Liberal Polycentrism in East Asia: Not “Small” or “Big,” but Bottom-Up - Response to Sungmoon Kim

Sungmoon Kim’s criticism largely misunderstands liberal polycentrism and the cultural knowledge problem that motivates it. In his attempt to defend a pragmatic Confucian democracy, he doubles down on precisely the monocentric thinking that polycentrism transcends. He conflates liberal polycentrism with standard political liberalism. Kim seems to think that our position merely seeks a neutral state in which Confucianism is contained within small social worlds. While our framework does adhere to state neutrality, it is not merely a management strategy for pre-existing differences. It is grounded in cultural experimentation in the face of ongoing social change. We are not simply trying to carve out maximum space for plurality because people disagree. Rather, we recognize that we do not, and cannot, know how these differences will interact, revise, and evolve to produce new cultural pathways beyond what exists. Kim misses this point, and it is not a small one.