PROLOGUE
THE
SIGNIFICANCE OF RESEARCH IN
EAST
ASIAN CULTURE
YU
XINTIAN
In
inspecting international issues, there are at least three layers of thinking:
state, region and world. A region generally is referred to as a continuous area
of the world having definable characteristics, but not always fixed boundaries
like a state. A region often has a large enough space to become an important
component of a continent. Moreover, a region is not only a simple matter of
space, but also a culture with a psychological identity born in a complicated
and interrelated historical process. East Asian culture is just such a region.
The
triumphal progress of modernization in East Asia (including Southeast Asia) is
one of the most exciting phenomena following WWII. If Japan’s prosperity is a
special case of development of non-Western countries and the relatively small
scale of the achievements of Asian “four dragons” limits their universal
significance, the tide of China, ASEAN and Indo-Chinese countries doing their
utmost to catch up has compelled people to recognize afresh the East Asian
miracle. The emergence of East Asia since 1990 has broadened people’s field of
vision and provided a foundation for looking forward to the prospect of a newly
industrialized East Asian economic-cultural circle.
Traced
to its source, there existed a broad Chinese civilized circle in history. One of
its outstanding characteristics was the learning and identification of Chinese
culture. The Chinese cultural circle covered China, Japan, Vietnam and Korea.
Buddhism, remade with Chinese culture, spread to Japan, Korea, Vietnam and
Southeast Asia. The painting, medicine, architecture, music and persons
influenced by the religion bore the strong imprint of Chinese culture.
Confucianism took root in the lifestyle, ethics and political system of Japan,
Korea and Vietnam, which were very close to the core of China’s “cultural
circle”.
“The
Silk Road in the Sea” from China to Southeast Asia took shape as early as the
4th and 5th centuries. During the Tang and Song dynasties,
the ancestors of the Persians and Arabs also made use of these sea routs to go
to Guangzhou Prefecture, Quanzhou and Hangzhou for missionary work and business.
The first emperor of the Yuan Dynasty was regarded as the originator of
China’s “marine policy”. Beyond two expeditions to Japan (in 1274 and
1281), he sent his “navy” on an punitive expedition to ancient Vietnam and
sent 10,000 naval troops to Java (in 1292).
However,
as these wanton military ventures did not achieve far-reaching political,
economic and cultural results, the first and third emperors of the Ming Dynasty
drew the historical lessons and developed trade and friendly relations with
Southeast Asia and the West on a large scale. The seeds of capitalism in China
then grew sturdily. China’s foreign trade was booming on an unprecedented
scale after Zheng who went to the West seven times. His tracks were left in the
present Cambodia, Thailand, Sumatera, Brunei, Java, Malaya, Kalimantan, the
Philippines, Sri Lanka, India and the eastern seacoast of Africa.
In
the conditions of the times, contacts with Southeast Asia were very frequent,
while those with remote countries were occasional. China set up trade
strongholds and residential areas in Malaya, Indonesia and the Philippines. In
fact, Zheng He’s records described the people of Chinese origin settling down
in Southeast Asia as constituting the local high society because of their higher
cultural level and good management. Though the Ming Dynasty failed to spread
“the system of rule by ceremony and propriety” to Southeast Asia, where
Indian and Arab cultures were always influential, long-term coexistence and
exchanges promoted cultural fusion.
Comparing
typically Islamized Indonesian culture with Chinese culture, one finds many
parallels. Indonesians believe that Allah created humankind through parents, so
to believe in Allah one must respect and love parents and esteem teachers: one
must “have a respect as great as a mountain and have a mind as open as a
valley” for elders and betters. The Indonesian parliament advocates adopting
resolutions through consultation; finding common ground as stressed in political
institutions in East Asia. Indonesia promotes three principles: first, we are
masters of society; second, we are duty-bound to protect our homes and defend
our country; and third, frequent introspection into one’s faults will lead to
knowing one’s deficiencies. In Chinese culture these have different
approaches, but equally satisfactory results: “every ordinary person has
responsibility for the rise and fall of China,” and “I daily examine myself
on three points.” The Indonesian Government stipulates that during the period
of construction, people are allowed the freedom of responsible speech. Though
people have different interests, everyone must bear responsibility for the
extensive state and social interests, and cannot impose their personal will on
others. In foreign relations, Indonesia advocates “winning without fighting
and overcoming the hard with the soft.” This is in harmony with high Chinese
strategy.
Though
Indonesia is an Islamic country, the principles it follows differ to a certain
extent from those of the Arab countries in West Asia -- the core region of Islam
-- but are similar to its neighboring Chinese cultural circle. Of course, not a
few Southeast Asian nations devoutly believe in religion, while the religious
element is relatively weak in Chinese culture; this is an obvious cultural
difference. However, in Thailand where Buddhism occupies the leading position
and in Malaysia and Indonesia dominated by Islam, the spiritual religious
pursuit does not hinder people’s striving for improving the material
conditions of this life. People cannot help calling to mind the Chinese cultural
approach: “the planning lies with man, the outcome with heaven”.
East
Asian culture is a gem of human thinking. According to the German philosopher,
Karl Jaspers, in the axial period, that is between 800 BC and about 200 AD,
Egypt, the two river valleys of the Tygris and the Euphrates, the West (Greece
and Roman), and India and China all made the first spiritual leap on their own.
Our various philosophies have originated since from that brilliant era. This
proves humankind’s common origin and identity, not in the sense of biology,
but rather of spirituality.
Western
culture has made significant contributions to the world’s historical process,
leading to drastic social changes with the scientific and technological
revolution as the centerpiece. However, the technological era has caused
difficult problems such as environmental pollution and cultural crisis, while
bringing happiness to humankind. We must draw the tools for a response to new
needs from our own ideological treasure house. Chinese and Indian cultures both
will be beneficial in overcoming global threats.
From
a longer historical perspective humankind after all will transcend the “animal
circles” of war and be creative in a peaceful and unified environment, thus
taking a second spiritual leap. Arnold Toynbee, a master in research on
historical cultures, pointed out that “peace and unification . . . must center
on the main shaft of geography and culture, and be constantly crystallized. I
have a premonition of this main shaft in East Asia rather than in the U.S.,
Europe and the Soviet Union”.1 East Asian culture with deep
connotations and rich diversity is bound to play a catalytic role in reviving
and renewing the spirit of humankind.
Researchers all over the world have tried to find the clue to the sustained and rapid economic development of East Asian countries and regions. One of the important reasons is their culture which is a time-honored and continuing topic of debate. During the period when Japan devoted major efforts to pushing forward its industrialization an Australian expert was disappointed after his investigation in Japan. He said that the Japanese were content with things as they were, had no concept of time and found it difficult to grasp Western modern technology and management. Since then the facts have contradicted his predictions. In the 1960s, most social scientists asserted that Confucianism was incompatible with modernization, so it was hard for East Asia to take off economically. Confucianism lays stress on harmony and coordination, thinks highly of the collective and stability, does not seek change, attaches importance to humanism rather than to science and technology, and thus cannot be counted on to guide modernization. But after the 1970s, important changes took place. The economic success of “Asian four dragons” was looked upon with increased respect. The Confucian values, which had been criticized in the past, were universally recognized as the inherent driving force for this new growth.
Weber
saw the spirit of Western capitalism embodied in individualism, market
competition and laissez-faire policies, which helped to bring about the uniquely
successful modernization in the human history. But the East Asian work ethic and
enterprise spirit are quite different. Only in the network of interpersonal
relations can individuals have their significance, so everyone must scrupulously
abide by his/her duties and obligations in organizations and pay attention to
mutual cooperation. East Asian cultural features can be analyzed qualitatively
and quantitatively. American scholar Michael Bonfd investigated the values of
people of Chinese origin in 22 Eastern and Western countries. He devised 40
basic value items and asked every interviewee to rank each item. The 40 items
were grouped into four categories: “integration”, “Confucian motivation
for work”, “kindheartedness” and “ethics and discipline”. With regard
to the “Confucian motivation for work” (superior and inferior, thrift,
willpower, sense of shame, mutual courtesy, steadiness, face and tradition)
Bonfd noted that Japan and the “Asian four dragons” ranked ahead of the
other countries. Yu Shaohua with Singaporean National University investigated
values of middle-level managerial personnel in 51 medium-sized enterprises in
Singapore and Malaysia. Though he questioned Bonfd’s four categories,
generally speaking, he agreed with the relationship between cultural background
and economic development. Confucianism has important influence on economic
development, but this, of course, does not diminish the importance of a sound
political system and economic structure.
Chinese
culture has existed for thousands of years while the East Asian takeoff is a
matter of only recent decades. It should be noted that in the process of
industrialization, East Asian countries have not consciously created a new
ethics and spirit, but rather have learned from, imitated and introduced Western
capitalist technology, management and systems. But just as colorless light is
refracted into an entire spectrum through a prism, Western culture is bound to
be filtered through Eastern culture, resulting in quite different styles and
features. The converse may also be true, namely, that Eastern culture is
transformed and renewed in conformity with the evolving situation, leading to
new developments.
In
sum, Western cultural nativization and native cultural transformation are
important experiences of East Asian economic and social development, and can be
used as points of references for other developing countries. In most developing
countries, there still exist the phenomenon of a dual economy, causing the
phenomenon of a dual culture. In vast rural areas, native culture sticks to the
tradition, while in a few cities it copies Western culture. Undoubtedly, this
kind of conflict and split in economy and culture is absolutely harmful to
mobilizing the whole people to realize modernization. East Asian countries have
removed the basis of a dual culture by eliminating the dual economy; that has
promoted economic growth while solving the problem of a dual culture. It proves
that conflict between Eastern and Western cultures may be eliminated through the
practice of self-determined choice by independent states. This is a breakthrough
for modernization theory and the practice of developing countries.
As
for the debates over relations between culture and modernization, the views can
be classified into two schools: “culture theory” and “system theory”.
The “culture theory” holds that nations have different cultures and social
systems which play a great and even decisive role in economic development. If
so, it is very difficult to learn from and disseminate their experiences, since
any nation obviously finds it hard to transplant another nations’ culture. The
“system theory” considers that the cultural role is very small and economic
development depends on special economic policies and conditions. Proceeding from
this view, the expansion of modernization is easier. The famous expert on
modernization, Peter Berger, wavers between the two views, and holds that the
correct answer seems somewhere between the two. In fact, it is very
hard completely to separate them.
Firstly,
this is because the cultural factor cannot play a role on its own without the
support of other political and economic conditions. For example, while all are
located in East Asia, Cambodia, Myanmar and North Korea have not yet entered the
road of rapid growth. So, in doing research on culture, we cannot seek the
“causes” of economic development exclusively in culture, but must look for
the “juncture” with economic development. That is to say, we must identify
the cultural factors which can vitalize the economy, not the cultural feature by
itself.
Secondly,
the role of culture is not illusory. Correct policy and rational system will, of
course, encourage enterprises and the people who work for them; but how to work
out correct policy and how to make entrepreneurs and people willing to follow
the government’s strategy cannot avoid issues of the cultural background. The
ratio of saving by East Asian people is high, while that of Americans is low.
This cannot be attributed to the difference in the system or wages or bank
policy.
Thirdly,
recognizing the impact of culture, in a broad field of vision, culture is one of
the variables. Culture not only determines the scope of policy, but also is
related to features of social outlook. As almost everything is filtered through
culture, the same economic policies may produce different results in different
countries.
Lastly,
the process of East Asian countries shows that in the initial stage of
modernization more emphasis often is put on the introduction and building of
systems and policy. With development, various nations may give more
consideration to the realization of spiritual values on the basis of the fusion
of Eastern and Western cultures so that the impact of the native culture on
society may gradually be intensified. System and culture move forward in
interaction and coordination.
East
Asian experiences not only inspire other developing countries, but also are of
international significance in theory. For example, the range and intensity of
government intervention in the economy in East Asian countries are more than in
other regions of the world. However, their market mechanism is flexible and
vigorous and is capable of responding to changes. In discussion with US
development economist Bhagwati, he held that the mechanism is still a mystery
and that after in-depth research the Western theory may be rewritten. Culture
cannot be simply transplanted, but it can be studied. The ability of humankind
to realize and control the surrounding environment cannot be completed by a
single nation on its own. Much of the culture of every society comes from other
societies. Tools, organization, belief, art and other cultural factors keep
moving from one society to another. A culture which has accepted the incentive
of new information may respond and gradually change. Therefore, East Asian
culture has both its own particularity in history, but also potentiality for
universalization.
In
the early 21st century, East Asia may become one leg of the tripod,
together with North America and Europe. Reality determines consciousness, which
is manifested in action. Asians have realized their own strength and are proud
of it. They want to voice their own views and seek their own development norms
and paths. In the past centuries by means of arms Europe and the U.S. destroyed
most of the original civilizations and cultures of the world with Christianity,
law and trade, and they denied or changed local ethics standards. Westerners
were over confident that European ethical standards were superior and could
effectively set up new standards all over the world; they bragged that they are
teachers of other national spirits and ethics. According to their own standards
arbitrarily they decided other nations’ destiny on the premise of being
beneficial to them. Power politics is swollen with cultural arrogance.
Economic
vitality and interdependence have enhanced the self-confidence of developing
countries. In the past they could only submit to insufferable Western arrogance,
but now they define themselves and regain their justice and self-respect. The
West spares no efforts to preach democracy and human rights. Without mentioning
the problems and malpractice in their implementation in the West, even if they
were absolutely perfect could they be applied in the different situations of the
countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America? The West once sharply criticized
the “autocracy” and “centralization” of South Korea, Singapore and
China’s Taiwan, but these countries and regions ensured economic prosperity
and promoted market development. On the contrary, the economy of the Philippines
whose political system was most similar to the U.S. long was stagnant.
Asians
began to make it clear that Western values do not conform to Asia. In December
1993, this author took part in the “Asian Economic Development and Political
Democracy” International Symposium sponsored by The Asia Foundation. Experts
and scholars of Asian countries and regions unanimously held that democracy
itself is not bound to lead to economic development, but economic development
will after all promote democracy. What is most important is to seek a balance
between economic growth and political democracy and to build a form of democracy
suitable to a particular economic phase. The tide of democratization in Japan,
South Korea and China’s Taiwan has proven that only after the economy arises
to a certain level can democracy achieve a higher stage. In the terms of the
Governor of Bank of Korea: South Korean democracy is sure to be South Korean
with both Eastern and Western strong points.
Asians
are undergoing psychological changes from “everything being the best in the
West” to finding again the values of their cultural heritage and achieving a
modernization unequal to Westernization. Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian Deputy Prime
Minister, recognized that Asia indeed has its deficiencies on the issue of human
rights, but allowing others to lecture us and threaten us on issues of freedom
and human rights is equal to accepting insult. In an article in the International
Herald Tribune, a former Singaporean ambassador enumerated several policies
effective in East Asia. They included social contracts between the state and the
people, building a clean ethical environment and a free and responsible public
opinion, and casting away Western extreme individualism. While Asians have
learned from the West generation after generation and will continue to do so, he
hoped that the West should also learn from the East willingly and gladly. It is
now time.
This change of attitude by Asians has shocked the West. The noted
American political analyst, Samuel Huntington, wrote the article “The Clash of
Civilizations” with specially keen insight when he held:
-
that the dominant source of conflict will be cultural;
-
that increasing interaction will intensify awareness of the differences
between civilizations;
-
that Western efforts to spread its values have aroused a confrontational
response from other civilizations;
-
that Confucianism and Islam are uniting to challenge the West; and
-
that the next world war, if there is one, will be a war between
civilizations.
Huntington’s
views are incorrect in theory. Differences in culture and religion may often be
the fuse for conflict, but the scramble for interests in terms of territory,
wealth, resources and power is the main reason. Furthermore, between different
cultures there are not only conflict and confrontation, but also exchange and
fusion. The Islamic culture he regards as a great scourge hung like a bright
moon in the dark sky in the Middle Ages before the rising of the sun of the
Renaissance. Chinese culture spread to the West and became the engine of the
Enlightenment. Moreover, religions such as Christianity, Islam and Hinduism have
similar views on humankind, the environment, the importance of society and
family, the significance of spiritual guidance and the objectives of life.
Cultures can share values and different cultures can temper intersecting
interests and aspirations.
All
this has disappeared in Huntington’s vision. If in theory his views are
incomplete and incorrect, politically they are indeed sensitive and insightful.
Western countries took the lead in soft power while dominating the world with
hard power. The rise of East Asian countries made the West feel severely the
challenge of different cultures for the first time. Western superiority in soft
power is declining as East Asian ideologies, cultures, religious beliefs and
value systems pour onto the international arena. They pay no attention to
Western centralism, but rather affirm their own presence with a particular
political culture. This is the real reason for Huntington’s heavyheartedness.
The
people in the original colonies and semi-colonies experienced painful cultural
impact. Native cultures under strong attack by Western culture manifested
features unsuitable to modern society. People could not but cut their braids and
abandon tattoos, and were forced to learn foreign cultures. The compulsion
resulted in two deviations: One was fiercely to boycott all Western culture
while resisting the exploitation and oppression of colonialism and imperialism;
the other was to feel keenly their own backwardness, worship the West, copy its
indiscriminately, and dream of golden hair and blue eyeballs. Only after
national independence could people eliminate the two deviations and learn to
choose on their own and with balance. Western countries have not had such an
experience, which is their good fortune. However, for this reason it is more
difficult for them to understand the excellence and greatness of many cultures
in the world. This is their future misfortune. Western centralism will be
spurned in time and become the shackles of Western progress. Huntington
represents exactly the habits of Western conservative forces.
East Asian nations, while enhancing their strength, can demand their due in the international political arena. Culture is one of their weapons. As early as 1980, the famous British politician Roderick MacFarquhar noted that in the next century the challenge of the Russians will be military, and that of Middle East will be economic. Only East Asia will constitute an all-round challenge to the West from the style of economic development to basic values. However, East Asian nations will not conquer the West and dominate the world, since the times are completely changed. East Asian cultures are still opening the way for East Asian countries to obtain due rights. Reaching this objective, having undergone colonial oppression and enslavement, these countries will be absolutely unwilling to bully and humiliate others. East Asian cultures will embrace the quintessence of the various ideologies and cultures of humankind in terms of their culture of the golden mean and contribute their wisdom to creating a fairer political and economic order and a more brilliant world culture.
1.
Prospects for the 21st Century---Dialogue between Toynbee and Ikeda
Daisaku (International
Cultural Publishing Company, 1993), p. 294.