This is a short book that discusses the history and policy choices that Hong Kong’s administrators took after the handover in 1997.

The book’s core thesis is that after 1997, the administrators now running Hong Kong knew that they had a good thing. But they misunderstood what exactly that thing was. They spoke to the businesses currently thriving there and determined that it had to do with those businesses. So the thing to do was to craft policies that would preserve the dominance and monopolies that gave rise to those businesses.

Under colonial rule, the administration, while undeniably pro-business, had always been separate from the business itself. The governor was sent from Britain and the top posts were filled with career civil servants – also all from the UK, until shortly before the handover.7 While these officials were friendly to business, they were not of business.

The book argues that this is a mistake. Hong Kong, the author argues, is successful because the existence of an environment in where insurgents can defeat incumbents. The environment is friendly to Business but not a business. I am not sure if that makes sense. To put it more specifically, such an environment would allow small firms about 1-2 people the ability to succeed in winning land grants from the government because they had the best idea to use it - NOT because the firm’s founder plays golf with the local land admin.

I think one missed opportunity is the chance to look more at the policies that might be able to break up the land holding monopolies that the current developers have. As someone who reads a lot of business-friendly literature, I’d like to hear some ideas that are not tied to the “fact” that what is good for business is also good for the people.

I have noticed that governments that listen to a business rather than Business tend to start seeing this effect. An environment in where you have a Samsung but no small businesses start seeing a “crowding at the top” effect where elites feed only other elites. That is fine for those at the top but those at the bottom start accumulating like pools of bad blood, simmering in their lack of business prospects, marriage opportunities, and land. They then demand a solution - starting with a political one before devolving into a violent one.

I enjoyed this book and would recommend it as a short read to anyone interested in Hong Kong’s history.