Eva Harris
ASTD 304
March 5, 2011
UMUC
Singapore
Early Legends and Facts
The earliest records of the area we now call Singapore goes back to the 3rd century when it was called Pu Luo Chung by the Chinese, a translation of the Malay word Pulau Ujong. Back then the area of Singapore was mainly a fishing village and a port between Sumatra and Melaka visited by mostly Chinese traders (Oakley, 2008). A later name of Singapore is recorded as Temasak, which literally means sea town, after a son of an Indian royal family had declared himself ruler of the Malays and set up a trade base there, according to legend (Baker, 2009). Another legend describes the name change from Temasak to Singapore. When, allegedly, a beast was seen on the island that resembled a singa, the Hindu word for lion, and the word pura was added, meaning city in Hindu (Baker, 2009).
It was during the time of Malay Sultanate that Melaka, the area we now refer to as Malaysia and Singapore, became a major trading port due to its geographical position and a great infrastructure built by royal Malay families, who ruled the Malays between the late 14th and 17th century (Baker, 2009). They built an infrastructure conductive to trade with low port fees, educated port officials, a police force and a navy fighting piracy, and keeping law and order. Very quickly, Melaka became the main center of trade in the Southeast Asian Sea forming alliances with the Chinese, Javans, Siamese, and Indians.
The people living in Singapore during the early times were mainly Malays, followed by the Chinese and Indians in the 19h and 20th century. Peranakan people are often referred to as the original people of Singapore. Early Peranakans were the result of early Chinese settlers in Melaka, around the 15th century, who mated with Malay women, and became the forefathers of the more modern Peranakans when great amounts of Chinese people immigrated to Singapore later in the century. Being part of the empire of Melaka, probably the greatest of the pre-modern Malay Sultanates of its time, Islam greatly influenced Singapore politics and religion at the time, providing unity and a sense of identity (Baker, 2009).
East meets West
The best-documented history of Singapore begins when contact with the West took place. Whereas contact with India and China had brought about mainly peaceful trade, cultural change, and diversity, Europeans were more interested in dominating the area for their trading purposes and control the people and their land during the 16th and 17th centuries. However, the Portuguese being the first Europeans settlers trying to control Melaka were rather unsuccessful in keeping up the former Sultanate’s achievement of making the area a major trading center for Portuguese purposes (Baker, 2008). After the defeat of the Portuguese by the empire of Johor and the Dutch, the Dutch established Singapore as one of their colonies and trading ports with the help of the Dutch East India Company around the end of the 16th century and 17th century. However, the Dutch had a rather negative effect on the positive image of Singapore as a trading port in Melaka.
Singapore’s rise began with the arrival of Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles in 1819 who worked out a deal with the British East India Company not to destroy Melaka as a trading port. At this point he was the head of the EIC, which had been rivaling the Dutch East India Company in the attempts to gain more power and control over British trade in the Southeast Indies. In 1826, Singapore became part of the Straits Settlement together with Melaka, and Penang to form an outlying residency of the British East India Company (Republic of Singapore, 2003).
The British saw Singapore as a good port to secure trading routes between India, China, and Malaysia in their competition with the Dutch and Portuguese. Raffles finally purchased Singapore from the Sultan Hussein who was also a rival of the Dutch, and the British East India Company now owned Singapore. Raffles realized his plans for Singapore and made it a free trade port, meaning that trading activities themselves were taxed versus individual trading actions (Chandler, 1985). It would be this free trade status that would catapult Singapore into one of the most flourishing trade ports of Southeast Asia within only a few decades.
In order to avoid quarrels among different cultures and people, Raffles also divided the city into districts that can still be seen on today’s city maps: the Arab quarter, Little India, and the Colonial District. The city was booming and established more great trading relationships around the world. Trading goods such as tin, rice, rubber, coffee, and steel were sold along the riverbanks and many people of different descents became very rich through trade and sales. People all over the city indulged in the new lifestyle and adapted to the mixing and mingling of cultures and religions. Buddhism and Islam had been the dominant religions in Singapore at the time but were now joined by a great amount of Indian Hindus and European Christians.
However, wealth and prestige also brought about more negative developments, such as prostitution, disease, opium addiction, violence, and gang warfare in the poorer parts of the city (Baker, 2009). However, overall, Sir Raffles had been successful in laying the groundwork of making Singapore the most important trading port in Southeast Asia by the turn of the 20th century. New banks were established in the city by the United States, France, and the Netherlands and thus secured money needed to expand production. Politically, however, there was some concern about Singapore being taken over by its lawless elements and change was only implied after the British established the Crown Colony in Singapore with its own government and administration run by the British government in 1867 (Baker, 2009).
By the turn of the 20th century, the modern centralized British government was accepted and welcomed by the people of Singapore, most of which had been born into the multicultural environment of the city. There was, however, still a great gap between Westerners and Europeans living in Singapore and all others, most of which had immigrated from China, India, and Malaya. Westerners still formed an elite society that was considered superior to any of the Asian groups, no matter how successful or wealthy they were. Despite this distinction in class, people in Singapore accepted the institutions and rules of British rule, especially the advancements in education and the development of a health care system (Baker, 2009).
Independence
The first steps towards independence from British rule were taken following the two World Wars. Singapore was minimally involved in World War I, although it benefitted economically from the rising demand in raw materials during that time. However, during World War II, Singapore fell into the hands of the Japanese and many people living in Singapore, Europeans and Singaporeans alike became victims of Japanese torture, execution, and abuse. During Japanese occupation, people in Singapore had fought for what they considered their land and culture, and they had resisted until the Allies defeated the Japanese. The events of World War II certainly brought the people of Singapore closer together and formed a national identity. They strongly believed that they did not need the British or anybody else to tell them how to live their lives, now that the city of Singapore was called home to more than a million people (Baker, 2008).
After the Japanese were defeated in August 1945, Singapore was given back to British control, expected to pick up the pieces following the destruction of World War II. However, for the reasons mentioned above, British rule was now in question and with the rise of the socialist People’s Action Party founded in 1945, Singapore started moving towards self-governance (Oakley, 2008). Lee Kuan Yew was an English-educated Singaporean who first became the secretary general of the PAP and later Singapore’s first prime minister after arrangements for an internal government had been made. He would hold this title for the next 31 years starting in 1959 (Oakley, 2008). Lee Kuan Yew realized his aspirations to bring more equality and social justice to all Singaporeans by using British models for health, housing, education, and income (Baker, 2009) Up until this day, the PAP is the dominant party in Singapore and under Yew’s leadership, Singapore made enormous progress to eliminate the class system, provide more jobs, diversify the economy, and control labor policies.
In the 1960’s, the British decided to withdraw regional colonial rule and created the state of Malaysia, including Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore. Unfortunately, Singapore was excluded in 1965 because of Malay dread of Chinese dominance (Oakley, 2008). Singapore was declared a sovereign and independent nation on August 9th, 1965. This was the first test for Singapore to prove they could make it on their own. Only a few years later, the British announced that they would withdraw their military force by 1972, which accounted for 15 to 20% of Singapore’s national income. Government and people realized they had to stand on their own feet once again (Baker, 2009).
Knowing that a strong government, a good infrastructure, and effective work force had been the reasons for Singapore’s success in the past, Singapore’s government immediately started programs to instill a strong work ethic among its people. Land formerly owned by British forces were used to build new housing and industrial areas, and the air fields were used to build the future Changi International airport. Singapore succeeded in staying interesting for foreign investors and also benefitted from the Vietnam War by supplying US forces with nearly everything they needed.
Singapore Today
Singapore today is one of the most densely populated countries of the world. Its national language is Malay but due to its history of multiculturalism, many other languages are spoken, such as English, Tamil, and Chinese. The parliamentary system of government rests the political authority with the Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Toong, who is also the leader of the political party PAP. The president of Singapore, S.R. Nathan, takes over a ceremonial and representing role (Republic of Singapore, 2003). Although the popularity of the PAP dropped since the elections of 1984, the PAP has successfully defended their position and remains in power.
Since the 1980’s, the island nation of Singapore has proven its abilities to constantly modernize its society and maintaining a stable economy. The people of Singapore now have a national identity that views them as Singaporeans, many of which have Chinese, European, or Indian roots. Shortly after its independence, leaders of the PAP had introduced a limit to Western influence and banned magazines such as Playboy or Cosmopolitan from newsstands. This was done in the hopes of bringing Singaporeans back to their Asian values, along with the offering of classes in Mandarin, Confucianism, Taoism, and other traditions rooted in Asian culture. It was not long before these rules were loosened as a result of the continuing exposure to the West and the lifestyle that came with it. Singaporeans realized that they wanted more freedom and less political control (Baker, 2009).
Fortunately, Singapore was not nearly as affected by the Asian economic crisis as its neighbor countries and recovered very well. The model of liberal capitalism and illiberal democracy had proven to be successful for the republic, however, entering the 21st century, Singapore had become a global player with an annual household income of $40 000 (Baker, 2009). Its challenges are now to secure its position on the global market with more competitors. More productive and better skilled workers are constantly needed, which partially promoted another recent wave of immigration to Singapore.
With a low unemployment rate and a relatively high general household income, life in Singapore is good for most of it inhabitants. Anybody who has walked the bustling streets of Singapore with its many shopping opportunities, colorful markets, and exotic variety of foods from all over the world knows that this city provides a fantastic quality of life for anybody who chooses to live and work there.
Conclusion
Singapore has come a long way from its early beginnings as a fisherman’s village, to developing its superior situation as a trading port under Malay Sultanate, growing into a city of international trade under British rule, and finally its independence as a nation state. It is no wonder that the people of Singapore have been looking for their true identity after being influenced by so many different cultures. While it is undoubtedly part of Monsoon Asia, one cannot ignore the European influence on land and people since the Portuguese, followed by the Dutch, and the British set foot on the island. Singapore has been and is a melting pot for all kinds of cultures from all over the world and by absorbing numerous of those cultures into the existing ones; it has grown into a city full of cultural diversity. There is no doubt in my mind that Singapore will continue its economic growth and expand its cultural diversity going forward in this century.
References
Baker, J. (2009).Crossroads: a popular history of Malaysia and Singapore. Singapore: Marshal Cavendish International.
Chandler, D.P., Roff, W.R, Smail, J. R.W., Steinberg, D.J., Taylor, R.H., Woodside, A., Wyatt, D.K. (1985). In search of Southeast Asia: a modern history. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Oakley, M. (2008). Singapore Encounter. Oakland, CA: Lonely Planet Publishing.
Republic of Singapore. (2003). Source: Background Notes on Countries of the World. Retrieved February 24, 2011 from Academic Search Complete.
Shuudan-Ishiki and the Japanese Education and Employment System
Eva Harris
University of Maryland University College
Abstract
This paper will explore the role of shuudan-ishiki (group cohesiveness) in Japanese society and its importance in the educational system and employment. Group cohesiveness has been deeply rooted in the Japanese mind for centuries and is reflected in the way society models behavior to its children from the moment they are born. School and university education prepares children to explore individual spirit and character (seishin) in order to later be integrated in a cohesive work force where most decisions are made by a system that includes all members of a group (ringi system), and where lifetime employment is representative for the harmonic idea of strong organizational consciousness (dantai-ishiki).
To the Japanese, shuudan-ishiki means to belong to a group and to do what is expected in order to keep group harmony. Its origins can be traced back to the introduction of Chinese Confucianism to Japan, which emphasized hierarchy, social order, and achieving a common goal by working hard while maintaining harmony (Murphy, 2009). These basic rules are still applied in Japanese society today and are especially reflected in the educational system as well as the employment system, by strongly supporting group activities, a collective decision-making making process, and emphasizing long-term relationships as a key to success for all. This essay explores how Japanese schools prepare a young adult for the individual effort they are expected to bring to the work force, by teaching them about seishin (individual spirit and character development), shudan-ishiki (group consciousness and belongingness), and dantai-ishiki (organizational consciousness).
According to McDonald (2007), “morals and sociability are found in the commonsense of the group and the naturalness of relationships within the group” (p. 10). Japanese children learn this principle from an early age on upon entering the educational system. Within their families children learn quickly about the mutual support and obligation among family members, a situation that is reflected in their future education and work situation (Singelton, 1989). Group cohesiveness is always supported in early school days by playful group activities. However, it is in junior high school that most Japanese children learn about the hard individual discipline they have to follow in order to become a valued member of society. Getting university is the primary goal for most students, however, it is a very elite group that will be allowed to elite university based on high achievement in the entrance exams (Singleton, 1989). It is a family and community affair to make sure the student gets all the support he needs to master the exams in order to be accepted to a good school, which will in turn ensure that they will appropriately contribute to society upon entering the work force. When a student is not accepted to university, it essentially disturbs the harmony and common goal within the entire support group.
Upon being accepted to University is when the real search for seishin begins. A university curriculum not only includes the specific studies but also the “cultural curriculum”, where students learn how to find their place in society (McDonald, 2007). While the support from family and community continues, university students also learn to live among their university elite and further develop their group cohesiveness by participating in extracurricular clubs such as sports and art clubs. Similar to Western school clubs, these activities are supposed to enhance a young person’s understanding of group solidarity, commitment, achievement, and equality (McDonald, 2007). Here, students learn how to be competitive in a social environment and manifesting their productive place in it rather than being better than everybody else. After all, it is part of the Japanese mentally to be group-oriented and strive for group harmony instead of being singled out (Adhikari, 2005). Individuality can repeatedly be reinforced, however preferably within a group, teaching a student the importance of social promotion, which will accompany him throughout his life and career (Singelton, 1989).
While attending university, students learn how important it is to be a part of a group and to form long-term relationships, which is essential for the “maximization of collective utility” (Adhikari, 2005, p. 64). According to Singleton (1989), “exclusive group solidarity and group commitment are part of the real or hidden educational curriculum for Japanese students”. (p.12). Typically, this accounts for the same status group but also within the sempai-kohaki relations (junior to senior obligation and privileges) (Singleton, 1989). This mentality will follow them into the work force upon graduating from university. Many companies in Japan today still practice lifetime employment with a seniority system, which means that they will employ a person until it is time for them to retire, and promotion or salary increases are based on seniority (Nippon, 2006).
Equipped with the drive to work hard to achieve group success, many students strive for lifetime employment as it ensures the benefit of being part of a collective whole that contributes to society. In a big organization, shuudan-ishiki goes hand in hand with dantai- ishiki and the employee will identify with his employer and co-workers in order to achieve the common goals of the company. Dantai-ishiki in this sense means to consciously be aware of the organization one operates in and to know where the individual place is in order to effectively contribute to goals and achievements.
However, group oriented Japanese management does not stop with organizational consciousness by its workers. According to Adhikari (2005), “group duties rather than individual duties and responsibilities, and collective decision making by consensus are other features of Japanese management practices” (p. 65). Especially, the ringi-system, or business decision-making process, is representative of shuudan-ishiki within an organization and the government. Whenever a business decision has to be made that affects all employees of the institution, a proposal is written up by lower-level management. It is then passed through all levels of the institution with all parties giving their consent before it is passed by upper management (Nippon, 2009).
The cooperation of the entire group in the ringi system or decision making-process is another good example of collectivism in national Japanese politics, big businesses, and other elites (Adhikari, 2005). Japanese society teaches its children from an early age on to develop their individual identity within the group and to adapt a way of thinking collectively rather than individually throughout the educational system. While the educational and employment system might slowly adapt to a more individualistic and Western way of operating, I believe that shuudu-ishiki is so deeply rooted that it will stay one of the core principles of Japanese society for a very long time as it has helped manifest Japan’s position in the world as a remarkably productive nation with remarkable people supporting it all the way.
Word count: 995
References
Adhikari, D. R. (2005). National factors and employment relations in Japan. Tribhuvan University. Retrieved May 26, 2010 from http://www.jil.go.jp/profile/documents/Adhikari.pdf
McDonald, B. (2007). The university rowing club as a site of moral and social education in Japan. Victoria University. Retrieved May 26, 2010 from www.isdy.net/pdf/eng/2007_05.pdf
Murphy, R. (2009). A history of Asia, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Nippon “The Land and Its People”, 8th Edition. (2006), Tokyo, Japan: Gakuseisha Publishing Co. Ltd.
Singleton, J. (1989). Gambaru: a Japanese cultural theory of learning. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
