Comparative analysis reveals tensions between national identity and global influences in East Asia.
This paper will begin with an examination of the history of geographically construed national and regional identities (e.g. based on a clearly defined physical location, and based on contiguous proximity), particularly as they have developed in East Asia. These historical models will be compared to other components of contemporary globalized identity, where physical proximity is much less relevant (e.g. economic, social, even military contacts can directly link distant communities, regardless of who/what might geographically be in between). The comparative analysis will first address the issue on the global historical scale, then focus in on modern East Asia as a case study. It will explore how these modern elements of globalization are compatible with, or incompatible with, national and regional identities constructed around strictly physical geographical reckoning. It will conclude by suggesting alternate models of globalism and regionalism that fully account for alternate conceptions of contemporary international relations (e.g. China’s concept of “harmonious regionalism”).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brett McCormick (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: