The whole of Myanmar is out in force today for the Burma Revolution to protest against the military coup and demand it moves aside. Threading photos from @cvdom2021 to show the scale.
I thought you are a UN-recognized human rights defender, my colleague mocked me. Then why didn't you speak up for us, she said. At the Taiwanese work place, hierarchy is steep and workers do not challenge bosses, for fear of losing their jobs or being scolded.
When my boss took my writings and put his name on it while omitting my name, I kept quiet. While our admin manager said that if we do did not follow the leave application procedures twice, she will deduct our bonuses, I kept quiet. We all kept quiet, because we feel powerless.
Taiwan is a democracy, but its workplaces are still authoritarian. When I finally gave my resignation letter just before lunar new year, my director told me - not everything can be democratic. As you grow older, you will become more authoritarian, he said. And this is in Taiwan.
The next 5 to 10, or 15 years of Taiwan's transition might be very important. China is expected to build up its capabilities to start a war, while some countries, like in Europe, are aiming to be able to manufacture leading-edge processor chips by then to compete with Taiwan's...
... semiconductor industry. This means it can no longer be business as usual for Taiwan. There's a need to review whether Taiwan's current economic model and the 5 shortages rhetoric (lack of land, water, power, manpower, and talent) contradicts with its national goals.
The 5 shortages are already irrelevant for the major export companies, which are paying higher salaries for tech talent and where youths flock to them, while their high profits can sustain increases to the costs of land, energy & water. 5 shortages should therefore be downplayed.
This is so touching. A person in Myanmar opens up about how he felt his silence previously made him "complicit in the genocide of Rohingya" and how recent protests have opened his eyes, and how he vows never to make the same mistake again.
The thing is, the unity in Myanmar today is allowing people to have greater empathy and solidarity with one another, it has helped to remove barriers and strengthen relationships and unity, and like I wanted with the HK protests, I want people in Myanmar to win too.
Because these social movements have such a power to transform societies and move them to another level, and if their governments are wise, it's such a powerful energy to rally, to build society, and to give people new hope and progress.
In our research, Taiwanese say innovation is poor in Taiwan because the government tends to invest in big companies or companies which are already innovating and they want to make a quick buck from, and tend not to invest in SMEs. The quality of innovation is also ...
... not monitored, leading to companies reporting on good outcomes on paper but with many so-called innovations not being followed up on, or not real. Research funds are also given due to 關係 (guanxi), resulting in younger/returning Taiwanese not getting research funds.
There's of course the usual issues of Taiwan's low salary, a lack of educational reforms, which therefore means the low wages results in subpar quality work, and the system gets stuck. A culture therefore develops where Taiwanese workers do not question the system, ...
What @acertainjolene is saying 👇. When authoritarian regimes oppress the voices of citizens, they start to believe their own stories, and when other countries continue to uphold so-called 'soft' authoritarians as examples, they start to think they do not need to change. And ...
... when such authoritarian models are spread across the world, it starts to embolden authoritarian regimes. There's no such thing as a 'soft' authoritarian. Believing that these regimes will come around while supporting their oppression is only allowing them to bide their time.
By the time authoritarian regimes become stronger together and democracies become more reliant on them, then democracies will be at their mercy. We can talk about localization and bringing production back to democracies, while ignoring the human rights transgressions ...
However, at which point do we want to start rebalancing Singapore's political situation?
When PAP's performance drops below 60%? 55%? 50%?
Do we want to wait for PAP to fail miserably before we try to prepare for an alternative scenario?
Will it be too late then?
For Singapore's long term stability, is it the interest of Singaporeans to prepare Singapore's political scene for a stable transition that involves multiple parties having the ability to negotiate and perform in a manner that will facilitate a smooth transition of power.