Chuck Bazerman
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 28 May 96 06:59:30 -0500
From: Peter Smagorinsky <psmagorinsky who-is-at uoknor.edu>
To: Charles Bazerman <bazerman who-is-at humanitas.ucsb.edu>
Subject: Re: east/west
Chuck, thanks for your thoughts on this, which I think would provide a good
perspective on this question to xmca. I tried to allude to my own questions
about Mahathir's motives in my post, although somewhat obliquely. I've
never travelled to that part of the world and so only know it through my
reading, the texts of which are themselves agenda-driven. My purpose was
primarily to question the assumption that the middle class whites who make
up the xmca subscribership can really determine what's best for everyone,
which was a thread (picked up by Arne) that I saw coming through the whole
language discussion and discussion of coersion. Mahathir himself may be a
questionable character who's primarily interested in maintaining his own
position of power. This does not mean that his remarks on the fundamental
differences between east and west are invalid. I see them played out in my
classrooms, and wonder what the implications are for the sorts of classrooms
envisioned on xmca.
Peter
At 12:48 PM 5/27/96 -0700, you wrote:
>I am replying off-line for now. depending on the discussion, I may
>repost to t xmca, or may not.
>Chuck
>
>Peter,
> Since I am a bit familiar with the situation and history of
>Malaysia, let me suggest some ways to think about Mahathir's speech and
>the columnist's use of it.
> First, concerning the column--could it not be seen simply as
>framed within the familiar debate over whether U.S. economic policy ought
>to have a human rights component, or we ought to encourage all
>multi-national economic enterprises follow their own course whether they
>violate norms and policies that are not accepted within our own borders.
>The move of invoking cultural relativism is in such cases a very thin
>screen for preferring a certain version of unfettered large corporate
>capitalism as the determiner of international values and international
>law.
> Second, in order to speak credibly on a subject one has to have
>some recognizable history of understanding and acting upon the principles
>one is espousing. Thus Singapore was taken by some as speaking
>credibly on the disciplining of children and other forms of unruliness
>and potential social disorder. They have a history of espousal and
>action in this area, of which we all hear from time to time. You can make
>up your mind about that one. Also we might say that Singapore might
>credibly make statements about economic development--which they have--and
>also about providing economic safety nets, full employment,
>multi-cultural identities, and other social issues. Singapore might also
>make statements, as it has, about the virtues and need for Confucian
>values (although internal local reception is a complex matter)
> Malaysia might speak
>credibly on economic development, advancing cultural hegemony and
>reversing the historical economic and power relations of different
>ethnicities, Islamization while containing an expanding radical Islam
>movement, and so on. But human rights would hardly be a matter on which
>Mahathir could speak credibly given the history of government policies
>since independence thirty years ago.
> Look into Mahathir and Malaysia's record. And then ask yourself
>whether Mahathir might not be seeking a free hand to create economic
>deals with large multi-nationals, to the benefit of a small elite wrapped
>in ethnic and religious identity.
>Chuck
>
>On Mon, 27 May 1996, Peter Smagorinsky wrote:
>
>> I read an interesting column today in the business section of the Dallas
>> Morning News. Jim Landers reported on a speech by Malaysia's Prime Minister
>> Mahathir bin Mohamad in Washington last week in which Dr. Mahathir argued
>> that if an Asian parliament threatened to impose human rights sanctions on a
>> European country, the West would regard the Asian country as crazy. He also
>> questioned the arrogance of the Western media: "There are democracies where
>> political leaders are afraid to do what they know is right. Indeed, they
>> are quite literally oppressed by their own media, the way people in feudal
>> societies are oppressed by their rulers, knowing their unfortunate situation
>> but not daring to raise their voices against an established institution, to
>> curb its excesses." According to the article Mahathir has been rebutting
>> Western critics of Asian politics since 1981. Among his argument is that
>> Asian societies value order and harmony over freedom of expression, while
>> Westerners value freedom of expression and other individual liberties above
>> all else. He argues that these values are political and are used to justify
>> political regimes.
>>
>> My own interest in this article concerns its application to schooling.
>> Generally speaking, I'd say that the orientation to order and harmony
>> characterizes the Asian students I've taught over the years (keeping in mind
>> that "Asian" includes multiple ethnicities, including groups that have
>> ruthlessly engaged in war with one another over the centuries). I'd say it
>> also describes some non-Asian cultural groups within the US. The
>> orientation to order would seem to me to work against the ideals expressed
>> on xmca over the past few months in the discussion on coerciveness--I would
>> say (without sounding patronizing, I hope) that such students view the
>> constraints of order as *facilitative* in the sense described by Valsiner.
>> Yet Western discussions of how education should ideally be would appear to
>> involve the same imperialism that Mahathir finds in American international
>> politics--imagine, for instance, how we'd respond if a Malaysian lectured us
>> on the need for greater teacher and administrative control over Western
>> schools.
>>
>> Back to the article: Some important quotes: "Dr. Mahathir has led Malaysia
>> with a firm hand for a long time. What Dr. Mahathir and the rulers of
>> Singapore, Indonesia, and China have to back their claims of "Asian-style"
>> representative government is economic success." One perspective on Mahathir
>> is that, by defending "order", he keeps himself firmly in power--yet this
>> may be a Western perspective on a different type of society. A second point
>> is that, in some way, the arrangement "works." But then so did the
>> antebellum American South.
>>
>> I find these questions so interesting because I see no immediate way to
>> think about them. Any thoughts?
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Peter Smagorinsky
>> University of Oklahoma
>> College of Education
>> Department of Instructional Leadership and Academic Curriculum
>> 820 Van Vleet Oval
>> Norman, OK 73019-0260
>> office phone: (405)325-3533
>> fax: (405)325-4061
>> psmagorinsky who-is-at uoknor.edu
>>
>>
>
>
>
Peter Smagorinsky
University of Oklahoma
College of Education
Department of Instructional Leadership and Academic Curriculum
820 Van Vleet Oval
Norman, OK 73019-0260
office phone: (405)325-3533
fax: (405)325-4061
psmagorinsky who-is-at uoknor.edu