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 help the understanding of the general problems

of the cultural conflicts and integration in a certain socio-cultural context. The article
will first consider the general arguments on culture, and investigate the relation between
the arguments on culture and the cultural conflicts, and the relation between the cultural
conflicts and the cultural integration. For its conclusion, this article will propose a
question, instead, how the cultural integration would 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 the unique and original life style that reflects the
dynamics and complexity of the 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 its 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 to focus on the life style of the people in a specific
region, many ruptures and differences do 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 flexibly 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 are promoted intellectual
efforts 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
attain a view through 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.
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

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

Various arguments have been made on 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 complicate
events and situations. Besides, there are certain qualitative differences between
normative, ethical messages and a strategic utterance in the practical level. If one views
culture as a fixed entity, or simplifies the cultural dynamics as “culture moves from the
center to the marginal,” through a dichotomy that puts one’s own culture at the center
and the other’s in the marginal, the clashes and tensions between cultures, the dynamic
interactions between cultures such as cultural conflicts can be overlooked.
Examples can be taken from the 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 through, mainly, economic development. Many of the Chinese films
have been produced and distributed with the subtle intention to uplift 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 movies, where can be observed a symbolizing process
of the nationalist message, which advocates that Hong Kong and Taiwan should be
unified with China despite their geographical and cultural differences, through the
Chinese food. In this film is implied the strong pride of the Sinocentrism that the
Chinese people, wherever they live around the world, should not forget their cultural
identity and China should be the center of the world.
Japan has been showing a consistent, passive attitude in that it has built mutual
cooperative relations with other countries following the strategy and goal of its
modernization, “out of Asia, into Europe (脫亞入歐).” Japan’s tepidness toward the
establishment of the economic cooperative system among the 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 nationalist inclination and the tendency that
emphasizes the exclusive competitive spirit for its national development, not the
cultural hybridity. Korea, indeed, is well-known as a country that puts its interest before
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

everything in establishing a cooperative relation with other countries. In this context, a

serious consideration should be paid to a remark that says, “Korea is so concerned and
obsessed with its own problems, it does not show any interest in the problems of the
neighboring countries and cannot play its role in solving them” (Kim Sangwoo, May 9,
2002).
We are now required to reflect on our own conducts, whether we have been
rather passive in understanding and respecting others’ cultures, and, at the same time,
have put forth our efforts to apply the directly imported experiences to solve the cultural
conflicts. We should also ask ourselves whether we are confronting a cultural reality
that everybody is devoted to building and maintaining a strong wall to protect each
culture.
The existing perceptions and argements on culture, in most cases, tended to be
based on the ethnocentric linguistic dogmatism without a deep introspection into the
internal view on the specific historical experience and cultural environment of a specific
culture (Kim Gwangeok 1998; Han Kyeonggu 1997). These arguments divided the
world according to the 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 the
cultural elements through the 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, thus led an unscientific and illogical
arguments on cultural values and world views, 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 the binary structure. In the 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 on the following matters: the courtesy to human beings, the
importance of family, the respect for honor, the mixture of the normality and
abnormality, the definition and standard for being human, the world order, the
movement of the universe, and the destiny of human being. What is required now is a
work 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 the
concreteness, as the substance of culture is ambiguous. A culture of a specific region is
a cultural entity that holds the concrete notions on and practices of life, rather than a
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

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
the combination of the spatial concept and some cultural terms, without a deep
introspection on the people and their cultural practices.
There has been the assumption that a cultural integration in a region could be
achieved after a 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 a too simplified approach to characteristics and
meanings of culture. Through our historical experiences, we should be able to observe
that there have been many cases where the internal conflicts caused by the cultural
clashes became obstacles in understanding each other’s culture and establishing a
cultural integration. An empirical research on the causes and effects of a cultural
conflict should be preceded also in order to test this observation.
A cultural integration between heterogeneous cultures should be based on
cultural exchanges between them for a long period. It should also be noted that the
processes of cultural exchanges vary according to each country or ethnic group’s
historical experience both in the 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 are bent on the “appellation” of a specific culture based on
subjective ideas and emotions without any concrete proofs to explain the cultural
differences.
We should be also careful not to fall into the error of the cultural determinism.
In order to avoid the unrefined cultural determinism, we need to focus on the cultural
heterogeneity not the cultural homogeneity, on the aspect of the cultural conflict not of
the cultural harmony and stability. The 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 the economic development of a community is
determined by culture only does imply certain possibility of fallacy.
We should ask ourselves whether we are indulged in a sort of “culture-making”
as we discuss culture. We should raise a question on whether our diverse cultural
discourses are ignoring the aspect of the cultural conflict and hiding our world views
based on our strong faith in the cultural homogeneity and different strategies.
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

Furthermore, the differences between the state and the nation should be concerned. 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 perceived
as a political entity that was formed in modern times; 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 themselves
as culture itself. The system of perceptions or thoughts is an important constituent
element of culture, though, it is not a solely determinative element of culture. On that
account, the 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 concern 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 the cultural conflict or integration, the fundamental question
to be raised first is what “culture” is. 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
thoughts; it is also defined as a 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 the theories on culture. For whom and by whom all the diverse
discourses on culture are produced? The arguments and discourses on the cultural
conflict and the cultural integration usually imply double consciousness of the subject’s
fear for the alienation and the subject’s pride in the culture. The concepts of culture as
the explanation on, the excuse for, or as the resistance against the political activities,
human rights, democracy, economic activities and social ethics were introduced to avoid
the evaluation through the Western concept, category, or norms of culture. To achieve
this aim, the specific historical processes and experiences of each ethnic or cultural
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

community should be accounted.

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 the grass-root
movements and other NGO movements that have been spread widely around the world
in recent days (Appadurai 2000). It is necessary to examine what roles those voices
from the social movements and practices take in a specific society, 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 conflict and integration of other cultures as a part of
the 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 network between different tribes or ethnic groups around the world can be recognized
as a revival of the 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
the globalization, as an attempt to change the center by the marginal.
With the recognition of the cultural diversity, we should reflect 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 the cultural dynamics and practices, not through a certain,
putative prototype or innate nature of the subjects.
To deal with the issues of the cultural conflict and integration, we should get
over the binary paradigm that divides the world into the center and the marginal. For a
more productive understanding of the dialogic relation between the cultural conflict and
the cultural integration, we need to overcome the binary system and train to view the
world in a more objective way. Intellectual introspections on the internal conflicts of a
culture should be made which do not emphasize “essential” and “truthful” culture that
can be found in common between different cultures and acknowledge that each culture
has its unique peculiarities.
The theories on culture should be based on concrete and empirical observation
on culture, and homogeneity and heterogeneity in each culture. To suggest to promote a
common culture or the cultural integration without considering the dimension of
cultural conflict can raise the essentialist emotions of the subjects that enjoy a specific
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

culture and obstruct the establishment of the sense of community or the cultural
integration (Geertz, 1998: refer to Chapter 10). A true cultural integration can be
achieved by the group of “people” who are willing to share their diverse and complicate
cultures beyond the boundaries of the nation or ethnic groups.

III. In Conclusion: Is the Cultural Integration Possible?

When dealing with the issue of the cultural conflict and the cultural integration
in the current situation where the globalization is proceeding rapidly, we need to
consider one more thing. The globalization of culture takes a different shape from it of
the capital. While the economic globalization make use of a variety of means that can
be absorbed into different societies and assimilate (refer to Appadurai 1990, 1996). This
argument can be applied in the same way when dealing with the problems of the
cultural conflict and integration around the world.
Thus, those elements that have influenced in 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 market, the competition
between countries, the state’s policy on companies, and the relation between the
traditional and the contemporary, can be examined further through a 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 the empirical research from the
comparative perspective as a part of the specific efforts to search for the paradigm with
which we can overcome the simplistic optimism and 문화만능주의. Without
inspection on the causes of the cultural conflict and on the specific measures to cope
with the conflict, the discussions for the cultural integration and a cultural community
will find themselves unfounded.
Culture has come to occupy the 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 on the causes and the contexts of each cultural conflict, along with
culture, should be preceded to the discussion on the possibility of the cultural
integration, especially when the world is experiencing a rapid globalization and, at the
same time, the localization of each society to obtain the cultural originality.
Culture does not exist as a united entity. It is the absence of a proper approach
to culture, as well as our superficial and ideative tendency in conceptualizing culture,
that have led us to understand culture as a united, universal entity.
Gwanju Human Rights Folk School 2004

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

confrontations, clashes, and conflicts among very heterogeneous elements, studies on
culture are naturally led to focus on the theories and practices on the issue of the
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 the
unique and peculiar historical experience of a specific region is accounted enough, the
cause and context of a cultural conflict can be grasped better. For example, a
comparative investigation on 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 people’s power
movement that expelled the dictator in Indonesia, can open the possibility of the
solidarity between these societies based on their common experiences, and ultimately
the possibility of the 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 the cultural conflict. A
culture can be grasped only through the conflicts, confrontations, and tensions among
the constituent elements in the culture. The possibility for the cultural integration can
be expected only when the cultural conflict is thoroughly understood, and systematic
and concrete discussions are made on the cultural integration. Without these,
discussions on the cultural integration could well remain as an unfounded discourse.