Groupthink and linear thinking

[This is a reprint from 2017, with an expanded discussion on “groupthink.” And as the blog argues, our instincts and caste system have rendered us “helpless,” mutually reinforcing one another. Its scientific name is “learned helplessness,” expounded by the blog before. “A mental state that occurs when people find out that nothing they do matters.”]

Wittingly or not, we are falling into the trap of “Que sera, sera.”

Or why PHL isn’t synonymous with innovation. “Pinoy abilidad” is classic linear thinking and inside-the-box thinking?

“President Duterte has a valid point. He has the support of many Catholics, especially those who have grown tired of toothless pastoral messages that hardly anyone pays attention to nowadays.” [Can local clergy do more to combat the drug menace (?), Atty. Joey D. Lina, Former Senator, Manila Bulletin, 23rd Aug 2017]

Recalls Lina, “We protested against fascism, militarism, and your wife (referring to the dictator Ferdinand Marcos’ profligate wife, Imelda.)

“Despite his years of activism, Lina’s animosity against Imelda melted away when she attended his concert and praised him for his talent.

“‘Ngayon, kaibigan ko na siya (Now she’s my friend),’ Lina admits with a smile, proving that the adage ‘music gets people together’ is true. ‘In fact, we had dinner a few weeks ago.’” [Dreaming the Impossible Dream in an evening with Joey Lina, Simeon G. Silverio, Jr., Publisher & Editor in Chief, Asian Journal San Diego, Our Life & Times, 3rd Jul 2016]

All’s well that ends well.

Yet, if Juan de la Cruz is to lift himself from poverty, he must learn to think “outside the box.”

With due respect to Senator Lina, what body of knowledge would support Du30’s war on drugs? And which the blog has discussed before. More to the point, nations tried and failed to combat this menace, and the one singular success story – and has become the model and best practice – as far as the UN is concerned is that of Portugal.

Conversely, the rest of the world saw us as the pariah. Still, our blindness was so profound that we rallied behind Duterte – including the business sector that is now applauding the recycling of economic managers?

But our streets feel safer? Like a police state feels safer because tyranny appropriates the rule of law, paraphrasing Garry Kasparov, arguably the greatest chess player. And why he became an activist and a symbol of opposition to Putin. Tyrants are accountable to no one, yet Juan de la Cruz loves tyranny that he submits himself – first to Marcos and now to Duterte?

“In a police state, there is no drug problem. [The wife and I experienced what a police state is like during earlier visits to Bulgaria. Within 48 hours of arrival, we report to the police, where their dossiers are updated each time.] The dictatorship insulated them from the drug culture in Portugal – until freedom descended. And “freedom” is what “freedom” is – the freedom to experiment.” [https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-after-decriminalization-drugs-weed-to-heroin; 20th Apr 2016]

But let’s come back to PHL. Because of groupthink and our hierarchical instincts, we swear by Du30’s war on drugs? And so we view everyone that does not toe the Du30 line as unpatriotic? Do we like to talk about history yet easily forget the past? Do we need to be reminded of where a cult of personality can lead?

“Both Hitler and Mussolini built their empires on a cult of personality with themselves at the center.” [http://www.media-studies.ca/articles/fascism.htm]

Yet even the well-informed among us would be forwarding trolls and fake news, wittingly or not, spreading propaganda? Is it called groupthink or our hierarchical instincts?

Let’s get back to the Portugal experience.

“Today, Portuguese authorities don’t arrest anyone found holding less than a 10-day supply of an illicit drug — a gram of heroin, ecstasy, or amphetamine, two grams of cocaine, or twenty-five grams of cannabis. Instead, drug offenders receive a citation, ordered to appear before so-called “dissuasion panels” of legal, social, and psychological experts. Individuals who repeatedly come before the panels may be prescribed treatment, ranging from motivational counseling to opiate substitution therapy. And they suspended most cases.

“‘We had much criticism at first,’ recalled Goulão, a physician specializing in addiction treatment whose work led Portugal to reform its drug laws in 2000 and is today its national drug coordinator. After decriminalizing, the first inquiries Portugal received from the International Narcotics Control Board — the quasi-judicial UN oversight body established by the UN drug convention system — were sharp and scolding.

“‘Now things have changed completely,’ he went on. ‘We are pointed to as an example of best practices inside the spirit of the conventions.’ Indeed, Werner Sipp, the board’s new head, said as much at the UN’s Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna.

“Though often narrowly assessed about its decriminalization law, Portugal’s experience over the last decade and a half speak as much to its free public health system, extensive treatment programs, and the hard-to-mimmer trickle-down effects of the legislation. Though at least twenty-five countries have introduced some form of decriminalization, Portugal’s holistic model and its use of dissuasion panels set it apart. In a society where drugs are less stigmatized, problem users are more likely to seek care. Police, even if they suspect someone of using drugs, are less likely to bother them.

"Usually, the focus is on the decriminalization itself, but it worked because there were other services. The coverage increased for needle replacement, detox, therapeutic communities, and employment options for people who use drugs. The combination of the law and these services made it a success. It's tough to find people in Portugal who disagree with this model.

“In the run-up to the UN General Assembly’s special session, Goulão cautioned that countries had to consider their domestic environments first in learning from Portugal’s experience.

“We don’t assume that this is the silver bullet, but in my view, it has been crucial because it introduced coherence into the entire system. If our responses come from the idea that we are talking about addiction, chronic disease, and health issues, having it out of the penal system is a clear improvement. It was crucial for our society because it allowed us to drop the stigma.’”

The blog’s consistent theme speaks to how we as a people and a nation have yet to learn to be forward-thinking to undo linear thinking, think beyond “Pinoy abilidad,” and overcome groupthink.

Are we the regional laggard because we can’t “think outside the box” – and beyond the cult of Du30’s personality? And we’re back to the Marcos cult?

“Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of well-intentioned people makes irrational or non-optimal decisions spurred by the urge to conform or the belief that dissent is impossible. A particular agenda may fuel the problematic or premature consensus characteristic of groupthink—or it may be due to group members valuing harmony and coherence above critical thought.

“The term “groupthink” was first introduced in the November 1971 issue of Psychology today by psychologist Irving Janis. Janis had conducted extensive research on group decision-making under conditions of stress.

“Since then, Janis and other researchers have found that in a situation characterized as groupthink, individuals tend to refrain from expressing doubts and judgments or disagreeing with the consensus. In making a decision that furthers their group cause, members may also ignore ethical or moral consequences. While it is often invoked at the level of geopolitics or within business organizations, groupthink can also refer to subtler social or ideological conformity processes, such as participating in bullying or rationalizing a poor decision by one’s friends.” [Groupthink | Psychology Today]

Let’s speak to our go-to initiative of addressing poverty and job generation, being the two sides of the same coin.

And we argue that economic development has failed to address inequality.

That brings us to why the blog keeps raising our instincts, reinforced by our caste system. 

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

Can we pause and ponder?

We like to point to the inequality of the West, forgetting that we are comparing apples and oranges. Specifically, the West has attained economic equilibrium being a well-developed economy – as evidenced by their GDP per person that is many folds ours.

In short, indeed, there is an argument against the Western model.

But that is why we must benchmark not against the West but our neighbors. They have moved from third- to first-world.

We have indulged in a fallacy for the longest time despite the price we had to pay. And it comes from our “fixed mindset.”

In other words, the comprehensive agrarian reform program, the OFW phenomenon, and the priority we put on call centers – over industrialization, for example – are elements of the reality we can’t admit.

They were all meant to address poverty and job creation, leaving our GDP per person at underdeveloped levels.

Unsurprisingly, that is not how our neighbors pursued economic development.

Beg for Western money and technology was how Lee and Mahathir explained it to Deng.

What is so mysterious about that? Why is Vietnam succeeding in adopting the same playbook?

Beyond groupthink and linear thinking, the blog again discussed the “fixed mindset” versus “growth mindset” and the 3 Cs of a sturdy mindset: commitment, challenge, and control.

Recall cognitive development. It is not IQ but the ability to move across the continuum of dualism (or binary thinking) and relativism. And it is a function of experience – in development, for example. It explains why Singapore has overtaken the US in competitiveness and GDP per person.

We are in deep doo-do. We can’t keep falling into the trap of a fixed mindset.

Let’s say that one more time: We are between a rock and a hard place because we don’t have the development experience of our neighbors, yet we can’t “think out of the box.” 

In other words, we are the regional laggard, yet we keep celebrating our “experts.”

The evidence? We keep recycling economic managers across administrations, confirming our caste system. Unsurprisingly, business groups are applauding the appointments. 

Question: How do we explain why even Vietnam left us in the dust? And how do we ensure we stop the bleeding, our downward spiral – despite growing GDP by 6%-7% over a decade – that Juan de la Cruz suffers from abject poverty? What about the volatility the world faces given the Russian invasion of Ukraine, among others? And why can’t we grasp that PHL suffers from a structural problem and why Arangkada was a welcome effort yet failed to exploit over two administrations?

In other words, we are riding on the back of Juan de la Cruz – the over ten million OFWs and over a million call center workers – yet we in the Philippine elite want to take the credit. 

Consider: “Because of the proper handling of our macroeconomic affairs over the past two decades, only 10 to 15 percent of our national budget now pays our debts.” [“Continuity in our economic policy,” Sonny M. Angora, Better Days, BusinessMirror, 27th May 2022.]

“Your view of yourself can determine everything. If you believe that your qualities are unchangeable — the fixed mindset — you will want to prove yourself correct over and over rather than learning from your mistakes.” [Carol Dweck: A Summary of The Two Mindsets (fs.blog)]

Why is PHL not synonymous with innovation?

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

Gising bayan!