Most teachers would agree with the following: Some days, your students leave you despairing for the future of the society into which they’ll eventually be unleashed, while on other days, they inspire you to believe that there is indeed hope for our collective tomorrow. Not long ago, I had an experience of the latter sort, and I’m still buzzing with excitement about it.
As executive director of the Graduation Pledge Alliance (GPA) in Asia, I regularly meet students, teachers, school staff and administrators to help them explore questions of social responsibility as they relate to students’ choices of careers and jobs and their on-the-job decisionmaking. As a taking-off point, we often use the Graduation Pledge of Social & Environmental Responsibility, which states: “I pledge to explore and take into account the social and environmental consequences of any job I consider and will try to improve these aspects of any organizations for which I work.”
First started in 1987 at Humboldt State University in northern California, the Graduation Pledge is a voluntary oath usually taken at commencement time by tens of thousands of students at well over 100 colleges, universities, professional schools and high schools in a growing number of countries. Much more than a piece of paper signed without thinking, the pledge represents a serious, lifelong personal dedication to make making the world a better place a priority in one’s work, whatever that work may be. By examining themselves and the world around them during their schooling, before graduation, students can develop a sense of empowerment.
Frequently, we hear in conversation or see in the media criticisms of the current crop of Taiwan youth. Members of the “Strawberry Generation” are accused of being soft, pampered and self-absorbed, without a sense of purpose or direction, and of possessing an overmaterialistic drive that leads them to seek get-rich-quick opportunities rather than pursue healthier, more stable career development. Yet the classes of English students I spoke to recently at Chinese Culture University certainly didn’t fit this dire description.
Most students already had clear ideas about the careers they wanted and they knew that there was more to employment than just making money. After group discussions, students said that the purposes of jobs included contributing to one’s organization, making achievements and satisfaction, gaining experience and broadening one’s vision, interacting with people and making friends, living happily with a sense of meaning and giving back to society.
I also asked the students to consider how they could improve the world. While they had good ideas, such as donating money to charity and teaching students about world issues, they were less able to come up with job-specific ideas.
But we shouldn’t judge them harshly for that, as they’ve grown up in a society where most employment has usually been seen as directed solely toward making a living and supporting one’s family. Until recently, Taiwanese workers were urged to just keep their noses to the grindstone, and leave decisions and thoughts about the effects of their work on society and the environment to management and the government.
Now, however, is a time of real hope, because we’re in the midst of several massive global shifts about how individuals, organizations and societies can, and must, live if we are to preserve what’s good in the world, address its numerous problems. This new thinking has gained a foothold in Taiwan and throughout Asia, and the challenge is to develop our visions of a brighter future, find the concepts and resources we’ll need and and join hands with those who share our dreams.
Matt Nicodemus is the executive director of the Graduation Pledge Alliance-Asia Regional Center, Taipei.
Taiwan might just give up. That’s the argument Simon Shuster made in The Atlantic’s October issue. The US is unreliable, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) leadership is aligned with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and Taiwan does not have the military capability to defend itself in a prolonged war without help. What hope does Taiwan have? Quite a bit more, in fact, than Shuster lets on. Shuster points to genuine problems. The first Donald Trump administration had a mostly positive record on Taiwan policy. It regularized the arms sales process, enhanced the military-to-military relationship, and treated Taiwan more like a normal
A Facebook post by Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) earlier this month achieved record levels of engagement — although perhaps inadvertently. In it, he attacked Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator and Taipei mayoral candidate Puma Shen (沈伯洋) for an op-ed published in 2014 discussing drug harm reduction policies. In attempting to stir up fear with talk of community centers, drugs and needles, Chiang’s comment section exploded. More than 100,000 comments poured in within the first two hours; more than 330,000 after the first 12; and more than 400,000 by noon the following day. Rather embarrassingly, many commenters made a point
Last year, Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) turned the Double Ten National Day ceremony into a platform for grievances against the government. Yesterday, standing before the president and foreign dignitaries, he warned against Taiwan becoming a “false democracy, in reality a dictatorship.” Then he called for unity. Democratic leaders must tolerate criticism, even on ceremonial occasions, but Han misused his position and a national celebration to insinuate that Taiwan’s elected president was steering the country toward dictatorship and cast himself as a statesman offering reconciliation. Han asked how Taiwan’s security should be examined, using a medical analogy. If he insists on playing
Southeast Asian food delivery platform Grab Holdings Ltd in March applied to acquire Delivery Hero SE’s Foodpanda operations in Taiwan, with the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) scheduled to announce its decision on Oct. 27. On the surface, the deal is a business merger — but in substance, it involves personal data, national geospatial information and digital sovereignty. It cannot be assessed solely in terms of market share and price competition. Grab has extensive and long-standing connections to Chinese capital. In 2015, Chinese ride-hailing firm Didi Chuxing and China Investment Corp, a sovereign wealth fund, invested in Grab. Grab invested in Chinese autonomous-driving