A caste system = Myopia = A failed nation

We are not quite like Afghanistan. Still, within the region, there is only one nation left from a competitive standpoint. The rest has left us behind. In other words, we’re just a few rungs above a “failed nation.”

Thank God for OFW remittances and the BPO industry. That’s only the short of it. And the long? Globalization, which we like to deride because of (1) “Pinoy abilidad” or (2) parochialism or  (3) “pwede na ‘yan” or (4) all the above?

Sadly, they reveal how much a myopic value system defined this proud nation.

But the momentum is not in our favor. And it is beyond the pandemic, i.e., Covid-19 revealed every nation’s weakness.

“The government can no longer rely on the protectionist instruments of the past and must now muster more positive, enabling measures.

“The focus on industrial catch-up is motivated by the prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry and its profound impact on the country’s labor market.

“Unlike developed countries whose workers have primarily transitioned away from agriculture to industrial and high-skilled services employment, workers in developing countries such as the Philippines have been moving out of low-productivity agriculture towards low-skilled jobs.

“The services sector account for 61% of gross domestic product and six out of 10 workers, but a third in low-paying jobs.

“Meanwhile, elements of its exports sector with a competitive advantage and the number of exporting companies have been declining, making the Philippines a ‘market of consumer goods rather than a hub for manufacturing exports.’

“The country can explore several paths towards economic diversification and upgrading, which includes ‘leapfrogging’ to high-productivity and aiming for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.” [Diversification, Jobs and the COVID-19 Recovery.pdf (un.org)]

The blog purposely raises the above – from the UN policy brief – repeatedly because the Philippine elite and chattering classes aren’t doing it.

Why? Denial is a great defense mechanism.

That’s why in a recent posting, the blog gave room to “How the ‘Bobos’ [bourgeois bohemians] Broke America.” [David Brooks, The Atlantic, Sep 2021]

“The bobos didn’t set out to be an elite, dominating class. We just fit ourselves into a system that rewarded a certain type of achievement and then gave our children the resources that would allow them to prosper in that system too. But blind to our power, we have created enormous inequalities—financial inequalities and more painful inequalities of respect. The task before us is to dismantle the system that raised us.”

Here’s to paraphrase David Brooks, the task before us is to toss our caste system. Yes, the system that raised us.

But the momentum is not in our favor.

“The failure of Philippine education is to develop the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve problems one encounters in real life.”

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.

“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]

As Fr. Gorospe explained, even if students are exposed to the dynamism of reality in the classroom, once outside, they live out our world: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy that ours is a culture of impunity.

Then consider: “If only words can fuel a power plant, we should have no problems. Unfortunately, unless actions follow ‘words,’ the danger of power shortages or brownouts exists. Good intentions behind new laws also don’t amount to much.

“I viewed the symposium of the Management Association of the Philippines (MAP) on energy security, and I didn’t hear a thing I haven’t heard before. The numbers are ‘bad,’ the solutions are logical, but there is no hope unless the government moves.

“For a while, we thought the economic slowdown due to the pandemic lockdowns might allow us to catch up. But recent yellow and red alerts deliver the message that we have no time to fool around as usual.

“Demand has started going up as restrictions are relaxed. Right now, we are skating on relatively thin ice in terms of reserves.

“Our power plants are getting old and less reliable, explaining forced outages. We should plan way ahead, given how long it takes to get regulatory approval to put up new power plants. Otherwise, power failures will become something Filipinos are doomed to accept.

“Then there are debates on what power plants to build. Coal-fired power plants now provide baseload capacity. But coal has been demonized, with some good reasons, so that our publicity-conscious Energy secretary declared a moratorium on more coal-fired plants.

“Problem is big brother doesn’t tell us what we will do in place of coal-fired baseload plants. Even Sen. Win Gatchalian, who agrees with the coal ban, laments that the Department of Energy has not provided him a transition plan with the details of how it will proceed with no disruptions.” [“Words, words, words,” Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 13th Aug 2021]

See below; to divine our power needs, we must be both tactical and strategic.

Here’s again a quote from an earlier posting: “The character of creation and the universe is that of dynamism and interdependence. Human undertakings are subsets of larger sets, e.g., humankind thrives courtesy of the photosynthesis phenomenon.

“In other words, there is the ‘big picture.’ That beyond ‘tactical’ is ‘strategic’ thinking.

“How do we Filipinos then figure out how to thrive as a nation?

“Recall what Mahathir said to us: You don’t have to love your former colonizer. But beg for money and technology. We are poor nations. We cannot go it alone. Moreover, he knew the “big picture.” While he zoomed in on KL – made it the priority over his hometown – he zoomed out to the big picture: to relentlessly drive Malaysia’s growth and development.”

As the blog asserts, we don’t have a track record in successfully delivering against complex undertakings. And, sadly, we are nowhere near overcoming the dilemma.

Because the GPS model that the blog speaks to often isn’t easily transportable to the real world: Where are we; Where do we want to be; How do we get there.

Practice. Practice. Practice.

And that’s why the blog raises a range of examples often — from a small, new restaurant co-owned by a nephew to the Mahathir successful leadership with a lot else in between. But they won’t get traction if we keep to a frozen mind. 

In the social sciences, they call it the “unfreezing exercise.” That for the mind to take in new learnings, we must first unfreeze it.

I remember the late Anacleto del Rosario, my mentor and the first Philippine marketing consultant and co-founder of PANA (Philippine Association of National Advertisers.) He also brought Edward de Bono, the father of “Lateral Thinking,” and Louis A. Allen, the management guru, to the Philippines.

And while conducting his seminars, he would have a glass filled with water and an empty one in front of the group. And as if on cue, he would take a pitcher of water and pour it on the already filled glass for water to spill over. “If that’s how much knowledge you have in your brain, everything thing else just goes to waste.”

Our overarching goal is to traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly. That is how our neighbors did it. The Western focus on fiscal and monetary interventions did not influence them.

Why? They knew they were underdeveloped, unlike the wealthy Western nations.

And adds the UN policy brief: “A pure laissez-faire approach could make catch-up growth even more unattainable. For example, market failures and externalities cumulatively worsen and further discourage investments on (1) knowledge creation and (2) technological advancement.”

In other words, if a Philippine leader has to be a strongman, they must model after Lee or Mahathir or Deng – and not like Marcos or Duterte. Even PNoy did not run with the ball of Arangkada, for instance, that the JFC did not mince words to assess his performance. The blog had high hopes when PNoy started his term because the JFC presented Arangkada on a silver platter.

Let’s hold it right there.

One more time with feeling: Our neighbors sought to traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly. They were not influenced by the Western focus on fiscal and monetary interventions – because they were underdeveloped, unlike wealthy Western “laissez-faire” nations.

Unsurprisingly, they awed the West – and called them “Asian Tigers.”

What then? We cannot keep to our myopic value system – aka our caste system – because we won’t have the chance – ever – to be the next Asian Tiger.

And here’s something the blog keeps repeating: “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 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.”

“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 mantra. “Recall the GPS model: Where are we; Where do we want to be; How do we get there.

“We must free ourselves from this prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry. Not sing hosanna to our top companies. 

“We haven’t cut it!”

How do we learn from Mahathir? How can we be both tactical and strategic?

For example, setting our goal “To raise Philippine GDP by $200 billion rapidly” will clear the cobwebs in our heads.

Let’s toss our “sabog” instinct for now.

And that’s why the above questions: 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?

If we are brainstorming, we would ask: What products will aggressively drive our export receipts? Think of Samsung Vietnam and how they deliver more economic benefits than our top eight companies combined.

That is also what the UN policy brief is saying. We must leapfrog to high productivity and aim for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.

And Vietnam translated that by luring Samsung smartphones and then Apple AirPods.

That is how we must rack our brains – not doing 50 or so industry road maps.

Once we figure out the products that will deliver us $200 billion, we must plot how to attract suitable foreign money and technology.

And if we stack the products that will generate the $200-billion number together with our current GDP drivers, we should be able to figure out (1) what we need infrastructure-wise and (2) where we need them, and (3) including the power-source profile. 

Let’s pause and ponder.

We cannot divine our power needs if we don’t first establish the platform of products and industries to generate the requisite GDP.

And again, from a prior posting: “The pursuit of freedom and the free market takes a village.

Let’s then look at “Ambisyon Natin: 2040: It is a picture of the future, a set of life goals and goals for the country. It is different from a plan, which defines the strategies to achieve the goals. It is like a destination that answers the question, ‘Where do we want to be?’. It describes how to get to the destination; AmBisyon Natin 2040 is the vision that guides the future and is the anchor of the country’s plans.”

And NEDA commits to translate Ambisyon into specific goals and milestones for the “next steps.”

And that is why the blog offers the above.

And let’s not forget the UN policy brief and how it explains how our neighbors did it.

“Leapfrogging is possible in the presence of certain critical conditions: (1) a forward-looking coherent vision centered on bold ambitions; (2) integrated government interventions galvanized by a lead agency with strong coordinating and monitoring powers; (3) intense policy learning to speedily correct errors; (4) autonomous, high-quality and ‘long-termist’ bureaucracy; (5) close monitoring of progress and survival of domestic firms; and (6) tight collaboration with the private sector and other stakeholders.”

We are not quite like Afghanistan. Still, within the region, there is only one nation left from a competitive standpoint. The rest has left us behind. In other words, we’re just a few rungs above a “failed nation.”

And the momentum is not in our favor.

Our overarching goal is to traverse poverty to prosperity rapidly. That is how our neighbors did it. 

The Western focus on fiscal and monetary interventions did not influence them.

And teeing up 50 or so industry road maps has not brought home the bacon.

Why? Our caste system explains our myopic value system – and has brought us closer to a failed nation.

Gising bayan!

Why reinvent ourselves?

Over a dozen years ago, that was the question I wanted to answer after friends asked: “How can you help the Philippines?”

They knew I was a volunteer expert (VE) in Eastern Europe. But as I shared with my Eastern European friends, the free market is not about rules but principles. [The challenge of cognitive development is to move away from binary and closer to relative thinking. To us Catholics, recall Christ and his battles with the scribes and Pharisees.]

And that the pursuit of freedom and the free market takes a village. [The character of creation and the universe is that of dynamism and interdependence. Human undertakings are subsets of larger sets, e.g., humankind thrives courtesy of the photosynthesis phenomenon. In other words, there is the “big picture.” That beyond “tactical” is “strategic” thinking. How do we Filipinos then figure out how to thrive as a nation? Recall what Mahathir said to us: You don’t have to love your former colonizer. But beg for money and technology. We are poor nations. We cannot go it alone. Moreover, he knew the “big picture.” While he zoomed in on KL – made it the priority over his hometown – he zoomed out to the big picture: to relentlessly drive Malaysia's growth and development.]

Since I am not a politician nor seek higher office, I don’t have to promise miracles. [Toss our caste system and get out of our pigeonholes. Recall that “design thinking” is cross-discipline and consistent with the egalitarian ethos, i.e., rank has no privileges. How long have we been hostage to the metric of the 6%-7% GDP growth rate, for example? And how did our neighbors blow past our economic mantra? How come abject poverty is still with us – while they have moved up to first-world nations?]

And the blog became my response: “Philippine Economy: Reinventing Ourselves.”

At that time, I had just stepped aside (after two years) organizing, running, and developing the regional — but geared to be global — sales organization of my Eastern European friends. That was on top of the six years in a consulting capacity. And that meant they had to learn to swim — and do the job themselves. Recall that learning is experiential.

And a couple of years later, they would be adjudged a model: “The European Business Awards takes great pleasure in congratulating you and your team on your amazing success. Every year the European Business Awards research team spends six months analyzing over 15,000 companies across Europe to seek out the very best businesses that demonstrate the guiding principles of the Awards: Commercial success, Innovation, Business Ethics. You demonstrated them in your drive for growth – and the impact is across the business.”

While I stepped aside from a direct role, I accepted their request to hold them by the hand even when they became globally respected players in the industry.

They understood the science of “thinking.” Born and raised socialists under Soviet rule, they knew their instincts could undermine the two operating systems in the brain: (1) automatic and (2) conscious, postulated by Daniel Kahneman, the Noble Laureate.

And that is despite their exposure to the distinctions between (a) analysis – think “tactical” and (b) analytics – think “strategic.”

In other words, to go beyond the “automatic” response of the brain, one must tap the “conscious” chamber. But that takes lots of practice. And it explains why logical and incremental thinking comes naturally, while forward and lateral thinking doesn’t.

And an excellent forward-thinking model is the GPS: Where are we; Where do we want to be; How do we get there.

Sadly, taking the model to the real world is not a cakewalk.

Why must we Filipinos reinvent ourselves?

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

Why is our automatic response to the challenge of Juan de la Cruz the war on poverty? Because we aren’t conscious of “cause-and-effect,” it reveals our focus on the tactical and misses the strategic. Simply put, underdevelopment is the cause of Philippine poverty.

Let’s scan what we read in our media to illustrate the point: (1) DoF sees 7.4% GDP growth in 2022; (2) 11.8 percent GDP growth—what it means; (3) Understanding the four industrial revolutions; (4) Electric cars in our future.

Then recall the following, quoted from an earlier posting: “Consider the policy brief released by the United Nations in the Philippines and reported in the BusinessWorld, 6th Aug 2021:

“The focus on industrial catch-up is motivated by the prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry and its profound impact on the country’s labor market.

“Unlike developed countries whose workers have primarily transitioned away from agriculture to industrial and high-skilled services employment, workers in developing countries such as the Philippines have been moving out of low-productivity agriculture towards low-skilled jobs.

“The services sector account for 61% of gross domestic product and six out of 10 workers, but a third in low-paying jobs.

“Meanwhile, elements of its exports sector with a competitive advantage and the number of exporting companies have been declining, making the Philippines a ‘market of consumer goods rather than a hub for manufacturing exports.’

“The government can no longer rely on the protectionist instruments of the past and must now muster more positive, enabling measures.”

“The country can explore several paths towards economic diversification and upgrading, which includes ‘leapfrogging’ to high-productivity and aiming for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.” [Diversification, Jobs and the COVID-19 Recovery.pdf (un.org)]

In other words, the United Nations is telling us to be conscious of the imperative for the Philippine industry to catch up – because of its prolonged stagnation. And its profound impact on the country’s labor market, i.e., we haven’t risen beyond low-productivity agriculture and low-skilled jobs.

That’s why we have underemployment – and poverty. To appreciate “cause-and-effect,” as Mahathir demonstrated, we must be at home with both tactical and strategic thinking.

But why do we struggle?

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

On the other hand, per the UN, the Philippines must “leapfrog to high-productivity and aim for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.”

And if we want to inject strategic thinking in our efforts beyond the 6%-7% GDP growth rate mantra, we must develop forward and lateral thinking techniques.

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “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 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.”

“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.”

The bottom line: We have pushed our luck for decades at the expense of Juan de la Cruz. 

We cannot continue to rely on the two drivers of the economy, OFW remittances, and the BPO industry.

It reveals our myopic value system. 

Isn’t globalization one of the many culprits we blame for our predicament? 

Yet, OFW remittances and the BPO industry are both spoils of globalization. Not surprising. They are consistent with the character of this universe, dynamism, and interdependence.

In other words, for us to leverage globalization, the United Nations is telling us to be conscious of the imperative for the Philippines to catch up — because of its prolonged stagnation. And it’s a profound impact on the country’s labor market, i.e., we haven’t risen beyond low-productivity agriculture and low-skilled jobs.

But we will struggle to turn over a new leaf if we don’t reinvent ourselves. Because our caste system defines our value system – and undermines the imperatives of dynamism and interdependence.

Will it help us figure out if — beyond the story of how people born and raised socialists can reinvent themselves and succeed in the free market — we talk about the insanity of the Western or American value system?

For example, don’t we relate to the people’s misery behind the Trump election in 2016 and why they continue to indict the American system?

In other words, we see the bankruptcy of the American model.

Consider: “The [American] creative class was supposed to foster progressive values and economic growth. Instead, we got resentment, alienation, and endless political dysfunction.

“Over the past two decades, the rapidly growing economic, cultural, and social power of the bobos [‘bourgeois bohemians’] has generated a global backlash that is growing more and more vicious, deranged, and apocalyptic. And yet, this backlash is not without basis. The bobos—or X people, the creative class, or whatever you want to call them—have coalesced into an insular, intermarrying Brahmin elite that dominates culture, media, education, and tech. Worse, those of us in this class have had a hard time admitting our power, much less using it responsibly.

“First, we’ve come to hoard spots in the competitive meritocracy that produced us.

“Affluent parents have increased their share of educational spending by nearly 300 percent since 1996. Partly as a result, the test-score gap between high- and low-income students has grown by 40 to 50 percent. The children of well-off and well-educated are thus ideally situated to predominate at the elite colleges. That produced their parents’ social standing in the first place. Roughly 72 percent of students at these colleges come from the wealthiest quarter of families, whereas only 3 percent come from the poorest quarter.

“Second, we’ve migrated to just a few vast wealth-generating metropolises.

“Young creative types were indeed clustering in a few zip codes, which produced enormous innovation and wealth along with soaring home values.

“The population of college-educated young people between the ages of twenty-five and thirty-four grew three times faster in downtown areas than in the suburbs of America’s fifty largest metro areas.

“This concentration of talent meant that a few superstar cities have economically blossomed while everywhere else has languished. The 50 largest metro areas around the world house 7 percent of the world’s population but generate 40 percent of global wealth. Just six metro areas—the San Francisco Bay Area; New York; Boston; Washington, DC; San Diego; and London—attract nearly half the high-tech venture capital in the world.

"This has also created gaping inequalities within cities, as high housing prices push middle- and lower-class people out. Over the past decade, nine in ten US metropolitan areas have seen their middle classes shrink. As the ‘middle’ hollows out, neighborhoods across America divide into large areas of concentrated disadvantage and much smaller areas of concentrated affluence. The sizeable American metro areas most segregated by occupation are San Jose, San Francisco, Washington, Austin, L.A., and New York.

“Third, we’ve come to dominate left-wing parties around the world that were formerly vehicles for the working class. We’ve pulled these parties further left on cultural issues (prizing cosmopolitanism and questions of identity) while watering down or reversing traditional Democratic positions on trade and unions. As creative-class people enter left-leaning parties, working-class people tend to leave. Around 1990, nearly a third of Labour members of the British Parliament were from working-class backgrounds; from 2010 to 2015, the proportion wasn’t even one in 10. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the 50 most-educated counties in America by an average of 26 points—while losing the 50 least-educated counties by an average of 31 points.

“The creative class has converted cultural attainment into economic privilege and vice versa. In a new book, The Constitution of Knowledge, Jonathan Rauch describes the epistemic regime—the massive network of academics and analysts who determine truth. Most of all, it possesses the power of consecration; it determines what gets recognized and esteemed and what gets disdained and dismissed. The web, of course, has democratized 'taste making,' giving more people access to megaphones. But the setters of elite taste still tend to be graduates of selective universities living in creative-class enclaves. If you feel seen in society, the creative class sees you; if you feel unseen, this class does not.

“Like any class, the bobos are a collection of varied individuals who tend to share certain taken-for-granted assumptions, schemas, and cultural rules. Members of our class find it natural to leave their hometown to go to college and get a job, whereas people in other classes do not. In study after study, members of our class display more individualistic values, and a more autonomous sense of self, than other classes. Creative class members see their career as the defining feature of their identity and place a high value on intelligence.

“That seems radically egalitarian because there are no formal hierarchies of ‘taste’ or social position. Without even thinking about it, we in the creative class consolidate our class standing through an ingenious code of ‘openness.’ We tend to like open floor plans, casual dress, and eclectic ‘localist’ tastes that are willfully unpretentious. But only the most culturally privileged person knows how to navigate a space where the social rules are mysterious and hidden.

“Openness in manners is matched by openness in cultural tastes. Once upon a time, high culture—opera and ballet—had more social status than popular culture. Now social prestige goes to the no-brow—the person with so much cultural capital that he moves between genres and styles, highbrow and lowbrow, with ease.

“Culture is a resource used by elites to recognize one another and distribute opportunities based on the display of appropriate attributes. Today’s elite culture is even more insidious than it had been in the past because today, unlike years ago, the standards are argued not to advantage anyone. The winners don’t have the odds stacked in their favor. They have what it takes.

“Somehow, we imagined, our class would be different from all the other elites in world history. We have many of the same vices as those who came before us.

“When you tell a large chunk of the country that their voices are not worth hearing, they are going to react badly—and they have.

“As these rebellions arose, pundits from the creative class settled upon certain narratives to explain why there was suddenly so much conflict across society. Our first was the open/closed narrative. ‘Society,’ we argued, is dividing between those who like open trade, open immigration, and open mores, on the one hand, and those who would like to close these things down, on the other. Second, and related, was the diversity narrative. Western nations are transitioning from being white-dominated to being diverse, multiracial societies. Some people welcome these changes, whereas others would like to go back to the past.

“Both these narratives have much truth to them—racism still divides and stains America—but they ignore the role that the creative class has played in increasing inequality and social conflict.

“For all its talk of openness, the creative class is remarkably insular.

“The educated elite tended to be the most socially parochial group, as measured by contact with people in occupational clusters different from their own.

“What causes psychic crisis are the whiffs of ‘smarter than’ and ‘more enlightened than’ and ‘more tolerant than’ that the creative class gives off. People who feel that they have been rendered invisible will do anything to make themselves visible; humiliated people will avenge their humiliation. Donald Trump didn’t win in 2016 because he had a tremendous healthcare plan. He won because he made the white working-class feel heard.

“As the bobos gain control of the economy, the culture, and even our understanding of what a good life is, what would we expect? Consider: the bobos have abundant cultural, political, and economic power; the red one-percenters have economic power but scant cultural power; the young, educated elites have tons of cultural influence and growing political power, but still not much economic power; and the caring class and rural working class, unheard and unseen, have almost no control of any kind at all. No wonder society has begun to array itself against them, with the old three-part class structure breaking apart into a confusing welter of micro-groups competing for status and standing in any way they can. Meanwhile, our politics has become sharper-edged, more identity-based, and more reactionary, partly because politics is the one arena in which the bobos cannot dominate—there aren’t enough of us.

“If there is an ‘economic’ solution to the class chasms that have opened up in America, the Biden legislative package is undoubtedly it. It would narrow the income gaps that breed much of today’s class animosity.

“But economic redistribution only gets you so far. The real problem is the sorting mechanism itself. It determines who gets included in the upper echelons of society and who gets excluded; who gets an escalator ride to premier status and worldly success, and who faces a wall.

“The modern meritocracy is a resentment-generating machine. But even leaving that aside, as a sorting device, it is batshit crazy. Performing academic tasks during adolescence is nice to have, but organizing your society around it is absurd. That ability is not as important as the ability to work in teams; to sacrifice for the common good; to be honest, kind, and trustworthy; to be creative and self-motivated. A sensible society would reward such traits by conferring status on them. A rational community would not celebrate the skills of a corporate consultant while slighting the skills of a home nurse.

“Some 60 years after its birth, the meritocracy seems more and more morally vacuous. Does the ability to take tests when you’re young make you a better person than others? Does a society built on that ability become more just and caring?

“This situation produces a world in which the populist right can afford to be intellectually bankrupt. Right-leaning parties don’t need to have a policy agenda. They need to stoke and harvest resentment toward the creative class.

“The only way to remedy this system is through institutional reform that widens the criteria by which people get sorted. For instance, we need more pathways to success, so those not academically inclined have routes to social leadership. Programs like national service, so that people with and without college degrees have more direct contact with one another; an end to policies like residential zoning rules that keep the affluent segregated on top. More broadly, changing this sorting mechanism requires transforming our whole moral ecology, such that possession of a Stanford degree doesn’t signify a higher level of being.

“The bobos didn’t set out to be an elite, dominating class. We just fit ourselves into a system that rewarded a certain type of achievement and then gave our children the resources that would allow them to prosper in that system too. But blind to our power, we have created enormous inequalities—financial inequalities and more painful inequalities of respect. The task before us is to dismantle the system that raised us.” [“How the ‘Bobo’ [bourgeois bohemians] Broke America,” David Brooks, The Atlantic, Sep 2021.]

The bottom line: If America sees the challenge to reinvent itself, shouldn’t we in the Philippine elite and chattering classes at least try? Isn’t that what patriotism is? 

Why must we Filipinos reinvent ourselves?

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

Why is our automatic response to the challenge of Juan de la Cruz the war on poverty? Because we aren’t conscious of “cause-and-effect,” it reveals our focus on the tactical and misses the strategic. Simply put, underdevelopment is the cause of Philippine poverty.

Gising bayan!

The elephant in the room

Consider the policy brief released by the United Nations in the Philippines and reported in the BusinessWorld, 6th Aug 2021:

“The focus on industrial catch-up is motivated by the prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry and its profound impact on the country’s labor market.

“Unlike developed countries whose workers have primarily transitioned away from agriculture to industrial and high-skilled services employment, workers in developing countries such as the Philippines have been moving out of low-productivity agriculture towards low-skilled jobs.

“The services sector account for 61% of gross domestic product and six out of 10 workers, but a third in low-paying jobs.

“Meanwhile, elements of its exports sector with a competitive advantage and the number of exporting companies have been declining, making the Philippines a ‘market of consumer goods rather than a hub for manufacturing exports.’

“The government can no longer rely on the protectionist instruments of the past and must now muster more positive, enabling measures.”

“The country can explore several paths towards economic diversification and upgrading, which includes ‘leapfrogging’ to high-productivity and aiming for more sophisticated goods by adopting high technology over the medium to long term.” [Diversification, Jobs and the COVID-19 Recovery.pdf (un.org)]

Let’s hold it right there.

What were we thinking? 

Reflect on what, who, why — whatever else — we kept blaming, except ourselves. 

And we in the Philippine elite class and the chattering classes were singing hosanna to our top companies?

It will take us several hurdles to go from “denial” to “acceptance.” And we better start rolling up our sleeves, lest we see Juan de la Cruz sink more profound in the abyss?

In other words, everything we’ve done – from the comprehensive agrarian reform to borrowing tons of money to put Juan de la Cruz’s body and soul together – didn’t cut it. 

Our problem is not poverty per se.

Can we pause and ponder?

Recall that “The failure of Philippine education is to develop the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve problems one encounters in real life.”

And the elephant in the room? 

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

Here’s a quote from an earlier posting: “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]

“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.”

Do we want to blame science too — when in this case, we see a convergence?

How do we explain our crab mentality?

We cannot hide behind the skirts of our faith: God helps those who help themselves, paraphrasing St. Ignatius.

Let’s get back to the UN policy brief.

For example, how do we ‘leapfrog’ to high productivity, aim for more sophisticated goods, and adopt high technology over the medium to long term?

Recall what Mahathir said to us: “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 UN brief raised the following: Targeting strategic sectors can be helpful to build an ambitious narrative for a developmental, industrial policy, but perseverance, implementation strategies, and policy learning are crucial.

In other words, the crab mentality is a no-no – as in the 50 or so industry road maps we’ve teed up. The opposite must be the case – as in Pareto, i.e., targeting strategic sectors.

Still, there is no free lunch, so perseverance and dogged implementation are crucial.

Here’s another quote from an earlier posting: “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 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.”

“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.”

But let’s get back to the UN brief. It is well thought out and spells the targeted products and sectors if we are to leapfrog to (1) high productivity, and (2) aim for more sophisticated goods, and (3) adopt high technology over the medium to long term.

“And these products and sectors are found in the top 30 percent of exports in terms of (1) revealed comparative advantage, e.g., industrial machinery and chemicals; (2) rapid employment growth, i.e., a 4 percent annual growth per annum in the next ten years to 15 years would increase its employment share from 6 to 13 percent; (3) a clear sign of dynamism; (4) rank highly in terms of wages, their expansion will raise the pool of quality jobs.

“However, the number of establishments has been falling at a rate of 3 percent annually from 2012 to 2018. Stimulating the new entry of firms and carefully monitoring the status of firms in the industrial machinery and chemicals sectors to arrest further exit are therefore necessary ingredients in the employment dimension of industrial policy.”

In other words, our government and industry leaders must learn to be true partners and keep their eyes on the ball.

How did our neighbors do it?

“Leapfrogging is possible in the presence of certain critical conditions: (1) a forward-looking coherent vision centered on bold ambitions; (2) integrated government interventions galvanized by a lead agency with strong coordinating and monitoring powers; (3) intense policy learning to speedily correct errors; (4) autonomous, high-quality and ‘long-termist’ bureaucracy; (5) close monitoring of progress and survival of domestic firms; and (6) tight collaboration with the private sector and other stakeholders.”

But so that we don’t fall into the trap of logical yet linear thinking, let’s step back a bit. And digest the two operating systems in the brain: (1) automatic and (2) conscious, postulated by Daniel Kahneman, the Nobel Laureate.

Recall that beyond the above-targeted products and sectors, the blog repeatedly raised the Samsung smartphones and Apple AirPods.

These two brands are market leaders because they are dynamic innovators. Vietnam today is their regional manufacturing hub. These two enterprises must be in our crosshairs. And that means to engage them because they are forward- not passive-thinking.

They have a keen understanding of human needs that informs their innovation sense and capacity to translate them into [a product] architecture — consistent with Maslow’s— and innovative products.

And engaging them will give us valuable lessons and insights. In other words, we cannot give them up as a potential foreign investment.

Those familiar with the blog may remember how a small Guangzhou enterprise knocked on the doors of my old MNC-company. “We are coming to you because you are the global market leader in the industry. We want to be partners with you. We are a minor player in the industry, but with you as partners, together we can replicate what you have achieved globally in China.”

Long story short, after sealing the partnership, they were privy to the MNC’s product architecture. They presented another partnership opportunity in another major China city, which was an even much bigger venture. Of course, we grabbed it.

Different undertakings pose different challenges. They can’t be the replica of another. That’s why I am again sharing my nephew’s interview with Tatler below.

It is about the science of “thinking,” i.e., beyond logical and incremental is forward- and lateral thinking.

The UN policy brief is incisive. But how do we in the Philippines take it to the real world?

Recall the Ph.D. candidate I mentored with her dissertation. “I will only assist you if you commit to utilizing the outcome to a real-world challenge.” 

And she did. And today, she’s the global marketing director of one of the world’s most popular brands. How did she do it? She demonstrated to her company that there is a more forward- and lateral thinking model for their business — to be more dominant in the market — if they would challenge the status quo.

In other words, there is no free lunch.

As necessary, can we toss our instincts? We are parochial and insular. So, we value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy, a culture of impunity.

Here’s another quote from an earlier posting: “Mahathir demonstrated that the art of strategy versus the theory is: a practitioner is both strategic and tactical. He zoomed in and prioritized KL over his hometown and zoomed out to the big picture: to relentlessly drive Malaysia’s growth and development.”

Put another way, can we move away from binary and closer to relative thinking? Recall that “The failure of Philippine education is to develop the ability to think, meet new situations, and solve problems one encounters in real life.”

Then recall the nephew, “barely 30 – and those familiar with the blog may recall him; he had sought my advice but very infrequently – interviewed by Tatler:

“Lampara is currently on self-preservation mode – as are other restaurants, I'm sure. Earlier this year, we were supposed to push through with other projects, like opening different dining concepts. But the ever-changing policies and lockdowns not only lagged us but ultimately stifled our plans to pursue any significant undertakings.

“Honestly, it’s tough to look too far ahead nowadays because you get all excited and motivated to launch something new and revolutionary, then the next day, another lockdown is announced. So, we keep in our back pocket the next steps we conceptualized.

“The pandemic stirred alarming anxiety for us [as owners of Lampara], but also the rest of the team. Every decision, every move we make has to consider the ever-changing guidelines from the government. In our neighborhood, there are just a few of us establishments left. And even if you follow the guidelines [you can still end up being closed down].

“At the moment, it feels like Mad Max. Many establishments around the area have closed, either due to the pandemic or for other reasons. Ironically, parking spots are also harder to find. Road renovations are taking months to finish, and at times would commence at quite inconvenient hours. The service we provide our customers isn’t limited to what happens inside Lampara; and must include how they arrive and leave our restaurant – it’s the whole experience. Being unable to help out our customers concerning parking is something very troubling.

“We adapted to the pandemic by launching our weekly meal plan brand. It kept us afloat during lockdowns, and we’ve even had subscribers stay with the subscription the whole time. We are truly grateful to them because, without them, we would probably be closed by now. We experimented with something a bit off-brand with that one, outside Filipino Food – we incorporated different cuisines to keep it interesting. We also noticed that many Filipino restaurants are not performing well in take-out operations because of the mentality that you can cook it at home.

“We were able to explore new products and dishes, and we received offers for some collaborative projects too. The ‘tres leches’ resulted from the lockdown, which we have since adapted to our regular menu, and it has been a strong player ever before.

“It made us more creative; we were able to experiment with other techniques and cuisines that we have now integrated into our current menu. Through Lampara Lite, we explored different cuisines and developed some feasible concepts even if another lockdown takes place.”

The bottom line: Our economic managers and legislators will have to figure out how to move away from the metric of a 6%-7% GDP growth rate. We’ve had this mental model for decades and still haven’t cut it.

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 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.

Recall the GPS model: Where are we; Where do we want to be; How do we get there.

We must free ourselves from this prolonged stagnation of the Philippine industry. Not sing hosanna to our top companies. 

We haven’t cut it!

If Philippine media doesn’t get it, who will?

Gising bayan!