From old Hong Kong to new Hong Kong, countless facts tell us that the Hong Kong we know is being rewritten by various forces and discourses in terms of its past, present, and future. But who is rewriting it? How is it being rewritten? In an era where 'history' itself has become a political tool, which perspective can we trust to view this city?

It is precisely at such a moment that revisiting Japanese historian Hamashita Takeshi's 'Hong Kong in Broad Perspective' provides an exceptionally clear way of viewing—a perspective that belongs neither to the colonizers nor to the nation-state. He does not start from the power center of China, nor is he bound by the Western order framework, but instead constructs a 'Asian network center' that transcends national boundaries and takes fluidity as the norm—Hong Kong—through maritime networks, diaspora economies, remittance systems, and intermediary roles.

This is not a romantic nostalgia for the past, but a historical explanatory power for contemporary crises.

1. Viewing the Periphery from the 'Center', or Understanding Asia from the Periphery?

In today's Hong Kong, 'history' is no longer a distant discipline, but a real-time political struggle. Whether it's the rewriting of secondary school curricula, the reorganization of museum exhibitions, or the representational struggles in news reports, Hong Kong's past has long been卷入 into today's power games. In such a time of reconstruction, rereading Japanese historian Hamashita Takeshi's 'Hong Kong in Broad Perspective', published in 1997, is not just a review of the past, but may also provide us with a historical perspective that transcends contemporary geopolitical frameworks.

The 'Asian network center' perspective proposed by Hamashita refuses to see Hong Kong as an isolated colony or dependency, but as a network intersection point composed of Chinese移民, trade finance, and maritime activities. This perspective not only breaks down the barriers between Chinese history and world history, but also allows us to see a new historical framework of 'viewing China from the south' and 'understanding power from movement'. And this networked understanding may be the historical resource most urgently needed for Hong Kong to respond to and reflect on when 'one country, two systems' exists in name only and politics and economy are deeply陷入困局.