🚀 go-pugleaf

In <472p1i$28v@news.ios.com> davey@soho.ios.com (David Yang) writes: 
>
  If you look at the Confucian classics,
>or the scholarly commentaries through the ages a very different
picture 
>emerged.  Confucian values belittle the importance of the merchant,
true,
>but that was a rather primitive agrarian value based on some mistaken
notions
>about productivity, and very different from the real reason why
historically
>Chinese dynasties had discouraged foreign trade.  The real reason was
more
>political than cultural - the state could not control foreign trade 
>effectively and it was not willing to let private citizens gain too
much 
>power.
>
>I agree much of the so-called Confucian values are no more than mere
tradi-
>tional values the world over.  Yes Confucianism is about social
hierarchy,
>yes it's more about responsibilities than about rights.  But it's not
at all
>about the "pre-eminence of the state over the individual", and its
emphasis
>on the bureaucracy is not some proto-socialist big-government
mechanism but
>rather as a mechanism to check the excesses of the emperor. 
Confucianism
>was adopted as the official state philosophy in the Han Dynasty and in

>the process a heavy dose of Legalism - which does stress the absolute
power
>of the state over the individual - was mixed in.  Throughout history
orthodox
>Confucianism - which stresses private inter-personal relationships,
and the
>perfection of the individual personality - flourishes in the private 
>academies which were periodically shut down by the state.  All this 
>probably doesn't make much of a difference with regards to the
Confucian
>heritage claimed by the East Asian states today, but I would just like
to
>point out that Confucianism should not be viewed as a monolithic
entity 
>devoid of internal tensions.  And I suppose that the bottom line is
that cul-
>tural factors are problematic because culture can be so easily twisted
to
>suit whatever practical contingencies.
>
>David
>
>
I am not sure that we should discount culture so much.  Yes, the study
of culture can be twisted to mean everything as far as studying
politics is concerned, but so can almost all data.  Culture, however,
remains to be an extremely important concept in political theory and
political science.  For example:

1.  Robert Putnam of Harvard University recently concluded that history
and social interaction does make a difference as far as Italy is
concerned--those italian states that had a history of pluralism had
higher degrees of economic performance while those that did not didn't.
The cultureof the different italian states did make a difference.

2  Samuel Huntington concluded in his book The Third Wave, and another
article in Foreign Policy, that culture does matter as far as
perceptions is concerned, and that in order to understand international
politics and the study of democratization, we must be willing to
understand the internal dynamics of transformation, which includes an
understanding of culture and perceptions.

3 Adam Przeworski and Henry Kitschelt have stated that the study of
democratization and political/economic development is also a study of
internal elites, elite perceptions, the structure of elite power, and
the "instituttionalization of uncertainty".  In order for a state to
politically develop, it must have a culture of interaction, consensus,
etc--otherwise political development and democratization may take a
long time..


Many have argued in the past that political development is simply
dependent on education, economic growthm etc, but evidence has shown
that these variables alone are insufficient to help a nation
democratize or develop.  An understanding of culture is important as
well.

In the Confucianism example that was given, what is more important to
understand is that confucianism was a front for authoritarianims, but
also a front for economic concentration of wealth and obedience on the
part of state subjects.  This allowed for wealth accumulation, which
later, it seems, transformed into vestiges of democracy.  You will
notice hiowever, that many of these same states have a difficult time
avoiding problems with internal corruption, etc.  IMO, until these
cultures change into more pluralistic ones (which will take some time),
corruption and full participation of all citizens may take some; even
Japan has had problems.

Sean McKitrick