Something called the Asia Cultural Co-operation Forum 2005 (ACCF) – Open Forum, opened in Beijing today.  I think it brings together government people and intellectuals from around the region (and also from the US: it seems Jonathan Spence from Yale will be making an appearance) to talk about, among other things: Intellectual Property Protection, the Future of Asia Movies and Opportunities
for Cross-cultural Publication.  But the central theme of the conference just blew my mind: Brand Asia.  Here’s a description:

Developer of the concept of the Nations Brands Index Simon Anholt, Professor
of School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University,
Director of International Relations of Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation of South
Korea Song Weon Geun were invited as speakers at the first day of the Open
Forum.

At the forum, Anholt gave a speech entitled Branding Countries saying that
Nation Branding was a systematic process of aligning the policies, investments,
innovations, behaviors and communications of a country around a clear strategy
for achieving enhanced competitive identity.

It can be simply harmonizing the promotions of the tourist board and
investment promotion agency, or it can be a decades-long policy of coordinating
culture, sport, education, policy, trade and some other aspects into a coherent,
planned process, said he.

     So, "culture" becomes just another vehicle for enhancing "competitive identity."  But what of cultural products or practices that explicitly reject profit-seeking business strategies as crude and unethical?  You know, like Confucianism and Taoism.  Can they meaningfully survive the transformative effects of cultural globalization?

    The short answer is: no.  If Confucianism and Taoism are made into commodities meant merely to be consumed by middle class cosmopolitans (i.e. the people with sufficient money to be able to benefit from economic globalization) the world over, then they lose their philosophical depth and significance.  I can see Confucius becoming just another Martha Stewart household item to perk up a sunny Connecticut kitchen.  We can inscribe sayings from the Analects on Williams-Sonoma plates and sell them on eBay. The possibilities for "competitive identity" are endless.  Who cares if Confucius himself rejected tawdry, grubby profit-seeking?  What matters is: will it sell?

    I shouldn’t be surprised; I shouldn’t be depressed.  This is everything the post-modern cultural critics have been arguing all along.  But it is depressing to think how the possibilities for learning from ancient philosophies are being completely overwhelmed by global capital.  But, obviously, I have not been paying attention.  How ’bout a happy Chuang Tzu towel set.  We could use this picture; Martha would love it: