Losing Face

It is meant to be a Chinese thing. Face isvery important. A western synonym might be a combination of pride andcredibility. At any rate, it is important that a person not be seen to loseface; that they are not made to look foolish or stupid.  

In addition, the person who is right has tobe careful not to look too superior. They are all too conscious of the Westernproverb: “There but by the grace of God…”

The West, on the other hand is an “I told youso society”. It loves to rub the noses of its politicians in their mistakes andfailed promises. It positively drools at the prospects of adopting an air ofrighteous superiority.

Asian politicians will often give theiropponents a way out—an honourable exit. Their Western counterparts, will hound,pester and plague their rivals to the bitter end.  Their aim is tostrengthen their position with an adversarial political system that allowsnothing less than the total humiliation of their foe.

There are advantages and disadvantages to bothapproaches. The retention of face is more of a long game. It recognises thattoday’s enemy could be tomorrow’s ally. Forcing a loss of face is more a winnertakes us all scenario.

The prize in the West is higher. But so isthe price paid the loser, which is why they fight so hard to win, and if theycan’t win they fight hard not to lose. When caught in a lie—or a mistake– theydouble down, fabricate, invent,  cover-up, issue counter-accusations,rant, rave… almost anything and everything short of an admission of  erroror wrongdoing.

It is not only the specific politicians whoact this way. Their supporters follow suit. They are so afraid of being made tolook foolish in the eyes of friends, relatives and neighbours that they willmimic whatever their political leader says because they have no option to dootherwise if they wanted to avoid the dreaded phrase: “I told you so.” Thedangers of division and the opportunities for compromise and common purpose arehampered.

The Asian view, however, may ignore painfultruths with the danger that they may blow up in their faces at a later andinopportune time.

One system lends itself to the morefree-for-all democratic system with representatives elected by the public atlarge. The other leans towards a centralised totalitarian state or what somepolitical leaders are wrongly labelling “an illiberal democracy.”

At the moment the democratic system inBritain, America and the rest of Europe has thrown up extremism and division.The recent election of the far-right Vox party in Spain, Matteo Salvini’sLeague in in Italy, the success of the Alternative for Deutschland, Marine lePen in France, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, Donald Trump and hisimpeachment and Brexit and an extreme left-right election in the UK.

Political systems are constructed by falliblehumans and thus riddled with flaws. The democratic system is currentlyfoundering, Itsfailings are becoming apparent for all to see. But often thechoices are not between good and bad but between bad and worse. A combinationof common sense and common humanity dictates  it must be worse to denypeople the right to participate in the political process.

However, the West can still learn from lessrepresentative systems. Its politicians and their supporters can learn thevalue of saving face for themselves and their opponents. When the dust finallysettles—and it will—then the emphasis must be on finding a renewed commonpurpose. To do that Western political leaders should take a leaf from the bookof the East and avoid crowing: “I told you so.”

Tom Arms is currently completing a new book on Anglo-American relations.