Asian Intellectuals for Cultural Resistance: Departures and Disruptions
Abstract
In the past, the emergence of viable intellectual groups had been stunted by the grip of colonial imperialism, apart from the long years of feudal tutelage that made the society subservient to its ruling ideology. Today, the challenges are far more complex. Calling for intellectuals to take up cultural resistance can be just a utopianistic fervour, unless we first unravel the obstacles that prevent intellectuals from making a substantive presence in society. In this paper, four main areas will be discussed, namely: (a) the relegation of intellectuals in this era of technoscientific and soundbites euphoria, (b) the domains in which intellectuals should take up the task of cultural resistance, such as addressing intellectual captivity, culturalism, ethno-religious exclusivism and neoliberalism, (c) the timidity in our context of forging an Asian intellectual solidarity and comradery, and (d) the need to forge autonomous and humanistic sociological thinking amongst Asian cultural and intellectual circles. At present, the struggle for cultural resistance is marked by departures and disruptions. Thus, it warrants the creative and critical approaches with foremost commitment in imagining the possibility of cultural resistance as a start.
Keywords: cultural resistance, intellectuals, culture circle, postcolonialism
References
[1] A. Pramoedya, The Role and Attitude of Intellectuals in The Third World, translated by Harrry Aveling, p. 47.
[2] Syed Hussein Alatas, Intellectuals and Nation Building: An Essay, Culture and The Asian Tradition, vol. 1, no. 4, 1974. p. 46.
[3] Read, Syed Hussein Alatas, Intellectuals in Developing Societies. London: Frank Cass, 1977; Edward Shils, ”Asian Intellectuals,” in the Intel.
[4] S. Edward, Representations of the Intellectual, Vintage Books, New York, 1996.
[5] 1969, As Chanchal Sarkar pessimistically wrote decades ago that he was convinced that, intellectuals in Asia are ineffective. They are very thin on the ground. As a class they would find it impossible to live even reasonably well of their gifts of mind. Their status is low, their influence on policy feeble. Theirs is not the voice of passionate protest and they themselves far from being the catalysts of modernization, Chancal Sarkar, Their isnt the Voice of Passionate Protest, The Asia Magazine,.
[6] Read for instance, Ahmad SyafiiMaarif, ”PengkhiatanKaumIntelektual Indonesia: PerspektifKebudayaan,” in HerySucipto (ed.) Islam Madzhab Tengah: Persembahan 70 TahunTarmiziTaher. ( Jakarta: Grafindo, 2007).
[7] E. S. Juan, “The Poverty of Postcolonialism,” Pretexts: Literary and Cultural Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 57–74, 2010.
[8] Rendra a renowned Indonesia poet calls for affirming the ”cultural paradigm” He highlights 4 main areas that need attention. Firstly is the ability to appreciate objective facts. Second categorising these facts so that it could be identified and differentiated effectively. Third cultivating an academic discipline, yet at the same time able to avoid consumptive intellectuality. Lastly: ”the wide opportunities to express and having opinions so that our students could feel his self as ’sovereign being” / having the rights as human being. The people’s rights is linked to his rights as a human and as an individual.” Rendra, Rakyat belummerdeka: sebuahparadigmabudaya. ( Jakarta: PustakaFirdaus, 2000), pp. 37-9.
[9] One such internal criticism came from F. Sionil Jose: ”The Filipino intelligentsia imbibed much of the elitism of its colonial master while it paid noisy homage to the grand ideals of justice, freedom and nationhood. It identified its interests basically with that of the power elite. It was more concerned with the form than the substance of democracy, paying scarce attention to the ancient exploitation of the peasant and the land hunger of the larger masses of people...Filipino intellectuals have argued and fought for freedom, but for themselves, and not for the farmer who feeds them, the factory worker who clothes them…” ”The Filipino Intelligentsia” Index on Censorship. May 1998, pp. 80-81.
[10] A point made by Soedjatmoko on the impact of global communication on our local culture is illuminating ”The extent of our ignorance in this area becomes even more obvious when we turn the question of the impact of communications on Third World cultures around the address it to the industrialised West, before dealing with its impact on developing countries.” Soedjatmoko, ”Communications and Cultural Identity,” Thirld World Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 3, 1979, pp. 78-86.
[11] M. Yoshitaka, An Anatomy of Eurocentrism in Communication Scholarship: The Role of Asiacentricity in De-Westernizing Theory and Research,China Media Research, vol. 6. no.1, 2010.
[12] H. A. Giroux, “Liberal Arts, Public Philosophy, and the Politics of Civic Courage,” Curriculum Inquiry, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 331–335, 1987.
[13] Amilcar Cabral, Unity and struggle: speeches and writings. Texts selected by the PAIGC; translated by Michael Wolfers. Nairobi: Ibadan, 1980, p. 149.
[14] Ibid., p. 2.
[15] Edward Saids reading of literature is one critical approach which is interestingly hardly given attention, though he is much venerated as leading expert of comparative literature.
[16] At undergraduate programme, students simply dreadful to take literature as it is one that is most challenging when it comes to scoring good grades apart from the fact the technicalities of literary studies are at best.
[17] Jeffrey Arellano Cabusao, “The Social Responsibility of Filipino Intellectuals in the Age of Globalization and Empire: an Interview with E. San Juan. Jr. and Delia D. Aguilar,” Cultural Logic, p. 19, 2009.
[18] Ibid., p. 20.
[19] Ibid., p. 6.
[20] Edward Said’s struggle for the enlivened the imagined Palestine is one example of the cultural resistance.
[21] Noam Chomsky, ”The Responsibility of Intellectuals,” The New York Review of Books, February 23, 1967.
[22] An excellent account by Pankaj Mishra From The Ruins of Empire; The Revolt Against the West and the Remaking Asia. (London: Penguin Books. 2013).
[23] Pramoedya A. Toer, The Role and Attitude of Intellectuals in The Third World, translated by Harry Aveling, p. 48.
[24] Shils, Edward, ”Asian Intellectuals”, in the Intellectuals and the Powers and Other Essays. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1972, p. 379.
[25] Shil adds ”This cultural dependence has always carried with it overtones of inferiority. The response to this inferiority almost everywhere among Asian intellectuals has a propensity toward revivalism. This has entailed, in the new states, an effort to rehabilitate the indigenous culture, to make it prominent and more appreciated Among the most Westernized intellectuals there has been a quickening of interest in the traditional artistic, architectural, and religious inheritance. Here and there are efforts to modernize by reformulation in the modern idiom and to discover points of continuity between the cultural inheritance and the aspirations toward modernity.” Ibid., p.380.
[26] Read, Masao Miyoshi, ”Sites of Resistance in the Global Economy,”. boundary 2, 22:1,1995. pp. 61-84.
[27] Read, Syed Hussein Alatas ”Intellectual Imperialism: Definition, Traits, and Problems,” Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science, vol. 28, no. 1, 2000, pp. 23-45.
[28] MochtarLubis, ”Between Myths and Realities: Indonesia’s Intellectual Climate Today,” Asian Affairs, vol. 5, no. 1 (Sep. - Oct., 1977), pp. 39-46.
[29] Paulo Freire, Letters to Cristina: Reflections on My Life and Work. (London: Routledge, 1996), p. 121.
[30] Hilda and Miguel Escobar, Dialogue in the Pedagogical Praxis of Paulo Freire. (Tokyo: United Nations University, 1981), p. 34.
[31] Ibid., pp. 8-9.
[32] Masao Miyoshi, ”Sites of Resistance in the Global Economy,” p. 71.
[33] Edward W Said, Intellectuals in the Post-Colonial World. Salmagundi. No. 70/71, (spring-summer 1986), p. 64.