Asia as Method: Toward Deimperialization

by Kuan-Hsing Chen

Centering his analysis in the dynamic forces of modern East Asian history, Kuan-Hsing Chen recasts cultural studies as a politically urgent global endeavor. He argues that the intellectual and subjective work of decolonization begun across East Asia after the Second World War was stalled by the cold war. At the same time, the work of deimperialization became impossible to imagine in imperial centers such as Japan and the United States. Chen contends that it is now necessary to resume those tasks, and that decolonization, deimperialization, and an intellectual undoing of the cold war must proceed simultaneously. Combining postcolonial studies, globalization studies, and the emerging field of “Asian studies in Asia,” he insists that those on both sides of the imperial divide must assess the conduct, motives, and consequences of imperial histories. Chen is one of the most important intellectuals working in East Asia today; his writing has been influential in Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, and mainland China for the past fifteen years. As a founding member of the Inter-Asia Cultural Studies Society and its journal, he has helped to initiate change in the dynamics and intellectual orientation of the region, building a network that has facilitated inter-Asian connections. Asia as Method encapsulates Chen’s vision and activities within the increasingly “inter-referencing” East Asian intellectual community and charts necessary new directions for cultural studies.

Genres: Asia, History, Politics, Theory, China, Nonfiction, Post Colonial

344 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2007

Reviews

[Trevor · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was at a conference recently about Asia literacy and language learning and just about every second presentation made some mention of this book. Years ago I was at another conference and one of the speakers said this is a key text and everyone should read it. It has taken me quite a lot of time to get around to reading this, but I finally have.

The short version of this review is to say that Asia often is defined by its relationship with the colonial other – and this isn’t always just between Asia and the West, but also between China and Japan, China and Taiwan, Taiwan and South East Asia – and so on. These imperialist and colonial and cold war relations and power dynamics will continue to structure the present and future of Asia generally unless there is a decolonial, de-imperialist and de-cold war movement – and that movement will need to include the previous colonial and imperialist powers, who also need to enter into new and more mature relationships with Asia – particularly now that the centre of world development is shifting to be somewhere between China and India.

The author is from Taiwan and so brings to the fore the innumerable paradoxes and contradictions that being from Taiwan involves. He does this by discussing films and novels and the impact these have had on the nation and how they illuminate the national spirit. This is an interesting book in that sense, a bit of politics, a bit of colonial theory, a bit of cultural theory - eclectic but not maddeningly so.

The chapter I found most interesting in this was chapter 4 – Deimperialization: Club 51 and the Imperialist Assumption of Democracy. Club 51 is a group of mostly Taiwanese businessmen who want Taiwan to become the 51st state of the USA. No, I kid you not. This is particularly interesting because many of the elite in Taiwan seem to have been educated in the US, and so, for the elite at least, this doesn’t seem as completely crazy to them as it did to me. And also given China’s ambition to fully reintegrate Taiwan, and the US being one of the main forces standing in China’s way with this, it is pretty clear why this might make sense to those who feel much more connection and commitment to the US than to China. The complications of this, however, seem all too obvious to someone quite outside the whole drama. But then, I guess there would be lots of people in Australia too who might think it was a good idea for us to become 51 – God save us…

The title to this one is complicated – he spends quite a bit of time trying to explain it, and I didn't really come away fully able to say I get what he means. Other books and articles have had a similar title, and so, I think ‘fitting into that tradition’ is probably the key thing he was trying to do here. But I sort of like the idea that Asia is not a ‘thing’ or 'place' that we need to discover, but rather something that is defined by the approach that we take in seeking to understand it. I guess I think that is more or less true of most things – but when you consider that Asia starts pretty well at Turkey and takes in all of Iraq, India, China, Indonesia, Vietnam and Japan (and so on and so on) thinking of it a ‘a thing’ is a hell of a lot sillier than thinking of it as a method of inquiry.

[Jeremy Hurdis · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a very problematic study of Asian regionalism. Attempting to develop a line of theory Chen calls 'Gecolonial Historical Materialism,' which is lacking in materialism, Chen prescribes for Asia a process of 'decolonisation,' 'deimperialisation,' and 'de-cold war' to break the East Asian countries out of a historically produced enmity which prevents them from forming a cooperative region.
Without any real theory, Chen is only able to express his concerns on the most vulgar political level, taking such categories as 'imperialism' and 'nation-state' as given. Thus, much of Chen's analysis seems to reproduce the ideology of Japan's East Asian Coprosperity Sphere. This is likely due to Chen's neglect of the severe impact Japanese imperialism had on Taiwan and Korea, which allows him to suggest simply getting over it to form economic partnerships. On the surface his goal is positive, but his method amounts to idealistic dreaming not sufficiently grounded in historical conditions.

[Jaymee Goh · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the vein of Provincializing Europe, Chen Kuan-Hsing offers a way of thinking about Asia as a reference point, and the potential this can offer, rather than constantly comparing East and West (which is a faulty binary, and not very logical besides). His counterpoints of "decolonization" and "deimperialization" are extremely important: we hear a lot of the former, but the latter remains unarticulated, or conflated into the former effort. On hindsight, it seems to make so much sense that of course this would be the flipside process, but no one ever bothered naming it. Chen also goes on to demonstrate several cultural contexts that form the background of Asian society which never gets spoken of, and are thus invisiblized in larger discourses of democracy and liberalism. A very useful and important book.

[Tram Nguyen · Rating 4 out of 5]

she is pretty dense yet compelling, sharp yet gently guiding, abstract yet practical, kinda wish i was her.

[Juhyundred · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fascinating, with a particularly incisive analysis of postwar Taiwan. Chen's general identification and definition of decolonization, deimperialization and de-cold war are fantastic, but his application of them within the text hits the commonly found limits of cultural studies. Absent real practical applications of his theories and claims, or a revolutionary orientation, Chen can only offer what possibilities his framework *might* produce. Still a worthwhile read in my opinion.

[Adhoc · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kuan-Hsing Chen is helpful in disambiguating colonialism, imperialism, globalization, and democratization. Calling for a more robust "Asian Studies in Asia," he frames "Asia" as a methodology and "imaginary anchoring point" where societies in Asian can "become each other's points of reference, so that the understanding of the self may be transformed, and subjectivity rebuilt" (212). Focusing on the transition from Japanese colonialism to American neo-colonialism and imperialism in Asia, Chen asks how Asian societies can de-imperialize and "de-cold war" their subjectivities.

He highlights three traditional ways post-colonial scholars have approached decolonization: nationalism, nativism, and civilizationalism. He points a more syncretic way to avoid the pitfalls of these three former approaches, where imperial/colonial subjectivities are transformed into an active and reflective consciousness, shifting and multiplying objects of identification with other Asian societies so that the colonizing power no longer becomes the desired object of identification (98). We have to start from local (or "base-entity") histories specific to that region ("geocolonial historical materialism"), but rather than viewing those histories as mere case studies from a standpoint of 'universal' Western theory/methodology, Asia as method draws from diverse historical experiences and social practices to provide alternative horizons of possibility and alternative understandings of world history.

[Owen Hatherley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent sort-of-subaltern studies/sort-of-Marxist essay on the need for both decolonisation and de-coldwarification in Asia in general, via Taiwan in particular. Politically sharp, full of detail and argument and intelligence; it's sad how far away both of these 'de's feel (especially 'de-cold war'), but would also love to know what the author makes twenty years on of the continued rise of the PRC and the question of division within Asia into economic 'successes' and 'failures', or the (East) Asiaphilia common in western youth (not to mention what he makes of one of the people cited approvingly here, Martin Jacques, becoming a full-time China Booster), but this is really fascinating and ambitious stuff as it is.

[KT · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent if limited analysis calling the terrain of analysis to be shifted towards the question of deimperialisation in the context of Asia

The author argues that by moving beyond the limited form of identity politics that fuels politics of resentment and instead constructing alternative frames of reference can new forms of intellectual alliance be built and new solidarities forged in the new context of globalisation

The method is rooted in the subjective, as is the nature of cultural studies, but I am somewhat unconvinced that new imaginings, perspectives and subjectivity alone will lead to liberation and the practice of Asia as method that simply results in new knowledge production in and centred in Asia has a somewhat low ceiling, if not complemented by concrete forms of struggle

[Dann · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the first time I could understand someone's explanation of Fanon. Kuan-Hsing Chen's making clear the personal experiences that colour his theoretical orientation adds an empowering touch to his thesis. While examples are given aplenty, some parts seem to revolve too much around theory to the extent that it loses grip on reality, which the writer is aware of I think. Not sure if intentional or not, the demonstrated reflexive self-criticism at the concluding chapter reminds me exactly of the Marxist-Leninist concept.

[Z · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting look at decolonialization and deimperialization in Asia, looking towards the countries in Asia and not the West.

[Claire]

i won’t rate books i read for school but this one was sort of fun to read. the discussions it brought on were really insightful

[Miyona Katayama · Rating 2 out of 5]

unsure what the method is

[哲伦 周 · Rating 4 out of 5]

補標. All I can say is… douban is trashy 垃圾豆瓣. 🤷🏻🤦🏻

[巴甫洛维奇 · Rating 3 out of 5]

以左翼台湾人的视角探讨台湾问题以及台湾人的复杂情结比较难得，为研究台湾近现代史提供了光明的路径。而本书更想表达的、作者反复强调的那碟醋凝练成一句话便是：警惕换皮殖民主义。如果读者能够明白这番意图的话，那么就能理解此条目在豆瓣下架的原因了。

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

An innovative look at cultural studies, forging new lines of inquiry and discovery. Particularly relevant in our somewhat turbulent times.

[CL Chu · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is a grain of truth in the book's assessment of the dilemma of Taiwanese nationalism ca 2000. Fortunately, academics (and civil society) in the past twenty years have tried to expand and refine the meaning of being a Taiwanese as well as reflect on the legacy of colonialism and Cold War.

The trouble stays with us - there is a constant danger of appealing to "freedom and democracy" when the authoritarian regime has done the same under the anticommunist disguise in the 1960s. If those words only mean "economic growth and some sort of alliance with the capitalist world," then they become hollow & easily appropriated. What exactly do those values mean in the 2020s for the island and all its diverse peoples must be continually sorted out.

[Andre · Rating 1 out of 5]

Sigh, forwords with roman numerals... at least these were only 14 pages.
The author stated that postcolonial studies are obsessed with the West is definitely an early plus for this book. And luckily, the words that he is using are easy enough to understand, but his sentence structure of cramming many smaller sentences into one, make it difficult to follow him.
His statements regarding China and colonialism can either be interpreted that it was colonized but not in the same way as Taiwan and Korea, or that it wasn't colonized at all. Curious. He doesn't even seem to consider Manchuria to be a colony, merely a puppet state. And if he considers Japan to be colonized due to American occupation, does that mean he considers Germany to have been colonized? Later, it was clear: He does consider Germany and other European areas to be politically, economically and culturally colonized by the US.
Apparently, during the Cold War, the Left projected its romantic longing onto China (and became confused and disillusioned by the Cultural Revolution) and the right projected its colonial nostalgia onto Taiwan (seen as the real China as well as a shadow Japan) and South Korea. Ironic.
And considered that this book came out in 2006, I do wonder what the author would write today in regards to the topics of China's opening, deimperrialization, regional integration and the fear of China in the rest of East Asia.
He says that South Korea, Taiwan, mainland China, India and Sri-Lanka are in third-world locations. But while I can see why the latter three could be considered third-world if you go by the Cold War structures, but how does that work with South Korea and Taiwan? Both were firmly in the western camp during the Cold War and economically, they weren't third world either at the time and certainly not today. Furthermore, in an earlier passage he critisized someone for taking exceptional anectdotes as something common, but it seems to me that he does the same here when he claims the Taiwanese ideology of belonging to Southeast Asia due to aboriginal ties to be something widespread. And in the chinese world French civilization represents the pinnacle of the mysterious and romantic western culture? That is new to me. I remember some things that would fit that but not that much as he suggests here. In the taiwanese media that I consumed so far this desire to be acknowledged by the mainlanders doesn't come across as he suggests it here. It seems rather that national sovereignity was not acknowledged, not so much any identity. Did it change so much over the last 20 years? Or is this a KMT thing? And saying that the chinese chauvinism cultivated by Chiang Kai-shek and his son harmed Taiwanese society is new.
I wish I could have read the entire book, but it was impossible. The author just has too bad of a sentence structure for me to keep track of what he is doing. Idecided to jump to the last chapter because that one's title at least suggests something interesting, unlike the prior ones where I often had no clue what was going on. In the last chapter, he definitely says that Han racism exists, that is w elcome change from what I usually hear on the topic of racism. Indeed, that chapter was refreshing to read. Even though it is about the specifics of Han racism (how e.g. it defines levels of humaness to other ethnicities), it has much better sentence structure than the prior chapters. And especially the saint concept sounds really problematic.

[Nurul · Rating 4 out of 5]

Asia sebagai pusat produksi pengetahuan telah menjadi suatu pergerakan yang memunculkan issue akan Asia as Method ini. Terdorong dari wacana masa pasca perang dingin dan pasca postkolonial, Chen Kuan-Hsing ingin mencoba mengangkat dan menganalisa bagaimana kontemporer Asia telah dibentuk dari kejadian diatas dan bagaimana menyampaikan wacana akan keterkaitan dan kesenjangan hubungan kekuasaan global pada Asia itu sendiri. Perdebatan akan adanya Asia as Method itu sendiri sudah dimulai sejak tahun 1960 di Jepang. Lalu Chen dan beberapa intelektual seperti Wang Hui dari China dan Cho Hee Yeon yang berasal dari South Korea mulai menyuarakan debat akan demokrasi, perkembangan dan perubahan sosial di Asia yang terdiri dari berbagai macam suku dan etnisitas.

Chen ingin melihat bagaimana reaksi negara-negara dunia ketiga terhadap adanya perang dingin dan bagaimana perang dingin telah membantu membentuk Asia sebagai kesatuan wilayah yang memiliki kesamaan sejarah kolonialisasi dan imperialisasi.
Dalam buku Asia as Method ini juga Chen ingin mengemukakan akan adanya lokal kolonialisasi dan imperialisasi di dalam negara-negara Asia itu sendiri. Perang dingin berperan aktif dalam jalannya beberapa negara di Asia Timur, dan itu adaalah salah satu hal yang juga menunjukkan akan adanya kesenjangan pada pertumbuhan dan pergerakan politik, ekonomi dan kebudayaan di beberapa negara tersebut. Tujuan Chen adalah mengembangkan proses “self-critique, self-negation, and self-rediscovery” pada diri masyarakat khususnya di Asia.

Chen memulai dengan membuat analisis perbedaan antara kolonialisasi dan imperialisasi. Pergerakan Jepang di Taiwan dan Korea bisa diartikan sebagai kolonialisasi, tetapi di China dimana secara fisik ataupun kependudukan tidak pernah dijajah oleh Jepang, keterlibatan Jepang di negara tersebut bisa didefinisikan sebagai imperialisme. Daerah koloni akan dipimpin langsung oleh si penjajah tersebut, sementara dalam kasus imperialisme, negara yang terimperialisasi mempunyai kekuasaan atas daerahnya itu sendiri. Kolonialisasi adalah pengertian akan imperialisasi yang lebih dalam dan dari situ juga bisa disimpulkan bahwa pergerakan deimperialisasi lebih luas dari dekolonialisasi.

Pada chapter 5 Chen memetakan konstruksi peranan negara dan civil society dalam kegiatan politik di ruang politik negara tersebut. Chen berpendapat bahwa perbedaan antara negara dan civil society belum terlalu jelas dan bahwa pada kenyataannya pada beberapa negara di Asia Timur civil society masih menjadi bawahan dari kekuasaan negara tersebut. Disinilah keberadaan atas political society merasa menjadi keharusan, political society bisa menjadi media atau tempat bagi masyarakat untuk memodifikasi hubungan antara kekuasaan dan kepentingan masyarakat.
Dengan adanya pengertian tersebut Chen bermaksud untuk meningkatkan kesadaran antara sesama wilayah-wilayah di Asia yang pernah terkolonisasi. Chen mengajak masyarakat untuk lebih aktif mengadakan inter-referencing kepada bangsa-bangsa di Asia untuk menganalisa dan lebih terbuka akan transformasi sosial dan perjuangan-perjuangan sesama negara di Asia yang bertujuan untuk memperkuat hubungan kekuasaan global antar negara-negara tersebut.

“....decolonization is the attempt of the previously colonized to reflectively work out a historical relation with the former colonizer, culturally, politically, and economically. This can be a very painful process involving the practice of self-critique, self-negation, and self-rediscovery, but the desire to form a less coerced and more reflexive and dignified subjectivity necessitates it.”

Salah satu kutipan yang menarik adalah ketika Chen menekankan bahwa salah satu cara untuk menuju dekolonisasi adalah dengan mengikutsertakan proses self-critique, self-negation, dan self-rediscovery pada diri individual. Bahwasanya niat dan gerakan antara the colonized and the colonizer untuk mengatasi masalah politik dan ekonomi pasca perang adalah sangat diperlukan, tapi kesadaran dari diri masing-masing untuk bisa lebih fleksibel dan kritis terhadap masalah tersebut.

[Sense Hofstede · Rating 1 out of 5]

Misrepresents Taiwan. Work of a pro-PRC nationalist dressing his work up in the garbs of anti-US imperialist ‘marxism’. Selectively uses unrepresentative examples to mislead an audience that may not be too familiar with Taiwan.

Serious issues with citations: undercited, selective use of citations, and whole sections that consist of merely restating one single work.

Uses outdated historical materialism, has many logical flaws and non sequiturs. Author mistranslates a few Chinese phrases to benefit his argument. Deduces conclusions from too little evidence without many arguments.

[L · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's easy to get too engrossed with your specific field of study and forget about how your readings and education inform your method of analysis. I found the work to be very helpful for scholars of Asia to think about Asia outside of a Western framework, or at least try to.