Reinventing the wheel (II)

Is it aka as “Pinoy abilidad”? Let’s start with OFW remittances. For decades, we were ecstatic that we were generating so much income – and in foreign currency to boot – while remaining underdeveloped. And we were equally proud of the land reform program to address rural poverty. And today we want federalism to enhance direct democracy and counter Imperial Manila.

Wittingly or not, we have been reinventing the wheel. Instead of moving along the development continuum – from agriculture to agribusiness to industrialization to services – like the Asian Tigers did, we rationalized and leapfrogged to a service economy as though we’re London or New York? While taking good governance for granted, even proud of the Marcos dictatorship, and today Du30?

More to the point, instead of celebrating OFW remittances as an income stream we could have embarked on industrialization. Instead of land reform and subsistence farming we could have embarked on large-scale cooperative agribusiness – with a portfolio of products that will win in the global market, i.e., think of our neighbors that left us behind in agribusiness. Instead of jeepney modernization we could have embarked on infrastructure development, if we had the foresight. And instead of federalism, we could have dismantled political patronage and dynasties, and oligarchy.

Has any of the Asian Tigers attributed their success to federalism? Yet we want to throw the baby out with the bathwater? And precisely because we took the wrong turn at the fork, we are today the regional laggard.

How different is our mindset today from what it was 30, 40, 50 years or even 100 years ago? As the blog has discussed, we personify the “fixed mindset” when progress, growth and development comes from a “growth mindset.”

But we want to reinvent the wheel for the umpteenth time? “There are two important reasons converting unitary Philippines into a federal country is insensible. One is the current poor state of the country’s political development. The Philippines is beset by widespread corruption, not only at the national level, but more so at the local level. The governing class is oligarchic; the country continues to be governed by 100 or so families.

“There is widespread inefficiency, as evidenced by long-unsolved traffic problems; long delayed infrastructure project execution; poor-performing bureaucracies, including the police; poor public education system; long-delayed justice system; prevailing selfishness of members of Congress; and many more. All these are strong impediments to sustainable economic growth.

“If the present national government cannot deal effectively with these poor conditions, how is it possible for the governments of the designated inexperienced federal states to deal with them in a better way?

“Would splitting the country into federal states turn government personnel into becoming more skillful and efficient? Would government systems and processes at federal and state levels become more efficient and effective? Would corruption be substantially reduced? Would oligarchy disappear? Would legislators be less selfish? These developments are highly unlikely.

“The other important reason is the widely uneven economic development of the various Philippine regions. NCR, Region III, and Region IVA generate about 63% of the country’s GDP, while having only 39% of the population.

“The fundamental premise of the proposed federalism is for each designated state to drive its own development with the expectation that the poorer regions will achieve accelerated economic growth and be at par with other regions. How can that be achieved under the current widely uneven economic development of the various regions?

“Without substantial money transfers, the economic gap between the rich states and poor states will become much wider and, thus, will drive a massive population shift. On the other hand, if substantial money transfers are made, then the fundamental underlying principle of federalism will become irrelevant. Moreover, such money transfers will only make it clear to the rich states the magnitude of the amount of wealth they are forgoing and may try to hold them back and, thus, create serious disputes.” [Federalism revisited, Benjamin R. Punongbayan, BusinessWorld, 30th Nov 2017]

As the blog has argued, it is about community and the common good which is undermined from the get-go by our instincts: of parochialism and insularity; deferring to hierarchy and expecting paternalism in return; valuing and relying on political patronage and dynasties, and oligarchy.

In other words, we must abandon “crab mentality” and instead create the ecosystem of development via its building blocks – from infrastructure development to industrialization to innovation and competitiveness. [Where are our architects and engineers? As kids if we played tinker toys – before today’s LEGO – we knew how to build a structure from the ground up!]

If we cannot, we can kiss progress, growth and development good bye not only for this generation but for succeeding ones too. Let’s not bury our head in the sand!

“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]

“Now I know why Paul dared to speak of ‘the curse of the law’ (Galatians 3:13). Law reigns and discernment is unnecessary, which means there is little growth or change in such people. When you do not grow, you remain an infant.” [Faith and Science, Open to Change, Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, 23rd Oct 2017]

“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]

“National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does not grow out of a country’s natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency’s value, as classical economics insists . . . A nation’s competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and upgrade.” [The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990]

“Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” [William Pollard, 1911-1989, physicist-priest, Manhattan Project]

“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]