Politics, yes; but nation-building?

Ambivalence if not confusion. That’s how social scientists would characterize our traits and values. “‘We really are not friendly to foreign investors,’ University of the Philippines School of Economics Prof. Ramon Clarete said, citing instances of confusing and incoherent government regulations.” [PHL only ‘half-open’ when it comes to FDI, Bianca Cuaresma, Business Mirror, 15th Jul 2015]

Ambivalent. Confused. Incoherent. Whenever we focus on family we earn brownie points even when the mirror image is negative? Take political dynasty. Is it a reflection of a ‘personalistic’ culture and an inward-looking, self-serving bias and the struggle to define the common good? And our response? To have sectoral representations, for instance, even when their reasons for being are suspect? Is it a reflection of ‘crab mentality’ and chaos?

From fixers to expedite one’s driver’s license to the non-availability of car license plates, for example? That is not what we’re bringing to the 21st century that is highly globalized and competitive? What we ought to bring is the desire to change the world, not to preserve the status quo: (a) a hierarchical system and structure; (b) nurtured by learned helplessness; (c) by politicians gifting caddies with a round of golf and cellphones, senior citizens with adult diapers and Viagra too? Have birthday cakes gone out of fashion? In exchange we’d eliminate terms of office? Do we have the next Marcos in our midst?

But one can be altruistic! Which was running in this writer’s head listening to young Asian-American playwrights from Ma-Yi read excerpts from their works (while we were gathered at a friend’s place by Washington Square in Manhattan.) And they were incredible! They’d appeal even to hard-to-please New Yorkers, spoiled by world-class arts in their many forms.

The Ma-Yi website reads: “Founded in 1989, Ma-Yi Theater Company is a Drama Desk and Obie Award-winning not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization whose primary mission is to develop and produce new and innovative plays by Asian American writers . . . [It] has distinguished itself as one of the country’s leading incubators of new work shaping the national discourse about what it means to be Asian American today.

“Ma-Yi” is the term used by ancient Chinese traders to refer to a group of islands that is known today as the Philippines . . . We chose this name in recognition of the vibrant culture that existed in Ma-Yi, prior to the coming of the colonizers from the West . . . There were traders of the country of MA-YI carrying merchandise to the coast of Canton in the seventh year of Tai-ping-shing-kuo.”

As friends from Ma-Yi explained, because of their mission, institutions like Yale and Brown would introduce their students to Ma-Yi. And one shouldn’t be surprised with the quality of their output.

And what do we read back home? Thankfully, we have pundits that point us in the right direction so that we don’t take our traits and values for granted? “Taking stock of the hopefuls,” Adelle Chua, The Standard, 13th Jul 2015, First of two parts; “If Grace decides not to run…,”Danilo S. Venida, @inquirerdotnet, 13th Jul 2015; “Fragmented into self-interested factions, they are unable to lead nation forward,” JUAN T. GATBONTON, EDITORIAL CONSULTANT, The Manila Times, 11th Jul 2015.”

“Let’s not get distracted by the antics of the personalities – let’s instead put them under scrutiny to see if they can indeed take on the challenges of one of the toughest jobs there is. And then let’s do the math – devoid of soundbites, emotional appeal and other distractions . . . This problem has been noticed by management professionals and academicians, as well. In mid-2003, the Management Association of the Philippines . . . embarked on a project that . . .  would look into what a Philippine president must be . . . The team eventually narrowed down the ‘must’ roles to five: Navigator/ Strategist, Mobilizer, Servant Leader, Captivator and Guardian of the National Wealth, Patrimony and Law and Order. Each of these roles were defined and clarified, with the behavior and competencies associated with each role fleshed out . . . More on the five roles in my next column.” [Chua, op. cit.]

“Transcending politics is the challenge that a transformative leader must confront in the current Philippine milieu. There is too much of toxic and elitist politics. A viable formula to be able to take the challenge will have to be concocted. Changing the mindset of Filipinos toward a global orientation with local footing needs to be pursued. The landscape is changing; the soul must change as well. The aspiration for the common good will have to be highlighted. The support for Poe is likely to swell in the coming weeks. The goodwill can overflow. May that goodwill ignite the sought-after social transformation of all, by all, for all. Let it be the revolution.” [Venida, op. cit.]

“Middle-class Filipinos take pride in the civil liberties they enjoy; but to a great extent Philippine democracy still is permitted only by the broadly equal dispersion of power—which makes it imprudent for any leader or group to try to overpower the others.

“And modernization will not be easy, because the interest groups that resist reform are powerful, organized, and focused—while reform’s potential beneficiaries are weak, scattered and distracted.

“Our next President must find ways of harnessing Filipino idealism—particularly that of our young people. He must point us toward a national purpose. He must set out a series of national goals that will engage our civic spirit . . . Right now, we have no individual, no institution responsible for wider public interests beyond those of the individual and the family. We as a people need to develop a national ‘vision’—a shared preconception of the national future—and a set of national goals that everyone accepts.” [Gatbonton, op. cit.]

In an earlier posting this blog discussed the imperative of sense of purpose not only in private-sector pursuits and even more importantly in nation building. That is, if we want to overcome the perils of a relatively young democracy and underdevelopment. We can be better than South American countries?

“Pope: Corruption is gangrene of people,” Agence France-Presse, Associated Press, @inquirerdotnet, 13th Jul 2015. “Look what happened with ideologies in the last century … they ended in dictatorships, always,’ . . .  applause ringing out in response during the gathering attended by Paraguayan President Horacio Cortes.”

“In a question-and-answer session, he denounced corruption, which plagues several countries in South America. But perhaps to avoid offending his hosts, he stressed that it was a recurring problem ‘among all peoples of the world.’

“As he had done on previous stops during his trip, first in Ecuador, and then Bolivia, Francis called for an end to poverty—also endemic in the region—and lamented today’s consumer society.

“‘Putting bread on the table, putting a roof over the heads of one’s children, giving them health and an education—these are essential for human dignity, and businessmen and women, politicians, economists, must feel challenged in this regard,’ Francis told the gathering of business leaders, politicians, labor union leaders and other civil society groups.

“Wealth creation should not be ‘only for the benefit of a few,’ he said to more acclaim, and must be extended to ‘each citizen, without exclusion.’ He urged political leaders not to ‘sacrifice human lives on the altar of money and profit . . . In economics, in business and in politics, what counts first and foremost is the human person and the environment in which he or she lives,’ he said.”

Does the pope understand the imperative of an ecosystem better than we do? Because connecting the dots isn’t second nature to man? Which is what creativity is about, not Pinoy abilidad! For example, wealth creation in an oligarchic economy is meant to benefit a few. On the other hand, wealth creation in the Asian Tigers came about because their leaderships demonstrated commitment to nation building – beyond self and family – which demands connecting lots of dots.

Competitiveness; not a culture of entitlement

In an earlier posting this blog talked about PHL pursuing a Japan Inc. (or Singapore Inc. or China Inc.) model by focusing on and establishing a competitive platform via the 7 industry winners from the JFC. But beyond that, why competitiveness even when it means that there will winners and losers? Because in the real world there is no free lunch! Surprise . . . surprise . . . it took us more than 20 years to pass a competition law! Still, “The Philippines is among the more restrictive economies in the Southeast Asian region when it comes to foreign direct investments (FDIs), a recent study by the Economic Research Institute for Asean and East Asia (ERIA) showed.” [Philippines among most restrictive in SEA on FDI, Danessa O. Rivera, The Philippine Star, 2nd Jul 2015]

Can we reconcile our ambivalence notwithstanding the demands of the real world? Or is it about Pinoy abilidad – which informs our perspective of freedom and democracy and by extension the free market? In a highly globalized and competitive 21st century world, it is conviction not ambivalence that matters.

What about compassion? Compassion is in the dismantling of an oligarchic economy, tossing the values inherent in a hierarchical system and structure! Yet we don’t need Robin Hood but a system that is more egalitarian, not patronizing. We can’t have a competition law on the one hand and be inward-looking – and among the restrictive economies – on the other! In other words, political patronage and oligarchy are the first in line in our culture of entitlement. Yet we took it for granted because it is our normal? As the Greeks rather belatedly realized!

“Search for top ASEAN companies launched,” James Loyola, Manila Bulletin, 7th Jul 2015. “We are working towards strengthening SMEs in our country. They are the backbone of our economy,’ said PLDT Chairman Manuel V. Pangilinan, who heads ASEAN BAC Philippines.”

Does it ring a bell? “The so-called ‘MVP’ group of companies—dubbed after the initials of its public face and chief executive Manuel V. Pangilinan—has emerged as one of the biggest conglomerates in the country today, its newest and the most aggressive. Yet the real ownership of this vast conglomerate has been kept hidden from the public eye. Until now.” [The Indonesian billionaires behind the ‘MVP Group’: UNMASKING AN EMPIRE, RIGOBERTO D. TIGLAO, The Manila Times, 2nd Jun 2015; First of a series]

“The conglomerate is dominantly owned and controlled by Anthoni Salim, 66, heir to the fortune of his late father, Soedono, who was the biggest and closest crony of the late Indonesian strongman Suharto during his 33-year regime. “MVP” has miniscule shares in the conglomerate. That the group has strived to make it known by that name, as will be explained in this series, is for a specific purpose.”

Is that Pinoy abilidad? We’re neither here nor there? We keep/don’t keep FDIs out? Is it the root of Philippine corruption that explains our mockery of the rule of the law?

“An increase in competitiveness translates to more investments, jobs, wealth creation and the widening of the middle class. This is why the NCC role is crucial to national development. The current board has done an impeccable job not only in terms of improving competitiveness but more so in showing us how to effect reforms quickly and effectively. This is why the current structure of the NCC, including its private sector representatives, should be spared from any changes in government leadership. With luck, they can start on Gameplan 4.0 to put the country in the top 10% of global competitiveness ranking.” [The National Competitiveness Council: the silent champion of change, Andrew James Masigan, Manila Bulletin, 7th Jul 2015]

Can we in fact aspire to be in the top 10% of global competitiveness ranking? Not if we keep playing games? “A new competition law at last (!),” Francis Ed Lim, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 25th Jun 2015. “It took Congress more than 20 years to pass a competition law. I vividly remember having attended Senate committee hearings presided by former President GMA as a senator in the early 1990s. Since then, I took special interest and got involved in the formulation of the law, having practiced antitrust law when I worked in a law firm in Washington, D.C. and being of the belief that we need a good one for the country.

“The antitrust bills that found their way in Congress proposed to adopt different policy approaches—from the very strict ones to the very liberal ones. After several Congresses, our present Congress passed what I think is a balanced version that takes into account the welfare of the consumers without sacrificing the need of our businesses to expand to make them competitive with their counterparts in the region.”

Will the new competition law be able to deal with Pinoy ambivalence? But we mean it this time? “PH creates 2 innovation hubs, targets at least 20 start-ups,” Bernie Magkilat, Manila Bulletin, 7th Jul 2015. “The creation of the innovation hub will be a critical component in the drive to boost the Philippines’ ranking in the Digital Evolution Index (DEI), which ranks countries in terms of their readiness for the quickly expanding digital economy.”

“The Philippines is one of the so-called “break-out” nations in the recent global DEI study conducted by the US-based Fletcher School at Tufts University, using data from 2008 to 2013. The country stands alongside China, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam as one of the ‘rapidly advancing countries’ in the global digital topography.

“The Philippine innovation center is patterned after the innovation districts around the world – the likes of Silicon Valley in the United States, Block 71 in Singapore, and MaGIC in Malaysia. It aims to foster the advancement of technology and innovation in the country with critical support from the government, the academe, and the private sector.

Can we celebrate yet? “Doing business beyond borders,” Cielito F. Habito, No Free Lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 23rd Jun 2015. “It takes shedding the common inward-looking, defensive posture of many of our firms, in favor of an aggressive outward-looking one, to realize that many of us are creating ghosts where we could otherwise be finding ‘gold mines.’”

“Wanted: enabling government,” Cielito F. Habito, No Free Lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 16th Jun 2015. “We actually have a law—Republic Act No. 9178 or the Barangay Micro Business Enterprise (BMBE) Law of 2002—that seeks to attract small businesses with less than P3 million in assets to come out from the shadows of the informal or underground economy . . . That is all good in theory, but it turns out that in most places, the BMBE Law is the best-kept secret in town, especially in the city or municipal hall itself. In our own barangay office, no one has even heard of it (or at least that’s what the people there claimed).”

What can we learn from the private sector about competitiveness? An ambivalent athlete who can’t put his heart in his sports can’t be a champion. In other words, we are either a restrictive economy or a competitive economy. Yet winners – in good times and in bad – in a truly competitive market are those responsive to man’s well-being. It is not art for art’s sake. Or technology for technology’s sake.

The technology of Samsung, for example, is as good as if not better than the iPhone. But how come Samsung seems to be missing a beat? Apple products have been conceived from the middle-class upbringing of Steve Jobs. It was his partner, Steve Wozniak, who was the techie. But Jobs knew he wasn’t the only one who wanted to change the world. He grew up with other kids tinkering with gadgets that could open endless possibilities. And he wanted to create a tool – that today we call an Apple – that would help people change the world.

What is competitiveness then? It starts with an idea like that of the desire to change the world. But even an idea needs investment. Steve Jobs sought investors for his venture while he and his friends developed the technology for the Apple 1. And then they had to learn and equip themselves to create other innovative products – meaning, self-actualizing or responsive to a person’s rational, emotional and experiential needs. And it didn’t stop there. They had to develop a supply chain like no other, and the local and global market for Apple. And today we have the Apple Store and the iTunes online store.

That’s a competitiveness path that we need to internalize: from an idea to investment to technology to innovation . . . to people, product, supply chain and market development.

Will reality hit home?

“To be sure, governance that is effective, legitimate, and responsive provides untold benefits, especially when compared to the alternative: inefficient governance, cronyism, and corruption. But the focus on governance reform has not proved nearly as effective as promised in fostering development.” [THE GOOD GOVERNANCE TRAP, Jomo Kwame Sundaram and Michael T. Clark*, PROJECT SYNDICATE, Business World, 29th Jun 2015]

“The case was flawed from the beginning. The indicators used were ahistorical and failed to account for country-specific challenges and conditions, with cross-country statistical analyses suffering from selection bias and ignoring the interlinkages among a wide array of variables. As a result, the World Bank badly overestimated the impact of governance reform on economic growth.

“In fact, this governance-focused approach may have actually undermined development efforts. For starters, it has allowed international institutions to avoid acknowledging the shortcomings of the new development orthodoxy of the last two decades of the 20th century, when Latin America lost over a decade, and Sub-Saharan Africa a quarter-century, of economic and social progress.

“Herein lies the real problem with the good-governance agenda: it supposes that the solution to most policy and political dilemmas lies in compliance with a set of formal process-oriented indicators. But experience over two decades shows that such directives provide little practical guidance for solving the technically, socially and politically complex real-world problems of economic development.”

Translation: A major undertaking demands an ecosystem, both soft and hard elements. In the case of the Philippines when this writer first looked into why we’ve been unattractive to FDI and underdeveloped and our people poor, what jumped out was how deficient our investment levels were. Yet we were desirous of “fighting poverty.” And indeed the World Bank proudly supported CCT. But we needed the hard elements, as importantly, like investment!

Invariably, good governance is a must. Given our deficits in infrastructure, it is common knowledge that corruption has undermined PHL infrastructure development efforts for decades – and, not surprisingly, kept FDI away!

We need the hard elements as well. For instance, the JFC, working with a cross-section of Philippine society, developed the 7 industry winners. Indeed investment must be prioritized! It is not rocket science but science nonetheless – i.e., the Pareto principle, an econometric model. In other words, we can’t be adopting unfettered free market – and rely solely on fiscal and monetary policies. Which in the case of the Philippines was hijacked by political patronage and oligarchy.

While a select few would invoke patriotism as they cornered major infrastructure projects, the reality is Juan de la Cruz continues to suffer from poor infrastructure – from commuting to and from work (or school in the case of children) to the inadequate and the most expensive power supply . . . and beyond. An oligarchic economy shuts out the outside world and holds Juan de la Cruz hostage! And how do we respond? That we are among the happiest people! Resiliency or parochialism – that comes hand in glove with hierarchy and subservience?

“Herein lies the real problem with the good-governance agenda: it supposes that the solution to most policy and political dilemmas lies in compliance with a set of formal process-oriented indicators.” [ibid.] As a private–sector practitioner, the writer lives with this reality: the distinction between being process- and outcome-oriented. Even in the public sector outcomes must be defined to justify budgets and programs. But when governance doesn’t set and embrace a shared purpose from the get-go, how will the bureaucracy manifest the imperative?

As the Asian Tigers proved, government must play a role in establishing a vision for a nation. And that is to move from Third- to First-World. And that presupposes a model like Japan Inc. or Singapore Inc. or China Inc., defined by a leadership that demonstrates strategic thinking: (a) it calls on the people to embrace and share the vision or purpose for the nation; (b) that would then necessitate learning self-responsibility – because of the imperative of division of labor; and (c) which then demands mastery.

That is an example of how good governance can be spelled out. In short, it is not about compassion per se and paternalism and the requisite populism. That was what both Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohamad lectured us Pinoys. And that we didn't have to love the West but we must seek their money and their technology if we are to move from Third- to First-World. And a mechanism has been offered by the JFC via the 7 industry winners. But we know better – i.e., that political patronage and oligarchy are supreme?

And how do we reconcile our notion of faith and freedom and democracy when we value a sheltered life and parochialism? That lends itself to a hierarchical system and structure – and why we are unable to demonstrate innovation and competitiveness? Does the Church reinforce the notion? What about the elite class that dictates our cultural norms? Not surprisingly, we remain underdeveloped and poor?

What else can we expect?

“A first-time Philippine senator who is the adopted daughter of a film star is edging out veteran politicians as the preferred candidate to replace President Benigno Aquino, even before she’s declared her intention to run.” [Film Star’s Daughter Wins Fans as Possible Philippine Leader, Karl Lester M Yap, Clarissa Batino, Cynthia Li, Bloomberg.org, 29th Jun 2015]

“Grace Poe, 46, was picked by 12 of 23 analysts and bankers in a Bloomberg survey this month as the best choice to steer the Philippine economy after Aquino leaves office a year from now. Vice President Jejomar Binay, 72, got three votes, while four chose Interior Secretary Mar Roxas, 58.

“Poe, whose senatorial bid was backed by Aquino, combines a compelling life story with a relatively new political career unblemished by scandal. Abandoned as a baby at the steps of a church in Iloilo city and raised by Fernando Poe Jr. -- famous for roles where he fought for the masses -- Poe’s perceived honesty resonates in a country whose biggest priorities are fighting corruption and building infrastructure.

“‘Aquino gave us a second chance to be a tiger economy,’ said Jonathan Ravelas, chief market strategist at BDO Unibank Inc. in Manila. ‘But we aren’t there yet. The next president has to have the will to stop corruption and boost infrastructure. In the case of Grace Poe, people perceive her as honest, somebody who will protect the anti-corruption drive.’

“More than half the respondents in the Bloomberg survey predict economic expansion of at least 6 percent will be sustained in the next 10 years. The biggest priorities economists, bankers and academics picked out for the next government were infrastructure investment and protecting the anti-corruption drive.”

Poe is what we probably need for good governance, assuming she does not follow the path of other celebrities – that first made us giddy but today can only regret? And beyond good governance, as pointed out by the respondents to the survey, is the priority of infrastructure investment. And even beyond is to develop Philippine Inc.

Can she do that? Sadly, our elite class that continues to define our cultural norms will influence her. And that is when she would make the first misstep? In other words, would we embrace a totally new perspective and mindset where political patronage and oligarchy won’t again hijack leadership?

In a democracy, we get the leadership that we deserve!

[*Jomo Kwame Sundaram is coordinator for economic and social development at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Michael T. Clark is special adviser on international governance at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]

E Pluribus Unum

“This motto was born in the early Republic and was central to conveying unity among the newly formed United States. The Latin phrase translates to Out of Many, One and emphasized that although the states were separate, they needed to unite as one.”[http://npg.si.edu/outofmanyone/index.html]

It’s July 4th, a long weekend, that gave this writer the chance to read about its significance. And came across the full-page “spiel” in The New York Times of Carnegie Corporation of New York. “Immigrants. The pride of America. The United States of America remains a land of immigrants. Andrew Carnegie, who founded Carnegie Corporation of New York in 1911, was an immigrant from Scotland. We at Carnegie Corporation salute his legacy, along with the contributions of the millions of other immigrants who have made, and continue to make, our nation strong and vibrant.”

And among the immigrants they paid tribute were two Filipinos: A. Gabriel Esteban, President, Seton Hall and Antonio M. Taguba, U.S. Army Major General, Retired. And on the back page of Section-A of NY Times was a facsimile of “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.”

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Andrew Carnegie is no stranger to us Pinoys. “[Napoleon Hill] was given an assignment to write a series of stories of famous men, and his big break came when he was asked to interview steel-magnate Andrew Carnegie. Mr. Carnegie commissioned Hill to interview over 500 millionaires to find a success formula that could be used by the average person. These included Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, Henry Ford, [etc.]

“He became an advisor to Andrew Carnegie, and with Carnegie’s help he formulated a philosophy of success, drawing on the thoughts and experience of a multitude of rags-to-riches tycoons. It took over 20 years to produce his book, a classic in the Personal Development field called Think and Grow Rich.

“I now understand that he didn’t write about some theory of how to think and grow rich. He wrote from experience his numerous experiences and the experiences of America’s most successful.” [Foreword, Think and Grow Rich, Napoleon Hill, The Ralston Society, Meriden, Conn, 1938]

And Chapter 1 begins with: “Truly, ‘thoughts are things,’ and powerful things at that, when they are mixed with definiteness of purpose, persistence, and a burning desire for their translation into riches, or other material objects.”

“He didn’t write about some theory of how to think and grow rich. He wrote . . . the experiences of America’s most successful.” Yet the human condition instead of embracing success stories or best practices would be critical like we Pinoys have been critical of Singapore, Malaysia and China? And, of course, the West and the US?

“E Pluribus Unum . . . Out of Many, One . . . Definiteness of Purpose . . . Persistence . . . A Burning Desire.” That may be the American perspective, but what does the science say? Autonomy or self-responsibility, a sense of purpose and mastery are the key to positive change because they are what truly motivate a person. And it is not materially different from the findings of Hill. 

If that is the best practice, how do we compare? Instead of land of immigrants, we are an island unto ourselves? Instead of Out of Many, One and of definiteness of purpose – e.g., to move from Third- to First-World – we value a hierarchical cacique system and structure, the great divide? And where political patronage and oligarchy have cut us by the knees? Instead of persistence we waste decades to erect anything of major consequence like NAIA 3 or peace in Mindanao? And instead of a burning desire to move forward we indulge in never-ending politics Philippine-style – which, sadly, has been self-serving? The evidence? Family dynasties!

And what is our instinct like? To seek excuses to justify our failings and/or fall into the trap of fatalism while preserving our oligarchic economy by shutting out the outside world? The evidence? “The Philippines is among the more restrictive economies in the Southeast Asian region when it comes to foreign direct investments (FDIs), a recent study by the Economic Research Institute for Asean and East Asia (ERIA) showed.” [Philippines among most restrictive in SEA on FDI, Danessa O. Rivera, The Philippine Star, 2nd Jul 2015]

“This was among the findings of the ERIA discussion paper titled “FDI Restrictiveness Index for Asean: Implementation of AEC (ASEAN Economic Integration) Blueprint Measures” authored by Shandre Mugan Thangavelu of the University of Adelaide-Institute of International Trade. It compared the situation between 2010 and 2014.”

“Growth in foreign direct investments (FDI) to the Philippines is expected to slow down as investors are expected to be cautious with elections to be held next year, real estate and property services firm Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) said. JLL regional director Leslie Orr said in a briefing yesterday next year’s presidential elections may slow down FDIs to the country as investors are expected to shift to a wait-and-see stance.”[Elections seen to slow FDI growth – JLL, Louella D. Desiderio, The Philippine Star, 3rd Jul 2015]

Is that how we view elections or, because of Pinoy abilidad, we see it as a positive consumption-wise given election spending, really, vote-buying? Is that again the ambivalence in our traits and values? When we know poverty cannot be overcome by such mechanisms – which in fact have undermined good governance and by extension economic development and nation building?

Or is it simply misplaced compassion? Which is a reflection of the condescension that comes with a hierarchical system and structure? Consider that even the Church isn’t exempt: “The Roman Catholic Church should not have “leaders for life” in its ranks, otherwise it would risk being like a country under dictatorship, Pope Francis said Friday.” [Catholic Church should not have ‘leaders for life’ – Pope Francis, Reuters, Manila Bulletin, 5th Jul 2015]

When there is no transparency there is autocracy, and compassion – to compensate for the absence of equality? Take the pork barrel phenomenon, and our complex and flexible budgeting system. “The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has issued a report ‘Philippines: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation’ which, while citing the government’s reform efforts, finds the Philippine budgeting system suffering from an unusually large amount of complexity and flexibility that “budget credibility is undermined.” [Editorial: IMF finds too much complexity, flexibility in Philippine budgeting, Manila Bulletin, 5th Jul 2015]

“Budget outturns differ noticeably from the budget law, the IMF report said. As a result, it pointed out, the annual budget law has become an imperfect indicator of the government’s priorities for resource allocation and service delivery.”

It is not about compassion per se which in the case of the Philippines has masked the nurturing of a cacique system and structure that by definition yields insidious poverty. And it is not about growing rich per se but nation building which demands an altogether different set of beliefs than what we’ve espoused for decades? And there is a science to it.

“Dear Mr. Vice President, I am pleased to hear of the efforts you have made as mayor of Makati to improve the lives of the poor and the need to change the imbalance between rich and poor . . . Chief among our national problems is the rotten political system . . . For too long, the oligarchs and family dynasties in this country have dominated the political system to the exclusion of the marginalized sector. Your own family, sad to say, forms part of the established order that resists change. Nancy has been quoted as saying she favors political dynasties. Why? Are they the only ones out of 100 million Filipinos who can govern the nation?” [Letter from VP Binay, Carmen N. Pedrosa, FROM A DISTANCE, The Philippine Star, 5th Jul 2015]

The death of “extraordinary”

Many of us in punditry whether in mainstream media or the alternative media are, wittingly or unwittingly, reinforcing the Filipino culture? 

What do you want to be when you grow up? Every young person has been asked the question.

It is not whether Binay is sinner or saint? Or if Roxas or Poe or Duterte is this or that? It is that we don’t want to see the demise of extraordinary? Worse, to sink into mob rule as one columnist described the spectacle in Makati? The Ampatuan dynasty, if not massacre, is one too many?

News item: Philippines remains in World Bank’s low-middle income category. “The Philippines remained among the ranks of low-middle income countries, failing to join Thailand and Malaysia which moved up to the upper middle economies, the World Bank said.” [Philippines remains in World Bank’s low-middle income category, Ted P. Torres, The Philippine Star, 3rd Jul 2015]

The death of extraordinary. The contrast, in a roundabout way, came as I was listening to the 24-year old daughter of my Bulgarian friend. “My daughter is proud to invite us to Soho House, that she's a member of the club,” my friend said as my wife and I met up with him at the corner of West Broadway and Spring Street. It's in the Meatpacking District and the two daughters were already having brunch and so we had to hail a cab. [“Soho House was founded in London in 1995 as a home from home for people working in creative fields. There are now 13 Houses located in the UK, Berlin, Istanbul, New York, West Hollywood, Miami, Chicago and Toronto. Unlike other club concepts, which often focus on wealth and status, we aim to assemble communities of members that have something in common: namely, a creative soul,” reads their website.]

Recently the daughter came to me while we were in the office in Sofia. She had joined us a year ago and is on to her second project. With the first one she was still learning the ropes and this time she was lobbying to pursue a project she conceived. She explained the parameters of the concept and to drive home her point added: “You always stress the experience dimension; we were in an Italian restaurant in New York not long ago and ‘wow’ – it was like we were transported to Italy. The music and the ambiance and the details were unmistakable.”

On the way to Soho House my friend said that the daughter “is about ready to present her project.” And in jest I warned him that sooner than later she would stop asking and begin telling. And he thought probably not in the next 25 years. Sooner than later he would know which is which.

The younger daughter was in town to look at colleges. “Princeton I like because it’s probably me, but my sister and father asked if that is me ‘today’ yet be different ‘tomorrow.’ So I’m looking at schools in the city too: NYU, Columbia, The New School.” It was a complete turnaround. Not that long ago she wanted a university in Europe with a program that allows a year in a US college. She knew my daughter did something similar but in reverse, one year in a European college (Bologna).

Must be the influence of the big sister. “I joined Soho House in London where I studied but having spent time in New York, I realized that here people are very welcoming of ideas. In Europe chances are we would first frown on a new idea because I think we Europeans dread and wish to avoid failure.”

“Europe has a long history of world-changing inventions, including the printing press, the optical lenses used in microscopes and telescopes and the steam engine.” [A Fearless Culture Fuels U.S. Tech Giants, James B. Stewart, The New York Times, 18th Jun 2015]

“But recently? Not so much. King Digital Entertainment, creator of the video game sensation Candy Crush and now based in London, was founded a decade ago in Sweden, which has emerged as a hotbed of video game innovation. A German, Karlheinz Brandenburg, is credited with the invention of the MP3 format for digital music, and the telecommunications application Skype was created by a group of two Scandinavians and three Estonians. But Apple created the iPod MP3 player and eBay bought Skype in 2005. (It’s now owned by Microsoft.)

“This hasn’t gone unnoticed in Europe. Last month, the European Union unveiled its ‘Digital Single Market’ strategy aimed at fostering European entrepreneurs and easing barriers to innovation. European countries have tried to replicate the critical mass of a Silicon Valley with technology centers like Oxford Science Park in Britain, ‘Silicon Allee’ in Berlin and Isar Valley in Munich, and ‘Silicon Docks’ in Dublin.

“‘They all want a Silicon Valley,’ Jacob Kirkegaard, a Danish economist and senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told me this week. ‘But none of them can match the scale and focus on the new and truly innovative technologies you have in the United States. Europe and the rest of the world are playing catch-up, to the great frustration of policy makers there.’

“Petra Moser, assistant professor of economics at Stanford and its Europe Center, who was born in Germany, agreed that ‘Europeans are worried.’”

Can we Filipinos relate to that? Rizal was the epitome of idealism. Do we need the 21st century Rizal?

“Compared with what we ought to be, we are only half awake… We are making use of only a small part of our possible mental and physical resources.” [How to Be Extraordinary: William James on the Psychology of the Second Wind and How to Release Our Untapped Human Potential, Maria Popova, Brain Pickings, 15th Jun 2015]

“We must learn to reawaken and keep ourselves awake,” Henry David Thoreau wrote in contemplating what it really means to be awake, adding: “Only one in a million is awake enough for effective intellectual exertion, only one in a hundred million to a poetic or divine life.” Those rare individuals are the ones who lift themselves out of ordinary life’s mediocrity and, through the sheer force of their creative and intellectual wakefulness, rise to the level of the extraordinary. They are the people we come to celebrate as luminaries, those whose ideas endure for centuries. But what is this mysterious force that jolts a human being into such wakeful aliveness from which greatness blossoms?

“That’s what legendary philosopher and founding father of modern psychology William James (January 11, 1842–August 26, 1910) addressed half a century after Thoreau’s famous words, in a superb speech he delivered before the American Philosophical Association at Columbia University in December of 1906. It was published in the January 1907 issue of the journal Philosophical Review under the title “The Energies of Men” and was eventually included in the out-of-print 1967 compendium The Writings of William James: A Comprehensive Edition (public library), which remains the finest record of James’s mind to date.”

Juan de la Cruz must've been asked during his younger days, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” Clearly, where we are today isn’t what he said he wanted to be? Have we killed idealism and extraordinary altogether?

“It takes a village”

It takes an ecosystem to develop a growing and sustainable economy and move from Third- to First-World. “It takes a village” came to mind upon reading the following: (a) “6 of 10 Pinoys do not believe PH corruption has lessened” and (b) “Connecting the Philippine economy to national, global competitiveness.” And then these: (a) “Doing business beyond borders;” (b) “Wanted: enabling government” and (c) “Gov’t lacks ability to implement.”

Should we be surprised that “Six out of 10 Filipinos do not think there is less corruption in the past three months, based on the latest Ibon Foundation survey results”? [6 of 10 Pinoys do not believe PH corruption has lessened, Ellalyn De Vera, Manila Bulletin, 25th Jun 2015]

“The nationwide survey conducted last May 13-23 among 1,496 respondents found that 59.8 percent have disagreed that there was less corruption in the last three months, while only 23.8 percent said corruption was less. This is an increase from the previous round of 54.7 percent share of respondents who do not think there was less corruption in the country.

“In the same survey round, seven in 10 Filipinos believe that poverty has not lessened in the past three months. Ibon found 72.3 percent of the population saying poverty incidence has not lessened in the past three months, while 17.9 percent said otherwise. The result is consistent with the poverty rate of 67.2 percent, which was earlier released by Ibon Foundation.

“The survey results were released amid government efforts to intensify its anti-poverty program. Based on the latest data by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the government’s conditional cash transfer program, the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program has expanded to 41,519 barangays in 144 cities and 1,483 municipalities with 4,424,705 registered households nationwide.

“The program is currently in its seventh year of implementation having started in 2008. Since then, roughly P200 billion was spent for the program.”

This blog has pointed out that fighting poverty will not be the answer to the state of affairs we’re in. Like an individual or enterprise a country needs to fend for itself. That is why economic development is fundamental to nation building. The evidence? Despite government efforts to intensify its anti-poverty program, poverty remains alarming.

And in today’s world, the challenge inherent in nation building is even more daunting. “The quest for new streams of revenue is stimulated by change. The change can be negative or positive. The discovery of vast prairies was eventually exploited by the formation of many great cattle ranches. But when in time ranching declined, some innovator coped with the problem by creating the first dude ranch. U.S. business history is rife with the discovery of endlessly new revenue streams in response to technological development, and the buzz about new revenue streams surrounding the Internet is just the most recent example. Change creates opportunities, the ability to see a potential and then to exploit it—that's what creates new revenue streams. The change may hurt or may entice. Either way, effective innovation makes use of the stimulus.”[http://www.inc.com/encyclopedia/revenue-streams.html]

In the case of the Philippines, that means we must go beyond services – or OFW remittances and the BPO industry – and higher up the value chain, and with a balanced portfolio that includes agribusiness and industry. And comes the 7 industry winners from the JFC that we haven’t embraced? Because of crab mentality – or is it “Pinoy abilidad”? We can talk but not walk Pareto? But then again, that is why visionary and strategic leadership is imperative.

“Most people seem to see the Asean Economic Community (AEC) as something that our country is not ready for, and will bring us great problems. The fact is, we are already more Asean-engaged than most people appear to think, and many Philippine businesses of various sizes are already reaping the benefits of doing business with our Asean neighbors. It seems to me that the first hurdle we need to overcome is the self-defeating mindset that ‘we are not competitive enough,’ ‘we are not prepared,’ or government has not done anything to prepare us for the AEC.’” [Doing business beyond borders, Cielito F. Habito, No Free Lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 23rd Jun 2015]

Is it the people or is it government? “‘Why is it that government wants to put every obstacle it could possibly think of in the way of small businesses?’ an exasperated young entrepreneur asked me the other day. I had been quietly pleased to see him pursue entrepreneurship after having spent several years working for different companies. For many years, I have been calling on young people not to be content with getting a job to work for someone else, but rather to aspire to create jobs for others; and not to settle for earning a salary, but rather to create wealth. Thus, I was glad to see one more young person heeding the call.” [Wanted: enabling government, Cielito F. Habito, No Free Lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 16th Jun 2015]

“We actually have a law—Republic Act No. 9178 or the Barangay Micro Business Enterprise (BMBE) Law of 2002—that seeks to attract small businesses with less than P3 million in assets to come out from the shadows of the informal or underground economy. Qualified enterprises may apply for inclusion in the BMBE Registry of a town or city, and be issued a certificate of authority that would entitle the BMBE to various benefits.”

“That is all good in theory, but it turns out that in most places, the BMBE Law is the best-kept secret in town, especially in the city or municipal hall itself. In our own barangay office, no one has even heard of it (or at least that’s what the people there claimed). I once wrote in this column about the travails of a colleague who tried to register her business under the law at Quezon City Hall, but was given the classic runaround until she eventually gave up on the idea.”

“In 2013 the first Cities and Municipalities Competitiveness Index (CMCI) ranking was implemented. Being voluntary in nature, about 285 cities and municipalities participated in the first round. The number has increased to 534 local governments in 2014. For the 2015 round, it is expected that about 1,000 local governments out of the total 1,634 local government units will participate. With this number, it is now possible to aggregate results to provincial levels and have provincial competitiveness index, as well. This will bring us closer to the idea of creating indicators that emanates from the local government levels that can be aggregated to provinces, then to regions, then national and, eventually, connect it with our global rankings.” [Connecting the Philippine economy to national, global competitiveness, Dr. Alvin P. Ang, Business Mirror, 25th Jun 2015]

“For example, data on the business registrations, including the gross revenues of firms, jobs created, productivity, among others, emanate from the business permits data. This data can be aggregated to represent the size of the local economy and comparing them into two periods will allow us to estimate growth. Hence, in a way, the indicators already show the local economic growth.”

That sounds promising. But are we in fact out of the woods? “For years, the excuse for lousy infrastructure is we don’t have enough money to build decent ones. Today, however, that is no longer the problem.” [Gov’t lacks ability to implement, Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 26th Jun 2015]

“We have enough funds in government and in the private sector to finance the construction of much needed infrastructure such as railroads, roads, flyovers, dams and airports. Government, by its own admission, is awash with funds, but they don’t have what it takes to implement approved projects . . . This is not good for the country. In fact, our economy stalled over the last quarter because of what Budget Secretary Butch Abad calls a technical deficit or the lack of ability on the part of implementing government agencies to get their projects going. It is also called lack of absorptive capacity.” 

Indeed it takes a village. But if we are to fend for ourselves, we better internalize that the world will not wait for us. Our track record is dismal! We are infamous for our inaction, wasting decades without batting an eyelash? The evidence? NAIA 3 and Mindanao . . .  and on and on . . . we go!

What are we missing? A sense of purpose? Focus? Conviction? Does Juan de la Cruz need to be stout-hearted?