You're completely missing the point, which is that whatever the rules, people have to respect them for them to work.
It's already illegal to drop litter on the tube - a 'mandatory restriction' - and yet litter remains the biggest unpleasantness associated with tube travel.
I'm no expert, but I would imagine the way the rules work in HK has a lot to do with how Hong kongese people are, and the way the rules work/don't work in London has a lot to do with the way Londoners are. The rules don't work in a vacuum like!
I'm not missing the point at all.
You are right.
We don't have (in any way worth mentioning stastiscally,) any kind of gun crime, knife crime, robbery, muggings, burglary, hate crimes or much any other kind of anti-social public behaviour either.
And this is beacause we have, of course in general, an extremely tolerant society, where a falling down drunk will be looked at as someone who needs help - and will be helped, peeps will call an ambulance while they wait and make sure you're OK.
We can do this because we don't need to worry that coming to peoples' aid will result in an assault. It won't! That's not how we do things here.
How would assaulting anyone help us as a society to create a better environment/world for all?
We (of course, once again, generally,) realise that we're
all in this together and therefore recognise that co-operation and tolerance of differences is the "way to go".
Any kind of violence would undermine our tolerent society and precipitate an acceptance of "mob rule", "jungle rule" or some such.
Why would
any civilised society accept that kind of shit?
We don't! We are
intolerent only of
intolerence and will
not accept the level of violence and lack of civic responsibility that seems to be routine in so many other societies.
We have
very severe penalties for street crimes, et al. We want to be safe to walk around alone, kid, woman or man at
any time in
anyplace within our region and, (in general, etc, etc.) we are.
It works!
We vocally criticise our (HK) politicians and executive and (of course, in general,) they respond to our concerns.
We are
far from a perfect society, but we've been here for over one hundred years (I mean "us", the growing immigrant community - HK has gone from 130,000 population in 1930 to over 7,000,000 in 2008,) and perhaps being a "refugee" population has allowed us to create this level of tolerance and understanding of each of our individual struggles.....
....You get on with your shit, I'll get on with mine. We're all different and yet we're all the same. We see that this society is a place where we can integrate and prosper and it's in our own interests to keep fostering the same ethos and culture within society.
So!
If you want to come and play with us, that's cool - we have a very welcoming immigration policy and we
always welcome talent, eccentricity and creativity.....
....But.....
We have certain rules when you travel on the MTR.
No smoking. No drinking. No eating.
We like it that way so we made a law - to make it clear where we set the boundaries.
Now.
You might imagine that, in such a society, we are very tolerant odf those the "break the rules within certain limits" - a woman who gives her infant a sip of water or milk on the MTR - or a group of kids straight of the public basketball court who sup their water - or even (god forbid
) the occasional complete tosser who is drunk and leery and spilling her piss all over the place. We can and do accomdate this.
Though it seems that there is a consensus about where to draw the line and (in general, of course,) everyone seems to be, in general, in agreement as to where that line lies - it's not about homogeneity, it's about
diversity among peeps who have an unspoken (other than through the normally accepted and vocal avenues of protest: assembilies, marches, gatherings, protests, demonstrations, writing to the press, screaming from the rooftops - [we're
very tolerant of that one], etc, etc.
But there
is a
social covenant that needs to be respected - or you will simply
not be welcome (we denied Paul Francis Gadd entry to HK today, sent him back from ehence he came, in the hope that he gets back to where he belongs and will be monitered properly and get the help that he obviously desperately needs).
It's a fantastic social experiment.
It's under threat from forces that you can't
imagine. Forces that, if permitted, would swamp us with the violence, corruption, repression, fear, chaos, starvation, murder and destruction that swept China between 1954 and 1978.
The very
concept of this society is also under threat from those societies that have aquiesed to accepting a level of violent crime that deems that "mugging" someone on the steet might warrant a sentence of "sweeping the roads for 260 hours".
Come here and rob someone with violence (or the threat of it - knife, gun, bottle, club..... ANY weapon,) on the street and you
will be caught, and you
will be sentenced to six years in jail.
If you actually
really hurt someone - badly stab, badly bash, shoot, etc. you will get a sentance of probably 8 - 12 years.
In the meantime, you can get pissed/wrecked, shout (within reason), make fun (24/7 - we never sleep), fall over, laugh and play.....and if you hurt yourself.....of course, we will come to your aid.
But if you are violent towards others?
Nah!
Do not pass go.
Oh! And did I mention?
We have the most bestest, most cheapestest, most
cleanestest, most pleasantest, most efficientest, most joy-to-travel-on est public transport system on the planet (rivalled, perhaps, only by Singapore - but they are a million miles behind us in terms of the "freedoms" we so cherish and vehemently defend. Tokyo can't compare either - the level of physical sexual abuse against females neccessitates "women only" carriages).
I'm not suggesting that a "three NO's" (other than water,) policy on the London Tube would suddenly create the same degree of "civil society" that we enjoy over here (if only,) and I've already said that the "Boris Booze Only" policy is daft and politically motivated.
I'm
only suggesting that a "3 NO's" policy
might just provide a better environment and make travelling on the tube a more pleasant experience for
most of those using it.
But I
do appreciate and accept your point that while this kind of "social contract" works
extremely well in a city like HK, it may simply not be possible in a city like London where, it seems to me, that any
concept of this kind of social contract has, almost,
completely disintigrated.
That's why I recognise - and am so grateful that - I have been fortunate enough (through random circumstances - other than being a refugee, as we almost all are here, first or second generation,) lucky enough to be a part of our beautiful, open, tolerant society.
Wanna play?
Woof
