents rioting and furiously fighting against the authorities. It shows that there is a demand for change in the government and that they are willing to get injured just to be liberated from colonial rule. Likewise, the British authorities are also willing to take extreme measures to subdue the Hong Kong rioters because they’re too overwhelming and powerful. This was one of the many riots that happened during 1967, but the main conflict began with the artificial flower factory in Hong Kong. In addition, this conflict was soon mixed up with other underlying issues that Governor Trench did not resolve, including housing, education, and labor issues. Another factor that intensified the situation was that it soon became politicized and rioters no longer had a problem with the labor treatment, but the entire government. This is when they began not just protesting, but also rioting against British colonial rule. Nobody wanted to be under British rule any longer.

The anti-colonial riot in 1967 is a significant part of Hong Kong’s history; Britain has always been an imperialist country, maintaining interest in Hong Kong since 1898 for 99 years, because of the profitable trade they received. David Trench was a British governor of Hong Kong, he was in charge of governing Hong Kong during the riot in 1967. But, since his goal aligned with Britain, he didn’t care much about the well-being of the citizens in Hong Kong. His shrewdness and irresponsibility allow corruption to flow into the country (Yep 1). The British government was in charge of Hong Kong and neglected the citizen’s water resources, housing, education, and labor wellness, resulting in increased hatred toward the British government.

To elaborate, water in Hong Kong was scarce, the colonial government got their water supplies from China. When China in 1967, “refused to sell water to Hong Kong, exacerbating residents and sparking frustration with the colonial government” (“Changing Protests”). The second problem was that Hong Kong was overly populated and, “there were still around 750,000 residents of Hong Kong living in residences deemed “gravely inadequate” by the colonial administration” (“Changing Protests”). This clearly shows that the government knows that people lived in houses with flimsy structures, that were overpopulated, had no privacy, were unhygienic, and the rent prices kept rising. Yet, they didn’t do anything to help, becoming the second reason for the riot. Third, the British governor didn’t give enough resources to support the education of the Hong Kong students and lacked qualified teachers to teach the students (“Changing Protests”). The school system was terrible and the curriculum was unbalanced, causing many students to be uneducated, and drop out. Also, “in addition to being poorly run, accidentally fostered anti-colonial sentiment by trying not to foster anti-colonial sentiment” (“Changing Protests”). It shows that Hong Kong was deprived of its resources which became a major problem to civilians. Lastly, the work given to the worker was unregulated and often inhumane, the workers were underpaid and those who rebelled were fired. The British government did not care, “the political system offered little representation or prospects for change” (“Changing Protests”). An example that shows the urgency of this problem is the incident at the Hong Kong Artificial Flower Works in Kowloon. Many residents worked in this factory and the conditions were terrible, the new regulation that made the working conditions worse was to “reduce their wages and put their job security at risk”(Cheung 23).  For example, workers were not allowed to take breaks and if one of their machines broke down they had to wait until it got fixed but somehow make money during that time or else they would be fired. Overall the factory’s regulations were so unreasonable that it even led to “cases of workers being laid off after many years of service” (Cheung 24). This shows the increasing dissatisfaction with the current rule of the British government.

Another factor is that many of the citizens were Chinese who fled from China because of the occupation of Japan in World War II and the rise of the Communist Party. The leader of the communist party was Mao Zedong. Mao wrote a book named “Little Red Book” that encouraged youth to rebel against their government and protest (“Changing Protests”). This spirit of protest made its way to Hong Kong and easily influenced the citizens to rebel against the government. The citizens ended up siding with communist because the communist-dominated Federation Trace Union supported the citizens, helping them demand better labor conditions from the colonial government (Yep 2). The “All Circles Anti-Persecution Struggle Committee in Hong Kong heralded the full-scale mobilization of local communists into the territory-wide anti-colonial campaign” (Yep 3). Communist propaganda posters were made to create distrust between the citizens and the police. They did that because the police work under the government (Yep 10). Originally a protest for labor eventually turned into an anti-British protest influenced by communism. Communist publications, schools, and unions helped protestors prolong the protests.

Newspaper at the beginning of the riots

The newspaper article “Wild Riot in Kowloon” shows how the unsatisfied civilians expressed frustration with their work and living conditions. Workers decided that they would strike against these conditions and write a list of demands that would make working conditions better for them as well as get rid of the new regulations. Slowly, an increasing number of workers joined the protest and the police officers also got involved. In the newspaper article, the author tells us how “the huge riot … saw cars and buses burnt, buildings ransacked and set on fire, street installations ripped out of the ground” – an altogether very violent scene that lasted for six hours (South China Morning Post). The picture shows people coming together to protest, police coming over and using tear gas to dissuade the protesters. They also arrested many of the protesters, one of whom is shown in the image above. This primary source shows the beginning of the anti-colonial sentiment, when people finally start to protest and riot against the system. This riot gradually led to a wider anti-colonial movement that would take hold of all of Hong Kong.

The Hong Kong riots of 1967 were a time when the citizens showed a true anti-colonial nationalistic spirit due to how they protested against the colonial government and the extreme measures that had to be taken against the rioters. Citizens would not only speak out against the British government but also frequently set bombs around the area as a form of protest. In a table describing the disturbances in 1967 during the riots, it is shown that there were a total of 253 explosions because of these bombs, not to mention the 1,525 bombs that weren’t detonated (Yep 4). These riots were brutal as people from both sides were getting injured or killed similarly shown in the video on top. With the magnitude of these riots, the British government was overwhelmed and began handing out prison sentences to anyone who participated during the riots or supported communism which opposed the government. Someone innocent could be caught with the wrong person at the wrong time by authorities and have to serve a similar prison sentence as the person who was committing a crime. In another case, a 14-year-old who planted a bomb was sent to jail for 4 years instead of a “correctional institution,” because law enforcement hoped that he “‘would serve as a warning for others’”(Yep 10). Both of these people would have to complete prison sentences that would have not been given to them before the riots, maybe even considered unjust. Yet at this time, anyone could be convicted. Despite the threats, the people were deeply against the colonial government and this did not stop them. Some even thought these sentences were honorable badges showing the nationalistic spirit. Like 18-year-old Tsang Tak Shing who became a “hero” after receiving a “two-year sentence for distributing anti-colonial leaflets in school” (Yep 9). Clearly, everyone was in support of the anti-colonial movement and some even found the support they wanted through pro-communist groups. Resulting in the movement also being associated with pro-communism, because they shared similar ideals. It was agreed no short prison sentence would keep them down, and that’s when the government began deporting people. The “explosion-related offenses” and “offenses” in general were so great that the government, specifically the governor, unofficially called a state of emergency and deported anyone who could be connected to the crime. In some cases, you would be given a sentence that is “recommended for deportation upon completion of…jail term” (Yep 17). All of this was because the British colonial government was afraid of the amount of damage the citizens could do if they were all able to gather with one another. That’s also why the government authorities were so tough on rioters since they thought all these people would collectively be able to overthrow the colonial government. Other more specific examples of nationalism are shown below.

rioters running away from officers on May 1967

From this image, one thing is clear: that there is a riot of some sort going on. The people in white running away are none other than the Hong Kong residents rioting in 1967. Meanwhile, the people at the front of the picture are the authorities trying to scare away the rioters. This was necessary for that time period because the Hong Kong riots were infamous for being violent and brutal. There was so much pent-up rage within the residents in this picture that a group collectively decided to go against the law and riot. The nationalistic spirit exists within these people because while they are running away now they’re still a group of people that decided to stand up for a better government than the one they have now. What’s more, is that you can see that several officers had to get involved with riot gear and scare away the rioters because of how intensely the rioters were fighting back.

Hong Kong residents “burning bamboo baskets” to protest in 1967

This image shows one of the many forms of riots: burning bamboo sticks. Fires and bombings were two of the strongest demonstrations against the British government since they successfully caught their attention and led to the decolonization of Hong Kong.

Despite all of the riots, Hong Kong’s future was determined by mainland China. In 1967, the same year the riots happened, China was anxious about using Hong Kong for economic purposes. Due to this, the Chinese government unexpectedly didn’t publicly speak of it. Their stance on Hong Kong can be described as an unofficial truce. Chi-Kwan Mark explains this by writing, “Ultimately, it was China that held the key to Hong Kong’s political future. During the Anglo-Chinese negotiations… Beijing never raised the question of Hong Kong. Rather, in the course of a private conversation on 19 October 1971, Zhou Enlai expressed to Malcolm MacDonald, a former British Commissioner-General for Southeast Asia… that China has no intention of seeking to get Hong Kong back until the expiry of the New Territories lease’” (Mark, 18). The British had three options from China for Hong Kong, but Alec Douglas-Home, the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary of that time chose the third (and most logical) option: maintaining the peace in the situation and preparing an optional withdrawal from Hong Kong as soon as possible (Mark 18). The British carefully kept their toes on China’s latest decision on Hong Kong, which was “In early January 1972, the Prime Minister approved the paper and the proposal for an annual review of the situation of Hong Kong” (Mark 18). On March 8th of the same year, China’s representative at the United Nations (UN), Huang Hua, stated that “Hong Kong was ‘part of Chinese territory’ under British ‘occupation’” and that Hong Kong should be removed from the colonial territories category (Mark 19). Hong Kong themselves also responded to this, agreeing with the removal, which wasn’t what anyone necessarily expected. Mark’s reasoning for writing this is, “The response from Hong Kong was favorable: many expected that Hong Kong would benefit from Sino-British relations, and its colonial status would be secure for the time being” (Mark 19).

On May 5th of the same year, Murray MacLehose, the governor of London thought that in the future (the 1980s-1990s), Hong Kong would eventually become a colonial territory for the British once again, however at this time, the United Kingdom as a whale was accepting decolonization, so that never happened. “At a time when the United Kingdom accelerated decolonization and gradually embraced Europe, Hong Kong was regarded as both valuable and peripheral” (Mark 20). Margaret Thatcher, who became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in 1958, also tried to recolonize Hong Kong. However, the new Chinese leader of that time, Deng Xiaoping, proved her wrong, leaving Hong Kong as an untouched land once again. The 1967 events are still being questioned to this day, but not with any negative intent. Instead, the question is if the riots were “the last straw to precipitate social reforms that had long been under consideration, or were they the primary driving forces for transformation in the colonial government’s approach to managing social affairs?” (Bickers & Yep 159) Regardless of why the riots happened, the flower factory that started it all helped Hong Kong citizens gain popularity and eventually led to political independence.

Bibliography

_{Bickers, Robert, and Ray Yep. “May Days in Hong Kong: Riot and Emergency in 1967.” Wikipedia, 1 August 2009, https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=gl6x2tpkyQMC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=1967+hong+kong+riots&ots=Hyc675K7SK&sig=sWDPcbEjmsgau3xLuJ3R-3dHkzU#v=onepage&q=1967%20hong%20kong%20riots&f=false. Accessed 15 May 2024.}

_{Cheung, Gary Ka-wai. Hong Kong’s watershed: The 1967 riots. Vol. 1. Hong Kong University Press, 2009.https://books.google.com/books?id=0uStp3CUaqUC&lpg=PP1&ots=PM1c_lk_Q- (Yep)&dq=1967%20hong%20kong%20riots&lr&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=1967%20hong%20kong%20riots&f=false}

_{Ives, Mike, and Elsie Chen. “In 1967, Hong Kong’s Protesters Were Communist Sympathizers.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 16 Sept. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/09/16/world/asia/hong-kong-1967-riots.html.}

_{MARK, CHI-KWAN. “Development without Decolonisation? Hong Kong’s Future and Relations with Britain and China, 1967-1972.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 24, no. 2, 2014, pp. 315–35. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43307297. Accessed 10 May 2024.}

_{“The Changing Protests of Hong Kong: Leftist Riots of 1967.” Leftist Riots of 1967: Contextualized in a Decade of Turmoil, mediakron.bc.edu/edges/2019-final-projects/riot-reversal-the-changing-protests-of-hong-kong/story-1.Accessed 16 May 2024}

_{“1967 Hong Kong Riots Protesting British Rule Newsreel Www.Publicdomainfootage.Com.” YouTube, 22 Nov. 2012, youtu.be/pJaoi0yTVoQ?feature=shared.}

_{“Hong Kong and The Opium Wars.” The National Archives, The National Archives, 12 Dec. 2023, www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/hong-kong-and-the-opium-wars/#:~:text=The%20Opium%20Wars%20resulted%20in,that%20ran%20out%20in%201997.} 

_{Whitehead Kate. (2019). “Witnesses to anarchy: the 1967 riots in Hong Kong, by some of those caught up in the violence”. South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/2089195/witnesses-anarchy-1967-riots-hong-kong-some-those}

_{Yep, Ray. “‘Cultural Revolution in Hong Kong’: Emergency Powers, Administration of Justice and the Turbulent Year of 1967.” Modern Asian Studies, vol. 46, no. 4, 2012, pp. 1007–32. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/41478426}

_{Yep, Ray. “The 1967 Riots in Hong Kong: The Diplomatic and Domestic Fronts of the Colonial Governor.” The China Quarterly, no. 193, 2008, pp. 122–39. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20192167 .Accessed 17 May 2024.}