The false equivalency between the stormings of Hong Kong’s LegCo and the US Capitol

Why pairing the 2019 incident at Hong Kong’s Legislative Council with Wednesday’s attack on the US Capitol is a misguided comparison.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash.

Some clarification is in order in light of commentators from the English and Chinese media drawing parallels between the 2019 storming of HK’s Legislative Council and Wednesday’s insurrection at the US Capitol.

While these incidents may seem strikingly similar at face value, equating what happened in LegCo to the actions of the Trump supporters who broke into the Capitol undermines the underlying complexities of each situation.

There are many differences worth discussing that set the protests in HK and the US apart, but to tackle one major conflation:

Protesting against the US’ political system vs. HK’s

To describe the scenarios at LegCo and the Capitol, as CNN correspondent Will Ripley has done, as both “marginalised” groups standing up to a government that they feel has failed them misses a fundamental difference between the two systems the groups rebelled against.

The havoc at the US Capitol was caused by a group of people who objected to decisions ultimately made through a democratic system (although not perfect, the US is a democracy). In contrast, the perpetrators of the Legislative Council’s breach were pro-democracy advocates acting in dissent against a system controlled by an authoritarian regime.

Wednesday’s event at the US Capitol, in which four people have died, came after President Donald Trump’s repeated false statements regarding the results of the 2020 presidential election, claiming that he had won and was a victim of election fraud. A large number of his supporters organised a protest at the US Capitol in response, which escalated into a riot and breach of the premises in an attempt to delay the affirmation of President-elect Joe Biden’s Electoral College win.

On the other hand, the 2019 LegCo raid was a climactic moment that occurred nearly a month after the million-person march that demanded the removal of the anti-extradition law. This peaceful mass protest, along with several other demonstrations that occurred before July, received a response from the government that essentially dismissed their demands. The result of their response was an increase in the wide-spread negative sentiment towards the government, which arguably led to the events of 1 July. The storming of LegCo was violent and controversial, even amongst prominent opposition figures such as Martin Lee, but was part of a pro-democracy movement that stood in defiance of a non-democratic regime.

In response to Ripley’s tweet, Yuen Chan, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Journalism at the City University of London, said his take “doesn’t help those of [his] colleagues in Hong Kong who are trying to cover the city with understanding and nuance.”

Jerome Taylor, Hong Kong/Taiwan/Macau bureau chief for AFP, added that another “big difference is Hong Kong’s protesters stormed the legislature to halt a piece of legislation that was drawn up by their unelected leadership … The Capitol Hill storming was to try and overturn the results of a free and fair election.”

This article has been edited for tone and clarity.

For a nuanced perspective without losing the big picture, sign up to our newsletter:

Printer: R&R Publishing Limited, Suite 705, 7F, Cheong K. Building, 84-86 Des Voeux Road, Central, Hong Kong

Jasmine Lee

Jasmine Lee is writer, commentator, and journalist. She graduated from McGill University where she took numerous opportunities to study and work around the world. Her specific areas of interest include media studies and human rights.


  1. Your argument that there are stark difference between the 2 incidences appeared flawed. There are stark differences because you are picking a side in each conflict. In the US riot, you are siding with the government, while in the HK protest, you are siding with the pro-democracy movement. Depending on your stance, you will label the protester differently. One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. If you look at the US riot from the perspective of a Trump supporter, the rioter are fighting for their rights and freedoms as well. They believe (even if flawed) that the election was rigged and fraudulent. To them Biden is not the duly elected President. If one steps back and judge each situation by their actions, they both are equally guilty. They both trespassed, broke and entered and vandalized and should be prosecuted according to the law. A political stance should not influence your writing in order to avoid any perceived bias.

    • Hi Alan, thanks for your response. The fundamental differences I’m outlining are the systems which the protesting groups are speaking out against. I have no interest in “siding” with the US government nor the HK protesters in this piece. What I do intend with this article is to say that one incident should not be used to justify nor vilify the other due to the underlying circumstances of each scenario. Painted in broad strokes, both are extreme cases of citizen violence against the standing regime; the events leading up to both stormings carry distinct characteristics that should be considered as similar and separate – but not equivalent – case studies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enter the text from the image below


Forgot Password?

Join Us

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.