Having immigrated to the United States when I was 8, I had to learn English and simultaneously assimilate to American society. While I was busy attempting to do all of that, my peers seemed always one step ahead of me. And in a way, they still are — culturally. Because I had to learn English at 8 years old, and because I had to learn how to live in a new country at that age, I missed out in the years that followed on what many of my peers learned. Some–if not most?–of this ‘pop culture knowledge’ or what is deemed as ‘common knowledge’ is, in fact uncommon to me. I could not count the number of times I’ve gotten the incredulous looks alongside the “how do you not know that?” or “where were you growing up?” comments when I admit that I do not know some pop culture or “American culture” references.

Of course, I am open to learning and discovering what I may have missed out on when I was at home and not allowed to watch TV because I had to do homework. Don’t get me wrong — I’m not blaming all of my “confusedness” in certain aspects of American culture on my immigration, but it plays a pretty major role in why I may not know what people are talking about when they refer to characters of TV shows that were popular in the 1990’s. Most of the time, I respond to people’s glances and remarks with the “I wasn’t even in the States until 1997″ answer.

Pop culture references aside, I think there’s more at work here than the mere “wow, you don’t know that?” comments. It becomes a question of assimilation and just how much “assimilating” is “enough.” In one of my classes last semester, I learned about the assimilationist policies adopted by the Bureau of Indian affairs in dealing with the American Indians, and the assimilationist attitudes of the Mexican American movement, before it gradually became the Chicano movement. These policies attempted to erase the cultural traditions and ways of life of each respective racial group and called for them to be distinctly “American.” We often covered the topic of cultural authenticity: just what exactly is “American,” anyway? The rest of the world, when they think “American,” they think of what we term “WASPs” — White Anglo Saxon Protestants. But that’s not always the case, obviously. The US as a country prides itself on racial and ethnic diversity, cultural diversity, etc. etc.; at the same time, there seems to exist certain societal expectations of immigrants assimilating to “American society.”

Take the Asian population, for example. Here, I will refer to the “Asians” as one large population, but obviously the different ethnic groups apply here as well. For one, if an Asian is “too Asian” (of which we will define as those who may speak their Asian language to their Asian friends, focus mostly if not solely on Asian pop culture), we refer to them as “fobs” and with that, the expectation for them to assimilate into “American society” seems to be lowered. On the other hand, for the Asians who may have “completely” assimilated into American society (of which we can say those who know nothing of their Asian culture, may not have learned or have forgotten their Asian language, focus solely on American pop culture), we call them “white washed.” And then there are others in the middle — which is where I view myself — who have, for the most part, assimilated to the American society but nonetheless would like to retain (or do retain, because it’s partially ingrained in us) aspects of our Asian culture. Along this middle-part of the spectrum, we are neither “too white” nor “completely fob,” where people would expect you to know enough about American ‘traditions’ and ‘pop culture.’

There is a fine line between not being exposed to certain aspects of American society/pop culture references and plain ignorance, but from my experience these two areas have become mixed. I don’t think people have in mind per se that I am an ignorant person for not knowing X and Y about some aspect of American culture, but yet I don’t think people take into account that different cultural knowledge and traditions are emphasized during one’s childhood.

This goes back to the question of cultural authenticity: just how “authentic” can one be? Especially in a country of such a diverse background and population, there exists misconceptions and judgmental expectations for just what exactly every “American citizen” should know about “America.” But I see this, on a less major but still significant level, as the American assimilationist policy at work here, perpetuated by the American people. What does it actually mean to be American, anyway? We boast of our “melting pot” or perhaps the “salad bowl” population, but this assimilationist attitude is really calling for all of us to be “melted” into the pot instead of accepting the “salad bowl” that exists instead. There is no “the distinct American identity”; there are only versions of it. Until we as a population decide to acknowledge the indistinct American identity, I think that we will continue to hold the assimilationist attitudes instead of adopting an accepting attitude towards individuals residing in America.

And, at the end of the day, we will all still grapple with the question of “cultural authenticity.” What a marvelous world it is!

Note: This post will be making a lot of references to The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky, so it may be a bit incomprehensible…and will basically be a ramble.

So I just wrote a 7-page paper on why Dostoevsky believes Ivan does not know how to deal with suffering and why Alyosha does…but I didn’t get a chance to try and figure out how this applies to my life. That’s the whole reason I’m taking this class on existentialism, isn’t it? To attempt to figure out why my so-called existentialist philosophy on the world may or may not work for me… So, I’m going to try and flesh out my thoughts here.

While I argue in my paper that Ivan does not know how to deal with suffering, and that his view on the world is problematic, I find myself identifying with the majority of Ivan’s beliefs. Here are some examples:

“the absurd is only too necessary to earth. The world stands on absurdities, and perhaps nothing would have come to pass in it without them. We know what we know! …I made up my mind long ago not to understand. If i try to understand anything, I shall be false to the fact, and I have determined to stick to the fact” (Dostoevsky 220).

“What do I care for a hell for oppressors? What good can hell do, since those children have already been tortured?” (221)

However, a discrepancy between Ivan’s and my views is that he oscillates between claiming God exists and God does not exist; for me, God does not exist. Perhaps I don’t have a clear understanding of Ivan’s belief about God’s existence. But the fact of the matter is, he did not existentialize God the way Alyosha seemed to have been able to.

For Alyosha, the existentialization of God was the ability for him to get in touch with agape love – the Christian love of brothers, an “interestedness” in people. Through such, he is able to escape suffering and despair. I like to believe that I have “existentialized God” in the sense that the meaning others attribute to God, I’ve attributed to other things in my life. Vague, perhaps. But at the same time, how could I have ever existentialized God if I were never really exposed to it in the first place? That’s the issue with my trying to understand the philosophies of philosophical thinkers Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, and the like: that they come from a background of Christian religion (or even Western religion, at that), and that it was after they were exposed and taught it, that they attempted to reconcile such with their own existential beliefs. What am I reconciling?

I’ve had friends who wanted me to go to church and try and be exposed to Christian teachings. It’s one thing to be exposed to it — which I have, mildly, through most of my classes involving philosophy and/or English — but it’s another to attempt to learn it for your own life and own philosophy. I honestly just don’t see the need to do that, because why would I need to learn about Christian teachings only to have to reconcile those teachings and “beliefs” that I may obtain with my current views?

Anyhow, that wasn’t the point – the point is that I need to figure out what it is I’m missing – the steps between Ivan and Alyosha… Because in the novel, Ivan goes into despair and becomes crazy. I argue that it’s his logical nature and his need to rationalize everything with reason that becomes his downfall. For me, I reason things – to an extent. But then it’s like Ivan’s own quote about the absurdities. There are things on earth (and even beyond, if you’d like to believe) that we can never understand – that I can never understand. I’m trying to, which is why I even take these classes to begin with, but I know that there are always going to be aspects of our existence that are just incomprehensible and inexplicable. But I’m okay with that.

…And I think that’s what may be “bad.” Ivan was okay with it – or so he thought. His doubts and so-called “convictions” come back to haunt him and, in my reading, attribute to his downfall/craziness. I can see my similarity to Ivan: we are both so convicted in our convictions. What if that’s all we have? I always like to think that it’s enough, that it is all we have and that’s the beauty of it…Because what I believe, I so strongly believe it’s true for me, that there can be nothing else of a fundamental truth in my mind. Is it bad, to have this strong of a conviction, through reasoning?

Alyosha, on the other hand, gets in tune with this interconnectedness and “agape” love that Dostoevsky supposed believes we need to do. How do I do this, via a non-Christian context? Alyosha does it by existentializing the religious sacraments and being incarnation of God (or, rather, Dostoevsky existentalizes them..), but what would be the need for me to existentialize these sacraments if I never had them in my life to begin with?

So, somehow, I need to figure out how to get “in touch” with this interconnectedness amongst people. I don’t think it’s really socially or anything in that sense. A disconnect I can pinpoint would begin with basically the content of this post. In my lifetime, I’ve come across very few people who share similar sentiments or are even willing to discuss these types of issues with me. I think it’s difficult for me to feel “interconnected” with others in this sense when I don’t feel like I can connect with others philosophically(?). But I don’t think it’s so much that they need to have the same philosophy as I do, for what would be interesting to discuss then?, but as that few people think about these issues and question their beliefs. Again, this is probably an issue I’ve struggled with for who knows how long now, but I think the fact that I still feel this disconnect is something that should be figured out… But how??? Practically, it’s not really possible. Who has time to think about fundamental beliefs such as these. Some people don’t want to, because then it shakes the very foundations of their existence…etc.etc.

…so what is it?? I’m confusedddddddd. Obviously I’m not going to evaluate my life and philosophy exactly as how Dostoevsky pictured it, for how do we even know 100% that that was really even his philosophy? But it’s an everyday struggle (yes, I am being overly dramatic) in figuring out how we (myself include, and perhaps the human race too…and no, I am not trying to be patronizing nor all-knowing) get out of despair and find meaning in our lives, or else everything is rendered ‘pointless’ and what would be the point of that?

Note: My reading of Dostoevsky’s Brothers Karamazov is via my professor’s (Professor Hubert Dreyfus) interpretation of the novel. The class it’s for is “Existentialism in Literature and Film.”

This blog post is part of Akhila’s “Be the change” series and is also posted on her website here. Much thanks to Akhila for hosting this awesome series – I suggest you check out all the other entries! All have great insight
——————————

I’ve been attempting to find time and contribute to this awesome blog series “Be the change” thanks to Akhila, and of course, I am writing this instead of working on a paper that’s due in a few days.

Prior to attending school at UC Berkeley, all I knew was that I was interested in “business” and “changing the world” (or more specifically, I used to say “starting a revolution”). Little did I know that individuals such as Muhammad Yunus were already doing so! My friend introduced me to the concept of “social business” and “social entrepreneurship” around second semester of my freshman year, and that was when it all began.

I embarked on a Google-ing, internet-searching quest to learn more about this concept, and ended up first reading Yunus’ book, Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism. From then on, I’d continue to read articles, books, and scour the Internet for more about social entrepreneurship and social business.

I often stop and reflect on why it is I seem to have this insatiable need and want to help others and improve the lives of the less fortunate. For the most part, I think it’s because I have grown up with so much opportunity laid in front of me, the privilege of living in a nice community and have the comfort and support of my parents. Maybe I was too comfortable that I became uncomfortable with my comfort. Does that make sense?

Perhaps it’s why I want to pursue a career in poverty alleviation through the power of social business and entrepreneurship. I happened to be born into a family that gave me the opportunity to obtain a good education. It was chance that I was born in Taiwan to parents who wanted to pursue a better life in the United States and brought my sister and I here. What about others who live in poverty and are not presented with the opportunity of obtaining an education, of living a privileged life? How is it their fault?

It’s not, and it’s a thought that resounds in me and propels me forward. I joined a student grassroots organization CalPIRG my freshman year, and by the second semester my friend and I started the Hunger and Homelessness Campaign, where we tried to tackle food insecurity in West Oakland. I then proceeded to help plan, in collaboration with two other student groups on campus, a conference on hunger and homelessness in the Bay Area. On the side, I worked with a local homeless shelter to establish and implement recycling and composting programs through another student organization BEACN. These experiences have helped me improve my skills and have provided me more insight in ways of addressing poverty. However, the models and methods of social business and social entrepreneurship are what really motivate me.

I’ve found it difficult to advance much in attempting to be more “in” the field (I am so inspired by social businesses such as the one I interned with this past summer World of Good, and projects such as the Allyu Initiative), because I often find myself constrained in my schoolwork and the fact that I am still in school. I’m often impatient in my demands, and too much of the time I’d rather be out there and immerse myself in a community and area to learn about the issues and critically evaluate ways to tackle them. I have to stop and remind myself that my getting an education is an important aspect: I need to focus on learning as much as I can in school so that I can apply it later on.

In the meantime, I have found the Twitterverse and the blogosphere to be of great company. It’s been absolutely inspiring and just plain awesome to be connected to other Gen Y-ers such as Akhila, Dwight, and Leslie and know that there are so many who are interested in similar topics and care about issues other than the best way to maximize profits and how to make the most money. So, I’d like to conclude by thanking Akhila once again for encouraging others to engage in social change and bringing together awesome individuals in this blog series!

I’ve posted this idea on both Futureshifters and UnLtdWorld to generate some discussion about this topic, and would like to continue the conversation further. So, I’m going to post this on my blog and elaborate a bit more…

First off, I was reading an article: “What Microloans Miss” from The New Yorker from March 2008. In essence, the article explained a bit about the trend of microloans:

The innovation—​microfinance—​involves making small loans to poor entrepreneurs, usually in developing countries…Even ordinary Americans can now get in on the act, at sites like Kiva.org, where you can make a microloan yourself.

However, microloans do not always guarantee success, and they also do not necessarily improve the economic well-being of developing countries. As Surowiecki puts it,

The idealized view of microfinance is that budding entrepreneurs use the loans to start and grow businesses—expanding operations, boosting inventory, and so on. The reality is more complicated. Microloans are often used to “smooth consumption”—tiding a borrower over in times of crisis… It’s less common to find them used to fund major business expansions or to hire new employees. In part, this is because the loans can be very small—frequently as little as fifty or a hundred dollars—and generally come with very high interest rates, often above thirty or forty per cent. But it’s also because most microbusinesses aren’t looking to take on more workers. The vast majority have only one paid employee: the owner.

Furthermore, there is a conception out there that all individuals in developing countries can (and want to be, but lack the opportunity to) be an entrepreneur. While this is true for those seeking the microloans,this is not the case for all others:

[I]n any successful economy most people aren’t entrepreneurs—they make a living by working for someone else. Just fourteen per cent of Americans, for instance, are running (or trying to run) their own business. That percentage is much higher in developing countries—in Peru, it’s almost forty per cent. That’s not because Peruvians are more entrepreneurial. It’s because they don’t have other options.

The article continues to discuss the need for small-to-medium-sized businesses to find a source of funding and investments (versus microloans to microbusinesses) in developing countries. While this is also an important issue to discuss, I’d like to touch upon microloans the are ‘helping’ entrepreneurs.

A concern I have with all microlending institutions and websites (such as Kiva.org, etc.) is that it seems, based on my research, that there isn’t really any follow-up. What I mean by this is, are the entrepreneurs who have received these loans, paid them back, truly benefiting from these loans? We make the logical assumption that seeing as they have paid back their loans, that they are better off. But is that true? (Of course, user-based microlending sites’ main mission is to raise funds for microloans to entrepreneurs, and something such as the “follow-up” I am proposing may be out of the scope of these organizations’ mission.)

Microbusinesses and entrepreneurs in developing countries are often very focused — rightfully so — on very local endeavors, such as increasing the size of a shop, or finding funding to raise more farm animals. But there seems to be a lack of a medium that helps them expand and grow their businesses. The closest I’ve found to something like this is Endeavor.org that offers “high impact entrepreneurial consulting” to entrepreneurs in developing countries. The website includes much more detail on their selection criteria, but in essence it looks like Endeavor selects entrepreneurs based on:

• entrepreneurial initiative
• business innovation
• value and ethics
• role model potential
• development impact
• fit with Endeavor

But to get back to the entrepreneurs who have received microloans in the past (such as through Kiva.org, UnitedProsperity.org, Wokai.org, Microplace.com, etc.), is there a way to help those entrepreneurs to expand their businesses? Of course, several implications come with this, including whether or not it is “our” place to “help” them expand the businesses that they operate, regional conflicts, competition, etc. However, what about just creating an online platform that features these microfinance-d entrepreneurs with their products or services?

Some more details on my idea:

Like Craigslist, this online marketplace would be geographically specialized, and could connect either locals to different business’ products, or even those from abroad (i.e. in the US) to buy a local business’ products.

Of course, there would be tons of logistical details to work out, such as:

• Would the website provide the transaction, or just connect the two people?
• Would this be a nonprofit, or how could we make it a for-profit social business?
• How would we get these listings? An idea is to partner with microfinance organizations
• How would this website be differentiated from the microfinance organizations that already LIST their entrepreneurs they’re financing? My answer to this would be that THIS website would feature businesses that already got off the ground, VIA the microfinance loans that they’d already PAID OFF.
• How could we bridge the connection between someone from, i.e. the US, to the business in the developing country, via shipping?

From posting it online, I’ve received responses including one from Kevin, who commented:

I think this idea might work within a partnership framework meaning leveraging existing platforms whether it’s the two above, ebay, craigslist, local and global MFI’s, to create a unique value to these already proven entrepreneurs as well as these partnering institutions. I think connecting these proven entrepreneurs’ goods to the global marketplace is a valuable service but I think is not so much if you can create a unique tool or platform to do so, but whether or not you can find the right institutions that already exists to create a network that leverages each others partners strength.

Alastair also brought up a similar point in regards to partnerships:

As I understand it, this marketplace would have some sort of seal of approval – businesses listed on the site are recommended, on the basis that they must do what they say on the tin because they’ve paid back their financing. The question is how you build that brand, why do people trust you?

One approach would be to piggy back on the current work in the UK around social enterprise branding (see here: view link). Is there something similar in the USA?
Even if the enterprises you’re listing aren’t in the UK we could still hold them to similar standards.
Most of the MFIs won’t be recognised by most businesses so I perhaps think the real opportunity lies in partnering with a household name (like google).

Those have been insightful responses, but I’d love to get more discussion going on this topic. Please comment and let me know what you think!