Blog

Though the concept of Asian Values is one that some might consider outdated, it’s an extremely relevant concept today. To summarise, Asian Values was a concept predominantly used in the 1990s by Southeast Asian leaders such as Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew to discount the universality of human rights. Arguing that democracy and human rights are Western concepts that don’t suit Asia, and are disguised forms of cultural imperialism. The central argument is that, in contrast to the West, the interest of the community should come before that of the individual in Asia. They claim that too much freedom can cause disorderly conditions detrimental to development. Thus justifying limitations on political and civil rights to prioritise the urgent need for development to satisfy the material needs of the people. 

Fast forward to today, though the exact words “Asian Values” aren’t usually explicitly invoked, the core ideas of Asian Values are still being used. Such ideas were recently used in debates surrounding LGBTQ+ rights, the sedition act and Bumiputera rights in Malaysia. This is evident through PM Mahiaddin’s cabinet’s proposal to increase criminal penalties against LGBTQ and PM Ismail Sabri’s discriminatory Bumiputera equity policy.

A typical argument for oppressive/discriminatory policies is that human rights are a non-universal doctrine. That not all human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNHDR) are applicable for they are irreconcilable Western Values. This sentiment is captured by Mahathir in 1997 and  2021, where he posits that the West is different, in that “there is no respect for marriage or family, young girls even teenagers even sleep around” and that such values in Asia would “disrupt and damage the well-being of the community in the name of individual rights”.

However, is this a sound argument? Is it true that Asian values are less supportive of freedom than are Western values, and that political and civil rights are, therefore, less relevant in Asia? Are human rights a form of Western imperialism?  Before answering these questions, it’s important to note that this dichotomy of Asian and Western values is itself problematic. It’s an oversimplified generalisation that assumes homogeneity of underlying principles within Asia and the West. For example, in Malaysia itself, we would be able to determine what are exclusively “Malaysian values” despite stark differences in cultures. 

Nevertheless, granted we do concede that such a dichotomy exists, adoption of the “Western concept” of human rights doesn’t entail that Asians/Malaysians will adopt the same Western lifestyles. We could have the same rights and similar values without having the same lifestyles. Using Mahathir’s examples, giving reproductive rights to women doesn’t entail that Malaysians would start “sleeping around”.  Furthermore, I argue that it’s not true that human rights are entirely a Western concept. On examination of the historical formation of the UNHDR, it’s evident that the principles espoused are shared across diverse cultures. It was a collective doctrine formed in cooperation with various member states, including Asian representatives. A UNESCO group consisting of members of diverse cultural backgrounds had conducted studies with statesmen and scholars worldwide to collect replies reflecting on human rights from various religions and cultures. The result from the replies and study found that the lists of basic rights and values across cultures were broadly similar. It was this based on the affirmation of the same set of convictions concerning action that founded the UNHD. The core notions/values of UNHDR are indeed relevant in Asian traditional values and it was through this cross-cultural examination that human rights were formulated.

This is perhaps not surprising, for the notion of freedom and tolerance of others holding different beliefs is not foreign to Asian tradition. Just because freedom-oriented perspectives are more explicit in Western thought, it doesn’t mean that it’s completely absent in Asian values. To illustrate this, with regards to freedom of expression in Singapore and even Malaysia where there’s a relatively large Chinese population, Confucius doesn’t recommend blind allegiance to the state. Rather, it recommends the governed to oppose a bad government- “When the [good] way prevails in the state, speak boldly and act boldly. When the state has lost the way, act boldly and speak softly.”. Yet how are draconian laws like the Sedition Act, used to arrest dissenting individuals like Sarah Irdina justified under the pretext of Asian values? 

Nevertheless, even if we concede that the values of human rights are more Western rather than Asian, it’s unclear how human rights are a dangerous form of cultural imperialism. Many leaders love asserting such anticolonial assault on political and civil rights in Asia. Leaders like Lee Kuan Yew have claimed that human rights are a tool used to impose Western hegemony. Though I fully agree that we should resist Western hegemony,  how does providing political and civil rights to citizens of sovereign Asian states benefit the West? How do political and civil rights in Asia possibly compromise the rights of Asians to benefit the West? Human rights are bestowed onto us not based on our beliefs, identity or values, but on our inherent humanity to benefit the individual self.  They aren’t rights that can be given or taken away by any authority. Therefore claiming that human rights are a form of cultural imperialism seems ungrounded and dubious.

It seems to me that the use of Asian Values or the general idea of cultural relativity is merely an excuse for authoritarian policies and control over the population. Nevertheless, although it might seem as if there is no hope for political and civil rights in Malaysia, we mustn’t remain overly pessimistic. With the globalisation of information and ideas, we are witnessing a rise in a progressive “collective consciousness” among the youth community today. As a fellow Malaysian youth, I believe that the solidarity that we have been witnessing through youth movements during Covid will stay in the long run. Hopefully enabling Malaysians to unveil dubiously justified oppressive policies to shape a safer and freer Malaysia for all.