On Modernity: Korea and the West

Courtesy of Jul Lee

By David Tizzard

David A. Tizzard

To define whether or not a country is modern is a rather difficult thing. Some of us instinctually reach for economic factors as a mark of a state's development. The simple equation being: the more cash it has, the more modern it is. Yet such figures can be deceiving. Rather than just mere gross domestic product, people expect a reasonable amount of economic distribution in a modern state and so look at GDP per capita. The two ways of presenting such information put South Korea either 12th or 36th. More dramatically, China drops from 2nd to 79th when seen in such a way.

For others, money cannot buy modernity if certain values are lacking. The Gulf States, for example, are drowning in money ― providing fabulous backdrops for Instagram influencers wanting to flex. Yet there are those who would suggest that despite being able to buy gold from vending machines, there are cultural obstacles which prevent these countries from being modern. Whether such requirements are fair or rather a neo-colonial form of cultural imperialism remains a matter of perspective. It also raises the question of whether there are any absolute moral or ethical standards vis-a-vis modernization or whether we are all simply left adrift in a horizon-less ocean of liquid modernity and a post-Nietzschean world.

Certainly there are many who believe a modern state is a secular one and not theocratic. Reason rules, not god. Ernest Renan gave this view its clearest pronouncement when he said, "Mankind used to believe, but now it knows." A wonderful irony being that tolerance allows anyone to believe what they want (from Buddhism, to Scientology, and Jedi) providing such beliefs don't influence their decisions should they be in positions of power. Gender, race, and sexual orientation are far more acceptable as choice-drivers than anything spiritual. How we derive ethics from science remains a very fun and interesting discussion though.

Whether or not modernity has values, absolute or otherwise, it has certainly conquered time and space. We are no longer influenced by the natural rhythms of night and day, summer and winter. A modern state is one in which anything is available, all the time. Our desires no more constrained by the hour of the day or geographic location. We have swimming pools in winter, neon lights at night, and strawberries all year round. Fulfillment is instantaneous. It is achieved by large-scale urbanization: another important feature of modernity. With it, the civilizing process takes place as CCTV and social media become the Foucauldian panopticon observing our every move and threatening punishment should we do anything not 'normal'.

As Freud, Stiglitz, and many others have observed, modernity brings with it discontents: anxiety, depression, and suicide. Atomized living and hyper-individualization is far too much for some to bear. What was once solid has melted. The necessity of becoming oneself, a branded commodity, is suffocating. Sadly, as suggested by Mark Fisher, this becomes seen as an individual problem requiring insurance, counselling, and the right amount of meds. All purchased with money of course. And the problems are attributed to chemical imbalances or generational trauma. Few ever dare suggest that the cause is structural or something inherent in the modern system itself.

Despite this brief and clearly inadequate exploration of what modernity might be, I will end with the suggestion that South Korea is now more modern than its erstwhile sponsor, the United States. This is of course not to suggest that South Korea is perfect, far from it; nevertheless, its trajectory and modern environment is one of ascension and progress rather than regression. Its streets are relatively safe to walk ― a single tragic and senseless murder sees outrage and demand for immediate action and change rather than empty platitudes of thoughts and prayers; its shopping malls and churches free from mass shootings; drug and opioid crises on a nationwide scale non-existent. The health care is excellent and available. The transport and infrastructure is modern, clean, and cheap. The university classrooms are places of education and learning with professors still commanding respect and students free from ideological culture wars dividing the population. The culture itself promotes hard work, effort, study, and respect.

It's easy to bash South Korea, and my column will attest to the fact that I'm not blind to these problems. But my word, isn't it worth celebrating the fantastic achievements once in a while? This country has achieved so much. Will it avoid the various pitfalls to which the west has succumbed? Perhaps. It will no doubt have its own problems on the journey. But when has this country ever done things the easy way?

Dr. David A. Tizzard (datizzard@swu.ac.kr) has a Ph.D. in Korean Studies and lectures at Seoul Women's University and Hanyang University. He is a social/cultural commentator and musician who has lived in Korea for nearly two decades. He is also the host of the Korea Deconstructed podcast, which can be found online. The views expressed in the article are the author's own and do not reflect the editorial direction of The Korea Times.