Left Flank

I always assumed the Golden Rule was unexportable, but Hans Küng argues for a globalized ethics based on the Golden Rule and a modified form of the Abrahamic religions.

Likewise, Confucius was the first to formulate the Golden Rule of Reciprocity: «Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.» Through the spread of Chinese characters, the concept of ren and the Golden Rule spread throughout the vast Chinese-influenced area that reaches from Central Asia to Taiwan and from Korea to Singapore.

This Golden Rule, however, also appears in the Indian tradition. In Jainism, it is stated as: «A man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated.» In Buddhism: «A state that is not pleasant or delightful to me must also be so to him; and a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?» In Hinduism: «One should not behave towards others in a way which is disagreeable to oneself. This is the essence of morality.»

This «Golden Rule» can also, of course, be found in the Abrahamic religions. Rabbi Hillel (60 B.C.) said: «What is hurtful to yourself do not do to your fellow man.» Jesus worded it positively: «So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.» Islam, too, has a similar concept: «None of you believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.»

Moreover, such commonalities go beyond the principle of humanity and the Golden Rule of Reciprocity. Four concrete ethical rules were laid down in the Buddhist canon by Patanjali, the founder of Yoga, in the Chinese tradition and, of course, in the three prophetic religions: «Do not kill,» «do not steal,» «do not bear false witness,» and «do not abuse sexuality.»

These trans-cultural ethical rules form structural elements of a common human ethic, whatever we call it, and make almost irrelevant the idea of a deep antagonism between «Asian» and «Western» values. If Asia focuses on its trans-cultural ethical core, an entirely new spirit of unity can be developed that uses soft power instead of military force and does not know enemies, but only partners and competitors. In this way, Asia could catch up with the West in terms of its cultural integration while contributing to the establishment of a genuinely peaceful new world order.

This project differs from the West's human rights movement, which is based on natural law thinking. The point is rather to integrate values, standards, and attitudes of ethical-religious traditions that, while appearing in each culture in a specific form, are common to all, and that can be supported by non-religious people as well.

Take these two quotes to understand the difference between the younger and the older generations in ROK:

"Most people believed or suspected this sort of thing was always going on and took it for granted," says Lee Ji-soo of the Center for Good Corporate Governance in Seoul. "The difference this time is that someone has come forward to speak out against it, and there are more people prepared to say that this is not acceptable.

"There is a generational divide in Korea," Lee says. "And the younger generation is saying that Korea can't move forward unless we overcome that old way of thinking to become a more transparent society."

(...)

The whistleblower himself has sought sanctuary. Mr Kim is housed and fed by the CPAJ. Meanwhile a whispering campaign against him is making its way around Seoul. Father Kim In-kook of the CPAJ defends him: «He spent a lot of time thinking what he should do; and he has concluded that uncovering these actions by Samsung will benefit society.» But Father Kim declined to meet The Economist, saying his group had made a collective decision not to talk to foreign reporters about the Samsung allegations. «We don't want to air Korea's dirty laundry to the world,» he said. They have that, at least, in common with Samsung.

And, if either article can't satisfy the urge to see dirt, here's another scandal brewing.

What might the presidential candidates do about the corrupt business sector itself? Not much, but not surprising for the older guys. One wants to coddle the indebted; another college grads. And, Lee Hoi-chang wants tax breaks for small businesses. How a corrupt culture could exist in ROK barely needs explaining.

"Competition for survival has become ruthless and morality disregarded," says Kim Mun-cho, a Korea University sociologist. "In the competition to be ahead of others, people resort to any means available, resulting in corruption."

Some blame the tendency to shave corners on a cutthroat mentality that developed in the wake of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, which shook Koreans' faith in an ever-expanding economy. Others contend that South Korea has never shaken off the mutual back-scratching culture of a small society, where the establishment has tight personal connections forged by blood, school or regional ties.

And some suggest that Korean society simply has an unhealthy obsession with success. "Living an ordinary life is not regarded as being successful, and staying still economically is seen as an unbearable retrogression," Kim says. "Korean society demands overachievement."

They forgot those cute white envelopes stuffed full of cash children receive on New Year's. And, William Pesek stumbles over another solution, but doesn't take a good point about legal rights for whistleblowers (via TMH) far enough. ROK needs to evolve from a republic by laws into a republic of laws.

(Actually, was antebellum America any less eager to cut corners?)