Decentralized Democratic Participation: How Hongkongers Mobilized Against the Extradition Bill through the LIHKG Forum and Telegram

Luna Tian

Abstract

This study explores how Hong Kong citizens utilized the LIHKG online forum and Telegram to engage in decentralized democratic participation during the anti-extradition movement. With the widespread adoption of social media and digital tools, the coordination of collective action has become increasingly reliant on these platforms, moving away from traditional social movement organizations. The research highlights how LIHKG’s anonymity and real-time feedback mechanisms allowed participants to rapidly reach consensus and initiate actions, breaking the conventional dependence on centralized leadership in protests.

During the anti-extradition movement, LIHKG functioned as a virtual coordination hub, empowering users to engage in collective decision-making through discussions and polls, demonstrating a robust capacity for decentralized organization. Meanwhile, Telegram served as a tool for organizing concrete actions, effectively bridging online discussions with on-the-ground mobilization. This enabled participants to contribute based on their individual strengths, further reinforcing the movement’s cohesion.

Through case studies, this paper illustrates how distributed participation advanced the resistance movement across various domains, including frontline mobilization, fact-checking, and cultural advocacy. Ultimately, the study concludes that the effective use of LIHKG and Telegram—due to their immediacy, anonymity, and harnessing of collective intelligence—provides a new paradigm and perspective for decentralized democratic participation, challenging the conventional structures of social movement organization.

Theoretical Framework

The coordination of collective action has increasingly been facilitated by the Internet rather than traditional social movement organizations (Carty, 2015). This shift has significantly diminished the role of conventional organizational structures in shaping collective action. In recent years, the paradigm of collective action has begun to pivot toward grassroots mobilization, spontaneous operation, leaderless structures, and reduced reliance on financial and labor-intensive resources. Digital tools and new forms of communication have enabled collective action characterized by decentralization, self-organization, and fluid social networks. These individualized and flexibly managed online technologies align well with the social network structures of collective action, resulting in interpretive patterns and structures that are fluid, fragmented, and personalized (Castells, 2015).

Social media has enhanced the exchange of information between individuals and among groups (Jost et al., 2018). It allows politically marginalized actors with limited resources to establish connections, accumulate social capital, and gain a foothold in the public sphere through social networking services (SNS) (Lee et al., 2015, p. 360). Manuel Castells (2015) argues that the role of social media in social movements goes beyond information dissemination—it serves as an extension of real-world action. He emphasizes that the integration of cyberspace with physical occupation of space is essential to driving social movements. Castells describes social movements in networked societies as leaderless and reliant on digital communication, with their success being deeply intertwined with the cultural and contextual environments (see also Kidd and McIntosh, 2016).

Social media not only facilitates communication but also enables rapid mobilization and the emergence of short-term participatory collective action. It coordinates dispersed and atomized individuals into collective entities capable of pursuing shared causes and actions (Lee et al., 2015; Della Porta & Diani, 2014). Moreover, social media provides a platform for heterogeneous groups, fostering the formation of collective identity. This sense of shared belonging helps sustain solidarity among participants. The perceived intimacy of connections formed through social networks amplifies the psychological impact of political appeals (Choi, 2022; Yang and Liu, 2019).

Zizi Papacharissi and Blasiola (2015), in their study of Egyptian protestors using Twitter, analyzed social media messages and concluded that protest participants and observers used emotional expression not only to convey protest information but also to establish interpersonal connections. These tweets, which blended emotions, opinions, and real-time reporting of street events, created an emotionally charged news stream. Even when the movement was not covered by mainstream media, this online stream sustained the momentum of protest. Most tweets were not purely news or opinion but a hybrid of emotionally infused information, making it difficult to distinguish among news, opinion, and emotion.

Similarly, in Hong Kong’s anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill (ELAB) movement, social media messages were heavily imbued with emotional expression. These collective expressions of emotion helped forge a sense of shared fate among young protestors, strengthening the formation of a “community of destiny.” This shared civic identity among pro-democracy supporters sparked a wave of consumer activism. Hong Kong protestors adopted political consumerism as a form of resistance—boycotting pro-government (“blue”) businesses while supporting pro-democracy (“yellow”) enterprises. This pattern of consumption continues today (Chan, 2022).

Background

LIHKG is one of the most influential online forums in Hong Kong. Initially established as a platform for users to anonymously discuss a wide range of topics, its open, anonymous, and decentralized nature quickly made it a vital space for the younger generation to express opinions and organize actions. The discussion model on LIHKG allows users to express their views through simple actions such as posting, upvoting, or downvoting, effectively pushing content with broad consensus to the top of the platform’s popularity ranking.

In 2019, Hong Kong saw the outbreak of mass protests against the proposed amendment to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance (the Extradition Bill), known as the anti-ELAB movement. The bill would have allowed the extradition of criminal suspects to mainland China, raising widespread concern among Hong Kong citizens about the erosion of the city’s judicial independence.

Typically, although social movements involve voluntary participation, they are often shaped by various organizations and networks. These organizations may possess different resources, enabling them to dominate the demands and discourse of a movement. Beginning in 2014, the term “Big Stage” (大台) emerged to describe coordination bodies that lacked democratic legitimacy. These groups controlled vital resources such as media, materials, and manpower and often bypassed protestors to unilaterally define the goals, methods, and strategies of a movement. Often unauthorized by democratic procedures, these organizations drew criticism from participants who felt excluded from decision-making, with no fair process in place to address such grievances (Zheng, 2019).

In 2019, protestors also faced significant repression from the state apparatus. Many participants in prior movements had experienced imprisonment. The risks to protest leaders were substantial, and internal divisions regarding ideology and tactics undermined mutual trust among different factions (Lee, 2019).

In this context, the anti-ELAB movement broke away from previous protest models by operating without clear leadership. Instead, it relied on digital platforms such as LIHKG and Telegram for coordination and organization. Citizens participated spontaneously, expressing opinions and planning actions in virtual spaces. Through these platforms, they efficiently called for supplies, shared transport locations, and reported live developments, enabling rapid mobilization for street protests. This leaderless yet highly organized resistance surprised many establishment figures—especially those less familiar with digital technologies—who found it difficult to imagine a sustained, coordinated movement without a “Big Stage” (Kwok, 2019).

LIHKG served as a virtual “central coordination hub” for the movement. Its anonymity allowed users to freely express their views, while the platform’s voting mechanism enabled collective opinions to surface quickly. Posts received immediate feedback through upvotes and downvotes, helping users gauge support for actions and ensure offline mobilization only proceeded after consensus was reached online. For example, when the June 27 protest surrounding police headquarters received widespread support on LIHKG, the action was swiftly executed—demonstrating the tight integration of collective deliberation and direct action (Zheng, 2019).

Additionally, LIHKG worked in tandem with Telegram to facilitate concrete planning. Users would share Telegram group links under LIHKG posts to allow interested participants to join further action planning. Whether creating protest posters, organizing street stations, or besieging government buildings, LIHKG users turned online discussions into real-world action through voluntary participation. Each participant could contribute based on their personal strengths, exemplifying the power of decentralized organization (Zheng, 2019).

LIHKG’s decentralized model represents a textbook case of distributed participation.

• First, LIHKG has no central leadership, commander, or “Big Stage.” Any user can anonymously post and participate in discussions, with decisions about subsequent actions determined through community voting. This collective decision-making model enhances flexibility and spontaneity while dismantling the concentration of power seen in previous movements, granting ordinary participants greater influence and voice.

• Second, the platform’s openness ensures diversity of opinion. Any internet user, regardless of background, can express views anonymously without fear of identity-based discrimination. This not only breaks the phenomenon of “dismissing voices based on the speaker,” but also allows professionals from various fields to offer expert insights to the collective. This openness and anonymity enhance the movement’s adaptability to public sentiment while safeguarding participant security.

The principle of no-splitting (不割席) was regarded as the key to maintaining cohesion and legitimacy in this leaderless movement. At its core lies solidarity and humility: the belief that all acts of resistance against the regime—regardless of whether they are seen as moral or rational by others—deserve public support, and should never be condemned in public (Kwok, 2019).

Case Studies

During the anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill (anti-ELAB) movement, the power of distributed participation emerged as a key driver of protest action, demonstrating the potential of collective action in online communities. Many participants initiated, organized, and coordinated activities through social media platforms, creating a decentralized model of resistance.

For example, Alvin, a 23-year-old college student known online as “Eruption in Silence,” was the first user to initiate offline action via LIHKG. His call quickly gained traction, becoming a starting point for many netizens to join the movement.

As the protests evolved, platforms like Telegram and LIHKG became crucial channels for information dissemination and mobilization. These platforms allowed participants to stay updated in real time and collaborate effectively, showcasing the responsiveness and cooperative spirit of online communities.

This distributed model not only strengthened the movement’s cohesion but also enabled participants to adapt flexibly to a rapidly changing environment.

The following sections examine specific cases to illustrate how distributed participation advanced the movement in three key domains:

1. Frontline Mobilization
2. Fact-checking and Tool-making
3. Cultural Propaganda

---

1. Frontline Mobilization

Distributed participation demonstrated exceptional mobilization capacity during the anti-ELAB movement.

• Alvin, the 23-year-old student mentioned earlier, began posting on LIHKG on May 16, calling on netizens to produce and distribute leaflets related to the movement (Zheng, 2019).
• The mobilization power of LIHKG was especially evident during major protest events on June 9, 12, and 16.
• Netizens used both LIHKG and large Telegram groups such as “High Seas Main Channel” (公海總谷), which attracted tens of thousands of members.

Although these communications were not picked up by traditional media, they spread rapidly online, allowing participants to stay informed with real-time updates from protest sites.

Even organized political groups joined in:

• On June 27, the political group Demosistō responded to LIHKG’s call by joining a protest at the Department of Justice to demand the withdrawal of the “riot” designation and the release of arrested protestors.
• Joshua Wong noted that this movement emphasized spontaneity, shifting the role of political organizations from leadership to support and coordination (Yang & Liu, 2019).

Ahead of the G20 summit, netizens launched a crowdfunding campaign via LIHKG and Telegram to publish open letters in international media.

• The campaign raised HK$6.7 million (approx. USD 850,000) within 11 hours.
• Numerous contributors were involved in writing, coordination, and media outreach (Zheng, 2019).

2. Fact-Checking and Action Tool Development

Fact-checking and the development of tactical tools also played a critical role in the progress of the movement. Participants contributed through decentralized efforts on platforms like Telegram.

One notable example is the “Airport Fact Check Channel,” a volunteer-led fact-checking initiative involving over a dozen individuals from diverse backgrounds. They verified and published real-time information relevant to the protests, including police deployments and traffic conditions.

Due to the movement’s lack of centralized leadership and authoritative information sources, fact-checking became essential. These teams effectively countered misinformation from both within the movement and external actors. Such decentralized tools helped protestors stay rational in an environment rife with rumors (Tin, 2019).

Crowdsourced mapping tools like 103.hk and hkmap.live became essential for situational awareness. These tools collected crowd-sourced data on police deployments, first-aid stations, and more, enabling demonstrators to make swift decisions.

Key strengths of these tools:

• Real-time updates
• Decentralized participation
• For example, 103.hk updated every 15 minutes during major demonstrations, helping protestors reduce on-site anxiety and respond with agility. This model minimized reliance on centralized commands and enhanced flexibility (Tin, 2019).

---

However, these platforms also faced challenges:

• False rumors often spread faster than verification efforts.

  Unverified claims about airport takeovers or MTR station closures caused unnecessary panic.

• Uneven critical thinking skills among participants led to susceptibility to emotionally charged misinformation, increasing the burden on fact-checking teams.
• Real-time mapping issues:
  • Crowdsourced data lacked professional verification.
  • Early versions of 103.hk were manually updated and slow to reflect changes.
• Volunteer management problems:
  • Inaccurate data contributions.
  • Volunteer dropout mid-task, leading to coordination difficulties.
• Resource constraints:
  • Most volunteers had to juggle other life commitments, limiting long-term operations.
  • Technical complexity of map updates restricted efficiency.
• Personal risk:
  • Some volunteers were arrested for managing map groups.
  • Anonymity and digital security became vital for survival (Tin, 2019).

3. Cultural Propaganda

The cultural propaganda teams consisted of hundreds or even thousands of volunteers who used digital media to create and distribute information. Their work took many forms—posters, videos, social media posts—and served not just as artistic expression but as vital tools for solidarity-building and mobilization.

For example, certain Telegram channels amassed over 100,000 subscribers, significantly accelerating the dissemination of protest-related updates and legal information.

These platforms allowed anyone to freely create, upload, and download content, making it difficult to estimate the exact size of the cultural teams but easy to observe their impact.

• The “777 Propaganda Material Archive” had nearly 38,000 subscribers and published over 10,141 images and videos.
• The “Anti-ELAB Propaganda Channel” exceeded 123,000 subscribers, releasing over 13,471 items in just three months.
• On average, these two channels alone distributed 85 to 112 propaganda materials per day.

Most creations were unsigned, copyright-free, and optimized for online sharing or printing on Lennon Walls (Sou, 2019).

Outside Telegram, HKGETV (Hong Kong Education Television) also emerged as a key propaganda platform. This volunteer-run initiative was made up of “non-professional” media creators who produced short videos on socially relevant topics to promote public knowledge. Founded in 2019, it spread content widely via social media, enriching the movement’s messaging with diverse perspectives (Sou, 2019).

Glory to Hong Kong

Another powerful example of distributed participation was the creation and dissemination of the protest anthem “Glory to Hong Kong.”

• Composed during the 2019 anti-ELAB movement by netizens and a composer using the pseudonym Thomas dgx yhl.
• After its initial online release, the lyrics were crowd-edited and refined collaboratively.
• The song reflected strong civic belief in freedom, democracy, and human rights.

It quickly became an iconic symbol of the movement, widely sung during protests, public gatherings, and international advocacy events.

• Initiator T and two other members had formed a band in 2018.
• T composed the melody and posted on LIHKG, inviting others to help improve the lyrics.
• Through LIHKG, netizens collaboratively arranged, edited, and finalized the song.
• A sound engineer joined, and 20+ users volunteered to record the final version.

Despite never meeting in person, the team successfully completed the project based on shared beliefs and experiences (Wong, 2022).

Its dissemination relied entirely on Telegram and social media—without support from mainstream media—highlighting the decentralized nature of the movement.

---

Conclusion

The core strengths of LIHKG and Telegram lie in their:

• Immediacy
• Anonymity
• Harnessing of collective intelligence

On LIHKG, users can quickly assess support for a proposed action through the upvote/downvote system, which functions as both a digital polling mechanism and a form of psychological reinforcement.

As user Alvin noted, this voting function provides not only a way to gauge opinion but also emotional support (Zheng, 2019).

Example:

• On June 12, a pastor stood between protestors and police singing “Hallelujah.”
• The scene was recorded and uploaded to LIHKG, receiving 4,500 upvotes within an hour (Joeng, 2019).

Such interactions fostered care and solidarity, helping to counteract helplessness. Real-time sharing affirmed that actions had broad public backing, boosting morale. Users also posted fact-checks in comment threads to curb misinformation (Zheng, 2019).

Anonymity and Security

• Anonymity offered protection in a high-risk political climate.
• LIHKG’s structure enabled decentralized decision-making—mass action was driven by collective wisdom and spontaneous initiative.

---

Challenges

1. Professionalism
   Many volunteers lacked formal training, resulting in:

   • Imprecise language
   • Subjective content in reports
   • Inaccurate, hand-drawn maps

2. Strategic Direction
   The absence of leadership created difficulty in:

   • Long-term planning
   • Coordinated tactical shifts

Francis L. F. Lee observed that while leaderless movements excel at defensive action, they struggle with offensive strategy (Lam, 2019).

3. Information Overload
   The rapid pace overwhelmed many organizers and participants.

   • E.g., during airport protests, misinformation led some to withdraw prematurely (Sou, 2019)

4. Coordination Efficiency
   While anonymity protected users, it also:

   • Reduced accountability
   • Hindered efficient planning and internal communication

---

Final Reflection

Decentralized movements offer freedom, inclusivity, and resilience, but also come with structural vulnerabilities.

Future participants must seek a balance between anonymity and collaboration to ensure effective and sustainable resistance.

References

• Carty, V. (2019). Social Movements And New Technology. Routledge.

• Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.

• Chan, D. S. W. (2022). The consumption power of the politically powerless: The Yellow Economy in Hong Kong. Journal of Civil Society, 18(1), 69–86. doi.org/10.1080/1744…

• Choi, W.-M. (2022). 從紀錄片《時代革命》 看香港公民社會在 2019 年「反修例運動」的體現. 台灣人權學刊, 6(3), 185–193.

• Coleman, S., & Sorensen, L. (2023). Handbook of digital politics. Edward Elgar Publishing.

• Della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Social Movements. Oxford University Press.

• Joeng, Z. K. (2019, July 5). 運動中的「救火」牧師：他們擋警察、唱聖詩、支援年輕人. 端傳媒 Initium Media. theinitium.com

• Jost, J. T., Barberá, P., Bonneau, R., Langer, M., Metzger, M., Nagler, J., Sterling, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2018). How Social Media Facilitates Political Protest: Information, Motivation, and Social Networks. Political Psychology, 39(39), 85–118. doi.org/10.1111/pops…

• Kidd, D., & McIntosh, K. (2016). Social Media and Social Movements. Sociology Compass, 10(9), 785–794. doi.org/10.1111/soc4…

• Kwok, C. (2019, November 18). 去中心化運動中，「不割席」的異見與包容. 端傳媒 Initium Media. theinitium.com

• Lam, C.-W. (2019, June 28). 逃犯條例：沒組織、沒領袖，香港青年如何成為「抗爭專家」. BBC News 中文. bbc.com/zhongwen

• Lee, C.-W. (2019, June 12). 無大台、去中心化和「三罷」，能幫「反送中運動」走多遠？ 端傳媒 Initium Media. theinitium.com

• Lee, P. S. N., So, C. Y. K., & Leung, L. (2015). Social media and Umbrella Movement: insurgent public sphere in formation. Chinese Journal of Communication, 8(4), 356–375. doi.org/10.1080/1754…

• Satoshi, Y. (2019, November 13). “Be water”: Hong Kong protesters learn from Bruce Lee. NHK WORLD-JAPAN News. nhk.or.jp

• Sou, J. K. (2019, October 8). 文宣組的故事：合作可以帶來很大的創意. 端傳媒 Initium Media. theinitium.com

• Tin, J. (2019, September 25). 匿名、素人、內部勢力：「無大台」運動中的即時資訊台. 端傳媒 Initium Media. theinitium.com

• Wong, L. Y. (2022). 在創作與抗爭之間: 論香港反修例運動之中的新唱作世代. 文化研究, 35, 49–80. doi.org/10.6752/JCS…

• Yang, Y., & Liu, S. (2019). 社交媒体时代集体行动发生与演进的机制研究. 中共杭州市委党校学报, 1(4), 47–56.

• Zheng, P.-S. (2019, June 28). 連登仔大爆發：「9up」中議政，他們「講得出做得到」. 端傳媒 Initium Media. theinitium.com

• Zizi Papacharissi, & Blasiola, S. (2015). Structures of Feeling, Storytelling, and Social Media. Routledge EBooks, 211–222. doi.org/10.4324/9781…