Our cognitive challenge

To lift Juan de la Cruz from abject poverty demands a new – absolute and complete – mindset.

And that is our cognitive challenge.

It starts with tossing “pwede na ‘yan.”

Recall that Arangkada set an FDI target of $75 billion. And after two administrations – Aquino and Duterte – we’re still nowhere near the mindset that demands.

“Trade department pursuing 250 leads from potential foreign investors,” BusinessWorld, 5th Apr 2022.

“Some of the leads can generate expected investment of about P450 billion ($9 billion.)

“The most substantial leads involve electronics projects from MinebeaMitsumi, Inc.,  Brother Industries Co. Ltd., US automotive electronics supplier Amphenol Corp., data center equipment supplier Positronic, contract electronics manufacturer Foxconn Technology Group; as well as an expansion by Toyota Motor Corp. and the previously-reported entry of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX).

“In 2022, PEZA hopes to post 7-8% growth in approved investments, while the BOI targets P1 trillion ($20 billion) worth of investment approvals.”

In fairness, we have a ‘Stronger foundation of economic growth,’ The Philippine Star, 6th Apr 2022.

“Through our joint efforts, we will continue to build a market-friendly policy environment that reflects the shared vision and aspiration of the business, youth, and civil society sector.”

Let’s hold it right there.

We are playing catch-up.

When the going gets tough, the tough get going, not sit on their laurels.

Where does “pwede na ‘yan” come from?

Try our caste system where rank has its privileges – and we value hierarchy and paternalism.

In other words, we want the status quo. And that puts us “out of sync” with this universe.

This universe is about dynamism and interdependence. And that explains why we’re not even in the game.

We know that Vietnam has left us in the dust.

And we won’t be in the game if we can’t think beyond “pwede na ‘yan.”

We now know that a 6%-7% GDP growth rate isn’t satisfactory even over ten years.

It is insane to beat it black and blue when something does not work.

Those familiar with the blog are tired of hearing “forward, lateral, and creative thinking.”

We want to be a developed, first-world nation. There is nothing terrible about that.

We don’t like the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness? But we want to lift Juan de la Cruz from abject poverty. That means we want to be a developed, first-world nation.

But that demands pulling our collective thinking together. And that is the reason, despite sounding immodest, the blog shares my encounters with the real world.

I did not overcome those challenges by my lonesome self but instead shared forward, lateral, and creative thinking with those around me.

To be able to craft the way forward for the Philippines, we must embrace an altogether different mindset.

For example, we must toss the 6%-7% metric out the window. Instead, we want to raise GDP by an incremental $200 billion – because our GDP per person is less than half of Thailand’s and not even a third of Malaysia’s.

That’s how our minds can create a new paradigm.

And then we can benchmark against Vietnam, for example.

Consider: Samsung has already invested over $17.5 billion in Vietnam, and they put in another $920 million. On the other hand, they made $3.8 billion in 2020 from exports of over $50 billion – which revs up the Vietnam economy.

If we can’t define and fathom dynamism and interdependence, isn’t the above an excellent example?

Then see above; what we are celebrating. From 250 leads, we expect a potential FDI of $9 billion, while the BOI is targeting $20 billion worth of investment approvals.

Given our 6%-7% GDP growth metric, those potential FDIs are good enough.

But, and it’s a big but, if we want an incremental GDP of $200 billion, they are not good enough. When the going gets tough, the tough get going, not sit on their laurels.

That’s why we need to hear from Tim Cone.

Whatever monetary and fiscal interventions we create must be building blocks to attain our North Star – a developed, first-world nation.

We are playing catch-up. But then again, we in the Philippine elite and chattering classes don’t mind the status quo.

We can’t sit on our laurels.

To lift Juan de la Cruz from abject poverty demands a new – absolute and complete – mindset.

And that is our cognitive challenge.

Gising bayan!

Think forward – and then work back

Please recall the Theory of Change from postings ago.

Then consider: Investment per se is not the silver bullet. How do we think forward – and then work back? In other words, don’t we want to match if not outdo our neighbors?

We’re well into the 21st century, characterized by (a) innovation and (b) global competition.

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

That’s why the blog asked, do we want to mirror Russia?

Given our caste system, our debate is within the Philippine elite and chattering classes. What motivates us to move this nation forward when we benefit from its spoils?

The status quo serves us well. We are not suffering from our backwardness. Think of Afghanistan. We aren’t Afghanistan, but we aren’t Singapore either.

Without development experience, we turn “academic” – and celebrate technocrats.

And so, we accept logical yet linear and incremental thinking. But our neighbors have a different paradigm.

One plus one is two, yet one plus one can be three? It’s called “synergy,” the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. 

The bottom line: We have a cognitive challenge. But are we equipped to recognize it? See above; for our lack of development experience.

That’s why the blog wanted to hear from the winningest basketball coach. We can’t internalize how it is to overcome challenges – and win consistently to boot.

The Theory of Change illustrates why and how the desired change happens – i.e., in a particular context. Or, conversely, why it doesn’t come to fruition.

In other words, it is about the (a) why, (b) how, and (c) context of the desired change.

“It is focused in particular on mapping out or “filling in” the “missing middle” between what a program or change initiative does (its activities or interventions) and how these lead to the attainment of desired goals.

“It does this by first identifying the desired long-term goals and then works back from these to identify all the conditions (outcomes) that must be in place (and how these related to one another causally) for the goals to occur.” [What is Theory of Change? - Theory of Change Community]

Those familiar with the blog may recall how the above mirrors the photosynthesis phenomenon.

“There has been much good news that justifies optimism in our country’s ability to attract foreign direct investments. Today’s primary focus is signing a revision of the outdated Public Service Act (PSA) into law.

“Even before the law’s enactment, net FDI inflows in 2021 totaled $10.5 billion, higher than the $6.8 billion recorded in 2020 and 21.3 percent higher than the pre-pandemic figure of $8.7 billion.

“While this is good news, we still have a vast ground to recover, as we have lagged behind key ASEAN peers in attracting FDIs in our region. Total FDIs in the ASEAN region in 2020 were $137 billion. Indonesia attracted $18.31 billion, and Vietnam attracted $15.8 billion. Behind us are Cambodia and Malaysia at around $3 billion each.

“Our past leaders insisted on a narrow-minded Filipino First policy that has kept Filipinos last. It is difficult to believe that war-torn Vietnam, with a communist government, attracted more foreign investments and easily overtook us, a “supposedly” free enterprise economy.

“Credit Duterte for using his large political capital to break this Filipino First mindset among our rent-seeking business sector.” [“Attracting investments,” Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 30th Mar 2022]

But how do we think forward? How do we develop the brain’s chamber that houses “forward, lateral, and creative thinking”?

The good news is that we are not the only ones facing the challenge.

That is why Einstein and Jobs stand out among a handful of others. And we can add the Franciscans too. What do they have in common? They spoke to the “universe” – and its character. St. Francis, for example, embraced the oneness of creation.

In other words, these people aren’t necessarily like-minded. But they are beyond logical, linear, and incremental thinking. They can pull different elements and disciplines together.

In other words, we don’t have to be all business-minded – or economists. Philosophers contributed to the body of knowledge we know as quantum physics, i.e., it is beyond classical physics.

Here is a good exercise: Don’t we want to be a developed, first-world nation? Recall that Lee Kuan Yew spoke about the success of Singapore, “From third-world to first-world.”

Can we pause and figure that out?

There is no one stopping us from imagining, visualizing, and creating the future for Juan de la Cruz. Every developed nation started “poor.”

We like to talk about “pwede na ‘yan,” yet we all fall into its trap.

Let’s get to the context of the desired change. And here, the modern math concept of sets and subsets comes in handy.

Because we are a subset of this “universe,” we have to fight our instincts of parochialism and insularity. And the universe manifests dynamism and interdependence.

That brings us to the following pieces that can help us lead our cognitive exercise.

We want to be a developed, first-world nation in a dynamic and interdependent universe.

That is the playing field that we must recognize.

Where are we? Take our GDP per person. Ours is less than half of Thailand and not even a third of Malaysia’s?

Vietnam mirrors the route taken by the Asian Tigers before them and by China. 

Vietnam overtook us despite delivering GDP growth of 6%-7% over ten years. And ours came from OFW remittances and the BPO industry, i.e., over $50 billion. In contrast, Vietnam’s came from Samsung Vietnam, i.e., over $50 billion, and other export-based industries.

Those are the pieces that we want in front of us, so we can leverage our brainpower – i.e., visualize the big picture and create a new paradigm.

We cannot just talk about the differences between our neighbors and us. We must learn from them. In other words, we can’t be proudly parochial and insular. We are not God’s gift to humankind.

Our GDP per person is merely a fraction of Thailand's and Malaysia's, which is a good starting point to acknowledge if we want to be a developed, first-world nation.

We must think forward and then work back.

For example, It is not only Vietnam that was able to attract the best of both worlds, i.e., investment and technology, i.e., Samsung Vietnam. The Asian Tigers did it before them and why they left us in the dust export-wise.

Consider: Thailand and Malaysia’s exports compared to the Philippines are 3.3 and 2.6 times, respectively. But that isn’t a surprise because we allocate a mere 31% of GDP (end-use) to export goods and services against their 68% and 71%, respectively.

We don’t instinctively prioritize because we don’t think forward and then back. Add to that our bias for the crab mentality instead of the common good.

In other words, logical yet linear and incremental thinking ignores the imperative to prioritize.

We can’t still get over the 6%-7% GDP growth metric.

The blog introduced the metric of raising our GDP by an incremental $200 billion. And we can’t fathom that if we can’t shift paradigms as our neighbors did.

Our parochialism and insularity add to our blindness. For example, we continue to aspire to balance foreign and our interests as mutually exclusive. Think of Samsung Vietnam.

Or China. None of our neighbors had that blindness. Beg for Western money and technology, so said Lee and Mahathir to Deng.

How did that play out? Foreign investments brought state-of-the-art technology and accelerated technology development to these neighbors.

What about equity ownership? Has Singapore sold itself out to foreign investors? Neither did the rest of the Asian Tigers or China or Vietnam.

What is the challenge? We don’t have to reinvent the wheel. All we need to learn is to benchmark against best practice models [c/o] our neighbors.

See above; parochialism and insularity are blinding.

What is this universe? It is dynamism and interdependence.

Ukraine lost Crimea to the Russians in 2014. Yet, in eight years, it was able to repel Russia’s tank convoy that measured forty miles long and menacingly approached Ukraine to take down its capital and government.

Ukraine, unbeknownst to Russia, had rapidly developed a world-class military with arms and technology from the West. And without any foreign troops to the rescue.

Still, they aspire to join the EU and NATO.

Do they manifest dynamism and interdependence?

Let’s digress a bit for a real-world war story.

Those familiar with the blog may recall my Eastern European friends doing business in Ukraine. And on the ground in Kyiv, we have a local team headed by a former rocket scientist. He and his deputy enlisted in the Ukrainian army. And two others opted to relocate to Sofia, Bulgaria, from where they oversee the supply chain of products to Ukraine.

There is a need for our products, specifically snack food and personal care, and they come as frantic requests from the major retail chains transported from Bulgaria. Local factories in Ukraine, including those owned by MNCs, were damaged by the Russian bombings.

And here’s the rub: The Ukrainian retail chains are begging for any food items supplied from neighboring countries. And we are tapping our networks because of the humanitarian crisis.

But let’s get back to the Philippines.

Please think of how we kicked out the U.S. military. Unsurprisingly, China pursued its adventurism immediately after.

Can we pause — and ponder? 

Can we internalize the dynamism and interdependence inherent in this universe?

Why do we need to imagine, visualize, and create the future of Juan de la Cruz – to be a developed, first-world nation? Because we can’t craft a new paradigm if we don’t learn “forward, lateral, and creative thinking.”

And that starts with learning from the likes of Einstein and Jobs and the Franciscans. And learning from our neighbors. 

We must learn to think forward and then work back.

And that presupposes that we commit to and live out a set of principles.

Gising bayan!

Is today the chance for Juan de la Cruz to reinvent himself?

It’s refreshing to hear from a Russian about democracy and autocracy. And not any Russian but its Foreign Minister, 1991-1996.

“Andrei Kozyrev says there can be no return to normal business with Russia once the war ends,” The Economist, 25th Mar 2022.

“The prospect of a westernizing, democratic, and prosperous Ukraine is the nightmare of the Putin regime because it will be a powerful motivation for Russians to follow suit. However, to change, [freedom-loving people] must recognize Russia as a nation under a belligerent and ruthless dictatorship and be treated accordingly.

“Mr. Putin has stoked nationalism as a means of maintaining power. For years the Kremlin has cracked down on free speech and democracy and proved its commitment to dominating Ukraine, undermining the West, and protecting dictatorships as far away as Syria, Cuba, and Venezuela.

“The West reacted with inadequate words and sluggish sanctions. (Dirty money has brought comfort to Russia’s elites and corruption to the West.) Mr. Putin demands that NATO backtrack from eastern and central Europe. The cold war’s divisive lines are back in Europe and beyond, like it or not. For the situation to change, Russia must change.

“America and its allies at last imposed tough sanctions on Russia in recent weeks because it again violated the civilized norms of behavior in Ukraine. Yet useful idiots or pseudo-experts on Russia who sympathize with autocratic leaders, such as Tucker Carlson on Fox News, are pushing for a prompt return to business “as usual” with Russia and its oligarchs. If they succeed, the sacrifices of Ukrainians and the discomfort of Western taxpayers will have been for nothing.

“If the Kremlin gets away with this war, and business relations return to normal in its aftermath, the country’s aggression will continue to grow—with or without Mr. Putin. The West should keep the bulk of its sanctions in place and maintain its military preparedness until the Kremlin respects the rights of its people and those in other countries, in line with international norms.

“Sadly, Russians will suffer from Western sanctions. But it will be impossible to hide the sanctions’ effects, even amid the mire of the Kremlin’s militarist propaganda.

“And only the country’s citizens can reform the regime.”

As the blog asserts, we Filipinos bend closer to autocracy than democracy because of our caste system. Unsurprisingly, political patronage and oligarchy undergird our economy. Do we want to mirror Russia?

Is today the chance for Juan de la Cruz to reinvent himself? From the former Russian Foreign Minister, “only the country’s citizens can reform the regime.”

For the umpteenth time, it’s worth restating that perfection is not of this world.

Consider: While America granted me citizenship for my contributions to my old MNC-company, I acknowledge its imperfections. And as a sign of protest, I don’t exercise the right to vote.

Why? American politics – and it explains its current polarized state – undermines its professed commitment to “the common good.” And the world is yet to see how that plays out in the medium- to longer-term. But the signs are ominous.

They are threading not the way forward but the reverse. Even the Supreme Court can’t stand away from backsliding – its failure to codify recusal norms within its August body. There is nothing wrong with feeling strongly about one’s belief, but what happens to the common good when lies justify these beliefs?

In other words, democracy is not about the “left or right.” And given its Judeo-Christian heritage, America must be the first to embrace the coming of Christ, specifically, how he battled the scribes and Pharisees for appropriating the faith.

“Paul is one of the most misunderstood and disliked teachers in the Church. We have tried to understand a nondual mystic with our simplistic, dualistic minds.

“Paul recognizes that the greatest enemy of ordinary daily goodness and joy is not imperfection, but the demand for “supposed perfection” or order.” [Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditations, Center for Action and Contemplation, 26th Mar 2022]

Why did Pope Francis take the name of St. Francis? The latter, like St. Paul, kept to the message of Christ – e.g., they were nondual mystics. For example, St. Francis recognized the Creation story and the independence of the universe. He saw the Creator not only in humans but in all of creation, including plants and animals.

News item: How Joe Manchin aided coal and earned millions. Manchin, the Democrat who rose through state politics to reach the United State Senate, where through the vagaries of electoral politics, is now the most critical figure shaping the nation’s energy and climate policy. [The New York Times, 27th Mar 2022]

The concept is beyond “climate change” but the imperative to sustain our lifeblood, the photosynthesis phenomenon.

And if we drill down said interdependence, it will facilitate our cognitive recognition of “forward, lateral, and creative thinking.” And they promote problem-solving and development, including the quantum leap we witness today in the 21st century. And they are best nurtured by freedom and democracy, not autocracy.

Question: How can parochialism and insularity cut into the dance of interdependence? Is that why we’re out of step that Juan de la Cruz suffers from abject poverty?

Given America’s commitment to freedom and democracy, I represented USAID in Eastern Europe as a volunteer – to assist Bulgarian MSMEs to gear up for the onslaught of global competition as the country prepared for accession to the EU.

And because these people demonstrated their embrace of freedom and the free market, I remained even after the USAID program ended. [With the pandemic ebbing, the wife and I will travel again and be Eastern Europe based, April through July.] I have done business across Eastern and Central Europe and showed these people how to pursue innovation and global competitiveness, the characteristics of this century.

There is a soft spot in my heart for the Ukrainians. They were not prepared to join NATO because of political patronage and oligarchy. Yet, the average Ukrainian has their heart in the right place. And the world no longer doubts that, given how they demonstrated their readiness to die for freedom and democracy.

These former Soviet satellite states are learning to live out a set of principles. They have cherished freedom, yet they know they have work to do. As in the case of Russia, political patronage dictated how the communist leadership farmed out and privatized state-owned entities that created the oligarchy. It is no different from the Philippines.

But that is why there is a group of us holding their hands and encouraging them to keep the faith. Their storied past helps because they know how autocracy robbed decades of their existence.

The wife hasn’t gotten over her visits to the museums in Ukraine, learning about “Holodomor” – derived from the Ukrainian words for hunger and extermination.

“Holodomor, “man-made” famine that convulsed the Soviet republic of Ukraine from 1932 to 1933, peaking in the late spring of 1933. It was part of a broader Soviet famine (1931–34) that also caused mass starvation in the grain-growing regions of Soviet Russia and Kazakhstan. However, the Ukrainian famine turned deadlier because of political decrees and decisions aimed chiefly or only at Ukraine.

“The origins of the famine lay in the decision by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin to collectivize agriculture in 1929. Teams of Communist Party agitators forced peasants to relinquish their land, personal property, and sometimes housing to collective farms. They deported so-called kulaks—wealthier peasants—and any peasants who resisted collectivization altogether. Collectivization led to (a) a drop in production, (b) the disorganization of the rural economy, and (c) food shortages. It also sparked a series of peasant rebellions, including armed uprisings, in parts of Ukraine.” [Britannica]

Can we Filipinos learn to recognize the distinctions between freedom and autocracy – and live them out? Can we commit to certain principles?

Please recall how I entered into a social contract with these people: You must commit to transparency, or I am out the door.

“Ukraine is not in the EU at this tragic hour because it could not meet Western standards on law and order and anti-corruption measures. It should make a more significant effort to reform after the war to open Europe’s doors.

“The West must double its support to the country as it rebuilds and recovers. Failing to do so could have dire consequences. A Marshall plan of sorts is imperative, and encouragement from the EU about its future membership is to inspire it. (Several states already have spoken in support of the application to join just days into the war.) A nation in the center of Europe subdued to Mr. Putin’s control would set a dangerous precedent.” [Kozyrev, op. cit.]

But isn’t the West to blame too?

Consider the sham justifications behind the Vietnam war and the attack on Iraq. Or the greed – care of Western financial institutions – that brought about the global recession of 2008 that impacted the entire world, especially developing economies. Even America did not fully recover from it and paved the way for the Trump presidency, i.e., right-wing populism.

“There is no dispute now that Mr. Putin wants to defend Russia’s sphere of influence. At the start of his speech on 24th Feb, as his forces invaded Ukraine, he criticized the “expansion of the NATO bloc to the east, bringing its military infrastructure closer to Russian borders.

“He embarked on a tirade against the actions of the Western powers and the Ukrainian government. He claimed an ongoing “genocide against the millions of people” in the Donbas region without evidence.

“However, for Professor John Mearsheimer (political scientist, University of Chicago) to reduce the causes of Russia’s invasion to the Bucharest declaration is simplistic and wrong. For a start, there were apparent frustrations, fears, and mistakes. Other, more crucial factors were at play. Professor Mearsheimer mentions that the continuing American strategic partnership with Ukraine may indeed have played a part, rubbing salt in the wound of NATO’s projected expansion.

“Ukrainian defiance in response to Russia’s huge military exercise on its border last year would have been hard for Mr. Putin to tolerate. A successful and democratic Ukraine undermines the Russian leader’s authoritarianism at home. And there was a faulty understanding of the situation: both America in Iraq and Russia in Ukraine have launched wars on terrible “intelligence.”

“Alongside these proximate causes, three other factors help explain the current Ukraine crisis. The most important and the most neglected is that the break-up of empires is often messy and traumatic. Usually, a foreign military intervention of some kind follows.

“The end of European colonial empires, and the collapse of the Soviet and Yugoslav empires in the 1990s, forced new or re-constituted states to make fateful decisions. What frontiers does the state have? Is citizenship based on ethnicity or simply residence? Should kin living outside the state have a right to citizenship? Or what friends and allies? What constitution? What language?

“Such questions have been at the heart of political crises and armed conflicts of the past hundred years. The dozens of UN peacekeeping missions established since 1945 have all addressed post-colonial and post-imperial problems.

“Both Georgia and Ukraine faced these quandaries in the 1990s—and faced them long before the question of NATO membership arose. From the beginning of their new existence, the status of Russian minorities in Georgia and Ukraine was complex.

"In Georgia, two breakaway republics provided a basis for occasional Russian intervention or at least a pretext. In Ukraine, too, defending the rights of its two Russian-supported breakaway republics was the ostensible reason for Russian military interventions there. And in these pro-Russian republics, there were “forced expulsions” of Georgians and Ukrainians, respectively, leading to calls to free passes to return to their homes.

“Second, nuclear weapons outside Russia necessitated Western involvement in security matters. An array of nuclear weapons remained in Ukraine (and in Belarus and Kazakhstan) following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances of 5th Dec 1994 addressed the problem of what to do with this arsenal.

“The three post-Soviet states agreed to hand these nuclear weapons over to Russia. In return, they received security assurances from Russia, Britain, and America, which all undertook to respect the sovereignty, independence, and existing borders of Ukraine and the other two states.

“Russia violated this provision by its takeover of Crimea in March 2014. The breakdown of the Budapest Memorandum left Ukraine in an awkward situation. It could not trust Russia’s word and had reason to doubt Western security guarantees. The idea of full-blooded membership in NATO appeared increasingly attractive but not necessarily more attainable.

“The third factor is color revolutions—the popular revolutions that occurred in many countries in the former Soviet Union in recent decades. They must have reminded Mr. Putin of the movements in eastern Europe in 1989 that precipitated the collapse of one communist regime after another.

“Mr. Putin was deeply suspicious of the revolutions, such as the Rose Revolution in Georgia in November 2003. It was the first successful assault in the former Soviet Union against the corrupt strongmen who had come to power immediately after communist party rule—then followed within a year by the Orange Revolution in Ukraine that threw out another such strongman, Viktor Yanukovych.

“It suits Mr. Putin to treat civil resistance movements as parts of a grand international conspiracy. I have been studying such movements for more than 50 years. And there were accusations that such movements were the pawns of outside forces. There is little evidence to support such theories.

“Professor Mearsheimer, in a lecture on “The Causes and Consequences of the Ukraine Crisis” at Chicago University in 2015, actually lent credence to the idea that such movements verge on being an American instrument. “Our basic strategy is to topple regimes all over the world,” but evidence for this generalization was missing. Throughout his analysis, Professor Mearsheimer pays remarkably little attention to people’s “ideals” and political desires in countries that have experienced “people power” revolutions.

“These factors suggest that the 2008 proposal to expand NATO to include Georgia and Ukraine is just one among developments that have made the current crisis acute. Indeed, it is arguable that the NATO expansion proposal made matters worse, as may other Western actions, but to assert that “the West is principally responsible for the Ukrainian crisis” goes too far.” [“Sir Adam Roberts rebuffs the view that the West is principally responsible for the crisis in Ukraine,” The Economist, 26th Mar 2022]

We Filipinos must learn from history. But it’s not a cakewalk.

“Four hundred and fifty-three years ago in Cebu, Miguel Lopez de Legazpi wrote out a report to the king describing the natural and human resources of the Philippines as the first step toward their exploitation.

“This description of lawlessness struck me: The inhabitants of these islands are not subject to any law, or king, or lord. Although there are large towns in certain regions, the people do not act in concert or obey any ruling body; but each man does what he pleases and takes care only of himself and of his “slaves.” He who owns most “slaves” and the strongest can obtain anything he pleases. No law binds “relative to relative,” parents to children, or brother to brother.

“Filipinos have not changed much in the last 450 years. The challenge of history is breaking the cycle, so the present will stop reading like the past.” [“History is a circle,” Ambeth R. Ocampo, LOOKING BACK, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 25th Mar 2022.]

“And only the country’s citizens can reform the regime.”

In other words, we shall perpetuate our caste system if we can’t undo our instincts: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

“What’s preventing Filipinos from getting rich? Extractive institutions allow a small group to extract incomes and wealth from the rest of society and block economic growth to safeguard its interests.

“Powerful groups often stand against the engines of prosperity,” write Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson in Why Nations Fail: The Origins Of Power, Prosperity And Poverty. Economic growth is not just a process of more and better machines and more and better-educated people but also a transformative and destabilizing process associated with widespread creative destruction.

“Growth thus moves forward only if not blocked by the economic losers to protect their economic privileges and by the political losers who fear the erosion of their political power.

“Worse, extractive institutions breed corruption and political oppression.

“Nations fail when they have extractive institutions, supported by extractive political institutions that impede and even block economic growth,” Acemoglu and Robinson.” [“Why Filipinos Remain Poor,” Panos Mourdoukoutas, Forbes, 1st Jun 2017; Mourdoukoutas is Professor and Chair of the Department of Economics at LIU Post in New York; and teaches at Columbia University.]

Are we more like Russia than our neighbors – better known as Asian Tigers?

What will it take for us to embrace the principles of freedom and democracy?

Is today the chance for Juan de la Cruz to reinvent himself?

Gising bayan!

Are we more catholic than the pope?

Is our caste system more powerful than the Roman Curia?

“Reforming the often unwieldy and out-of-touch Vatican bureaucracy, known as the Roman Curia, which governs a church of 1.3 billion faithful, was central for Francis’ election in 2013.

“The document, drafted by top cardinals chosen by Francis, was released on the ninth anniversary of his installation as pope. It explicitly states in its preamble that “the pope, bishops and other ordained ministers are not the only “evangelizers” in the church,” creating space for Catholic “laymen and laywomen” to have “roles of government and responsibility.” Another section, called “Principles,” states that the pope can appoint any Catholic he considers qualified to lead a Vatican office.

“Pope Francis issued a new constitution, nearly a decade in the making, to govern the bureaucracy that runs the Roman Catholic Church.

“The new constitution also places Francis’ abuse commission inside the powerful doctrinal office that often opposed the panel’s recommendations. The new structure, the constitution says, will help the church “protect minors and vulnerable persons from sexual abuse.”

“The constitution, signed by Francis on Saturday and published immediately, and only in Italian, will go into force on 5th Jun, replacing the charter “Pastor bonus,” or “Good Shepherd,” introduced in 1988 by Pope John Paul II.

“Francis has made a tradition of hammering the leaders of the Roman Curia — usually in a significant Christmastime address — for a host of sins, including being enamored with power and status and being far from the faithful.

“He has denigrated the Curia hierarchy as a self-important, “ponderous, bureaucratic customs house” plagued by “intrigues of little groups” that placed itself and the priesthood above parishioners, instead of being “shepherds, with the smell of sheep.”

“Francis has repeatedly sought to put his pontificate within the continuum of the Second Vatican Council, the landmark meeting of bishops in the 1960s that sought to embrace the modern world.

“He has recently cracked down on using the old Latin rite in celebrating Mass favored by traditionalists. Francis decided that they were divisive within the church, as they promoted a view that undercut the legitimacy of the modern church.” [“In a New Constitution, the Pope Sets Out to Overhaul the Vatican,” Jason Horowitz, The New York Times, 19th Mar 2022]

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

The evidence? “The current Constitution has a provision that calls on Congress to pass an anti-political dynasty law. Of course, that never happened. Over the last 35 years, Congress ignored the Constitutional mandate. The old ruling elite, national and local, has succeeded in perpetuating power in their hands.” [“Family business,” Boo Chanco, DEMAND AND SUPPLY, The Philippine Star, 21st Mar 2022]

If the character of the Roman Curia isn’t perpetual, why can’t the Philippine caste system?

The universe we live in is dynamic, e.g., after winter comes spring. The universe is a 24/7 phenomenon. We can’t be bogged down by “winter” – and be sick and tired of democracy because “war and peace” is the human condition. Think of the story of Eden and Adam and Eve.

“So much of what we imagine to be new is old; so many seemingly novel illnesses afflict modern society is just resurgent cancers, diagnosed and described long ago. Autocrats have risen before; they have used mass violence before; broken the war laws.

“In 1950, in the preface to the first edition of The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt knew that what had just passed could repeat itself. She described the scant half-decade that had elapsed since the end of the Second World War as an era of great unease.

“Never has our future been more unpredictable. We have never depended so much on political forces that are unworthy to follow the rules of common sense and self-interest—forces that look like sheer insanity if judged by the standards of other centuries.” [“Why We Should Read Hannah Arendt Now,” Anne Applebaum, The Atlantic, 17th Mar 2022]

Unsurprisingly, Bongbong Marcos will be the next president.

A caste system is a system of entitlement, i.e., rank has its privileges. On the other hand, whoever is lower in the hierarchy deserves paternalism.

It is a vicious circle that Juan de la Cruz can’t seem to undo.

In the meantime, we thrive in “pwede na ‘yan,” as in the status quo.

“PH economy holding up,” Editorial, Manila Standard, 18th Mar 2022.

Are we holding up against what yardstick? Have we forgotten that we are the regional laggard and must borrow tons of money to keep Juan de la Cruz’s body and soul together?

Moreover, we had to borrow tons more because of the pandemic.

“The economy is hanging in despite the twin threats of the pandemic and rising commodity prices in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Philippine economy has more room to grow—it has not fully reopened since COVID-19 began two years ago, while millions of workers have yet to reclaim their jobs.

“Economic Planning Secretary Karl Kendrick Chua predicted confidently that the economy was on track to achieve the growth target of 7 percent to 9 percent in 2022, notwithstanding the sharp increase in crude prices and the escalating war in Europe.

“Mr. Chua is relying on the strength of the domestic economy that has not reached its full growth potential. Most of the Philippines is still under Alert Level 1, meaning COVID-19 is still restricting the mobility of the people and preventing the full reopening of commercial establishments.

“The Russia-Ukraine war, meanwhile, may initially impact the Philippine economy, especially domestic pump prices. The conflict, though, may not last. Moreover, the Philippines has limited trade links with Russia and Ukraine.

“The Philippines’ economic expansion, thus, will be driven mainly by the domestic side. The people who lost their jobs from the pandemic should rejoin the economy, and the students and teachers bottled up in their homes for months."

The following is a quote from an earlier posting. If it sounds sickening, it is. Yet, those familiar with the blog would know that it says the same thing over again for thirteen years.

Our predisposition for reform or to change lags those of our neighbors. It isn’t surprising given our “materiales-fuertes culture.” We grew up accepting perfection – and hierarchy and authority. And Padre Damaso didn’t help any.

And at the risk of being immodest, the blog keeps relating my experiences – because even in other countries, they are not typical. For example, two countries, one the wealthiest and the other the poorest in Europe, offered me citizenship.

When I say our best is not good enough, the countless encounters I’ve had in the real world attest to our inability to problem-solve.

Yet, I don’t take credit for myself. Instead, I share the principles that guided them.

For example, given my decades of experience in global business and competitiveness, my Eastern European friends assumed that I would spoon-feed them. But problem-solving is not about rules but principles.

Consider: Innovation is not R&D per se. In other words, no one discipline can take ownership of a problem-solving challenge – that will satisfy the character of this century, i.e., innovation and global competitiveness.

Please recall that I changed the planning and budgeting model in a 200-year-old Fortune 500. And I have done “oversight” at the local, regional, and corporate levels. In other words, even brilliant people from the best schools in the West can’t be the be-all and end-all.

Consider: When I first arrived at the corporate headquarters, the company was doing the plans and budgets for the ensuing year. Things were moving along and approved by Thanksgiving Day.

But I also knew from my time at the Philippine subsidiary and the region that plans and budgets can change. I was reporting to the new president of Asia Pacific, and so I put together a regional meeting, and we chose Bali as the venue. Being new to the company, I knew the region and the players better than her.

“We will invite the country managers and the global marketing and technology leaderships to present their respective approved plans and budgets. We will listen. Our task is to reconcile whatever differences that will come up. But we will not do it ourselves; we will ask them to align their thoughts to agree on how collectively they will manage and run their respective organizations. Still, the final numbers must satisfy the corporate commitment. It is a huge number. What is key is everyone goes away recognizing and accepting where we are, where we want to be, and how we will get there.”

I am thankful to the late Anacleto del Rosario for introducing me to Edward de Bono, the father of lateral and creative thinking.

While I was too young and naïve to run with the “de Bono ball,” it stayed in my subconscious that surfaced every time I encountered real-world challenges.

And here’s the quote again: “What’s preventing Filipinos from getting rich? Extractive institutions allow a small group to extract incomes and wealth from the rest of society and block economic growth to safeguard its interests.

“Powerful groups often stand against the engines of prosperity,” write Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson in Why Nations Fail: The Origins Of Power, Prosperity And Poverty. Economic growth is not just a process of more and better machines and more and better-educated people but also a transformative and destabilizing process associated with widespread creative destruction.

“Growth thus moves forward only if not blocked by the economic losers to protect their economic privileges and by the political losers who fear the erosion of their political power.

“Worse, extractive institutions breed corruption and political oppression.

“The Philippines is the 101 least corrupt country out of 175 countries, according to the 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index reported by Transparency International. The Philippines’ Corruption rank averaged 92.09 from 1995 until 2016, reaching an all-time high of 141 in 2008 and a record low of 36 in 1995. Meanwhile, the country is on and off “martial law.”

“That’s sad news for the future of the Philippines. “Nations fail when they have extractive institutions, supported by extractive political institutions that impede and even block economic growth,” Acemoglu and Robinson.” [“Why Filipinos Remain Poor,” Panos Mourdoukoutas, Forbes, 1st Jun 2017; Mourdoukoutas is Professor and Chair of the Department of Economics at LIU Post in New York; and teaches at Columbia University.]

The bottom line: There are “winners” and “losers.”

Sadly, we are the losers and don’t seem to know any better.

Is our caste system more powerful than the Roman Curia?

Are we more catholic than the pope?

Gising bayan!