The insanity paradigm

“Pray as though everything depended on God; act as though everything depended on you.”

“Some people think this quote is authentic because paragraph 2834 of the Catechism attributes it to Ignatius. But the Catechism is not inerrant like Scripture is; even in its sections that describe infallible dogmas, the magisterial gift of infallibility extends only to divinely revealed matters of faith and morals. It does not ensure that scientific or historical assertions in the Catechism, including citations for quotations that support those dogmas or doctrines, are without error.

“In paragraph 2834, the Catechism cites Joseph Guibert’s nineteenth-century study of the Jesuits. But in a footnote on the page it cites, the editor of Guibert’s book (published after his death) says of the popular Ignatian quote, ‘In this precise formula, the thought isn’t in Ignatius’s writings nor any contemporary documents; nevertheless it does correspond to his ideas.’

“[And] in a letter he wrote to Francis Borgia in 1555, St. Ignatius provides a sound perspective on the relationship between human efforts and divine providence:

‘I consider it an error to trust and hope in any means or efforts in themselves alone; nor do I consider it a safe path to trust the whole matter to God our Lord without desiring to help myself by what he has given me; so that it seems in our Lord that I ought to make use of both parts, desiring in all things his greater praise and glory, and nothing else.’” [https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/st-ignatius-said-what]

After that, longish predicate, let’s get back to the title of the posting, “The insanity paradigm.”

We are in a rut, and it is beyond the global pandemic. What to do?

“I consider it an error to trust and hope in any means or efforts in themselves alone, nor do I consider it a safe path to trust the whole matter to God our Lord without desiring to help myself by what he has given me.”

Are Filipinos missing something?

Indeed, we must dig ourselves out of this pandemic hole, but that won’t suffice – because we’re in a perfect storm for the longest time. And it explains why the knee-jerk is our default fix.

As the blog argues, Philippine poverty is the effect of underdevelopment. And that is evident in our status as an underdeveloped nation measured by national income. We cannot romanticize this reality by opting to seek “happiness” instead and take development for granted.

We didn’t stay put as an adolescent. We don’t want our children either. Why do we want Juan de la Cruz to be Bondying?

Does this apparent dilemma explain why the world has left us behind?

Development and happiness aren’t an either/or choice.

What is the source of our static – or absolutist – impulses? Recall metacognition. Because of human development, humankind moves up to “relativism” – from “dualism or absolutism” – and why people can walk across the continuum that runs across “static” and “dynamic.”

Recall AmBisyon natin: 2040: “By 2040, Filipinos enjoy a strongly rooted, comfortable, and secure life. In 2040, we will all enjoy a stable and comfortable lifestyle, secure in the knowledge that we have enough for our daily needs and unexpected expenses.”

That probably explains why we seek “happiness” instead of development. Here is a quote from an earlier posting: “On the other hand, if we are outward- and forward-looking, we would have – years ago – benchmarked against our neighbors. For example, AmBisyon Natin 2040 could have been AmBisyon Natin: To be the next Asian Tiger.”

Beyond our families and a “clean, efficient, and fair government,” it must be innovative and globally competitive for a nation to thrive in the 21st century.

“Recall the 4Cs of 21st-century skills: (1) critical thinking, (2) creativity, (3) collaboration, (4) communication.

“Humankind – and its ever-changing needs – is at the core of “change” and why innovation is merely the expression of our world’s dynamism. Innovation is not a matter of choice but a response to the spirit of creation – as in human development.

“Creativity. It is the practice of thinking outside the box. While Creativity generally connotes either you-have-it-or-you-don’t quality, students can learn how to be creative by solving problems, creating systems, or just trying something they haven’t tried before. That doesn’t mean every student will become an artist or a writer. Instead, it means they’ll be able to look at a problem from multiple perspectives — including those that others may not see.”

Let’s get some examples:

Do we distinguish between an imperialist and a hegemon? Recall the elder from a village in Papua New Guinea that said to the writer, “The outside world still assumes we are cannibals. Just like others, we outlive our past.”

Are we stuck with our perspective of an imperialist America that we can’t figure out how to relate with Uncle Sam? 

Every nation is a subset of our universe, and we will have friends and otherwise, and they are subsets too. If we value the respect of humankind, we must reconcile our world view accordingly. We must cherish the rule of law. It is not about choosing between world powers but being true to what we profess. Where do we put the Western nations and China, for example?

Trump and Putin are not the models. Why? Like Juan de la Cruz, they’re parochial and insular. And why is Juan de la Cruz the regional laggard?

Think personal responsibility; it is what self-government is. Recall the banishment of Adam and Eve from the garden. Yet, they were equipped and given the same gift as Ignatius to help themselves.

We are in a dilemma on the VFA. Is it coming from our static tendencies? Isn’t it why Rizal created the character of Padre Damaso? Or why would wealthy nations like Japan, Germany, and South Korea think differently?

The writer, like students in his time, demonstrated against MNCs. Yet, he had a career with one. And he has lived and worked with Eastern European friends that today live the life of an MNC. Not that long ago, they were socialists under Soviet rule.

Why do we recognize MNCs as best practice models? Their dynamism is at the heart of the ecosystem. They are continually seeking to mirror a virtuous circle. They acknowledge that the universe is a 24/7, dynamic phenomenon.

We Pinoys, including the writer when he was a student, saw MNCs as evil. Tell that to Lee, Mahathir, Deng, and the Vietnamese. 

Why did we not heed Lee and Mahathir’s advice to Deng, to beg for Western money and technology?

Yet, it never is too late given the dynamism of our universe. Recall the blog raised these two challenges:

(1) For Messrs. Dominguez and Ang to figure out and lead the effort to replicate the Samsung Vietnam wonder. Our top exports are in the same product category. And the exercise should consider a top global brand and enterprise that we can attract to the Philippines as the Vietnamese did with Samsung.

But it must be of a similar scale so that we leapfrog Philippine exports and be a quarter of the way to generating incremental receipts of $200 billion (to beat the hell out of Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam.)

(2) Likewise, to pursue the initiative of replicating the Pearl River Delta Economic Zone right in Central Luzon. Instead of pulling our top industrialists to build a bigger NAIA, we can think outside the box and elevate our perspective beyond our wildest dreams. Beyond the Philippine version of an export processing zone as we know it.

And in both cases, our economic managers can revisit our approach to fiscal and monetary interventions. They must be a product of (1) forward-thinking; (2) prioritizing; and (3) leveraging Pareto. 

Recall that the exercise is to create an ecosystem that is a virtuous circle. Think of the photosynthesis phenomenon.

In other words, we can pick and choose the best practices of Communist Vietnam and Communist China. As the blog argues, problem-solving is not about an ism but dynamism.

But then again, can Juan de la Cruz think outside the box like the Vietnamese? For example, we’re still into GVC or global value chain, which explains why we’re in computer chips and wire harness. Those are pretty narrow boxes – and can only make our neighbors feel grateful that we’re no competition.

If we can’t see the way forward, the Vietnamese, on the other hand, appears well poised in their view of the future. We must read this article to get a sense of their world view: “ASEAN at 53: Transition and recovery,” Võ Trí Thành, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 8th Aug 2020.

“From a less-developed region, ASEAN has become much more prosperous and dynamic. [W]e have a firm foundation to believe that its central role and position in shaping the wider region’s future would be maintained.”

Can we, in the chattering classes, get Juan de la Cruz to stop and ponder? Can we think outside the box? How do we overcome our bunker mentality – aka the caste system?

Do we see democracy and socialism as an either/or proposition? 

China and Vietnam are communists, but both showed the world how capitalism could lead to foreign trade. But because of the trade war with the US, China’s draw as the world’s manufacturing hub hit a bad patch. And Vietnam is picking up a lot of the spoils.

Those are mixed systems. And one can find them even in the Nordic model. Social democratic parties played a more significant role in Sweden and Norway, while in Iceland and Finland, right-wing political parties did.

What about federalism? Do we see it as a fix for the problems of the Philippines? But we never had the heritage of self-government as the Germans did in their different states. Or even in the US.

What are Filipinos missing? Think personal responsibility – beyond self and family – including community and the common good. And the common good, as we see from the above examples, is not driven by an ism. Nor by static impulses, but dynamism.

But where do we start to square the circle? Is it with Rizal who said, “We submit to tyranny because we love it”?

Let’s pause right there.

Does it go without saying that the ethos of “personal responsibility” is missing in Juan de la Cruz and why he submits to tyranny?

When we hear a pronouncement from big brother, we ask: “how high do we jump”? Recall the war on drugs. We’re active on social media. How come we didn’t figure out that no one country has won the war on drugs? Google can quickly tell us that only Portugal had a successful initiative. It took drug dependency as a health care challenge, not a crime. And then it created a robust ecosystem to defy the odds.

But now the table is turning. Some of us in the chattering classes are questioning big brother. What took us so long? 

The pandemic unmasked the world. Now we see its actual color. Enter: Personal responsibility and speak truth to power.

The world doesn’t have the knowledge base to deal with the pandemic. But as with challenges in general, there are best practice models. For instance, leadership is always imperative. And forward-thinking and disciplined execution is a must. That is why even those that followed that commonsense model suffered a resurgence after putting their guards down. 

Consider: The New York metro or Tri-state area (of over 20 million people) was the epicenter of the pandemic in the US. And it did not come from China, but Europe. Specifically, Italy, France, and Spain. Think of the metro’s international airports and Americans visiting Europe and then rushing to come home to beat the announced travel restrictions. COVID-19 was already in the area by the time the lockdown came.

But the leadership and coordination of the three governors flattened the curve, and the epicenter shifted to other states, while the Tri-state is now on track with its choreographed stages in reopening the area.

Let’s get back to personal responsibility and speaking truth to power.

Duterte has two more years. How can he deliver on ridding corruption from the face of this nation and the drug menace, to name just two of his promises?

What about our oligarchy? Our eight top companies can’t even match one Vietnam enterprise. Does Bondying come to mind?

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

In other words, our reliance on the hierarchy is misplaced. And Juan de la Cruz is paying the price.

Yet, because of our insanity paradigm, we are not about to reinvent Juan de la  Cruz. Tradition matters; however, human development shows us that even “cannibals” outlive the past. Tradition matters to the scribes and Pharisees. And we know what happened.

“Pray as though everything depended on God; act as though everything depended on you.”

Gising bayan!

“Here is a land in which a few are spectacularly rich while the masses remain abjectly poor. And where freedom and its blessings are a reality for a minority and an illusion for the many. Here is a land consecrated to democracy but run by an entrenched plutocracy, dedicated to equality but mired in an archaic system of caste. 

“But the fault was chiefly their own. Filipinos profess the love of country, but love themselves – individually – more.” [Ninoy Aquino, Foreign Affairs magazine, July 1968; Stanley Karnow, New York Times Magazine, “Cory Aquino’s Downhill Slide,” 19th Aug 1990.]

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? Moreover, 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]

“True social reform has little to do with politics. To unmoor ourselves from the burdens of the past, we must be engaged in the act of continual and conscious self-renewal. All men are partially buried in the grave of custom. Even virtue is no longer such if it is stagnant.

“Change begins when we finally choose to examine critically and then recalibrate the ill-serving codes and conventions handed down to us, often unquestioned, by the past and its power structures. It is essentially an act of imagination first.” [David Henry Thoreau; American essayist, poet, and philosopher; 1817-1862]

“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]

“You have to have a dream, whether big or small. Then plan, focus, work hard, and be very determined to achieve your goals.” [Henry Sy Sr., Chairman Emeritus and Founder, SM Group (1924 - 2019)]

“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]

“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]