RESPONSE PAPER | THE POLITICAL ECONOMY AND CULTURE OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN
EAST ASIA
I largely agree with Professor Davis’ argument. Constitutional values and democracy enable
opposition to voice itself, a check-and-balance mechanism, and legal methods to vent against
government regimes, rendering democracy as the only model befitting modern times.
Customizing this to local needs seems to secure justice in totality, at least in theory.
Therefore, on paper it seems like the most balanced argument. However there are some points
that may require further clarification.
The Asian values debate centers around tautological arguments and extending a stream of
Confucianism to modern times without understanding the implications of such a discourse.
However, one part of the debate that highlights Asian values as communitarian is a direct
attack on liberalism. Asian communities have been known to work in harmony as a collective
including appointing an ombudsman-like figure to spearhead local justice as recommended by
Professor Davis in the final section. Thus, if research regarding how communitarianism was
understood in East Asia is to be taken into account, this ombudsman mechanism may not
work in the way envisioned. The Article relates such a person to an ex-Monarch, indicating
that he may not be elected, thereby leading to the probability that authoritarianism may
continue to be enforced through local laws and customs in practice.
Further, the Article proceeds to explaining that democracies have cushioned the impact of
economic devastations as compared to authoritarian regimes that face a steep impact.
However, there seems to be a lack of sufficient analysis linking democracy to economic
cushioning except for data indicating the same. Even in the West (more mature society
engrained in democratic values), the brunt of the 2009 US economic crisis was felt across
democracies and is still felt in the US itself as indicated through the Occupy Wall Street
movement. Further, as the Article itself notes, authoritarian regimes such as China have
molded their systems to shelve themselves from such economic blitzkrieg, thereby indicating
that deeper analysis may be required to accept this prong of the argument.
The Article further notes that indigenous adaptation of democratic constitutional systems by
ensuring local and contextual justice could be a valid form of balancing both worlds.
However, such societies may be marred by various conflicting groups and opinions based on
a variety of considerations such as tribe, caste, social class etc. Due to this, it may be difficult
to achieve the most utilitarian situation since the understanding, in principle, becomes
subjective the moment representation is provided based on these associations. For instance, an
example cited often in the Article, Japan, was only able to achieve economic success through
democracy because a single party led elections. Therefore, if we institutionalize
representation based on a myriad of categories it may not be possible to achieve that level of
Raveena Sethia
RESPONSE PAPER | THE POLITICAL ECONOMY AND CULTURE OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN
EAST ASIA
success in practice due to divulging opinions now focused on considerations other than mere
development.
Therefore, even though the Article largely finds a balance in theory, there are a few practical
considerations and some points used to base the argument that may require further
clarification.
Raveena Sethia