Asian Culture Symposium 2005

Session 2. Asia, Democracy, Region

2-1. Asian Modernity and Changing Living Spaces - Revealing from Korean
Experiences

Presented by Cho, Myungrae (Professor, Regional Development

Department, Dankook University)
Panel: Lee, Jeongok (Professor, Sociology, Daegu Catholic
University)

We had two presentations In this session under the broad subject of "Asia, Democracy
and Region". The two presentations started by taking not of the increasing importance
of Asian region.

Professor Cho reviewed over what the essence of Asian modernity is and in what
process the Asianization of modernity and Asianization of identity is made. He
explained that modernity, in universal aspect, has characteristics like reason, rationality,
humanism, citizen-centerism, progress and liberation and that in representational
aspects it is institutionalized added with regional and historical particularity.

Professor Cho pointed out the problems of post-modernism principle, that is, the
modernity is being taking place at a faster rate and we are overlooking the global
significance of various (with particularity) representations exceeding western
modernity. Then taking an example of Korea, he presents the process of hybrid and
representational establishment of Asian modernity with its own particularities.

The hybrid representation of Asian modernity does not mean a simple mix of west and
non-west but an internal dynamism that creates identity through self conflicts and
reflections. This internal dynamism is the emergence of subjects to take charge of
modernity and their reflexity. He seems confident that the result of this internal
dynamism is appearance of Asian discourse which is particular to Asia and different
from western discourses, from which Asian values can be sought to contribute to the
mankind. Backing his claim, he cited the case of Korean urbanization, in which process
the modernity and discourse of East Asia is being represented.

Meanwhile, professor Lee, mostly agreeing with Cho, discussed about theoretical
limitations of his claims. Lee argued that the Asian modernity and the discussion on

1
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

modernity of Korean cities as a representation of Asian modernity is basically founded

on the western modernity theories, suggesting the necessity to establish Asian identity
based on the unique experience of Asia.

As an alternative, Lee proposes the need to examine Asia historically and in more detail
within "world's capitalist system". That is, he says, it will be necessary to establish a
modernity based on cooperation and mutual reconciliation surpassing the superfluous
modernity (excessive capitalization) found in Asia which is in the periphery of world
capitalism, non-cohesive characteristic of Asia, the experience of ruling and submission
between colonized and uncolonized Asian nations and the struggle for hegemony. Lee
also mentioned that in order to achieve cohesion, that is, to secure common factors, it
would be possible to fulfill representational modernity and hybrid modernity in Asia
when Asia universalizes its experiences as a weak against the west and when Asia form
a new culture out of these experiences.

2-2. Possibilities and Impossibilities of East Asia

Lecturer: Kim, Kibong (Professor, Sociology
Department of Gyeonggi University)
Panel: Lee, Jeongman (Professor, Geography
Department, Seoul National
University), Dong Bing-Yue(Academy of Social
Science, China)

In his presentation, professor Kibong Kim asked questions like how it is possible to
form identity of East Asia as a bridge between globalizaton and nation-states in the 21st
century and what makes this possible or impossible.
Concerning the question of why an East Asian community, professor Kim says it is a
new regionalistic response toward the challenges raised by today's globalization and that
it is an inevitable task of the region. Seeking an answer to this question, he reviews over
the factors that promoted East Asian alliance in the past and the history of the alliance,
based on which he attempts forming a new alliance of East Asia.

He defines the exploration of Oriental identity in Asia in late 19th century and early
20th century as a failed experience and sees the desire to resist the West, the other, that
appeared in the wake of deconstruction of the Chinese empire as the motive behind. As
for the reason of failure, he points out "the paradox of synchronization of

2
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

unsynchronized things", which means Asia attempted to form a regional community

surpassing nation-state in the era of nation-state when nations competed for hegemony
rather than alliance and peace. In addition, he cited as a reason for the failure that Asia
lost the meaning as a regional community as it was reorganized centering around the
Cold War ideology as the West intended due to its defeat in the Pacific War.

He also saw the rising sign of revival of East Asian-centerism in the late 20th century as
the reminder of the similar situation in the late 19th and early 20th century and as a
driving force behind the change, he pointed out the restoration of the meaning of
regional community of East Asia let alone Europe with the end of the Cold War. In other
words, East Asia is regaining its importance as a region and domestically cooperation
and prosperity of Northeast Asia is being recognized as a favorable condition for the
inter-Korean unification. However, there are remaining barriers to this, the remnant of
the Cold War in the Korean peninsula and East Asia, that is, the US' attempt toward
Cold War. Therefore, he says, it is necessary to first "deAmericanize" and "share
context" in order to promote mutual understanding.

Concerning the question wether the conditions are prepared to share the context or
formation of a community based on mutual consent, he presents positive answers in
economic, cultural and peace terms. Economically, an international cooperative system
linking Korea, Taiwan, Japan and East Asia with China at the center has emerged.
Culturally, there is Korean Wave serving as a foundation for mutual understanding
among Korea, China and Japan. Also, in terms of peace, the theory of peace community
based on deAmericanization is being raised. He suggests active establishment of an East
Asian community supported by ASEAN and Asian Peace Alliance.

In the discussion, professor Dong Bing-Yue pointed out that an East Asian community
is already existing in certain form and that it is a more important problem to recognize it
in historical context. He presents two possibilities to expand the similarities among
Korea, China and Japan in historical context: Chinese letters and Confucianism. He
recognizes these two not as something owned by a certain country or as other but as a
precious heritage enabling equal distance relationship among the three nations. In
addition, he agrees that Korean Wave is serving as a good medium for sharing and
compassion. However, he sees that realization of Asian community will take more time
and currently it is meaningful enough to seek ways to fulfill the goal.

3
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

Professor Jeongman Lee discussed from geographical perspective whether formation of

an East Asian community is essential in the context of globalization and seeking its
possibility from other point of view. According to him, East Asia geographically
includes countries beside Korea, China and Japan and it is not appropriate to focus only
on geographical vicinity in defining transnational community. He says the relationship
between countries have problems which may be totally different from the actual
interaction between citizens and thus it could be meaningless to have a concept of an
East Asian community based on geographical conditions. Concering the possibility of
realizing an East Asian community, he pointed out that the global dynamic relations are
subject to changes far more than assumed by professor Kim and therefore it may be
more difficult than expected to deAmericanize or form a tie with Japan or China. In
addition, he argues that ethnocentrism shown in Korea, China and Japan may work as a
barrier against cooperation. Also, he suggests that language, religion, economic network
and political unity to be included in the context share by the East Asian community
along with politics, economics and culture.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the modernity that East Asia has pursued so far is possible to emerge as a
new modernity in the world history. If the new identity is shared, it would be also
possible to establish a regional community. In this sense, the presentation and discussion
has focused on the essence of East Asian modernity as a new modernity and the
modernity to be shared for establishment of a regional community.

However, there are some remaining questions to be further discussed.

1) Will the traditions and historical experiences of East Asia positively contribute to
Asian representation of modernity?
2) Is it possibile within the framework of Western modernity to see the essence of Asian
modernity exceeding the Western modernity? Or is it needed to be established from
bottom within Asian framework?
3) What are the paradoxes of the representation of East Asian modernity now
undergoing and what kind of historical elements (including capitalist system) is it
related with?
4) The Asian modernity created through this will become an alternative to surpass the
Western modernity? Is it precious enough to establish an East Asian community?
5) What are the "contexts to be shared" to form the foundation of East Asian identity?
What is the historical meaning of these contexts that are shared historically? What are

4
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

the obstacles in terms of international politics, ethnocentristic, and geographical terms

to facilitate or hamper sharing of those contexts?

2-3. Asian Democracy and Gwangju

Lecturer: Wattanachai Winichakul (Manager, October 14
Foundation, Thailand)

The paper of Wattanachai Winichakul mainly deals with following three areas.
First, the characteristics of democracy embraced by Asia.
Second, the direction to be pursued by Asian democracy.
Third, the status of Gwanju in the context of Asian democracy.

1) The representation democracy embraced by Asia is a product of the West. Asia

mainly accepted its format and functions which means its democracy is totally different
from that of the West. The problem of Asian democracy lies in the political foundation
surrounding hierarchical structure and centralized power system. In many countries,
authoritarian politics have been developed under the name of democracy. Leaders in
many Asian nations have established strong authoritarian politics under the pretext of
the necessity for a strong leadership.

2) The democracy currently adopted by Asians is liberal democracy or capitalist

democracy, which are not appropriate for realizing social justice. The democracy
become dangerous when it embraces competition system without consideration for
social justice.
3) Many Asian countries are run by irrational practices such as unreasonalbe inheritance
of power and exclusive society from outside.
4) Gwangju will be able to serve as a venue for international negotiation to coordinate
various conflicts, a forum for international meeting to exchange the experience of Asian
democracy and a network for collecting and distributing information on Asian
democracy.

(Critical Point 1)
The development of Asian democracy was delayed because of the weak power of
middle class and liberalist supporters. If these can grow, the procedural democracy will
be expanded.

5
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

What complements the limitations of procedural democracy is social democratic

elements and for this, there should be progress political forces pursuing equality.
The limitations of representation democracy of the West are as follows. The Western
democracy started from republic system and it is not a real democracy but
commissioned democracy which does not allow power to the general public. The power
concentrated to president is much like the power granted to a king and with this system
it is impossible to solve the problem of social bipolorization (pointed by Seungok Park).
In order to overcome this, participatory democracy is a must. The case of electronic
democracy and utilization of the Internet were successful. The Internet is an alternative
mass media, which created a new communicative channel within the civil society
(Youngtae Choi).

Liberal democracy is not successful because of the weak strengh of democracy based on
the power of ordinary citizens. In Korea, an average of two people commit suicide
because of poverty. Democracy should become something that guarantees not only
equal opportunity but also the equality of consequences. It is necessary to realize a
community that cares social dropouts (Seungok Park).

(Critical points 2)
Democracy in Gwangju was in its light in the democratic movements in 1980s.
However, after 20 years, does Gwangju have its own spirit? What did it learn from
history, what is it changing and what vision is it presenting for our democratic future?
Isn't the city remain without changing failing to show a good example of practicing
democracy and reflection? We can not blame the phantom of regionalism (Seungok
Park).

What is the reason? There are still negative notions related with compensation for the
democratic movements in many intellectuals but as for ordinary citizens, they have
almost forgot about it. After the 5.18 movement, the democratization in the 1990s was a
process of revolutionary energy to be incorporated in the political circle.

This questions are related with the questions raised in the discussion after keynote
presentation on the 23nd, for what and with whom Gwangju is attempting to ally? In
what way Gwangju will be linked with Asia and how Asia can accept Gwangju.

6
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

It is necessary to reflect on whether there is socialism and democracy in China and

whether democracy exist in Gwangju. The leading role played by the city in the 1980s
should be now internalized into reflective democracy (Seungok Park).

"Excuse for Gwangju" - There is 5.18 fatigue in Gwangju. Some say that why only
Gwangju citizens? Why we should be asked so much when we ourselves are in a poor
condition socially and economically? (Youngtae-Choi)

If Gwangju is a city of democracy, now a real democracy should be practiced and

realized in the every day life of citizens.

2-4. Modernization, Modernity and Change of Ordinary Living Spaces:

The Case of Apartment Complexes in Korea
Lecturer: Valerie Gelezeau(Assistant
professor, Human sociology department,
Marne-la-Vallee University, France)

Apartment of Korea is a sign to read Koreans' living. Apartments in Seoul have been
constructed in a means to tackle the housing problem cause by population movement to
urban area in the modernization process that able Korea's fast economic growth after
1960s. The construction was realization of Western co-housing theory and adjacent
housing theory in early 20th century reflecting Korea's policy, social, economic and
conceptual conditions. As mass construction of co-housings were encouraged, many
mid and large-sized apartments were made for middle class people for whom
distribution of apartment was considered as a meas of increasing wealth.

Now 30 to 40 years later, the proportion of housing distribution has increased and with
newly appearing limitations of apartments in economic and social terms, the high class
has left apartments. Also there have been many problems arising concerning
reconstruction and remodelling.
Korean apartments are the modern product of the society with rapid economic growth
and dense population and for the related problems, new recognitions and measures are
required.

(Critical points 1)

7
Asian Culture Symposium 2005

Apartment was a means to tackle the problem of population concentration caused by

law agricultural product price, export-driven policies and forced displacement of
farmers led by the Jeong-hee Park administration in 1970s. In planning the city of
Seoul, various factors were considered such as national security, confrontation with
Pyongyang, and forced displacement of farmers from rural areas. Therefore, apartments
were constructed in a very uniform way (floor discussants).

(Critical point 2)
What are the alternative in city planning to consider both Gwangju as a cultural city and
a community to realize human-centered living? Can the life in apartments guarantee a
human-centered life? What are the possible alternatives? Can apartment complex
become like a hometown?
There must be many squires in Gwangju. Destruction of walls and wall painting could
be another alternative.
From the stage of design, Gwangju as a human-centered city should be reflected. And
we expect these efforts to be expanded across the nation.