Beyond words, deeds.

With due respect to the business community, the above came to mind when the writer read this article: “Shared Prosperity: The business groups’ response to inequality and the pandemic,” BusinessWorld, 23rd Nov 2020.

“A historic event in the annals of Philippine Business happened on 5th Nov. In that event, 26 of the country’s largest business and professional associations signed a Covenant for Shared Prosperity.”

Over three decades ago, the writer sat in a committee under the umbrella of the PBSP (Philippine Business for Social Progress) to figure out how the business community can share prosperity.

But first, what is the PBSP? Says its website: “Philippine Business for Social Progress is the largest business-led NGO at the forefront of strategic corporate citizenship and business sector leadership, contributing to sustainable development and poverty reduction. Established in 1970, PBSP remains a consultant and partner of choice of companies and donors.

“PBSP scales up ‘impact’ by adopting the Collective Impact strategy to solve large, complex, systemic problems. PBSP organizes Platforms for Collective Engagements (PLACEs) to ensure alignment and sustainability of initiatives by multiple stakeholders.

“Responding to the changing landscape of CSR, PBSP’s brand of corporate citizenship taps into the core business competencies of companies and promotes inclusive business as a strategy. PBSP also continues to strategically engage companies through social investment, responsible business practices, and philanthropy.

“PBSP creates sustainable solutions to societal problems in its core program areas, which are Health, Education, Environment, and Livelihood and Enterprise Development. It also provides off-the-shelf options for the engagement of companies and their employees.

“With a proven track record, PBSP provides end-to-end services in development consulting which include project and grants management, events, and backroom management.”

The PBSP is half a century old. On the other hand, Mohamad Mahathir first became prime minister of Malaysia in 1981, eleven years after the Philippine business community created PBSP.

Where is Malaysia today?

“Since gaining independence in 1957, Malaysia has diversified its economy. From one that was initially agriculture and commodity-based to one that is host to robust manufacturing and service sectors, which have propelled the country to become a leading exporter of electrical appliances, electronic parts, and components.

“Malaysia is one of the most open economies globally, with a trade to GDP ratio averaging over 130% since 2010. Openness to trade and investment has been instrumental in employment creation and income growth, with about 40% of Malaysia’s jobs linked to export activities. After the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998, Malaysia’s economy has been on an upward trajectory, averaging 5.4% since 2010. It’s on the way to achieve its transition from an upper-middle-income economy to a high-income economy by 2024.” [World Bank}

And where are we, the Philippines? Indeed, our GDP has been growing. Yet, we can’t claim a most open economy like Malaysia with a trade to GDP ratio averaging over 130% since 2010. Because we remain a consumption-service economy, driven by OFW remittances and the BPO industry. And we are way too far from becoming a high-income economy.

Have we in the business community ever stopped to wonder why we can’t see what is going on within and around us? Try looking outward and ahead of the curve. But it demands beyond logical and linear thinking, forward and lateral thinking. 

Here’s a bit of anecdote: Colleagues at ECOP (Employers Confederation of the Philippines), another organization of business enterprises, founded in 1975, had just briefed Marcos following a trip to Malaysia. “That guy Mahathir is aggressively pushing the development of his country. You will not believe how magnificent the highways he is building. And you won’t know it until you drive on them. They are rubberized, and you can’t find anything like it, comfort-wise when you’re traveling.”

And there was also China, doing its thing. “In 1979, the Central Government of the People’s Republic of China announced that Guangdong Province would follow less restrictive economic policies and would be permitted to set up three Special Economic Zones (SEZs), including two in the Pearl River Delta, Shenzhen, and Zhuhai.

“Preferential policies included a 15 percent tax rate, tax holidays up to five years, the ability to repatriate corporate profits and capital investments after a contracted period. Plus, duty-free treatment of raw material imports and intermediate goods destined for exported products and exemption from export taxes.

“The Pearl River Delta Economic Zone accounted for 19.9 percent of GDP and 38.9 percent of total trade in 2005. As the most dynamic region in the Chinese Mainland, it is increasingly important as a market. Given the massive scale of its export sector, the region has become an important industrial market for all sorts of inputs, materials, and capital goods.” [Wikipedia]

And, of course, there is Singapore.

“Upon independence from Malaysia in 1965, Singapore faced a small domestic market and high levels of unemployment and poverty. Seventy percent of Singapore’s households lived in badly overcrowded conditions, and a third of its people squatted in slums on the city fringes. Unemployment averaged 14 percent, GDP per capita was US$516, and half of the population was illiterate.

“The oil crises (1973-1979) raised government awareness of economic issues. It slated the government to create a new form of economic change. The government highlighted a focus on technology and education to be the new wave of economic growth. It managed to minimize inflation and provide workers with the proper machinery to sustain growth.

“The Singapore government established the Economic Development Board to spearhead an investment drive and make Singapore an attractive destination for foreign investment. FDI inflows increased significantly over the following decades, and by 2001 foreign companies accounted for 75% of manufactured output and 85% of manufactured exports. Meanwhile, Singapore's savings and investment rates rose among the world's highest levels, while household consumption and GDP's wage shares fell among the lowest.  

“The economy of Singapore is a highly developed free-market economy. Singapore’s economy ranks as the most open in the world, 3rd least corrupt, most pro-business, with low tax rates (14.2% of gross domestic product (GDP)) and has the third-highest per-capita GDP in the world in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP).” [Wikipedia]

Sadly, beyond Malaysia, China, and Singapore, even Vietnam has overtaken the Philippines.

“Vietnam’s development over the past 30 years has been remarkable. Economic and political reforms under Đổi Mới, launched in 1986, have spurred rapid economic growth, transforming one of the world’s poorest nations into a lower-middle-income country. Between 2002 and 2018, GDP per capita increased by 2.7 times, to over US$2,700 in 2019, and over 45 million people overcame poverty. Poverty rates declined sharply from around 70 percent to below 6 percent (US$3.20/day PPP).

“In 2019, Vietnam’s economy continued to show fundamental strength and resilience, supported by robust domestic demand and export-oriented manufacturing. Real  GDP grew by an estimated 7 percent in 2019, similar to 2018, one of the fastest growth rates in the region.” [World Bank]

Let’s get back to PBSP. 

The writer represented his MNC-company that was recognized as a “Model Employer” for developing employees to attain their potentials, including getting them into its global management pool and paid well-above-average compensation. It had a worldwide program to promote dental health in grade school that conforms to its clinical norms in product innovation. Also, it supported track and field sports for the youth, among others.

What else? He didn’t have to think hard; Fr. Ben Beltran had approached the Christian community the writer and wife headed and suggested a livelihood project for the young folks in Smokey Mountain.

And it was easy given the writer’s MNC-company was in household products. Fr. Ben explained: Why not provide this youth group some inventory of your products that they can peddle to the Smokey Mountain residents, and they get the markups. And the cycle can continue because they will be able to pay you for the costs. The benefit to them is that they don’t have to raise the capital for the inventory. And if you give them for the least costs so much the better.”

Let’s stop right there.

We Filipinos, including those of us in the business community, see the challenge of Juan de la Cruz as poverty, period. 

In fairness, neuroscience says the chamber of the brain that triggers pleasure likewise triggers pride in charity-giving.

Consider our instincts: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism that we rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

In other words, we are yet to internalize the heart of democracy and free enterprise. They demand self-government and personal responsibility in the pursuit of the common good.

The common good, as our neighbors demonstrated, is to traverse poverty to prosperity.

It is not to share prosperity. That is insulting and patronizing. But we don’t recognize it as such because of our value of hierarchy and paternalism.

And how do we traverse poverty to prosperity?

Benchmark. Benchmark. Benchmark.

Recall the posting on “behavioral economics.”

“Very little can surprise me anymore. But perhaps the most surprising is that many people, particularly economists, believe that we are perfectly rational. The interesting thing about economics is that it has become the main guiding principle for policymakers, lawmakers, and businesses.

“My hope for the kind of work I do, and for behavioral economics in general, is that by augmenting standard economics, it could help design better policies that work with what people can compute and the ways they reason.

“What motivates me the most is trying to take what we’ve learned from cognitive psychology and apply it to real-world problems to improve the way we live. 

“To remain aware of our irrationality.

“That is easier in situations where we have a history of acting irrationally.” [The Science of Irrationality: Why We Humans Behave So Strangely; Dan Ariely, scientificameric.com, 21st May 2008; Ariely is a behavioral economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and author of the best-selling book, Predictably Irrational]

“Those familiar with the blog may recall it discussed the book, Thinking Fast And Slow by Daniel Kahneman, a Princeton University psychologist who won the Nobel prize in economic sciences in 2002 ‘for bridging economics and psychology.’

“And here are two of the three points Kahneman reinforces: (a) “2 systems determine your behavior in your mind – one conscious and the other automatic, (b) Your brain is lazy and causes you to make intellectual errors.”

See above; our instincts as Filipinos.

That is why the blog keeps speaking to our neighbors.

Given the sorry plight of Juan de la Cruz, it behooves us to figure out the way forward. 

Instead of PBSP 2.0, shouldn’t we rally the country behind Arangkada? 

And we can start by speaking up for a more open economy as our neighbors have done. If amending the Constitution is a long shot, why not lobby legislators and economic managers to move beyond our decades-old approach to fiscal and monetary policies? 

We have to overcome the shotgun model for a more targeted one. 

Prioritize. Prioritize. Prioritize.

It means going to school on the vital few over the trivial many.

Or, get over the crab mentality. But can we? See below; what Ninoy Aquino said of our fault.

That is why the blog raised these two priority initiatives that can be models for public-private partnerships. Neither can go it alone, i.e.,

(a) Replicate Vietnam's efforts, drive exports to the hilt, focus on the next electronic device after the smartphone and the Apple AirPod. That means attracting FDIs via an aggressive tax regime, among others, and

(b) Replicate the Pearl River Delta Economic Zone, which is several steps above the Philippine model.

See above; forward and lateral thinking.

In other words, we must find a way to traverse poverty to prosperity. 

Beyond our respective industries, we want a much larger economic pie, given we are over a hundred million people. We have been rationalizing the positives of a much smaller one, calling for inclusion.

That’s empty rhetoric. See above; the science of irrationality.

Gising bayan!

“Here is a land in which a few are spectacularly rich while the masses remain abjectly poor. And where freedom and its blessings are a reality for a minority and an illusion for the many. Here is a land consecrated to democracy but run by an entrenched plutocracy, dedicated to equality but mired in an archaic system of caste. 

“But the fault was chiefly their own. Filipinos profess the love of country, but love themselves – individually – more.” [Ninoy Aquino, Foreign Affairs magazine, July 1968; Stanley Karnow, New York Times Magazine, “Cory Aquino’s Downhill Slide,” 19th Aug 1990.]

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? Moreover, that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“True social reform has little to do with politics. To unmoor ourselves from the burdens of the past, we must be engaged in the act of continual and conscious self-renewal. All men are partially buried in the grave of custom. Even virtue is no longer such if it is stagnant.

“Change begins when we finally choose to examine critically and then recalibrate the ill-serving codes and conventions handed down to us, often unquestioned, by the past and its power structures. It is essentially an act of imagination first.” [David Henry Thoreau; American essayist, poet, and philosopher; 1817-1862]

“National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does not grow out of a country’s natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency’s value, as classical economics insists. [A] nation’s competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and upgrade.” [The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990]

“You have to have a dream, whether big or small. Then plan, focus, work hard, and be very determined to achieve your goals.” [Henry Sy Sr., Chairman Emeritus and Founder, SM Group (1924 - 2019)]

“Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” [William Pollard, 1911-1989, physicist-priest, Manhattan Project]

“Development is informed by a people’s worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]

“Now I know why Paul dared to speak of ‘the curse of the law’ (Galatians 3:13). Law reigns and discernment is unnecessary, which means there is little growth or change in such people. When you do not grow, you remain an infant.” [Faith and Science, Open to Change, Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, 23rd Oct 2017]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists, and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

Overcome “Pinoy Kasi” or perish

“No new laws, such as the creation of a separate disaster management department or yet another task force, will make much difference without, for starters, the necessary competence and will to implement critical plans to completion.

“The Commission on Audit (COA) has a pertinent reminder on this in a recent report: Flooding in the metro could have been prevented, or at least mitigated, had the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) completed crucial flood-control projects planned for 2018 and 2019.

“In 2012, its annual audit report noted that the MMDA—whose mandate includes the formulation and implementation of policies and programs for an integrated metro-wide flood control system—completed more than 80 percent of flood-control projects only in the third and fourth quarters of that year. That defeated its purpose: mitigate and prevent the damage from the heavy rains.

“The COA recommends that procurement for flood-control projects be done by the first quarter before the start of the rainy season from June to November.” [Hold MMDA to account, EDITORIAL, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 22nd Nov 2020]

The above Editorial raised the challenge of basic competence and will to implement critical plans to completion.

What else is new?

Enter: Behavioral economics. “Very little can surprise me anymore. But perhaps the most surprising is that many people, particularly economists, believe that we are perfectly rational. The interesting thing about economics is that it has become the main guiding principle for policymakers, lawmakers, and businesses.

“My hope for the kind of work I do, and for behavioral economics in general, is that by augmenting standard economics, it could help design better policies that work with what people can compute and the ways they reason.

“In particular, I think that this approach in behavioral economics can have a substantial impact on savings, health care, and a tendency to engage in risky behaviors. What motivates me the most is trying to take what we’ve learned from cognitive psychology and apply it to real-world problems to improve the way we live. 

“To remain aware of our irrationality. That is easier in situations where we have a history of acting irrationally.” [The Science of Irrationality: Why We Humans Behave So Strangely; Dan Ariely, scientificameric.com, 21st May 2008; Ariely is a behavioral economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and author of the best-selling book, Predictably Irrational]

Those familiar with the blog may recall it discussed the book, Thinking Fast And Slow by Daniel Kahneman. A Princeton University psychologist, he won the Nobel prize in economic sciences in 2002 “for bridging economics and psychology.”

And he reinforces the following points (a) “2 systems determine your behavior in your mind – one conscious and the other automatic, (b) Your brain is lazy and causes you to make intellectual errors, (c) When you’re making money decisions, leave your emotions at home.”

But let’s get back to Dan Ariely and his examples on behavioral economics’ impact on personal savings and health care.

Like countless US companies, his old MNC-company has the 401-K or savings and investment plan for employees to invest in the market that they can draw down upon retirement. To be guaranteed retirement health insurance, they instituted a program where employees pay the insurance over ten years.

Here’s another disclosure: The writer’s interest in economics and psychology came from his private-sector practitioner experience. It evolved rapidly at first but a mere sliver of the challenge he was continually figuring out.

His first job, which was all of ten months, made him realize what it feels to be at the bottom of the hierarchy. Thankfully, on the next one, he was given the task of creating a function in a young company, i.e., what we know today as “shared services.” He hired three subordinates to manage different areas, and one of them he called “Systems.”

It was before the age of IT. It was the “big box” era from IBM, and Phil Am Life had one of the largest. His stock in the industry had risen after people learned he turned down the job of a programmer. It was a career unknown to him. And he may have made an irrational decision. He could have been in Silicon Valley instead of Park Avenue.

What did he learn while at the bottom of the heap? That information is power. He did not have it and was moving like a robot. That explains why he told his boss that the job was not for him in the sixth month, i.e., he wanted more challenges. He suggested for the writer to explore a programming career given the company had decided to computerize.

He passed the required tests and shown around the cubicles of the programmers. A stall was not his image of a promotion, but a real office. And that’s what he got on his next job. How irrational can that be?

Fast-forward to the present: He introduced his Eastern European friends to 21st-century innovation and global competitiveness. For example, their portfolio of products is world-class and, in specific cases, bested those from giants.

“The free enterprise system is not ‘rules but principles.’ It must satisfy the fundamentals of (a) human needs, (b) the common good, and (c) innovation – given the real world’s demands of sustainability and dynamism.

And so, he kept feeding them with principles instead of “rules and specific answers.” In the beginning, they were “angry” because they assumed that given the writer’s experience, he had answers for them.

But the “primacy of principles” is also why he was able to change the planning and budgeting system of a 200-year old Fortune 500 company – despite not being an accountant or a finance person. And today, he teaches big data and analytics to his Eastern European friends. 

“If you understand the principles, you can create your algorithms. And you can figure out whether to buy a business or not or when to sell one.“

Simple as it sounds, it demands forward-thinking. Because without forward-thinking, one is reduced to “analysis” and can fall into the trap of “analysis-paralysis” without first figuring out “the object of the exercise.”

Consider these simple parameters to figure out the object of the exercise: Where are we? Where do we want to be? How do we get there?

For example, we cannot keep brushing aside that we’re the regional laggard. In other words, while there will always be the low-hanging fruit that we must exploit, we have a structural problem. And we can’t take our eyes away from the ball.

Industrialize. Industrialize. Industrialize.

Yet, we can’t go it alone.

We must “beg for foreign money and technology” – as our neighbors did – and not let political patronage and oligarchy shut the rest of the world – and Juan de la Cruz – out.

We must traverse poverty to prosperity.

The Church can be a significant stumbling block when it stops at poverty – as the be-all and end-all. As the blog raises tirelessly, poverty is the effect of underdevelopment in the case of the Philippines.

The Church has to move beyond selling salvation in the afterlife as its reason for being. That is why the blog speaks to Franciscan theology. “The Kingdom of God is within you. The Kingdom of God is at hand.”

And it comes from the creation story that we are in the image and likeness of the creator – and that it is good.

And the sciences confirm that development is a dynamic phenomenon. Like the rest of humankind, we Filipinos need not be in a rut, in poverty. We can be prosperous as our neighbors demonstrated.

Prosperity is not exclusive to the West. That is why the writer has spent most of his retirement years with his Easter European friends, to help them overcome decades of tyranny and abject poverty.

We, in the East, are free to partake of these spoils.

But it presupposes harnessing our God-given talents and not let our brain stay lazy. [See above; behavioral economics.]

Sadly, our caste system adds fuel to the fire.

We in the elite class must be leading and showing the way to Juan de la Cruz. But why should we when the system benefits us?

It is the human condition, and that is why, even in the US, the caste system holds on the average Joe. And that is why the writer has no respect for US politics. 

Democracy demands self-government and personal responsibility in the pursuit of the common good. Recall the Two Great Commandments. It is not about being conservative or progressive.

If the Vatican cannot take on the minority view and remains wedded to tradition, what more Americans? They should have learned from the Gilded Age.

Sadly, in the 21st century, they are backsliding.

The change can come from the dynamism of the Americans.

For example, are the millennials doing a reprise of Woodstock?

“In the early morning hours of Monday, 18th Aug 1969, the Woodstock weekend concluded spectacularly with Jimi Hendrix’s performance. Hendrix played for nearly two hours – the most extended set of his career.

“Forty-five minutes into his set, Hendrix broke into his rendition of ‘The Star-Spangled Banner,’ injecting the national anthem with new meaning for a new generation. 

“The guitarist performed his most famous solo, channeling the atmosphere of beauty and love amid anger and aggression that defined the culturally-tumultuous era.  

“You can hear the Air Force dive bombers staking their lives for the country in Vietnam through Jimi’s whammy bar dives.

“You can feel the mourning of American mothers and fathers in the fragments of military funeral hymnal ‘Taps’ he added near the song’s end. You can hear the nation’s chaos in the atonal distortion.

“And you can hear the hope shine through as Hendrix hits the anthem’s final notes with optimistic purpose.

“The concert officially closed with comments by stage announcer Chip Monck, imploring the stragglers to grab a plastic bag and help clean up–to do ‘anything you can do to give us a hand to leave this area somewhat the way we found it. I don’t think it will ever be quite the same.’

“Everyone dropped their defenses and became a huge extended family. Joining together, getting into the music and each other, being part of so many people when calamity struck – the traffic jams, the rainstorms – was a life-changing experience. 

“None of the problems damaged our spirit; in fact, they drew us closer. We recognized one another for what we were at the core – as brothers and sisters, and we embraced one another in that knowledge. 

“Woodstock declared that a young generation could take on the issues of personal freedoms, stopping an unjust war, creating respect for the planet, and work for human rights. Woodstock showed that the world could be a better and more peaceful place, and that view keeps resonating.

“Because of Woodstock, we’re always aware that the issues we thought disappeared in the ‘60s will ever need attention. Like the Civil Rights Act, signed in 1964, we thought everyone’s right to vote is a given, but that issue needs attention now more than ever. We made much progress on the environment, but global warming and new forms of pollution are growing.

“There was a level of shared consciousness that occurred that weekend – that we need to stay involved and be sure that the next generation knows that it’s their turn to be involved.

“Despite the rain, lack of food, and limited sanitation, those at Woodstock found genuine respect, kindness, and unconditional acceptance of others. When eyewitnesses recall Woodstock’s memories, they seldom – if ever – linger on the drugs or the sex. What they do treasure are the three days of unity – chatting happily with local cops, or sharing oranges with strangers, or standing on a street corner handing out lollipops – the simple human dignity of sharing and caring. 

“The impact of the remarkable growth of the counterculture and social consciousness spawned in the 1960s would ebb and flow over the decades, in tandem with the ongoing seesaw of political viewpoints and national agendas across the nine presidential administrations since then.

“Woodstock vividly represents the intangible best qualities of the American experience. Apollo 11 demonstrated US achievement’s most tangible expression; Woodstock symbolized a new generation's possibilities and dreams – whether those dreams could be achieved or not.

“What Woodstock represented, and what it still represents today, is hope. Woodstock gave the hope that things could be different.

“Woodstock showed that people could take care of each other. For that reason alone, it reaffirmed our faith in people.” [“The Cultural History of Woodstock and a Message of Hope,” https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/172879]

We Filipinos may not have the dynamism of the Americans. But we must unlearn our instincts.

We must overcome “Pinoy Kasi” or perish.

Gising bayan!

“Here is a land in which a few are spectacularly rich while the masses remain abjectly poor. And where freedom and its blessings are a reality for a minority and an illusion for the many. Here is a land consecrated to democracy but run by an entrenched plutocracy, dedicated to equality but mired in an archaic system of caste. 

“But the fault was chiefly their own. Filipinos profess the love of country, but love themselves – individually – more.” [Ninoy Aquino, Foreign Affairs magazine, July 1968; Stanley Karnow, New York Times Magazine, “Cory Aquino’s Downhill Slide,” 19th Aug 1990.]

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? Moreover, that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“True social reform has little to do with politics. To unmoor ourselves from the burdens of the past, we must be engaged in the act of continual and conscious self-renewal. All men are partially buried in the grave of custom. Even virtue is no longer such if it is stagnant.

“Change begins when we finally choose to examine critically and then recalibrate the ill-serving codes and conventions handed down to us, often unquestioned, by the past and its power structures. It is essentially an act of imagination first.” [David Henry Thoreau; American essayist, poet, and philosopher; 1817-1862]

“National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does not grow out of a country’s natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency’s value, as classical economics insists. [A] nation’s competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and upgrade.” [The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990]

“You have to have a dream, whether big or small. Then plan, focus, work hard, and be very determined to achieve your goals.” [Henry Sy Sr., Chairman Emeritus and Founder, SM Group (1924 - 2019)]

“Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” [William Pollard, 1911-1989, physicist-priest, Manhattan Project]

“Development is informed by a people’s worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]

“Now I know why Paul dared to speak of ‘the curse of the law’ (Galatians 3:13). Law reigns and discernment is unnecessary, which means there is little growth or change in such people. When you do not grow, you remain an infant.” [Faith and Science, Open to Change, Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, 23rd Oct 2017]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists, and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

How can Juan de la Cruz develop dynamism?

We can indulge in wishful thinking, but until we develop a “hardy mindset,” we will be stuck in a rut and not demonstrate the dynamism demanded by the universe.

“The solution to a problem depends to a great extent on one’s awareness of the problem and his attitude towards it. The worse possible attitude is not to be aware of the issue at all.

“Some individuals see the problem, but it is too frightening. Hence, they are afraid to decide and initiate change because it is painful and difficult. That is the attitude of timidity.

“Others try to escape from the real problems. They skirt confrontation with the real issue in their lives and raise pseudo-problems as camouflage.

“Finally, a typical attitude is rationalization. People who know they are doing wrong but do not want to change easily find excuses.

“In the age of ‘passing the buck,’ another excuse for shirking personal responsibility is the ‘Filipinism,’ ‘I am not the one.’

“All these attitudes of mind are wrong, and without the proper attitude, there can be no solution to the problem. Filipinos will make no progress toward a Christian solution until they realize that the problem is serious and urgent.” [Christian Renewal of Filipino Values, Vitaliano R. Gorospe; Philippine Studies vol. 14, no. 2, 1966; Ateneo de Manila University]

Many years ago, the writer’s small family went on a road trip to Lancaster in Pennsylvania over the Christmas holiday. It’s home to the Amish and next door to The Hershey Company, the chocolate and cocoa products company. The daughter was still in grade school. Why not see where they make chocolates.

How does the dynamism of Juan de la  Cruz – or the absence of it – get into the picture?

Consider: “The Amish are a group of traditionalist Christian church fellowships with Swiss German and Alsatian Anabaptist origins.

“The Amish are known for simple living, plain dress, Christian pacifism, and are slower to adopt many conveniences of modern technology, not to interrupt family time, nor to replace face-to-face conversations whenever possible.

“The Amish church’s history began with a schism in Switzerland within a Swiss and Alsatian Mennonite Anabaptists group.

“In the early 18th century, many Amish and Mennonites immigrated to Pennsylvania for various reasons. 

“Today, they continue to speak Pennsylvania German, also known as ‘Pennsylvania Dutch.’

“Over 165,000 Old Order Amish lived in the United States, and about 1,500 lived in Canada. A study suggested they increased to 227,000, and in 2010, had grown by 10 percent to 249,000, with increasing movement to the West.

"Most of the Amish continue to have six or seven children while benefiting from the significant decrease in infant and maternal mortality in the 20th century. Between 1992 and 2017, the Amish population increased by 149 percent.

“Amish church membership begins with baptism, usually between the ages of 16 and 23. It is a requirement for marriage within the Amish church. Once baptized within the church, a person may marry only within the faith.

“Church districts have between 20 and 40 families, and worship services are held every other Sunday in a member’s home. The community is under a bishop and several ministers and deacons.

“The rules of the church, the Ordnung, must be observed by members and cover many aspects of day-to-day living, including prohibitions or limitations on the use of power-line electricity, telephones, and automobiles, as well as regulations on clothing.

“Most Amish do not buy commercial insurance or participate in Social Security. As present-day Anabaptists, Amish church members practice nonresistance and will not perform any military service. The Amish value rural life, manual labor, and humility, all under the auspices of living what they interpret to be God’s word. 

“Members who do not conform to these community expectations and who cannot be convinced to repent are excommunicated.

“In addition to ex-communication, members must limit social contacts to shame the wayward member into returning to the church. Almost 90 percent of Amish teenagers choose to be baptized and join the church.

“Amish church groups seek to maintain a degree of separation from the non-Amish world. They call Non-Amish people ‘English.’ Generally, there is a heavy emphasis on church and family relationships.

“The Amish typically operate their one-room schools and discontinue formal education after grade eight, at age 13 or 14. Until the children turn 16, they have vocational training under their parents, community, and school teacher’s tutelage. 

“Higher education is generally discouraged, as it can lead to social segregation and the unraveling of the community. However, some Amish women have used higher education to obtain a nursing certificate so that they may provide midwifery services to the community.” [Wikipedia]

But let’s get back to George, Fr. George Gorospe.

“No human formulation of reality, no philosophical explanation of human experience can say: ‘I have grasped the whole of ‘reality’ and crystallized it in an expression or system that exhausts all its meaning. Reality is too rich and is continuously changing; it can’t fall under a set of categories.

“Hence, there is need today of a more dynamic and more existential philosophy inspired by the Neo-Thomist revival of the authentic thought of St. Thomas, i.e., it is not a ‘closed system’ but remains ‘open’ to the valid insights of other philosophies. For example, to the contribution of contemporary phenomenology and existentialism.

“A shift in emphasis from the traditional systemic courses in philosophy now obtaining in the Catholic College is much to be desired. For example, they can include the history of Indian and Chinese philosophy and intersubjectivity’s contemporary philosophy.

“If philosophy is to become relevant and meaningful to the average Filipino College student of today, a re-examination of the philosophy curricula in the Catholic College is imperative.”

The Amish have their expression of reality. And we Pinoys have ours. We are not as traditionalist as the Amish, but what about when compared with the Vietnamese?

Consider: “Vietnam's economy will continue to soar, and the Philippines will be hard-pressed to catch up unless it embraces industrialization. Not to do so will cause us to be left further behind in the development race.

“Since Marcos’ ouster, we have failed to industrialize the nation fully. Let’s hope that the next administration has the vision and political will to do so.” [Where did the Philippines go wrong? What did Vietnam do right (?), Andrew J. Masigan, Numbers Don’t Lie, BusinessWorld, 8th Nov 2020]

Here’s how Investopedia defines industrialization: how an economy transforms from primarily agricultural to one based on the manufacturing of goods. Mechanized mass production and assembly lines can replace individual manual labor and artisans. Characteristics of industrialization include economic growth, a more efficient division of “labor,” and technological innovation to solve problems instead of dependency on conditions outside human control.

The Amish won’t fit the above definition. What about Juan de la Cruz?

Industrialization does not depend on conditions outside our control, but transformation.

Let’s hold it right there.

Recall the 3 Cs of a “hardy mindset” that the blog discussed a few times. And note the opposite of “hardy” is “feeble.” And they are: (1) Commitment; (2) Challenge; (3) Control. [Robert Brooks, Harvard University, faculty of Harvard Medical School; served as Director of the Department of Psychology at McLean Hospital, a private psychiatric hospital.]

“Commitment.” To be involved with others and experience a sense of purpose and meaning; how ordinary people can do extraordinary things. “Challenge.” To appreciate that change rather than stability is the norm; view new or difficult situations as opportunities for learning; the importance of thinking outside the box. “Control.” Focus on cases where we influence, not where we have little if any control; you have control only over yourself; you must be the one to change. Develop a problem-solving attitude; why are you unable to succeed in your efforts?

In other words, Juan de la Cruz has no control over the wealthy countries that call the shots in how people and nations relate. Take the US. It is a superpower, and despite Trump and its polarized electorates, it leads the rest of the free world.

It has its faults and cannot be the epitome of righteousness. Perfection is not of this world. But that is why the writer doesn’t participate in the US elections – as the blog discussed recently. And it is not unusual. In this 2020 presidential election, America saw a 50-year high when 62 percent of eligible voters participated. But that is paltry compared to the rest of the democratic world.

Still, why did our neighbors get the best of all worlds to traverse poverty to prosperity and left us behind? The blog discusses “benchmarking” all the time. Why can’t we take what’s best for us?

Consider: “Capitalism” has contributed to significant gains in economic growth and prosperity throughout its history.

“Benefits of the US model have not only accrued to the American economy and people but have spread around the world, through competition, trade, investment, and the proliferation of globally relevant innovations in areas like technology, medicine, and financial and capital markets, as well as in managerial and business model innovations.

“Rapid economic growth in emerging economies during the past 30 years has lifted a billion people out of poverty. This growth in prosperity is in large part due to the effects of trade and participation in a global economy in which the American model and its related institutions and ecosystems have played a central role.” [Rethinking the future of American capitalism; James Manyika, Gary Pinkus, and Monique Tuin; McKinsey Global Institute, 12th Nov 2020]

Recall what the blog calls the instincts of Juan de la Cruz: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism that we rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

In other words, we can’t seem to benefit from the interdependence of nations, aka the common good. Because the community and the common good are outside our instincts. Why?

We recognize the imperfections of others but not ours. And credit that to our parochialism and insularity. And that explains why interdependence is Greek to us. Interdependence is dispensable only if humankind is perfect.

Consider the challenges capitalism faces, and they come from its imperfection. But that is to be expected given the dynamism of this universe.

Humankind has needs. But beyond these needs is the common good. And it is not offered on a silver platter. There is no free lunch.

And that is why the blog has raised the parallels between Christianity and democracy – expressed by the free market’s characteristics.

Democracy presupposes personal responsibility that translates to self-government – and demands the pursuit of the common good. Christianity defines that via the Two Great Commandments, which in popular culture is the Golden Rule.

Sadly, humankind tried different ways to interpret what they mean – and fell into the trap of tribalism, anathema to the common good. [See above, “reality” is too rich and is continuously changing.]

Everyone recognizes their needs, as in human necessities. But humankind isn’t isolated islands. It acknowledges the common good. That’s why we Filipinos know, “Bayanihan.”

But beyond the common good comes the demands of this universe and thus the imperative of innovation.

Consider these three elements: (1) Human Needs; (2) The Common Good; (3) Innovation.

Recall the blog speaks to a bit of Franciscan theology that it espouses the cycle of (1) Order, (2) Disorder, (3) Reorder. 

And in the Western hemisphere, there are four seasons. And they represent how nature goes through the said cycle.

Even in the tropics, we don’t have 365 days of glorious days. We just had two deadly typhoons in the Philippines.

The Franciscans also preach against dualism – either/or. That is why they see the nuances between the new and the old testaments. From a judgmental creator, they moved up to the kind and merciful Christ. And they give prominence to “public virtue” – not caught up in personal purity.

That is why they call Christ radical – neither conservative nor progressive, i.e., he kept company with sinners, including prostitutes. Think of the penitent-saint, Mary Magdalene.

And they go back to the story of creation and why St. Francis cared for creatures like animals and the environment. Or why early humankind worshipped the Sun-God.

Still, Franciscan theology represents the minority and why most Catholics still shudder with the actions of Pope Francis. Or why there is a big following for Pope Benedict, a traditionalist.

Social science says human development goes beyond dualism to relativism. Unsurprisingly, the 21st century confirms that beyond “human needs” and the common good is “innovation” because that is what this universe demands.

How does the Philippines overcome the typhoon season that is getting worse each year?

Innovation. Innovation. Innovation.

And it starts with revisiting our instincts so that we traverse poverty to prosperity and gain the wherewithal to deal with our countless challenges.

Or how does America keep the lead over China as an economy?

Consider: The US still leads in innovation despite China’s advances in specific technologies. The US remains the biggest recipient of investments from around the world. But the local economy of China is ahead in consumption because of sheer size.

That is why the blog referenced the book, One Billion Americans.

But that is where the issue of progressives versus conservatives falls flat on its face. It lacks the critical element of forward-thinking. For example, today’s US does not have the infrastructure and services home to a billion people. But China, for the longest time, did not.

That is why the blog often talks about Singapore and, more recently, Vietnam.

Or why the writer continues to hold the hands of his Eastern European friends. They continue to demonstrate dynamism and are well on their way to become an even stronger player in their part of the world to the detriment of more significant Western enterprises.

Let’s get back to the McKinsey treatise on rethinking the future of American capitalism. In the above-referenced article, they raised the challenge for the nation:

“The crisis [from inequality to climate change to the pandemic] provided a glimpse into the challenge that liberal market systems, like America’s, can face in addressing large-scale and coordinated interventions in response to external shocks.

“Where – and how – can American capitalism reinforce and broaden its strengths to fully benefit the growth and prosperity of all in the United States, and others beyond it, to fully capture the promise and evolving opportunities and possibilities of the 21st century?”

The bottom line: Juan de la Cruz is not the only one challenged. And he must learn from others and want to develop dynamism. And that is why the blog has repeatedly discussed the 3 Cs of the “hardy mindset.” There is no free lunch. Even big brother America has to paddle his own canoe.

Gising bayan!