Hong SeokjunThe Cultural Conflicts and Integration

8/14/2019 Hong SeokjunThe Cultural Conflicts and Integration

1/10

Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

The Cultural Conflicts and Integration

Presented by Hong Seokjun(Faculty of History and Culture, Mokpo University)

I. Introduction

This is an introductory article to promote an understanding of the general

problems of cultural conflicts and integration in a certain socio-cultural context. This

article will first consider general arguments on culture, investigate the relation between

arguments on culture and cultural conflicts, and discuss the relation between culturalconflicts and cultural integration. In its conclusion this article will instead propose a

question: how could cultural integration be made possible?

When interpreted in a broad sense, both academic and practical, culture has

been traditionally understood as a sort of life style. According to this view, a culture of

a specific region can be defined as a unique and original life style that reflects the

dynamics and complexity of a community in the region. A specific culture, however, is

formed through the specific historical experiences and the unique cultural context of a

community, whether formed spontaneously or formed by pressure from outside. Is it

then possible to combine the society and the culture of a region into one concept or

category? In order to answer this question, the differences and the similarities of

cultures should be considered first.

Different cultures around the world have characteristics that are both different

from and similar to each other. If one focuses on the life style of a people in a specific

region, many ruptures and differences can be seen to exist in their specific culture. A

culture, here, is an entity that has diverse and complex characteristics, shares certain

common elements with other cultures and changes itself in a flexible manner according

to the time and context.

Under the current rapidly changing political and economic situation, the

cultures around the world are expected to accelerate their globalization and localization.

Accordingly, there will be formed an environment where promoted intellectual efforts

are made to explain how the culture of a region is formed, transformed, and interpreted

based on the actual daily, specific reality. In this context, it can be said that we need to

come to a perspective with which we can understand the cultural peculiarities and

meanings embedded in the daily life of a cultural community, as well as to be equipped

with the theoretical and practical tools.

1


2/10


II. A Critical Investigation of Cultural Theory and the Issue of the CulturalConflict.

Various arguments have been made concerning culture in general. It seems

now quite difficult or almost impossible to deal with culture itself as a general, fixed

entity, as it has been widely recognized that a culture always changes in relation with

complicated events and situations. Furthermore, there are certain qualitative differences

between normative, ethical messages and a strategic utterance at the practical level. If

one views culture as a fixed entity, or simplifies the cultural dynamics as culture movesfrom the center to the marginal, through a dichotomy that puts ones own culture at the

center and the others in the marginal, the clashes and tensions between cultures and the

dynamic interactions between cultures, such as cultural conflicts, can be easily

overlooked.

Examples can be seen in social situations of the moment in China, Japan, and

Korea. In the case of China, the Sinocentrism and the Han-Barbarians structure has

been set forth for the cultural integration in the process of its modernization, mainly

through economic development. Many Chinese films have been produced and

distributed with the subtle intention of strengthening the pride in the Chinese people of

their Chinese identity and culture. Eat, Drink, Man and Woman 2 is a good example

of this kind of movie, where can be observed a symbolizing process of the nationalist

message, advocating that Hong Kong and Taiwan should be unified with China, despite

their geographical and cultural differences, through Chinese food. In this film is

implied the strong feeling of pride of Sinocentrism and that Chinese people, wherever

they live around the world, should not forget their cultural identity and that China

should be the center of the world.

Japan has been showing a consistent, passive attitude in that it has built

mutually cooperative relations with other countries following its strategy and goal of

modernization, out of Asia, into Europe (). Japans tepidness toward the

establishment of an economic cooperative system among East Asian countries also

demonstrates that Japan holds a very one-directional and exclusive view on the matter,

concerned only with its own interest, but not with equal, cooperative relations with

other Asian countries.

Korea is also suspicious of its own nationalist inclination and a tendency that

emphasizes an exclusive competitive spirit for its national development, not a spirit of

2


3/10


cultural hybridity. Korea, indeed, is well-known as a country that puts its own interest

before everything in establishing cooperative relations with other countries. In this

context, serious consideration should be paid to a remark that says, Korea is soconcerned and obsessed with its own problems, it does not show any interest in the

problems of the neighboring countries and cannot play a role in solving them (Kim

Sangwoo, May 9, 2002).

We are now required to reflect on our own conduct, whether we have been

rather passive in understanding and respecting others cultures, and, at the same time,

have put forth an effort to apply directly-imported experiences to solve cultural

conflicts. We should also ask ourselves whether we are confronting a cultural reality

that stipulates that everyone is devoted to building and maintaining a strong wall toprotect each culture.

The existing perceptions and arguments on culture, in most cases, tended to be

based on ethnocentric linguistic dogmatism without a deep introspection into the

internal view of the specific historical experience and cultural environment of a specific

culture (Kim Gwangeok 1998; Han Kyeonggu 1997). These arguments divided the

world, according to a dichotomy, into the center and the marginal, the dominant and the

subordinate, the high and the low, or the superior and the inferior; categorized all

cultural elements through a binary equivalence; and, consequently, fossilized culture

itself, ignoring the internal diversity of a culture and its flexibility and variableness.

Moreover, many arguments were based on rather subjective interpretations and

assumptions without enough empirical verification, and thus led to unscientific and

illogical arguments on cultural values and worldviews, wanting the concrete contents of

a culture (refer to Kim Gwangeok 1998).

It is very dangerous to follow the simplified logic that divides the world

according to a binary structure. In numerous societies around the world, various

cultures are being practiced in either similar or different forms. Some of the similar

features that can be found in common in different nations and societies across the world

are the notions and practices of the following matters: courtesy to human beings, the

importance of family, respect for honor, the mixture of the normal and abnormal, the

definition and standard for being human, the world order, the movement of the universe,

and the destiny of human beings. What is required now is to identify the concrete

patterns and meanings of those notions and practices, or how those matters are

perceived and practiced in a specific social and cultural context.

In one word, the existing theories on culture can be evaluated as lacking

concreteness, as the substance of culture is ambiguous. A culture of a specific region is

3


4/10


a cultural entity that holds concrete notions on and practices of life, rather than a spatial

or geographical entity. We cannot define a culture simply by drawing lines on a map. It

is very important to recognize that a cultural substance is not grasped through thecombination of the spatial concept and some cultural terms, without a deep

introspection concerning the people and their cultural practices.

There has been an assumption that cultural integration in a region could be

achieved after long-term geographical unification. For a cultural integration, however,

the internal conflicts and tensions in a culture should be examined first. To argue that

there have been consistent positive contacts between two cultures in a geographically

unified region is likely to result in an over- simplified approach to characteristics and

meanings of culture. Through our historical experiences, we should be able to observethat there have been many cases where the internal conflicts caused by cultural clashes

became obstacles to understanding each others culture and establishing cultural

integration. Empirical research on the causes and effects of cultural conflict should be

undertaken also in order to test this observation.

Cultural integration between heterogeneous cultures should be based on cultural

exchanges between them over a long period of time. It should also be noted that the

processes of cultural exchange varies according to each country or ethnic groups

historical experience, both in cultural and social aspects. The differences in the

historical experiences and cultural environments of different nations or societies

indicate differences not only in their systems and institutions, but also in their customs

and their views on the world and the nation. We should be cautious of those attitudes

and arguments that hang on the appellation of a specific culture based on subjective

ideas and emotions without any concrete proof to explain the cultural differences.

We should be also careful not to fall into the error of cultural determinism. In

order to avoid unrefined cultural determinism, we need to focus on cultural

heterogeneity not cultural homogeneity, on the aspect of the cultural conflict not of the

cultural harmony and stability. Cultural integration can be made possible when the

cultural heterogeneity and conflicts are explained through our understanding of the

specific peculiarities and meanings of a culture in the social and cultural context. To

stick to the belief that the politics and economic development of a community is

determined by culture only implies a certain possibility of fallacy.

We should ask ourselves whether we have indulged in a sort of culture-

making as we discuss culture. We should raise the question of whether our diverse

cultural discourses are ignoring an aspect of the cultural conflict and hiding our

worldviews based on our strong faith in cultural homogeneity and different strategies.

4


5/10


Furthermore, the differences between the state and the nation should be addressed. In

some cultures, the state and the nation are considered as an identical category, while in

others the two are perceived as two strictly different categories. The state is perceivedas a political entity that was formed in modern times while, on the other hand, the

nation is understood as an imagined community, a collection of the common

fundamental elements such as language, custom, and religion (Anderson, 1991).

We sometimes tend to confuse culture as a matter of images or ideas through

which we perceive a specific culture and culture as a whole way of life. Those theories

and methodologies that regard the perceptual dimension in the same light with the

actual cultural dimension are given great importance in the field of cultural studies. It

seems, however, not appropriate to simply identify the perceptions or ideas themselvesas culture itself. The system of perceptions or thoughts is an important constituent

element of culture, though it is not the sole determinative element of culture. On that

account, cultural homogeneity and the community spirit are exposed as false discourses

due to their insistence on the original emotion or loyalty for the cultural community.

Thus, we should be concerned as to whether the inclination for the tradition or the

mutual intimacy amongst the members of a community would guarantee the

universality and the infinite expansion of the civil society.

When we discuss cultural conflicts or integration, the fundamental question to

be raised first is: what is culture? Culture has been defined in many ways: some

define culture as the field of art; others define it as religion, language and the system of

thought; it is also defined as customary institutions and the system of rules. Could each

of these concepts of culture be applied separately in explaining a cultural community?

Culture has its meanings only to those who practice it. Therefore, it is very dangerous

to assume a cultural homogeneity or a cultural community from the fact that some

elements or forms are found in common between different cultures (Hong Seokjun,

1998).

This is why it is very important to expose the subjects of and the force behind

the production of theories on culture. For whom and by whom are all the diverse

discourses on culture produced? The arguments and discourses on cultural conflict and

cultural integration usually imply a double consciousness of the subjects fear of

alienation and the subjects pride in the culture. The explanation of, the excuse for, or

the resistance against, democracy, political activities, human rights, democracy,

economic activities and social ethics mystify the concept of culture so that the others

can avoid evaluation through the Western concept, category, or norms of culture. To

achieve this aim, the specific historical processes and experiences of each ethnic or

5


6/10


cultural community should be accounted for.

To further a concrete discussion on the entity of a culture, we need to pay

attention to the various voices of the social movements such as grass-root movementsand other NGO movements that have been spreading widely around the world in recent

days (Appadurai 2000). It is necessary to examine what roles those voices from social

movements and practices take in specific societies, in which context, and what socio-

cultural implications they have. In other words, we should first acknowledge the

coexistence of different cultures in a society, and approach those problems involved in

the cultural conflicts and integration of other cultures as a part of a new social

movement that purports to restore the cultural rights of different groups of people. This

movement, that has aroused a new type of tribalism through establishing a networkbetween different tribes or ethnic groups around the world, can be recognized as a

revival of nationalism. What is remarkable here is that this sort of small-scaled social

movement can be taken as an alternative to confront the logic and the strategy of

globalization and as an attempt to change the center by the marginal.

With the recognition of cultural diversity, we should reflect upon whether we

have been obsessed with the search for a cultural prototype (Hong Seokjun 1998). A

culture can be defined differently according to the unique historical experience and the

cultural environment of a cultural community. The obsession with a cultural prototype

leads us to consider culture as an isolated static entity, to ignore the aspect of cultural

conflicts, and to overlook the aspect of the agency of the cultural subject. The agency

of the subjects that assume and perform certain identities according to their aims can be

explained only through cultural dynamics and practices, not through a certain, putative

prototype or innate nature of the subjects.

To deal with the issues of cultural conflict and integration, we should leave

behind the binary paradigm that divides the world into the center and the marginal. For

a more productive understanding of the dialogic relation between cultural conflict and

cultural integration, we need to overcome the binary system and train ourselves to view

the world in a more objective way. Intellectual reflections upon the internal conflicts of

a culture should be made which do not emphasize some essential or truthful culture

that can be found in common between different cultures, reflections that should

acknowledge that each culture has its unique peculiarities.

Theories of culture should be based on concrete and empirical observations of

culture, as well as homogeneity and heterogeneity in each culture. To suggest the belief

in a universal culture or cultural integration without considering the dimensions of

cultural conflict can raise the essentialist emotions of the subjects who enjoy a specific

6


7/10


culture and can obstruct the establishment of the sense of community or the cultural

integration (Geertz, 1998: refer to Chapter 10). A true cultural integration can only be

achieved by the group of people who are willing to share their diverse andcomplicated cultures beyond the boundaries of the nation or ethnic groups.

III. In Conclusion: Is Cultural Integration Possible?

When dealing with the issue of cultural conflict and cultural integration in the

current situation where globalization is proceeding rapidly, we need to consider one

more thing. When we consider the cultural dimension of the globalization (Appadurai

1996; Beynon and Dunkeley 2000; Short 2001), we should acknowledge theglobalization of culture is not a process of assimilation as in the globalization of the

capital. The economic globalization makes use of a variety of means that can be

absorbed into different societies and assimilate the patterns of economic activities and

products. These means can be now substituted with different discourses on the

sovereignty of the nation, free enterprises, and fundamentalism that reduce the role of

the state (refer to Appadurai 1990, 1996). This argument can be applied in the same

way when dealing with the problems of cultural conflict and integration around the

world.

Thus, those elements that have influenced the formation of the cultural

environment and historical experience of each country, including the tension and

conflict between the state and the civil society, the expansion of markets, the

competition between countries, the states policy on companies, and the relation

between the traditional and the contemporary, can be examined further through concrete

and empirical research that also accounts for the socio-cultural context. The citizens of

each nation should share the recognition of the necessity of empirical research from a

comparative perspective as a part of the specific efforts to search for a paradigm with

which we can overcome simplistic optimism and the belief in omnipotent culture.

Without inspection of the causes of cultural conflict and of the specific measures to

cope with conflict, the discussions concerning cultural integration and a cultural

community will find themselves unfounded.

Culture has come to occupy a core position in our contemporary knowledge

society or knowledge-based society. Without a good use of culture, a society will be

left behind in the sphere of knowledge and information. A thorough and careful

understanding of the causes and the contexts of each cultural conflict, along with

culture, should precede any discussion of the possibility of cultural integration,

7


8/10


especially when the world is experiencing a rapid globalization and, at the same time,

the localization of each society to obtain its cultural originality.

Culture does not exist as a united entity. It is the absence of a proper approachto culture, as well as our superficial and ideative tendency in conceptualizing culture,

that has led us to understand culture as a united, universal entity.

If culture is understood, not as an integrated whole, but as a scene of

confrontations, clashes, and conflicts among very heterogeneous elements, studies of

culture are naturally led to focus on the theories and practices of the issue of cultural

conflict and integration. The cause and the context of the cultural conflict can be

grasped better when inspected not only from the internal cultural angle, but also from

the external political, economic and social perspectives. In other words, when theunique and peculiar historical experience of a specific region are understood enough,

the cause and context of a cultural conflict can be better grasped. For example, a

comparative investigation of different experiences, such as the democratization of South

Korea, the democratization movement against the military authority in Myanmar, the

June Revolution against the dictatorship in the Philippines, and the Peoples Power

movement that expelled the dictator in Indonesia, can open the possibility of a solidarity

between these societies based on their common experiences, and ultimately the

possibility of cultural integration.

To understand culture is not to understand the harmony and stability between

different cultures, but to understand the conflicts and confrontations between them as a

whole. In a word, understanding culture means understanding cultural conflict. A

culture can be grasped only through the conflicts, confrontations, and tensions among

the constituent elements in the culture. The possibility for cultural integration can be

expected only when cultural conflict is thoroughly understood, and when systematic and

concrete discussions are held on cultural integration. Without these, discussions on

cultural integration could well remain as an unfounded discourse.

Nepalese Laws Discriminating Women

Nepal is a country situated between two big countries India and China. The culture of

Nepal is highly dominated by males and male are given much priority in the social life.

The laws of Nepal also reflect the same tradition and culture. Nepal was never ruled by

any foreign invaders, but there was a family rule of Ranas for 104 years. After the

collapse of Rana regime, Nepali people could see democracy for 10 years form 1951 to

1961, then the king declared the multiparty system unsuitable to the country and banned

8


9/10


political parties and took all the powers in his own hand. Two years after, he introduced

party-less Panchayat System. This was a kind of direct rule by the king; however there

were council of Ministers to advise him. These systems never tried to reform thesituation of women in the country, neither they ever thought of empowering women and

give them equal status. Many of the laws still reflect the discriminatory provisions, after

the re-introduction of multiparty democracy in 1990.

The constitution of Nepal, 1990, which is considered to be the outshoot of the popular

movement of 1990, has guaranteed equal rights of men and women in Article 11. In 22

Apr 1991, Nepal ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All forms of

Discrimination Against Women. The Supreme Court of Nepal has also ruled out many

of the discriminatory provisions of the laws. For example, women were not allowed toask for the partition of patriarchal property unless they reached the age of 35 and

remained unmarried. But the Supreme Court had ordered to change such discriminatory

laws to the government. The law was changed and the women are now provided with

the partition in patriarchal property if she is not properly cared of in the house at any

age. But, because of the deep rooted male dominated mentality, the change is not worth

welcoming. According to this, such women have to return the remaining property if she

gets married.1 But men should not return if they are married. . According to the

provision of the Chapter "of Partition" of the Country Code, a married daughter should

not be given the patriarchal property.2

Similarly, the law of inheritance (as mentioned in the Chapter "of Inheritance", in

Muluki the Country Code) has also put women in least priority. It has further

discriminated married and unmarried women. According to the inheritance law of

Nepal, the priority to receive the inherited property is as follows i) husband or wife ii)

son or widow of the son and unmarried daughter iv) son's son v) unmarried daughter of

son's son vi) married daughter of the deceased vii) married daughter's son or unmarried

daughter vii) other relatives.3 Not only that, if a women gets inherited property while

she was unmarried and if she gets married, she has to return the remaining property to

other legal heir, such as the deceased person's son's son etc.

Likewise, the provision regarding women's properties has not given full right to

property to a woman. According to section 2 of the Chapter "Women's Property", a

woma is not permitted to sell out or dispose of her whole property without the consent

of her parents if she is unmarried and of her matured son or unmarried daughter.

Similarly, this section of the Country Code hinders a woman to marry a person whom

1 Section 16 of Chapter "of Partition" of the Country Code (Muluki Ain).2

Ibid, Section 1(a).3 Section 2 of the Chapter "of Inheritance" of the Country Code

9


10/10


she has already given some fixed assets. If she marries such a person, she has to return

such property to her parents or other heir.

According to the law of Nepal, a female cannot accept a foreign employment unless shegets permission of her parents and such parents should be attested by the local authority

such as Village Development Committee or Municipality.4

Thus we see that women are not provided with the proper property right by the laws of

Nepal resulting into making them dependent to the male counterparts. This has been the

great impediment to the development of the society.

The situation of discrimination against women does not exhaust here. The treatment in

everyday life in the villages is far discriminatory. A daughter in law is more likely to be

treated badly if she can not give birth to a son. In many cases people prefer son ratherthan the daughter. Sons are given better education, clothing, food etc while daughter are

not taken much care to be provided with these fundamental rights.

4 Section 12 of Foreign Employment Act.

10

Documents

Hong SeokjunThe Cultural Conflicts and Integration