Society is not a fixed structure. It is constantly developing, which is why there are always contradictions in open societies. The key to steady social development lies in various institutions' ability to resolve their own contradictions and, if not, to adapt to the contradictions by readjusting the institutions. The demise of cities is often the result of negligence over vital contradictions as society focuses on the wrong issues and fails to resolve the critical ones until it is too late.

After a few months of fomentation, "Occupy Central" has become a focal topic of public discussion and even appears to have taken over the spot of Hong Kong's main contradiction at the moment. It has divided Hong Kong people into two sides; proponents and opponents of the illegal campaign. I pointed out when "Occupy" was first unveiled on paper that the best way to prevent the divisive rhetoric from morphing into an expanding movement is for the government to put forward the plan for the next stage of constitutional reform and bring public attention back to constitutional development by launching public consultation over a detailed plan for the 2017 Chief Executive (CE) Election by universal suffrage.

Given the resources at its disposal, the government should be the topic setter for social debate and steer society toward a pre-determined goal, but the reality is the opposition has successfully drawn public attention to the illegal "Occupy" campaign.

A local school recently invited one of the leading advocates of "Occupy" to share his theory of the illegal campaign with teenage students and drew widespread criticism of the gesture. Many commentators believe schools should be off-limits to the propaganda of illegal movements. Instead they should discuss the content of constitutional reform plans such as that of the 2017 CE Election by universal suffrage.

I believes the school management in question failed to maintain a clear mind over two aspects of reality. One is that, as stated above, the top issue of contention in today's Hong Kong society is not "Occupy". It should be the next phase of constitutional development, with the focus on the details of the 2017 CE Election. "Occupy" is merely some opposition parties' means to achieve their version of universal suffrage. If schools pay undue attention to discussing the illegal movement they are in fact letting themselves be brainwashed by political propaganda.

The other aspect is that, since "Occupy" is a highly controversial topic, schools should maintain a balanced approach to related discussions by exposing students to both sides of the argument as best they can. The school in question did arrange for two opposing speakers to talk to students, but separately instead of together. As a result some students did not get to hear one side's or the other's opinion. Those who only heard the proponent's view may have reached the wrong conclusion based on biased information. That was surely not the original intent of the school management.

The plain truth is, the government has lost the ability to set topics for public debate. This is not saying the government should stop, by administrative means, schools or various organizations from discussing illegal activities. It is not what governments should do in a free society like Hong Kong after all. On the other hand, the topics chosen by schools for students to discuss are more often than not the focus of public debate at large. If the lecture by the leading advocate of "Occupy" at the school in question started a trend, it will demonstrate once again the government can only react to challenges mounted by opposition parties.

When the government can only react passively over development and social issues, it will become weaker and risk losing public confidence, becoming more passive from one issue to the next.

The next phase of constitutional reform, in the form of the 2017 CE Election by universal suffrage, will be an extremely important historical event in Hong Kong. One decision will determine whether a plan will be accepted by the majority of local residents and restore public confidence, or the constitutional development will be halted or even turned back. As such the current-term SAR government would better submit its draft constitutional reform plan for public consultation sooner rather than later, because we cannot afford to wait any longer.

The author is a committee member of the Hong Kong Association of Young Commentators.

(HK Edition 07/25/2013 page1)