How Collectivist Culture Enlarges Human Disasters and Intensifies Human Suffering
Recently, a massive cruise ship accident off the coast of Korea has become the latest human disaster, quickly overshadowing the still nowhere-to-be-found Malaysian Airlines flight 370 to become the global headline-grabber. Global attention and sympathies proved easily to obtain in such combination of circumstances: a holiday cruise of young high schoolers enjoying the last vacation before exam studies, a country supposedly leading the world in a technological manufacturing, and a rescue procedure so inept-sounding, incompetent-looking, and punctured with a story line so full of holes that the casual observer can only be shocked.
To remind the readers of what supposedly happened, a cruise ship carrying hundreds began a quick two-hour sinking process after giving off an SOS signal. The crew asked the passengers to stay put as the boat tilted to one side. Some of the ship's crew fled first, while many students failed to reach the life boats before the slanting of the deck forced them into the water. Trapped in air bubbles throughout the ship, many texted their last goodbyes as the boat disappeared from the surface. By the time rescue teams arrived, the ship was at the bottom of the sea, with more than a hundred passengers unaccounted for and presumably dead.
Even with this six-line summary of the event, one can cast doubt on the moral righteousness of how the turn of events transpired. Isn't wrong for the crew to leave the boat first? Isn't weird that the students themselves continued to stay put when they were fully aware that the boat was tilting and sinking sideways? And why is the society reacting so meekly to all of this? Yes, the government called the ship captain "murderous" and made sure of his arrest, and officials from the young victims' high school took their own lives out of shame, but is that enough to soothe the anger of the parents?
The anger ought not to be directed at the ship's operational crew. Perhaps there were genuine technical issues that caused the ship's unfortunate end. Such things do happen and there is no need to really dwell on it. However, it is in the interest of everyone involved, from the school, the crew, the government, to minimize the overall damage of the accident. How these groups collectively done so reveals a severe cultural problem that prioritizes a certain code of ethics so familiar to those growing up in an Asian environment but simultaneously hampers what should be the best possible scenario in such situations.
This code of ethics, to put bluntly, is a certain deviated strand of Confucianism that still governs social relationships within Korean (and much of East Asian) society. The high schoolers, as the immature young with no social understanding, obediently behaved as told, even though they clearly knew what was told was wrong. The captain, as the head of the ship, justified his quick escape with top rank in seniority. The patronizing government and school officials, as those higher on the social ladder, appealed to their own failed sense of social responsibility, making things worse by inviting blame for themselves.
In every actor's mind, even as the ship was sinking to the bottom of the ocean, was how to behave in accordance to their "place in society" as dictated by Confucian traditions, how to avoid some trivial social faux pas even though their very lives were at stake. The ludicrously divergent social emphasis is not only ridiculous but completely appalling, sacrificing the bright future of a country just so its "cultural integrity" can be maintained, in very subtle and conditioned ways. It is this, rather than the technical details of the ship's sinking, that people ought to be angry about.
Yet, the fact that the parents and the society are openly angry is already a positive sign. A developed society of the 21st century is one that places greater value in the lives of individuals more than maintenance of what is considered social mainstream. It is a place where the rebel and the non-conformist are worshiped, even if the very act of worshiping involves conformist imitation. In other words, what is considerable to many as the "social orthodox" holds little value in the face of growing subcultures and an open environment where every person can be him or herself and be respected for the courage of such individualism.
Collectivist ideologies, much in line with traditional Confucianism, then, becomes not only outdated, but counterproductive to social progress. They, by placing undivided trust and unchecked powers in the hands of authority, as in the case of the cruise ship accident, has shown itself to be conservative, self-interested, and downright lost in touch with others, hamper the efficient discovery and use of best responses for each situation. And as the accident has shown, that failure to let the individuals outshine the traditional patriarchs sometimes is a matter of life and death. A culture of collectivist obedience needs to be changed to prevent further unnecessary loss of life.
To remind the readers of what supposedly happened, a cruise ship carrying hundreds began a quick two-hour sinking process after giving off an SOS signal. The crew asked the passengers to stay put as the boat tilted to one side. Some of the ship's crew fled first, while many students failed to reach the life boats before the slanting of the deck forced them into the water. Trapped in air bubbles throughout the ship, many texted their last goodbyes as the boat disappeared from the surface. By the time rescue teams arrived, the ship was at the bottom of the sea, with more than a hundred passengers unaccounted for and presumably dead.
Even with this six-line summary of the event, one can cast doubt on the moral righteousness of how the turn of events transpired. Isn't wrong for the crew to leave the boat first? Isn't weird that the students themselves continued to stay put when they were fully aware that the boat was tilting and sinking sideways? And why is the society reacting so meekly to all of this? Yes, the government called the ship captain "murderous" and made sure of his arrest, and officials from the young victims' high school took their own lives out of shame, but is that enough to soothe the anger of the parents?
The anger ought not to be directed at the ship's operational crew. Perhaps there were genuine technical issues that caused the ship's unfortunate end. Such things do happen and there is no need to really dwell on it. However, it is in the interest of everyone involved, from the school, the crew, the government, to minimize the overall damage of the accident. How these groups collectively done so reveals a severe cultural problem that prioritizes a certain code of ethics so familiar to those growing up in an Asian environment but simultaneously hampers what should be the best possible scenario in such situations.
This code of ethics, to put bluntly, is a certain deviated strand of Confucianism that still governs social relationships within Korean (and much of East Asian) society. The high schoolers, as the immature young with no social understanding, obediently behaved as told, even though they clearly knew what was told was wrong. The captain, as the head of the ship, justified his quick escape with top rank in seniority. The patronizing government and school officials, as those higher on the social ladder, appealed to their own failed sense of social responsibility, making things worse by inviting blame for themselves.
In every actor's mind, even as the ship was sinking to the bottom of the ocean, was how to behave in accordance to their "place in society" as dictated by Confucian traditions, how to avoid some trivial social faux pas even though their very lives were at stake. The ludicrously divergent social emphasis is not only ridiculous but completely appalling, sacrificing the bright future of a country just so its "cultural integrity" can be maintained, in very subtle and conditioned ways. It is this, rather than the technical details of the ship's sinking, that people ought to be angry about.
Yet, the fact that the parents and the society are openly angry is already a positive sign. A developed society of the 21st century is one that places greater value in the lives of individuals more than maintenance of what is considered social mainstream. It is a place where the rebel and the non-conformist are worshiped, even if the very act of worshiping involves conformist imitation. In other words, what is considerable to many as the "social orthodox" holds little value in the face of growing subcultures and an open environment where every person can be him or herself and be respected for the courage of such individualism.
Collectivist ideologies, much in line with traditional Confucianism, then, becomes not only outdated, but counterproductive to social progress. They, by placing undivided trust and unchecked powers in the hands of authority, as in the case of the cruise ship accident, has shown itself to be conservative, self-interested, and downright lost in touch with others, hamper the efficient discovery and use of best responses for each situation. And as the accident has shown, that failure to let the individuals outshine the traditional patriarchs sometimes is a matter of life and death. A culture of collectivist obedience needs to be changed to prevent further unnecessary loss of life.
this connection is now all over the news, titled "dangers of obedience," even here in Taiwan: http://www.ettoday.net/news/20140423/349529.htm?fb_action_ids=770984319588104&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_ref=news
ReplyDelete