As the new academic year begins in Hong Kong, the University of Hong Kong (HKU) — widely regarded as the territory’s most prestigious institution — marked the first day of classes on Monday last week with an astonishing notice: A sign taped to a library trash bin read: “Please do not defecate in the trash can.”
Founded in 1911, the university had never seen anything like it. The announcement instantly sparked a firestorm.
The signage was first exposed by online news outlet HK01, which has also sent a letter to the university seeking an explanation on the matter. The university’s response seemed to imply silent acquiescence and an inclination to steer clear of further discussion.
The notice is printed in traditional Chinese, simplified Chinese and English — an ostensibly egalitarian gesture that strategically avoids charges of racial discrimination — but it only added fuel to the fire.
One person wrote online: “Use traditional Chinese or English by all means, but please don’t use simplified characters to imply that the perpetrator was someone from the Chinese mainland.”
Most online users assume the culprit to be a Chinese from the mainland. Considering Hong Kongers and mainland Chinese seem to attribute cultural differences to genetic varieties in their respective communities, maybe the only solution would be to conduct DNA testing on the feces.
After all, Chinese call themselves the “descendants of the Yan and Yellow Emperor” (炎黃子孫), Hong Kongers are derisively considered “remnants of southern barbarians” (南蠻餘孽), while Westerners are gweilo, a derogatory term loosely translated as “foreign devil.” Case closed, they claim, with little need for forensic nuance.
Hong Kong welcomes many overseas talents, including those from the mainland. However, investigators are now uncovering a counterfeit industry focused on creating fraudulent academic degrees, with the manufacturing bridging across the mainland and Hong Kong.
Although Hong Kongers still make up the bulk of the university body, the surge in mainland enrollees — particularly among research postgraduate students — is telling. Non-locals account for 87.1 percent of them and 72.9 percent of postgraduate students.
No wonder Hong Kongers are not taking this “crap” sitting down, the distinction between “us” and “them” becoming ever more important. Fortunately — or perhaps conveniently — the vice chancellor and pro-vice chancellor are from mainland China, making the matter less delicate to handle internally.
Conversely, perhaps it was a tourist’s doing. Hong Kong, eager to expand its tourism economy, remains a magnet for mainland visitors. When nature calls, such as in the library — where bathrooms are apparently hard to find — one would instinctively resort to relieving themselves at the nearest trash can. At least this avenue avoids public peeing or pooping. Which, in a twisted way, would then preserve the spirit of “Chinese civilization.” After all, incidents such as a tourist allowing their child to pee in a bottle by a dining table occur even at Din Tai Fung in Taiwan.
Ironically, the Chinese Communist Party had loudly denounced Shanghai-born Japanese Legislator Hei Seki (石平) — who is already a naturalized citizen in Japan — as a “21st century Hanjian” (漢奸), a pejorative term for those deemed traitors to the Chinese state and the Han Chinese identity.
Following this logic, could a university restroom become a site where defecation is pragmatically adapted to circumstances? Is this not, as they claim, a uniquely communist-educated expression of civilization?
One person online wrote: “One dump in HKU — and the integration is with us. The SAR [Special Administrative Region] is truly returned; westernization must end.”
The Hong Kong government’s urgings for Hong Kong-China integration triggered the comment.
Similarly, Beijing continues to urge Taipei to “integrate” with it through cognitive warfare. Could Taiwanese truly “integrate” with such a communist civilization? Would they be able to align with the behavior of those who smuggle bulks of Taiwanese insurance-covered medicines back to China, consigning our welfare system to overload? Standing firmly with Taiwanese sovereignty is, for now, the most effective antidote to this campaign of unification.
Paul Lin is a Taipei-based political commentator.
Translated by Lenna Veronica Suminski
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS