On the 25^th of last month, Seoul National University Professor Emeritus of Sociology Sang-Jin Han visited Munich to discuss the Second Modernity and the East-West divide with University of Munich Professor Ulrich Beck, an expert on “risk society.” Professor Beck stated that with the entry into the Second Modernity, which is caused primarily by modernity’s creative destruction, the East and West are moving along different paths – paths that require more dialogue.

“Governments assert that they can predict and manage risk, but in reality they are creating the risks in the process. Now governments need to recognize the risks that its citizens are starting to realize. The murky politics has become an unwanted part of managing affairs. And, in the end, the responsibility falls on not simply on government, but on diverse governance.”

There are few countries that are more receptive to Ulrich Beck and his world-renowned theory of “risk society” than Korea. In 1994~95 both the Seongsu Bridge and Sampoong Department collapsed, and many people expressed great interest in his theory when he first visited Korea in 2008. Coincidently, the mad cow disease crisis hit the country right after he left. For two months, the disease tempered controversy that led to candlelight vigils of nearly 7 million protesting citizens.

Beck also seems to be personally interested in Korea and East Asia. At a 2010 academic conference in Nagoya, Japan, he made an impactful observation. “For ages, the West has viewed the world via Western eyes, but this is clearly a biased perspective. Korea, Japan, and China scholars have also walked their own courses towards modernity in Asia, while we from the West have merely driven around in it. The Western experience is not universal. It’s particular. It’s now time that we begin to understand that things are not universal and teach one another the particularities of our circumstances.”

I was stunned by his candidness for even he, a global scholar, had at one point ridden on the crest of such Western-centric interpretations. His pointing out of the limits of Western universalism is significant to say the least. Interested in pursuing his idea further, my colleague Professor Young-Hee Shim of Hanyang University and I paid him a visit in Munich, Germany on our way to attend a global Sociology Association meeting in Italy.

Last June 25^th, at an elegant cafe in Munich, he expressed his somewhat controversial views. “I’m amazed at East Asia’s trend of self-destruction and at its overflowing energy for self innovation. I am personally against the West’s “burnout” modernity or “go-all-out” mentality. Even in the West, the internal characteristics are changing and a new generation is dawning. I call it the Second Modernity. But just as in the West, those changes are also sharply affecting East Asia.”

The European Union is a great example of how the world is entering the Second Modernity. However, there are several issues that exceed democratic politics. Economically strong and competitive, Germany is marginalized by its European peers. Instead of hearing out the views of other countries when the case of economic risks present themselves, these countries generally only stick to pointing out the changing courses nations are taking.

Disagreeing with this trend Beck plans to publish a paper with the provocative title, “German Europe” in August. According to Beck, “Germany aiming at Europe” has now become “Germany manipulating Europe.” He went on to say “though readers are sure to be surprised by my adopting a Nazi saying as the title, I’m going to do it my own way.”

Beck’s point is that modernity’s creative destruction is leading to the Second Modernity, and that history’s dialectic development is changing into a cosmopolitan (global citizenship-oriented) system. In addition, a tradition of the global citizen that can be traced back to the Greek Civilization is reemerging.

“The restructured European tradition that I’m speaking of is fundamentally different from the America-centric global hegemony. There’s diversity, difference, and a need to acknowledge the existence of others,” he said.

The West’s view of the Second Modernity is on the cutting edge of the avant-garde. This, according to Beck, is the effect of modernity’s rapid development. Rapid advancement is always self-destructive, he argues.

However, East Asia’s developmental path is different than that of the West’s. For these reasons, East Asia’s Second Modernity is also progressing along a different path. The West traditionally reached modernity through a natural process leading of self-enlightenment; however, the East was forced to throw away its culture to follow the path of modernization established by the West. As a result, a direct and simple model, like Creative Destruction, cannot begin to capture the full context of the Second Modernity. The relationship between the individual and society is a complex one. So before seeking out the cutting edge, we need to strive for systemic sustainability, equilibrium, and harmony.

The fact is that we’re looking broadside at the spillover effects of rapid modernization, an unfathomable risk society. “Japan, unlike Korea and China, seemed to be blindly pushing for a policy of individuality rather than addressing advancement with the social risk theory in mind. That quickly changed following the nuclear disaster that recently hit Fukushima. Citizens’ awareness of social risks and technology has increased greatly.”

Due to this situation, citizens are showing more active involvement rather than simply being the bystanders or objects of policy.

“Since the Middle Ages we’ve had a somewhat sanctimonious trust in scientific development as the measure of national advancement. We assume that democracy is evidence enough that our lives are protected. However, it is this very belief that has brought us to the brink of a risk society. The question is the ‘who’ and ‘how’ in establishing a system of governance for preventing and managing risk. The point is evident when you look at global economic risk management and China’s unilateral behavior.” Beck predicts that China, similar to the West, will follow its own route towards development. “Whether it’s free democracy or not, for social cohesion the government can impose policies to manage the risk caused by market competition. More freedoms are leading to the diversification of the family structure.”

Professor Shim and I wrote a rebuttal to some of Beck’s arguments after having researched his Korea and China findings. Namely, it was quite odd that he would profess that East Asia’s culture of individuality is leading to the diminishment of communitarian values. China’s notion of individuality is different from that of the West. China’s individuality has to do with escaping poverty and strengthening family solidarity. In the case of Korea, individuality among its youth moves with the diversity of a participatory network. Individuality and community values are simultaneously changing, rather than being mutually exclusive.

Beck believes that the Internet is accelerating individualism. However, in my view, the civilian communication revolution of the Second Modernity has more to do with the form in which it is changing us rather than simply accelerated individuality resulting. “Doesn’t the entry of new modes of media of the Second Modernity, like the Internet and SNS services, serve more as the heart of the revolution? Aren’t we talking about more than the general sources of popular opinion like newspapers and public broadcasts?”

As expected, Beck seemed to understand this point. Clearly, nations with stronger technological connectivity would have the upper hand when it comes to competing during the Second Modernity. It’s also a cause for a new risk governance model that can serve as a model for participatory democracy.

After having met Beck during his visit in Korea in 2008, Professor Shim and I went to Japan in 2010 and met with Beck and his wife Elizabeth again. Having studied at the same schools during the same time and on similar subjects, we connected fairly well with one another. To further prepare the “East-West Active Dialogue” in Nagoya, he and his wife planning to visit Seoul again in the fall of 2014.

Who is Ulrich Beck?

Ulrich Beck (1944 ~) is one of the most influential European sociologists together with the likes of Jurgen Habermas and Anthony Giddens. He received his doctorate degree in Sociology from University of Munich, and he is the director of the Institute for Sociology at Munich University. One of his most noted works is Risk Society (1986), which deals with the problems faced by modern society due to Western industrialization and modernization.