Trump and Bannon – the partnership meant to accomplish a mission?

As the dust begins to settle – despite the recount in a couple of states – what could be emerging is that the Trump-Bannon team is “on a mission.” And it may not be crystal clear if we’re a logical, linear thinker? Which most people are. [Disclosure: the writer doesn’t exercise his right to vote but would not have voted for Trump if he did.]

Trump is an entrepreneur. Not everyone is endowed to be one, much less to have such a lofty mission as to be the leader of the free world.

There is a Philippine version of entrepreneurship where roughly 99% of registered enterprises are MSMEs; and it makes us proud and so we want more. But let’s remind ourselves of Italy – the home of great innovations. Yet because many are small family-owned enterprises, Italy isn’t truly competitive in this day and age. The post-industrialization world where technology-driven undertakings don't equate to greater employment.

Peter Drucker, the 20th century management guru, saw it as the shift from the manual worker to the knowledge worker. The challenge: how can industry move from the Detroit-model of yesterday and keep employment healthy – and at auto company-level wages that once defined middle-class America?

But let's get back to the Philippines. Remember the 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration? We don’t fail to point to the countless efforts under our belt but not the 1% that we can’t seem to figure out – and why we remain the regional laggard?

The 1987 Philippine Constitution is exhibit no. 1: A Constitution that is “anything but Marcos.” Logical and linear does not necessarily mean forward-looking. Which is what “tactics” are even when they are meant to overcome operational hurdles. Yes, they are meant to address or solve a problem but they’re not by definition outcome oriented. It is about doing something, like act. Say, pursue the war on drugs.

But beyond tactics is a much greater strategic outcome that must be the North Star. To put Marcos behind us, for example, is not the North Star. It is to be a First-World nation. And we have yet to stumble upon a leadership that can bring that about.

To mothball the Bataan nuclear plant and not follow through with infrastructure development in general, for instance, is shortsighted – when our neighbors are busy accelerating their march into the 21st century? And that narrow view is still with us and not surprisingly we continue to pay a heavy price?

Which explains why certain quarters still pine for Marcos, including Du30 and his cohort. If Cory and PNoy were not change agents, Du30 is. A change agent is what we need.

There lies the misconception – a disaster waiting to happen. Tyranny is a false choice. Which Rizal pointed out over a century ago. Desperate people submit to tyranny forgetting cause and effect. There is manna from heaven yet to be impoverished – or more precisely the failure to grow and develop as in a failed state – is not God-given. It is man-made.

Let's start with FDI. Even the British Ambassador who earlier said UK investment is coming cautioned Du30 against embracing Putin. Putin is about the old order where tyranny rules – as in Czarist Russia and then the Soviet Empire. And of more recent vintage, think Georgia and Ukraine.

We cannot be working at cross purposes. If FDI, for example, is key to pump-prime the economy beyond infrastructure development, who should we attract? Do we want to embrace Russia or China or Cuba? We can be friends with anyone but what do they represent? What is it that we aspire to be? Or are we flirting with communism? Beyond tyranny, the dearth of motivation against the tolerance of mediocrity is palpable in Eastern Europe decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, for example.

Have we given up on a loftier set of yardsticks aka the Asian tigers? Or are we showing our true colors, puerile in freedom and democracy? Whatever happened to our proud faith? That man is made in the image and likeness of his Creator? How can tyranny have a rightful place if we’re who we claim we are? Did we teach “People Power” to the South Koreans and yet we’re the ones busy resurrecting Marcos? Is it character-building (e.g., self-reliance, courage) that we sorely need – for bastardizing “compassion” aka populism?

Do we suffer from “victimhood”? The US if not the West in general took advantage of us when we expected paternalism? What if our neighbors are indeed smarter than we are? Do we have the maturity to accept such a reality? Or are we preoccupied justifying our being the regional laggard?

We can’t acknowledge that Lee, Mahathir and Deng begged for Western money and technology? And the outcome? Globalization that lifted millions from poverty particularly in our part of the world! Yet, because ours is a tyrannical enterprise, our “bossing culture” must have primacy else we throw a temper tantrum? How much childishness are we up to?

EJK is barbarism! And when supposedly smart Filipinos are cheering Du30 because he is a change agent, are we magnifying the misconception? Barbarism is moving us back to the Stone Age. Progress is what pump primes an economy.

What about Trump? Trump is a wheeler-dealer. But he is beyond deals per se. He has grandiose dreams. That for him to want to be leader of the free world is not surprising. That beyond being an entrepreneur – and beyond tactics – his grandiose desires make him very flexible and adaptable. Which Bannon mirrors. In other words, Trump has his North Star – which is beyond the gambling business and why he abandoned it despite the embarrassment of a bankruptcy.

But how does a billionaire relate to the average Joe more than a life-long public servant like Hillary? Did his involvement in reality TV give him a peek into the world of average Joe? In other words, he could still be a bully yet feel for working-class Americans. To wheel and deal demands one to be a bully – aka brinkmanship.

And to get to one’s goal requires the ability to gauge which battles to fight and which ones to abandon. But always, the best defense is offense. Which explains the incessant tweets: In your face – get to the face of the opposition rightly or wrongly, with or without evidence.

Which brings Bill Clinton to mind: there is a difference between campaigning and governing. Clinton had to be reminded by his advisers. A natural charismatic leadership persona could put him in a bubble yet he would understand the real world – given his humble beginnings. And so he would find his place in the sun – governing from the center, not as a populist which people assumed.

Of course payback time came – in Trump versus Hillary. NAFTA was bad, welfare reform a disaster, the war on crime punished the black community disproportionately. Which brings us to the present: The Trump-Bannon team.

Will they learn from the Bill Clinton lesson and sacrifice the center and be a populist administration? And also from Obama’s abandonment of American exceptionalism – because Dubya overreached in Iraq?

Are we going to witness a populist, “exceptional” (i.e., American exceptionalism) Trump government? That is focused on its North Star? [Exceptionalism with a caveat, e.g., “we will support NATO so long as member countries pay their fair share.”]

Yet nothing is absolute especially to an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurs want to stay ahead, are inquisitive and seek different even conflicting perspectives. They believe they can make the right decision because they’re smart. The reality is they don’t want to be left out opportunity-wise. Will it be Romney or Giuliani for State or even Petraeus or Corker?

Irrespective, their North Star will always be the North Star – grandiose. From property development from the ground up to property development driven by brand building – i.e., the Trump brand. And the flirting with gambling and bankruptcy is now water under the bridge. As is the flirting with Trump University aka a scam is now water under the bridge.

Entrepreneurs will go for it – to the hilt. Including leader of the free world in the case of Trump. At the end of the day, they learn from their mistakes. The Trump-Bannon team will make mistakes – and learn from them? To get to their North Star – beyond campaigning into governing – they will have to. They must learn from their mistakes!

But let’s get back to the Philippines. Can we Filipinos learn from our mistakes? First of all, even at 7% GDP growth year-on-year, it will take us a generation to see the end of the tunnel. And how do we in fact make that a reality?

“Philippines good at frustrating foreign investors – MAP,” Richmond Mercurio, The Philippine Star, 28th Nov 2016. “The Philippines is still much ‘talk’ and less ‘walk’ when it comes to addressing the country’s attractiveness as an investment destination.

“It is for this reason that the Philippines continues to trail other members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in foreign direct investment . . . We are so good at enticing foreign investors. We are so good at inviting them into our country and say please come to the Philippines because it is fun in the Philippines, it is so good in the Philippines. But the moment the foreign investor comes here, we’re so good at frustrating them . . .

“Even though the country beams with a lot of opportunities for foreign businesses to thrive . . . existing restrictions and persistent corruption kept many of these investors from coming in.”

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

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

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

“Moving backward, not forward”

That’s lifted from The Economist, “Hail to the thief: The Philippine government offers a hero’s burial for a murderous kleptocrat,” 12th Nov 2016. But it’s the Western press, manipulating our psyche for the umpteenth time?

So let’s pick a local paper. “PH shares skid to 9-mth lows as foreign funds flee,” Kristyn Nika M. Lazo, TMT, The Manila Times, 23rd Nov 2016. “Fears of US protectionism under a Donald Trump presidency kept foreign funds streaming out of the Philippine Stock Exchange, sending share prices plummeting to nine months. The Philippine market was the only decliner among Asian markets.

“The sell-offs from yesterday continued as foreign funds flocked to the US market, which closed in record territory, as oil prices surged 4 percent, the greenback’s rally paused and withered, and the bond market selling relented . . . Strong US economic activity improved during October . . .

“Investors were disturbed by a slowly deepening chasm between the US-Philippine relations that could hit remittances from the US and revenue from business process outsourcing which are major drivers of the Philippine output . . . Also, interest rates are forecasted to be hiked soon . . .

“The market has lost around 16 percent from the year’s high of 8,100 on the PSEi in July . . . A bearish situation may come about once the PSEi drops another 4 percent to the 6,480 level . . .”

But let’s get back to The Economist. “Rodrigo Duterte, the erratic strongman now running the Philippines, believes the dead dictator deserves better: he has approved the Marcos family’s long-standing request to bury their patriarch in Manila’s National Heroes’ Cemetery, with full military honors—an idea all Marcos’s other successors rejected.

“Opponents tried to get the supreme court to block the burial, arguing that the law reserves the cemetery for those ‘worthy of admiration’. This week, however, the court approved the burial and urged the country to ‘move on’. But to many, as one strongman buries another, the Philippines appears to be moving backward, not forward.

“Mr. Duterte may spy a political opportunity. He comes from the southern island of Mindanao, and is the first president who is not part of the elite of Manila. His victory owes as much to voters’ disenchantment with the dozen or so families that dominate Philippine politics as it does to his tough-talking image. But winning as an outsider is a lot easier than governing as one, and the Marcos family remains powerful . . . Bongbong, is a swaggering senator who came within a few thousand votes of the vice-presidency. Appeasing the family gives Mr. Duterte a political boost in Ilocos and a favor to call in when he needs it.”

Are we indeed moving backward, not forward? Do we in fact equate the war on drugs to nation building – i.e., the common good? If in tourism there is an infrastructure chain that we sorely lack aka ecosystem, economic development and nation building likewise has its requisite ecosystem. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel. Our neighbors are the models – if we’d care to look outward, not inward!

But we held hopes to be the next Asian tiger? Yet are we (a) doing the right homework; (b) building the wherewithal and the confidence to find our place in the sun; (c) tossing parochialism and insularity and (d) subservience and paternalism; or (e) all of the above? And would our shortcomings explain why tyranny has defined us? And why we can’t reconcile ourselves with Francis’s “who am I to judge”? And brought Marcos and Duterte upon us?

Say again, what country has won the war on drugs? Not the Americans. Try Portugal – but they did not make war, they decriminalized all drugs. [https://news.vice.com/article/ungass-portugal-what-happened-after-decriminalization-drugs-weed-to-heroin]

For decades we’ve considered ourselves perpetual optimists even when we and the world could see that our neighbors were leaving us in the dust? God helps those who help themselves?

Are we re-thinking CCT? We’ve been borrowing tons of money to keep it going yet stark poverty remains with us. Is it the economy, stupid? Whether in a developing or a developed economy, there are local practices that undermine economic performance? Take Italy as an example.

“A recession that lasted seven years wiped out nearly a quarter of Italian industry. The unemployment rate sits above 11 percent. The population is aging, and too few women are working, limiting spending power. Too many Italian businesses are small operations that are especially vulnerable to globalization . . . Negative interest rates maintained by the European Central Bank to encourage lending have cut into bank profit margins.

“This is a bank-centric country, and there was a huge crisis . . . When the tide goes out, you don’t see everything nice in the sea.”

“Italy’s banking pain is a symptom of an Italian business style that has traditionally favored relationships and community ties over a dispassionate analysis of the bottom line — a perception the nation is eager to alter. To visit senior Italian officials in their offices decked out like personal versions of the Sistine Chapel is to hear a recitation of complaints that reforms have gone underappreciated. They betray resentment that Italy continues to be caricatured as the reckless debacle at the center of European economic decline.” [Italy’s Banks Are in a Slow-Motion Crisis. And Europe May Pay; Peter S. Goodman, The New York Times, 19th Nov 2016]

Can the Italians outdo us, Pinoys? Consider: “But trust the politicians to grandstand on every popular issue – even if populist gimmickry is inherently shortsighted. They want to legislate wage increases, for instance, even if a regional wage board exists for that purpose.

“From a pure market standpoint, government has no business interfering in matters that should be in the exclusive domain of the private sector. The wage level should be the outcome of free transaction between employer and worker. Otherwise wages will be politicized and the entire domestic market skewed.

“Fortunately, we do not have the Oil Price Stabilization Fund (OPSF) anymore. That was a mechanism that, in the guise of protecting consumers from oil price shocks, effectively politicized fuel prices. The public decided to pay the price it wants. In the end, government subsidized the difference between the politically acceptable price level and prices in the real world.

“The OPSF, while it was there, inflicted huge budget deficits that forced government to borrow. That, and the subsidies on power, account for much of the foreign borrowing that brought about the debt crisis of the eighties. Consumers benefitted from subsidized fuel and power, the rich particularly since they consumed more of both on a per capita basis. But all of us, the poor especially, bore the costs of the debt crisis.

“The lesson here is that untargeted subsidies are never progressive. They always end up harming the poor more . . . We have so much populist legislation in the books. Collectively they explain why rates of extreme poverty have become so high.” [Overreach, Alex Magno, FIRST PERSON, The Philippine Star, 22nd Nov 2016]

Beyond harming the poor via populist legislation which we have accepted as normal in the Philippines is – of course – our turning a blind eye to EJKs? Because we made the judgment that criminals must die and thus Du30 has license to kill? See above re Francis.

Why don’t we make the judgment instead “Like installing for once, a truly democratic, pro-freedom, and honest, competent and inclusive government?” [“Low-ambition culture,” Tony Lopez, Virtual Reality, Manila Standard, 23rd Nov 2016]

Did Marcos set the standards for Du30? “[A]n estimated 34,000 trade unionists, student leaders, writers and politicians were tortured with electric shocks, heated irons and rape; 3,240 men and women were dumped dead in public places; 398 others simply disappeared.” [The $10bn question: what happened to the Marcos millions (?), Nick Davies, The Guardian, 7th May 2016]

And, indeed, what happened to the Marcos millions? “Bongbong, 58, started his political career before his family was exiled, becoming vice-governor of Ilocos Norte province in 1981, aged 23. Six years after exile, he returned to become a congressman. He recently denied any involvement in the legal moves that have blocked so much of the PCGG’s work. In February, Richard Amurao [head of the PCGG, a conspicuously decent lawyer, aged 41] issued a tough response, saying his claim was ‘belied by court records which show his involvement’. He listed cases in which Bongbong and his mother are still laying claim to what the PCGG says is ill-gotten wealth.

“The work is not finished . . . There is no statute of limitation on seeking justice. But the passing of time makes it more and more difficult to find new leads. Time is an ally for those who want us to forget.” [Davies, op. cit.]

How could we ever move forward?

“Can we not aspire then for higher, nobler goals? Like removing from our political milieu the four or five families that have ruled this country in the last half century? Like removing from our economy the 100 families that have ruled our economy and business in the last 100 years? Like installing for once, a truly democratic, pro-freedom, and honest, competent and inclusive government?” [Lopez, op. cit.]

Where to Philippines?

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

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

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

Of carpetbaggers, the economy, poverty, tyranny and worldviews

“The market’s response to the announcement we achieved 7.1 percent GDP growth in the third quarter was described as ‘muted.’ Although our economy has apparently risen to a higher growth plane, there was no dancing in the streets.

“Remittances from Filipinos abroad kept our head above water the past several years as our exports lost competitiveness, as our industrial base shrunk and as our tourism fell way behind our neighbors.

“The new administration appears bent on using public spending to fuel economic expansion. Budget Secretary Ben Diokno, staunch critic of the previous administration’s underspending, advocates relaxing budget deficit targets and speeding up the infrastructure modernization program.

“Our economic managers envision sustained growth of at least seven percent over the next generation. That is the only way to bring down poverty and raise our GDP per capital to high-income levels.

“The pace of growth we have achieved can only be achieved if we are able to industrialize. In the present global economy, no nation achieves industrialization without support from government. That support can only happen if there is a clear plan . . . Carpetbaggers could make a load of money in the short run but doom our industrialization eventually.” [7.1%, Alex Magno, FIRST PERSON, The Philippine Star, 19th Nov 2016. Professor Alex Magno, is a political scientist and academician in the Philippines.]

That’s from a political scientist. Let’s hear from our economists. “Even granting that it may take time for the President to change his style, I enjoin creditors and investors to focus on the predictables about the Philippine economy. They will realize that what we can posit for certain about the economy will make the uncertainties perceived by the likes of Standard and Poor’s pale into insignificance.

“First, the Philippine economy will be enjoying for many more years the close to $30 billion in annual remittances from overseas Filipino workers.

“Second, whatever happens to political leadership at the national level, our young, growing and English-speaking population will continue to make the Philippines a preferred site for the global business process outsourcing (BPO) and knowledge process outsourcing industries.

“The incomes generated by these two engines of growth will feed into the consumption sector and will generate large investments in retailing; the hospitality business . . . and the expansion of manufacturing of food, fashion goods, and furniture and fixtures. Construction and real estate will continue to benefit from the demand for more middle-priced condominium and residential units and for office spaces to cater to the BPO-information technology sector, with more of the expansion in second-tier cities . . .

“We can also count as highly predictable the maintenance of a stable financial sector by a very competent central bank that has admirably institutionalized inflation-targeting tools . . . and moderating the depreciation of the peso. We can also consider as certain the ability of the finance and budget departments to continue maintaining fiscal discipline, which began during the administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.” [Predictables about PH economy, Bernardo M. Villegas, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 19th Nov 2016]

“We have earlier used the findings of AmBisyon in our previous columns on the kind of issues the new government needs to immediately address.

“One of the main results of AmBisyon is that an overwhelming majority, or about 79.2 percent, of the respondents aspire for a simple and comfortable life. A question raised by the moderator, Tony Lambino, suggested that this seems to say the aspirations of the majority are too low and, therefore, easy to achieve. However, as the AmBisyon web site itself explains—a simple and comfortable life is actually a middle-class lifestyle. It consists of “having a car of their own, a house of their own, and enough money and savings to send their children to school and to afford leisure, like travel.”

“Considering the latest poverty statistics as of 2015, this simple and comfortable life aspiration is not easy to achieve immediately.

“This would mean a lot of factors have to change for the country. Our planners and stakeholders have to work together for this. What may be critical is to understand that this cannot be done immediately. Prioritization may be done by phases focusing first on those who are in poverty. Phase 1 must be to ensure that people are getting out of poverty faster. Phase 2 is to ensure that those who have gotten out of poverty must be protected from falling back. Interventions per-income level may be necessary. Those that have gotten out of poverty are usually wanting to reach middle-class status immediately. Data from a World Bank financial behavior study reveal that only about 10 percent of the population have bank accounts. Our own research in rural hometowns reveals that families receiving remittances and those that do not have behave in the same way in regard to savings. Our data show that those who have savings actually keep them at home and most would put them into land and houses rather than in financial assets.

“A big challenge, but not necessarily unachievable. We need to work together with the government and other stakeholders to reach this dream. Behavior change and education can help facilitate the process and for the government to make the overall environment conducive for dreamers to achieve.” [A simple ‘ambisyon,’ Dr. Alvin P. Ang, Eagle Watch, Business Mirror, 17th Nov 2016]

And what does Juan de la Cruz have to say? “A place where there are no slaves and tyrants,” CARLOS D. ISLES,carlosisles@gmail.com, Letters to the editor, Opinion, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 19th Nov 2016.

“As a senior citizen dribbling down the last years of my life, my fondest hope is to pass from this valley of tears to the next where ‘there are no slaves, tyrants or hangmen, where faith does not kill and where God alone does reign.’ (Dr. Jose Rizal’s, “Last Farewell”)

“It would indeed be quite a radical change from a country ruled by a tyrant, where politicians are corrupt, where the media have turned their back on their activist role, where the Supreme Court brazenly defies the letters and the spirit of the Constitution, where extrajudicial killings  of suspected users of illegal drugs are routinely done by policemen and vigilantes, where the brains of young people are addled by low quality education and noontime shows, where the Church fails to denounce abuses of power by elected officials, where those at the ‘laylayan ng lipunan’ are victims of government promises and band-aid development programs, where a former dictator is accorded a place in the Libingan ng mga Bayani, where the President of the country speaks with a forked tongue thus, confusing the people as to his real intentions, where women are fair targets of misogynistic and sexist comments and innuendos, where the leader of the nation routinely hurls insults and dirty words against heads of state and international organizations, where the President claims that God talks to him, which is a sign of schizophrenia, where the President believes that drug addicts are less human therefore they do not deserve to live, where the Cabinet secretaries are nothing but lap-dogs and apologists of the President, where people lie supinely on their backs doing nothing to halt the gradual death of democracy in the country, and finally, where evil will continue to prosper if we, Filipinos, do nothing.”

And here is what our neighbors are saying. “Regional economic integration can be made to work better and its benefits more obvious, said Juan Raffo in a statement. Raffo is the Abac chair for 2016. If governments adopt policies which enhance the capacity of economies, their communities and people will be better able to take advantage of more open and competitive markets . . .

“In the face of growing public disquiet about the impact of freer trade and investment, business leaders are concerned that many governments are looking to impose new tariff and non-tariff barriers . . . But ‘protectionist actions make it harder for business to play its part in creating employment and raising living standards across the region,’ he added, in remarks that appeared to be in response to Trump’s vaunted economic policies focusing on shoring up the US economy.

“Brexit (Britain’s exit from the European Union) and recent election results in both developed and developing economies seem to have served as a referendum on the merits of economic integration . . . Raffo said such developments have created an ‘unprecedented uncertainty about the direction of the global economy.’ They appear to call into question the successful model of economic integration that has been responsible for rapid growth and the spread of prosperity around the world . . .

“We accept the need to do more to help convince our citizens that economic integration is directly linked to expanding prosperity and that open markets—enhanced by new technologies and ways of doing business—have lifted millions out of poverty.” [Apec warned: Trump-inspired policy to kill growth, DJ Yap, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 19th Nov 2016]

“In many countries, liberal democracy is no longer considered the best political system for selecting national leaders. It is not the only way forward. The China model has never been a more attractive alternative in those countries, including Indonesia, still grappling with nation building.

“America can help restore faith in liberal democracy by carrying out the necessary electoral reforms. It needs to show once again that democracy is the best political system for selecting leaders because it is based on the principles of respecting freedoms and basic human rights.” [US electoral democracy: signs of failure or fatigue (?), Endy Bayni, Asian Editors Circle, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 19th Nov 2016; Endy Bayuni is editor in chief of The Jakarta Post.]

Do we recognize if the worldviews of our neighbors differ from ours? Because we’re the regional laggard? And we will be until we stand up – enough is enough?

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

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

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

The Buffett Rules – a winning worldview

With the Western world becoming unhinged, what would be the winning worldview for Juan de la Cruz? From the Global Recession of 2008 to the Brexit vote to the trauma of the Trump election, how would the Buffett Rules apply? Buy low, sell high. When everyone is greedy, be scared. When everyone is scared, be greedy.

Buffett is known as the great investor, not as a behavioral economist. But what his rules say is he doesn’t behave against his self-interest. But most everyone does. Including us Pinoys – we have been behaving against our self-interest for decades. For over a century, according to Rizal. “He who submits to tyranny loves it.”

Because there is something very fundamental that we Pinoys have yet to recognize given we take it as a positive element of our culture – i.e., our value of hierarchy. Because we put people and nations in a rank order, we cannot see beyond the horizon?

“You entered the business but uncertain of the way forward? You obviously know that you must win against the Western competition that you admire but fear. It will demand a lot from you. First, you must believe in yourself. That you are not inferior to anyone – not to anyone whether from the East or the West. You can find your place in the sun as much as they do.”

The blog has often said that it was inspired by the writer’s Eastern European friends. When he first arrived, he was amazed by their courage to go up against a Western behemoth. “Now, think Steve Jobs and Apple going up against IBM.” And so Apple became their benchmark and model and inspiration.

Fearful as they were, they asked: What are the rules of the game? And the writer will not tire repeating that it is not about the rules but the principles. And to discover its import, they had to understand what the GPS is about: Where are we? Where do we want to be? How do we get there?

And the most important thing they embraced is: “To be the best in the business” – to come out of their part of the world and put them in good stead against the rest of the world.

And while they look to the writer as their “teacher,” they must discard “hierarchy” from their psyche and transform themselves into a “high-commitment team.” To imagine the organization structure as a wheel: the hub being the leadership that carries the banner of their shared purpose – to be the best in the business – with the rest of the management team making up the spokes, reinforcing the organization as the rubber hits the road.

That at the end of the day they are not a dysfunctional bureaucracy but a wheel that can run as fast as they want – and faster than the competition. And that they must develop the requisite skills to make it happen: from doing the business plans to execution to establishing the reward system to innovation and product development to demonstrating to external partners and constituencies (public and private and the end consumer) what their principles are and how they are translated into their values down to the day-to-day business practices visible to and shared by the outside world – under the banner “to be the best in the business.”

Indeed, there is the bigger community and the common good that as a good corporate citizen they must respect. Business is business is so yesterday because it cannot be the key to innovation that has defined the 21st century. Innovation is relevant so long as they respond to human needs and aspirations. And why even supposedly famous brands would prove unworthy and fall by the wayside. 

But as we would say it in the vernacular, “Hindi ma-gets ni Juan de la Cruz” because of a “triple whammy” [to borrow from Solita Collas-Monsod, Get Real, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 12th Nov 2016]. But for purposes of this posting they differ from those of Ms. Monsod and are as follows: (1) Inferiority complex owing to our hierarchical or simply “bossing” culture; (2) Paternalism which we expect from one in authority – like Uncle Sam or the West in general being richer and more developed than PHL; (3) “Transparency quotient” that is underdeveloped, again, owing to our value of hierarchy.

And they explain why we love tyranny? And why ours is a culture of impunity? That is reflected in Du30’s pursuit of the war on drugs and the pivot away from the US and the West and into the arms of China/Russia?

And here’s another example that Juan de la Cruz can relate to: When one of us does something extraordinary at home or abroad, while it makes us proud and rejoice, we take it as an exception.

In other words, to us a level playing field is a notion – not a reality? And it explains our inability to have our finger on the pulse of, say, competition or even development? Because to us there is always something or someone bigger that outranks us? Rank has its privileges. And feeds a culture of impunity – ruled by political patronage and dynasties and oligarchy?

If indeed that is our psyche, how do we thrive in the 21st century that is global and highly competitive? [Brexit and the Trump Wall notwithstanding. As history tells us, empires may fall and others would rise.] And where the age of artificial intelligence appears to be rearing an ugly head?

Will unemployment become an even bigger problem? If indeed we want to stand on our own two feet, how do we get started? And would we be equipped to face the challenges of the post-industrialization era? When we have yet to figure out what industrialization means? For example, how would we develop and harness robotics if we have no industry experience and heritage?

We’re too underdeveloped that we are still debating whether we’re coming or going? That we bought into the idea that the war on drugs is priority no. 1, the rule of law be damned? How long have we been wailing about poverty, about Metro Manila traffic, about the energy crisis, etc., etc.?

Yet we couldn’t come to terms with how we blew it as our neighbors, the Asia tigers, left us in the dust. They demonstrated how it is done – from pulling together the building blocks of an economy to becoming industrialized to being competitive – yet we want to reinvent the wheel?

The one caveat for empires that applies to economic tigers as well is to strive for dynamism – e.g., neither Brexit nor the Trump Wall can undo Darwin? In the same manner that the Tea Party – that brought infamy for shutting down the US government – failed to deliver, these two more recent Western developments likewise go against the grain? Extremism whether from the left or the right has history to open their eyes? On the other hand, why did Einstein believe in a Higher Being? Ergo: creation and evolution are realities of the universe?

How about us, how do we grow up? Giving solutions to a problem we have yet to acknowledge is why we’re in a race to the bottom? We’ve blamed everyone and his uncle except Juan de la Cruz?

“Fr. Edward Dowling, SJ, a friend of Bill Wilson, the founder of Alcoholics Anonymous, was convinced that the Spiritual Exercisesinfluenced the 12 Steps of AA (which guide many other 12-step programs). Bill Wilson said he had never heard of Ignatius or theExercises. He said he sat down at his kitchen table one day and wrote out the 12 Steps in about 20 minutes. To this Fr. Dowling said, ‘If it were twenty weeks, you could suspect improvisation. Twenty minutes sounds reasonable under the theory of divine help.’

“I recently ran across an article Fr. Dowling wrote showing the parallels between the Exercises and the 12 Steps. A sample:

“St. Ignatius starts with a presumption that our power of faculties is bound by sinful tendencies and addictions to the wrong things. The Spiritual Exercises, therefore, work on the soul in both a negative and positive way. The first section, the consideration of my sins and of their effects in hell, is the negative part. It aims by self-denial to release our wills from our binding addictions, to enable the will to desire and to choose rationally.

“The second part of the Spiritual Exercises, start in with a consideration of the Incarnation and going through the Passion and Resurrection, is an effort to see how Christ would handle various situations.

“A priest alcoholic, who has written with discernment on the Spiritual Exercises, first pointed out to me the similarity between them and the twelve steps of A.A. Bill, the founder of A.A. recognized that those twelve steps are pretty much the releasing of myself from the things that prevent my will’s choosing God as I understand Him.” [http://www.ignatianspirituality.com/8765/the-spiritual-exercises-and-the-12-steps]

In other words, the cure for addiction is not EJK and the trampling of the rule of law. Yet we are submitting to tyranny instead of acknowledging who and what we are? And why we behave against our self-interest?

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

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

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