Asian Value

Asian Values and Confucian Discourse

Lee Seung-Hwan

The Significance of Asian Values and the Discursive Space

Since the Asian economic crisis of 1997, the discussion of Asian val-ues has been active both in Korea and abroad. The concept of Asianvalues denotes the distinct value system found in the Asian culturalregion. The claim that the Asian cultural region has its own uniquecultural traditions and value system is not strange at all. Then, whyhas the notion of Asian values become the topic of heated debatesthroughout the world in the last few years?

The discourse on Asian values can be addressed in terms of poli-tics, economy, and culture. First, let us examine how Asian valuesare discussed in the economic sphere. Western scholars introducedthe concept of the Asian development model in order to explain theeconomic miracles of the newly industrializing Asian nationsbetween the 1970s and 1980s. Noting that the newly industrializingAsian economies, especially the Four Mini-Dragons, belong to theConfucian cultural sphere, Herman Kahn and Ezra Vogel1 claimed

Lee Seung-hwan (Yi, Seung-hwan) is Professor of Philosophy at Korea University. Hereceived his Ph.D. from the University of Hawaii in 1991. His publications includeYuga sasang-ui sahoe cheolhakjeok jaejomyeong (Understanding of Confucianismfrom a Social Philosophical Perspective) (1998) and Asiajeok gachi (Asian Values) (co-authored, 1999). E-mail: [email protected]

1. Herman Kahn, World Economic Development: 1979 and Beyond (London: CroomHelm, 1979); Ezra Vogel, Japan as Number One (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-

D E B A T E on Asian Values (4)

DellHighlight

that Confucian values were the critical driving forces of economicgrowth in this region. They argued that Confucian cultural factorssuch as strong leadership, tendencies to be thrifty and moderate, zealfor education, interpersonal relations emulating family relationship,cooperation and diligencewere the major cause of economic devel-opment. This explanation incited both support and critique in acade-mia. But the sudden rise of Asian economic crises in the late 1990sbegan to cast doubt on the plausibility and validity of the Asiandevelopment model, thus making Asian values the focus of debatesamong economists and sociologists. A prime example of this trend isthe seminar held at George Mason University (Washington, D.C.) on24 April 1998 with the title, Asian Ethics, Institutions, and Econo-my. In this seminar, many renowned scholars such as FrancisFukuyama, the author of The End of History and the Last Man, JamesBuchanan, a Nobel Prize winner in economics, Tu Weiming, a pro-fessor at Harvard University, and Peter Beck, a research fellow atKorea Economic Institute of America, discussed the Asian economiccrisis and its cultural backgrounds. In addition to this seminar, manyinternational economic magazines have pointed to Asian culture(such as the importance of personal relationships in staffing, corrup-tion, bribery, murky corporate management, affective linkage as wellas connections between politicians and businessmen) as the mainculprit behind the economic crisis. The Asian values which previous-ly had explained Asias economic miracles were now considered asthe main cause of the economic crisis.

The concept of Asian values is used not only in the economicsphere but also in politics to explain the political system unique tothe region. Since the beginning of capitalistic modernization, theleaders of development dictatorships in Asia have displayed theattitude that individual freedom and human rights can be withheldfor the nations economic growth. These political leaders have oftenattributed the unique characteristics of Asian politics to the Asian cul-

199Asian Values and Confucian Discourse

versity Press, 1979); Roy Hofheinz, Jr. and Kent E. Calder, The East Asia Edge(New York: Basic Books, 1982).

DellHighlight

DellHighlight

DellHighlight

200 KOREA JOURNAL / AUTUMN 2001

tural value system. For example, Korean President Park Jung-heeadvocated Korean democracy and the former Prime Minister of Sin-gapore Lee Kuan Yew claimed that Western democracy is not suit-able for Asian societies where family relations take precedence overall other forms of relations.2 In addition, former Indonesian PrimeMinister Suharto and incumbent Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathirargued that the Western style of human rights and democracy is notsuitable for the Asian situation due to unique cultural factors. Theirassertions appear to be reasonable in that they recognize the limita-tions of Western democracy, such as excessive individualism, moralcorruption and the breakdown of the family structure, and argue fora suitable political system compatible with Asian cultural traditions.However, some criticize this argument as nothing more than politicalpropaganda to suppress the demands for human rights in their coun-tries. Should peoples political freedom be on hold to overcomepoverty? Is democracy an obstacle to economic growth? Do culturalfactors and values influence the political and economic system?These questions continue to draw attention from social scientists.

The concept of Asian values also plays an important role in thecultural sphere, especially for those searching for the unique valueand moral system that is different from that of the West. Tu Weimingsuggests that modern Western culture placed too much emphasis onindividualism and materialism which led to the break-down of moralvalues, the fragmentation of the self, and the disintegration of bothfamily and community. He argues that the West should turn to Con-fucian humanism as the foundation for overcoming the cultural crisesof postindustrial society.3 Roger Ames of the University of Hawaii

2. Refer to Fareed Zakaria, A Conversation with Lee Kuan Yew, Foreign Affairs(March/April 1994): pp. 113-114.

3. Du Weiming (Tu Weiming), Ruxue di sanji fazhandi qianjing wenti (Problemson the Prospects for the Third Take-off of Confucianism), in Rujia chuantongdixiandai zhuanhua (Modern Transformation of Confucian Tradition) (China:Guangbo Dianshi, 1993), pp. 235-277. For reviews of Tu Weimings arguments,see Yi Seung-hwan (Lee Seung-hwan), Ttu weiming-ui yuhak je 3-gi baljeonnon(Tu Weimings Views on the Third Take-off of Confucianism), Cheolhak-gwahyeonsil (Philosophy and Reality) (fall 1997): pp. 173-189.

DellHighlight


and David Hall of the University of Texas also make similar claims.4

They share the view that Asian values is an alternative solution inovercoming the cultural crisis in postindustrial society. In contrast tothese benign views on Asian values, Samuel Huntington presents arather hostile and cautionary argument. In The Clash of Civilizationsand the Remaking of World Order, he predicts that the struggle forworld hegemony in the post-Cold War era will result in cultural con-flicts among civilizations. According to Huntington, the WesternChristian civilization, faced with challenges from the Islamic and Con-fucian civilizations, must defend itself from such challenges fromthese Asian civilizations. As a tangible solution to this problem, hesuggests the formation of a political, economic, and military alliancebetween the United States and European countries, as well as theexercise of military, diplomatic, and technological restraints againstvarious cultural regions in Asia.5 Here, it is evident that Huntington isintentionally distorting and exaggerating the conflicts between the

4. Refer to David Hall and Roger Ames, Thinking Through Confucius (New York:State University of New York Press, 1987).

5. See the following quotation from Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizationsand the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996), p. 312.

To preserve Western Civilization in the face of declining Western power, it

is in the interest of the United States and European countries: to achieve the

greater political, economic, and military integration and to coordinate their

policies so as to preclude states from other civilizations exploiting differ-

ences among them; to incorporate into the European Union and NATO the

Western states of Central Europe, that is, the Visegrad countries, the Baltic

republics, Slovenia, and Croatia; to encourage the Westernization of Latin

America and, as far as possible, the close alignment of Latin American

countries with the West; to restrain the development of the conventional

and unconventional military power of Islamic and Sinic countries; to slow

the drift of Japan away from the West and toward accommodation with

China; to accept Russia as the core state of Orthodoxy and a major regional

power with legitimate interests in the security of its southern borders; to

maintain Wastern technological and military superiority over other civiliza-

tions; and, most important, to recognize that Western intervention in the

affairs of other civilizations is probably the single most dangerous source of

instability and potential global conflict in a multicivilizational world.


Eastern and Western civilizations to maintain the Western globalhegemony and to foster sentiments of crisis in the West. As seen here,the concept of Asian values is manipulated, diffused, and propagatedin the discursive space of the maintenance of world hegemony.

Elements of Orientalism in the Discourse on Asian Values

Is it valid to define Asian values as a generalized concept? Do cultur-al characteristics which can be universally applied to the vast area ofAsia exist? Geographically, Asia is very large, occupying much of theworld excluding Europe, Africa, America and Oceania. Asia hosts anumber of religions such as Islamism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Judaism,Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism, as well as a myriad of races,ethnicities, customs, and languages. This being said, it is question-able whether a universal value system exists in Asia where so manyethnicities, languages, religions, and beliefs intricately coexist.

From the perspective of discourse analysis, the notion of Asianvalues is not a transparent concept, nor is it a neutral one that refersto objective facts; it is rather a constructed discourse approachedfrom a particular perspective or viewpoint. The discourse of Asianvalues takes place within specific temporal and spatial coordinates,which are influenced by the intentions of the main actors of the dis-course who desire to impose their ideas on the audiences. Althoughthe foreign media have pointed a finger at Asian values as the meta-physical suspect behind the recent Asian economic crisis, these veryvalues were deemed responsible for the remarkable economic growthin the region during the 1970s and 1980s. Evaluations of Asian valuesdrastically change depending on the particular interest and intentionof the discussant. In the 1980s when the United States was mired inan economic recession, many advocated the adoption of strong lead-ership and the family-like corporate management style found in Asia.The same people now criticize the Asian business managementmodel as a paternalistic model that suppresses creativity and flexibili-ty; they argue that the Asian model is nothing but cronyism based


on personal ties and connections.In the Age of Enlightenment, Westerners had interpreted the

Confucian political doctrines as promoting righteous governance bythe enlightened king and tried to emulate it in their efforts to over-come ecclesiastic authority and aristocratic oppression. However,having restored self-confidence through the Industrial Revolution andcivil revolutions, they made imperialist advances in the name of thediffusion of civilization.6 During this period of the mid-nineteenthcentury, Westerners traced the cause of Asias backwardness andunderdevelopment to Asian values. For example, sociologist MaxWeber associated the lack of capitalistic development in Asia withConfucian culture, notably with such characteristics as traditional-ism, animistic worship of ancestors, affective personal relationships,and the unconditional acceptance of this present world.7 He arguedthat because of these Confucian values, capitalism could not developin Asia. Ironically, while Max Weber had attributed Asias failure toachieve capitalistic economic development to Asian values, manyWesterners turned to these very Asian values to explain the remark-able economic growth in Asia during the 1970s and 1980s. As shownhere, the evaluation of Asian values differed drastically depending onthe intention and interest of those involved in the discourse. Like achameleon, Asian values take on different colors depending on thetime, space, and the intention of the discussant; hence, it is a dubi-ous concept lacking reality. The discourse on Asian values, like Ori-entalism, is only an imaginary construct which changes meaningsdepending on the intention and purpose of Westerners.

To put it simply, Orientalism refers to the ideologically-charged

6. For more information, see Yi Seung-hwan, Yugyo-ui gwanjeom-eseo bonmunhwa-ui jinbo (Advance of Culture from the Confucian Perspective), inMunhwa-ui jinbo-e daehan cheolhakjeok seongchal (Philosophical Reflections onAdvance of Culture), edited by the Korean Philosophical Association (Seoul: ChulHak Gua Hyun Sil Sa, 1998), pp. 42-67.

7. Max Weber, The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism, trans. and ed.Hans H. Gerth (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1951).

DellHighlight

DellHighlight


viewpoint of Asia intentionally created by Westerners since the peri-od of imperialism.8

Since then, to justify their imperialist expansions, Westernershave considered Asian civilization as backward and barbaric. Forexample, while British colonial officers in India enjoyed the privilegesof an exclusive class, they held Indian religion and philosophy incontempt. They branded the Confucian culture of Asia, including thatof China, as the symbol of primitiveness and savageness. Westernintellectuals, in their imperialist perspective, disparaged Asian cultureboth to confirm their cultural superiority and to justify their exerciseof power in the non-Western nations.9 The Western explanations ofthe recent economic crisis in Asiafor instance, favoritism, crony-ism, familism, authoritarianismare, in fact, mere metaphysicalrhetoric to justify their economic domination over Asia. In traditionalKorea, there was a cross-appointment system which placed govern-ment officials in locations other than their hometowns to eradicatefavoritism and the abuse of personal connections. There was aninspection and appeals system to hold the king in check, and publicofficials and the ruling elite were required to adhere to the principleof putting public considerations over the private to prevent injus-tice and corruption. The ultimate goal of Neo-Confucianism, theJoseon dynastys governing ideology for 500 years, was to secure therighteous spirit in rulers and officials by acquiring knowledgethrough the investigation of things.

The reason for Western scholars concentration on favoritismand personal ties as the main Asian characteristics is very clear: theyneed a metaphysical justification for their economic domination. If

8. On Orientalism, see Yi Seung-hwan, Orientallijeum-eul haebu-handa (An Analy-sis of Orientalism), Jontong gua Hyundae (Tradition and Modernity) (winter1997): pp. 206-223.

9. On this point, see Yi Seung-hwan, Seoyang-ui yugyo ihae-e daehan damnonhak-jeok bunseok (Analysis of Discourse on Western Understanding of Confucian-ism), Sasang (Thoughts) (spring 1998): pp. 70-93.

DellHighlight


we scrutinize the Western modernization process since the Enlighten-ment, we can trace quite easily the dark signs of corruption, bribery,favoritism, and authoritarianism in the West. The fact that Britishanti-corruption laws have been repeatedly revised throughout themodernization process indicates that corruption and favoritism arenot unique to Asia, but are common wherever greed exists. Theseelements considered as Asian values in the West are not unique toAsia but are simply the shadows accompanying human conditionsthroughout history. In particular, the negative values present in con-temporary Korea are not permanent cultural traits that are unrelatedto political and economic changes; rather, they indicate the transi-tional phenomenon amidst drastic social changes. Soon after the lib-eration from Japanese colonial rule, Koreans experienced a tragiccivil war and following in the footsteps of the West, rapidly marchedalong the road to condensed modernization under military authori-tarian governments. In this process, Koreans could not afford to con-sider morality or ethics. Desperately seeking to escape from hungerand to accumulate material wealth in a short period of time, the soci-ety was inevitably rapt with practices of hantang juui (the get-rich-quick tendency), close ties between politicians and businessmen,corruption, bribery, favoritism and cronyism. In this sense, equatingthe negative ramifications of recent Korean history with the perma-nent characteristics of Asian culture is only a Western attempt to dis-guise and justify the Wests economic domination of Asia.

Asian Values as a Mechanism for Internal Oppression

The concept of Asian values is used by the West as a vehicle to justi-fy not only their economic but also their political domination overAsia. The diplomacy of human rights employed by the United States,which proudly takes the role of the world police, is a good exam-ple. The United States takes every opportunity to rebuke Asiannations for violating human rights by putting the nation and the col-lective over individual freedom. They contend that Western democra-

DellHighlight

DellHighlight

cy cannot take roots in Asia because of such cultural elements. In hisvisit to China in 1998, Clinton criticized and dictated human rightsconditions in China without reservations. It is very naive to considerthis as an act of good will from the gatekeeper of world justice andfreedom. The United States problematizes human rights in China butnot those in Saudi Arabia. It took extra efforts to drive out the invad-ing Iraqi forces from oil-rich Kuwait while it gave the cold shoulderto oil-free Bosnia, when invaded by Serbia; it demanded arms reduc-tion from Iran and Iraq, but not from Israel; it raided Albania forcommitting ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, but the casualties from theraids were greater than those from the ethnic cleansing. Behind thejust interventions by the vanguard of human rights lurk nationalinterests and the desire for global hegemony. Employing such hypo-critical double standards, they adjust the degree and level of inter-vention on each individual case. The United States intervenes in theinternal affairs of countries that are considered to depart from itsglobal management initiative in the name of protecting humanrights, and regards Asian values as the cultural poison which hin-ders human rights.

In the interview with Foreign Affairs (March/April 1994), LeeKuan Yew protested that the West should not indiscriminately forceother countries to adopt Western values and the Western system. Hisremarks were in protest against the United States coercive and hypo-critical human rights imperialism, and they seize our attention, inthat they were intended as a form of resistance against Westernerswho try to define Western values as universal and force them on theother parts of the world through imperialist coercion. However, simi-lar to deceptive American intentions, Lee Kuan Yews attitude is farfrom being transparent.

Lee Kuan Yew makes use of Asian values to justify his authori-tarian rule. On the surface, he appeared as a self-confident nationalistdefying Western imperialism, but he emphasizes the unique charac-teristics of Asian culture and tradition to justify his authoritarianismdomestically. When the opposition party demanded democratization,he retorted, They demand democratization, but I doubt they can



maintain democracy even for nine days.10 Claiming that Singaporecannot develop a Western-style democracy due to its unique culturalcharacteristics, he argues for Asian patriarchal democracy.

Since the stabilization of Singapores economic growth in 1980,Lee Kuan Yew has sought to establish Confucianism as the nationalethical guideline. In 1982, he designated Confucian ethics as anelective course in middle schools, and in the following year, he hadthen-Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Education Goh Keng Sweeestablish the Institute of East Asian Philosophy and to initiate theConfucianism revitalization movement.11 This cultural policy,though, met resistance from the non-Chinese citizens as a vile inten-tion to expand Sinocentrism in Singapore.12 Singapore is a multi-eth-nic and multi-religion nation, including Chinese (76 precent), Malays(15 percent), Indians (6 percent), Europeans, Japanese, Arabs, Jew-ish, Filipinos, Thai, and Myanmarese by ethnic origin. In terms ofreligion, Christianity, Sikhism, Islamism, Hinduism and Buddhismcoexist. In a society with a complex ethnic and religious web, theadequacy of Confucian values only promotes division and conflictsrather than solidarity. Since people of Chinese descent alreadymonopolize key government positions and economic power, theeffort to foster Confucian values as the ruling ideology inevitablyinvited the criticism that Chinese are going to grab everything theycan.

As a matter of fact, in the 1970s when Singapores economy was

10. Annotations of the Political Debates of Lee Kuan Yew for 40 Years, p. 205. Recitedfrom Wang Wanqin, Xinjia poyu rujia wenhua (New Revitalization of ConfucianCulture) (China: Suzhou University Press, 1995), p. 227.

11. Between 1985 and 1990, the Institute of East Asian Philosophy held three interna-tional seminars on Confucian ethics and modernization (July 1985, January 1987and August 1988). The papers presented in the seminar held in 1987 were laterpublished by Tu Weiming as a book titled The Triadic Chord: Confucian Ethics,Industrial Asia, and Max Weber (Singapore: Institute of East Asian Philosophy).

12. Eddie C. Y. Kuo, Confucianism as Political Discourse in Singapore: The Case of anIncomplete Revitalization Movement, in Confucian Traditions in East AsianModernity: Moral Education and Economic Culture in Japan and the Four Mini-Dragons, ed. Tu Weiming (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996), p. 304.

rapidly growing, concepts of Confucian values or Asian values werenot discussed. During the early period of Asias modernization, HongKong obtained its capital from China, and Korea and Taiwan reliedon loans from the United States; Singapore, however, depended onmultinational corporations (MNCs). Lee Kuan Yew enacted laborlaws, in which labor disputes were considered illegal and forced asmuch as 50 percent of workers monthly wages to be withheld for theCentral Provident Fund. Even as of the 1980s, 43.7 percent of theadult population of Singapore aged 25 or over did not have schooleducation, and high-skill jobs were mainly filled by foreign work-ers.13 These statistics reveal that the Asian development modelbased on a high educational level, paternalistic labor-managementrelations emulating family relations, cooperation and diligencedoesnot fit the case of Singapore. Therefore, the concept of Asian valuestouted by Lee Kuan Yew was created as a political strategy afterachieving economic success.

Immediately following Lee Kuan Yews interview with ForeignAffairs, Kim Dae-jung, then president of the Peace Foundation for theAsia-Pacific Region, made a rebuttal in the same journal under thetitle, Is Culture Destiny?14 Kim Dae-jung claimed, Asia has its owndemocratic tradition just as the West, and Lee Kuan Yew was wrongin claiming that Western-style democracy is not suitable for Asia dueto its unique cultural characteristics. Taking the examples of Men-cius theory of righteous government and Joseons Donghak philoso-phy, Kim emphasized that Asians, too, can achieve democracy byreviving their cultural tradition. He clearly refuted Lee Kuan Yewsposition and stated, Asia should lose no time in firmly establishingdemocracy and strengthening human rights. The biggest obstacle is


13. John Wong, Promoting Confucianism for Socio-economic Development: The Sin-gapore Experience, in Confucian Traditions in East Asian Modernity: Moral Edu-cation and Economic Culture in Japan and the Four Mini-Dragons, ed. Tu Weiming(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996), pp. 285-286.

14. The article by Kim Dae-jung has been translated into Korean and the Korean ver-sion is available on the homepage of the Office of the President, Republic of Korea(http://www.cwd.go.kr/korean/pensident/speech/speech10.php).


not its cultural heritage but the resistance of authoritarian rulers andtheir apologists. Asia has much to offer the rest of the world; its richheritage of democracy-oriented philosophies and traditions can makea significant contribution to the evolution of global democracy.15

The concept of Asian values, therefore, is both metaphysical rhetoricemployed by the West to justify its political, economic and culturaldomination over the non-Western world and an ideological apparatusutilized by politicians of development dictatorships in Asia to per-petuate the status quo. In addition to Lee Kuan Yew, we should alsonote that the late Korean President Park Jung-hee was an avid advo-cate of Korean-style democracy in his prolonged 18-years of rule, andSuharto, the former autocratic President of Indonesia, in power forabout 30 years, was another faithful supporter of Asian values.

Asian Values and Our Future

The concept of Asian values can be compared to a rifle. While it isimportant to distinguish a good rifle from a bad one, what is morecrucial is to define its use and purpose. Although a rifle can be usedto combat robbery, it can also be used by a robber. This is the samewith Asian values. Tradition has both good elements, which shouldbe passed on, and bad elements, which should be ameliorated. (Ofcourse, this applies not only to the traditions of Asia but also to anyother traditions, including those of the West.) It is important to dis-tinguish between the positive and negative aspects of tradition, but itis more necessary to define which traditional elements will be usedfor which purposes. It is imperative to keep a close watch over thevarious attempts to use culture and tradition for dishonest motives.16

15. Kim Dae Jung, Is Culture Destiny?: The Myth of Asias Anti-Democratic Values,Foreign Affairs (November/December 1994).

16. On this issue, see Yi Seung-hwan, Hanguk-ui munhwajeok jihyeong-gwa jeon-tong damnon (Koreas Cultural Topography and Discourse on Tradition), in Jisik-ui segye (The World of Knowledge), vol. 2 (Seoul: Dongnyok Publishers, 1997),pp. 203-226.

DellHighlight

DellHighlight

Such concepts as Asian values, Korean democracy and global-ization, all embody the desired specific intentions of the discussantswhich are meant to influence the audience. The unequal power dis-tribution in real life is reflected in the discursive construction, andpower is packaged in the name of knowledgethe discourse onAsian values is no exception. Therefore, we need to point out theconstruct in the discourse on Asian values and explore how toachieve modernization in independent and self-sustaining capacities.

Culture is a continually evolving entity which must not be regard-ed as constant or static. In this sense, the concept of Asian valuescommits the fallacy of reductionism in which everything is reducedto culture with complete disregard for political and economic foun-dations. Furthermore, it commits the fallacy of metaphysicalism,which views culture as a permanent entity. The media of the pastexaggerated and glorified Asian values whereas the contemporarymedia condemn them. If there is a perspective overstating Asia-spe-cific characteristics, it is likely to be an Orientalist view, a reflectionof Western imperialism, an attempt to extend authoritarian rule, oran expression of narcissistic nationalism. Meanwhile, if there is any-one who dismisses or disregards Asia-specific characteristics, s/hemay be a self-demeaning Westophile, a blind follower of neoliber-alism, or an idealistic citizen of the world.

We should depart from both the extreme tendencies of universal-ism and relativism and carefully regain a balanced point of view. Amore intricate and complex consideration of cultural topography isnecessary for such an endeavor. While Park Chung-hees militaryauthoritarianism posited the slogan of Koreanized democracy andcultural uniqueness, Kim Young-sams regime, which ruined thenational economy in the name of globalization, sloganed the uni-versal market economy in all aspects of governance. In observing theKim Dae-jung governments reaction to the recent financial crisis, itseems that the government has too much faith in the market econo-my just like the preceding Kim Young-sam government. The KimDae-jung administration appears to be too easily compliant withthe IMFs universalist, more precisely, neoliberalist prescription.


Malaysias Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad, during his atten-dance at the summit meetings of fifteen developing countries inEgypt on 11 May 1998, remarked that the Asian crisis was caused notby Asian values, but by international foreign currency speculators.He announced that he would rather live poorly than submit to theIMF.17 Mahathir criticized the neoliberalist globalization trend asrapacious capitalism and contends that the recent economic crisisin Asia has been masterminded by Jewish capitalists in order to holdChinese capitalists in check and by the United States trying to rein inits emerging competitor of the twenty-first century, China. On 8 July1998, former British Primer Minister Thatcher stated that she agreedwith Mahathir on the need for the IMF to establish a monitoring sys-tem in order to prevent the sudden international mobility of financialcapital from causing crises in the national economies.18

While Mahathir points out the rapacity of global capitalism itselfand asserts the necessity of regulating international speculative capi-tal and the responsibility of G7 nations, Kim Dae-jung focuses onKorean capitalisms inability to react to the global capitalist regime.Mahathir promotes market openness,19 but also is vigilant againstinternational speculators, whereas Kim Dae-jung is obedient to theIMF. The Kim Dae-jung government must complete a drastic reformof the big business sector, which weakened the entire economy, andat the same time, against the IMFs demand for neoliberal restructur-ing, it must show a gesture of cool-headed resistance based on a clearconsciousness of reality. The neoliberal prescription, that is, the


17. Munhwa Ilbo, 11 May 1998.18. Mal (Words) (August 1998): p. 73.19. Mahathir is critical of the IMF and the schemes of international financial capital,

but he is not a ultranationalist. He has played a leading role in opening up Asia byinducing direct foreign investment. Through the multimedia super corridor pro-ject, he has made over 100 foreign firms, including Microsoft and Samsung, toinvest in Malaysia, and this is one example of his efforts to promote the internatio-nalization of Asia. While implementing the open-door policy to the maximum, heis watchful of the cunning schemes of international financial capital and the IMFat the same time.

Washington consensus, demands us to be dependent on foreigncapital by privatizing government-owned companies in the name ofrestructuring, by increasing the flexibility of the labor market viamass lay-offs and by reducing social welfare costs. But this restruc-turing plan is only a consensus among international finance capitalowned by advanced capitalist powers, and it intentionally disregardsthe specific conditions of new capitalist economies. The IMF programis not based on universal rationality, but upon an elaborate, strate-gic device created by world capitalist forces for their own motives.The anticipated results of the restructuring include the disintegrationof the social framework, the loss of wage negotiation rights, a deep-ening gap between the rich and the poor, the destruction of the envi-ronment, and subordination of national sovereignty to foreign capital.In particular, the inequality gap, which is deepening with massunemployment and declining wages, has the danger of seriouslyundermining the social integration of new democracies. The neoliber-alist logic of the market solves it all touted by the first world andconglomerates of Korea should be transformed to fit the Korean con-text. Wise state intervention in, and the thoughtful regulation of themarket are necessary for this readjustment. Therefore, the Koreanstate must transform itself into an entity that transcends class andpromotes the political participation of all social strata. In addition,the public and private sectors should become more democratized andmore transparent.


Documents

Asian Value