We can’t be more aristocratic than the British monarchy

We aren’t, but how entrenched is our caste system?

Let’s get straight to the point: We have the worst GINI index coefficient – the degree of inequality in the distribution of family income in a country – among our neighbors (Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam.)

Not only. We also have the worst GDP per capita.

Unsurprisingly, we don’t want to talk about GDP. But we like to dissect the defects of capitalism, precisely, inequality.

Let’s hold it right there.

Because we keep falling into the trap of binary thinking, we frame our assumptions as Philippine GDP growth is wrong, and thus charity-giving is primordial. See below; World Bank approves a $600-million loan for the PHL 4Ps program.

What are we missing? Recall the fixed versus the growth mindset. The latter is an expression of dynamism. In short, our instincts carry neither “dynamism” nor the “growth mindset.” That comes from our caste system where — for us in the hierarchy — preserving the status quo is a given.

Yet, while consistent with the US model, Philippine GDP growth miserably fails compared to our neighbors. In other words, we are in la-la land.

The bottom line: Our reality holds that we cannot be more aristocratic than the British monarchy.

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

Does our caste system undermine our reality?

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “Recall George, Fr. George Gorospe: ‘No human formulation of ‘reality,’ no philosophical explanation of human experience can say: ‘I have grasped its entirety and meaning.’ Reality is too rich and is continuously changing; it can’t fall under a set of categories. [Does that bring the spectrum of binary to relative thinking, i.e., cognitive development, into mind? What about the tribalism and polarization of US politics – which translates to an assault of democracy that Fitch is mulling, lowering the credit rating of America?]

“Hence, there is a 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.” [Christian Renewal of Filipino Values, Vitaliano R. Gorospe; Philippine Studies vol. 14, no. 2, 1966; Ateneo de Manila University]

Let’s borrow a bit of Franciscan theology: “Jesus reimagines and expands, inviting an alternative and often innovative reading of Jewish tradition. 

“When we translate Jesus’ words in Aramaic (instead of Greek), they will read like this: ‘Get up, go ahead, do something, move, you who are hungry and thirsty for justice, for you shall be satisfied.’” [Richard Rohr's Daily Meditation, Center for Action and Contemplation, 24th Jul 2021]

See below; the 3C’s of the science of “hardy mindset.” This universe is not a place for Juan Tamad or Bondying.

Beyond our caste system, we have a more practical challenge.

The longer we sustain the status quo, the more our neighbors will leave us in the dust. 

One more time with feeling: The longer we sustain the status quo, the more our neighbors, will leave us in the dust.

And our lack of experience in development will widen the gap between them and us.

That is not an opinion. It is from the laws of big and small numbers. That’s why the blog speaks to the 6%-7% GDP growth rates we crow about – that is comparable to the ideal for the US, with a staggering GDP of over $20 trillion.

In other words, the Asian Tigers – and then China, and most recently, Vietnam – became economic miracles by blowing past these GDP yardsticks. And they were not constrained by fiscal and monetary policies. Instead, they begged for foreign money and technology.

On the other hand, we like to talk about trickle-down economics – to explain our inequality.

We are yet to grasp the positive aspect of trickle-down economics – aka “multiplier effect” in Economics 101 – that we can be innovative and globally competitive – demanded by the 21st century – via interdependence, i.e., begging for foreign money and technology. Not parochialism and insularity.

The evidence? Our top companies – combined – can’t match the performance of Samsung Vietnam precisely because political patronage and oligarchy – aka rent-seeking – explains why we failed in innovation and global competitiveness.

And beyond interdependence is the imperative of dynamism. See above; George Gorospe re the need for a dynamic and existential philosophy.

Yet, we in the Philippine elite class and chattering classes see charity-giving as primordial.

Charity-giving is not wrong per se. But it is not a license to lord it over Juan de la Cruz, which the GINI index says.

Consider: “World Bank approves $600-million loan for PHL 4Ps program,” Beatrice M. Laforga, BusinessWorld, 30th Sep 2020.

On the other hand, “64.25% of Filipinos cannot afford a healthy diet. That means that out of the total 105.2 million Filipinos (1917), 67.57 million had limited to no access to a set of dietary recommendations intended to provide nutrient adequacy and long-term health.” [“Study says most Filipinos can’t afford to eat ‘healthy,’” Cristina Eloisa Baclig, INQUIRER.net, 11th Jul 2021]

Let’s hold it right there.

What has to give – if not 67.57 million malnourished Filipinos – to nudge us forward? Or do we know how?

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting re Philippine education: “We neglect the development of the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one meets in real life.”

And we in the Philippine elite class and chattering classes are from the same Philippine education. Many of us have gone to the West too. And as the blog has raised, when my old MNC-company moved the family to New York, corporate America had to deal with the shortcomings of US education too. Perfection is not of this world.

That is why this world, this universe, demands dynamism and interdependence.

Consider too: “Gawad Kalinga’s plan, called GK 777, spread over three ‘phases.’ Every seven years, it will move towards a goal to ultimately ‘un-squat’ the poorest of the poor, heal their woundedness, regain their trust, build their confidence, make them think and act as a community and to share the joy of a country rising from poverty.

“On 25th Feb 2006, GK launched the Isang Milyong Bayani (‘One Million Heroes,’ also known as GK1MB) program, where volunteers from various nations would donate 4 hours of work per month to assist in GK communities.

“The final phase spans from 2018 to 2024 and is envisioned as a time of Social Progress. This phase seeks to achieve scale and sustainability by developing the grassroots economy and expanding the reach and influence of GK to 5 million families with support from key sectors of society in the Philippines and partners abroad. GK seeks to relieve poverty by providing an environment in which Filipinos may work and be productive.” [Wikipedia]

Question: Why can’t we arrest poverty?

It is not about giving fish but teaching Juan de la Cruz how to fish.

This blindness has gone on for decades, but we can’t get over it because of our caste system.

So, where are we?

“How we balance the health and the economy is crucial in the next few months. As Sec. Karl so aptly puts it: We have two economic principles to memorize, dream about, and apply: Nothing is free from heaven, and everything is a trade-off.”  ["Recovery," Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 23rd Jul 2021]

With due respect, that is traditional motherhood.

That is why the blog introduced the science of “thinking.” That human undertakings are subsets of larger sets.

We must walk and chew gum simultaneously – i.e., zoom in and zoom out.

In other words, the art of strategy versus the theory is: a practitioner is both strategic and tactical. See above; cognitive development is the spectrum of binary to relative thinking. 

Consider: Mahathir prioritized KL (zoomed in) over his hometown as he relentlessly drove Malaysia’s growth and development (zoomed out). Today, their GDP per capita is three times ours, while our poverty rate is three times theirs.

Would you please think of how Lee, Mahathir, and Deng successfully got their countries to traverse poverty to prosperity?

And recall what Mahathir said to us Pinoys: You don’t have to love your former colonizer, but beg for money and technology. We are poor nations. We cannot go it alone.

The challenges we face are beyond logical yet linear thinking – i.e., forward and lateral or creative thinking.

Translation: Where do we want to be? We want to traverse poverty to prosperity.

How? Not by making charity-giving primordial. Instead, to leapfrog the 6%-7% GDP growth rate yardsticks.

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “Philippine GDP is a pathetic fraction of the US, Germany, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. These countries are indeed wealthy. They can speak to wealth inequality.

“While our GDP is that of an underdeveloped nation, and we are the regional laggard to boot.

“Let’s hold it right there.

“We must generate much more economic output. 

“And we need it in a hurry, like yesterday. That is why the blog has raised the imperative to raise Philippine GDP by $200 billion rapidly. That is what IRR for CREATE and SIPP must deliver.

“Why? To leapfrog the economic output of our neighbors — which is why they were able to put poverty in the rearview mirror.”

Question: Do we have to amend the Constitution to leverage CREATE and SIPP to (1) put us on equal footing with our neighbors; (2) attract the suitable foreign money and technology; (3) that will aggressively drive our export receipts – i.e., benchmark against Samsung Vietnam because Vietnam arrested poverty?

That must be the debate amongst our economic managers and legislators, not to keep to a 6%-7% GDP growth rate.

Here’s another quote from a previous posting: “We are true ‘insanity’ defined – per Einstein.

“And the blog has been raising it for over a dozen years. And why it introduced the science of ‘thinking.’

“For example, to forward-think, beyond logical yet linear — i.e., lateral and creative thinking.”

“We will have zero chance to overcome our well-ingrained instincts if we don’t reinvent ourselves.

“Those familiar with the blog will recall the 3C’s of the science of “hardy mindset”: (1) Challenge, (2) Commitment, (3) Control. 

“A strong mindset accepts challenges, even daunting ones. In other words, this universe is not a place for Juan Tamad or Bondying. They are not defeatists and instead embrace their commitments knowing full well that they control only themselves.”

Consider: Why we can’t get over such a crisis as the basics of water and electricity. We created EPIRA and privatized water and electricity, yet Juan de la Cruz would still yell “tubig” and “kuryente.”

And we think the private sector is the answer when our top companies, combined, can’t match the performance of one Vietnam enterprise?

That comes from our lack of experience in development and why we’re closer to binary than relative thinking.

In other words, beyond “analysis” is “analytics” – to address the “entire methodology.”

Recall that the blog often speaks to the ecosystem that makes organisms thrive. It is a subset of this universe.

And our failure to move beyond analyses explains why we can’t successfully deliver against complex undertakings.

The bottom line: Rank comes with privileges. We are not accountable to Juan de la Cruz even though we control much of the nation’s wealth. See above; we have the worst GINI index coefficient – the degree of inequality in the distribution of family income in a country.

But is it hubris? 

And we would instead solve wealthy nations’ problems and the world order when we can’t put our own house in order? See above; we want to leapfrog the 6%-7% GDP growth rate yardsticks. And not to make charity-giving primordial. Nor debate isms and motherhoods. They are a pointless exercise for 67.57 million malnourished Filipinos.

We can’t be more aristocratic than the British monarchy.

Gising bayan!

We are “insanity” defined – per Einstein.

“DBCC keeps economic growth target,” Beatrice M. Laforga, BusinessWorld, 20th Jul 2021. “This fiscal consolidation strategy will continuously be adopted by the government to ensure fiscal sustainability over the medium-term and to bring back the country’s deficit to pre-pandemic levels.

“The interagency Development Budget Coordination Committee (DBCC) maintained its gross domestic product (GDP) growth targets of 6-7% for 2021. The GDP targets for the next three years were also left unchanged at 7-9% for 2022, and 6-7% for 2023 to 2024.”

There is no doubt that keeping the economic growth target is a good analysis.

Here’s the twist. That mirrors the American model – despite our denunciations of their ways – which we have been doing for decades, i.e., fiscal and monetary interventions will drive the economy and deliver 6%-7% growth rates.

But then again, the US economy is the most developed – more than China and Japan or even Germany – and delivers over $20 trillion in GDP.

Recall that “analytics” demands addressing the “entire methodology.”

And the Asian Tigers – and then China, and more recently, Vietnam – demonstrated what it means.

Beg for foreign money and technology. That is why and how these neighbors blew past the 6%-7% yardsticks.

The problem is, we learned our economics from the West, especially the Americans. And so, we keep to the American model. 

But they had done nation-building before, and we have not. We’re stuck in our caste system while America, as the New World, purposely upended aristocracy.

If the education system the Americans brought us isn’t for Juan de la Cruz, all the more the economic model – absent nation-building?

We are true “insanity” defined – per Einstein.

And the blog has been raising it for over a dozen years. And why it introduced the science of “thinking.”

We will have zero chance to overcome our well-ingrained instincts if we don’t reinvent ourselves.

Those familiar with the blog will recall the 3C’s of the science of “hardy mindset”: (1) Challenge, (2) Commitment, (3) Control. 

A strong mindset accepts challenges, even daunting ones. In other words, this universe is not a place for Juan Tamad or Bondying. They are not defeatists and instead embrace their commitments knowing full well that they control only themselves.

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

Are we finally stepping up to the plate?

“Economic bills move to the front burner in Senate,” Kyle Aristophere T. Atienza, BusinessWorld, 20th Jul 2021. “THREE MEASURES aimed at relaxing foreign investment restrictions in the country are expected to be approved by the Senate next month.

“Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel F. Zubiri confirmed that the proposals amending (1) the Public Service Act, (2) Foreign Investments Act, and the Retail Trade Liberalization Act are a priority when Congress’ third and final session opens on 26th Jul.

“The three measures have all been certified by President Rodrigo R. Duterte as urgent and are part of a list of priority bills endorsed by business groups and foreign chambers.”

Question: Recall CREATE and SIPP and the challenge to make the IRR give us a fighting chance to compete for FDIs against our neighbors, including Vietnam. Vietnam, not long ago, was a small fry that we poo-pooed.

In other words, if we failed to compete for FDIs against the Asian Tigers and China, will the measures referenced above once and for all put us on equal footing with our neighbors?

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting re Philippine education: “Different subjects were taught ‘in almost complete isolation, one from the other.’ Worse, ‘the development of the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one meets in real life is neglected.’ [“Philippine education: 1925 vs. 2021,” Ambeth R. Ocampo, LOOKING BACK, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 14th Jul 2021]

There is no doubt that the above measures will benefit our most prominent companies. We talk about the inequality in the well-developed free markets. Are we doing anything different?

And Samsung Vietnam showed us what “different” means – because they generate far more significant economic benefits than our top companies – combined. But who cares if we created in the Philippines dollar billionaires? In short, trickle-down economics works in Vietnam but not in the Philippines. 

Recall that the 21st century demands innovation and global competitiveness. That’s why the blog never fails to raise that one enterprise in Vietnam outperforms our top companies combined. And it also explains why San Miguel’s market value is merely a fraction of the typical Fortune 500 company.

But does a Philippine billionaire acknowledge our reality?

Consider: “PHL’s long-term economic prospects are getting better,” Manny B. Villar, BusinessMirror, 19th Jul 2021. Economic recovery is undoubtedly on the horizon based on recent economic indicators, such as electricity demand, exports, manufacturing, remittances, vehicle sales, and office space take-up. That is why I am not bothered by Fitch Rating's revision of our credit rating outlook to 'negative' from 'stable.'

“Our macro-economic fundamentals support my optimism. The inflation rate is now on a downtrend despite the uptick in petroleum prices. While the peso has recently shown weakness against the US dollar, it was mainly due to rising imports, an indication of improving household spending and investments.

“Our banks remain stable, although they could do more to extend loans to businesses. Our gross international reserves exceed $100 billion, or nearly a year worth of imports. Government debt is still one of the lowest in Asia when measured as a percentage of the gross domestic product. The Department of Finance expects the national government debt to remain manageable at 58.7 percent of GDP this year.

“What will sustain our growth in the medium term is the massive infrastructure buildup that is underway. The Department of Public Works and Highways, led by Secretary Mark Villar, inaugurated the Central Luzon Link Expressway connecting Tarlac City and Cabanatuan City. Projects such as this would boost businesses in areas along the central road and disperse economic activities to more people.

“Employment also started to recover as workers return to offices. The business process outsourcing sector is supporting the growth of the real estate sector in the provinces. That will translate into more economic opportunities in those areas. A 1,000-seat BPO center, for example, can match the income of a small rural town.

“In the long-term, I believe our young population will carry us through the next stage of global economic growth. With most of our neighbors adjusting their expectations because of their greying population, the Philippines is in the best position to take advantage of the new global economy.”

Question: Haven’t we heard all of this before?

And if we failed to compete for FDIs against the Asian Tigers and China, will the positives and measures referenced above finally put us on equal footing with our neighbors?

See above; the science of “thinking.” For example, to forward-think, beyond logical yet linear — i.e., lateral and creative thinking.

When Sen. Villar was in the Senate, he raised oligarchy as the stumbling block to FDIs.

Today, do we know who is laughing their way to the bank? “Tax perks for ‘favored’ firms hit P482 billion before the pandemic.”

Consider: “To strengthen PHL economic recovery, World Bank cites the need for more FDIs,” Gerardo P. Sicat, CROSSROADS TOWARD PHILIPPINE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PROGRESS, The Philippine Star, 21st Jul 2021. 

“The primary structural constraint to FDI policy improvement: Constitutional restrictions. I said I agree with the judgment made that the Philippines could do well in economic growth.

“The World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the UN agencies, and bilateral development partners will help us with advice to move the frontiers of our economic and social policies so that we can refine them to help raise our 'economic' performance.

“All such measures have to be compatible with existing policies that are compatible with our constitutional policies. Even if our external economic cooperation partners are aware that the best move is to deal with our political constitution simply by amending the portions of the ‘constitution’ that act as barriers to economic progress, they will not cross that line.

“They will not tell us how to handle our political problems. I have often said that the original sin in our development performance, concerning foreign direct investments, is in those restrictive economic provisions.

“I will say it in another form. Although those provisions sound high and noble for nationalist political rhetoric and protectionism, they represent the poison pill that makes it difficult for some foreign investors to put us high in their priorities.

“Prospective foreign investors see them as a threat if not discomfort.”

The bottom line: We have seen Juan de la Cruz sink into the abyss. We can’t kick the can as though there is no tomorrow.

Recall that the blog often speaks to the demands of the 21st century, i.e., innovation and global competitiveness. And we see it in such an essential commodity as rice. Thailand and Vietnam, for example, export rice while we import them.

The domino effect on Philippine agribusiness – especially farmers – is profound: we can’t arrest rural poverty.

Should we pause — and ponder? Why haven’t we solved poverty, especially in the rural areas? When will we step up to the reality of the 21st century?

And if we push the envelope, the fact that we also lag in industrialization will keep us behind the pack – and rely on OFW remittances and the BPO industry.

There lies the insanity. We know the outcome won’t be any different.

We are “insanity” defined – per Einstein.

Consider: In Philippine education, “We neglect the development of the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one meets in real life.”

Let’s drill that down. 

How many dissertations are classroom work per se?

In the absence of experience, we fall into the trap of binary thinking. And why the blog introduced “cognitive development.” But not from a theoretical but experience standpoint.

And it is not only in Eastern Europe or less developed countries. Even in the West, because of ideology, people can fall into binary thinking. And that’s why the blog raised that despite the conservatism of US bishops, they won’t withhold the Eucharist to abortion rights supporters: Relativism applies even in theology — and is not evil.

And here’s a Philippine example: “Social democracy versus capitalism,” Elfren S. Cruz, BREAKTHROUGH, The Philippine Star, 22nd Jul 2021. “Capitalists believe that the most crucial target is economic growth or GDP. Social democrats believe that the most important goal is achieving income or wealth equality.

“The answer hopefully lies in the social democratic movement that President Biden is slowly espousing in the United States.

“The next country where social democrats could take over government is Germany.”

With due respect to Elfren, let’s dissect the above.

Firstly, are we solving the problem of Juan de la Cruz? On the other hand, recall what the blog has said about the US. They take one misstep after another, yet they keep reinventing themselves.

What Biden is doing is borrowing from the playbook of FDR. It is a demonstration of dynamism.

And if we are solving the problem of Juan de la Cruz, America cannot be the model. 

But we must take the sense of dynamism — which the Asian Tigers, and then China, and most recently Vietnam, have embraced.

Let’s ponder on that one word, dynamism.

And they did not invoke a system — and they each have their own — but begged for Western money and technology.

On the other hand, we’re stuck to force-fitting a system because of our failings. Even in the private sector, it happens. How many local companies have installed ERPs like SAP, yet our top companies, combined, can’t match the revenues of one Vietnam enterprise?

As Deng said to the West, “We need Western money and technology if we are to raise our people from poverty.”

Philippine GDP is a pathetic fraction of the US, Germany, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. These countries are indeed wealthy. They can speak to wealth inequality.

While our GDP is that of an underdeveloped nation, and we are the regional laggard to boot.

Let’s hold it right there.

We must generate much more economic output. 

And we need it in a hurry, like yesterday. That is why the blog has raised the imperative to raise Philippine GDP by $200 billion rapidly. See above; what the IRR for CREATE and SIPP must deliver.

Why? To leapfrog the economic output of our neighbors — which is why they were able to put poverty in the rearview mirror.

And we cannot if we keep to our instincts: We are parochial and insular. So, we value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

That is the crux of our “inequality.”

And unless we reinvent ourselves, we won’t raise Juan de la Cruz from poverty.

For example, why hasn’t “Philippine education developed the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one meets in real life.”

Consider the referenced articles in this posting: (1) DBCC keeps economic growth target; (2) Economic bills move to the front burner in Senate; (3) Philippine education: 1925 vs. 2021; (3) PHL’s long-term economic prospects are getting better; (4) To strengthen PHL economic recovery,  World Bank cites the need for more FDIs; (5) Social democracy versus capitalism.

Then consider the continuing themes of the postings, for example: (1) Why haven’t we solved poverty especially in the rural areas; (2) We lag in industrialization — and rely on OFW remittances and the BPO industry, our top companies notwithstanding, i.e., together, they can’t match one Vietnam enterprise ; (3) America cannot be the model — but we must take the sense of dynamism; (4) We must benchmark against our neighbors — the Asian Tigers, China, and Vietnam; (5) Our neighbors have embraced dynamism and interdependence — which characterize this universe — they begged for foreign money and technology.

Indeed, they are a mouthful. That’s why the blog speaks to these themes too: (1) Human undertakings are subsets of larger sets, i.e., the universe and the ecosystem that makes organisms thrive; (2) Why do freedom-loving nations need a hegemon to lead them in their commitment to pursue the common good.

Furthermore, the blog introduced neuroscience: (1) The science of “thinking”: it is beyond logical and incremental thinking, i.e., lateral or creative and forward-thinking; (2) Cognitive development — the spectrum of binary to relative thinking — comes from experience; (3) The 3C’s of the hardy mindset: challenge, commitment, control.

And that is why learning is crucial, i.e., recall these themes: (1) Education is experiential; (2) The 21st-century skills: critical thinking, creativity, collaboration; (3) The 21st century demands innovation and global competitiveness — e.g., Thailand and Vietnam export rice; PHL imports them.

At this point, indeed, we need a “compass,” and hence these topics: (1) The GPS model: where are we; where do we want to be; how do we get there; (2) Steve Jobs’ definition of creativity: connect the dots; he tapped a Japanese technology in moving the world from analog to digital with the iPod.

In the final analysis, we must ask ourselves: Do we know Juan de la Cruz?

Our instincts reflect a caste system: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

The bottom line: Juan de la Cruz’s place in the sun is to traverse poverty to prosperity. But Philippine education hasn’t developed the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one encounters in real life.

Unsurprisingly, we are “insanity” defined — per Einstein.

Gising bayan!

Ignore Einstein’s “insanity” definition at our peril.

“After almost a century of education reports, we are still in a rut. It is tragic that the 1925 Monroe Report, available online, is still relevant today. We have not changed much in the past 96 years.

“Reading the 1925 Monroe Commission report on Philippine education, I was struck by the opening lines: ‘The Board of Educational Survey is not unmindful of the consequences which may result from its frank discussion of the country’s education. There is in the report much criticism of existing conditions. This report will fall into the hands of persons who have at heart the welfare of the Filipino people and some who may seek to reap some personal advantage from such criticism.

“Then as now, government officials are sensitive to truth, i.e., the risk of being weaponized for personal, partisan, or political purposes.

“Significant findings of the Monroe report are on the medium of instruction, the need for a common language, and bridging communication in an archipelago separated by many languages and dialects.

“English replaced Spanish and brought to a Malay people ‘Anglo-Saxon institutions and civilization [and] ideals of universality, practicality, and democracy.’ The ‘universal’ education recommended wasn’t suited to the needs of Filipinos.’

“Issues on quantity and quality of education, academic vs. social education, were noted. Not all students were suited for an ‘academic’ path, so there was a need for more agricultural, trade, and vocational schools.

“Then as now, Reading was not the problem but Literacy or understanding what ‘is read.’ The 1921 Civil Service Records revealed that 98 percent failed the English composition exam. Nobody passed the 1918 exams for messengers and third-class patrolmen. In the 1922 exams for junior teachers, 87 percent failed. How would today’s students perform in international assessments if the tests were in Filipino? How successful are our bilingual or mother tongue experiments?

“In 1925, the Board found that classroom education was bookish and artificial (Filipinos were then using US textbooks alien to their lives). There was ‘an overemphasis on uniformity and a corresponding failure to provide for initiative and participation.’

“Different subjects were taught ‘in almost complete isolation, one from the other.’ Worse, ‘the development of the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one encounters in real life is neglected.’

‘The educational process here is largely the memorizing of materials in books or developing specific skills in formal operations or handwork.’ That sounds painfully familiar.

“Attention-grabbing recommendations from the 677-page report: That real property, real estate, and cedula taxes be increased and devoted to educational purposes; that national government should not bear all expenses of education, that provinces and local government should share in it.

‘Support of the academic high school be thrown entirely upon the province, with the option cost of instruction is covered by tuition or provincial funds or a combination of the two,’ it said.

“Non-teaching work of administrators and teachers like reports and records be simplified and reduced – and education insulated from politics.” [“Philippine education: 1925 vs. 2021,” Ambeth R. Ocampo, LOOKING BACK, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 14th Jul 2021]

Those familiar with the blog won’t miss the following:

“In 1925, the Board found that classroom education was bookish and artificial (Filipinos were then using US textbooks alien to their lives). There was ‘an overemphasis on uniformity and a corresponding failure to provide for initiative and participation.’

“Different subjects were taught ‘in almost complete isolation, one from the other.’ Worse, ‘the development of the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one meets in real life is neglected.’

‘The educational process here is largely the memorizing of materials in books or developing specific skills in formal operations or handwork.’ That sounds painfully familiar.”

Let’s hold it right there.

Is Philippine education still (1) bookish and artificial; (2) with an emphasis on uniformity, thus failing to provide for initiative and participation; (3) different subjects taught in almost complete isolation, one from the other, and neglects the development of the ability to think, to meet new situations, and to solve the kinds of problems one meets in real life?

Is Philippine education still essentially memorizing materials in books or developing specific skills in formal operations or handwork?

Consider: The character of this world, this universe – of dynamism (as in personal “initiative”) and interdependence (as in “participation” in the pursuit of the common good) – aren’t part of our instincts.

Instead, we are parochial and insular. And so, we value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

Then consider: Duterte’s running for VP isn’t a constitutional issue? But does it demonstrate impunity given the worldwide condemnation of EJKs? Of course, we’re not alone. 

The GOP House leader, captured in TV clips speaking against the 6th Jan insurrection, is now promoting the return of Trump as party leader. 

Recall that I have no respect for US politics and chose not to exercise the right to vote. America is the hegemon — and has no right to lead the free world if it can’t demonstrate exceptionalism. 

Unsurprisingly, “Fitch Ratings warned that the United States could lose its perfect credit rating due in part to the ongoing assault on democracy and worsening political polarization.”

Let’s hold it right there.

Why do freedom-loving nations need a hegemon to lead their efforts — and personal commitment — for the common good? 

Recall even the wife asked the question, “What are we doing in this god-forsaken place?” And I am not the only volunteer expert showing people — born and raised as socialists — the ropes of freedom and the free market. WE FILIPINOS MUST KNOW IF THESE EFFORTS HAVE VALUE between JICA and USAID and those from the EU.

And perfection is not of this world. There will be despots and autocracies that will undermine the world order. Not a surprise, given in Eden and the Last Supper, evil was present.

But then again, if Peter wasn’t perfect, how can Uncle Sam be?

Yet, given our values of hierarchy and paternalism, we expect omnipotence. Instead of the pursuit of the common good, we put primacy on parochial and insular concerns. 

Sadly, that is why and how we created a Marcos and a Duterte. Said Rizal, he who submits to tyranny loves it. There is no free lunch.

The bottom line: It is about the value of freedom instead of tyranny. And these values aren’t expressed in binary terms. That’s why the blog often speaks to the spectrum of dualistic to relative thinking in cognitive development.

In other words, there are as many hues as nations are representing these values, and not one can be copied and pasted.

But we Filipinos can’t move beyond narrowly defined systems given our failings in our system. Try to establish a benchmark like our neighbors, and we won’t see poverty as our be-all and end-all. Instead, we would have traversed poverty to prosperity.

Let’s pause — and ponder.

Do we or don’t we hold the future of Juan de la Cruz in our hands?

Why can’t we internalize that Juan de la Cruz’s place in the sun is to traverse poverty to prosperity? 

Yet, it is not surprising, given that our caste system puts us in pigeonholes. 

And if we push the envelope, what he deserves is “paternalism,” as in the 4Ps. In short, he will always be subservient to hierarchy.

But we won’t acknowledge that because that is how we define “inclusive.” We conveniently forget that we preach otherwise to teach Juan de la Cruz how to fish as Christians.

And so, we turn around to denounce the inequality in the free-enterprise system.

Yet, inequality is not a representation of “freedom” alone. Oligarchy and political patronage — not foreign to Juan de la Cruz, the Philippines is the epitome of “inequality” — are why former Soviet satellite states remain under tyrannical rule. I do business in this part of the world, and friends haven’t stopped bending my ears to their reality.

And to temper this impunity, Western institutions impose sanctions on individuals concerned. Our problem as Filipinos is that we love tyranny ourselves. We still can’t step up to the reality of EJKs, for example, despite the condemnation from freedom-loving nations.

“Moldova: An anti-corruption party triumphs. Moldova has a chance to clean up.” And some nations pay heed.

“She is slight, polite, and gets what she wants. On 11th July, the party founded by Maia Sandu won parliamentary elections by a landslide. Over the past two years, Ms. Sandu has seen off a local oligarch and has now dispatched the men from Moscow, too. [The Economist, 17th Jul 2021]

One more time with feeling: Our parochial and insular concerns — that we equate with national interests and why the crab mentality sticks with us — are subsets of a more extensive set. Think of dynamism and interdependence inherent in this universe. Systems are a human construct — not static nor omnipotent. Unsurprisingly, the 21st century’s character is that of innovation and global competitiveness.

I speak not as an academic but practitioner – and have lived in the West for over 30 years and with people born and raised as socialists under Soviet rule for almost two decades. 

But let’s get back to Juan de la Cruz.

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “In the meantime, 64.25% of Filipinos cannot afford a healthy diet. And whatever happened to the 4Ps where we have to borrow tons of money to keep Juan de la Cruz’s body and soul together?” 

In other words, we cannot keep throwing good money after bad if indeed we want to overcome the poverty of Juan de la Cruz.

As the blog has argued, the 4Ps will not succeed on their own – and are the tangible expression of paternalism given our failure to traverse poverty to prosperity.

And where is the “insanity”? How? See above; we were taught different subjects in almost complete isolation, one from the other. But not only. We keep to populist initiatives yet take the requisite principles for granted.

They neglect to develop the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve the kinds of problems one encounters in real life.

The evidence? There’s a slew of them, as the blog has repeatedly pointed out. Start with the comprehensive land reform. Add the farms-to-market roads and the irrigation and fertilizer programs, among others.

It is not that they are wrong per se. We must move beyond analysis into analytics – i.e., analytics is not overly concerned with individual “analyses” or analysis steps but with the entire methodology.

And this is where the modern math concept of sets and subsets comes in. For example, the 21st century’s character is one of innovation and global competitiveness. Why do we fall flat on our face by addressing rural poverty?

Because as our neighbors like Thailand and Vietnam have demonstrated, our products must be perceived as innovation outcomes and thus globally competitive. That is why these countries export rice while we import them.

Or think of the drivers of our economy, OFW remittances. Again, because we wanted to address the poverty of Juan de la Cruz, we saw overseas employment as the answer. And we celebrated the fact that over 10 million Filipinos are OFWs.

Again, that is not wrong per se. But we missed the “entire methodology.” We must move up to an investment-industrial economy. Our neighbors, the Asian Tigers, and China, and most recently, Vietnam, showed us the way.

Question: This phenomenon of tiger economies has been around for decades. Yet, over that period, we celebrated our vaunted fiscal and monetary policies – delivering GDP growth rates of 6%-7% – while neglecting to make the Philippines an industrial economy.

Recall that the blog has argued that while we look on the economic managers to drive the economy – via the said interventions –  we miss the context of our challenge: nation-building.

In the process, we also took infrastructure development for granted, including the most basic of them, water and electricity.

Why? Because we became a major service economy and applauded that our top companies gave the Philippines dollar billionaires.

Still, we haven’t learned. The “entire methodology” demanded by the 21st century should have been crystal clear to us: Our top export categories – that account for over 64% of export revenues – are in the related sector as that of Samsung Vietnam. But Samsung Vietnam – singlehandedly – delivers far more significant economic benefits than our top companies – combined.

Let’s drill that down just a bit. Take San Miguel. San Miguel’s revenues can compare to Fortune 500 companies, yet its market value is a mere fraction. See above; the 21st century’s character is one of innovation and global competitiveness.

And we are not alone. As The Economist pointed out, Europe lags the US and China in nurturing businesses in industries that dominate contemporary times.

Over the last dozen years, the blog has argued that we won’t lift Juan de la Cruz from poverty until we reinvent ourselves and overcome our instincts.

Between “Pinoy abilidad” and our education counting almost a century, we cannot meet the challenges of this century.

And given that we in the Philippine elite class are in the best position to show the way to Juan de la Cruz, we are also the least predisposed to change and reinvention. Consider: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

In other words, rank comes with privileges. Why change?

“After almost a century of education reports, we are still in a rut. We have not changed much.” 

Yet, we expect a different outcome for the good of Juan de la Cruz?

Consider: “The education crisis we face is a catastrophe in the making. We raise much noise about the love of country and patriotism in connection with foreign intrusion into our lands. But we have a more significant problem in our backyard, and there is mostly silence from among our leaders. They fail to realize that the problem involves the lives of our children and grandchildren and the nation’s future as a proud member of the international community.

“The truth is we have been on this long journey to nowhere for some time now. Things do not just develop overnight and suddenly happen.” [“World Bank apology,” Ramon J. Farolan, REVEILLE, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 19th Jul 2021]

Gising bayan!