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.
My colleagues told me, when you resign, just say you feel unwell. Don't speak the truth. I thought I would do as they said, because that's the way things are done in Taiwan. But when I met my bosses, I couldn't help it. I decided since I'm leaving, I'll be honest.
You took what I wrote, you wrote nothing, but you put your name on it, and did not include mine. It is unethical, I told my boss. He feigned ignorance. You have mistaken me, I must have forgotten, you must understand I am so busy, don't malign me, he said. I did not.
With my admin manager, I said, you cannot make decisions without consulting our colleagues. When awarding bonuses, there should be fairness. How should I do it, she asked? Should I not give bonuses, to be fair then? No, I said. Come out with a system that measures performance.
Finally, when I have resigned, I finally dared to be honest at the workplace. My colleague said: you are finally a human rights defender! Another said: thanks for speaking up, you have been quiet for so long. I can finally live up to this badge, after staying silent.
This is why I keep speaking up about worker disempowerment in Taiwan. In both places I worked at, my colleagues have been quiet even as they are angry with how things are run at work. But while Taiwan is a democracy, Taiwanese don't feel they can speak up at work.
And I was just another worker in Taiwan who feels compelled to keep quiet and be oppressed by our bosses, and the hierarchy. It is a pity that you can only speak up when you resign, my colleague said. And even then, it's only me. You are so brave, some colleagues say.
Most Taiwanese would keep quiet, pretend they are unwell, then leave. Several of my colleagues did that. I am not brave. I am naive, I told my colleague. And that allows you to be brave, she said. But it was too late. I've already resigned. And things won't change at work.
Things won't change because my boss pushed me back down when I challenged him during my exit interview. My admin manager rolled out a new online system for leave application, but instead of replacing the old redundant one, wanted the old and new systems to be run together.
Taiwanese workplaces don't want to change. And this represents not just workplaces, but how the government is run. Which is why things don't change. Everyone wants to keep using the old ways of doing things, no matter how cumbersome it is, because they don't want to change.
They don't want to change because it requires them to try new things. And even if workers wanted to propose new solutions, bosses won't listen. It's how it's like where I work. In the end, workers don't try to think about improving the system. They do as they are told.
And then things remain broken. This is how it has been over and over, my Taiwanese friends tell me. Taiwan is a democracy, but its workplaces are authoritarian. Workers feel powerless, things don't change. Taiwan trumps its democracy to the world, but internally it's different.
How can Taiwan expect to advance in its democratic development, if it does not want to empower workers, if it does not want to strengthen labor unions, increase wages, create a whistle blowing system to protect workers and penalize unethical bosses with illegal practices?
As long as Taiwan turns a blind eye to the how workers and their rights are not protected, how can Taiwan say it's a champion of democracy? How can I shout out loud about Taiwan's democracy when I know in practice, there are pockets of oppression, which silences people?
My Taiwanese colleague joked, the difference between Taiwan and Singapore is that in Taiwan, you can speak up but won't be politically persecuted. But things won't change too. Workers are oppressed too. And while we want to celebrate Taiwan, we need to hold it accountable.
I am finally a human rights defender, after nearly 3 years of complicit silence. After 3 years, I found my voice again. But it took being so angry at work with feeling so disempowered, that I finally decided to quit the game. That I finally chose not to be oppressed.
But speaking up meant risking my job. As was the case in Singapore. So when we say Taiwan is a democracy, is it one that flourishes from bottom-up engagement from citizens, or is it a top-down one used to market Taiwan and make Taiwan look good vis-a-vis China?
If so, there's a part of Taiwan's democracy that is hypocritical, where citizens continue to feel disempowered and oppressed. This is the reality. Of course, Taiwan has strong NGOs, there are vibrant protests, it has Asia's largest LGBTQ parade. There's transitional justice.
But Taiwan's crony capitalism is bad. Money in politics still exist more than you expect of a democracy. Strikes are very few, because workers have little unionization power. And strikes are more effective than the protests which are tolerated because they have little impact.
But how serious is Taiwan in its democratization then? Is Taiwan willing to take an honest look at its democratic development, instead of thinking that because it has better democratic functions than other countries in the region, that this will do? US will support it anyway.
I understand that perhaps Taiwan's democratization is a process. A colleague said, Taiwanese youths only started being more aware after 2014's sunflower movement. And Taiwan's democratization will take another 20, 50 years or more, other Taiwanese say. Maybe I'm too impatient.
But I'm just pointing out what I see. These are the problems, and there aren't enough people speaking up on them, on worker rights, on empowering citizens. China's threat, while very real, has taken away the attention from these issues, while also being an excuse to ignore them.
A colleague said, when the main opposition KMT is so bad it offers no real alternatives, and when the smaller progressive parties are too weak, there's simply no impetus for current ruling party DPP to do better. And internal party factional politics take precedence.
But the DPP is trying. It enabled easier referendums, it wants to change the constitution. Perhaps if the Taiwan identity is more resolute, it would finally allow refocus onto worker rights. But will it? Can they not be dealt with together? They can. But why isn't it done?
Taiwan is at its peak, arguably the best #COVID19 performance globally, countries appealing to it for semiconductor chips, Taiwan has the support of other democracies. Internally, Taiwanese feel greater pride. But among workers, disillusion and loss of hope continues.
Things at workplaces won't change, but at least Taiwan is recognized. Yay! But while Taiwan is at its peak, isn't this the best time for Taiwan to try to change things? Moreover, how long can this peak last, when other countries are competing to develop their own chip industry?
It is not my place to say these, perhaps, because I'm not Taiwanese. But what I'm saying is what I'm told by Taiwanese. And an honest reflection is needed. Taiwan's colonial background might make people overcompensate, accept that being oppressed is an acceptable state.
Perhaps greater Taiwan pride might allow people to become more confident, and then demand for greater changes to the system. Perhaps then this is the long game in the social & democratic revolution. But it doesn't hurt to understand these things are being swept under the carpet.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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.
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.
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.