Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:15:25.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performing civilisational narratives in East Asia: Asian values, multiple modernities, and the politics of economic development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2020

Yong Wook Lee Open the ORCID record for Yong Wook Lee [Opens in a new window]
Yong Wook Lee*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science and International Relations, Korea University
*
*Corresponding author. Email: yongir@korea.ac.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article aims to uncover the socially constructed normative foundation for the alternative East Asian economic development paradigm to neoliberalism in the context of civilisational politics. The question I seek to address is why East Asian states make value claims when promoting their alternative method of economic development. In addressing this question, I make two interrelated arguments. First, I argue that the politics of Asian values can be understood as another case of non-Western society's struggle to demonstrate multiple paths to modernity. Second, on a deeper level, I show that the discourse and narratives on Asian values is part of civilisation politics aimed to recalibrate the place of East Asia in a world consisting of the civilised and the uncivilised, a divide that still remains today in various forms following European expansion in the nineteenth century. In so doing, I shed light on the performative power of ‘the standard of civilisation’, which naturalises the temporal and sequential hierarchy of civilisational identities in world politics. On the basis of this article's findings, I draw out implications of a recalibrated East Asia for the ideas of hierarchy and progress in world politics.

Keywords

Performative PowerCivilisational NarrativesAsian ValuesMultiple ModernitiesEast Asian Economic Development
Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , October 2020 , pp. 456 - 476
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In this article, East Asia refers to the geographic region that includes China, Japan, Korea, and ASEAN countries.

2 Combining insights of Hobson, Katzenstein, and Bettiza, I conceptualise civilisations as ‘the broadest, loosely coupled, internally differentiated, cultural and social constructs that help relationally constitute political actors’ identities and interest’. See Hobson, John M., The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 7–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Katzenstein, Peter J., ‘A world of plural and pluralist civilizations: Multiple actors, traditions, and practices’, in Katzenstein, Peter J. (ed.), Civilizations in World Politics: Plural and Pluralist Perspectives (London: Routledge, 2010), p. 5Google Scholar; Bettiza, Gregorio, ‘Civilizational analysis in International Relations: Mapping the field and advancing a “civilizational politics” line of research’, International Studies Review, 16:1 (2015), p. 7Google Scholar.

3 Wade, Robert, ‘Japan, the World Bank, and the art of paradigm maintenance: The East Asian miracle in political perspective’, New Left Review, 217 (1995/1996), pp. 3–37Google Scholar; Lee, Yong Wook, The Japanese Challenge to the American Neoliberal Order: Identity, Meaning, and Foreign Policy (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008)Google Scholar.

4 See, for example, Ferchen, Matt, ‘Whose China model is it anyway? The contending search for consensus’, Review of International Political Economy, 20:2 (2013), pp. 390–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Drawing on So Young Kim's extensive conceptual survey of Asian values, I broadly define Asian values here as a set of values that are putatively, perceptively, and distinctively shared among Asians, which are believed to be responsible for Asia's successful economic development. More specifically, the four major components of Asian values are familism, communalism (the primacy of group goals over individual welfare and freedom), authority orientation (deference to authority, penchant for order and stability), and work ethic (hard work, thrift, and emphasis on education). See Kim, So Young, ‘Do Asian values exist? Empirical tests of the four dimensions of Asian values’, Journal of East Asian Studies, 10 (2010), pp. 317–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 See Chey, Hyeong-kyu and Helleiner, Eric, ‘Civilizational values and political economy beyond the West: The significance of Korean debates at the time of its economic opening’, Contemporary Politics, 24:2 (2018), pp. 191–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Helleiner, Eric and Wang, Hongying, ‘Beyond the tributary tradition of Chinese IPE: The indigenous roots of early Chinese economic nationalism’, The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 11:4 (2018), pp. 451–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Hobson, John M., ‘Part 2 – Reconstructing the non-Eurocentric foundation of IPE: From Eurocentric “Open Economy Politics” to intercivilizational political economy’, Review of International Political Economy, 20:5 (2013), pp. 1055–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Nye, Joseph, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (New York: Public Affairs, 2004)Google Scholar; Kurlantzick, Joshua, Charm Offensive: How China's Soft Power Is Transforming the World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007)Google Scholar.

9 Johnson, Chalmers, MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925–1975 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar.

10 Barr, Michael, Cultural Politics and Asian Values: The Tepid War (London: Routledge, 2002), pp. 26–9, 39–44Google Scholar.

11 Castells, Manuel, ‘Four Asian tigers with a dragon head: A comparative analysis of the state, economy, and society in the Asian Pacific Rim’, in Appelbaum, Richard and Henderson, Jeffrey (eds), States and Development in the Asian Pacific Rim (Newbury Park: Sage, 1992), pp. 51–2Google Scholar.

12 Woo-Cumings, Meredith, ‘Introduction: Chalmers Johnson and the politics of nationalism and development’, in Woo-Cumings, Meredith (ed.), The Developmental State (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999), pp. 7–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Woo-Cumings, Meredith, ‘Back to basics: Ideology, nationalism, and Asian values in East Asia’, in Helleiner, Eric and Pickel, Andreas (eds), Economic Nationalism in a Globalized World (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005), pp. 93–5Google Scholar.

13 I take advantage of Eisenstadt's conceptualisation of ‘[Western] modernity’ here, as it is not only authoritative in its own right, but also it resonates with this article's emphasis on East Asian agency (‘East Asian struggles to recalibrate its place in world politics by challenging neoliberalism’, for example). According to Eisenstadt, modernity, which is rooted in Western Enlightenment's twin premises of autonomous human agency and progressive view of history, refers to a secular humanist programme/movement entailing that human beings can create and chart the world as they design and plan (as opposed to God-ordained cosmos). See Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., ‘The civilizational dimension of modernity: Modernity as a distinct civilization’, International Sociology, 16:3 (2001), pp. 321–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Bettiza, ‘Civilizational analysis in international relations’, pp. 1–28; Bowden, Brett, The Empire of Civilization: The Evolution of an Imperial Idea (Chicago: the University of Chicago Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chong, Alan, ‘Civilizations and harm: The politics of civilizing processes between the West and the non-West’, Review of International Studies, 43:4 (2017), pp. 637–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Go, Julian, ‘Civilization and its subalterns’, Review of International Studies, 43:4 (2017), pp. 612–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘The “revolt against the West” revisited’, in Dunne, Tim and Reus-Smit, Christian (eds), The Globalization of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hall, Martin and Jackson, Patrick (eds), Civilizational Identity: The Production and Reproduction of ‘Civilizations’ in International Relations (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hobson, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation; Katzenstein, ‘A world of plural and pluralist civilizations’; Linklater, Andrew, ‘Process sociology, the English School, and postcolonialism: Understanding civilization and world politics’, Review of International Studies, 43:4 (2017), pp. 700–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Mattern, Janice and Zarakol, Ayşe, ‘Hierarchies in world politics’, International Organization, 70:3 (2016), pp. 623–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 In this article, I broadly define discourse as a constitutive structure of meaning for what can be said and done, while a narrative is taken to be a subclass of discourse with the key characteristic of having ‘a clear sequential order that connects events in a meaningful way’. See Hinchman, Lewis and Hinchman, Sandra, Memory, Identity and Community: The Idea of Narrative in Human Sciences (Albany: SUNY Press, 2001)Google Scholar.

17 Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., ‘Multiple modernities’, Dadalus, 129 (2000), pp. 1–29Google Scholar.

18 Since I use the concept of multiple modernities analytically, the question of what the proper meaning of modernity is, which is extremely important in its own right, goes beyond the scope of this article. For the role of concept in interpretation, see Duranti, Alessandro, Linguistic Anthropology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), ch. 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dworkin, Ronald, Law's Empire (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986), ch. 2Google Scholar; Geertz, Clifford, The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays (New York: Basic Books, 1973), ch. 2Google Scholar; Harding, Sandra, Is Science Multi-Cultural? Postcolonialisms, Feminisms, and Epistemologies (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1998), pp. 9–28Google Scholar.

19 Bettiza, ‘Civilizational analysis in international relations’, pp. 5–9. Bettiza categorises civilisational politics as one of four research paradigms in the field of civilisational analysis. The other three are ‘civilisational dynamics’, ‘inter-civilisational ethics’, and ‘the politics of civilisation’. ‘Civilisational dynamics’ research mainly investigates the historical patterns of civilisational interactions. ‘Inter-civilisational ethics’ research, which has a strong normative orientation, is concerned with the ways in which inter-civilisational dialogues and understandings are best promoted for international peace. Lastly, ‘the politics of civilisation’ research critically examines how civilisational discourses and invocations are called in as rhetorical tools to legitimise unequal power relations and practices among concerned parties. In contrast, the centrality of civilisational politics research lies in ‘the desire to investigate how actors come to perceive the international as a place where civilisations and their relations matter; and how actors, when reshaping international politics along these beliefs, bring civilizations into existence as social facts at this historical juncture in world politics’ (ibid., p. 4, emphasis in original). For a similar survey of civilisational analysis and research, see also Bettiza, Gregorio and Petito, Fabio, ‘Why (clash of) civilizations discourses just won't go away? Understanding the civilizational politics of our times’, in Orsi, Davide (ed.), The ‘Clash of Civilizations’ 25 Years On: A Multidisciplinary Appraisal (Bristol: E-International Relations, 2018), pp. 37–51Google Scholar.

20 Recent exceptions include Bell, Daniel, Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brett Bowden and Leonard Seabrooke, ‘Global standards of market civilization’, in Hall and Jackson (eds), Civilizational Identity, pp. 119–33; Chey, Hyoung-kyu and Helleiner, Eric, ‘Civilizational values and political economy beyond the West: The significance of Korean debates at the time of its economic opening’, Contemporary Politics, 24:2 (2018), pp. 191–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Helleiner, Eric and Wang, Hongying, ‘Beyond the tributary tradition of Chinese IPE: The indigenous roots of early Chinese economic nationalism’, The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 11:4 (2018), pp. 451–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hobson, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation; Hobson, ‘Part 2 – Reconstructing the non-Eurocentric foundation of IPE’; Hobson, John M., ‘Reconstructing International Relations through world history: Oriental globalization and the global-dialogue conception of inter-civilizational relations’, International Politics, 44 (2007), pp. 414–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hobson, John M., ‘Part 1 – Revealing the Eurocentric foundation of IPE: A critical historiography of the discipline from the classical to the modern era’, Review of International Political Economy, 20:5 (2013), pp. 1024–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Katzenstein, Peter J. (ed.), Sinicization and the Rise of China: Civilizational Processes beyond East and West (New York: Routledge, 2012)Google Scholar; Pomeranz, Kenneth, ‘Without coal? Colonies? Calculus? Counterfactuals and industrialization in Europe and China’, in Tetlock, Phillip, Lebow, Richard, and Parker, Geoffrey (eds), Unmaking the West: ‘What-If’ Scenarios that Rewrite World History (Ann Arbor: the University of Michigan Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

21 Morriss, Peter, Power: A Philosophical Analysis (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

22 Sterling-Folker, Jennifer and Shinko, Rosemary, ‘Discourses of power: Traversing realist-postmodern divide’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 33:3 (2005), pp. 637–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Krebs, Ronald, Narrative and the Making of US National Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Milliken, Jennifer, ‘The study of discourse in International Relations: A critique of research and methods’, European Journal of International Relations, 5:2 (1999), p. 229CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Emirbayer, Mustafa and Mische, Ann, ‘What is agency?’, American Journal of Sociology, 103:4 (1998), p. 962CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hayward Alker, ‘Discussion: On the discursive turn in civilizational analysis’, in Hall and Jackson (eds), Civilizational Identity, p. 57.

25 Doty, Roxanne, ‘Foreign policy as social construction: A post-positivist analysis of U.S. counterinsurgency policy in the Philippines’, International Studies Quarterly, 37:3 (1993), p. 298CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Hopf, Ted, Social Construction of International Politics: Identities & Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002), pp. 13–16Google Scholar.

27 Weldes, Jutta, Cultures of Insecurity: States, Communities, and the Production of Danger (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999), p. 9Google Scholar.

28 Butler, Judith, Gender Trouble: Feminism and Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge, 1999 [orig. pub. 1990])Google Scholar; MacKenzie, Donald, Muniesa, Fabian, and Siu, Lucia (eds), Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Callon, Michel (ed.), The Laws of the Markets (London: Blackwell, 1998)Google Scholar; MacKenzie, Donald, An Engine Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008)Google Scholar.

29 Ibid., p. 4.

30 Michel Callon, ‘What does it mean to say that economics is performative?’, in MacKenzie, Muniesa, and Siu (eds), Do Economists Make Markets?, p. 316.

31 As Butler herself acknowledges in her 1999 preface of Gender Trouble, pp. xiv, xxiv, her idea of performativity has changed or evolved over time in response to criticisms. In Butler's own assessment of how she has clarified and revised the use of performativity, she was initially interested in employing the concept of performativity to highlight the performative role of gender discourses (‘regulative discourses’) in creating ‘the anticipation of a gendered essence’ for a socially sanctioned ritual of gender performance, which in turn reinforces the gendered anticipation in a self-fulfilling prophecy fashion. In her subsequent writings, Butler more explicitly elaborated on the performativity link between gender scripts/descriptions and gendered ontologies. See Butler, Judith, Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of ‘Sex’ (New York: Routledge, 1993)Google Scholar; Butler, Judith, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative (New York: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar. For her claim that performativity is useful to analyse the processes that engender the naturalised assumptions of what constitutes reality; see also Butler, Judith, ‘Performative agency’, Journal of Cultural Economy, 3:2 (2010), pp. 147–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In fact, both MacKenzie, Muniesa, and Siu (eds), Do Economists Make Markets and Mackenzie, An Engine Not a Camera recognise Butler as a pioneer who utilises the notion of performativity for social analysis.

32 In Butler's own words, ‘Such acts, gestures, enactments, generally constructed, are performative in the sense that the essence or identity that they otherwise purport to express are fabrications manufactured and sustained through corporeal signs and other discursive means. That the gendered body is performative suggests that it has no ontological status apart from the various acts which constitute its reality.’ Butler, Gender Trouble, p. 173, emphasis in original.

33 Callon, ‘What does it mean to say that economics is performative?’, p. 327.

34 Hall, Rodney, ‘The discursive demolition of the Asian development model’, International Studies Quarterly, 47:1 (2003), pp. 71–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Hacking, Ian, The Social Construction of What? (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999)Google Scholar.

36 Guzzini, Stefano, ‘The concept of power: A constructivist analysis’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 33:3 (2005), p. 499Google Scholar.

37 Alker, Hayward, Rediscoveries and Reformulations: Humanistic Methodologies for International Studies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 400CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Moses, Jonathan and Knutsen, Torbjørn, Ways of Knowing: Competing Methodologies in Social and Political Research (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), p. 207CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Reed, Isaac, ‘Power: Relational, discursive, and performative dimensions’, Sociological Theory, 31:3 (2013), p. 200CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 See fn. 13 for the discussion on two premises of Western modernity.

41 See, for example, Katzenstein's discussion on two modes of analysis for the concept of civilisation, dispositional and discursive. Discursive analysis examines how the idea of civilisation shapes the constitution of ‘gender, kinship, territory, language, or race’. Katzenstein, ‘A world of plural and pluralist civilizations’, pp. 6–14.

42 Meyer, John, Boli, John, Thomas, George, and Francisco, Ramirez, ‘World society and the nation-state’, American Journal of Sociology, 103:1 (1997), pp. 144–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Bowden and Seabrooke, ‘Global standards of market civilization’, p. 120.

44 Drezner, Daniel, All Politics is Global: Explaining International Regulatory Regimes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Mattli, Walter and Woods, Ngaire (eds), The Politics of Global Regulation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 Bowden and Seabrooke, ‘Global standards of market civilization’.

46 See Hughes, Christopher, ‘The enduring function of the substance/essence (Ti/Yong) dichotomy in China's nationalism’, in Callahan, William and Barabantseva, Elena (eds), China Orders the World: Soft Power and Normative Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Press, 2011), pp. 118–42Google Scholar.

47 Hall, Derek, ‘Japanese spirit, Western economics: The continuing salience of economic nationalism in Japan’, New Political Economy, 9:1 (2004), pp. 79–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Eisenstadt, ‘Multiple modernities’.

49 Eisenstadt, ‘The civilizational dimension of modernity’, pp. 320–40.

50 Katzenstein, ‘A world of plural and pluralist civilizations’, p. 17.

51 Woo-Cumings, ‘Back to basics’, p. 92.

52 Gong, Gerrit, The Standard of ‘Civilization’ in International Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

53 Linklater, Andrew and Suganami, Hidemi, The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 146–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 Stivachtis, Yannis, The Enlargement of International Society: Culture versus Anarchy and Greece's Entry into International Society (New York: St Martin Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Gong, The Standard of ‘Civilization’ in International Society, p. 24.

56 Keene, Edward, Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Suzuki, Shogo, ‘Japan's socialization into Janus-faced European international society’, European Journal of International Relations, 11:1 (2005), pp. 137–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 Jacinta O'Hagan, ‘Discourses of civilizational identity’, in Hall and Jackson (eds), Civilizational Identity, p. 19.

59 Huntington, Samuel, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996)Google Scholar.

60 Ian Hall, ‘Clashing civilizations: A Toynbeean response to Hungtington’, in Orsi (ed.), The ‘Clash of Civilizations’ 25 Years On, p. 21.

61 Braudel, Fernand, A History of Civilization (New York: Penguin, 1993)Google Scholar.

62 Elias, Nobert, The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000)Google Scholar.

63 Alker, Hayward, Huntington's, ‘If not “civilizations”, then whose?’, Review, 18:4 (1995), pp. 533–62Google Scholar.

64 Hobson, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation.

65 Katzenstein, ‘A world of plural and pluralist civilizations’.

66 Otherwise, it is hard to fathom the empirical fact that clashes occur primarily within rather than between civilisations. For this empirical insight, see, for example, Ben-Yehuda, Hemada, ‘The clash of civilization's thesis: Findings from international crises, 1918–1994’, Comparative Civilizations Review, 49 (2003), pp. 28–42Google Scholar; Chiozza, Giacomo, ‘Is there a clash of civilizations? Evidence from patterns of international conflict involvement, 1946–97’, Journal of Peace Research, 39:6 (2002), pp. 711–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 See above the discussion of agency.

68 Bettiza, ‘Civilizational analysis in international relations’, p. 10.

69 Patrick Jackson, ‘Civilizations as actors: A transactional account’, in Hall and Jackson (eds), Civilizational Identity, p. 47.

70 Hobson, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation.

71 Hobson, ‘Part 2 – Reconstructing the non-Eurocentric foundation of IPE’, p. 1070.

72 Tetlock, Lebow, and Parker (eds), Unmaking the West.

73 Interestingly, Zhang empirically tracks how China helped shape the formation of European civilisational subjectivity as a superior other during the Enlightenment period. As such, China was indispensable to the development of European ‘idea of progress’ in the eighteenth century. See Yongjin Zhang, ‘Worlding China, 1500–1800’, in Dunne and Reus-Smit (eds), The Globalization of International Society, pp. 204–23.

74 Bowden, The Empire of Civilization, pp. 50–3.

75 Shmuel N. Eisenstadt, ‘Modernity and modernization’, Sociopedia.isa (2010), available at: {doi: 10.1177/205684601053}, p. 13.

76 O'Hagan, ‘Discourses of civilizational identity’, p. 22.

77 Hobson, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation, pp. 7–11.

78 O'Hagan, ‘Discourses of civilizational identity’, p. 16.

79 See Nisbet, Robert, History of the Idea of Progress (London: Heinemann, 1980), p. 308Google Scholar, cited in Bowden and Seabrooke, ‘Global standards of market civilization’, p. 124.

80 See Rostow, W. W., The Stages of Economic Growth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), pp. 4–13Google Scholar, cited in Bowden and Seabrooke, ‘Global standards of civilization’, p. 125.

81 Bowden and Seabrooke, ‘Global standards of market civilization’, p. 125.

82 See, for example, Aydin, Cemil, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia: Vision of World Order in Pan-Islamic and Pan-Asian Thought (New York: Columbia University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

83 Woo-Cumings, ‘Back to basics’.

84 Wade, ‘Japan, the World Bank, and the art of paradigm maintenance’.

85 Higgott, Richard, ‘The Asian economic crisis: A study in the politics of resentment’, New Political Economy, 3:3 (1998), pp. 333–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

86 Barr, Cultural Politics and Asian Values, p. 8.

87 Cumings, Bruce, ‘The origins and development of the Northeast Asian political economy: Industrial sectors, product cycles, and political consequences’, International Organization, 38:1 (1984), pp. 1–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

88 Barr, Cultural Politics and Asian Values, p. 3.

89 Ibid., p. 27.

90 Kim, ‘Do Asian values exist?, p. 318.

91 Kim, Dae Jung, ‘A response to Lee Kuan Yew: Is culture destiny? The myth of Asia's anti-democratic values’, Foreign Affairs, 73:4 (1994), pp. 189–94Google Scholar; Zakaria, Fareed, ‘Asian values’, Foreign Policy, 133 (2002), pp. 38–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Fukuyama, Francis, ‘Social capital, civil society, and development’, Third World Quarterly, 22:1 (2001), pp. 7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ahn, Chung-Si and Kang, Won-Taek, ‘Trust and confidence in government in transitional democracies: South Korea in comparative perspective’, Journal of Korean Politics, 11 (2002), pp. 3–40Google Scholar; Apodaca, Clair, ‘The globalization of capital in East and Southeast Asia: Measuring the impact on human rights standards’, Asian Survey, 42:6 (2002), pp. 883–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lee, Junhan, ‘Primary causes of Asian democratization: Dispelling conventional myths’, Asian Survey, 42:6 (2002), pp. 821–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

93 Hirschman, Albert, The Strategy of Economic Development (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958)Google Scholar; Gerschenkron, Alexander, Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962)Google Scholar.

94 Lee, Kuan Yew, ‘Culture is destiny’, Foreign Affairs, 73:2 (1994), pp. 109–26Google Scholar.

95 Rosker, Jana, ‘Modern Confucianism and the concept of Asian Values’, Asian Studies, 4:1 (2016), pp. 153–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

96 Saaler, Sven and Koschmann, Victor (eds), Pan-Asianism in Modern Japanese History: Colonialism, Regionalism, and Borders (London: Routledge, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

97 Murakami, Yasusuke, ‘Ie society as a pattern of civilization’, Journal of Japanese Studies, 10:2 (1984), pp. 281–363Google Scholar.

98 Morishima, Michio, Why Has Japan Succeeded? Western Technology and Japanese Ethos (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

99 Kim, Jongtae, ‘The West and national identities: A comparison of the discourses of Korean Seonjinguk, Japanese Nihonjinron, and Chinese new nationalism’, Social Science Research, 19:2 (2011), p. 19Google Scholar.

100 Lee, The Japanese Challenge to the American Neoliberal Order, pp. 119–24.

101 Zheng, Yongnian, Discovering Chinese Nationalism in China: Modernization, Identity, and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)Google Scholar.

102 Zhao, Suisheng, A Nation-State by Construction: Dynamics of Modern Chinese Nationalism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

103 Kim, ‘Do Asian values exist?, p. 22.

104 Ibid., p. 31.

105 Zhao, Suisheng, ‘Chinese intellectuals’ quest for national greatness and nationalistic writing in the 1990s’, The China Quarterly, 152 (1997), p. 739CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

106 Hu Jintao, Keynote Speech at Opening Ceremony of Boao Forum of Asia Annual Conference 2011 (15 April 2011).

107 Wen Jiabao, Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the 4th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting of Asia Cooperation Dialogue (6 April 2005), emphasis added.

108 Hu Jintao, ‘Scientific Outlook Development’, Lecture for Yale University (24 April 2006).

109 Jintao, Keynote Speech at Opening Ceremony of Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference 2011, emphasis added.

110 Xi Jinpin, Keynote Speech at Opening Ceremony of Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference 2015 (28 March 2015), emphasis added.

111 Xi Jinping, Keynote Speech at the Opening Session of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2017 (17 January 2017), emphasis added.

112 Xi Jinping, Keynote Speech at Opening of Belt and Road Forum 2017 (14 May 2017), emphasis added.

113 Kalinowski, Thomas and Cho, Hyekyung, ‘Korea's search for a global role between hard economic interests and soft power’, European Journal of Development Research, 24:2 (2012), pp. 242–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stallings, Barbara and Mee, Kim Eun, ‘Japan, China, and Korea: Styles of ODA in East Asia’, in Kato, Hiroshi, Page, John, and Shimomura, Yasutani (eds), Japan's Development Assistance (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), pp. 120–34Google Scholar.

114 Nakao, Takehiko, ‘Economic outlook for Asia and the role of the Asian Development Bank’, Asia-Pacific Review, 24:1 (2017), pp. 37–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

115 Gu, Bin, ‘Chinese multilateralism in the AIIB’, Journal of International Economic Law, 20 (2017), pp. 137–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Andronova, Inna and Shelepov, Anrey, ‘Potential for strengthening the NDB's and AIIB's role in the global financial system’, International Organization Research Journal, 14:1 (2019), pp. 39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

116 Gong, Gerrit, ‘Standards of civilization today’, in Mozaffari, Medhi (ed.), Globalization and Civilizations (London: Routledge, 2002), p. 80Google Scholar.

117 Tannenwald, Nina, The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons since 1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

118 Finnemore, Martha, The Purpose of Intervention: Changing Beliefs about the Use of Force (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

119 Hall and Jackson, Civilizational Identity, p. 2.

120 Wang, Horng-luen, ‘The relevance of modernity to contemporary East Asia: An outline’, International Journal of Japanese Sociology, 27 (2018), pp. 48–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

121 Pitts, Jennifer, A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

122 Ringmar, Erik, ‘Performing international systems: Two East Asian alternatives to the Westphalian order’, International Organization, 66:1 (2012), pp. 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.