Do you believe that there is such a thing as "western culture" and "eastern culture" (alternatively, "west/east-ern values")? I find that most Malaysians use the terms with such currency, it seems we take for granted that there are such things.

What does Western culture promote? Many would say "liberalism", "human rights". In the West you can demand anything. Sue everyone for anything. Buy designer clothes for your dog, elope with the same sex, marry your mother, etc.
Do you truly believe that this is so? I also find that a handful of those who nurture these views often spit out the words "human rights" or "liberal/western democracy". Yes, I mean SPIT. They don't just say, they eject the words. It seems that the terms cannot be mentioned without the emotional baggage of the Israel-Palestinian conflict burning in their hearts.

Anyway, back to the terms "western/eastern culture".
If you believe in such a thing, have you ever noticed that in the West there are groups that are strongly religious and conservative? None of these groups would consider themselves as living the "eastern culture" though. No, they see themselves as Westerners.

So who are they?

You could speak of the Christian right (conservatives). They want all marriages to stay heterosexual, families to respect their elders and believe in God, discourage condom distribution (esp Vatican and supporters), "curing" of gay teenagers, girls to dress decently (depending on how much materialism/prosperity Gospel is practised), no premarital or extramarital sex, anti-abortion, absolutely despise the Theory of Evolution, etc.

Then there are political conservatives who want less rights for refugees, immigrants (esp illegal), more jobs for locals, pressure gov for less dependence on foreign labour, less political interference in foreign affairs, harsher penalties to discourage crime (often blamed on minorities) etc .

In light of the large spectrum of views in the West, don't you think it is misleading to speak of Western culture as if it is all homogenous?

I am quite convinced that this concept of East vs West "culture"/"values"was first thought up by Asian political leaders to stir up some nationalistic pride, to create an imaginary divide between "us" and "them", to blunt or dismiss altogether criticism from human rights commentators that naturally thrive in liberal democratic countries (not a "democracy" that employs force to arbitrarily remove critics).

Don't you think the real dichotomy (division) in opinions is more accurately "conservative" vs "liberal", and not "east" vs "west"?
Don't you think that the people normally accused of poisoned with "Western" ideas are really people with liberal motivations and that those normally praised to be a true "Oriental" are really conservatives (albeit often a very misinformed and couldn't-be-bothered-to-challenge-their-own-notions-of-right-and-wrong kinda conservative? yes, not a very good kinda conservative).

Do you agree?

^ I personally believe that there are differences between Eastern and Western cultures. This is mainly I believe because of the influences of Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism. But I agree with you that these "differences" are not as big as its made out to be and that politicians do use this mentality for their own benefit. Mahatir was a an avid user of this.

Overall I agree with what you say.

Would you care to give me some examples? I'm not baiting, just want to know what cultural differences you refer to.

It mostly refers to religious differences, given Asians tend to be multi-religious in racial make-up.

It also refers to regional & cultural differences, which can be dissimilar as well.

All in all, Eastern values usually refers to loyalty, piety to parents, close bond with family, awareness on the importance of culture & tradition etc.

Not all Malaysians are loyal, close to their families and traditional. And to behave that way, they don't have to have watched too much American TV programmes or have studied abroad either. Some people just don't have love or are selfish or are mean.

By contrast there are some "Westerners" who are all of the above. Especially those who grew up in country areas, the very old-fashioned or very religious types.

So where did we get the concept that in the East, we are necessarily better to our families than "Westerners"?

Of course if you look at specifics you will always find some that will be like the other and vice versa, but what we saying here is generally.

Having been born in Malaysia and lived in Aust I have experienced both cultures, initially coming to Australia was a big cultural shock. The mindset and way of thinking is different, education system is different. In Asian cultures we are generally taught to follow and be conformist, as a result Asian students are very good and do well at school when the information is presented to them. Western cutures though the student is expected to think for themselves and are encouraged to be themselves. There are pros and cons with both systems.

In my experience though both cultures are loyal and close to their family, they just express it in different ways. Asian cultures are more obvious, Western generally more subtle.

I think, to begin with, the problem with my response is the use of the term "culture" when we're really disputing moral/ethical values. This really confuses the discussion. I should have stuck to the terms used in the title of this thread.
When Asian politicians and their media disseminators speak disparagingly of "budaya" Barat, they're really criticising the so-called values of the West, not the culture. I made the mistake of borrowing directly the term "budaya" when its true meaning has been twisted beyond recognition.

No this thread is not about using chopsticks vs using fork and knife.
I'm really asking how many of us here think that developed Western countries have a uniform code of ethical/moral values ("Western values") that are different, and perhaps even opposed to our so-called "Eastern values".

These "Western values" are purportedly the result of a white culture that is overly-permissive.
For I often hear some Malaysians speak of unlimited freedom/liberties in the West, that the West loves "freedom" so much that their society pays for this stupidity. What they don't often add however is some evidence of this "unlimited freedom".
What they also forget to add is: if Western values contribute to all the social problems in the West, what is the cause of social ills in the East? Eastern values? Or the effects of modern living in a globalised world?

I agree that the West values presonal freedom more then the East. With a persons right to be able to do as he pleases within the law, there is a higher chance of antisocial behaviour. However with the East's lesser priority on freedom and higher expectation to conform, it leaves the Eastern cultures more prone to being dominated by govnts and individuals. Even looking at Malaysia and Singapore, both countries have been dominated by govnts and individuals.

Otherwise I think both East and West have basically similar values.

Frankly speaking, i don't even think we asians have successfully articulated what the hell Asian Values are, let alone understand what are the core Western Values to attack in the first place.

I just have the notion that many asians are unable to observe ourselves objectively... for instance... many so-called 'conservative asians' can't describe how sex feels like while a westerner can basically articulate that fleeting moment in paragraphs and paragraphs in a lurid novel... most asians just say 'it happened'...

At a fundamental state, i just happen to think that asians don't know their values very well... most live and react like creatures of instincts, with a bias for supernatural explanations and mysterious conjointedness with the spirit world around them (Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Taoism, indigenous polynesian and malay cultures all relate very well to spirit world). Whereas more and more Europeans are educated to be cynical and skeptic about the world around them.

When a european talks about freedom, they are keen to come to a definition of what freedom constitutes of both politically and economically. They could go to arms for the freedom of another person or state.

For the asian, freedom is all about instinctual freedoms to eat, sleep, spend, and generally be left alone to indulge in his/her various vices. they couldn't give a $hit if another person enjoyed the same type of freedom as they do. neither are they capable of analyzing and articulating their freedom in a economic political context, instead, they are likely to rely on religious texts for their freedoms. And their freedoms tend to entail a withdrawal into their own universe and self, rather than an outward aggressive display of liberty and freedom of expression.

So juz cuz the west is able to articulate their freedoms more explicitly, the easterner jumps on these articulated notions and bash it. But the truth is, the form of 'unbridled' freedom articulated and practised in the West entails much more restraint in behavior, thought and speech pattern on the average westerner than the easterner can muster. How many politically correct statements tend to come from the lips of an easterner compared to the westerner? Not that many if u have been to enough swanky dinner parties.

With so much articulation in the west about liberalism and freedom, it's so damn easy for the average easterner to retract into his inner world of religious/philosophical instinctual thought patterns and pick and disregard whatever aspect of western values to distinguish it from values which he has decidedly termed as asian values, when all such notions are commonly shared by the human race anywayz.

Now, as a contrast to the exceedingly political correct animal that is the western politician, isn't the asian politician the ultimate instinctive animal? Great survivors and longish term leaders.. aren't we??

Hope that helps the discussion?

"western culture" and "eastern culture"....just like UK spoken english and english spoken in the rest of the world..
Times have changed!!!!!!

Not really. The idea of East vs West, or Orient vs Occident, was first thought up by European colonialists. They considered their own culture superior to all other cultures, so they identified their own culture as uniquely Western or Occidental, while lumping all the extremely diverse cultures of Asia and North Africa under a single Eastern or Oriental label.

You make an interesting point, Jagger. But I would like to point out one technicality: I was referring to the concept of Eastern values vs Western values, not just East vs West per se.

And this is not really a debate about "culture". I know that there is difference in culture. It was my mistake to use that term. I wanted to question whether there is such a thing as Eastern values vs Western values. Nothing to do with culture. Nothing to do with costumes or food or religion. This is a question about any difference in ETHICS and VALUES.

Consequently, I still believe that the Asian politicians were the ones who came up with the concept to trump conservative "Asian values" vs the allegedly amoral miasma of the West. Using this deception, I believe, they justify authoritarian backlash against anyone who criticizes their governance.

Except for this one politician Anwar Ibrahim... if you read his thoughts on Universal Values and Muslim Democracy (google it), he said that his 6 years of incarceration made him realise with blind clarity that freedom (what GWB pontificates about) is the very essence of being which unlocks the full potential of the human spirit.

So tangawizi...what are you trying to say!!!!...or being polite have I missed the point...?

Hm???

My point abt Mr Ibrahim is very clear.



That freedom is not an asian nor western value, but a universal value is something not many Asian politicians will understand unless they went through incarceration n suffered injustice themselves. not even u nor i can appreciate that fact easily..

What other points have u missed??

I think freedom is important to everyone but the West generally places a higher importance of it then the East. Most Eastern cultures(rather then values) for a variety of reasons have less personal freedom then the West, though I don't think its the same freedom that Mr Ibrahim is talking about.

I didn't realise this but reading excerpts form a speech he gave in Melbourne, Mr Ibrahims confesses to be a fan of Sheakspeare(I know my spelling is crap)

Mr Ibrahim is talking about universal suffrage that kind of freedom.. not the freedom to have sex, drugs and rock n roll, doc..