Hong Kong under COVID-19: Active self-mobilization, freedom and responsibilities, and learnings

Q3 Social Sciences
E. Chong
{"title":"Hong Kong under COVID-19: Active self-mobilization, freedom and responsibilities, and learnings","authors":"E. Chong","doi":"10.1386/ctl_00063_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hong Kong society became the site of active self-mobilization when there was a virus outbreak in early 2020. Hong Kong residents quickly adopted voluntary protective measures such as minimizing social contacts and buying personal protective equipment. After the presence of a new Coronavirus\n was confirmed, medical and health care workers went on strike in early February, clamouring for the Hong Kong SAR government to close border crossings with China. They feared the medical and health care system would not be able to bear the rising numbers of infection. The government responded\n with a pronouncement that the strike was endangering lives, and that a complete closure of border checkpoints was unfeasible. Generally, Hong Kong residents exercised self-protection and self-restraint, voluntarily choosing to stay home except to go to work or buy daily necessities. As a result,\n Hong Kong did not adopt a citywide lockdown. More people began to leave their homes when infection rates slowed, but this led to further waves of infection. The Hong Kong experience raises a number of questions about society that are relevant to education and citizenship. What are individuals’\n responsibilities during a pandemic? Does a state of pandemic make it acceptable to limit freedom of movement and freedom of expression, and if so, how can this principle be applied in relation to the right to strike for the purpose of compelling the government to take stronger public health\n measures? Specific to education, how can young people be taught to follow safety advice amid the temptation to go outdoors for exercise under restrictive measures? There is a need for engaging students in social compassion and dialogues to face a persistent pandemic.","PeriodicalId":38020,"journal":{"name":"Citizenship Teaching and Learning","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Citizenship Teaching and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00063_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hong Kong society became the site of active self-mobilization when there was a virus outbreak in early 2020. Hong Kong residents quickly adopted voluntary protective measures such as minimizing social contacts and buying personal protective equipment. After the presence of a new Coronavirus was confirmed, medical and health care workers went on strike in early February, clamouring for the Hong Kong SAR government to close border crossings with China. They feared the medical and health care system would not be able to bear the rising numbers of infection. The government responded with a pronouncement that the strike was endangering lives, and that a complete closure of border checkpoints was unfeasible. Generally, Hong Kong residents exercised self-protection and self-restraint, voluntarily choosing to stay home except to go to work or buy daily necessities. As a result, Hong Kong did not adopt a citywide lockdown. More people began to leave their homes when infection rates slowed, but this led to further waves of infection. The Hong Kong experience raises a number of questions about society that are relevant to education and citizenship. What are individuals’ responsibilities during a pandemic? Does a state of pandemic make it acceptable to limit freedom of movement and freedom of expression, and if so, how can this principle be applied in relation to the right to strike for the purpose of compelling the government to take stronger public health measures? Specific to education, how can young people be taught to follow safety advice amid the temptation to go outdoors for exercise under restrictive measures? There is a need for engaging students in social compassion and dialogues to face a persistent pandemic.
新冠肺炎下的香港:积极自我动员、自由与责任、学习
香港社会在2020年初爆发新冠肺炎疫情时,成为积极自我动员的场所。香港市民迅速采取了减少社会接触、购买个人防护装备等自愿防护措施。在新型冠状病毒确诊后,医护人员于2月初举行罢工,呼吁香港特区政府关闭与中国大陆的过境点。他们担心医疗保健系统将无法承受不断上升的感染人数。政府的回应是声明,罢工正在危及生命,完全关闭边境检查站是不可行的。总体而言,香港居民自我保护和自我约束,除了上班或购买生活必需品外,自愿选择呆在家里。因此,香港没有采取全城封锁。当感染率放缓时,更多的人开始离开家,但这导致了进一步的感染浪潮。香港的经验提出了一些与教育和公民身份有关的社会问题。大流行期间个人的责任是什么?在大流行状态下,限制行动自由和言论自由是否可以接受?如果可以接受,如何将这一原则适用于罢工权,以迫使政府采取更强有力的公共卫生措施?具体到教育方面,如何教育年轻人在限制措施下外出锻炼的诱惑下遵守安全建议?有必要让学生参与社会同情和对话,以面对持续的大流行病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Citizenship Teaching and Learning
Citizenship Teaching and Learning Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Citizenship Teaching & Learning is published in partnership with the Children’s Identity and Citizenship in Europe Association (CiCea). Citizenship Teaching & Learning is global in scope, exploring issues of social and moral responsibility, community involvement and political literacy. It is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal that advances academic and professional understandings within a broad characterization of education, focusing on a wide range of issues including identity, diversity, equality and social justice within social, moral, political and cultural contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信