From Sinocentrism to Civilization Discourse

Abstract

The Sinocentric dichotomy between civilized people and barbarian people has long been the worldview of East Asians. Although this view was challenged before, the decisive challenge was posed by the changes in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. What was the reason for the irreversible overthrow of traditional Sinocentrism and the adoption of what they had previously considered to be barbarianism?Qing China’s Kang Youwei (1857-1927), Japan’s Fukuzawa Yukichi (1835-1901), and Joseon Korea’s Yu Giljun (1856-1914) all thought Western civilization to be a more advanced civilization. However, the eventual aims the three men sought were not the same. From revitalization of Confucianism (Kang Youwei), permanent separation from the tradition of Confucianism through “de-Asianization” (Fukuzawa Yukichi), to the pursuit of a modern independent state without abandonment of traditional Confucianism (Yu Giljun), these three representative intellectuals of East Asia display how the traditional mentality formed during the premodern period continued to influence the modern transformation.The variations and methods of acceptance of the Sinocentric dichotomy of civilized and barbarian played a very important role in the formation of mentalities among the three nations of East Asia. Psychological responses to the injury created by the impact of the Western civilization were not unrelated to the extant mental attitude displayed by Sinocentrism. While China failed to abandon its narcissism and maintained its faith in its origins, Japan radically abandoned Sinocentrism and assimilated itself to Western culture–creating its own narcissism vis-à-vis others. Korea appears to have switched the object of assimilation beginning at the point of the Sino-Japanese War. While traditionalism may have persisted at the underlying level, the thrust of modern Korean society could be found in this transformation.