{"id":6214,"date":"2015-08-18T08:14:32","date_gmt":"2015-08-17T22:14:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wordpress-711166-2356953.cloudwaysapps.com\/?p=6214"},"modified":"2015-08-18T08:14:32","modified_gmt":"2015-08-17T22:14:32","slug":"unsettling-century","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peril.com.au\/topics\/politics\/unsettling-century\/","title":{"rendered":"Unsettling Century"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is, we are told, the Asian century and Australia\u2019s place in it is by no means \u2018settled\u2019. Over the past decade there has been endless commentary about the rise of China with India following a distant second. Prior to that economists talked with great fervour about the \u2018tiger economies\u2019 of Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and occasionally Vietnam. But the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 somewhat cooled their enthusiasm.<\/p>\n

There is, of course, a pre-history to these recent conversations and we could go back to Keating\u2019s pivot pre-ceded by Whitlam in China pre-ceded by any number of other examples. We could too begin to think through the Macassar and Indigenous relations in the top-end and slowly we might begin to understand that \u2018Asia\u2019 has always been irrevocably tied to \u2018Australia\u2019 and not simply geographically. The black-white myth that undergirds Australian national history simply forgets too much of the spectrum to be factually correct.<\/p>\n

Australia is not an island. The resilience of these myths attests to a vested interest many have in them. What then are ‘Asians’, including those of us in Australia and their fellow travellers, to do with ‘Australia’? What hay can we make while the sun of this century shines? These are political questions as much as they are questions of identity and culture.<\/p>\n

In the 1990s \u2018Asian values\u2019 became a term for the elements of society, culture and history that were common to Southeast and East Asia. Codified in the Bangkok Declaration of 1993, \u2018Asian values\u2019 was a transnational \u2018ideological state apparatus\u2019 promoted most keenly by Mahathir Mohamad (then PM of Malaysia) and Lee Kuan Yew (then PM of Singapore). It sought to create a pan-Asian identity centred around:<\/p>\n