How relevant is cultural relativism?

I do not doubt the good intention of the United States government to bring the Iraqi people out of peril and suppression brought on by Saddam Hussein's regime and to free friendly states from malevolent menace. The chivalrous proclamation, to me, mingles with the pungent odor of oil and geopolitics. I doubt not if external efforts must be needed for bringing constructive and notable reform in Iraq, though I detest to acknowledge, the fact that US intervention shall be indispensable.

The same can be said in many other areas of the world where US intervention is found to be blatant and dominant, for instance in former Yugoslavia and East Timor. Thanks to the Tufts Institute for Global Leadership (TILIP) for organizing a number of lectures and inviting prominent speakers from all walks of life, many of whom allowed (and forced) me to further recognize the leading role of the US in spilling democracy throughout the world.

These talks often carry an air of American ego and arrogance and I, thus, hesitate to swallow. On the other hand, in every one of these talks and discussions, my Chinese fellows often raise the notion of cultural relativism. I totally sympathize with them that without acknowledging cultural difference as existing among different countries, which is also too often ignored by many Americans, big talks about globalization and democratization for instance shall prove to be no more than castles in air or instigating more notorious reactions and projecting a grimmer prospect.

The history of Iraq in the last century itself reminds us all of a memory too strong to forget. I see a paradox in front of me that while in theory we all acknowledge without difficulty that there exists some universal values and common goals we all strive for, there also exist cultural pluralism and diversities. I find that the American society seems to be too optimistic to overlook cultural pluralism, while my Chinese fellows are sometimes overly jealous about difference among cultures.

There are far too many talks and comments concerning the so-called American ego but as a Chinese, however, I would like to touch more on the "cultural pluralism" sentiment.

For Chinese, Tibet, Xinjiang and Taiwan are sensitive issues. Frankly speaking it hurts my feelings when I have to think about letting go any one of the three, seeing them seeking independence from the territory of China. But feelings are just feelings. The notion of cultural relativism is used by many to say that China has long been a multi-ethnic (or multi-national) country and that Tibet has long been a part of the China territory.

The notion of self-determination is said to be not applicable in the case of Tibet, or to dismiss the will of the Tibet people to seek autonomy by saying that it is only the minority who advocate it. I am not saying whether or not the self-determination principle should be applied in the case of Tibet.

It would be na??ve for one to say that if the Tibet people were once and are perhaps still a distinct race then Tibet should be independent, which is mere ignorance. This is also an issue of history and politics, that country (not nation) borders are arbitrary creations which take little concern about "true" nations.

In many cases the notion of cultural relativism may have nothing to do with the disputed topics; and in many occasions there are people who are just too ready to employ this notion to defend their own stance, which logically does not follow that their own stance could be defended, or in any case has anything to do with the stance they are defending.

In human rights talks for instance, the US system of democracy may be far from being the best political system that human beings can devise and the most suitable one to a particular culture and society concerned, but difference in culture surely does not entail a regime in which the definition and implementation of freedom and rights of individuals are to be subject to the discretion of some selected few. In the case of Taiwan, for instance, if cultural relativism does matter it is bewildering why most Taiwanese are so reluctant to rejoin the Mainland, at least at the moment concerned.

Furthermore, it makes little sense to me to say that we are different because we are from different cultures; or I should say that though emotionally I cherish such cultural differences which is an element defining and differentiating us all, consciously I sometimes believe it is helpless to say we are different because of our own cultures. Since we cannot satisfyingly explain the reasons for why there are such cultural differences, it would be perhaps more meaningful to rephrase the question into that given our common goals and values we so cherish to why are we not the same.

However, to answer this question we may have to argue among so many sets of values, which one is deemed the most desirable, which seem apparently a futile effort, and we may hopelessly return to square one _ cultural relativism as the panacea to all questions.

Patrick Pak-hung Lai is a student at the Chinese University of Hong Kong majoring in Government and Public Administration. He is participating in the TILIP program.