It's been a long time that I haven't talked about politics in my diary, and I think there are so many interesting things for me to talk about these days. Perhaps the most interesting thing these days in Hong Kong is surely about the debate on patriotism, and the debate mainly concerns with the definition of a patriot.

Hey, but who gets to define a patriot? Chinese Communist Party? Hu Jin-tao? Wen Jia-bao? An Min? Chief Executive? LegCo? Audrey Eu? Martin Lee? Ma Lik?

There is no "authority" version of definition of patriot, and probably there is nobody who can say who is being a patriot. Why? Because love, as we all know, is something that is almost impossible to define. We at most know what comprises of love, Tender, Love and Care. But still we cannot know what is love. Being something abstract, probably we cannot say 'love' and simply thinks that we love. Example? Can I say I love somebody, and that's love? My dearest, smart, and intelligent readers, I think you all know the answers.

By simple knowledge we know, "love" is something to be done rather than said. You probably won't be loving your mother if you just say that you love her, while you are treating her poorly, not showing that you are really loving her on acts. This applies on everything, from love between two persons, to love to a country, which is, patriotism.

I guess the best current direction for Hong Kong would be no longer dragging on who is a patriot, and spend more time discussing on the concrete issue concerning constitutional reform.