Western ideology has dominated Asia for quite some time that even the mere acceptance of this notion could be considered as being submissive to this claim. Ideologies are hard to battle especially ones that have been instilled in the minds of more than a few generations ago. But accept it we shall or not, ideals from the West have come to take their place in the formation of what we see as the "Modern of Contemporary Asia". Before we go on to see how Asia today has come to be, let us see first the origin of having such conditions.
First let us identify what is the West and what is Asia. The immediate answer to this would be the west is comprised of the Americas and the European continent and the East would be of Africa and Asia. But what is Asia? Have you ever wondered why this continent has been called as such? To put it bluntly, the name Asia is already a manifestation of the West imposing their "mandated power over the world because the term Asia was a European word for everything across the Eastern borders. We then see here that the identity of the Asian continent has become a minor entity to that of the West. It is here in this global manifestation that we see the societal impact of subordination of having the "other being" as it is called. The other being is one that is identified as being unable to exist without the presence of the subject. This is then called objectification. What such a name then tells us is that Asia would not exist without the presence of the West. But is this an absolute truth? It would be a truth in partial ways such as the names, but it is not true that the existence of the West is what makes Asia as it is for this part of the world has been able to bring about rich cultures and civilizations even before being given such a collective term, even before the rise of the West.
But as strong as the cultures it has brought out may be, there are some that sprung from it as products of the Western effort of "civilizing" the world. This then produced nations caught in an identity crisis as part of their history. A very strong manifestation of such a case could be seen in the Philippines where there is not much a sense of identification within the peoples of the nation. But given the strength that the other nations in the region have exuded, it might be a mistake to generalize on the Western term of "oriental" as the main identity of Asia.
Today, Asia-- the term continually being used out of lack of other appropriate terms-- is slowly catching up with the Western motif of development with its integration of ideas: liberal front and culture mixed into one. In many contemporary Asian nations, this proves to be an effective method for fostering development such as the case of Singapore, Japan, and South Korea. But for many as well, it is hard to find the balance between the cultural and the developmental constructs that they need. Such, I think is the case of the Philippines where its historical essence tries to meet with its cultural and developmental identity.
From how I see it, such a balance is not a impossible task. The only thing that makes it impossible is the idea of not knowing how to find the delicate mixture of which liberal ideas from the west to accept and which to reject. In short, there needs to be a critical analysis of what the nation's socio-political and economic culture and environments are in order to be able to correctly identify what Western ideas might be helpful in improving the country's state. But as such, if this step is not achieved, then the balance might prove to be difficult for a nation to achieve. It is not to say that the Western ideology is the answer to the developmental problems of the Asian nations. This is only to say that because the ideas of the old Asia are not applicable to the current times of the West's domination, that an integration or adaption of their ideas is needed in order for the nations to survive.
As such acceptance integration occurs, the liberation of ideas from the enlightenment brings us the age of Modernity. we mainly think of modernity as having something new or something updated. This is quite correct because the term does imply new ideas. Modernity has brought to us, as a product of the age of enlightenment, breakthroughs in the realms of science, social ideas, and economic thrusts. On these three levels, modernity has proved to be of useful existence. One characteristic of this age is that there has come to be a fancy on the ideas presented by science and capitalism as modes of development. These two combined together have brought a new mode of production to societies that have helped increase their capacities for development.
A personal comment I have on this ideology would be the fact that its basic tenets or bases are mainly or purely that of Western thinkers. simply put, it focuses more on the developmental ideas of the west and little or none at all on what was occurring in the "Eastern" nations at that time. What does this then say about the ideology? It brings to the table the argument that the theories or ideas arising from this school of thought are not of universal application. Perhaps this is one reason why it is hard for many Asian nations to find the balance with the integration given their histories and all.
A good example of this would be the implementation of democracy and capitalist and Marxist ideologies in Asian nations. I think that we will find in current settings that democracy has not always proven to be the best for there exists much diversity in the realm of political and cultural history. Likewise, the ideals of capitalism and Marxism would work or not work for certain nations. For example, the socialist/Marxist ideal would work for countries such as China or Russia given their culture, but not for the experience of Singapore of Japan. It is then here that we see that the patterns of development presented by the Western image of society are predictive of their own development, but it does not say much on that of the East.
One ideology though, that has managed to make a breakthrough on all levels I think is that of Feminism as it tries to take on the societal and historical significance of women. But the problem that persists in this edition of the ideology is that it has not yet made relevance to women of other races other than the "White women". In the latter movement of the ideology though, we see how Feminism has tried to expand itself on the appropriations of the scope of its perspective. It later included in its advocacies fighting for equal rights of men and women across all nations, radical thinking among women, fighting against oppression of women of color, and many others.
From how I see it then, this particular Western ideology could be one that could be easily embraced by Asian nations into their culture as a common identification they share is the oppression of women on differing grounds. this proves to me to be one avenue wherein a universal ideal has been shared, thus a portal wherein globalization may have taken place as well.
Globalization, the product of modernity otherwise known as the borderless state of the world, takes place in the socio-political and economic sphere. In perspective, this situation is one that has for the most part brought the integration of ideas into a productive one especially in the conditions of globality and locality. This interconnectedness effect on nations has been made easier by the modes of communication. But what seems to be the problem with this is that as the globality of ideas increases the implication they have on localities increases as well in that the global ideals replace that of the local ones-- even the traditional ones that give these said locals their identities. Such is then that we see another side-effect that is endo-colonialism.
As it is, colonial mentality is thriving enough that it has succumbed many nations into the mentality of the "object". This is much evident in the case of the Philippines where the fascination for foreign identity still thrives as a product of the colonial world it has lived in. With such a supplementary mentality then, how else could the identity of the indigenous be preserved? I think that in this case, it would take the part of the media manipulation to be done given the power it has over the masses in this country.
In effect, the challenges of modernity and globalization have given birth to a new ideology called post-modernity. It is here then that we see a more complex figure of what is the identity of a nation or a person as defined by his society . In this ideology, there has come to be the rise of pop culture and media power as communication has replaced production as the mode of development. It is also here where the aforementioned "new feminism" has taken place.
On pop-culture or formally known as "Popular Culture", it seems that there has come to be a discriminating outcome of society internally where this form of culture has come to be considered as a "low" form of culture given that it is the masses who has defined what it is. It is also being termed as inappropriate culture for identifying a nation in that it does not embody the essence of the past. In the defense of this arising culture, such criticism could only be taken with rebuttals that it can be considered as one that could be used to identify a nation for the simple reason that it is the masses that has given birth to it thus making it their identity and the majority of the nation's. A positive side to this arising culture would be that it could be a new mode for communication or transmitting ideas of the old or ideas of new generations so that more would be able to understand what situations are ongoing.
One method of communication for this new cultural brow today is the media. As mentioned before, the media can either be a tool for disaster or development depending on what kind of political culture or value they have. In the case of the Philippines I think it has the potential to do both. But with its current state, I am hoping that it lean toward the side of communal development and slowly shed its stronghold on its destructive path in political play. Another main tenet of post-modernism is the decline of old public ideologies where these are replaced by the rise of the said pop culture.
With all the new ideas it has presented, still I wonder how would these be applicable to the state of the Philippines in this country's venture to development? Is it in a complete state of post-modernity or are parcels of it left behind in the state of colonial mentality? Or perhaps, it is in a complete state of post-colonialism.
No comments:
Post a Comment