Social justice, national culture and the tensions of modernisation

袁伟时: 社会公正、民族文化与现代化的张力
Yuan Weishi, "Social justice, national culture and the tensions of modernisation"

Yuan makes an interesting case for the concern with social justice of Chinese intellectuals in the New Culture Movement of just 90 years ago. In the wake of World War I, "their hope was to establish an 'equitable', 'just' society in China, and avoid repeating the disastrous Western road."

He writes toward the end :

"After being tossed about for 80 years, 'social justice' is still quite a remote goal for Chinese people, though the price paid is actually quite unbearable to recall. A more stern fact is, although
'social justice' still needs efforts in the ugly West, Eastern culture in this regard is quite helpless; it is uncertain whether any of the great conceptions of scholars can be put into practice; the most practical path leaves no alternative but to study the record of the various measures Western countries have adopted in this field (taxation, social welfare, relief, insurance...), then select, transplant and improve them according to China's circumstances.

Western countries have not sought reform wisdom from Eastern cultures as Chinese assume; they seek the road of renewal from constant self-criticism. But the determining factor for social progress in Eastern countries and regions is to study the West. An important issue currently faced is further "hooking up internationally" in detailed institutions. The Asian financial crisis fully exposed the serious impediments imposed by traditions which are out of keeping with themarket economy and the rule of law.

In the moral domain, "thoroughly breaking off with tradition" is neither possible nor essential. But, as a modern market economy system is necessary, there is no alternative but to establish the core status of individualism. The modern age may derive from tradition, but only that part of the ideas and norms of tradition which does not obstruct the market economy and democracy can be widely identified with and accepted by the people.

In the modern world, states and nationalities should be equal. Cultures, whether global, or of different nations and peoples, all are internally pluralistic, and it is the citizens who decide. Criteria of choice imposed by others cannot be accepted by the majority for long. Mod­ernization has long been an irresistible global trend with its own value criteria. There are pro­found inherent contradictions between this trend and the medieval national cultures that various countries original had. History, however, is heartless: those who follow the trend of mod­ernisation prosper, while those who oppose it perish. If a national culture does not comply with the current tidal transformation, but becomes a firm fortress resisting foreign culture, it must degenerate into a binding which harms the interests of the state and citizens. The Qing empire was the epitome of this.

The equality of states and nationalities does not mean that different countries are on the same level of cultural development. Scholars of some backward states like to advocate a "national default culture", whipping up narrow nationalism. It withstands the test of time that when a state is at a historical juncture when it urgently needs tostudy foreign advanced culture, indulging in such games is highly deceptive, and can only bring disaster on the nation and the people."